Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Remains of Apostle Paul May Have Been Found
Associated Press (excerpt) ^ | December 6, 2006

Posted on 12/06/2006 4:29:58 PM PST by HAL9000

Excerpt -

ROME (AP) - Vatican archaeologists have unearthed a sarcophagus believed to contain the remains of the Apostle Paul that had been buried beneath Rome's second largest basilica.

The sarcophagus, which dates back to at least A.D. 390, has been the subject of an extended excavation that began in 2002 and was completed last month, the project's head said this week.

~ snip ~


(Excerpt) Read more at christianpost.com ...


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Foreign Affairs; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: apostle; apostlepaul; archaeology; catholic; christianity; godsgravesglyphs; paul; relics; rome; saintpaul; stpaul; vatican
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-50 ... 101-150151-200201-250 ... 401-409 next last
To: SuziQ
According to tradition, the Apostle Luke got the story of the Nativity from Mary, herself.

According to tradition, John Smith received the Book of Mormon from the Angel Moroni, himself.

I choose to believe that it is tradition, passed down through the teachings of the Apostles, and later their disciples. You may not believe it, but I don't know of any evidence that it isn't true.

Just like there's no evidence that the lost Plates of Nephi and the Book of Mormon aren't true either.

151 posted on 12/07/2006 12:18:24 AM PST by FreedomCalls (It's the "Statue of Liberty," not the "Statue of Security.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 148 | View Replies]

To: what's up
Lots of traditions were started apart from the Apostles' teaching.

Such as the selling of indulgences. Stripping away all these non-scriptural traditions is the basis of Protestantism.

152 posted on 12/07/2006 12:21:10 AM PST by FreedomCalls (It's the "Statue of Liberty," not the "Statue of Security.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 143 | View Replies]

To: khnyny

bttt


153 posted on 12/07/2006 12:30:50 AM PST by Mo1 (Thank You Mr & Mrs "I'm gonna teach you a lesson" Voter ... you just screwed us on so many levels)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: alnick

"When we die, our bodies cease to be "us," as our souls separate from our bodies. Then the body becomes worm food. It's a simple fact of nature."

Please show me anywhere in the Bible where a dead person's body "ceases to be us." The spirit separates from the body yes...but the body still belongs to that individual. This is why throughout the bible, burial is honored (explicitly starting with Abraham), and bodies are not just cast off as food for ravens.

Christianity has never taught that a human body is irrelevant...mainly due to the resurrection. Christianity has also never taught though, that should the body be lost...due to decomposition, or explosion, cremation or whatever that they won't be resurrected. God the Creator would have no problem reconstituting the dust or ashes we become into a new body--of the same type of Jesus's after His resurrection.

At the same time however, until the 20th Century, there has been no tradition of cremation, (originally a pagan practice, by those who devalued the body) as the body, even dead, does matter...and is understood as being resurrected some day.


154 posted on 12/07/2006 12:47:15 AM PST by AnalogReigns
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 68 | View Replies]

To: SuziQ
The problem is that some of the teachings about Mary actually contradict the Bible.

The Bible teaches that all humans are sinners. I don't think the apostles would have passed on by word of mouth the doctrine of the so-called immaculate conception since it so dramatically contradicts their writings in the New Testament which emphasize over and over that all men sin. Why would anyone believe anything they had to say if they contradicted themselves in that way? This is why Protestants can't believe the doctrine...not so much that it is based on supposed verbal tradition, but that it is overtly against the apostles' Biblical writings.

For example, why would John in Ephesus write in his epistle in 1 John 1:10 that "if we claim we have not sinned we make him out to be a liar..." if there was actually one who was living or had lived among them in Ephesus (Mary) who supposedly had not sinned?

Or why would Paul write, "For all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God" if he knew Mary was not a sinner? In order to make that not a falsehood he would have had to have added "for all have sinned except Mary". Paul especially says over and over and over again that all of humankind except Christ is in a lost condition because of sin. I take him at his word.

155 posted on 12/07/2006 12:59:38 AM PST by what's up
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 148 | View Replies]

To: FreedomCalls
Such as the selling of indulgences

Agreed. Another tradition which doesn't correlate with what the Bible teaches.

Very similar case to the immaculate conception.

