Is Prayer/Veneration/Worship to Mary Biblical?

self | 12-14-14 | ealgeone

[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.

[Texas Songwriter]

Thank you for your reply. I just finished reading Peter de Rosa's Vicars of Christ. De Rosa is a catholic and does not criticize the popes. I am convinced that anyone of the catholic faith who read the history of the popes, their Bulls and decrees to murder millions of people for believing in the scripture above the pope would be horrified. Their quest for absolute power over people and kings was insatiable. They murdered, by fire, 3 year old children, infants, women, children, men after the Inquisitors found them guilty of heresy. They defined heresy as believing differently than they believed. The torture was ordered by the popes and the original Inquisitors were Domincans who swore allegiance to Pope Gregory IX. The Jesuits came in later to become Inquisitors. It is said by Lea, de Rosa and other historians that the killing at the direct order of the popes dwarfed any number of murders by Stalin, Mao, Hitler, over the 600 years+ that it was prosecuted. And never so much as an apology for the popes ordering their deaths. It is true that John Paul II apologized for some deaths during the Inquisition carried out by some catholics, but never the popes. The sheer magnitude of the killing is unimaginable.

How anyone can lay claim that they are vicars of Christ and/or their followers defies logic. To say they follow the decrees of infallible popes on morals and faith.....to order these murders......and say they are followers of the One who said, 'Do good to those who despitefully use you", or 'Turn the other cheek", or "If someone takes your coat, give him your cloak also",........is obscene.

[Mark17]

You might be interested in a movie I saw back in the 70s, put out by Bob Jones University, called Flame in the Wind, set during the Spanish Inquisition. It was anything but pretty. The description being, would people choose a system that offered safety, protection and respectability, or Jesus Christ, who offers salvation from sin, and possible torture and death. A stark choice indeed, but a choice made by many. Now, I ask you, would people willingly be burned at the stake for a lie? I don’t believe that for a second. They went to their deaths, knowing they had the truth. Suppose?

[Elsie]

Some do not have that habit.

Where are the references?

[Elsie]

Says the person who ‘respects’ stuff that ain’t in Scripture.

[metmom]

They redefine EVERYTHING.

It’s the only way they can make their religion work for them.

[metmom]

There was one guy I worked with who was a Christian and I couldn’t stand him for a lot of reasons, and sadly they weren’t because he was a Christian.

He was not a nice person for all his witnessing.

And yet, being under the conviction of the Holy Spirit, I somehow KNEW what he was saying was true.

So it was his words and the life lived by another person who I knew before he became a Christian and I had watched the change in his life that convinced me of the truth of the preaching of the guy I didn’t like.

And BTW, I didn’t like him any more after I became saved.

[metmom]

Fortunately so far here, I have not seen any RC attempt it, which is much to their credit as logicians.

Well, now that you've given them the idea, we'll see it popping up all over the place.

However, we also now know where it comes from and how irrational it is.

[St_Thomas_Aquinas]

Says the person who ‘respects’ stuff that ain’t in Scripture.

Stuff like Sola Scriptura?

[CynicalBear]

>>Very clever, Jesus was.<<

Yes He was!! He knew that those Jews who took Him to mean literal blood that they would leave. He knew they were not His to begin with and that they wouldn't understand the spiritual meaning of His words.

1 Corinthians 2:14 The person without the Spirit does not accept the things that come from the Spirit of God but considers them foolishness, and cannot understand them because they are discerned only through the Spirit.

The Jews knew it would be breaking the law to eat blood but didn't understand that Jesus was not talking about the physical blood. Jesus knew they would leave. On the other hand those who were pagan would not be offended by the eating of the blood of their god as that was a custom with them anyway. So they would go right along with the idea of eating the physical blood. Only those who understood that He was speaking of the Spiritual would be His true followers. It actually isn't called clever it's "all knowing".

>>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 then explained to those who stayed but understood that those carnal minds without the Holy Spirit would not understand.

John 6:63 It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life.

Those "without the Spirit do not accept the things that come from the Spirit" so the carnal Jews would not understand and the pagans would simply continue eating the blood of who they perceived as their god. The Catholic Church simply adopted the pagan perspective as they did many other pagan beliefs.

[CynicalBear]

>>there is ample evidence proving Peter wasn't THE first Pope of Rome<<

It's interesting to note that the Catholic Church has to revise both scripture and secular history to even place Peter in Rome as a Bishop let alone a pope.

[CynicalBear]

>>He must agree with them too...<<

I would challenge you to find anyone else here who has had the audacity to claim the Holy Spirit agrees "with them" 100% of the time.

