"Devotion" to Mary...

I know the difference.

I am very, very well aware of the difference. I do not need you to explain it to me. I am not stupid.

I am also aware of the common tactic of covering up indulging ill-feelings about people by claiming `I am just opposing their errors.' I am not naive.

You, however, in your rush to defend this activity, have refused to listen to me. You insist that I listen to you -- and I have been listening to you, but you are not listening to me. Now, in return, listen to me, rather than just assume you need to `patiently' talk down to me. I have shown unmistakably that what this is about is airing a grudge.

Read it in the poster's own words:

The poster is angry. S/he wanted a fight. S/he has a grudge, and s/he wanted to get something going.

This is not about warning anyone about anything. That has been made a cover into something a lot less edifying.

There are folks here who love to see criticism of Catholicism so much that they do not care why it is done. They want to join in, or at least cheer it on and give it their support -- they do not care why.

You have defended this activity at length.

You are right; you are not participating in it directly.

You are just giving it your wholehearted support.

So I guess I stand corrected; you are only a wholehearted aider and abettor.

By
a) being an aider and abettor to Catholic bashing,
b) helping the grudge holder appear to be doing good by venting that grudge and soliciting others to do likewise,
you are showing contempt for Catholics.

No matter how much I disagree with a group of people, I would never defend the sort of activity for which this thread was created.

I am all for warning people about errant precepts, urging people not to adopt errant precepts. If that was the primary purpose of this thread, I would be supporting it.

However, if airing bad feelings and soliciting the same from others is the primary purpose of a thread or other discourse, I have a problem with it.

What boggles my mind that anyone can claim to care about Catholics and simultaneously defend the sort of activity this thread represents. I wish more people who claimed to care about Catholics really did.

Both idolatrous conduct and airing grudges get sugar coated. The one does not justify the other. They are both wrong.

 

To expose the works of darkness as a work of darkness, you need the light of scriptures.

John 10: 7Then said Jesus unto them again, Verily, verily, I say unto you, I am the door of the sheep. 8All that ever came before me are thieves and robbers: but the sheep did not hear them. 9I am the door:

By placing "Mary" inbetween Jesus and them, they have made her a thief. Prayers are to be given to God; not to the departed. In no way would God place Mary in a position where by His words, would make Mary or any other departed saint, a thief.

To be clearer still in how one is to approach God in prayer:

John 10:1Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that entereth not by the door into the sheepfold, but climbeth up some other way, the same is a thief and a robber.

This also include praying to the Holy Spirit. Yes, He is God, but no, the Holy Spirit is not the Mediator. The scriptures designated specifically Who to go to.

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

"The man Christ Jesus" cannot be blurred to mean the Spirit of Christ. The risen Saviour is at the right hand of God the Father as He, the Son, is the ONLY Mediator between God and man before that throne of grace.

Hebrews 4:14Seeing then that we have a great high priest, that is passed into the heavens, Jesus the Son of God, let us hold fast our profession. 15For we have not an high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin. 16Let us therefore come boldly unto the throne of grace, that we may obtain mercy, and find grace to help in time of need.

To not go boldly before that throne of grace in prayer where Jesus is, that is not heeding His words nor keeping them, thus doing a work of iniquity. This is what happens when wayward believers offer another door in approaching God.

Matthew 7: 13Enter ye in at the strait gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way, that leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go in thereat: 14Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it. 15Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves. 16Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles?

So not only is the RCC offering many doors: one towards the church as the instrumental means for salvation: one towards the priest for the confession and forgiveness of sins: and many doors afterwards to go to in prayer from Mary to the departed saints and even to the Holy Spirit.

Is not the fruit of the false prophet being ecumenical in nature as they "unite" in agreement with all the other "christian denomenations", they are uniting in "agreement" with other religions in the world. Definitely a fruit of the false prophte in its gathering of grapes of thorns and figs of thistle.

And before anyone protests this comparison using the defense of Christ's love being shown in unity:

2 Corinthians 6:14Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers: for what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and what communion hath light with darkness? 15And what concord hath Christ with Belial? or what part hath he that believeth with an infidel? 16And what agreement hath the temple of God with idols? for ye are the temple of the living God; as God hath said, I will dwell in them, and walk in them; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people. 17Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing; and I will receive you. 18And will be a Father unto you, and ye shall be my sons and daughters, saith the Lord Almighty.

