Rome's Mary on the Cross and God's Throne

[Thinkingstuff]

The context of the Bible defines the word.

No the context of the text gives contextual understanding to how the word is being used. It isn't a definition. There for contextually it is understood that if I Worship God it is a different context than if I Worship my wife. Worship isn't viewed the same based on the context but I can quite confidently say My worship of God is different than the worship of my wife. But no one argues if I use the same word in both contexts.

A false premise. Prayer simply does not mean petition. Why consider the rest of your post?

It does mean petition as the dictionary points out. The thing is you are limiting a word to just one thing "a petition to God". However, the word prayer has a greater significance than just a petition to God. I can petition you. "Pray tell me what it is you mean." is one such example. Another way we can look at it is that words have uses like a candle has a use. The primary function of a candle is to provide light. Now I can take a candle and make it have a specific function of or set it apart for only being used on a menorah. Which is what "holy" means to be set apart. So now I have a candle his is holy to the Menorah. I shouldn't use it for anything else. However, does that mean all candles are holy to the menorah? No but that is what you want to do with the word pray.

To petition does not mean to pray. I petition you to stop this nonsense.

Or you could rightly say "TS, pray, stop this nonsense." and by saying so you would not have committed idolatry because of the context of the word use.

You started from a false premise, and I don't know what kind of "bible dictionary" you used.

As I've shown I haven't and I use a Strongs Concordance and bible dictionary.

Prayer in the Bible is always directed to God. If not it is idolatry. Satan tried to get Jesus to worship him. If he did, would it have been sin, or just a simple petition??

Two different topics there is prayer and there is worship they are not necissarily synominous. So lets get back to prayer in English prayer as I've said has several connotations but all use one word. Hebrew has different words all translated into english as the one word prayer. And even in Hebrew the words often translated into prayer isn't always towards God. For instance "Palal" has the hebrew meaning and conotation "to fall down before one in authority and plead a cause" where in Isaiah 45:15 the same word used in other places as "pray" is now redefined as bow down because the Sabeans are bowing before the Israelites. The passage isn't indicating that the people are worshiping the Israelites as they would God. So my premise isn't wrong. And so it depends in the context you put it. I can petition someone else to pray for me and it not be considered Idolatry.

 

[Matt Black]

but there is this,

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.

Where does that mention bread and wine?

 

[Thomas Helwys]

Here is a good commentary that I found by doing a search on "communion":

"In the Fourth Gospel, Jesus delivers a lengthy discourse on eating his flesh and drinking his blood, and then explains that these are only metaphors, that the flesh profits nothing, and the thing that we disciples must eat is his Word:

John 6

[60] Many of his disciples, when they heard it, said, "This is a hard saying; who can listen to it?"
[61] But Jesus, knowing in himself that his disciples murmured at it, said to them, Do you take offense at this?
[62] Then what if you were to see the Son of man ascending where he was before?
[63] It is the spirit that gives life, the flesh is of no avail; the words that I have spoken to you are spirit and life.

If you will read this entire segment with this in mind, beginning with vs. 6:25, concentrating on the meaning of his term, "bread of life" this should become clear for you. The real manna from heaven is the bread of life that is his Word, and one must ingest the Word to receive eternal life -- that is, one must eat the Word. To eat his actual flesh, and drink his actual blood, if that were possible, is worthless because of what he has said in v. 63. The flesh avails nothing!"

 

[Zenas]

Here is a good commentary that I found by doing a search on "communion":

"In the Fourth Gospel, Jesus delivers a lengthy discourse on eating his flesh and drinking his blood, and then explains that these are only metaphors, that the flesh profits nothing, and the thing that we disciples must eat is his Word:

John 6

[60] Many of his disciples, when they heard it, said, "This is a hard saying; who can listen to it?"
[61] But Jesus, knowing in himself that his disciples murmured at it, said to them, Do you take offense at this?
[62] Then what if you were to see the Son of man ascending where he was before?
[63] It is the spirit that gives life, the flesh is of no avail; the words that I have spoken to you are spirit and life.

