Posted on 12/18/2010 6:01:48 PM PST by Gamecock
It seems as if there might be a sizable number of Christians who are unaware of the text of Jeremiah, particularly Jeremiah 44, which discusses a goddess called … the Queen of Heaven.
John MacArthur uses Jeremiah 44 as his text to introduce two sermons on Mary in Catholic Church dogma. These date from 2006.
The links to the full text are at the bottom of the post. I’ll provide excerpts, indented below, which will give many of us food for thought. Emphases mine throughout.
On Jeremiah 44
God condemns apostate Judah for worshipping this goddess of paganism called the Queen of Heaven that has had a number of different names throughout history. The latest name for this goddess, sad to say, is a name borrowed from the earthly mother of our Lord, none other than Mary who has now been morphed by apostate Christianity into the latest edition of the Queen of Heaven. Is it important to address this issue? It is … [In] Timothy 1:3, Paul says, “I urge you that you may instruct certain men not to teach strange doctrines, nor pay attention to myths and endless genealogies which give rise to mere speculation, rather than furthering the administration of God which is by faith.”
Christian obligation to point out error
It’s important to say at the outset that this is not because we are mad or hateful or resentful, but it is love from a pure heart. If you do not address error, if you do not address strange doctrine, damning heresy, this is not love, this is indifference. Love from a pure heart and a clear conscience and a sincere faith demands such a confrontation. And so we come to address this same age-old goddess heresy of paganism in its newest form with the modern goddess having stolen the name of Mary, a terrible dishonor to her. But there is nothing sacred to Satan anyway. And to address it is not a lack of love, but is the sincerest, purest kind of love rising out of a good conscience and a sincere faith.
It does make one wonder why the Catholic Church would refer to Mary in this way. Yet, Jeremiah 44 refers specifically to the Queen of Heaven in an idolatrous context. Here are verses 18 and 19:
18But since we left off making offerings to the queen of heaven and pouring out drink offerings to her, we have lacked everything and have been consumed by the sword and by famine.” 19And the women said, “When we made offerings to the queen of heaven and poured out drink offerings to her, was it without our husbands’ approval that we made cakes for her bearing her image and poured out drink offerings to her?”
Much of the text concerns St Alphonsus Liguori‘s The Glories of Mary, a 750-page work first published in 1745 in response to the 17th century Catholic heresy of Jansenism, which originated in the Netherlands, became popular in Paris and, in many ways, bears a close resemblance to Calvinism. Francophones may recall that the philosopher Blaise Pascal and the playwright Jean Racine (for a time) were Jansenists.
I have linked to an 1888 online version of the book above so that you can peruse the text yourselves. An eye-opener, to say the least. MacArthur has read it cover to cover. We didn’t study this book at school, I hasten to add. I never even knew it existed until this week. But then, I do recall one of the nuns telling my mother that there is much about the Catholic Church which would not be included in religion classes. My mother, mentioning Vatican II, said, ‘That’s a relief.’ Sister replied, ‘Oh, no, it’s not so much Vatican II as it is other texts.’ Could she have meant this one?
Unbiblical
MacArthur says that Mariology is unbiblical, much as the Book of Mormon and Christian Science’s Science and Health with Key to the Scriptures. What his sermons show us is the importance of being biblically literate — every book of the Bible. You will wonder how it is that Mary, not only bearing the appellation of a pagan goddess but having so many thousands, probably millions, of words written about her through the centuries is mentioned so seldom in the New Testament. That last one surprised me greatly when I was a teenager, and I suspect many Catholics would be similarly surprised should they read the gospels and epistles.
How could so many details be obtained about her life, from childhood to death? MacArthur reads excerpts from the Glories of Mary and papal documents from latter days to his congregation. You can find them in the sermon text. They are amazing.
