Prayers to Mary in concerning Matthew

[repentant]

These are the types pf responses that make me be very weary of catholic/orthodox. Brother, people ARE worth it. If you have to repeat yourself over and over 100 fold, it is worth it. Compassion on people should be, in my opinion, one of the greatest displays of love that Jesus examplified while He was here. If my compassion for people, when I am not in the flesh, means my having to say something 1000 times, I must do it.

Titus 3:10,11
Warn a divisive person once, and then warn him a second time. After that, have nothing to do with him. You may be sure that such a man is warped and sinful; he is self-condemned.

A man that is an heretick after the first and second admonition reject; Knowing that he that is such is subverted, and sinneth, being condemned of himself.

I am not going to repeat myself over and over, and be missunderstood and/or ignored. People don't really want to know what we really believe, and choose not to listen.

 

[E.C.]

In the end, prayers to Mary or saints in pointless because they can not hear them and God wants us only to pray to Him directly.

We ask the saints to intercede for our sins. We do not worship the saints, but venerate them because worship is for God alone. Same thing with Mary: we ask her to intercede for us.

I've seen plenty of Orthodox bow to paintings and idols.

Idolatry is the worship of a statue or other image, not the person/thing/event depicted, but the material of what it is made out of. Orthodox do not venerate the wood or the paint an icon is made out of, but the person depicted within the icon.

 

[Rion]

I am not going to repeat myself over and over, and be missunderstood and/or ignored. People don't really want to know what we really believe, and choose not to listen.

Who has been doing that here? It seems to me that you are trying to force people to say that they're heretics and non-believers, and when they refuse you're spiteful.

Truth be told I'm struggling right now with Tradition. The two churches are at least based off of the original, but there's so much in their Traditions that seems to oppose what the Bible clearly says. You and others have been a stumbling block to me, making it harder for me in regard to the Orthodox and RCC. I try not to judge, and try not to paint an entire group by a few, but there seems to be so much HATE from the two on this board. I don't say that to flame, because I know there's many on both groups who do not, and that there's many a Protestant who is just the same, but it confuses me.

You're right on some things, why was the Holy Spirit allowing Traditions if they weren't right, or at least harmless? Yet at the same time, I see so little love from you guys towards the Protestants. As a Protestant, I'd like to unify with the RCC and Orthodox, to find agreement over our disagreements, and to petition God to lead us together and be one again. But it seems like so many here want to keep it the way things were 500 years ago, Protestant, RCC, and Orthodox.

I love Christ, and God the Father, and I want to worship them in the manner they most desire, but Christ said to love Him with all of our minds as well as our hearts. I'm sure many protestants here are the same way. When we ask regarding Traditions that seem contradictary to Scripture, we are not seeking to insult or vilefy you guys. We want answers, because want to do the right thing. Yet look at the first few pages of this thread, all it was, was RCC members attacking the poor fellow. "This has been asked before" you say. So?! My Site Support hasn't cleared yet, meaning I cannot search for that question. Perhaps the guy's in the same boat, or he can't afford to subscribe, or maybe he was looking for fresh responses.

I would love to be a part of the RCC or Orthodox, but the answers provided didn't seem to make sense to me and others. In response, we're told to basically "accept and shut up" and that if we do not, we're heretics and our "holy spirit" is false. Do you know what that means? It means you claim our Holy Spirit is demonic. Do not deny this, for if it is not the Holy Spirit, it can only be the Spirit of the AntiChrist.

After knowing my friend for going on ten years, I thought that the Reformation was just Satan's work and that, while the break up remained, the foolish hatred between us had long passed, and only people like Jack Chick and a few rogues held on to such fallacies. Now, I'm not so sure. Is my Catholic friend the rogue? Is she the rarity?

I want to join the group that most reflects our Lord's Truth, but how can I not look at your fruit and wonder about the seed? If the ones like yourself are not common, then why are there so few who call you out for your remarks? We want to worship Christ, but to do it in the complete truth. If we struggle with Tradition, is it not because of our love of God? We seek to do what is true and right to Him. Would you have us worship along side you while our hearts do not match our praise? Is that not a greater sin than to remain skeptical of certain doctrines which are minor? Would you have us be liars before the Lord?

Perhaps we, who are Protestants yet seek to unite with all of our brothers and sisters in Christ, will be counted as failures in Heaven, saved only by the skin of our necks. Yet what blame will you of the True Church (if the Protestants are not a part of it) that hate us share for our failures? We are not Nicolations, who perverted everything Christ taught and reveled in sin. Do you think He hates us, who just want to unify our minds and hearts with His Truth? You say yours is the truth, but do your actions not speak louder than your words?

Mods, forgive me if this is considered a flame, or those of the RCC or Orthodox who do not fit into what I just said. I did not mean it as such. I am just sick in my heart from how much hatred I've seen here.

 

[Dyin2live]

sorry but. u MUST only pray to God. That is very wrong to pray to a person just like you and me (with the exception of being Jesus' human mother.) Where in the Bible does it say "pray to mary"? This is WRONG! Mary did have other sons the verse clearly states that. Mary was not always a virgin. She is not a virgin. She had children with Joseph.

 

[E.C.]

sorry but. u MUST only pray to God. That is very wrong to pray to a person just like you and me (with the exception of being Jesus' human mother.) Where in the Bible does it say "pray to mary"? This is WRONG! Mary did have other sons the verse clearly states that. Mary was not always a virgin. She is not a virgin. She had children with Joseph.

Actually, they are Joseph's kids from a previous marriage. To say that Mary was never always a virgin is completely erroneous. Besides, in Hebrew speak, brother meant any close male relative or friend or something like that.

You worship only God (Father, Son and Holy Spirit), but you venerate Mary and the saints. Big difference. When we venerate Mary and the saints, we are asking them to intercede for us.

 

[leothelioness]

Idolatry is the worship of a statue or other image, not the person/thing/event depicted, but the material of what it is made out of. Orthodox do not venerate the wood or the paint an icon is made out of, but the person depicted within the icon.

Wrong. Worshipping the person is idolatry. Worshipping anyone or anything other than God is idolatry.

Anything can be an idol. Money can be an idol, possessions can be an idol, success can be an idol. It doesn't have to be made out of iron or bronze or gold.

 

[leothelioness]

Actually, they are Joseph's kids from a previous marriage.

Okay, WHERE in the Scriptures or secular history is this even found??? Or is it only taught in the Orthodox church?

To say that Mary was never always a virgin is completely erroneous.

Or maybe, to say that Mary was always a virgin is erroneous.

You worship only God (Father, Son and Holy Spirit), but you venerate Mary and the saints. Big difference.

Maybe to you, but I still hold firmly to my convictions that there's a fine line between veneration and worship.

When we venerate Mary and the saints, we are asking them to intercede for us.

But that is completely pointless because Jesus is our only intercessor. Jesus said, "no one cometh unto the Father but by me."

 

[leothelioness]

Who has been doing that here? It seems to me that you are trying to force people to say that they're heretics and non-believers, and when they refuse you're spiteful.

Truth be told I'm struggling right now with Tradition. The two churches are at least based off of the original, but there's so much in their Traditions that seems to oppose what the Bible clearly says. You and others have been a stumbling block to me, making it harder for me in regard to the Orthodox and RCC. I try not to judge, and try not to paint an entire group by a few, but there seems to be so much HATE from the two on this board. I don't say that to flame, because I know there's many on both groups who do not, and that there's many a Protestant who is just the same, but it confuses me.

You're right on some things, why was the Holy Spirit allowing Traditions if they weren't right, or at least harmless? Yet at the same time, I see so little love from you guys towards the Protestants. As a Protestant, I'd like to unify with the RCC and Orthodox, to find agreement over our disagreements, and to petition God to lead us together and be one again. But it seems like so many here want to keep it the way things were 500 years ago, Protestant, RCC, and Orthodox.

I love Christ, and God the Father, and I want to worship them in the manner they most desire, but Christ said to love Him with all of our minds as well as our hearts. I'm sure many protestants here are the same way. When we ask regarding Traditions that seem contradictary to Scripture, we are not seeking to insult or vilefy you guys. We want answers, because want to do the right thing. Yet look at the first few pages of this thread, all it was, was RCC members attacking the poor fellow. "This has been asked before" you say. So?! My Site Support hasn't cleared yet, meaning I cannot search for that question. Perhaps the guy's in the same boat, or he can't afford to subscribe, or maybe he was looking for fresh responses.

I would love to be a part of the RCC or Orthodox, but the answers provided didn't seem to make sense to me and others. In response, we're told to basically "accept and shut up" and that if we do not, we're heretics and our "holy spirit" is false. Do you know what that means? It means you claim our Holy Spirit is demonic. Do not deny this, for if it is not the Holy Spirit, it can only be the Spirit of the AntiChrist.

After knowing my friend for going on ten years, I thought that the Reformation was just Satan's work and that, while the break up remained, the foolish hatred between us had long passed, and only people like Jack Chick and a few rogues held on to such fallacies. Now, I'm not so sure. Is my Catholic friend the rogue? Is she the rarity?

I want to join the group that most reflects our Lord's Truth, but how can I not look at your fruit and wonder about the seed? If the ones like yourself are not common, then why are there so few who call you out for your remarks? We want to worship Christ, but to do it in the complete truth. If we struggle with Tradition, is it not because of our love of God? We seek to do what is true and right to Him. Would you have us worship along side you while our hearts do not match our praise? Is that not a greater sin than to remain skeptical of certain doctrines which are minor? Would you have us be liars before the Lord?

Perhaps we, who are Protestants yet seek to unite with all of our brothers and sisters in Christ, will be counted as failures in Heaven, saved only by the skin of our necks. Yet what blame will you of the True Church (if the Protestants are not a part of it) that hate us share for our failures? We are not Nicolations, who perverted everything Christ taught and reveled in sin. Do you think He hates us, who just want to unify our minds and hearts with His Truth? You say yours is the truth, but do your actions not speak louder than your words?

Mods, forgive me if this is considered a flame, or those of the RCC or Orthodox who do not fit into what I just said. I did not mean it as such. I am just sick in my heart from how much hatred I've seen here.

Excellent post.

 

[GregoryTurner]

Titus 3:10,11
Warn a divisive person once, and then warn him a second time. After that, have nothing to do with him. You may be sure that such a man is warped and sinful; he is self-condemned.

A man that is an heretick after the first and second admonition reject; Knowing that he that is such is subverted, and sinneth, being condemned of himself.

I am not going to repeat myself over and over, and be missunderstood and/or ignored. People don't really want to know what we really believe, and choose not to listen.

Brother, there are people that do really want to know. They mat not agree with it but they genuinely want to know and understand. You never know who may be looking at these posts.

Peace to you...

g

 

[GregoryTurner]

Brother, there are people that do really want to know. They mat not agree with it but they genuinely want to know and understand. You never know who may be looking at these posts.

Peace to you...

g

Take me for example, I do not understand the difference between ortho and catho...

g

 

[ScottBot]

Okay, WHERE in the Scriptures or secular history is this even found??? Or is it only taught in the Orthodox church?


Or maybe, to say that Mary was always a virgin is erroneous.


Maybe to you, but I still hold firmly to my convictions that there's a fine line between veneration and worship.


But that is completely pointless because Jesus is our only intercessor. Jesus said, "no one cometh unto the Father but by me."

Nope, its taught in the Catholic Church as well. This concept that Mary had children with Joseph is a relatively new invention. Even Martin Luther and John Calvin believed in the perpetual virginity of Mary, which makes the idea that she had relations with Jospeh an idea that is only about 400 years old, which would also make it a teaching of man, not of Christ and His Apostolic Church.

 

[ScottBot]

Take me for example, I do not understand the difference between ortho and catho...

g

The Orthodox and the Catholic Church are much alike, with a few exceptions being that the Orthodox do not subscribe to Papal Authority and prefer episcopal collegiality. They also have an issue with the Catholic insertion of "I believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the Giver of Life, who proceeds from the Father and the son." The original Nicene Creed said only, "who proceeds from the Father". This is a problem known as the Filioque.

Most of the other differences are historical and cultural. One of the other major differences is that the Orthodox Church, being primarily Eastern in culture, tend to be more Mystical in their theology. They accept more on its face as unexplainable mysteries and don't rely on complex explanations of things. The Western Church tends to be more Scholastic in though, and seems determined to make long, complicated theological treatises on everything. In essence, the Orthodox accept things more on faith, whereas the West uses a mix of faith and reason. (this is not to say that the Eastern Church does not use reason)

A good example is Purgatory. While the Orthodox do not accept the Catholic use of the term or its explicit theology, it is a Westernization of a mutual idea shared by both churches on the theological premise of theosis. We both believe that Santification is a process that begins at baptism and is complete upon the beatific vision (when we come face to face with God). Sometimes that process continues after our earthly death. The East just doesn't use complex, technical terms, where the West does.

 

[CaliforniaJosiah]

This concept that Mary had children with Joseph is a relatively new invention.

1. The theory that Mary and Joseph were deprived of even a single instance of a normal, healthy, blessed sharing of intimacies within the sacred bonds of marriage after Jesus was born is a nonbiblical one and one that many conclude is therefore a nonbiblcial invention.


2. No Protestant denomination known to me officially teaches as dogma ANYTHING WHATSOEVER about the supremely private intimate marrital relationships between Mary and Joseph after Jesus was born. Every Protestant denomination known to me notes that the Bible is understandably and respectfully silent about their supremely private sexual relationship after Jesus was born - and so they are silent, too - with NO dogma on this point.


3. The obsession with how often Mary and Joseph did it after Jesus was born is not Protestant, it's Catholic and evidently Orthodox. "Dogma" is the highest level of importance and the greatest level of certainty. So, how often this married couple did it together is considered to be of THE VERY HIGHEST importance. Protestants tend to disagree. We re apt to see it as moot and, to be blunt, none of our business. Some are even apt to see it as a supreme and rude invasion of their privacy.



Back to the topic?