We are called to be seperate from the world so that our faith may stand out.

So to have a relationship with God the Father, it can only be had through the Son. Jesus meant what He has said in His invitation to Himself.

John 14:6Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.

The irony of it all is that most believers are ignoring how Jesus deferred believers from honouring Mary several times.

Luke 11:27And it came to pass, as he spake these things, a certain woman of the company lifted up her voice, and said unto him, Blessed is the womb that bare thee, and the paps which thou hast sucked. 28But he said, Yea rather, blessed are they that hear the word of God, and keep it.

Matthew 12: 46While he yet talked to the people, behold, his mother and his brethren stood without, desiring to speak with him. 47Then one said unto him, Behold, thy mother and thy brethren stand without, desiring to speak with thee. 48But he answered and said unto him that told him, Who is my mother? and who are my brethren? 49And he stretched forth his hand toward his disciples, and said, Behold my mother and my brethren! 50For whosoever shall do the will of my Father which is in heaven, the same is my brother, and sister, and mother.

So to do the will of the Father which is in heaven is to heed this standard of judgment which has been given to us as witnesses of Jesus Christ.

John 5: 22For the Father judgeth no man, but hath committed all judgment unto the Son: 23That all men should honour the Son, even as they honour the Father. He that honoureth not the Son honoureth not the Father which hath sent him.

How important is this in the worship place?

By not coming to God the Father through the Son only, and climbing up another way, wayward believers are being workers of iniquity. They cannot get to know Him through prayers to somebody else. That is why to avoid false prophets and false spirits, they need to narrow the way back to Jesus Christ to have that relationship with God the Father.

Luke 13: 24Strive to enter in at the strait gate: for many, I say unto you, will seek to enter in, and shall not be able. 25When once the master of the house is risen up, and hath shut to the door, and ye begin to stand without, and to knock at the door, saying, Lord, Lord, open unto us; and he shall answer and say unto you, I know you not whence ye are: 26Then shall ye begin to say, We have eaten and drunk in thy presence, and thou hast taught in our streets. 27But he shall say, I tell you, I know you not whence ye are; depart from me, all ye workers of iniquity.

After all, Jesus is the Bridegroom. Should we not be chaste in all matters spiritual?

2 Corinthians 11: 1Would to God ye could bear with me a little in my folly: and indeed bear with me. 2For I am jealous over you with godly jealousy: for I have espoused you to one husband, that I may present you as a chaste virgin to Christ. 3But I fear, lest by any means, as the serpent beguiled Eve through his subtilty, so your minds should be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ. 4For if he that cometh preacheth another Jesus, whom we have not preached, or if ye receive another spirit, which ye have not received, or another gospel, which ye have not accepted, ye might well bear with him.

Preaching the honouring of Mary is not the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

1 Corinthians 2:2For I determined not to know any thing among you, save Jesus Christ, and him crucified.

Philippians 2:9Wherefore God also hath highly exalted him, and given him a name which is above every name: 10That at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth; 11And that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.

Seems nowadays, other names besides "Mary" are being exalted up there right alongside Jesus Christ.

1 Corinthians 3: 5Who then is Paul, and who is Apollos, but ministers by whom ye believed, even as the Lord gave to every man? 6I have planted, Apollos watered; but God gave the increase. 7So then neither is he that planteth any thing, neither he that watereth; but God that giveth the increase.

So if Paul isn't anything..then neither is Mary. God gave only one promise regarding the answering of prayers:

John 14: 11Believe me that I am in the Father, and the Father in me: or else believe me for the very works' sake. 12Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me, the works that I do shall he do also; and greater works than these shall he do; because I go unto my Father. 13And whatsoever ye shall ask in my name, that will I do, that the Father may be glorified in the Son. 14If ye shall ask any thing in my name, I will do it.

So the asking and answering of prayers has to be directly to Jesus for Him to receive the glory of answered prayers.

So, as much as wayward believers are ensnared by routines and hardly discerning these practises by the Word of God to even test the spirits when apparitions appear, we that know better by His grace, should pray for this to occur.

