Catholic Mary

[Moriah]

Catholics elevate Mary, the mother of Jesus to that of “Mediatrix.” However, there is only one Mediator between God and man, and that is Jesus, 1 Timothy 2:5. It is wrong to pray to Mary. It is wrong to say the Rosary.
Catholics pray to Mary and ask her to go to Jesus with their request.

When Jesus saves someone…that person has Jesus living inside him or her. They are reconciled to God.
Let us then approach the throne of grace with confidence, so that we may receive mercy and find grace to help us in our time of need. Hebrews 4:16.

In him and through faith in him we may approach God with freedom and confidence. Ephesians 3:12.

Who is he that condemns? Christ Jesus, who died–more than that, who was raised to life–is at the right hand of God and is also interceding for us. Romans 8:34.

And he who searches our hearts knows the mind of the Spirit, because the Spirit intercedes for the saints in accordance with God’s will. Romans 8:27.

Therefore he is able to save completely those who come to God through him, because he always lives to intercede for them. Hebrews 7:25.

For there is one God and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus, 1 Timothy 2:5.

We do NOT go through Mary to get to Jesus and God!

Mary would not want to be exalted in such a way. In fact, a woman in the crowd called out, "Blessed is the mother who gave you birth and nursed you." Jesus replied, "Blessed rather are those who hear the word of God and obey it." See Luke 11:27-28. Does that sound like Jesus wanted Mary exalted to the level that the Catholic Church has exalted her? No. Someone told Jesus, "Your mother and brothers are standing outside, wanting to see you." Jesus replied, "My mother and brothers are those who hear God's word and put it into practice." See Luke 8:20-21. Does it sound like Jesus wants us to elevate and worship his mother? No!

Jesus did not come to this world to be a husband, or a father, or a son to Mary. Jesus came to this world to save us. When Jesus was on the cross, Jesus called Mary “woman,” and gave her to one of his disciples. See John 19:26.

Catholics believe Mary never had sexual intercourse with her husband Joseph. However, Joseph and Mary promised each other to get married, and this planned marriage was before Mary and Joseph knew that Mary was carrying the Son of God.
If Mary had plans to marry a man…surely she had in mind to have a marriage bed.

Mary having, or not having, sexual relations with her husband, after the birth of Jesus; this has no effect on our salvation. However, what does hurt one’s salvation is making up, and, or believing in things that are not God’s Word.

John 2: 1 On the third day a wedding took place at Cana in Galilee. Jesus’ mother was there, 2 and Jesus and his disciples had also been invited to the wedding. 3 When the wine was gone, Jesus’ mother said to him, “They have no more wine.”
4 “Woman, why do you involve me?” Jesus replied. “My hour has not yet come.”
5 His mother said to the servants, “Do whatever he tells you.”
Mary told them to do whatever Jesus tells you. Catholics, please do what Jesus tells you to do.
Catholics call Mary the Mother of God. Mary is not the mother of God the Father; Mary is the Mother of the human Jesus.
The Bible does not say Mary was sinless. The Catholics claim that Mary had to be born by Immaculate Conception. They say Jesus could not be in the womb of a regular human woman. Where does that thinking end? If Jesus could not be born from a real human woman, then Mary could not be born from a real human mother either, and on and on. In addition, to say Mary was born by Immaculate Conception makes Mary not human. Jesus was born from a human mother; to say Mary was not a normal human would go against the scriptures.

 

[Zenas]

Catholics believe Mary never had sexual intercourse with her husband Joseph. However, Joseph and Mary promised each other to get married, and this planned marriage was before Mary and Joseph knew that Mary was carrying the Son of God.
If Mary had plans to marry a man…surely she had in mind to have a marriage bed.

Mary having, or not having, sexual relations with her husband, after the birth of Jesus; this has no effect on our salvation. However, what does hurt one’s salvation is making up, and, or believing in things that are not God’s Word.

Mary had no other children after Jesus was born. She remained a virgin her entire life. I came to this conclusion in the 7th decade of my life after a careful search of the Scriptures. However, I was unable to reach this conclusion until I opened my mind to the possibility and actually looked at the overwhelming evidence of the perpetual virginity of Mary. Here are some of the things I found.

1. Scripture never says that Mary had other children. We can only infer this on account of Scriptural references to brothers and sisters of the Lord.

