Could someone explain?

I believe that would be Maryology -the study of Mary. as opposed to Theology- the study of God.
Or was that some kind of intended (and for the thinner skinned -offensive) Freudian slip. </font>[/QUOTE]Actually, that is the correct theological term.

 

Well then it is neither Theo, nor logical

 

". But even were there, the cannot simply set aside that only Christ is able to make intercession, I believe the Bible says he makes intercession.

Having the Son of God as my mediator, I have access to the Throne of Grace. There is no need for me to seek any kind of access by any other.
"

So you never ask anyone else for prayers? Was Paul weak minded in asking others for prayers? Your making a logical leap that does not have anything to do with Catholic theology. We believe that Jesus Christ is the one mediator between God and man of the new covenant. It is through that mediation that are prayers for others are of any good. Paul says it is good for us to pray for others in the timothy verse. In other verses he asks prayers for himself and the leaders of the Church. We as Catholics believe that those in heaven are still members of the Church, the body of Christ. They can pray for us. It is another logical leap that because we can't (and no longer need to) repent in heaven that we can't pray for others either. I think you will have a hard time supporting that from scripture. Also look at revaltions 5 where the 24 elders present the prayers of the saints before the throne. In Rev 8 the angel adds to the prayers of the saints an offering of incense. They are actively involved in what happens when our prayers go before the throne of God to be offered up to him.

I do agree that we are not sorrowful in heaven. But that I know is based far more on our increased understanding of this world and the freedom that God gives man in choosing him. Nevertheless I know that we know what is going on on this earth and that we pray for loved ones for Heb. 12:1 says we are surrounded by a cloud of witnesses. These witnesses are cheering us on as we run toward the finish line that results in our being united with them in our heavenly home.

Blessings

PS. The Catechism will at least do this for you. When you misrepresent my beliefs I write you off as just another anti-catholic regurgitating the falsehoods that he has recieved from others. If you wish to convert me you must not misrepresent what I believe.

 

Just want to ask the catholics:

If it is true that Mary interceeds for the catholics, how can she hear the prayers of every living catholic from across all nations simultaneously doing it to her.

Is she God who knows the mind and heart of every catholic?

Is she God who knows all things? ( considering the diffferent languages of all nation ).

Is she God who is present in everywhere to attend to all the prayers of every one in every place.

If you believe her to have these attributes, then you are making her God and therefore you are guilty of making her an idol.

 

thessalonian: please point me to an instance in Scripture where a living person asked a deceased person to pray for him/her.

Please.

One.

Just. One.

 

If it is true that Mary interceeds for the catholics, how can she hear the prayers of every living catholic from across all nations simultaneously doing it to her.

By the power of God. Mary is no longer bound as we are here on earth because she reigns in heaven in the resurrected state. Her state of being is entirely different than our own - a state we can not relate with until we pass from grace to glory as our Queen has.

Her abilities are God's gifts. Her salvation by means of preservative redemption was God's gift. All is grace.

Is she God who knows the mind and heart of every catholic?

No.

Is she God who knows all things? ( considering the diffferent languages of all nation ).

No.

Is she God who is present in everywhere to attend to all the prayers of every one in every place.

No.

If you believe her to have these attributes, then you are making her God and therefore you are guilty of making her an idol.

That would be true. Thankfully, Catholicism recognizes that Mary is a finite creature who shares in the life of God in glory. This is the scandal of Christianity - God becomes our Father, not in name only but in reality.

 

Where can we find in the Scriptures that Mary was resurrected? And God gave her all the attributes that all He has?

 

Christ did not institute the ordinances of the church any where but in the local visible church. Those now in heaven are not assembling with the church and cannot observe these ordinances. Those in heaven may have been a real visible part of the real visible church while alive in the world, but they cannot be that now. Now they are members of the family of God in accordance with Eph. 3.15. Of course I ask living members of the church to pray on my behalf, but never dead members. [This is why I asked the question concerning the rites controversy, though it was shown to me this was denied by the church, it seems obvious to me this practice is very much alive. As I remember it, the rites controversy resulted because the Chinese practice of praying to their ancestors was not pronounced as error, but permitted to enter into the church in order to attract Chinese converts especially among the Confucious ruling class]. Had this practice in truth been declared error, you would not have the practice of praying to the dead now. The logical leap you are making is that my actions here in this world have not betrayed you. It may be that this is the case [using myself as example] that in all appearances I am a believer, but in my heart I am not, so then I die. What happens? The church declares me a saint and another is added to the list to which heirs of God and Joint heirs with Christ are to pray. All the while my soul is in Hell and unable to even deliver itself. No, the name has changed, but the practice of pagan religions remain.