2 Timothy 2: 24And the servant of the Lord must not strive; but be gentle unto all men, apt to teach, patient, 25In meekness instructing those that oppose themselves; if God peradventure will give them repentance to the acknowledging of the truth; 26And that they may recover themselves out of the snare of the devil, who are taken captive by him at his will.

Ephesians 6:10Finally, my brethren, be strong in the Lord, and in the power of his might. 11Put on the whole armour of God, that ye may be able to stand against the wiles of the devil. 12For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places. 13Wherefore take unto you the whole armour of God, that ye may be able to withstand in the evil day, and having done all, to stand. :jesus:

 

Only God is untainted by sin. Claiming Mary on this same level is pure idolatry.

 

You say you understand the difference, yet you continue to post as though you do not.

AiC does indeed have a grudge against the teachings of the Catholic church and has personally seen the destruction of it to family. I also have contempt for these teachings because they are of the devil. I do have contempt for the devil.

If what I have said concerning this Mary worshipping is "Catholic bashing" then you are guilty of the same.

By your standards of "catholic bashing", you stand condemned by your own words. You joined in the bashing even in your bashing of the bashing!

Now you have the ability to see the heart? AiC said why the thread was started, just because you do not believe it does not mean you are right. You are calling AiC, and me, liars. So you have become a brother in Christ basher. Is that better than a catholic basher? I told you that I bash the sin not the sinner, but you do not accept that, therefore I am a liar in your ability to see my heart. You reject my words and know (by special powers maybe) for a fact that I really hate Catholics and just love bashing them.

I do have a grudge against Catholicism's anti-biblical doctrines and will join in exposing them at every chance I get. Just as I do against Mormonism, JW's, SDA's, etc, and against many anti-biblical doctrines held by "just Christians" such as "forgiveness revoked", Mellinial Exclusion, baptismal salvation, sinless perfection, etc.

Now since there are members on here that do not believe the Catholics worship Mary it is a legitimate thread for debate regardless if there are any Catholics on here or not. You have been an example of why this issue needs to be debated within Christian circles. I say they worship Mary, you say they do not. Thus a debate. These issues need to be debated so they do not creep into the church as accepted "traditions".

:jesus:

 

Darron and Steaver, you are effectively derailing this thread.
Note the Title: Devotion To Mary...
The Title is not whether of not Baptists should "bash Catholics." If you want to start a thread on that then be my guest. But stop derailing this thread, or your posts will be deleted.

 

Sorry! :wavey:

 

Very well.

Thanks DHK for telling both of us to drop it. I am tired of arguing with him, so thank you.

The rest of you: have fun.

 

There is a thought by Ireanaus about Mythras that might possibly be used here. If you studied Mythras you could draw a lot of similarities to christianity. But Ireanaus thought that this was God working with the pagans preparing them for the gospel message for better reception of it. Could it be that this is the case once again? Maybe thats why all the symbols are repeated again and again through out divergent cultures. Because logically different people groups should come up with unique symbolism for their faiths based on environmental differences but this is not what we see demonstrated on our planet. Just a thought.

 

I think the logic goes something like this. The Mercy Seat of God carried the presence of God. Everytime Israel would go out with the ark it was the presence of God that the people viewed. Thus if you went into the Holy of Holies you would come into the presence of God that was so holy that any infraction could cost you your life. So between the the Seraph-im (I still have an issue with the seraphim on the ark because of the close link to the goddess seraph protecting the seat of pharoah symbolised by a disk with out streached wings did Moses perputrate the Mott in his laws?) is the presence of God. Mary (who has been determined by council to be theotokos) carried in her womb Jesus who is the presence of God. Thus in some respect the Orthodox and Catholics are saying that as the Ark carried the presence of God so does Mary carry the presence of God. Thus the Catholics take everything they believe about Jesus (ie God, Holiness, etc) and form a view of Mary that is consistent with that view of Jesus. Thus the Ark could not be touched (Mary is ever virgin) etc... Mary is the first Christian to recieve the ressurection... Mary is thus venerated. Everything that Catholics believe about Mary starts with what they believe about Jesus.

