with
Darn if I don't detect an awfully similar stance toward art!
Posted on 11/24/2014 7:50:29 AM PST by Salvation
It is not a chapter and verse where it says “Mary was assumed into Heaven.” However, there are a number of references and inferences to be found in the Bible. Again, take a look at the sources I provided, and you will find the Catholic teaching on the subject.
Obviously, you are free to reject it, but at least you will know what is truly taught and believed.
So did you only mention that as some kind of straw man to divert? God made it rather clear.
Deuteronomy 12:30 Take heed to thyself that thou be not snared by following them, after that they be destroyed from before thee; and that thou inquire not after their gods, saying, How did these nations serve their gods? even so will I do likewise. 31 Thou shalt not do so unto the LORD thy God
The Catholic Church spits in the face of God by using those Babylonian pagan beliefs, rituals, vestments, and practices in their supposed worship of Him.
Oh I understand what they teach and believe. In most cases better than Catholics themselves. Such as Catholics actually pray TO saints and Mary asking them to specifically perform tasks reserved to Christ or the Holy Spirit. The Catholic Church believes they serve the same god as Muslims. The Catholic Church actually says that it was the confession of Peter rather than the man himself that the church is built on.
Wisdom 1:11 So beware of uttering frivolous complaints, restrain your tongue from finding fault; even what is said in secret has repercussions, and a lying mouth deals death to the soul.
Two things, the first is that the concept of the Sabbath was taken from the Jews, and made Christian.
Second the things Blessed Newman speaks of are not novel in themselves, such as rings, incense, etc, as they were used by Jews and pagans alike.
Most importantly is what Newman said, “sanctified by their adoption into the Church.”
At 377, Newman quotes St. John Damascene: “As the holy Fathers overthrew the temples and shrines of the devils, and raised in their places shrines in the {377} names of Saints and we worship them, so also they overthrew the images of the devils, and in their stead raised images of Christ, and God’s Mother, and the Saints.
Later, he quotes from his work, Essays (at 380-382):
“Mr. Milman argues from it,—’These things are in heathenism, therefore they are not Christian:’ we, on the contrary, prefer to say, ‘these things are in Christianity, therefore they are not heathen.’”
As the Pantheon was originally built to worship all of the Roman gods, so it was Christianized, to become a house of worship, honoring the One, True, God.
Many religious ideas are common to all mankind, but that doesn’t make either Christianity or Roman Catholicism syncretic.
We must agree to disagree.
May our joint faith in Jesus Christ lead us to better spread the Gospel.
Galatians 1:8 But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.
Now show where the apostles specifically taught the assumption of Mary.
Lots of good books on Mary. I recommend Hail, Holy, Queen by Scott Hahn.
You make a rather large boast and sadly, your interpretation is quite off the mark.
Catholics, as all Christians, ask other believers to pray for them. I may ask my neighbor to pray I find a new job. I may ask St. Anthony to pray for me to find my keys. In both cases, we are asking brothers and sisters in Christ to approach the Father on our behalf.
It is not a taught doctrine or otherwise, to belief either Our Lady, or the Saints in Heaven, bear the power of the Divine. To assume so would be a violation of the First Commandment.
Jews believe in the God of Abraham, but don’t recognize Jesus. Jesus, as a perfect Jew, believed His father was the God of Abraham. Catholics, following the example of Jesus, believe in the God of Abraham. Muslims claim to believe in the God of Abraham. Like the Jews, however, they do not believe in the Trinity.
with
Darn if I don't detect an awfully similar stance toward art!
If you've ever read Luke's Gospel, you said the Hail Mary, ha ha on you. The claim that Jesus built His Church on Peter's confession is strictly a protestant position. The muzzie/Catholic God issue is a bit sticky and not wishing to be complicit in more of your uncharitable banter, I shall save it for another time.
What part of "thou shalt not do so unto the Lord thy God" do you not understand? He didn't say unless they are "sanctified". That is a lie of the Catholic Church. It's why they are considered the whore of Babylon in Revelation.