Pax!


- Josiah



.

 

[ScottBot]

1. The theory that Mary and Joseph were deprived of even a single instance of a normal, healthy, blessed sharing of intimacies within the sacred bonds of marriage after Jesus was born is a nonbiblical one and one that many conclude is therefore a nonbiblcial invention.


2. No Protestant denomination known to me officially teaches as dogma ANYTHING WHATSOEVER about the supremely private intimate marrital relationships between Mary and Joseph after Jesus was born. Every Protestant denomination known to me notes that the Bible is understandably and respectfully silent about their supremely private sexual relationship after Jesus was born - and so they are silent, too - with NO dogma on this point.


3. The obsession with how often Mary and Joseph did it after Jesus was born is not Protestant, it's Catholic and evidently Orthodox. "Dogma" is the highest level of importance and the greatest level of certainty. So, how often this married couple did it together is considered to be of THE VERY HIGHEST importance. Protestants tend to disagree. We re apt to see it as moot and, to be blunt, none of our business. Some are even apt to see it as a supreme and rude invasion of their privacy.



Back to the topic?



Pax!


- Josiah



.

Through the daughters and the some of Simon, Judas, and Joseph Jr., Mary and Joseph had the opportunity to have descendents. It is uncertain under James because the book of the Acts of the Apostles, a writing credited to Luke, says that he was killed by a sword. I do not know if he married and had children or descendents. The main point is that it is almost 2,000 years since Mary and Joseph had children and the significance is that is very probable for them to have living descendents today.

Since addressing the relations between Mary and Joseph is raised in the OP, discussing them at this point is germain to the OP, so we are on topic.

 

[CaliforniaJosiah]

1. The theory that Mary and Joseph were deprived of even a single instance of a normal, healthy, blessed sharing of intimacies within the sacred bonds of marriage after Jesus was born is a nonbiblical one and one that many conclude is therefore a nonbiblcial invention.


2. No Protestant denomination known to me officially teaches as dogma ANYTHING WHATSOEVER about the supremely private intimate marrital relationships between Mary and Joseph after Jesus was born. Every Protestant denomination known to me notes that the Bible is understandably and respectfully silent about their supremely private sexual relationship after Jesus was born - and so they are silent, too - with NO dogma on this point.


3. The obsession with how often Mary and Joseph did it after Jesus was born is not Protestant, it's Catholic and evidently Orthodox. "Dogma" is the highest level of importance and the greatest level of certainty. So, how often this married couple did it together is considered to be of THE VERY HIGHEST importance. Protestants tend to disagree. We re apt to see it as moot and, to be blunt, none of our business. Some are even apt to see it as a supreme and rude invasion of their privacy.



Back to the topic?

Since addressing the relations between Mary and Joseph is raised in the OP, discussing them at this point is germain to the OP, so we are on topic.

Is the last sentence the only part of my post you want to respond to? That's fine, of course, just wondering.


Actually, as I read the OP, it has nothing whatsoever to do with the sexual intimacies between Mary and Joseph. As you know, it IS possible for a married couple to share sexual intimacies and not have a child specifically mentioned in the Bible, so even if these 4 brothers were not via Mary, that has no implications for this DOGMA of the Perpetual Virginity of Mary.


That's my humble opinion, anyway.


Thank you.


Pax!


- Josiah



.

 

[IamAdopted]

So now God married Mary? I hope this is not what I am hearing from that one post.. God has never been married.. And Mary was to marry Joseph. The Jewish people looked upon Children and a heritage from the Lord. So why would God not bless Mary with many children?

 

[IamAdopted]

When Christians are absent from their bodies they are present with the Lord.. They are not God like but they are in the presence of the Lord.. They are not omnipresent and do not know what is happening here on earth..Only God is this..

 

[ScottBot]

When Christians are absent from their bodies they are present with the Lord.. They are not God like but they are in the presence of the Lord.. They are not omnipresent and do not know what is happening here on earth..Only God is this..

Is there Scriptural support for this? Are you quoting your pastor? What is the source for all these assumptions?

 

[Benedicta00]

When Christians are absent from their bodies they are present with the Lord.. They are not God like but they are in the presence of the Lord.. They are not omnipresent and do not know what is happening here on earth..Only God is this..

Adopted, how do you know you are the one who has 'the' correct interpretation of scripture?

 

[Benedicta00]

So now God married Mary? I hope this is not what I am hearing from that one post.. God has never been married.. And Mary was to marry Joseph. The Jewish people looked upon Children and a heritage from the Lord. So why would God not bless Mary with many children?

No, it's just analogy to explain the relationship/bond Mary has to the Holy Trinity. Mary is daughter to God the Father, spouse of the Holy Spirit and mother to Christ.

It's in an analogic sense, not a literal one.