156 posted on 12/07/2006 1:01:42 AM PST by what's up
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 152 | View Replies]

To: khnyny; Manfred the Wonder Dawg; alnick; Tao Yin
Her holiness must indeed be great--so great that "none greater under God can be thought of, and no one but God can comprehend it....

In her case, the dignity of Mother of God is the highest possible for a creature. "

This teaching is DIRECTLY contradicted by her Son, Jesus, who said in Luke 7:28

I say unto you, Among them that are born of women there is none greater than John:.

Was Jesus lying? Was Jesus confused? NO! I think I'll believe Jesus and not some man made nonsense of Father William G. Most.

157 posted on 12/07/2006 2:41:11 AM PST by AmericaUnited
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 87 | View Replies]

To: SuziQ
Was John the Baptist assumed into Heaven? If not, why not? Jesus said in Luke 7:28

I say unto you, Among them that are born of women there is none greater than John:.

Jesus said that John The Baptist was greater than Mary (well at least until some one claims that Mary was born by an alien or a man).

And I don't see how honoring Mary is considered disrespectful to Jesus.

When Mary is 'honored' to the point where it makes Jesus to be a LIAR, that is disrespectful indeed.

158 posted on 12/07/2006 2:52:30 AM PST by AmericaUnited
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 73 | View Replies]

To: what's up
It's scary when people choose to believe man made blather rather than the plain spoken words of Jesus or the Apostles. I guess that's why some groups didn't want their people to read the scripture for themselves, else uneducated rubes like us might say 'Hey! That's not what it says..." Ping to #157.
159 posted on 12/07/2006 3:03:47 AM PST by AmericaUnited
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 155 | View Replies]

To: Diddle E. Squat; HAL9000

H'mm, perhaps they are in the glass triangle at the Louve along with the remains of Mary Magdeline


160 posted on 12/07/2006 4:41:42 AM PST by GreyFriar ( (3rd Armored Division - Spearhead))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies]

To: Diddle E. Squat; HAL9000

H'mm, perhaps they are in the glass triangle at the Louve along with the remains of Mary Magdeline


161 posted on 12/07/2006 4:41:42 AM PST by GreyFriar ( (3rd Armored Division - Spearhead))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies]

To: HAL9000

Cool, but not surprising. Kind of like finding Grant in Grant's tomb.


162 posted on 12/07/2006 4:46:58 AM PST by Aquinasfan (When you find "Sola Scriptura" in the Bible, let me know)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tao Yin

"Before 1950, the assumption of Mary was open to Theological debate, but once the Pope defined it as doctrine it is considered a closed topic in the Roman Catholic Church."

Yet that pope was not there to witness what happened, and no pope claims to be a prophet or get revelations. He just had power to turn his personal opinion into church dogma because of the office that other men voted him into.


163 posted on 12/07/2006 5:06:42 AM PST by Grig
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: Manfred the Wonder Dawg
That's because the worms ate her flesh, same as with everyone else.

The worms ate her bones too, like those of Peter and Paul?

Catholics and Orthodox Christians can know with the certainty of faith that Mary was assumed into heaven at the end of her earthly existence. Others can only speculate, but there is historical evidence that supports the belief in the Assumption.

For example, The Tomb of the Dormition [falling asleep] of Mary in Jerusalem was built around the year 450 A.D

164 posted on 12/07/2006 5:08:37 AM PST by Aquinasfan (When you find "Sola Scriptura" in the Bible, let me know)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Tao Yin

"What's really interesting about the letter is that it proclaims the Phoenix is a real bird and it states that we are justified through faith alone."

Is this letter online? I'd be very interested in seeing a translation of it.


165 posted on 12/07/2006 5:09:00 AM PST by Grig
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]

To: AmericaUnited
It's scary when people choose to believe man made blather rather than the plain spoken words of Jesus or the Apostles.

You mean these words of Jesus: "if he refuses to listen even to the church, treat him as you would a pagan or a tax collector"?

Was John the Baptist assumed into Heaven? If not, why not? Jesus said in Luke 7:28 I say unto you, Among them that are born of women there is none greater than John:

You seem to have purposely omitted the line that follows: "...yet the one who is least in the kingdom of God is greater than he."