 

If you click on this link of a current discussion thread regarding the priest of Mejugorjie and how it connects to mariolotry - you will see the reason.

http://www.baptistboard.com/showpost.php?p=1442153&postcount=109

Accuse first - read second is not a good model.

Check out the link above then respond.

in Christ,

Bob

 

1. "Soccer Mob Beats Catholic Man to death" -- there is no way to be a Christian member of a "nice Soccer Mob". The error is the "Soccer Mob". The error is not in "knowing where Catholic doctrine differs from the Bible".

2. The idea that if we simply ignore the error in the RCC then there will be no such thing as a "soccer mob in Ireland" is fiction.

3. Being informed is not a bad thing. Being a "soccer mob" is. being any kind of angry mob is a bad thing.

Even if he had no wife and no children and was not a community servant - it was a crime and a sin to insult him much less to justifying harming him much less to justify murder.

The point is that the "soccer mob" is evil, is sin. It matters not if they kill a Jehovah's witness or a Catholic or a Jew. It is all murder, all sin, all evil.

in Christ,

Bob

 

Indeed.

More history from the RC perspective may be of help as well.

Catholics claim that when they consult the DEAD in Christ on behalf of the living - it is right -- but when non-Catholics do it -- it violates the Bible injunction not to "Consult the dead on behalf of the living".

Yet in the text below - they seem to admit that it is a "distinction without a difference".


Catholics of the 20th century publish the connection to paganism for the world to see and understand. (Catholic Digest is the 2nd largest Catholic publication on the planet – though it is not written by the Vatican itself)

Pagan prayer methods.


Quote:
Catholic Digest 12/1994 pg 129

Fr Ken Ryan:
“The Rosary is, unsurprisingly, Not mentioned in the Bible. Legend and history place its beginning in the 13th century long After the Bible was completed. As a Pagan practice, praying on counting beads goes back centuries before Christ…

Buddhists use prayer wheels and prayer beads for the same purpose… Counting prayer beads is common practice in religious cultures”.

Quote:
Cath Digest 9/1993 pg 129
Question:
“My husband has been transferred to Japan and we have been here in Hiroshima for about two months. On a site seeing tour the Japanese guide brought me to a Buddhist shrine. There were statues of Buddha everywhere. The guide told me they represented different aspects of life and that the people offer food to the Buddhas and ask for Favors. It made me think of Our Catholic praying to the saints and wonder whether they have anything like the Ten Commandments to guide them.

There were fountains at the gate where pious visitors washed their hands before entering the shrine grounds. Could this be the same as our holy water?”

Fr Ken Ryan answers:
“Very probably the physical washing signifies some kind of spiritual cleansing, AS it does with Us! Some Muslims say prayers on rosarylike beads Just as We do, so there is no copyright enforced on prayerful customs among the great world religions. The Pagan Romans prayed, each family to its own household gods, JUST as we do to our patron saints. In Old Testament times the gentile had local gods for their town or country, and our Christian Saints eventually supplanted Them!

The Hebrews, of Course, had the mission of Wiping Out such heathen worship with the worship of the one true God, and while they have always had great respect for spiritual heroes, they Never set up any of their own race as substitutes for the local pagan gods!!
They had no need to make distinctions between praying TO the saints for their intercession with god and total adoration of God as the source of everything, as we must!

Knowing history does not make us evil - it makes us informed.

But for some who equivocate between knowing right from wrong - and "soccer mobbing " it is a different story.

in Christ,

Bob

 

It is true that Catholics -- and therefore Catholic acceptance of the infallability of the Papacy, belief in purgatory, indulgences etc makes up the majority of Christendom (strictly based on the numbers).

But in the Gospel accounts the unbelieving Jews made up the majority of the Chosen Nation of Israel, the holy priesthood, the people of God. They were still wrong.

in Christ,

Bob

 

I hope you understand my statement about Nimrod was my attempt at humor. There are significant historical issues with the statement I made though I agree there are similarities that are disturbing. Just as I'm disturbed by the similarities of Mythras and Christianity. Just as I'm disturbed by the OT law and the Egyptian Mott. Just as I'm disturbed by the choice terms of Moses with regard to the angels that protect the throne of God; the Seraphim. the 'im' indicating plurality in Hebrew. Seraph the Goddess that protects the throne of pharoah always displayed as a 'sundisk" with outstreached wings and the Seraphim on the ark of the covenant and later in the Temple of Solomon also have outstreached wings. But its still a leap to say Judaism and later Christianity are invalid because they were no more than a reformed Egyptian type religion.

