Posted on 02/10/2011 7:57:12 AM PST by Christian Engineer Mass
Jesus said that the truth will set us free. (John 8:32) However, He did not say that the truth would necessarily be easy to accept. It was painful for me to learn the information that I am about to share with you, but it was also liberating and it led to a closer relationship with God.
As a faithful Catholic, and later as a nun, I practiced Mary worship for many years without realizing it. The prayers and practices were so familiar. They were taught to me by good people, sincere people that I trusted. I prayed rosaries and wore a scapular and engaged in other “devotions” which I honestly thought were good and pleasing to God. Because of my lack of knowledge of the Bible and of Church history, I honestly had no idea that I was actually worshipping Mary.
If modern Catholic teachings and doctrines about Mary are true, then they will not be contrary to Scripture, the writings of the Early Fathers, or the decrees of past popes. For a devout Catholic to question these issues and put them to the test can be painful. It certainly was for me. However, it would be far more painful to have God correct us when we face Him on Judgment Day.
LETTING THE CATHOLIC CHURCH SPEAK FOR ITSELF
I believe in letting people speak for themselves. Therefore my primary sources about Catholic doctrines and history come from the Catholic Church.
First and foremost is the official Catechism of the Catholic Church which was written for the purpose of summarizing the essential and basic teachings of the Roman Catholic Church. It was approved by Pope John Paul II in 1992 and the English translation was released in 1994.
(Excerpt) Read more at parkviewgospelhall.com ...
And the Catholics don’t think of the Pope as God.
They believe that he is infalliable only through the power of the holy spirit.
If you sincerely believe that scripture is inerrant, why then do you take books out? You don’t really believe that scripture is inerrant, you believe that your own opinion of scripture is inerrant. Which is why books have been stripped out.
As a protestant who largely believes in Sola Scriptura, I can say I have NEVER thought either of the two things you said; nor have I ever heard any preacher or teacher say anything like that. If you want to assert that this is part of what "Sola Scriptura" means, please provide a link to an authoritative source which makes the claim you state.
“At some point, some group decided they didn’t want to deal with what those books say and dropped them for no reason anyone has ever been able to explain or justify to me. “
There is a ton of good reading on canon issues here:
http://www.bible-researcher.com/canon.html
>>The Bible; a word not found in Scripture<<
The word is the title of the scripture. It means “Book”. You are mincing words.
>>Scripture also teaches that we are all intercessors for one another: <<
I firmly agree. Now I will mince words. And to reference the entirety of the thought (verses 1 and 2): I urge, then, first of all, that petitions, prayers, intercession and thanksgiving be made for all people— 2 for kings and all those in authority, that we may live peaceful and quiet lives in all godliness and holiness.” I see that as instruction to those who are reading his words to Timothy. That would be people who are still occupying their “earthly tent” (body). IOW, those who are alive.
And the important thought is, who are those “petitions, prayers, intercession and thanksgiving” to be made to? I would say Jesus - directly. Since he is our “mediator”. We (the living) intercede for one another.
>>You fail to discern the difference between intercessor and mediator. I suggest that you actually read the Bible and have a dictionary handy while you do, before you comment on what it says.<<
You are mincing words again. You are correct however. I look at “mediate vs intercede” as similar in relationship as “imply vs infer”. The meaning is different, but the words are related, and sometimes (and incorrectly) seen as interchangeable.
Do a bible search on Melchizedek.
RobRoy,
If you look at the history of this thread, and the thread it refers to, you will see that the “Troll” comment is an echo of an identical post in that other thread by the originator of this thread.
At first, I also thought it was a harsh comment, but after looking I realised it was just a recipricol comment, so I let it go.
>>Since the Bible teaches that the Lord Jesus is our intercessor, <<
You are correct. To be precise, I should have said “mediator”.
>>Since the Bible teaches that the Lord Jesus is our intercessor, <<
You are correct. To be precise, I should have said “mediator”. But I do see it as mincing words. Here is the dictionary definition of intercede:
1. To plead on another’s behalf.
2. To act as mediator in a dispute.
Notice the close relationship of the words. And as I mentioned in another post, do a search on Melchizedek.
ROFL!!!!
That's how I deal with it ...
And you believe that the Pope but not the Scriptures is inspired by the Spirit?
"All Scripture is God-breathed".
Scripture is self-evident so the books that you are referring to were never true scripture to begin with.
No, I don’t believe my interpretation of scripture is inerrant. The Bible is still inerrant, but humans are not, including the pope. I admit that I don’t speak on any position with absolute authority.
“So when Jesus said, “It is written...”, he was lying?” What? Does your Bible not contain the Old Testament? Of the 39 books of the OT, not one single word is unknown to Him.
>>“Jesus was not especially respectful in how he referred to her”
Really? Which is why when he was dying, he tells John that Mary is his mother, and John interprets this to take Mary into his household to care for her.<<
The two are not contradictory.