The entire passage reads: "I tell you, among those born of women there is no one greater than John; yet the one who is least in the kingdom of God is greater than he." Certainly Christ's mother was "in the kingdom of God."

166 posted on 12/07/2006 5:15:25 AM PST by Aquinasfan (When you find "Sola Scriptura" in the Bible, let me know)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 159 | View Replies]

To: HAL9000
The sarcophagus, which dates back to at least A.D. 390

Wow! Only 330 years too late! *eye roll*

167 posted on 12/07/2006 5:16:52 AM PST by Sloth (The GOP is to DemonRats in politics as Michael Jackson is to Jeffrey Dahmer in babysitting.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AmericaUnited; SuziQ

Do you realize that Luke 7:28 has NEVER been used by the anti-Catholics to dispute Marian teachings?

Did you read what came before this passage? The Lord was talking about prophets, in fact the KJV includes the word prophet in the verse you quote. Mary was not a prophet and nobody has ever said she was.

If our Lord was to be taken literally here in the way you suggest, He would be lesser than John. JESUS WAS BORN OF A WOMAN.

Find a better argument, because this one goes nowhere.


168 posted on 12/07/2006 5:18:58 AM PST by wagglebee ("We are ready for the greatest achievements in the history of freedom." -- President Bush, 1/20/05)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 158 | View Replies]

To: what's up
Such as the selling of indulgences

Agreed. Another tradition which doesn't correlate with what the Bible teaches.

Well, the Catholic Church has never sanctioned the selling of indulgences. This was an abuse of office. Catholic priests are sinners, like most other Christians.

So tell me, where in the Bible is Luther's doctrine of "the Bible alone"? That one should be in the Bible, shouldn't it?

169 posted on 12/07/2006 5:20:07 AM PST by Aquinasfan (When you find "Sola Scriptura" in the Bible, let me know)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 156 | View Replies]

To: adiaireton8

"I am not asking you whether she had a Savior; even babies have a Savior in Christ. I am asking you how you know she committed sins."

If Mary had no sin and would not die, she would have not needed a Savior. Children do not inherit the guilt of their parents sins, so there is no reason Mary would have to be any different than any other righteous woman. By saying Mary had to be so fundamentally different denies God's miraculous ability to work though us mortals in spite of ourselves.

Mary needed a Savior to overcome sin and death just as we do. Our dying and rotting in the grave won't stop us from being with God again, so it won't stop Mary either.


170 posted on 12/07/2006 5:23:58 AM PST by Grig
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 122 | View Replies]

To: adiaireton8
"I am asking you how you know she committed sins."

Rom. 3:23 For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God

171 posted on 12/07/2006 5:26:35 AM PST by Grig
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 122 | View Replies]

To: Aquinasfan

Modern day televangelists sending out solicitations for money for new jets and mega-churches is completely consistent with the corruption that Luther protested,


172 posted on 12/07/2006 5:28:39 AM PST by wagglebee ("We are ready for the greatest achievements in the history of freedom." -- President Bush, 1/20/05)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 169 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee
Modern day televangelists sending out solicitations for money for new jets and mega-churches is completely consistent with the corruption that Luther protested,

Well, DUH.
173 posted on 12/07/2006 5:29:43 AM PST by beezdotcom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 172 | View Replies]

To: paulat

"Mary did not carry the burden of Original Sin"

Original Sin, another false doctrine. The only consequences we suffer from what Adam did are that we are mortal and we lack the strength to live a sinless life ourselves. We are only guilty of the sins we ourselves do however, anything else denies the justice of God.

Because of Christ, all will be resurected, and all can be forgiven of sin on condition of repentance. All the consequences of Adam's fall will be undone leaving us before God to answer for our own actons.

As for Adam, he did have nearly 1000 years to repent himself, who is to say God didn't forgive him?


174 posted on 12/07/2006 5:32:47 AM PST by Grig
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 127 | View Replies]

To: FreedomCalls

"If you say Jesus' wounds went with him to heaven then are you saying the paraplegic will continue to have to use a wheelchair in heaven for lack of missing limbs? Those who died in fire will walk around with dripping flesh? Lepers will carry leprosy-scarred skin with them?"

