Posted on 05/30/2008 10:21:34 AM PDT by Ultra Sonic 007
Some of you will remember my recent decision to become a Catholic. I suppose I should be surprised it ended getting derailed into a 'Catholic vs. Protestant' thread, but after going further into the Religion forum, I suppose it's par for the course.
There seems to be a bit of big issue concerning Mary. I wanted to share an observation of sorts.
Now...although I was formerly going by 'Sola Scriptura', my father was born and raised Catholic, so I do have some knowledge of Catholic doctrine (not enough, at any rate...so consider all observations thusly).
Mary as a 'co-redeemer', Mary as someone to intercede for us with regards to our Lord Jesus.
Now...I can definitely see how this would raise some hairs. After all, Jesus Himself said that He is the Way, the Truth, and the Life, and that none come to the Father but through Him. I completely agree.
I do notice a bit of a fundamental difference in perception though. Call it a conflict of POV. Do Catholics worship Mary (as I've seen a number of Protestants proclaim), or do they rather respect and venerate her (as I've seen Catholics claim)? Note that it's one thing to regard someone with reverence; I revere President Bush as the noted leader of the free world. I revere my father. I revere Dr. O'Neil, a humorous and brilliant math teacher at my university. It's an act of respect.
But do I WORSHIP them?
No. Big difference between respecting/revering and worshiping. At least, that's how I view it.
I suppose it's also a foible to ask Mary to pray for us, on our behalf...but don't we tend to also ask other people to pray for us? Doesn't President Bush ask for people to pray for him? Don't we ask our family members to pray for us for protection while on a trip? I don't see quite a big disconnect between that and asking Mary to help pray for our wellbeing.
There is some question to the fact that she is physically dead. Though it stands to consider that she is still alive, in Heaven. Is it not common practice to not just regard our physical life, but to regard most of all our spirit, our soul? That which survives the flesh before ascending to Heaven or descending to Hell after God's judgment?
I don't think it's that big of a deal. I could change my mind after reading more in-depth, but I don't think that the Catholic Church has decreed via papal infallibility that Mary is to be placed on a higher pedestal than Jesus, or even to be His equal.
Do I think she is someone to be revered and respected? Certainly. She is the mother of Jesus, who knew Him for His entire life as a human on Earth. Given that He respected her (for He came to fulfill the old laws; including 'Honor Thy Father and Mother'), I don't think it's unnatural for other humans to do the same. I think it's somewhat presumptuous to regard it on the same level as idolatry or supplanting Jesus with another.
In a way, I guess the way Catholics treat Mary and the saints is similar to how the masses treated the Apostles following the Resurrection and Jesus's Ascension: people who are considered holy in that they have a deep connection with Jesus and His Word, His Teachings, His Message. As the Apostles spread the Good News and are remembered and revered to this day for their work, so to are the works of those sainted remembered and revered. Likewise with Mary. Are the Apostles worshiped? No. That's how it holds with Mary and the saints.
At least, that's how my initial thoughts on the subject are. I'll have to do more reading.
All these pretender Christians never answer for their own inconsistencies by making it a point to constantly accuse real Christians. 5,984 posted on Monday, June 16, 2008 9:40:39 AM by papertyger
Either the RCC gospel is true or the scriptural one is true-they can't both be true.
Thus, you are either saved or lost based on receiving the true Gospel.
God the Father isn't going to 'look at your heart' He is going to see if you have been washed in the Blood of His Son and received the free gift of salvation.
That is what gets your name in the Book of life and if that name isn't in that Book, you will be face the wrath of God.
That sure upset you!
Exactly what it was suppose to do and that is why Christ preached more on Hell than He did on Heaven.
Remember that line from the act of contrition, 'because I fear the loss of heaven and the pains of hell'
I didn't say you had to go to hell, only that you were if you continued to put your trust in a false Gospel, faith plus works.
Amen and amen!
Amen.
Amen.
All scripture was written by the Jews in both Hebrew (Old Testament) and the New (Greek) 'What advantage have the Jew....chiefly that unto to them were committed the oracles of God' (Rom.3:2)
Amen.
That is correct sister, we must willing to go outside the camp and bear His reproach (Heb.13:13) and be willing even to reject one's own family (Matt.10:37)
And you keep saying that I am misunderstanding Paul, which I am not.
Eternity will reveal who really understood Paul.
I have no idea what you are talking about here.
Phil 2:12 means that the Christian needs to keep going in the process of salvation with ‘fear and trembling’ - a common Old Testament expression indicating awe and seriousness in the service of God (cf Exodus 15:16; Judith 2:28; Psalm 2:11; Isaiah 19:16).
And who is disputing that service ought to serious?
And don't throw in non-scriptural books like Judith as a proof-text for anything! ***Judgement Seat in which the Christian will be judged for his works on earth *** And what do you think that the ramifications will be for that Judgement?
At that Judgement for the saved, rewards or loss of rewards (1Cor.3)
[ ***Salvation is an event, not a process. Sanctification is a process, but one grows because one IS saved, not TO BE saved or to STAY saved***]
Methinks that you have things backwards and have reversed cause and effect.
No, and that is what makes my Gospel correct and yours a false one.
You are working for your salvation, which you cannot earn or merit.
[ ***If you are placing your confidence in anything other than the shed Blood of Christ for your eternal salvation, you have nullified grace and are not saved, since you are saved by grace and not works, else grace is no longer grace. ***]
Without the Grace of God, we cannot be saved.
That is what I said, but you nullify the grace of God when you add works to it.
Now to him that worketh is the reward of grace, but of debt, But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness (Rom.4:4-5)
And that is the Paul that you are claiming I am misunderstanding.