Prayer is not a tool for you and I to change the mind of God. It is not used to manipulate the Son of God on our behalf. Prayer is used to exact a humility in myself. This is comparable to fasting. In fasting my physical body is weakened. Through prayer my spiritual realization is such that I am weak and unworthy and have need of the continuing Grace of God to deliver me. Thus, there is no reliance upon myself, nor any other, the reliance is rested in Christ Jesus, the daysman, the kinsman redeemer.

You are confusing heaven with hell. Note Luke 16.19-31. Which is permitted to look beyond his position and his condition? Concerning Heb. 12.1 we are surrounded by a great cloud of witnesses, these are recorded in the word of God for our example, not that we may pray to them either expecting or at worse hoping they may carry our petition to the Throne of Grace. We are to seek access to this throne by one, God is one and between God and man there is one mediator, the man Christ Jesus. There is no reason, no need of any other to be prayed to for any purpose. This is merely a continuation of a false practice permitted into the church to win the allegiance of pagan groups to the church. This practice began because it permitted these pagan religions to continue in there idol worship while calling it by the name of Christ. [Is. 4.1].

For the reason you give that I read the catechism, I must say I would agree with you. But in reading the catechism, I would only be strengthened in my ability to show by Scripture the error of that teaching and its foundation upon the traditions of men.

Bro. Dallas

 

OK, then anyone please point me to an instance in Scripture where a living person asked a deceased person to pray for him/her. One.

 

Saul visited the witch of Endor to call up the spirit of Samuel...this was against the law of God. 1 Sam. 28.7 This also is not prayer, but for the purpose of having Samuel prophecy a positive prophecy on behalf of Samuel against David. See how that this is sin against God? See how this is an attempt to manipulate God? See how this is pagan idolotry?

Note vs. 6.

Bro. Dallas

 

If I believed in Sola Scriptura it would be problematic. I don't. And the Bible doesn't teach it. But there is one verse in which David appeals to the angels.

Psalms 103:20
Bless the LORD, you His angels,
Mighty in strength, who perform His word,
Obeying the voice of His word!

Now is this idolatry because he is asking the angels to bless the Lord?

 

"Funny enough, Jesus Himself spoke of His sanctity and divinity before He died and rose, and the writers of the New Testament made note of it. So bada-bing, it's in da Bible."

Things that Jesus said and reactions of his disciples and others toward him implied his divinity. He never said I am God. Proof of what Jesus said of who he was has to be done in retrospect. The claims Paul makes in Hebrews and Corinthians that he was without sin can be verified looking back on his life. I think that was WPutman's point. The Bible records no sin of Mary. Fact. It says she was "full of grace". To be full of grace is to be absent of sin for their is no room for sin in a grace filled soul. But the statement that Mary remained sinnless could not have been made until after she died as it was with Jesus. That is my point. Once again to be without sin does not make one God as some will charge me with saying. If it did, Adam and Eve were God's before the fall and were fallen God's. The angels who did not follow Satan are God's if sinlessness makes one God. So I just don't see the problem. There is nothing stopping God from creating a sinless person who remained sinless. To say otherwise is to say that Adam and Eve had to sin in the garden. Now she could not accomplish this on her own but by her son's grace. The same grace that allows me to get out of bed and go to work every day instead of heading down to the bar. Grace can prevent as well as cleanse sin.


Blessings

 

How can Mary be without sin when He said that God is His Savior.

Luke
1:46 And Mary said, My soul doth magnify the Lord, 1:47 And my spirit hath rejoiced in God my Saviour.

Where did Mary God saved from? i believe its from her sins.

If Mary had no sin then God will not gave
Mary grace. Since grace is exercise by God toward them who are sinners.

 

If I believed in Sola Scriptura it would be problematic. I don't. And the Bible doesn't teach it. But there is one verse in which David appeals to the angels.

Psalms 103:20
Bless the LORD, you His angels,
Mighty in strength, who perform His word,
Obeying the voice of His word!

Now is this idolatry because he is asking the angels to bless the Lord? </font>[/QUOTE]You are stretching here...hope you are not on a ladder...what would OSHA say?

First, this is an appeal to the angels. And what is 'bless'? It is 'barak' [according to Young's & Strong's]--the latter of which says it is a primary root; to kneel; by implication to bless God. Young's says: it is 'to declare blessed .

Is this not true of our Lord? Is this your problem with Sola Scriptura? That it doesn't exalt Mary to the place you hold her? This is not idolotry, this is declaring unto the angels that which is true, the Lord is blessed.