Our teaching is that he kept the wounds of his crucifixion by his own choice as a testemony of what he did. Personaly, I'm looking forward to not needing glasses anymore, and hope there is a weight loss option. :)


175 posted on 12/07/2006 5:38:43 AM PST by Grig
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 146 | View Replies]

To: SuziQ

That which mankind attributes God outside what He disclosed to us in the Bible (which has never included the Apocrypha) is the fancy of men.

Those ideas of mankind which elevate him (or her) above what God has declared about us in the Bible are mere fancy of men.

Mary was sinful as testified by the Scripture that all are sinners, none do good, all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God.

There is NOTHING in Scripture that tells us Mary was born without sin. That's the fancy of men. As you say, "Catholics believe" it. That's mere fancy. Some in your church have taken Mary worship to cultic extremes, as evidenced by all the talk about her being the co-redemdtrix (sic?) with Christ. That's beyond fancy and is clear-cut heresy.

Religion of man - false traditions of men. Do not hold dearly to these as they will lead you away from the Lord Jesus.


176 posted on 12/07/2006 5:40:45 AM PST by Manfred the Wonder Dawg (Test ALL things, hold to that which is True.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 73 | View Replies]

To: SuziQ

I think a big problem starts from the premise of asking, "Well, Why not??", as if we were really see things with thru his eyes.

Family to Jesus is revealed in his rejection of his own immediate family in "...they said unto him, Behold, thy mother and thy brethren without seek for thee. And he answered them, saying, Who is my mother, or my brethren? And he looked round about on them which sat about him, and said, Behold my mother and my brethren! For whosoever shall do the will of God, the same is my brother, and my sister, and mother."(Mark 3:31-35, Matthew 12:46-50, and Luke 8:19- 21).

Why would he just change his mind?


177 posted on 12/07/2006 5:41:05 AM PST by Paulus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 73 | View Replies]

To: Grig
THE FIRST EPISTLE OF CLEMENT TO THE CORINTHIANS
178 posted on 12/07/2006 5:42:55 AM PST by Tao Yin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 165 | View Replies]

To: khnyny

All the talk from popes that you quote is so much fanciful talk of men. As the Bible would say, "vain traditions of men" (see Mark 7:5 - 9; Colossians 2:8 - 12, & 1 Peter 1:18 - 21).


179 posted on 12/07/2006 5:46:09 AM PST by Manfred the Wonder Dawg (Test ALL things, hold to that which is True.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 87 | View Replies]

To: Tao Yin

Thanks.


180 posted on 12/07/2006 5:46:39 AM PST by Grig
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 178 | View Replies]

To: HAL9000
I knows it knows it
indeed I knows it brother
dem bones gonna rise again!
181 posted on 12/07/2006 5:48:40 AM PST by AD from SpringBay (We have the government we allow and deserve.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bonfire

"what is the difference between "assumed" (taken up) and ascention? (moving upward)"

Christ with his own power as God raised himself to heaven.

Mary was raised to heaven, not by her own power (she is of course not God), but by God's power.


182 posted on 12/07/2006 5:49:58 AM PST by rogator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 140 | View Replies]

To: Manfred the Wonder Dawg
...That's because the worms ate her flesh, same as with everyone else. The Word of God is True - and every man a liar (Romans 3:4)...

oh, geeze...you couldn't let sleeping dogs lie, could you?

I'm getting ready for about 40 posts full of snotty, pious name calling all followed with the assurance that "THIS" (whatever "this" is at the moment) is exactly what Jesus would have wanted.

The conservative movement is dead. There are no new ideas and damned few ideas of any kind, especially in threads like this.

On the other hand, if you want arrogant, self righteous high dudgeon and (squeeky old lady voice)"JesusJesusJesus", then buddy, this is just the right website for you!

I have come to the conclusion that there are lots of damned stupid people out there self-describing themselves as "conservatives".

183 posted on 12/07/2006 5:55:07 AM PST by martin gibson ("I care not what course others may take, but as for myself, give me Ralph Stanley or give me death")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: rogator

The end result is the same, and the end result is the same for a person who dies and is later resurected and goes to heaven.

If Christ was not too good for death and rotting in the grave (for a short time at least) then it doesn't nothing to dishonour Mary or anyone else to die as well.


184 posted on 12/07/2006 5:56:38 AM PST by Grig
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 182 | View Replies]

To: All

I'm surprised this thread is so focused on Mary instead of how wrong it is to make an object of veneration out of Paul's tomb.