Mythical
MacArthur tells us how Mariology began. Many will find this startling, although it ties in with what Dr Gregory Jackson, a Lutheran professor, said on Ichabod and reproduced here:
Now this idea about Mary, though it really wasn’t formally dogmatized until the twentieth century goes way, way back and you start to read about this in the fifth century as paganism and pagan goddess worship at the very earliest gets mingled. Remember the Holy Roman Empire, as it was called, the Holy Roman Empire was really not holy, it was Roman, for sure, but the emperor in the 325 decided that the best thing to do to unify the great empire was to make everybody automatically a Christian. And since the emperor was rife with paganism, they just married a kind of Christianity with paganism and all of this came very early. So it’s in the rule of somebody who calls himself Galacius(?) I, a self-appointed leader of the church in the fifth century, this comes up at that time. There’s a discussion about Mary being assumed into heaven. So already this goddess cult has imposed itself on poor Mary. And it was at first considered heretical. There was no evidence for it historically, there’s no evidence for it biblically, obviously. So the earliest appearance of this idea is in a very apocryphal work, an unreliable work like the gospel of Judas and hundreds of others. It was called Transitus Getti Marii (???) and it was in the fifth century it was denounced as a heresy. So when it first showed up in the fifth century, the 400′s, it is denounced as a heresy. But things began to develop over the years in regard to Mary. Praying to Mary arrives in 600…
A transitus is a service recalling a saint’s death and begins the eve of his feast day. Presumably in Mary’s case, the work mentioned involved the Assumption.
It should be mentioned that John MacArthur has nothing against Mary, just the hype and apparent falsehood built up around her life and death.
‘Mother of God’
MacArthur traces the origins of this title to Alexander, the 4th century Bishop of Alexandria:
Goddess worship, the very outset, the Holy Roman Empire comes into existence in the fourth century, early in the century. This mother of God comes in rapidly by the year 431 and the Council of Ephesus and 451, The Council of Chalcedon, this is established. She is to be called the mother of God, this contributes to centuries and centuries and centuries of accumulated deification of Mary. She becomes equal to God. And though the Church tries its best to wiggle out of this, it tries its best to deny this, the truth of the matter is, she really is superior to God and superior to Christ as becomes very evident in what they say and in how they portray her in cathedrals all over the world. She rules in heaven as queen, sovereign, saving, sanctifying, sympathizing, all this power is given to her that belongs only to God.
Apparitions and their nature
Like many of us, MacArthur wonders how the number of Marian apparitions can be increasing in frequency. I should like to mention here for the benefit of my Protestant readers that it used to be that the Church viewed these with scepticism and was very careful to investigate them thoroughly. Most investigations went no higher than local or diocesan level. Very few were authenticated.
Mary keeps appearing. Have you noticed? She keeps appearing. She descends from heaven to earth to make herself known to people. She comes quite frequently. She always comes with secret messages. She comes with secret messages for very isolated people …
The latest Pope, Pope Benedict XVI … said this, noted this, “In 1984 Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger, the head of the Roman Catholic Church’s congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith,” that was where he came from, he came from being the doctrinal gate keeper of Roman Catholicism, “declared … : ‘One of the signs of our times is that the announcements of Mary in apparitions are multiplying all over the world,’” … He made this observation as a comment on the many reports of the appearances of the Blessed Virgin Mary to individuals located in a wide variety of countries, cultures and political systems. In fact, the last century and a half has seen numerous appearance of the Blessed Virgin, they say, and they have received official approval by the Roman Catholic Church …
A book in 1993 had about a thousand appearances of Mary that were documented thirty times in the eighteenth century, 200 times in the nineteenth century and 450 times in the twentieth century. So they are escalating at a rapid rate. Cardinal Meisner claims that Mary brought Christ to Europe from Fatima and one would ask where was he before that if she brought him? She visited a farm in Georgia, an office building in Clearwater, Florida, and a subway wall recently in Mexico City. She comes so often and she comes to the down and out and she comes to the little children, she comes to the peasant people and this validates the fact that she is this loving, sympathetic, merciful, tender-hearted compassionate person …
The only person if there is someone really appearing to them is right out of hell. This is demonic, for sure….for sure. But what assurances and what cleverness the demons offer for the deceived and the damned with their hellish counterfeits.
