Tagged: Mary

Fielding more anti-Catholic objections

Anti-Catholic said:

Good thing I’m not in that religious cult where free thinking is prohibited. It’s based in Rome, heard of it?

Again, I thank you for providing this statement. It makes it very simple to compare your teachings to Scripture and Catholic Doctrine to Scripture.

So, is so called “free thinking” approved of in Scripture? Let us see what Scripture says:
Proverbs 3:5
Trust in the LORD with all thine heart; and lean not unto thine own understanding.

Not in that verse. No.
Hebrews 13:17
Obey them that have the rule over you, and submit yourselves: for they watch for your souls, as they that must give account, that they may do it with joy, and not with grief: for that is unprofitable for you.

Not in that verse, either.
1 Timothy 4:16
Take heed unto thyself, and unto the doctrine; continue in them: for in doing this thou shalt both save thyself, and them that hear thee.

Nor in that verse.
Romans 6:17
But God be thanked, that ye were the servants of sin, but ye have obeyed from the heart that form of doctrine which was delivered you.
Matthew 18:17
King James Version (KJV)
17 And if he shall neglect to hear them, tell it unto the church: but if he neglect to hear the church, let him be unto thee as an heathen man and a publican.
Not there either. Can you provide any verse which supports or promotes “free thinking”?

Please ignore everything I say –

I’m doing my best.

but you can’t ignore the Bible.

We know. We follow the Teaching of Scripture diligently. It is the Teaching of the Church. The Church wrote the New Testament and canonized the Old and then bound them together in one Holy Book.

Is that arrogance? You’d only think so if you mistook what I said for what the Bible said. If you make that mistake, shame on you, not me.

Its not we who mistake what you say for what the Bible actually says. It is you confounding the two.

The Bible says sorcery and enchantment really exist (eg, Ex 7:11, Acts 8:9, Isaiah 47:12, Prov 6:13) –

That is Catholic Teaching. That is why we have Exorcists.

whether Jack Van Impe (“imp” means a devil) uses it is pure speculation.

I have no idea who this guy is nor what you guys are talking about. Carry on. No comment on my part.

Also, the Bible has a rapture (Rev 14:14-16; Matthew 25:1) and a rapture (2 Thess 2:6-7; 1 Cor 15:52)- if you can reconcile them some other way than one post-trib and other pre-trib, then go ahead.

Only the Father knows. I’ll leave it to Him to reveal it in His good time.

And if you can explain the mystery of James the son of Alphaeus who is Christ’s brother – without changing the text – then go ahead.

Easily. The word “adelphos” is used to mean “close or intimate friend” as in the following:

Mat 23:8 But 1161 be 2564 0 not 3361 ye 5210 called 2564 Rabbi 4461: for 1063 one 1520 is 2076 your 5216 Master 2519, [even] Christ 5547; and 1161 all 3956 ye 5210 are 2075 brethren 80.

All of the Apostles are brethren according to Christ.

Strong’s G80 – adelphos

The word used there is adelphos.

Jhn 20:17 Jesus 2424 saith 3004 unto her 846, Touch 680 me 3450 not 3361; for 1063 I am 305 0 not yet 3768 ascended 305 to 4314 my 3450 Father 3962: but 1161 go 4198 to 4314 my 3450 brethren 80, and 2532 say 2036 unto them 846, I ascend 305 unto 4314 my 3450 Father 3962, and 2532 your 5216 Father 3962; and 2532 [to] my 3450 God 2316, and 2532 your 5216 God 2316.

This disproves the Protestant teaching that adelphos must always be a “brother of the womb”.

Ignore me every time –

Still doing my best.

but the Bible says what it says.

Yeah. And the Bible continually supports Catholic doctrine because it is based upon Catholic Teaching.

Why do you concern yourself so much with Mary while avoiding a Bible-based study of her?

Hm? It is you who concern yourself with denying the Bible based doctrines concerning the Mother of Our Lord.

Isn’t that rather ridiculous?

Your position is, yes.

We can thank Reformers for any Bible doctrine that stamps out men’s traditions –

No. It is precisely the opposite. The Reformers confounded the teaching of Scripture and have led many people astray, including you.

including the reformers’ traditions.

Any of their traditions which contradict the Teaching of the Catholic Church also contradict Scripture.

Traditions are fine unless the Bible says otherwise.

Exactly! Let me give you a clear example. Protestants say “justified by faith alone.” Scripture says:

James 2:24
Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only.

Why should snake handling cults shock people more than Roman Catholics whipping themselves or crucifying themselves??

Why should Catholics whipping themselves or crucifying themselves shock people more than snake handling Christians?

Galatians 2:20
I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me.

1 Corinthians 9:27
27 But I keep under my body, and bring it into subjection: lest that by any means, when I have preached to others, I myself should be a castaway.

1 Pet 4:1
Forasmuch then as Christ hath suffered for us in the flesh, arm yourselves likewise with the same mind: for he that hath suffered in the flesh hath ceased from sin;

Let the Pope sit in this special little seat and acknowledge the supremacy of the King James Bible over everything – then we will have something worthwhile to unify around.

The King James Bible is a translation based in part upon St. Jerome’s Latin Vulgate. It is St. Jerome’s Latin Vulgate which is the best translation of the originals that ever existed.