185 posted on 12/07/2006 5:58:31 AM PST by Grig
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 184 | View Replies]

To: Grig

"The end result is the same, and the end result is the same for a person who dies and is later resurected and goes to heaven.
If Christ was not too good for death and rotting in the grave (for a short time at least) then it doesn't nothing to dishonour Mary or anyone else to die as well."

Agreed.
As to whether or not Mary died, to my knowledge, there is no biblical, historical, or widely held traditional belief.
I think, however, that it is important to note that IAW Catholic belief, Mary did not raise herself to heaven on her own, but was raised by the action of God.


186 posted on 12/07/2006 6:15:19 AM PST by rogator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 184 | View Replies]

To: Harmless Teddy Bear
This was originally reported by Pravda and I was doubtful. Now that the AP has picked it up I know it must not be true.

LOL!

187 posted on 12/07/2006 6:21:57 AM PST by ELS (Vivat Benedictus XVI!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: Grig

"I'm surprised this thread is so focused on Mary..."
The Mary focus was brought in after the thread was hijacked.

"... how wrong it is to make an object of veneration of Paul's tomb."
If you wish to believe that it is wrong to venerate the relics of St. Paul that is your prerogative.
Hundreds of millions of Catholic, Orthodox, Coptic, and Protestant Christians, however, do not likely agree with you on this point.


188 posted on 12/07/2006 6:27:37 AM PST by rogator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 185 | View Replies]

To: rogator

Thank you for the explanation.


189 posted on 12/07/2006 6:40:48 AM PST by bonfire
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 182 | View Replies]

To: rogator

"Hundreds of millions of Catholic, Orthodox, Coptic, and Protestant Christians, however, do not likely agree with you on this point."

Well, perhaps I misunderstand what is meant by venerate in the article. I have no problem with people wanting to pay their respects or respecting the sancity of a grave (as would be the case for any grave), but when you start fostering the idea that physical objects (including dead bodies) have some kind of inherent mystical power or that they are worthy of some form or minor worship then you are getting into the realm of idolitry.

BTW, a saint was the term used for any Christian originally. The Catholic concept of Sainthood is another tradition men created later on. Paul was a man, his calling was divine, not he himself.


190 posted on 12/07/2006 6:42:17 AM PST by Grig
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 188 | View Replies]

To: khnyny

It's really interesting that every verse that the RCC uses to prove their point seems to point the direct opposite.

Grace is something freely given and not earned. Grace is not based on the receiver's value, but the giver's love. If the Lord filled Mary with grace, then she is getting something she doesn't deserve. Not only was Mary unworthy to have Jesus, she was totally unworthy. No woman was worthy to birth Jesus.

If Mary was born without sin and worthy to birth Jesus, she wouldn't need to be full of grace because grace is only needed when we are unworthy of the gift. The angel used the present tense "full of grace" because she was unworthy at that moment.

Mary herself says she is the bondservant of God; a slave deserving no wages and nothing in return. She is not the co-redeemer, she is a Godly obedient woman.


191 posted on 12/07/2006 6:50:45 AM PST by Tao Yin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 87 | View Replies]

To: AnalogReigns
Please show me anywhere in the Bible where a dead person's body "ceases to be us."

I'm not aware of anything in the Bible that says anything about that one way or another. Have you ever been to a wake and viewed the body? It's an empty shell. That person no longer occupies that body. If the Bible contradicts me, I will defer to it. :-)

192 posted on 12/07/2006 7:03:31 AM PST by alnick
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 154 | View Replies]

To: Grig

"...but when you start fostering the idea that physical objects (including dead bodies) have some kind of inherent mystical power or that they are worthy of some form or minor worship then you are getting into the realm of idolitry."

Agreed. This is not Catholic belief.

"BTW, a saint was the term used for any Christian originally. The Catholic concept of Sainthood is another tradition men created later on."
In the Roman tradition of Catholic Christianity the word Sanctus means holy. It can be applied to the people of God, living or dead. Used with a persons name e.g. St. Paul, it implies a belief that that person is with God in heaven.
This traditional practice is held by Catholic, Orthodox, Coptic, and many Protestant Christians.