2. Reference to brothers and sisters would certainly include the possibility that these people were "half siblings", i.e., children of Joseph. In fact, this belief prevailed in the early church until the time of Jerome (d. 420). Jerome concluded that these brothers and sisters were in fact cousins. In Hebrew and Aramaic there was no word for "cousin" and the relationship was either designated "brother" or it was shown by language such as "son of my father's brother", etc. For example, Genesis 14:14 (KJV) refers to Lot as Abram's brother; in Genesis 29:15 (KJV) Laban calls Jacob his brother; in 2 Kings 10:13-14 (KJV) the 42 captives of Jehu call themselves brothers of Ahaziah. Indeed it is possible that some of the "brothers" of Jesus were half-brothers and others were cousins.

3. When the angel announced the coming birth of the King of Israel, Mary's response was, "How shall this be, seeing I know not a man?" The implication here is that Mary had already committed herself to remain a virgin. The angel did not say when this birth was to take place and Mary was espoused to Joseph at that time. If she had planned on having sexual relations, she would be doing so shortly and it would not be a mystery how the birth was to occur. However, if she planned on remaining a virgin all her life, her question to the angel was perfectly reasonable.

4. None of the early church fathers advocated that Mary had other children. On the other hand, many of them advocated her perpetual virginity. Of particular note among this group were Jerome, Ambrose of Milan (d. 397) and Augustine (d. 430).

5. The early reformers, including Martin Luther, John Calvin and John Wesley advocated the perpetual virginity of Mary.

6. The strongest indicator that Mary had no other children is contained in John 19:26-27, where Jesus places the care of his mother with John. If Mary had other children, this would have been unthinkable at every level imaginable. In fact, it was when I really thought about this event that I decided Mary did not have any other children.

The only difficult Scripture for those who advocate the perpetual virginity of Mary is Matthew 1:25 ("but [Joseph] kept her a virgin until she gave birth to a Son"). The implication is that Joseph had sexual relations with his wife after the birth of Jesus. But the language of the Bible does not bear this out. For example, consider 1 Corinthians 15:25, "For He must reign until He has put all His enemies under His feet." Should we infer that He ceases to reign after He has put all His enemies under His feet? Likewise, we need not infer that Joseph had sexual relations with his wife after the birth of Jesus.

 

[The Biblicist]

Mary had no other children after Jesus was born. She remained a virgin her entire life. I came to this conclusion in the 7th decade of my life after a careful search of the Scriptures. However, I was unable to reach this conclusion until I opened my mind to the possibility and actually looked at the overwhelming evidence of the perpetual virginity of Mary. Here are some of the things I found.

1. Scripture never says that Mary had other children. We can only infer this on account of Scriptural references to brothers and sisters of the Lord.

2. Reference to brothers and sisters would certainly include the possibility that these people were "half siblings", i.e., children of Joseph. In fact, this belief prevailed in the early church until the time of Jerome (d. 420). Jerome concluded that these brothers and sisters were in fact cousins. In Hebrew and Aramaic there was no word for "cousin" and the relationship was either designated "brother" or it was shown by language such as "son of my father's brother", etc. For example, Genesis 14:14 (KJV) refers to Lot as Abram's brother; in Genesis 29:15 (KJV) Laban calls Jacob his brother; in 2 Kings 10:13-14 (KJV) the 42 captives of Jehu call themselves brothers of Ahaziah. Indeed it is possible that some of the "brothers" of Jesus were half-brothers and others were cousins.

3. When the angel announced the coming birth of the King of Israel, Mary's response was, "How shall this be, seeing I know not a man?" The implication here is that Mary had already committed herself to remain a virgin. The angel did not say when this birth was to take place and Mary was espoused to Joseph at that time. If she had planned on having sexual relations, she would be doing so shortly and it would not be a mystery how the birth was to occur. However, if she planned on remaining a virgin all her life, her question to the angel was perfectly reasonable.

4. None of the early church fathers advocated that Mary had other children. On the other hand, many of them advocated her perpetual virginity. Of particular note among this group were Jerome, Ambrose of Milan (d. 397) and Augustine (d. 430).

5. The early reformers, including Martin Luther, John Calvin and John Wesley advocated the perpetual virginity of Mary.

6. The strongest indicator that Mary had no other children is contained in John 19:26-27, where Jesus places the care of his mother with John. If Mary had other children, this would have been unthinkable at every level imaginable. In fact, it was when I really thought about this event that I decided Mary did not have any other children.