Works cancel out grace, and it is of faith that it might be of grace (Rom.4:16a)
Now, there is no further reason for you and I to continue to post to one another.
You are trusting the Roman Catholic Church, I am trusting the word of God.
We will see in eternity which one was gave us the true Gospel.
Ofcourse one can know another's eternal state, if doesn't believe in the Lord Jesus Christ he is going to hell! (Jn.3:36).
It must be by faith alone (not of works) because he makes faith null and void since grace and works are mutually exclusive (Rom.4:5-6).
So, if one tells me that they have rejected the true Gospel of Christ,(faith alone in Christ alone), I do know, as any believer knows, their eternal state, since scripture says what it will be.
I notice that you do not indicate repentence or even shame. However, I will answer, as all good Catholics ought.
Repent of what, telling you the truth?
I am not the one 'judging you' the word of God is.
I do note that you call yourself a Catholic and not a Christian.
Which is good, because there is a difference. As the Bible says, I am already saved (Rom. 8:24, Eph. 2:5–8), but I’m also being saved (1 Cor. 1:8, 2 Cor. 2:15, Phil. 2:12), and I have the hope that I will be saved (Rom. 5:9–10, 1 Cor. 3:12–15). Like the apostle Paul I am working out my salvation in fear and trembling (Phil. 2:12), with hopeful confidence in the promises of Christ (Rom. 5:2, 2 Tim. 2:11–13).
How someone can say that they are saved and yet hope to be saved is really amazing!
If you are depending on what the Roman Catholic Church teaches regarding salvation, you are going to be very disappointed in eternity.
But at least you received the true Gospel on these threads, but you have chosen to reject it for the false gospel of Roman Catholicism (Gal.1)
When the Bible explains what the Gospel is, it defines it as the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus. So, I would say Catholicism does preach the same Gospel.
And that same Bible states the difference between faith and works, and that the Gospel can only be received by faith. (Rom.4:4-5, Eph.2:8-9).
Any gospel that preaches any mixture of the two is preaching a false gospel that cannot save, which Paul called accursed (Gal.1)
2Cor.2:
15 For we are the good odour of Christ unto God, in them that are saved and in them that perish.
http://www.newadvent.org/bible/2co002.htm
5 But to him that worketh not, yet believeth in him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is reputed to justice, according to the purpose of the grace of God.
http://www.newadvent.org/bible/rom004.htm
But at least you received the true Gospel on these threads, but you have chosen to reject it for the false gospel of Roman Catholicism (Gal.1)
Surely, you are not implying that Gal 1 states that Roman Catholicism is false? It says no such thing.
How about "Haughty Hate"?
Perhaps you should consult my tagline.
There is nothing haughty about being repulsed by the stench of a smoker though they can't smell it themselves.
What a farce. The rules are, by their nature, favorable to anti-Catholic bigots.
Your side constantly makes it personal by accusing a nebulous RCC edifice to which your targets belong by default.
Your use of the term "sado-evangelist" when speaking to an individual is contrary to the rules of FR.
And of course I haven't done that, or my posts with that term would have been pulled, now wouldn't they.
But you already know that, don't you?
Further, your obvious pride in that terms speaks volumes.
It does do a spectacular job of conveying the perverse character of the "accusers for Jesus"
Nevertheless, the term is not of my invention, so "pride," much as some would dearly wish was a component of my usage, is an empty accusation.
“...The Lord communicates through prayer***”
You said:
Are you saying that the Lord prays to you?
When you pray, do you ever wait (listen) for the answer? Why is that not plain to you?
You said,
“It is Scripture. You read it; how does it talk to you?”
It is the very nature of scripture to speak to the one reading it. When you read something, you comprehend its import. Well, the scriptures are the Word of God!
Heb 4:12 For the word of God is quick, and powerful, and sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart.
God’s word taught me about myself. Through His Spirit, the word cut into me with its truth, contending with my spirit, convicting me of my sin, convincing me of His goodness and mercy, persuading me of His Truth, His righteousness, revealing to me His Son. Now, after receiving salvation, it continues to work in me (on me) by reminding me day by day of God’s will for my life. Jesus took the basin of water and went around washing the disciples’ feet. To Peter He said, “He that is washed needeth not save to wash his feet, but is clean every whit: and ye are clean, but not all.” Peter was not in need of the washing of regeneration (he had already obtained it in professing Christ as His Savior), but he needed the cleansing of his feet (daily, don’t you suppose?) Now, forward to Ephesians 5, “Eph 5:26 That he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word,
Eph 5:27 That he might present it to himself a glorious church, not having spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing; but that it should be holy and without blemish.” Those in Christ need the daily washing of water by the word that they might be cleansed. The word is instructive in this regard, as the psalmist has said, “Wherewithal shall a young man cleanse his way? by taking heed thereto according to thy word.”
There are many other examples to be found of the efficacy of scripture. When the believer reads it, it instructs him it admonishes him, it exhorts him, it rebukes him, it commends him. It talks to him!
Are the scriptures I have cited not in the bible you rely upon? If not, which ones? If so, are there any I have mishandled, misrepresented?
You really do have my sincerest sympathies. You see I understand your position is completely untennable, even if you don't.
Acknowledging the Spirit's inspiration of human authors says absolutely nothing about the content of the revelation, and the fact is there is no revelation in the Scripture authorizing sola scriptura.
Or do you believe as some that God cannot successfully communicate His word by His Spirit through human authorship?
So why is it so preposterous that God can successfully communicate through the human agency of the Church?
You can't have yours without giving me mine.
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.