That sordid bigot Leo X attacked Martin Luther and cut his church off from the work of God – which continued elsewhere.

It is the other way around. Martin Luther cut himself off from the work of God when he revolted against the Church.

Romanism went on to enacted the ludicrous “anathemas” in the Council of Trent – cutting itself off completely from Bible Christianity.

Still more error on your part. The Catholic Church did precisely what She was supposed to do when She condemned the heinous errors of the Protestants.

Luther wrote to the German princes that in view of Rome’s manifest failure to lead the flock of God, it was necessary that fellow Christians – who are all priests – appoint their own bishops. He was exactly right – 2 Tim 2:2.

He was wrong. He innovated and changed the Word of God. Thereby disobeying the verse you have provided in support of his heinous behavior:
2 Timothy 2:
2 And the things that thou hast heard of me among many witnesses, the same commit thou to faithful men, who shall be able to teach others also.

This is the support for Apostolic Succession. He flagrantly also violated this Scripture:
Hebrews 13:17
17 Obey them that have the rule over you, and submit yourselves: for they watch for your souls, as they that must give account, that they may do it with joy, and not with grief: for that is unprofitable for you.

Of course, “pillar and ground of the truth” (1 Tim 3:15) isn’t a sarcastic title when applied to saved believers under Christ’s head – but it is when applied to Romanism under the pope’s head.

On the contrary, it is a perfect description of the Catholic Church. The term “saved believers” when applied to Protestants is irony in its purest form. It is they who deny the Fountains of God’s grace which are the Sacraments. The only vessels by which they can be saved in this life.

In that very chapter, 1 Timothy 3, Paul says Bishops should be married.

And in another verse he says that in order to better serve the Lord a man should remain unmarried:
1 Corinthians 7:32
But I would have you without carefulness. He that is unmarried careth for the things that belong to the Lord, how he may please the Lord:

Which verse carries the greater force in your opinion?

So please forgive me if I involuntarily snicker when somebody calls Rome the “pillar and ground of the truth.”

It is God whose forgiveness you should seek for belittling the Church which His Son sacrificed Himself to build:
Ephesians 5:
24 Therefore as the church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in every thing. 25 Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it;

You aren’t aware of the “co-redemptrix” lobby? Once they get their way you will then have ample opportunity to “explain” how this didn’t deify Mary, like you explain so many other “consistencies” from 313 AD until the present.

Mary is co-redemptrix. It is a simple title which acknowledges that we are all fellow laborers with God and she chief among us because she brought Christ into the world:
1 Corinthians 3:9
For we are labourers together with God: ye are God’s husbandry, ye are God’s building.

Remember your loyalty must be first and foremost to holy scripture.

First and foremost to God and His Word which is taught us in Sacred Tradition and Sacred Scripture by the One, Holy, Apostolic and Catholic Church.

If you think God doesn’t allow his people to be tested by a corrupt religious leadership run by the devil, then you need to re-read the lessons taught in the Old Testament.

I believe it. It is you being tested by the corrupt leadership which you follow and which has mainlined the sins of adultery (Matthew 5:32), abortion (abortifacent contraception), homosexuality (permits homosexual ministers and has written homosexual versions of Scripture), etc. etc.


De Maria

Scripture says, “All generations shall call me blessed!”

Provide evidence from Scripture

I asked:
“Is there evidence of her sinfulness? Is there any evidence at all, in Scripture, that Mary committed any sin? Please provide chapter and verse so that we may discuss it.
Please provide the verses which you think deny her perpetual virginity. Chapter and verse.

Curious Presbyterian responded:
Demanding proof of negatives

Negatives. Before I continue I want to make sure to note that you just admitted that there is no evidence in Scripture that Mary committed any sin nor any evidence in Scripture which denies Mary’s perpetual virginity.

Demanding proof of negatives is a logical fallacy.

I’m not demanding proof of negatives. I’m asking you to provide positive evidence to support your contentions. Protestants claim they don’t believe anything which is not explicitly in Scripture. Well, where does Scripture say that Mary sinned and that Mary was not perpetually a virgin? Provide your positive proof.

We don’t concoct a bunch of beliefs and then demand that others show where the Bible denies them.

But you concoct a bunch of beliefs and claim that they are in Scripture and they are not. In fact, they contradict Scripture. Here’s an example. Where does Scripture say to hold Scripture alone? Have you folks not read in Scripture:
2 Thessalonians 2:15
Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle.

Let’s see: Mary had two heads. Can you prove me wrong by showing me where scripture denies it? “Chapter and verse.” Thought not . . .

I’m not the one who believes in Scripture alone. I believe in Scripture and Tradition as taught by the Magisterium. And the Magisterium always depicts a one headed Mary.

her assumption into Heaven

We see in Scripture (Rev 12:1) where a Woman who gave birth to the Messiah is found bodily in heaven. Since Mary is the mother of the Messiah, Jesus, we conclude that the Woman depicted in Rev 12 is symbolically teaches that Mary the mother of Jesus Christ is in heaven.  Do you have any proof, from Scripture, to the contrary?

Thought not . . .

Because you didn’t think it through. I’m not Protestant. I’m Catholic. I believe the Church who wrote the Scriptures. Anything that the Scriptures do not mention directly, I can find in the teachings of the Church. Have you ever seen a statue of Mary with two heads?