If you will read this entire segment with this in mind, beginning with vs. 6:25, concentrating on the meaning of his term, "bread of life" this should become clear for you. The real manna from heaven is the bread of life that is his Word, and one must ingest the Word to receive eternal life -- that is, one must eat the Word. To eat his actual flesh, and drink his actual blood, if that were possible, is worthless because of what he has said in v. 63. The flesh avails nothing!"

This appears to come from a website put up by a man named Edgar Jones, who rejects the Lord's Supper completely and maintains it was an invention of Paul, who made the whole thing up. Here is what he says:

There can be no doubt, however, as to the identification of the event, for Paul states that it was "in the night in which he was delivered up (I Cor. 11:23)." But we have already confirmed (according to the text) that there was no such happening on that night! So we are confronted with a choice that is most difficult for Christians: Paul lied when he said he received the Eucharist from the Lord, or the Lord lied when he told Paul that he instituted it "on the night in which he was delivered up."

It is not a hard choice for a genuine disciple who believes that the Lord is the Truth. The Lord does not lie -- Paul does! This demonstrates, from the accepted texts, that Paul was a liar and that the Eucharist was and is his invention.

I think I will search other sources for my commentary.

 

[Eliyahu]

Mary of Roman Catholic is nothing but the pagan goddess, another disguised from of Ashera, Astarte, Ishtar, Diana, Venus, Aphrodite.


Worshippers of Mary will be thrown into the Lake of Fire where they can argue with God, being tormented eternally.

 

[Walter]

Mary of Roman Catholic is nothing but the pagan goddess, another disguised from of Ashera, Astarte, Ishtar, Diana, Venus, Aphrodite.


Worshippers of Mary will be thrown into the Lake of Fire where they can argue with God, being tormented eternally.

What nonsense! So, because a pagan deity was known as the queen of heaven that means this term can't rightfully be applied, in another sense altogether, to the blessed Virgin. Here is another example, the pagan king of Babylon, Nebuchadnezzar, is called the king of kings by Daniel (Daniel 2:37), yet this doesn't preclude Jesus from being called by the same title (Rev 17:14; 19:16) does it?
Isn't it the destiny of all Christians is to reign as kings and queens with Christ in heaven? (Eph 2:12; Rev 1:6; 5:10). I see nothing wrong with giving her the title which Christ, the King of Kings, bestowed upon her by virtue of Him making Mary His mother.

I have yet to meet a Catholic that 'worhips' Mary. I know plenty that give her the honor she deserves, but not worship. I suppose you think that Catholics don't really know who and what we worship, right?

 

[Thinkingstuff]

What nonsense! So, because a pagan deity was known as the queen of heaven that means this term can't rightfully be applied, in another sense altogether, to the blessed Virgin. Here is another example, the pagan king of Babylon, Nebuchadnezzar, is called the king of kings by Daniel (Daniel 2:37), yet this doesn't preclude Jesus from being called by the same title (Rev 17:14; 19:16) does it?
Isn't it the destiny of all Christians is to reign as kings and queens with Christ in heaven? (Eph 2:12; Rev 1:6; 5:10). I see nothing wrong with giving her the title which Christ, the King of Kings, bestowed upon her by virtue of Him making Mary His mother.

I have yet to meet a Catholic that 'worhips' Mary. I know plenty that give her the honor she deserves, but not worship. I suppose you think that Catholics don't really know who and what we worship, right?

That's a very good point Walter. Daniel does indeed refer to King Nebuchadnezzar as the King of Kings. A title referring to the fact that he ruled over other Kingdoms.

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

What nonsense! So, because a pagan deity was known as the queen of heaven that means this term can't rightfully be applied, in another sense altogether, to the blessed Virgin. Here is another example, the pagan king of Babylon, Nebuchadnezzar, is called the king of kings by Daniel (Daniel 2:37), yet this doesn't preclude Jesus from being called by the same title (Rev 17:14; 19:16) does it?
Isn't it the destiny of all Christians is to reign as kings and queens with Christ in heaven? (Eph 2:12; Rev 1:6; 5:10). I see nothing wrong with giving her the title which Christ, the King of Kings, bestowed upon her by virtue of Him making Mary His mother.

I have yet to meet a Catholic that 'worhips' Mary. I know plenty that give her the honor she deserves, but not worship. I suppose you think that Catholics don't really know who and what we worship, right?

come on now....this is a fib if ever Ive heard one. Go into any RC Church on any given Sunday & they are loaded with them. I would go so far as to say that if they took Mary away from those people that they would leave the RCC. Mary is both Mother & God to allot of Catholics & I know that from experience.

 

[Thomas Helwys]

This appears to come from a website put up by a man named Edgar Jones, who rejects the Lord's Supper completely and maintains it was an invention of Paul, who made the whole thing up. Here is what he says:
I think I will search other sources for my commentary.

Doesn't matter where it came from, if it contains truth. There are LOTS of other sources that say the same thing. John 6 comes a considerable time before the Last Supper. Jesus could not have been and was not talking about the Lord's Supper in that passage.

Roman Catholics remind me of the Jews who couldn't understand what Jesus was saying because they couldn't distinguish the physical from the spiritual.

 

[Thomas Helwys]

What nonsense! So, because a pagan deity was known as the queen of heaven that means this term can't rightfully be applied, in another sense altogether, to the blessed Virgin. Here is another example, the pagan king of Babylon, Nebuchadnezzar, is called the king of kings by Daniel (Daniel 2:37), yet this doesn't preclude Jesus from being called by the same title (Rev 17:14; 19:16) does it?
Isn't it the destiny of all Christians is to reign as kings and queens with Christ in heaven? (Eph 2:12; Rev 1:6; 5:10). I see nothing wrong with giving her the title which Christ, the King of Kings, bestowed upon her by virtue of Him making Mary His mother.

I have yet to meet a Catholic that 'worhips' Mary. I know plenty that give her the honor she deserves, but not worship. I suppose you think that Catholics don't really know who and what we worship, right?

And that would be to make her born free from sin, and then later assumed into heaven? Where this come from? Certainly not from the Bible.

 

[Thomas Helwys]

Is the following "honoring" Mary, or is it something else?

In the Orthodox Church, in the Akathist to the Holy Virgin they pray, among other things, a sort of Litany to the Theotokos with petitions such as:

Rejoice, redemption of the tears of Eve!
Rejoice, height inaccessible to human thoughts:
Rejoice, depth undiscernible even for the eyes of angels!
Rejoice, Thou through whom creation is renewed:
Rejoice, Thou through whom we worship the Creator!
Rejoice, assurance of those who pray in silence!
Rejoice, bridge that conveyest us from earth to Heaven!
Rejoice, wonder of angels sounded abroad:
Rejoice, wound of demons bewailed afar!
Rejoice, Thou Who surpassest the knowledge of the wise:
Rejoice, Thou Who givest light to the minds of the faithful!
Rejoice, propitiation of all the world!
Rejoice, good will of God to mortals:
Rejoice, boldness of mortals before God!

The hymn goes on and on like this, and takes quite a while to get through all the prayers addressed to her. All this began with the "innocent" notion of asking "blessed Mary, ever-virgin" to pray for us, and slowly turned into mystical poetry - then, who knows what? If this doesn't begin to approach idolatry or worship, what on Earth does?

 

[Thomas Helwys]

Further, The Rosary concludes with the prayer "Hail, Holy Queen - mother of mercy: our Life, our Sweetness, and our Hope:. If this is not idolatry, what is it?

 

[saturneptune]

Further, The Rosary concludes with the prayer "Hail, Holy Queen - mother of mercy: our Life, our Sweetness, and our Hope:. If this is not idolatry, what is it?

Hail Mary, full of grace
Where did you get that ugly face?

 

[Thomas Helwys]

A further note: That litany I posted is an Eastern Orthodox one, and they are not nearly as extreme with their views of Mary as are the Roman Catholics.

 

[Alive in Christ]

This was posted, to the catholic churchs
mary goddess...