The only difficult Scripture for those who advocate the perpetual virginity of Mary is Matthew 1:25 ("but [Joseph] kept her a virgin until she gave birth to a Son"). The implication is that Joseph had sexual relations with his wife after the birth of Jesus. But the language of the Bible does not bear this out. For example, consider 1 Corinthians 15:25, "For He must reign until He has put all His enemies under His feet." Should we infer that He ceases to reign after He has put all His enemies under His feet? Likewise, we need not infer that Joseph had sexual relations with his wife after the birth of Jesus.

All you have produced is the personal opinions of various humans! But these opinions are rediculous when just common sense is applied to such passages as:

Mt. 13:55 Is not this the carpenter’s son? is not his mother called Mary? and his brethren, James, and Joses, and Simon, and Judas?
56 And his sisters, are they not all with us? Whence then hath this man all these things?

Notice that the home town folks point out "his" father and mother! Cousins would not be identified with "his" mother and Father but with their own father's and mother's. The idea these are his cousins is pure theological bias without any objectivity whatsoever.

In regard to the cross and committing his mother, a believer, into the care of John another believer, is normal when all his brethren and sisters were unbeliever's.


Tell me Zenas why do you remain in a Baptist church? You are not a Baptist by any stretch of the imagination in doctrine or in practice! Are you there to proselyte for the Catholic cause??? Are you on the same journey as TS on your way out and back to Mamma Rome???

 

[DHK]

Mary had no other children after Jesus was born. She remained a virgin her entire life. I came to this conclusion in the 7th decade of my life after a careful search of the Scriptures. However, I was unable to reach this conclusion until I opened my mind to the possibility and actually looked at the overwhelming evidence of the perpetual virginity of Mary. Here are some of the things I found.

1. Scripture never says that Mary had other children. We can only infer this on account of Scriptural references to brothers and sisters of the Lord.

Your Scriptural search wasn't careful enough.

Matthew 1:25 And [Joseph] knew her not till she had brought forth her firstborn son: and he called his name JESUS.
--The word "till" indicates that afterward, after Christ was born he had relations with Mary. Mary did not remain a virgin. This verse explicitly says so.

Matthew 1:25 and didn't know her sexually until she had brought forth her firstborn son. He named him Jesus. (WEB)

(Mat 1:25) But they did not sleep together before her baby was born. Then Joseph named him Jesus. (Contemporary English Version)

You can't really deny the meaning of this verse. Just look at the various translations. Its meaning is very clear. There is no question that she did not remain a virgin. Just by this one verse we have absolute verse. But there is more:

Matthew 13:55-56 Is not this the carpenter's son? is not his mother called Mary? and his brethren, James, and Joses, and Simon, and Judas? And his sisters, are they not all with us? Whence then hath this man all these things?
--Here are the names of his half brothers and half sisters are mentioned as well. Plenty of proof that Mary was not a perpetual virgin. She had many children.

2. Reference to brothers and sisters would certainly include the possibility that these people were "half siblings", i.e., children of Joseph.

According to Mat.1:25, the children came from Mary. This is a no-brainer.

In fact, this belief prevailed in the early church until the time of Jerome (d. 420). Jerome concluded that these brothers and sisters were in fact cousins.

The Bible has greater authority. The context in Mat.13:54-57 includes both Mary and Joseph and all the brothers and sisters. It is Jesus immediate family. That is the context. You can't get around this fact.

In Hebrew and Aramaic there was no word for "cousin" and the relationship was either designated "brother" or it was shown by language such as "son of my father's brother", etc. For example, Genesis 14:14 (KJV) refers to Lot as Abram's brother; in Genesis 29:15 (KJV) Laban calls Jacob his brother; in 2 Kings 10:13-14 (KJV) the 42 captives of Jehu call themselves brothers of Ahaziah. Indeed it is possible that some of the "brothers" of Jesus were half-brothers and others were cousins.

You are delving into RCC myth--the myth that Matthew was first written in Aramaic. It wasn't. It is myth. Such a gospel has never been found. It doesn't exist. There are over 5,000 MSS in existence today. Not one of them gives any indication that Matthew was ever written in Aramaic.

