Replies

As I said; “homegrown heresy of hyper-Marionism”

Yeah.....right.....sure.....if you say so.

Thanks for agreeing.

I didn't even have to do all the "work" to establish the fact. Your good Dr. assisted by showing how first-- support for much of the theology in regards to Mary beyond what is clearly enough written of her, and that which may be sensed by way of empathy perhaps -- is FIRST --- nonexistent, then thin, then stronger only several full centuries later. From there it can be seen to pick up more steam as it were...

the evidence (from earliest times) of "belief in Mary" beyond her being the virgin prophesied to bear Christ the Savior (and adored for that reason) is just__not_there.

Can you show from scripture that praying to "Mary" is a theologically sound practice?

I've pointed towards, on THIS thread, how establishing "booths" (tabernacles) dedicated to Moses & Elijah, (and one for Christ too) was interrupted by God the Father speaking audibly from heaven, before the words even got out of Peter's mouth --- but you shine me on, ignoring each and every single item which refutes particular aspects of [Roman] Catholic theology -- yet call us ignorant.

No, mister, we have our reasons (and it is not ignorance) for myself and many others have long examined just about every scintilla and scrap of "evidence" one can consider, doing so over and again for these sort of theological aspects most contentious, yet still reject the "sola ecclesia" which in the end (after edue examination) is much the only basis and imagined standing for *some* of Rome's claims.

I just outlined (with your help!) how the hyper-inflated "regard" for Mary, was a thing which grew --- and that it be a theology not taught by the Apostles, or the first several generations of successors, either.

Why the couple of centuries delay -- if prayers to "Mary" are so necessary for salvation? hmm? answer THAT.

Showing how this theological aspect slowly inflated, is why I'm justified in terming much of Marianism "homegrown heresy". But since it's one that tickles many a' fancy, and seems so "pious" and what-not, it is not only accepted, but demanded that it be so -- or else one be excommunicated (*even!)

Other than one prayer coming from some time in the 3rd century (as I noted -- coming from 'folk belief' for we see no theological support for it contemporary to the time that "prayer"is dated back to -- not until later did such written support for "Marianism" begin to be seen in the records) is there anything much at all concerning praying TO Mary herself, as if she was some sort of hearer with abilities beyond the ability of God himself to hear the prayers of His own adopted children.

Before some time in the 3rd century, it's not there. The support is no where to be found. Hence the view that items of that nature are things of invention.

Right along about that time, other "newish" looking stuff began slithering into -- the "ekklesia" also.

Some stuff, even before that time, was effectively enough stamped out. Other things --- like directing prayers to 'departed saints' rather than God Almighty Himself, seemed "pious" like I said, so wiggled into the picture.

On the other hand, the Jews had long "tradition" of NOT praying to departed ancestors, or past prophets, or long departed but seen as "benevolent" kings, yet pagan nations around them did do those very things.

God called Abram out of such darkness. I shall not return to it.

I'll take, "the God of Abraham. Isaac, and Jacob" or none at all, thank you.

"Hear Oh Israel, our God is One" --- not --- move over Jesus, you are sitting in mommy's chair!