Rejoice, redemption of the tears of Eve Rejoice, height inaccessible to human thoughts:
Rejoice, depth undiscernible even for the eyes of angels!
Rejoice, Thou through whom creation is renewed:
Rejoice, Thou through whom we worship the Creator!
Rejoice, assurance of those who pray in silence!
Rejoice, bridge that conveyest us from earth to Heaven!
Rejoice, wonder of angels sounded abroad:
Rejoice, wound of demons bewailed afar!
Rejoice, Thou Who surpassest the knowledge of the wise:
Rejoice, Thou Who givest light to the minds of the faithful!
Rejoice, propitiation of all the world!
Rejoice, good will of God to mortals:
Rejoice, boldness of mortals before God!

May almighty god have mercy on those responsible for such hellish, demonic, blasphemous, heresy.

As is always the case in the cultic Catholic church....

THE GODDESS MUST ALWAYS BE WORSHIPPED

 

[Thomas Helwys]

This was posted, to the catholic churchs
mary goddess...






May almighty god have mercy on those responsible for such hellish, demonic, blasphemous, heresy.

As is always the case in the cultic Catholic church....

THE GODDESS MUST ALWAYS BE WORSHIPPED

Please note, as I said, that this is from an Orthodox Church litany. It is much worse in the RCC. At least the Orthodox don't believe in such pagan superstition as the Immaculate Conception and Mary's assumption into heaven.

 

[DHK]

No the context of the text gives contextual understanding to how the word is being used. It isn't a definition. There for contextually it is understood that if I Worship God it is a different context than if I Worship my wife. Worship isn't viewed the same based on the context but I can quite confidently say My worship of God is different than the worship of my wife. But no one argues if I use the same word in both contexts.

When used as a verb Merriam-Webster gives only two definitions of the word "worship."

: to honor or reverence as a divine being or supernatural power
2
: to regard with great or extravagant respect, honor, or devotion <a celebrity worshipped by her fans>

Only one of these is acceptable in the Bible. The worship of your wife is not acceptable either. It would be idolatry. Worship belongs only to God. We cannot force new English definitions on the word. Worship belongs only to God. That is made clear in the Ten Commandments. It is clear in the answer Jesus gave to Satan:

Matthew 4:10 Then saith Jesus unto him, Get thee hence, Satan: for it is written, Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve.
--All worship belongs to God. Any other worship is robbing from God that which is due him, and is therefore idolatry.

It does mean petition as the dictionary points out. The thing is you are limiting a word to just one thing "a petition to God". However, the word prayer has a greater significance than just a petition to God.

Your definition is wrong. Let's look at Merriam-Webster again, and see how much prayer is related to worship:

Silent or spoken petition made to God or a god. Prayer has been practiced in all religions throughout history. Its characteristic postures (bowing the head, kneeling, prostration) and position of the hands (raised, outstretched, clasped) signify an attitude of submission and devotion. Prayer may involve confessions of sin, requests, thanks, praise, offerings of sacrifice, or promises of future acts of devotion. In addition to spontaneous private prayer, most religions have fixed formulas of prayer (e.g., the Lord's Prayer), often recited in group worship. The four prophetic religions (Judaism, Christianity, Islam, and Zoroastrianism) prescribe a daily set form of individual prayer, such as the Shema, to be recited twice a day by every male Jew, and the Islamic salat, performed five times a day.

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/prayer?show=0&t=1365374875

I can petition you. "Pray tell me what it is you mean." is one such example.

Obviously that is not prayer. It is just a game of semantics with you; trying to justify your idolatry.

Or you could rightly say "TS, pray, stop this nonsense." and by saying so you would not have committed idolatry because of the context of the word use.

Most words have more than one meaning. But the definition of "prayer" used in relation to God, doesn't. If that prayer or worship is given to another it is idolatry.

Two different topics there is prayer and there is worship they are not necissarily synominous.

All prayer is worship.