‘Mediatrix’
MacArthur quotes from the aforementioned documents, including Liguori’s book, as well as from the latest Catholic catechism from the 1990s — published during John Paul II’s papacy. No wonder so many of these notions — ‘New Eve’, ‘New Ark of the Covenant’ and ‘Co-Mediatrix’ — are so alien to me. When you read the quotes he uses, take note of the word ‘sovereign’ used in connection with Mary. He then offers the commentary below, based on what he reads to the congregation:
The point is, you go to Mary because Jesus can’t resist Mary. And Mary, because she’s so merciful, can’t resist you. Mary, claims the Church, can persuade God to grant what He otherwise wouldn’t grant …
You’re really banging on steel if you go to God yourself. Go to Mary and He listens to Mary …
You see, Roman Catholicism is pagan goddess worship, completely distracted. God is reinvented as judgmental, harsh. Christ is reinvented as indifferent. Everybody worships Mary …
She commands Jesus.
John Paul II
MacArthur tells us of the importance that Mary played in the late pope’s life from his childhood through to his papacy. He reads the congregation excerpts from some of John Paul II’s Marian thoughts and says:
Now that…that’s a pretty bold statement. She is not only the mediatrix of all grace, the channel through which all grace comes, the one to whom we go for everything, but she is even involved in our redemption …
Now I could go on and on with all of this, but I think you get the picture. The Church says nothing comes to us except through Mary’s mediation for such is God’s will. The Church says Mary is the most powerful mediatrix and advocate of the whole world with her divine Son.
So much like the enemy of mens souls to distract from the Savior by elevating one of Gods many servants over Him....and calling it Christian...when in fact it is indeed idolatry and hurts the very souls of those who practice Mariology.
Latin Vulgate 6:3 nonne iste est faber filius Mariae frater Iacobi et Ioseph et Iudae et Simonis nonne et sorores eius hic nobiscum sunt et scandalizabantur in illo
King James Version 6:3 Is not this the carpenter, the son of Mary, the brother of James, and Joses, and of Juda, and Simon? and are not his sisters here with us? And they were offended at him.
American Standard Version 6:3 Is not this the carpenter, the son of Mary, and brother of James, and Joses, and Judas, and Simon? and are not his sisters here with us? And they were offended in him.
Bible in Basic English 6:3 Is not this the woodworker, the son of Mary, and brother of James and Joses and Judas and Simon? and are not his sisters here with us? And they were bitter against him.
Darby's English Translation 6:3 Is not this the carpenter, the son of Mary, and brother of James, and Joses, and Judas, and Simon? and are not his sisters here with us? And they were offended in him.
Douay Rheims 6:3 Is not this the carpenter, the son of Mary, the brother of James, and Joseph, and Jude, and Simon? are not also his sisters here with us? And they were scandalized in regard of him.
Noah Webster Bible 6:3 Is not this the carpenter, the son of Mary, the brother of James, and Joses, and of Judas, and Simon? and are not his sisters here with us? And they were offended at him.
Weymouth New Testament 6:3 Is not this the carpenter, Mary's son, the brother of James and Joses, Jude and Simon? And do not his sisters live here among us?' So they turned angrily away.
World English Bible 6:3 Isn't this the carpenter, the son of Mary, and brother of James, Joses, Judas, and Simon? Aren't his sisters here with us?' They were offended by him.
Young's Literal Translation 6:3 Is not this the carpenter, the son of Mary, and brother of James, and Joses, and Judas, and Simon? and are not his sisters here with us?' -- and they were being stumbled at him.
It appears to me that the best argument you may have is in the placement of the comma after the phrase "the son of Mary" in several of these translations.
Again, I point to what purpose God might have in making Mary to be a "perpetual virgin". God does not do miracles on a whim. They always have a purpose (cf. "speaking in tongues."). Apply Occam's Razor.
I do not have the time or desire on this Sunday morning to learn Greek and translate the original scripture. I have made a good faith attempt to find as original source as possible.
Stating that "Luther believed it so it must be true" is not good enough for me. Citing sources dated in the 1500s also is not good enough for me.
I believe what is actually written. Period.
I guess it’s time for me to drop the sarcasm.
I apologize and ask for your forgiveness. I’m still a work in progress.
God bless you for the reference on Haydock this Sunday morning.
Without the CATHOLIC Charles Martel, we’d all be speaking Arabic tonight on this forum.
I would dare say that we would not only not be having this forum, but we would be stuck with at best tenth century technology. It was the Judeo-Christian cultural environment that encouraged the scientific discoveries.
Gamecock,
Have just finished reading more of MCArthurs sermons on the Catholic Sytem of Beliefs. WOW! Does he ever call a spade a spade and that with stong scripture easily read and understood.
I have suspected the worship of Mary in the catholic church is idolatry but I was willing to read and learn why they do this. Further investigation certainly proves that not only are they commiting idolatry...but I do believe they are under the judgement of God for doing so with the homosexual and pedophile’s infilitrating and securley fixed in their church. At the very least it is to be considered as the leadership certainly continues to be lax in ridding the church of those people...rather continues to stretch out their existance within.
I’ll be reading more of what McArthur is saying in this next week. He certainly brings it together remarkably well and agrees with all I have read in other sermons and writings. Most of all the scriptures prove it all.
Indeed they are taught this...maybe you have not graduated far enough yet to the next level of teaching. Perhaps better said is catholics are in a grave state of denial of what their church really teaches.
Idolatry, no matter how a catholic might frame it...is just that.... and as God has said..those who practice this become like the idols they worship...blind and can't hear. So it is perfectly understandable why catholics cannot see the truth. Thus it is an easy thing for them to justify to themselves what they do....So don't those who live together before marriage...or have sex before marriage and then wonder why they run into magnifold problems thereafter. They are unwilling to give up the relationship...and it is most difficult to turn it around and do it right. So too catholics cannnot let go of the relationship with their church...and the church will not let go easily either. It has it's members bound.
Until the idolatry is put away, which they have brought into the church, along with the goddess worship of Mary they will not see the truth. Rather a fearful judgment of God to come...if not already happening and I think it has in recent years been revealed as so.
Christ nor God records anything whatsoever making her Queen. There is no scripture to support that at all. It is something which Rome determined and fed it’s members...years ago...and remains entrenched today...and may be why the catholic church is having the difficulties they are...you cannot serve God and an Idol.
Can a catholic actually speak at length about Christ Jesus without mentioning Mary? Can they say a Prayer centered on Christ Jesus apart from mentiong someone departed?
What they might believe and what is actually spoken, written, and practiced are two different things. They do tend to pick and choose what they adhere to regardless of Rome. Nancy Pelosi comes to mind and those like her who are plentiful within the catholic church.
“Especially as Jesus has a brother, James.”
Where were you during the last 789,654,485,334,565 rebuttals of that, right here on FR?
For Heaven’s sake, GET IT ALREADY.
You might start by asking a Catholic; to ask what's-his-name is rather like seeking from Hamas the reason why Jews cling so fiercely to Israel.
We hold so fiercely to Mary because we appreciate so much more than the "anti-Mariolatry" crowd the greatness of Divinity, the quite astounding Mystery of God, the Most High, the Lord of Hosts, the Creator of all, becoming Incarnate in the womb of a Virgin; the "anti-Mariolatry" crowd -- whether they realize it or not -- reduce Christ to someone whose entire importance relies on His functional value to them (this "functional value" thing appears elsewhere in their thought too, but I digress).
To denigrate the human locus of the Miracle of the Incarnation with the truculent "I'm every bit as good as she is!" is vulgar, to say the least, and it denigrates the Incarnation itself.
Several claim (was it on this thread?) that God chose Mary because "she fulfills the prophecy," which lots of girls at the time could have done, as if God stumbled upon a prophecy independent of Him, made by someone else, but by which He is unaccountably bound, as if the God who, as they claim, had every detail of His Plan of Salvation worked out from all eternity, somehow overlooked planning and preparing a suitable vessel from all eternity and had to scrabble around at the last minute to find someone to answer His "help wanted" ad!
Some are unwilling to answer whether they believe Christ is God; some say they do, but their "God" seems awfully small.
I think it all comes down to Mary’s fiat and free will.
There are some on these boards who absolutely deny free will.
Sola scriptura would be a different discussion. As I explained Mary is Queen of Heaven, because her Son is king.
Do you disagree with giving Him that title as well?
Sure; here's one. There are several thousand more:
"Having beheld the resurrection of Christ, let us worship the holy Lord Jesus, the only Sinless One. We venerate Your cross, O Christ, and we praise and glorify Your holy resurrection. You are our God. We know no other than You, and we call upon Your name. Come, all faithful, let us venerate the holy resurrection of Christ. For behold, through the cross joy has come to all the world. Blessing the Lord always, let us praise His resurrection. For enduring the cross for us, he destroyed death by death. Have mercy upon me, O God, according to Your great mercy; and according to the multitude of Your compassion, blot out my transgression. Wash me thoroughly from my iniquity, and cleanse me from my sin. For I acknowledge my iniquity, and my sin is ever before me. Against You, You only, have I sinned, and done evil in Your sight, that You may be found just when You speak, and victorious when You are judged. For behold, I was conceived in iniquity, and in sin my mother bore me. For behold, You have loved truth; You have made known to me the secret and hidden thing of Your wisdom. you shall sprinkle me with hyssop, and I shall be made clean; You shall wash me, and I shall be whiter than snow. Make me to hear joy and gladness, that the afflicted bones may rejoice. Turn Your face away from my sins, and blot out all my iniquities. Create in me a clean heart, O God, and renew a steadfast spirit within me. Cast me not away from Your presence, and take not Your Holy Spirit from me. Restore to me the joy of Your salvation, and establish me with Your governing Spirit. I shall teach transgressors Your ways, and the ungodly shall turn back to You. Deliver me from bloodguiltiness, O God, the God of my salvation, and my tongue shall joyfully declare Your righteousness. Lord, open my lips, and my mouth shall proclaim Your praise. For if You had desired sacrifice, I would give it; You do not delight in burnt offerings. A sacrifice to God is a broken spirit; God will not despise a broken and a humbled heart. Do good in Your good pleasure to Zion; and let the walls of Jerusalem be built. Then You shall be pleased with a sacrifice of righteousness, with oblation and whole burnt offerings. Then they shall offer bulls on Your altar."
Here is my particular favorite:
"Κύριε Ιησού Χριστέ, Υιέ του Θεού, ελέησόν με τον αμαρτωλόν."
Otherwise:
"Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on me, a sinner."
I can say now why would I ask a catholic? But I did do just that in the beginning, finding there answers were anything but adequate...most don't know why. Those who do varied so in the history and or reasoning's about it that it was a fruitless cause....so I went to the Vatican...it is there the RC teachings are clearly shown...and equally as much writings of the Popes... for they do set the tempo of what is to be believed indirectly and directly. The dogma's there and all anyone might need to know what catholics are suppose to believe.
I believe there are various reasons catholics hold to Mary and various degrees of worship of her. But your Popes do set the pace and example...of which the members follow.
I would suppose to a catholic I am now part of the anti-mary crowd. For I do believe how she is portrayed in the catholic faith is indeed idolatry...and completely so.
In my Christian walk I have not spent a great deal of time looking at Mary when it comes to the Birth of our Savior. Rather on His coming and what that means to every individual. Equally as much His life and mission which followed. Yes, that God became a man is astounding and has often humbled me....that Mary was selected was an event which played out in the role of His birth...is pretty much enough for me...even after investigating further.
You see the old test. spoke all the way thru it that the Savior would be coming....it's about Him...very little mentioned of Mary...in fact her name wasn't mentioned..But his was. His birth was a fulfillment of all that was written...and that is cause for greatest of celebration over Mary's role...though she is certainly honored by God at that time...she was far far more humble than those who lay claim to her worship today...and would no doubt cringe for those who have exalted her above her son...and they have and they do.
God gave the son His Kingship...He did not give Mary a royal position, the catholic church did, nothing recorded as such in scripture. He gave Mary the privledge of being His mother...but more importantly that He came from the Father ......
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.