Posted on 10/14/2017 5:01:38 PM PDT by marshmallow
Actually it is Roman Catholicism that has misrepresented Mary.
That's the unbiblical part.
an advocate, intercessor, (b) a consoler, comforter, helper, (c) Paraclete.
3875 paráklētos (from 3844 /pará, "from close-beside" and 2564 /kaléō, "make a call") – properly, a legal advocate who makes the right judgment-call because close enough to the situation. 3875 /paráklētos ("advocate, advisor-helper") is the regular term in NT times of an attorney (lawyer) – i.e. someone giving evidence that stands up in court.
http://biblehub.com/greek/3875.htm
Therefore the Blessed Virgin is invoked in the Church under the titles of Advocate, Helper, Benefactress, and Mediatrix. CCC 969 http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p123a9p6.htm
Uh-oh....looks like the CCC is not in agreement with Campion.
Saying that Mary is an advocate does not detract from or usurp Christ in any way. Before whom do you think Mary is our advocate? Christ, obviously. Nothing wrong with having one of God's friends on your side.
Well, yes it does detract from and usurp Christ. She's never referred to as such in the New Testament. The RCC has knowingly assigned many of the attributes of Christ and the Holy Spirit to Mary in contradiction of the New Testament.
Only in the your twisted, zero-sum world is loving Mary as Jesus loves Mary somehow an insult to Jesus. If someone loves your mother, is that an insult to you? If someone asks your mother to ask you for a favor, is that an insult to you? Of course not.
Oh no...a Tim Staples apologetic argument. LOL!
But no....Roman Catholics go way beyond just loving Mary....they participate in outright idolatry as noted in this Morning Consecration prayer to Mary.
My Queen, My Mother, I offer myself entirely to thee. And to show my devotion to thee, I offer thee this day, my eyes, my ears, my mouth, my heart, my whole being without reserve. Wherefore, good Mother, as I am thine own, keep me, guard me as thy property and possession. Amen.
And there's a whole bunch more of this at the website below.
http://www.marypages.com/PrayerstoMary.htm
Amen. Second it.
Posts 19 and 20 just confirms it.
The RCC was born not in the 300s but on the day of Pentecost in the Upper Room.
The angel’s declaration to Mary as “full of grace” defines her holiness.
Christ was not born in a stained vessel.
Joseph certainly did not defile this vessel.
Luke 28 And he came to her and said, “Hail, full of grace,[e] the Lord is with you!”
And the angel said to her, “Do not be afraid, Mary, for you have found favor with God.
30 And the angel said to her, “Do not be afraid, Mary, for you have found favor with God
31 And behold, you will conceive in your womb and bear a son, and you shall call his name Jesus.
Luke 35 And the angel said to her,
“The Holy Spirit will come upon you,
and the power of the Most High will overshadow you;
therefore the child to be born[h] will be called holy,
the Son of God.
Christ’s divine nature always was.
Christ’s human nature began at the moment of conception when Mary accepted God’s will.
Luke 38 And Mary said, “Behold, I am the handmaid of the Lord; let it be to me according to your word.”
The Person of Christ is both God and Man.
Mary gave birth to that Person of Christ, who is both God and Man, and thus she is the Mother of God.
To suggest otherwise is anti-biblical and denies the the dual and simultaneous nature of Christ.
As the Catechism of the Catholic Church phrases it, “Christ’s humanity has no other subject than the divine person of the Son of God, who assumed it and made it his own, from his conception. For this reason, the Council of Ephesus proclaimed in 431 that Mary truly became the Mother of God by the human conception of the Son of God in her womb: “Mother of God, not that the nature of the Word or his divinity received the beginning of its existence from the holy Virgin, but that, since the holy body, animated by a rational soul, which the Word of God united to himself according to the hypostasis, was born from her, the Word is said to be born according to the flesh.”
And further, we have Elizabeth’s spontaneous reaction and declaration regarding “the mother of my Lord”:
Luke 41 And when Elizabeth heard the greeting of Mary, the babe leaped in her womb; and Elizabeth was filled with the Holy Spirit 42 and she exclaimed with a loud cry, “Blessed are you among women, and blessed is the fruit of your womb! 43 And why is this granted me, that the mother of my Lord should come to me?
Catholics have never suggested that Mary is Divine or to be worshipped.
Gabriel’s declaration to Mary as being “full of grace” is definitive regarding her sinless nature, as previously noted, Christ would not be born of a stained vessel.