Strong's identifies each usage in the OT of 'barak' as translated bless . Youngs Identifies ashar both being in the 3rd conjugation and showing action. Thus, kneeling such as in prayer. So, David is declaring unto the angels to kneel before the blessed one. As it is used here 'barak' is to declare blessed. This is said of the Lord. If used to mean prayer as you say {which would not in every case be wrong}, it is a kneeling before the Lord and not Mary nor any other. David is not praying to the angels, he is declaring to them their duty.

Bro. Dallas

 

If I believed in Sola Scriptura it would be problematic. I don't. And the Bible doesn't teach it. But there is one verse in which David appeals to the angels.

Psalms 103:20
Bless the LORD, you His angels,
Mighty in strength, who perform His word,
Obeying the voice of His word!

Now is this idolatry because he is asking the angels to bless the Lord? </font>[/QUOTE]Without a basis in Scripture you can't prove to me that my 2001 Grand Am isn't the Queen of Heaven, can you?

But, seriously, you are obfuscating. In Psalm 148 David says:

Praise the LORD.

Praise the LORD from the heavens,
praise him in the heights above.
Praise him, all his angels,
praise him, all his heavenly hosts.
Praise him, sun and moon,
praise him, all you shining stars.
Praise him, you highest heavens
and you waters above the skies.
Let them praise the name of the LORD ,
for he commanded and they were created.
He set them in place for ever and ever;
he gave a decree that will never pass away.

Praise the LORD from the earth,
you great sea creatures and all ocean depths,
lightning and hail, snow and clouds,
stormy winds that do his bidding,
you mountains and all hills,
fruit trees and all cedars,
wild animals and all cattle,
small creatures and flying birds,
kings of the earth and all nations,
you princes and all rulers on earth,
young men and maidens,
old men and children.

Let them praise the name of the LORD ,
for his name alone is exalted;
his splendor is above the earth and the heavens.
He has raised up for his people a horn, [2]
the praise of all his saints,
of Israel, the people close to his heart.

Praise the LORD.

How any of that, or the verses you quoted, in any way support Marian theology, is frankly beyond me. And dismissing it with "well, I don't believe in Sola Scriptura, so there" begs a question: what are you afraid of addressing? If something isn't clearly supported in Scripture, is it safe... heck, is it even worth it to believe in?

 

Double post. See below.

 

Oh?

John 10:30
"I and the Father are one."

Sorry. Wrong.

His life as it was recorded in the Gospels? In the only existing record? OK.

{QB]

Wow, another grand logical leap. Where did you dig that particular definition from?

The Bible records no sin of John, Paul, or Mattias for that matter. It records no sin of Balaam's ass, either. Are they, then, all divine as well? As divine as Mary? More or less divine? Why or why not?

A completely unsubstantiable and unfounded point, I might observe. Where is it in Scripture? Nowhere. Not one place. Nothing at all. Sorry.

Not my argument.

See, the problem is that we humans can't reconcile a Jesus who is both completely divine and completely human. Thus, in order to wrap our minds around the concept of the Creator in flesh, we have to oversanctify the vessel God used to come to earth in flesh. Yet in doing this we not only fall dangerously close to Gnostic heresies, we overdeify a willing servant of God.

Jesus was completely God, and completely man. He walked, talked, ate and drank, defecated and urinated, got tired, sore, sleepy, had emotions, yet did all of this without sinning. To say that his mom did so as well is to cheapen the deity of Christ.

Mary did as she was asked, knowing the consequences. For this she is commended in Scripture, and serves, along with all of the apostles and martyrs, as an example to us.

An example.

Not a mediatrix. Not Queen of Heaven. None of these are even remotely supported by Scripture, and in fact more can be found to refute such concepts than can be modified to support them.

The challenge stands. One scripture supporting Marian theology. One scripture where someone asked a DEAD person to pray for them.

 

Holy Mary Mother of God, pray for us sinners
Now and at the hour of our death. Amen
The Rosary

For Thou alone art holy;
Thou alone art Lord;
Thou alone, O Jesus Christ,
together with the Holy Ghost,
art most high in the Glory of God the Father.
Gloria In Excelsis

The teaching that Mary is holy is contrary to the historic liturgy of the church.

 

If a person dies and is with Christ and is in Christ and we on earth are in Christ and he is in us then it seems to me that we are all one big happy family. It seems to me we are all together aren't we?

 

If a person dies and is with Christ and is in Christ and we on earth are in Christ and he is in us then it seems to me that we are all one big happy family. It seems to me we are all together aren't we? </font>[/QUOTE]Not a Scripturally supported stance. "Seems to me" is not the evidence I requested, but thanks.