Posted on 12/14/2014 11:57:21 AM PST by ealgeone
The reason for this article is to determine if the worship/veneration given to Mary by the catholic church is justified from a Biblical perspective. This will be evaluated using the Biblical standard and not man’s standard.
Given the time we are rapidly approaching and the current pope with the split we see emerging in the Catholic Church we are going to see those Catholics here in some serious turmoil. With those ex cathedra “subject to the Roman Pontiff” statements Catholics have some serious soul searching to do.
They might think so but there is a rude awakening coming for them.
Revelation 18:4 Then I heard another voice from heaven say: "'Come out of her, my people,' so that you will not share in her sins, so that you will not receive any of her plagues;
I have always suspected that verse to refer to those in the Catholic Church who God is calling. I am now more convinced than ever it is.
>>Or liberal pro-abortion and pro-homosexual marriage politicians and those Catholics who vote for them?<<
Catholics always try to get us to align with some "denomination" or another in an attempt to tie us to whatever that denomination or those in it believe. I often wonder if that means we should associate them with the likes of those corrupt popes or people like Pelosi, Kennedy, and the like.
I thought of checking the posts to list all that could not be ones the Holy Spirit agrees with, but it could be considered personal and use up too much bandwidth.
I think the truth is quite clear...
1 John 4:1 Dear friends, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God...CynicalBear, We keep plodding on, "he that knoweth God heareth us; he that is not of God heareth not us."4:5,6 They are of the world: therefore speak they of the world, and the world heareth them.
6 We are of God: he that knoweth God heareth us; he that is not of God heareth not us. Hereby know we the spirit of truth, and the spirit of error.
>>I simply do not think y’all worship Jesus.<< It certainly is not the Jesus of scripture.CynicalBear, I would love to get a copy of the Bible that you edited! I would imagine you did so with the prayerful help of the Holy Spirit.would that be the scripture that the Catholic church brought down through the 1,600 years before you edited it???
terycarl, please show proof of CB saying he edited scriptures. If it's not true, you know that is against the rules of the Religion Forum.
Does the Holy Spirit agree with you 100% when you break the rules?
If so, it's better to say "some" spirit agrees with me 100%.
The Holy Spirit never agrees with falsehoods.
I would also!! If it ever shows up I will have to state like Paul did "-whether in the body or apart from the body I do not know, but God knows".
My aunt Elizabeth died one year ago last November. She was born with crossed eyes. She told me that one of her earliest memories was kneeling in front of her mother with her elbows on her mother's knees listening to her mother read to her from the BIble.
She became a nurse, married a WWII serviceman and had two fine boys.
She and I would have long conversations about Jesus. We were of different faiths - she being a Pentecostal and I am a Roman Catholic. However, that really didn't matter because we both loved Jesus with all our hearts.
She was a woman who never told a lie, never gossiped about others, was always ready to help all around her as she was able. When her pastor's wife died, my aunt organized women to clean and make dinner for him for six months.
I loved to sit and eat her fried okra and black-eyed peas and cornbread and banana pudding. She made the world's best sweet ice tea.
The world never knew her but her family and close friends did. She was a woman of solid virtue. She was humble and lived for others. I am blessed to have known and loved her.
That is how I feel about Mary, the mother of Jesus.
Jesus and NOT Simon is the “rock” upon which Jesus said he was founding his Church?
Riiiiight. Jesus renamed Simon with the new name of “ROCK” just to emphasize that by “rock” he DIDN’T intend to refer to SIMON.
Very clever, Jesus was.
Just as he said we must EAT his body and DRINK his blood—in order to make clear to us that he DIDN’T want us to eat his body and drink his blood.
And they called REAGAN the “Great Communicator.”
I do not understand that. Isn’t Jesus enough?
Affirmative Mama. He is enough. We need none other than He. In fact, if we try to put others in, such as a co-redemptrix, we then begin to have some SERIOUS problems, even if some might say, well, Jesus is 99% enough, but we still need 1% of someone else's help. Not going to happen. He is 100% all we need, NO ONE else need apply.
“She was a woman of solid virtue. She was humble and lived for others. I am blessed to have known and loved her. That is how I feel about Mary, the mother of Jesus.”
Totally agree. To that I would add the place in history God graciously gave her.
1 Corinthians 10:4 And did all drink the same spiritual drink: for they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them: and that Rock was Christ.No, if the not-so-Roman patristic writers, including Augustine, were able to get this right, and are joined by both Peter and Paul in seeing Jesus as the Rock, then there is no way Jesus can be faulted as a communicator, simply because some newer kids on the block are unwilling to remember these simple and easily accessible things. To paraphrase the Bard, the fault is not in our Savior, but in ourselves.
1 Peter 2:7-8 Unto you therefore which believe he is precious: but unto them which be disobedient, the stone which the builders disallowed, the same is made the head of the corner, (8) And a stone of stumbling, and a rock of offence, even to them which stumble at the word, being disobedient: whereunto also they were appointed.
sure they did. If you read he bible and interpret it PROPERLY it is very easy to see.
Based on whose understanding?
The Roman Pontiff to which all catholics are to submit based on catholic writings....or an individual's own personal understanding??
The question begs to be answered.
By "interpret it PROPERLY", you mean as the Roman Catholic church TODAY interprets it??? Within this nearing 5000 post thread as well as what Scripture really DOES say - and doesn't say, there is ample evidence proving Peter wasn't THE first Pope of Rome, that he didn't set up a single, over all authoritative magesterium, that he did not name a successor to his papacy (though he did lay hands on MANY that would carry on the teachings of the faith throughout the world) and he did not even think of himself as the rock on which the church of Jesus Christ was built - Peter KNEW that the ONLY rock was Christ. Though he was outspoken and sometimes put his mouth in motion before he engaged his brain, he was a humble man who did not think more of himself than he should. I imagine if he was here today and saw what has been done under his name, he would be extremely upset and disappointed.
So, no, sorry, there isn't any way to read the Bible and "interpret" what was never there in the first place. Besides, why bother trying to argue for Scriptural authority for what your religion teaches? They have stated on numerous occasions that they don't need it as the truth is whatever they say is the truth - when they say it. Y'all don't believe in sola Scriptura, remember?
Well, I don't think that I am the only one...numerous people on this thread have said that they don't need the Catholic church because they get their guidance directly from the Holy Spirit...He must agree with them too...
I say to you, among those born of women there is no one greater than John; yet he who is least in the kingdom of God is greater than he.” Luke 7:28
John didn't get a new name and Jesus says he is greater than anyone born of woman....that would include Mary as well.
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.