I almost stopped reading at this juvenile reply. What are you? 14 years old?
“btw...that’s a catholic priest in the photo in his knees before a statue of Mary.” So would you falsely accuse him of worshiping the statue OF Mary or Mary herself? Yeah, again, an anti-Catholic Protestant would be stupid enough to believe either thing.
In either case it's a graven image and the Bible clearly teaches we are not to worship or pray to graven images...or even make them for worship.
“Where? Need the verse.” I realize Protestants are often grossly ignorant about scripture, but you really need to learn how to use a search engine. I told you it was in St. Paul. Use the word “tradition” in a search engine at biblegateway or something.
Oh gee...thanks o' wise one...I never would have thought to do that. Hence the reason I asked you to show the verses that support tradition. There are three verses the RCC hangs their hat on for tradition. When read in their context, and not lifted out like the RCC does, there is no support for the "tradition" the RCC claims. Let's see if you can find them.
Only Christ can save us.” Yep, and Mary cooperated with His plan from the start.
Outside of giving birth to Christ and raising Him, Mary has NOTHING to do with our salvation. She plays zero part in our salvation. There is NOTHING in the Bible to support the allegations of the RCC.
Which looks remarkably like this from Wikipedia: “Mediatrix of All Graces is a special Marian title that some Roman Catholics give to the Blessed Virgin Mary as the mother of Jesus Christ, encompassing the belief that all the graces and blessings that her son gives come through her.” So, you’re cutting and pasting without attribution now? Gee, that really makes me think you’re honest. . . not.
Hey look...you know how to use a search engine! Regardless of the source and that it was not referenced, it remains a title the RCC give to Mary and it blasphemy. Sorry you don't like it.
“Vatican Website: Encyclical of Pope Leo 13th on the Rosary, Octobri Mense, Pope Leo 13th, 1903-1914)” First, you didn’t get that from the Vatican website or else you would have simply posted a link.
I don't give the reference and you're not happy and then I give the reference and you're not happy. Does it alter what is said?
I also left this out:
How grateful and magnificent a spectacle to see in the cities, and towns, and villages, on land and sea -- wherever the Catholic faith has penetrated -- many hundreds of thousands of pious people uniting their praises and prayers with one voice and heart at every moment of the day, saluting Mary, invoking Mary, hoping everything through Mary. http://www.papalencyclicals.net/Leo13/l13ro1.htm
Happy?
oh and there's lots more on the false teachings of Mary I haven't provided:
We notice that Vatican II did not add the words "of all graces." However, as many papal texts point out, Mary's role in dispensation flows logically from her role in acquiring all graces. Further, the Council itself added a note on the above passage, in which it refers us to the texts of Leo XIII, Adiutricem populi, St. Pius X, Ad diem illum, Pius XI, Miserentissimus Redemptor, and Pius XII, Radiomessage to Fatima. Leo XIII, in the text referred to, spoke of her, as we saw above, as having "practically limitless power." St. Pius X said she was the "dispensatrix of all the gifts, and is the "neck" connecting the Head of the Mystical Body to the Members. But all power flows through the neck. Pius XII said "Her kingdom is as vast as that of her Son and God, since nothing is excluded from her dominion." These and many other texts speak in varied ways of Mary as Mediatrix of all graces, so often that the teaching has become infallible. https://www.ewtn.com/faith/teachings/marya4.htmn
And that is a fabrication right out of the pit.
Sure it does: Peter had no way of giving or retaining forgiveness unless someone told him what their sins were. THINK. Look up 2 Corinthians 2:10 in an old pre-1966 Bible (Catholic or Protestant). See it? Look for the word “person”. Do you know why it is there?,
have you ever had a course on interpreting the Bible and looking at the verse in question in its context??
I await your enlightened answer.
“I almost stopped reading at this juvenile reply. What are you? 14 years old?”
Just as I thought: What I was so obviously true that you can’t actually deal with it. Again, if you’re going to claim “when you’re own your knees before someone, it’s worship” then I suggest you actually think it through. If you knelt down on one knee to ask your wife to marry you, you, according TO YOUR LOGIC, worshipped your girlfriend.
“In either case it’s a graven image and the Bible clearly teaches we are not to worship or pray to graven images...”
Catholics don’t worship or pray to graven images. Period.
“or even make them for worship.”
False. 1 Kings 6:23. Once again we see that Protestant anti-Catholics just don’t seem to know the Bible very well.
“Oh gee...thanks o’ wise one...I never would have thought to do that.”
Apparently not. So far you apparently didn’t think about kneeling in front of a woman you want to marry you is worship according to your logic, nor (apparently) did you about the statues of cherubim in the Temple.
“Hence the reason I asked you to show the verses that support tradition.”
You’re the one who needs to find them.
“There are three verses the RCC hangs their hat on for tradition. When read in their context, and not lifted out like the RCC does, there is no support for the “tradition” the RCC claims. Let’s see if you can find them.”
I don’t have to find them. Post as you want.
“Outside of giving birth to Christ and raising Him, Mary has NOTHING to do with our salvation.”
That’s not how orthodox Christians see it. Only Protestant sectarians see it as you do. Their Johnny-come-lately opinion (and yours) simply doesn’t matter.
“She plays zero part in our salvation. There is NOTHING in the Bible to support the allegations of the RCC.”
True is not an allegation. I can see why a Protestant anti-Catholic might see truth as a mere allegation, however.
“Hey look...you know how to use a search engine!”
But you apparently struggle to post simple attributions.
“Regardless of the source and that it was not referenced, it remains a title the RCC give to Mary and it blasphemy. Sorry you don’t like it.”
What I like or don’t like is immaterial. Passing off someone else’s material as your own, however, is another matter. Protestant anti-Catholics do that sort of thing, however.
“I don’t give the reference and you’re not happy and then I give the reference and you’re not happy. Does it alter what is said?”
Relying on a an anti-Catholic website like CARM – which is what you did – shows that you probably only know the anti-Catholic view and probably aren’t interested in the truth in any case.
“Happy?”
I have no reason to be unhappy about people praising God’s work in and through Mary.
“oh and there’s lots more on the false teachings of Mary I haven’t provided:”
Again, there’s nothing wrong with the quote.
“And that is a fabrication right out of the pit.”
No, it isn’t. Anti-Catholic Protestants fabricate things all the time.
“have you ever had a course on interpreting the Bible and looking at the verse in question in its context??”
Yes.