Wow - I wasn't expecting that. Here are my responses.
> Well first the Bible was written and canonized by the Catholic Church.
The word Catholic isn't even in the Bible. You don't find that significant? Don't make stuff up.
> You are Peter and on this rock I will build my Church. Jesus gave Peter the keys of kingdom of heaven. Jesus did not say I will write my book, but build my Church.
So? What relevance does that have with Catholics? You do realize Peter probably didn't even go to Rome? There's no mention of that in the Bible. So he probably didn't even go. Catholics just make stuff up. If you think he did show us the proof in the Bible. I cannot believe it wouldn't be mentioned in the Bible if he did. It would be just too important, especially with all of Paul's adventures getting there. You can see Rome was a very significant place back then.
> If all we had was a book, we would have the thousands of denominations we have now, because man is disobedient. Christ founded a Church not a book in order to establish authority, and He promised the gates of hell would not prevail against it.
But a church has to have guidelines and that comes from scripture. He didn't call the church back then Catholic, did he? That was more made up stuff from Catholics.
> Second, Mary is the first Christian because we say Christ in you, the hope of glory.
That's a ridiculous insinuation to any literate person that has read the Bible. You and your idolization of Mary. Unbelievable. Its sinful to idolize any person. Ever. ALL HAVE SINNED AND COME SHORT OF THE GLORY OF GOD. You do know the definition of "all" don't you? Every person that ever lived. That includes your idol Mary.
> She was the first person to literally have Christ in her, and the babe John the Baptist lept for joy when she approached Elizabeth.
That's because of Jesus, not Mary! More absurd Catholic insinuation.
> The Hail Mary is taken directly from the Bible in the Gospel of Luke. Gabriel says Hail Mary full of grace, the Lord is with thee, and Elizabeth cries out blessed are you among women and blessed is the fruit of your womb.
Actually the real quote is " Hail, thou grace-endued, the Lord is with thee." So much for your claim. More Catholic fiction. Nice try.
> Elizabeth calls her the mother of my Lord.
Well of course she was his biological mother. Don't try to inject things into scripture. Focus on Jesus, not Mary. That's the point. Note that mother is not capitalized and Lord is. Hint hint hint.
> Mary is preserved sinless by the grace of God, as Gabriel calls her full of grace.
Unbelievable that any person that can read a Bible can make such an untrue claim. Being full of grace in no way makes you sinless. More Catholic fiction. Or....show me one place in the Bible that proves that wrong. That claims Mary is sinless. One place. (This should be interesting.)
> She possesses the full measure of God’s grace according to the Bible.
I don't even know what you're trying to say. Where is that in the Bible? She's "blessed among women". So were lots of women. So were lots of men.
> Is it your contention that God’s grace is insufficient to save us from sin?
Of course its the only thing we need. Absolutely.
> She calls God her savior because it is by His grace that she is preserved sinless, not by her own nature. She is full of grace.
First of all she is not "preserved sinless". Prove me wrong: Where in the Bible does it claim she was sinless? Now of course as believers everyone's sin is taken away. But that again doesn't put Mary on another level. She sins like all of us. (Prove that wrong.) Before I mentioned how its rather odd that if Mary was so important to you Catholics don't you find it odd she is not even mentioned from the water to wine incident to the crucifixion? You ignored that question. Don't ignore questions. Its disrespectful.
> She also shows her perpetual virginity by her words to Gabriel.
Where in the Bible does it claim anything about "perpetual virginity"? She had children with Joseph after Jesus! How does that happen when you're a virgin?
> If she had been planning on having children with Joseph, she would have been overjoyed at Gabriel’s words.
Are you really serious? You think she was contemplating getting married to Joseph and NOT having children? Nearly everyone back then had children or certainly tried to. Is there social security! Are you really serious? So if that was true why did she have several children after Jesus? Please clarify.
> Joseph and I will bear a king? She did not say that because she made a vow of virginity, how can these things be since I know not a man?
Of course she was a virgin. Probably 99% of the unmarried women of that day were virgins. What's your point? She was asking how she can get pregnant without being with a man. That's a rather natural question, don't you think? What's your point?
> If you really want to contend that she had children with Joseph, you would have to go outside the Bible, as no verse says and Joseph knew his wife and she bore him children.
It says that Jesus had brothers and sisters. Everyone agrees on that. If Catholics don't they truly are living in an alternate universe.
What were the names of jesus brothers and sisters
Jesus had five brothers, namely, James (Ya’qov), Simon (Shim’on), Judah ( Yehudah ), Joses ( Yosef ) and Thomas (Toma’). And he also had two sisters , Rachel (Rakhel) and Lea (Le’ah).
Matthew 12:46 While he was yet speaking to the crowds, lo, his mother and his brethren stood without, seeking to speak to him.
Luke 8:19 Then his mother and his brothers came to him, but they could not reach him because of the crowd.
Mark 3:31 And his mother and his brothers came, and standing outside they sent to him and called him.
Matthew 13:55 Is not this the carpenter’s son? Is not his mother called Mary? And are not his brothers James and Joseph and Simon and Judas?
I didn't realize Catholics have this bizarre belief that these weren't actual brothers of Jesus. Unbelievable. Its like Catholicism is made up of completely illiterate people that can't read their Bible. How else can you explain such bizarre interpretations of multiple Biblical passages? I don't even understand the point of elevating Mary. No one in the Bible prayed to her, did they? That's pretty significant. Then along comes some bizarre sect that idolizes her. And people actually follow it - because THEY DON'T READ THEIR BIBLE. Remember it says "Study to show thyself approved". I bet God was tempted to say "because those Catholics are going to come along and try to twist and distort The Word so watch out!".
Seriously though. This is a serious lack of reading skill demonstrated.
> If that were true, who committed adultery? Was it God by having a child with another man’s wife, or was it Joseph that had children with God’s wife? You can see that position is biblically untenable.
God's wife? Where in the world did you get that from? I sure haven't read that in my Bible. More fiction no doubt.
She was a virgin before Jesus. After Jesus she had children with Joseph. What is your issue? Clarify please. (I wrote that before realizing this is a Catholic thing - that Mary was a virgin til her death I guess.)
> We believe Jesus is fully God and fully human. Neither the Trinity nor the hypostatic union appear in scripture alone, but were developed by Church councils. Do you believe in the Trinity and the hypostatic Union? Then it is easy to call Mary the mother of God, as the baby in her was God, and she was His mother.
Oh please. She bear the Holy Spirit's impregnation.
Jesus said I and the Father are one. Very clear. Its also clear the Holy Spirit is on the same plane. Are they a Trinity? I don't know and I don't think about it because to me we have 3 areas of guidance, wisdom, strength and general help. 3 is great. I'm very appreciative of all 3. To me God the Father represents foundational integrity, law, structure. Jesus represents forgiveness, hope and the future. The Holy Spirit represents blessings, gifts and inspiration. Combine all of those and you have quite a wonderful life. A life founded on the actual Bible, not fictional interpretations of it.
> There is no biblical inconsistency in Catholic teaching, thoughts or actions.
LOL...I would say its absolute fantasy from start to finish. Your words here just confirm it. But hey, I asked questions for clarification so let's see what your responses will be. Please stick to the questions asked. You've avoided many because you know there was no Biblical backing for your claims. Don't ignore questions. Its rude and disrespectful. And its not the way to conduct a discussion. And you know it.