 

Hi BobRyan.

Did you read moderator DHK's post?
http://www.baptistboard.com/showpost.php?p=1442838&postcount=86
Maybe you did not, as many of the same things you posted my way have already been addressed by me at least once and in detail, and some of the dispositions you attribute to me are fictions from your imagination.

Some dispositions you attribute to me that are wild fictions of your imagination I cannot go into without running afoul of DHK's directive. Other dispositions you attribute to me are obviously not so if you take the time to read my posts.

However, the personal accusation that I accused before reading is new and interesting.

If you had read everything here, you would know that both I and Steaver have pretty much been told to shut up.

I am not in a position to respond as much as I would like without running afoul of the site authorities.

This little stunt of your does not speak well of you:

• If you had not read that, then you are not in a position to lecture me about reading before coming to conclusions -- because I have read what is on this thread.

• If you had read that, and came after me anyway, then you are coward who goes after people when they cannot respond fully.

 

#1. I had not seen that.

#2. The thread is about the teaching on devotion to Mary. Your argument has been that we should not so quickly point out flaws in RCC teaching (presumably no matter what the topic or doctrine under discussion) because it leads to "soccer mob" like abuses against Catholics. I have to agree with DHK that these are two different topics.

#3. You are right that I engaged you on the subject of differentiating between knowing and pointint to Catholic errors - vs - "being a soccer mob" seeking to do catholic people harm. Had I known that that topic was closed here - I would not have addressed the point to you in that way.

However I have given a number of other points here related to communion with the dead etc - that do go directly to the OP subject about teachings regarding Mary and saints who have died.

I think that is still valid for discussion.

in Christ,

Bob

 

You stated this about Nimrod -

Surely you see very little humor there - agreed?

Please point to the area in your discussion of Nimrod where humor enters the picture.

In the Bible account - all makind is wiped out at the flood except for Noah and his 3 sons and their wives. That means that a mere 4500 years ago -- all the Egyptian's ancestory goes back to a family of 8 just as do all the Hebrew ancestory. It is not surprising then that some similarities in their views of the flood or the appearance of angels would exist. Far more shocking if there were no similarities at all!

But in the case of Abraham - and his line - (who lived at the SAME time as the sons of Noah) God directed and informed them regarding the truth.

In fact Christ Himself says that Abraham was also shown the future - was shown Christ's day as well.

We can not equivocate between pagan myths and Bible history as if BOTH have equal access to the Divine view of history. But we CAN compare the paganism in Mariolotry to the paganism in Rome since even CATHOLIC historians themselves admit that the two are linked.

in Christ,

Bob

 

BobRyan: again, I am not in a position to respond as much as I would like without running afoul of the site authorities.

It looks like you met the first thing. Now it looks like you now fit both things, because having read DHK's directive, you posted to me anyway knowing I am not in a position to respond fully to you without running afoul of site authorities.

Well you know what? I still cannot argue with you about this. DHK was clear.

Further, you admit that you had read that and knew this -- and you still posted an argument at me anyway.

You want to redeem yourself? Post on this thread like I do not exist, which is what you should have done to begin with, and what you should have done after you read DHK's directive.

 

I do have a dry sence of humor. And here when I list something that is in accurate (historically speaking) such as a seemingly train of connetions of pagan beliefs dating back to Nimrod where these legends grew indepently of each other rather than having one base belief is humorous. Its inaccurate in other words. This is false correlcation. For instance if I were Dan Brown writing his books I would have thought that a comedy because the premise is wrong. Christianity didn't start as a plethora and the most powerful one won out. But obvously he asserts that the gnostics have a valid a christianity as anyone else. I find this type of thing funny. Just like I often at my office will say something entirely outragous with seriousness. People sometimes believe me (which I find extremely funny) but most know I'm yanking their chain. Note I also directed this directly to Darron Steele who has accused me of not being baptist enough.