[CynicalBear]

>>Thus affirming that what he drank was not blood, but, "FRUIT OF THE VINE".<<

Only those with the Holy Spirit as their guide understand those words. Those who follow the carnal pagan beliefs of the Catholic Church will not.

[CynicalBear]

>>I'd like to hear your rationalization for this doozy.<<

It would actually be humorous to watch if it weren't so sad.

[CynicalBear]

>>I don't think that this silly post is worth answering<<

And yet here you are answering it.

[CynicalBear]

>>His sinlessness<<

That one for sure eliminates those who follow the beliefs of the Catholic Church. They ascribe to Jesus the sin of eating blood and encouraging others to do so.

[CynicalBear]

>>Stuff like Sola Scriptura?<<

And yet you fail to produce any evidence outside of scripture for what the apostles taught. If you don't believe that scripture is the only source for what the apostles taught why don't you produce those other sources?

[af_vet_1981]

Seems personal to me. We no longer huddle in fear below Mt Sinai, but rejoice on Mt Zion.

Seems odd to me that you quote blessed Mary, mother of God with us; does she also seem to be the mother of God in your eyes ?

[af_vet_1981]

In other words, you make a personal decision about the motivations of others who criticize your personal beliefs. Even when people have told you the name of their denomination in the past, you continue to badger as if they never have - apparently forgetting they ever did. Instead of asking for a denomination in the first place, why not realize what Springfield Reformer and others have been trying to tell you all along? What someone specifically believes comes across in what they SAY on these threads. Knowing the name of a church they worship in won't reveal that since, if you are being honest, EVEN Roman Catholics differ with each other on many areas of faith and morals.

On this very thread there has been disunity among Roman Catholics on an array of subjects. For example, is St. Peter the rock Jesus would build His church upon or was it the FAITH Peter expressed that Christ's ecclesia is built? Was the universe created in six literal days or is evolution responsible for a creation that took eons? Is there such a place as Purgatory or not? Does physical suffering take place there over untold lengths of time or is it a swift, instantaneous jaunt through a spiritual "car-wash"? All those personal preferences you condemn in non-Catholics are every bit as present within your OWN religion, maybe you just don't see it.

So this personal revulsion you express towards not-Catholic Christians because they may not agree with your own personal interpretation of Scripture is all just a bunch of hot air. It's a sidetrack to avoid going deeper into a conversation, a diversionary tactic intended to cease responses. As you can see, they don't work. All it does is make you look foolish, petty and anything BUT Christ-like.

It seems to me these, your comments, were better addressed to yourself.

I remind you again, according to the Apostle to the Gentiles, a woman is not to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man. I regard such attempts as contrary to Sola Scriptura. It seems to me if a woman teaches a man doctrine she should clearly identify the denomination, sect, faith group, or cult sponsoring her and eschew the doctrine of Sola Scriptura.

Next time you get the kind of inspiration to post to or about me, remember and own your words. Do not post to me (bold emphasis below mine) or about me (backbiting).

December 31, 2014 at 3:24:41 PM EST · 4,403 of 4,958
boatbums to af_vet_1981
I feel like you are just baiting me now. I feel like you don't really care what I believe as long as I believe something contrary to what you believe. I feel like this dialog is pointless and I waste my time trying to explain to you what I think and believe after you pepper me with questions. I feel like the Holy Spirit is telling me to pray for you more and post to you less. Buh-bye!

[Springfield Reformer]

Seems odd to me that you quote blessed Mary

What seems odd to me is this false dilemma, where if we don't see Mary according to the four (someday five) false Roman dogmas about her, then we don't love her, don't respect her, wouldn't even bother quoting her.  This is "dilemma" is false. Utter nonsense. There is a third way.  We respect Mary as much as we should, but no more.  And someday, when the deception of all the false apparitions has been fully exposed, and the idolatrous distortions of the false dogmas long forgotten, and we who believe are all seated together at the wedding feast of Jesus and His Bride, we will enjoy the new wine of the Kingdom alongside Mary and the apostles and all who have ever worshiped Him in spirit and in truth, as true brothers and sisters, with the full measure of divine love, undisturbed by any foolish talk of Queens or other pretenders to the throne, but having only one King, one Elder Brother, one Mediator and advocate set between us and God the Father, the Groom of the Heavenly wedding, Blessed Jesus, Messiah, Savior, still bearing the wounds that healed us, resurrected and triumphant Son of the Living God, Blessed forever, Amen.

Peace,

SR