>>Did your wife seek a dispensation to marry a protestant? How often did she attend mass? I’m sorry, but if she left the church to marry, then she’s not a ‘devout Catholic’.<<
My wife’s first husband died of Leukemia in his late 20’s, leaving her with three single digit aged kids and no life insurance. She was a devout Catholic and highly involved in outreach activities but, unlike the rest of her family, she actually READ the Bible and had questions about some of the “apparent” contradictions. The answers she was given by church leadership were not satisfactory in the vein of a biology student asking his college professor about irregularities in the chain of evolution can often be less than enlightening.
It got so bad that she eventually left the church and became protestant. About ten years later we met (age 43).
Regarding the church fathers, meh. That is merely argumentum “appeal to authority”, which is very popular with those who believe in man made global warming. If what they teach contradicts scripture, my personal God has empowered me to throw it out as I would the claims of any other man.
I do think I can be taught by other humans, but I’m not going to accept their words cart blanch simply because they lived before me. The Jews in Jesus time were terribly misguided by their equivalent of “church fathers”.
So are today’s Muslims and Mormons.
And you have access because Jesus is your High Priest! And that's what the book of Hebrews is all about.
You don't need to ask your family members for prayers...you have Christ Himself taking your prayers and praying on behalf of you to the Father.
I have had Catholics say to me that they are too sinful to come into God's presence. If they are believers and walking in obedience this is nonsense. They don't need to cling to other measures to approach God. You are in Christ...if you are a believer you are washed clean because of His blood and are blameless.
>>Son behold thy mother, mother behold thy son doesn’t apply to you?<<
I assume you are referring to John 19: 26,27:
When Jesus therefore saw his mother, and the disciple standing by, whom he loved, he saith unto his mother, Woman, behold thy son!
Then saith he to the disciple, Behold thy mother! And from that hour that disciple took her unto his own home.
I think this is pretty straightforward, He was telling the disciple (arguably, John) to take care of His mother. Makes total sense, especially if her husband had passed away or was otherwise unable to see to her needs.
There is so much the Bible does not say about the life of Jesus, and there is a tremendous temptation to try to fill in those gaps based on real stretches of the meaning of fairly plain and straightforward comments.
It may be why one bible translates the above words, in modern plain English, to say: When Jesus saw his mother standing there beside the disciple he loved, he said to her, “Dear woman, here is your son.” And he said to this disciple, “Here is your mother.” And from then on this disciple took her into his home.
Too many people are like the man in “Life of Brian” that, when brian loses a sandal, interprets it to mean “we are all to remove one sandal”
It is the same error that Pre-Tribulationists make when they interpret the beginning of Revelation 4 to be the rapture. Personally, I think there is much more support for Revelation 7:9 addressing an event like that, but that’s just me. I don’t have complete knowledge “For now we see through a glass, darkly; but then face to face: now I know in part; but then shall I know even as also I am known.
- 1 Corinthians 13:12
“The two are not contradictory.”
He was very respectful of her. The examples usually cited, “who are my fathers, my mothers, my brothers, etc” is why Christians call each other brothers and sisters. It is not because they do not love their biological family, but that the concept of a family is spiritual.
As for, “I am in my Father’s house.” He’s the Son of God. Mary was concerned for his wellbeing and he was reassuring her.
As for, “His family thought that he was crazy”, does not refer to Mary. As with most of these things, it involves reading into stuff that’s not there.
As for your wife, “the answers she was given by church leadership were not satisfactory”.
I’ve been on both sides of this equation. The story isn’t unusual for ‘Cradle Catholics’, to question their own faith and then leave the Church. If what you’ve given me here is a sample of her issues and her arguments, then I can only conclude that she was poorly taught her faith. None of these concerns are all that solid.
I would agree with you, save for what Christ said before, “whoever believes in me, and does what God teaches, is my father, mother, etc).
Mary is our mother, just as we are brothers.
>>I find it hard to believe that what you are claiming is true. Is it your contention that your wife,
“my wife was Catholic for a little over 30 years”
never recited the Confiteor in all that time? I say BS.<<
OK, believe what you want.
>>As a linguistic literalist you obviously are not familiar with the teaching of Calvin, Luther and Zwingli; for starters, on the perpetual virginity of the Blessed Virgin Mary either.<<
I’m more interested in the teaching of Jesus and the authors of the books of the Bible. With earthly teachers, God has given me the right and authority to accept what I believe edifies and is truthful and reject that for which I cannot find any scriptural support. That is why I am not a Mormon.
The Jews in Jesus time followed their teachers, who were dead wrong. After all, they were just men.
Hey, I’ve heard people say she was just a “damn incubator”, so, there you have it. Wonder no more.
Regards
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.