There is no basis for dismissing veneration or requests that she pray to her Son on our behalf, anymore than I may request a friend to pray to Christ for me, in addition to my own direct prayer. To suggest she is constrained in the afterlife would also deny the appearance of Moses and Elijah at the Transfiguration or Samuel’s appearance to Saul.
Finally, you might note that the forces of Pope Pius V, aided by the very prayers you dismiss, were in fact victorious in the Battle of Lepanto.
Not sure why you’re comfortable with gotquestions.org as your pope?
As for your assertion regarding the beginning of the Catholic Church, its right here in:
Matt. 17 And Jesus answered him, “Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jona! For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father who is in heaven. 18 And I tell you, you are Peter,[d] and on this rock[e] I will build my church, and the powers of death[f] shall not prevail against it.[g] 19 I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven,[h] and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.”
“dead”?
Where in Bible does it say that Mary died?
Uh....no.
The practices of the RCC we see today were not present in the NT church.
Well done! I stopped trying to find out what this guy’s problem is with the Catholic church. I’m just not interested in trying to convince someone who is clearly angry at the Church for some reason. Perhaps he he prayed to Mary and the answer was not to his liking hence the anger.
The arrogance evinced is often due to insecurity in one’s own beliefs.
Protestants who are insecure in their own faith are often very prickly and feel they simply must jump down the throat of someone who says something at variance with his particular take. There is no rational discussion with them.
A bad translation leading to bad theology/...especially the immaculate conception which is not supported by Scripture.
The Person of Christ is both God and Man. Mary gave birth to that Person of Christ, who is both God and Man, and thus she is the Mother of God. To suggest otherwise is anti-biblical and denies the the dual and simultaneous nature of Christ.
You were doing fine until you noted "Mother of God". Another title, among many, given to Mary by the Roman Catholic church not supported by the New Testament.
Catholics have never suggested that Mary is Divine or to be worshipped.
The idol of Mary you kneel before, pray to, and invoke for answered prayer says otherwise.
The attributes assigned to Mary by Roman Catholicism say otherwise.
She has been invoked as herefore the Blessed Virgin is invoked in the Church under the titles of Advocate, Helper, Benefactress, and Mediatrix.
These mimic attributes assigned to Jesus and/or the Holy Spirit in the New Testament.
Gabriel’s declaration to Mary as being “full of grace” is definitive regarding her sinless nature, as previously noted, Christ would not be born of a stained vessel.
Again, as previously noted....this is not supported by Scripture as Rome's own documents will attest.
There is no basis for dismissing veneration or requests that she pray to her Son on our behalf, anymore than I may request a friend to pray to Christ for me, in addition to my own direct prayer.
None other than the examples we have in the NT of directing our prayers to God.
When Jesus taught the disciples to pray it was to Our Father.
Paul told the Philippians to make their requests known to God. Phil 4:6-8
John wrote we have confidence in approaching God and noted that if ask according to His will, He will hear us. 1 John 5:14
1 Chronicles 16:11....look to the Lord and His strength; seek His face always.
Jeremiah 29:12 Then you will call upon Me and come and pray to Me and I will listen to you.
Psalm 17:6 I will call on you, my God, for you will answer me' turn your ear to me and hear my prayer.
Psalm 145:18 The Lord is near to all who call on Him, to all who call on Him in truth.
The examples we have in the Bible are clear...we are to pray to God and God only.
Finally, you might note that the forces of Pope Pius V, aided by the very prayers you dismiss, were in fact victorious in the Battle of Lepanto.
The Pope was not the CnC of this fleet. These were not his forces. I will grant he did play a major role in helping organize the Holy League.
You make a big assumption that prayers to Mary were responsible for the victory.
I assure you...I am confident in what I believe.
As one of your fellow Roman Catholic posters noted....if you're going to talk about a fellow freeper, it's common to ping the person.
And for the record...I've never prayed to Mary nor do I intend to as that would be against the Scriptures to do so.
Why do I post on these threads? To counter the false teachings of Rome.
You've must not have paid attention to several of your fellow Roman Catholics.
Mormons also take issue when they are challenged with what they believe.
You are obsessed with this. To the point of psychopathy. You are convinced you’re right regardless of what many people have pointed out that you are wrong in your assertions.
I won’t argue with you because you’re not capable of discerning reality on this subject.
I will continue to point out the errors of Roman Catholicism. I know I am not alone in this position.
Your position could easily be turned around to you. Roman Catholics are convinced they are right no matter how many times they've been shown otherwise...to the point of psychopathy.
I use Rome's own words and contrast them to Scripture. When one does this the gulf between what Rome advances and what Scripture advances is wide in many cases.
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.