So lets get back to prayer in English prayer as I've said has several connotations but all use one word. Hebrew has different words all translated into english as the one word prayer. And even in Hebrew the words often translated into prayer isn't always towards God. For instance "Palal" has the hebrew meaning and conotation "to fall down before one in authority and plead a cause" where in Isaiah 45:15 the same word used in other places as "pray" is now redefined as bow down because the Sabeans are bowing before the Israelites. The passage isn't indicating that the people are worshiping the Israelites as they would God. So my premise isn't wrong. And so it depends in the context you put it. I can petition someone else to pray for me and it not be considered Idolatry.

Simple petitions are not prayers, except if directed to God.
However, if put in the context of worship and adoration it is idolatry. In your petition to me, if you kneel down in front of me and treat me as a god, then yes that is idolatry. If you simply ask me to pray for you that is a petition. If you pray to me, that is idolatry.

 

[Walter]

Further, The Rosary concludes with the prayer "Hail, Holy Queen - mother of mercy: our Life, our Sweetness, and our Hope:. If this is not idolatry, what is it?

Ok, let's take a look at that. Mary is special, but not because she has any power of her own. We can refer to her as 'our life' because she is the vessel the Father chose to bring us her Son. I would say she is also our sweetness and our hope for the same reason. The reason Catholics love Mary so much is because she is God’s Mother. Theotokos. You think that our honor of Mary diminishs the reality of who her Son is but actually it magnifies it. She is special because of how much more special He is:

Hail, holy Queen,
Gabriel used the word hail to address Mary. If Jesus is our King, then his Mother is our queen. The Queen Mother is always seen in relation to the King.

Mother of mercy,
She is the Mother of Christ who is Mercy. Therefore, nothing wrong with this statement either.

hail, our life, our sweetness and our hope.
same as above.

 

[Eliyahu]

What nonsense! So, because a pagan deity was known as the queen of heaven that means this term can't rightfully be applied, in another sense altogether, to the blessed Virgin. Here is another example, the pagan king of Babylon, Nebuchadnezzar, is called the king of kings by Daniel (Daniel 2:37), yet this doesn't preclude Jesus from being called by the same title (Rev 17:14; 19:16) does it?
Isn't it the destiny of all Christians is to reign as kings and queens with Christ in heaven? (Eph 2:12; Rev 1:6; 5:10). I see nothing wrong with giving her the title which Christ, the King of Kings, bestowed upon her by virtue of Him making Mary His mother.

I have yet to meet a Catholic that 'worhips' Mary. I know plenty that give her the honor she deserves, but not worship. I suppose you think that Catholics don't really know who and what we worship, right?

You don't know that the goddess worship has been disguised as the Reverence to Mary? The Real Mary will be surprised to learn that so many billions of people prayed to her while she was sleeping after the death.

She never receive any prayer to her.

Isn't it a Goddess Worship that more than a billion of Catholic people are praying to Mary from millions of places?

How can Mary listen to the prayers from Mexico, Alabama, Louisiana, Argentine, Poland, Ireland, France, Italy, Spain, Greece, Portugal, Belgium, Philippines, Australia, etc unless she became a goddess and fly all over the world in a second?

Could she learn Spanish, Italian, French, Japanese, Hindi?

Unless she is Omnipresent and Omniscient, she cannot receive prayers from all over the world during the past 2000 years, right?

 

[Thomas Helwys]

Ok, let's take a look at that. Mary is special, but not because she has any power of her own. We can refer to her as 'our life' because she is the vessel the Father chose to bring us her Son. I would say she is also our sweetness and our hope for the same reason. The reason Catholics love Mary so much is because she is God’s Mother. Theotokos. You think that our honor of Mary diminishs the reality of who her Son is but actually it magnifies it. She is special because of how much more special He is:

Hail, holy Queen,
Gabriel used the word hail to address Mary. If Jesus is our King, then his Mother is our queen. The Queen Mother is always seen in relation to the King.

Mother of mercy,
She is the Mother of Christ who is Mercy. Therefore, nothing wrong with this statement either.

hail, our life, our sweetness and our hope.
same as above.

You can rationalize until hell freezes over, but this is idolatry.