>>we, on the contrary, prefer to say, ‘these things are in Christianity, therefore they are not heathen.’”<<
I have no doubt they would "prefer to say". That doesn't change the facts however.
>>As the Pantheon was originally built to worship all of the Roman gods, so it was Christianized, to become a house of worship, honoring the One, True, God.<<
God commanded to destroy all of the heathen worship places etc. He did NOT say to "sanctify" them and use them in worship of Him.
Perhaps it would serve you to re-read what I wrote. The Bible, as a single volume, didn’t exist until the Council of Nicea decreed what was canonical, and what wasn’t.
Certainly, the Pentatuch, and the other books of the Old Testament existed. And certainly, anything held to be canonical is believed to be the inspired word of God.
Nothing can diminish what was written in Timothy, yet your interpretation is way off. While the books of Scripture do serve every purpose written of, this was a letter, a single letter, just like 1Timothy. The Epistles, Revelations, and all other books of the New Testament were not seen as one text until, again, after the canon was declared.
Regardless of what I show, verses I point to, the writings of Church Fathers, none of these will you believe. You are set in your ways, and determined to promote assertions which are incorrect.
I don’t know to which branch of Christianity you feel closest to, and thus I don’t claim to be an expert on those beliefs. However, as a practicing Catholic, without exception, I can tell you that your presentation is way off.
You are struggling to justify the errant doctrines of Rome. Please tell me which of those errant doctrines you can find in the Scripture. Rome has left the very book that it pretends to have delivered to the world.
Rev.11:19 Then God's temple in heaven was opened, and the ark of His covenant was seen within His temple, and there were flashes of lightening, voices, peals of thunder, an earthquake and heavy hail.
Rev. 12:1 And a great portent appeared in heaven, a woman clothed with the sun, with the moon under her feet, and on her head a crown of twelve stars; she was with child. ... [S]he brought forth a male child, one who is to rule all the nations with a rod of iron.
We know that after the crucifixion Mary was cared for by the apostle John (Jn 19:26-27). Early Christian writings say John went to live at Ephesus and that Mary accompanied him. There is some dispute about where she ended her life, perhaps there, perhaps back at Jerusalem. Neither of these cities nor any other claimed her remains, although there are claims about possessing her (temporary) tomb. Why did no city claim the bones of Mary? Apparently because there were no bones to claim, and people knew it. -Dr. Stackpole
There is no errant doctrine in the Roman Catholic Church. There is nothing it its dogmata or doctrine that is contradictory to Scripture.
You may not agree with that, but to presume you are the sole arbiter is quite bold, and rash.
I challenge you to read the sources I have provided, which demonstrate the Biblical basis of doctrines. Once read, tell me again where and what doctrine isn’t in Scripture.
Oh, one more thing, how do you know your translation of Scripture is complete and accurate? I suspect you are not using the Jerusalem, Douay-Rheims, or the New American Bible, Revised Edition. You are likely using a Bible which was tampered with during the Reformation, and lacking several books.
How can you believe the Roman Catholic Church was accurate in creating the original canon of Scripture, yet incorrect with the canon, simultaneously? How did the Church fathers know how to pick what books and assemble them, and then later, have to have Reformationist remove said books?
Shows the hatred that the Papists have traditional had against the Protestants.
Oh isn't that cute. The angels greeting to Mary has little to do with the adulation Catholics have ascribed to that. The Greek word the Catholics like to somehow elevate into meaning something special doesn't mean anything close to what they would like. Then they like to include "full of grace" which the Greek does NOT say. It simply says "favored with grace". Now if you want to see someone "full" of grace you can find it here.
Acts 6:8 Now Stephen, a man full of God's grace and power, performed great wonders and signs among the people.
Let me know what you think about Henry VIII and his less than generous reign, including the execution of St. Thomas More, countless priests, the looting of monasteries, etc.
There is plenty of blood spilled on both sides of that conflict, and no one side can claim innocence in the violence.
LOL After reviewing the thread it seems dead on, doesn’t it?
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.