That being the case the Greek word for brother is adelphos, which means brother, and is properly translated. There is another word for cousin. It could have been used but wasn't. There was no Aramaic word used. Your argument is bogus.

3. When the angel announced the coming birth of the King of Israel, Mary's response was, "How shall this be, seeing I know not a man?" The implication here is that Mary had already committed herself to remain a virgin.

Nonsense. It was a fair question since she was a virgin. She was asking how was this biologically possible since she was a virgin. Mary was espoused to Joseph, ready to be married. Joseph had relations with her shortly after Christ was born as it says in Mat.1:25.

The angel did not say when this birth was to take place and Mary was espoused to Joseph at that time. If she had planned on having sexual relations, she would be doing so shortly and it would not be a mystery how the birth was to occur. However, if she planned on remaining a virgin all her life, her question to the angel was perfectly reasonable.

If she was already pregnant (by the Holy Spirit) and still a virgin, her question was very legitimate. Again, your argument makes no sense.

4. None of the early church fathers advocated that Mary had other children.

None? And we are just to take your word for this?? I don't think so. I would rather take what the Bible teaches anyway.

On the other hand, many of them advocated her perpetual virginity. Of particular note among this group were Jerome, Ambrose of Milan (d. 397) and Augustine (d. 430).

I don't know of the former, but Augustine was one of the Catholic "fathers". Of course he believed it--along with all the other RCC lies. What would you expect? The Bible plus one is greater than the world without the Bible. You are espousing an unbiblical philosophy.

5. The early reformers, including Martin Luther, John Calvin and John Wesley advocated the perpetual virginity of Mary.

Most of these men were Catholics trying to reform the RCC from within. What do you expect? When the got kicked out of the Catholic Church they brought much of the RCC baggage with them.

6. The strongest indicator that Mary had no other children is contained in John 19:26-27, where Jesus places the care of his mother with John. If Mary had other children, this would have been unthinkable at every level imaginable. In fact, it was when I really thought about this event that I decided Mary did not have any other children.

The half-brothers of Jesus did not get saved until after the resurrection. It was inconceivable that Christ would entrust Mary to an unsaved person even if it were her own kin. She would be better taken care of with his own close group of disciples, the same group that she found herself praying with in Acts 1.

The only difficult Scripture for those who advocate the perpetual virginity of Mary is Matthew 1:25 ("but [Joseph] kept her a virgin until she gave birth to a Son"). The implication is that Joseph had sexual relations with his wife after the birth of Jesus. But the language of the Bible does not bear this out.

The language can't be any clearer than to come right out and say that Joseph had intercourse with Mary. But the translators were not so blunt; they didn't have to be.

For example, consider 1 Corinthians 15:25, "For He must reign until He has put all His enemies under His feet." Should we infer that He ceases to reign after He has put all His enemies under His feet? Likewise, we need not infer that Joseph had sexual relations with his wife after the birth of Jesus.

non sequitor.

 

[Moriah]

The half-brothers of Jesus did not get saved until after the resurrection. It was inconceivable that Christ would entrust Mary to an unsaved person even if it were her own kin. She would be better taken care of with his own close group of disciples, the same group that she found herself praying with in Acts 1.

It is not “inconceivable” that Christ would entrust Mary to an unsaved person that was her own son. At the cross, Jesus gave Mary to his disciple John. John took Jesus’ place as Mary’s son. Jesus did not come to earth to be a Husband, Father, or Son to Mary. Jesus came to earth to save us.

John 19: 25 Near the cross of Jesus stood his mother, his mother’s sister, Mary the wife of Clopas, and Mary Magdalene. 26 When Jesus saw his mother there, and the disciple whom he loved standing nearby, he said to her, “Woman, here is your son,” 27 and to the disciple, “Here is your mother.” From that time on, this disciple took her into his home.

 

[Moriah]

If she had planned on having sexual relations, she would be doing so shortly and it would not be a mystery how the birth was to occur. However, if she planned on remaining a virgin all her life, her question to the angel was perfectly reasonable.

It was a mystery to Mary that she was pregnant because she had not had sexual relations with a man!
Mary did not plan to be a virgin all her whole life. Why would Mary plan to marry a man if she planned to remain a virgin her whole life? Mary had plans to marry a man. Surely, Mary had plans to marry a man and be his wife and have a marriage bed. Mary had plans to marry Joseph BEFORE the angel spoke to her. Again, Mary was a virgin who was not going to have marital relations until after she was married. Why else do you think Mary would plan to marry a man if not be the man’s wife in all the ways a woman is a wife?

 

[Jerome]

Lutherans and the Reformed affirm that Mary was "ever virgin":

Book of Concord:
Lutheran Church Missouri Synod

"The Book of Concord refers to Mary as “blessed” (AC III 1), “pure, holy, and ever-virgin” (SA-I 4)"

Second Helvetic Confession:
Alliance of Confessing Evangelicals

"the ever virgin Mary"

 

[DHK]

It is not “inconceivable” that Christ would entrust Mary to an unsaved person that was her own son. At the cross, Jesus gave Mary to his disciple John. John took Jesus’ place as Mary’s son. Jesus did not come to earth to be a Husband, Father, or Son to Mary. Jesus came to earth to save us.

John 19: 25 Near the cross of Jesus stood his mother, his mother’s sister, Mary the wife of Clopas, and Mary Magdalene. 26 When Jesus saw his mother there, and the disciple whom he loved standing nearby, he said to her, “Woman, here is your son,” 27 and to the disciple, “Here is your mother.” From that time on, this disciple took her into his home.

Christ came to save people from their sins; not Mary.
One of the last acts the Christ did on the Christ was to take care of his earthly mother, or the person who played that part.
Consider: Mary was now old. She was old enough to be a grandmother. Her sons were all grown. In just a couple years or so, James, the half brother of Jesus will be the pastor of the church at Jerusalem. However, John was the youngest. All of his works were written in the 90's and he probably lived into the first part of the 2nd century. He is also called "the beloved disciple" or "the disciple whom Jesus loved." To this disciple (John) he committed the care of Mary. John was young, strong, had the means to take care of Mary, and had the love and devotion that would be needed to care for her. If you wanted someone to take care of your mother, wouldn't you seek out someone who you knew would show much love and care? An unsaved person could never show the love that John could show.

 

[Moriah]

Lutherans and the Reformed affirm that Mary was "ever virgin":

Book of Concord:
Lutheran Church Missouri Synod

"The Book of Concord refers to Mary as “blessed” (AC III 1), “pure, holy, and ever-virgin” (SA-I 4)"

Second Helvetic Confession:
Alliance of Confessing Evangelicals

"the ever virgin Mary"

That is not in the scriptures.

 

[Moriah]

Christ came to save people from their sins; not Mary.
One of the last acts the Christ did on the Christ was to take care of his earthly mother, or the person who played that part.
Consider: Mary was now old. She was old enough to be a grandmother. Her sons were all grown. In just a couple years or so, James, the half brother of Jesus will be the pastor of the church at Jerusalem. However, John was the youngest. All of his works were written in the 90's and he probably lived into the first part of the 2nd century. He is also called "the beloved disciple" or "the disciple whom Jesus loved." To this disciple (John) he committed the care of Mary. John was young, strong, had the means to take care of Mary, and had the love and devotion that would be needed to care for her. If you wanted someone to take care of your mother, wouldn't you seek out someone who you knew would show much love and care? An unsaved person could never show the love that John could show.

The Bible does not say what you say. I only say what the Bible does say. I do not lean to the left or to the right; I do not add or take away.

 

[Zenas]

Like I said, the Bible never says that Mary had children. Of course, it doesn't say that she diidn't either. So I guess you all are entitled to your opinion. I would just note that there is no recorded history of anyone believing Mary had other children until well after the time of Luther and Calvin. It wasn't even a debated matter. If it had been, I may not have ever changed my mind about this after believing the other way all these years. There is nothing new under the sun. If it is new it's probably wrong and the idea that Mary had other children is a new idea.

 

[Zenas]

Tell me Zenas why do you remain in a Baptist church? You are not a Baptist by any stretch of the imagination in doctrine or in practice! Are you there to proselyte for the Catholic cause??? Are you on the same journey as TS on your way out and back to Mamma Rome???

Proselyte of course! The RCC tries to keep at least one family of undercover Catholics in every Baptist church to convert as many members as they can. Since they move them around from time to time, I'm coming to your church next to steal both of your members.

No I'm not on the same journey as TS. TS went from Catholic to Baptist and back to Catholic. I, on the other hand, grew up a Baptist and never left. I remained in the church of my birth until age 25 and have been happily serving in the same church for nearly 42 years. So I have only belonged to two churches--ever. I love everything about it except their beliefs, which they don't really wear on their shoulders.

 

[Zenas]

Mary would not want to be exalted in such a way.

Maybe not, but that is really speculation on your part, isn't it. Scripture doesn't say one way or the other. But she certainly seemed exalted when portrayed in Revelation 12:1.

A great sign appeared in heaven: a woman clothed with the sun, and the moon under her feet, and on her head a crown of twelve stars.

This is not exactly a portrait of the cleaning lady.

 

[Zenas]

Mary is the Mother of the human Jesus.

This belief is very old. It was and is called Nestorianism and was denounced as heresy at the Council of Ephesus.

 

[Zenas]

5 His mother said to the servants, “Do whatever he tells you.”
Mary told them to do whatever Jesus tells you.

And that is the very heart of Marian devotion, to point people toward Jesus. From the time she gave birth to her beloved Son, Mary's unwavering purpose has been to bring people closer to Him so that they will do whatever He says.

 

[David Lamb]

Lutherans and the Reformed affirm that Mary was "ever virgin":

Book of Concord:
Lutheran Church Missouri Synod

"The Book of Concord refers to Mary as “blessed” (AC III 1), “pure, holy, and ever-virgin” (SA-I 4)"

Second Helvetic Confession:
Alliance of Confessing Evangelicals

"the ever virgin Mary"

As it stands, your statement could be misleading, Jerome. It seems to suggest that all who espouse Reformed theology ("the Reformed" to use your wording) believe in the perpetual virginity of Mary). That just is not so.

Also, your wording of your second link could be seen as saying that the Alliance of Confessing Evangelicals holds to the perpetual virginity of Mary. But the Alliance site includes several Reformed statements of faith/catechisms, not just the Second Helvitic Confession. Many of those do not say that Mary remained a virgin. As far as I am aware, the Alliance does not teach perpetual virginity.

 

[soninme]

Mary

The last recorded words of mary in the bible are found in the gospel of John .

John 2:5 His mother saith unto the servants, Whatsoever he saith unto you, do it.

In this verse we notice that mary doesnt direct men to obey "Her" or any other human being , she points them to the Lord Jesus Christ .

 

[Moriah]

Like I said, the Bible never says that Mary had children. Of course, it doesn't say that she diidn't either. So I guess you all are entitled to your opinion. I would just note that there is no recorded history of anyone believing Mary had other children until well after the time of Luther and Calvin. It wasn't even a debated matter. If it had been, I may not have ever changed my mind about this after believing the other way all these years. There is nothing new under the sun. If it is new it's probably wrong and the idea that Mary had other children is a new idea.

I do not care about the Catholics recorded history believing Mary did not have other children. The Bible plainly says that Jesus had brothers and sisters. You add to the scriptures when you say they were really his cousins, or half siblings. Before Mary heard from any angel, Mary had planned to marry a man. Does that fact not mean anything to you? Mary had plans to marry a man; she had plans to be a wife. Why would you think Mary would not be a wife to her husband whom she had planned to marry all along? Do not add to the word of God, and do not take away. When you say that Mary was a virgin forever, you add to the Bible and take away.

 

[Moriah]

And that is the very heart of Marian devotion, to point people toward Jesus. From the time she gave birth to her beloved Son, Mary's unwavering purpose has been to bring people closer to Him so that they will do whatever He says.

No, that is not at the very heart of Marian devotion. Did you not read the prayer I posted? Did you not read the scriptures I gave about going only through Jesus?
We do not go through Mary to get to Jesus, then to get to the Father. We go through Jesus.
John 14:6 Jesus answered, "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.

 

[The Biblicist]

I love everything about it except their beliefs, which they don't really wear on their shoulders.

So you are a Roman Catholic in "beliefs" as you just admitted you are not Baptist in belief? Moreover, the "Baptist" church you belong to does not really teach and practice what they say they believe "they don't really wear on their shoulders"??

So, you do have some beliefs and they are not Baptist beliefs and you are a deacon in the church! Tell me, do you teach any Sunday school class? If so, do you teach what you really believe or do you teach what the Southern Baptist Sunday School literature teaches???