193 posted on 12/07/2006 7:19:06 AM PST by rogator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 190 | View Replies]

To: mountn man
Mary's body will never be found on this earth.

And why is that?

According to Catholic doctrine and the traditions of the Catholic Church, the Blessed Virgin Mary (Mary, the mother of Jesus) "having completed the course of her earthly life, was assumed body and soul into heavenly glory."[1] This means that Mary was transported into Heaven with her body and soul united. The feast day recognizing Mary's passage into Heaven is celebrated as The Feast of the Assumption of the Blessed Virgin Mary by Roman Catholics. This doctrine was dogmatically and infallibly defined by Pope Pius XII on 1 November 1950 in his Apostolic Constitution Munificentissimus Deus.

194 posted on 12/07/2006 7:27:17 AM PST by mc5cents (Show me just what Mohammd brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: A.J.Armitage
Who determined the Canon?

Here's an incomplete list of ancient books which failed to make the cut.

The Gospel of Thomas
The Gospel of Philip
The Gospel of Peter
The Gospel of Nicodemus (also called the "Acts of Pilate")
The Gospel of Bartholomew

You don't believe in them, and neither do I. So I ask again: who determined the Canon? And on what basis?

195 posted on 12/07/2006 7:28:51 AM PST by Mrs. Don-o ("Stand firm and hold to the Traditions"--- 2 Thess. 2:15--- because the Bible tells me so.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 145 | View Replies]

To: Manfred the Wonder Dawg; what's up; AmericaUnited; FreedomCalls
Do not hold dearly to these as they will lead you away from the Lord Jesus.

Have you noticed that the ONLY sites which purport to be Marian apparitions that have been 'approved' by the Church are those at which Jesus IS glorified, and are ones where people are led TO Christ? There are a lot of kooks in the world, and one can claim any sort of 'apparition', but the Church is very wary about putting any store in the claims before some diligent research. If Mary is helping to lead God's people, she would be leading them TO Him, not away from Him. As for the title of Co-Redemptrix; it is simply a statement of the fact that Mary was an active participant in the Redemption of man by virtue of her "Yes" to God's invitation to be that "Woman of the Promise", foretold in prophesy. It was she who brought forth Jesus into this world, as the Father had planned, so she is an important figure in our Redemption. The Church does not teach that she did the redeeming, only that she was the one who God chose to make it possible for us.

Catholics venerate and honor Mary, as led by Jesus's own example; we do not worship her. As for the 'tradition' not being explicitly in the Bible, and thus you find it difficult to accept, what about the teachings of Jesus that ARE explicit in the Word of God that you don't accept, such as the primacy of Peter, and the Real Presence?

We could bandy Scripture about all day long, but as far as tradition is concerned, I'll take the word of folks who were with Mary while she was alive, and who passed her story along to those Church fathers who DID keep her story alive for the successive generations. They didn't make it up out of whole cloth a millenia later; they continued her story from its inception. As for the idea that Mary couldn't possibly have been conceived without sin, I personally believe that anything is possible with God, and if He wanted the mother of His Son to be sinless, so as to be a worthy vessel, He certainly could have done so. Far be it from me to put any limits on what He can do. And as was pointed out before, Christ was fully human, as well as fully Divine, yet he was also born without sin.

196 posted on 12/07/2006 7:31:18 AM PST by SuziQ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 176 | View Replies]

To: HAL9000

Included in the burial were pieces of wood certain to be fragments of the True Cross.


197 posted on 12/07/2006 7:32:00 AM PST by bert (K.E. N.P. Rozerem commercials give me nightmares)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Grig; All
What do you think should be done with THESE tombs (people are venerating them by placing flowers there) and all of the statues in THIS church (there is even a statue of a man praying to other statues)?


198 posted on 12/07/2006 7:40:45 AM PST by wagglebee ("We are ready for the greatest achievements in the history of freedom." -- President Bush, 1/20/05)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 185 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee
See post 190.

Han Solo's mom? :) (sorry, couldn't resist)

199 posted on 12/07/2006 8:24:09 AM PST by Grig
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 198 | View Replies]

To: HAL9000

Apostle Paul - a real relic! ;-)


200 posted on 12/07/2006 8:26:28 AM PST by NotJustAnotherPrettyFace
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-50 ... 101-150151-200201-250 ... 401-409 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson