• Welcome to Christian Forums
  1. Welcome to Christian Forums, a forum to discuss Christianity in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

  2. The forums in the Christian Congregations category are now open only to Christian members. Please review our current Faith Groups list for information on which faith groups are considered to be Christian faiths. Christian members please remember to read the Statement of Purpose threads for each forum within Christian Congregations before posting in the forum.

Praying to Mary - A Biblical Defense

Discussion in 'General Theology' started by PanDeVida, Aug 7, 2017.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Goatee

    Goatee Jesus, please forgive me, a sinner.

    +3,558
    United Kingdom
    Catholic
    Divorced
    People state that the doctrine was added later by the church well that's fine. Why?

    Because God has continued to reveal things to the church throughout history. The Holy Spirit works at the heart of Catholicism. Be it Eastern, Western etc.

    Not all truths end when the Bible is closed shut!

    God lives and breathes in us, both as the church as a congregation of Christianity and the church as a denomination.
     
  2. amariselle

    amariselle Jesus Never Fails

    +4,132
    United States
    Christian
    Married
    CA-Conservatives
    (St. Louis De Montfort's Consecration)

    I, (Name), a faithless sinner -
    renew and ratify today in thy hands,
    O Immaculate Mother,
    the vows of my Baptism;
    I renounce forever Satan,
    his pomps and works;
    and I give myself entirely to Jesus Christ,
    the Incarnate Wisdom,
    to carry my cross after Him
    all the days of my life,
    and to be more faihful to Him
    than I have ever been before.

    In the presence of all the heavenly court
    I choose thee this day,
    for my Mother and Mistress.

    I deliver and consecrate to thee,
    as thy slave, my body and soul,
    my goods, both interior and exterior,
    and even the value of all my good actions,
    past, present and future;
    leaving to thee the entire
    and full right of disposing of me,
    and all that belongs to me, without exception,
    according to thy good pleasure,

    for the greater glory of God,
    in time and in eternity.


    Amen.

    O Mary, Virgin most powerful and Mother of mercy, Queen of Heaven and Refuge of sinners, we consecrate ourselves to thine Immaculate Heart.

    We consecrate to thee our very being and our whole life; all that we have, all that we love, all that we are.

    To thee we give our bodies, our hearts and our souls; to thee we give our homes, our families, our country.

    We desire that all that is in us
    and around us may belong to thee,

    and may share in the benefits of thy motherly benediction.

    And that this act of consecration
    may be truly efficacious and lasting,
    we renew this day at thy feet the promises of our Baptism and our first Holy Communion.

    We pledge ourselves to profess courageously and at all times the truths of our holy Faith, and to live as befits Catholics who are duly submissive to all the directions of the Pope and the Bishops in communion with him.

    We pledge ourselves to keep the commandments of God and His Church,
    in particular to keep holy the Lord's Day.

    We likewise pledge ourselves
    to make the consoling practices of the Christian religion, and above all, Holy Communion, an integral part of our lives,
    in so far as we shall be able so to do.

    Finally, we promise thee, O glorious Mother of God and loving Mother of men, to devote ourselves whole-heartedlyto the service of thy blessed cult, in order to hasten and assure, through the sovereignty of thine Immaculate Heart, the coming of the kingdom of the Sacred Heart of thine adorable Son, in our own hearts and in those of all men, in our country and in all the world,
    as in heaven, so on earth.

    Amen.

    O Immaculate Heart of Mary, Queen of
    Heaven and Earth, and tender Mother of men, in accordance with Thy ardent wish made known at Fatima,
    I consecrate to Thy Immaculate Heart myself, my brethren,
    my country and the whole human race.

    Reign over us, Most Holy Mother of God,
    and teach us how to make the Heart of Thy Son, Our Lord Jesus Christ reign
    and triumph in us even as It has reigned
    and triumphed in Thee.

    Reign over us, Most Blessed Virgin,
    that we may be Thine in prosperity
    and in adversity, in joy and in sorrow,
    in health and in sickness,in life and in death.

    O most compassionate Heart of Mary,
    Queen of Heaven, watch over our minds and hearts and preserve them from the impurity which Thou didst lament so sorrowfully at Fatima. Assist us in imitating You in all things, especially purity. Help us to call down upon our country and upon the whole world the peace of God in justice and charity.

    Therefore, Most Gracious Virgin and Mother, I hereby promise to imitate Thy virtues by the practice of a true Christian life without regard to human respect.

    I resolve to receive Holy Communion regularly and to offer to Thee five decades of the Rosary each day,
    together with my sacrifices, in the spirit of reparation and penance.


    Amen.

    Marian (Mary) Prayers - Prayers - Catholic Online
     
  3. amariselle

    amariselle Jesus Never Fails

    +4,132
    United States
    Christian
    Married
    CA-Conservatives
    The problem is that man has claimed absolute authority to add things to "Sacred Tradition" that directly contradict the word of God.

    That authority has been abused countless times. God does not contradict His word.
     
  4. amariselle

    amariselle Jesus Never Fails

    +4,132
    United States
    Christian
    Married
    CA-Conservatives
    Scripture?

    Indeed, and only through Him. He alone is Mediator. Mary is not.
     
  5. amariselle

    amariselle Jesus Never Fails

    +4,132
    United States
    Christian
    Married
    CA-Conservatives
  6. kepha31

    kepha31 Regular Member

    +582
    Catholic
    In Relationship
    Then support your false charge of sophistry with facts, instead of using sophistry. Catholic Answers is a good resource for reliable information on given topics. You don't like it when we use it because it destroys anti-Catholic lies. A good topic for discussion why lies have to be invented in the first place.
    That is not what I said, and it is not what my signature says. If it were not for Tradition, you would have no scripture.
    Tradition is defined in my signature. Another definition is the authentic history of belief and practice. You have little authentic history of belief, practice or doctrines beyond the 16th century, and what is authentic your spiritual ancestors borrowed wholesale from the Catholic Church. If the so called reformers did not invent SS, we wouldn't have to refute it. Refutations of man made traditions is not a tradition. Refutations of Arianism, Nestorianism, Apollinarianism or any of the legions of sola scripturist heretics is not a tradition either.
    I gave several examples. You just ignored them all.
    Define "NT church". What year the NT end? After John wrote Revelation in 95 AD, after the canon of Scripture was settled in 397 AD, or somewhere in between? Or did it end at all? The Divinity or Godhood of Christ was only finalized in 325 at the Council of Nicaea, and the full doctrine of the Trinity in 381 at the Council of Constantinople. The dogma of the Two Natures of Christ (God and Man) was proclaimed in 451 at the Council of Chalcedon. These decisions of General Councils of the Church (accepted by all branches of Christianity) were in response to challenging heresies. Why should Protestants accept these authoritative verdicts, but reject similar proclamations on the Communion of Saints, Church government, the Eucharist, Mary, Purgatory, etc.? You have no grounds except to cherry pick the councils based on a man made unbiblical premise of sola scriptura. Again, define "early church".

    Protestants build their entire rule of faith and theology upon sola Scriptura (the notion that the only infallible authority is Scripture, and in practice, that every doctrine needs explicit biblical proof to be believed at all), yet this idea is never found in Scripture anywhere (it was basically invented by Luther out of thin air, under pressure in a debate). So why the irrational double standard? You can base that false tradition of men on nothing whatever in Scripture, yet demand all kinds of explicit biblical proofs for every Catholic distinctive, (even though prayers to saints is rooted in Judaism) as if that is necessary, when there is plenty about it in Scripture, just not enough to your arbitrary taste. The rich man prayed to Abraham that you reject as prayer, Jesus prayed to Lazarus, that you reject as prayer, Peter prayed to Tabitha, that you reject as prayer, and so forth. Your definition of "pray" is overly modernized. And what is there many Protestants don't or can''t see, under the principle of "no man is so blind as he who will not see."
    What you seem to be saying throughout this post is the saints and angels are deaf, dumb and blind to the affairs of the earth, therefore have no concern for us and do not offer to God our prayers. Some heavenly reward that is.
    A requirement for belief is not the same as a supreme law, which implies enforcement, which is silly. You have requirements too. Does that make your beliefs supreme laws?
    But it does. The Bereans used the Greek canon to "search" because they were Greek Pharisees. Protestants use a Hebrew canon dictated to them by Jews who rejected Christ and the message of the NT. That's your authority, not mine.
    Of course they did not contain the Deuteros. The school of Jamnia of 95 AD rejected them to despite the Christians who were using them as scripture. Furthermore, these "infallible" determinants of the canon rejected everything that was Greek, including all of the NT.
    It's both/and, not either/or.
    We have the freedom to disagree, we do not have the freedom to rebel. Show me where Jerome or any Church Father rebelled against the Magisterium.
    Again, that has nothing to do with Sacred Tradition. "knowing hearts" has nothing to do with the Communion of Saints. Angels rejoice when a sinner repents, does that mean they have to know their hearts? "only God knows hearts". No kidding. It's not same as intercession. The argument fails.
    Jesus has only one Body—not one on earth and another one in heaven (Eph 4:4, Col 3:15). All Christians, including those in heaven, are members of that one body. The "manifest boundary" is a false man made Protestant tradition.

    Because of Christ’s victory over death, a victory in which all Christians share (see 1 Cor 15:25-26, 54-56; 2 Cor 2:14; 2 Tim 1:10), natural death cannot separate Christians from Christ or from each other. That is why Paul exulted, "What will separate us from the love of Christ? . . . I am convinced that neither death, nor life . . . will be able to separate us from the love of God in Jesus Christ our Lord" (Rom 8:35-39). Since death has no power to sever the bond of Christian unity, the relationship between Christians on earth and those in heaven remains intact. Paul chides Christians who think they don’t need other Christians: 1 Cor 12:18-20, 24-26


    The point is the angels and saints delivered the prayers to God. You can't explain how they got them in the first place.
    That they continuously know the express contents of believers prayers is dubious, while arguing for this based upon what God can do is specious.

    This is not likely referring to the view of those in Heaven, but the view of them by believers who were just presented with them in the previous chapter. "Wherefore seeing we also are compassed about with so great a cloud of witnesses, let us lay aside every weight, and the sin which doth so easily beset us, and let us run with patience the race that is set before us." (Hebrews 12:1)[/quote]
    This is the Greek word martus, from which is derived the English word “martyr.”

    1) Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament (Joseph H. Thayer, Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Book House, 4th ed., 1977; orig. 1901, 392) defines it — as used in this verse — as follows: “One who is a spectator of anything, e.g. of a contest, Heb 12:1.”
    [Strong’s word #3144; similar usages cited by Thayer: Lk 24:48; Acts 1:8; 1:22; 2:32; 3:15; 5:32; 10:39; 13:31; 26:16; 1 Pet 5:1 – the sense is indisputable in these other verses]
    2) Word Studies in the New Testament (Marvin R. Vincent, Grand Rapids, Michigan: Eerdmans, 1980; orig. 1887; vol. 4, 536), another standard Protestant language source, comments on this verse as follows:
    ‘Witnesses’ does not mean spectators, but those who have borne witness to the truth, as those enumerated in chapter 11. Yet the idea of spectators is implied, and is really the principal idea. The writer’s picture is that of an arena in which the Christians whom he addresses are contending in a race, while the vast host of the heroes of faith who, after having borne witness to the truth, have entered into their heavenly rest, watches the contest from the encircling tiers of the arena, compassing and overhanging it like a cloud, filled with lively interest and sympathy, and lending heavenly aid.
    3) Word Pictures in the New Testament (A. T. Robertson [Baptist], Nashville, Tennessee: Broadman Press, 1932, vol. 5, 432), comments:
    ‘Cloud of witnesses’ (nephos marturon . . . The metaphor refers to the great amphitheatre with the arena for the runners and the tiers upon tiers of seats rising up like a cloud. The martures here are not mere spectators (theatai), but testifiers (witnesses) who testify from their own experience (11:2,4-5, 33, 39) to God’s fulfilling promises as shown in chapter 11.
    [Note that the notion of “spectators” is the primary metaphor — the arena — so that both meanings: that of spectators and witnesses in the sense of example are present. Neither can be ruled out]

    4) Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, (ed. Gerhard Kittel & Gerhard Friedrich; tr. and abridged by Geoffrey W. Bromiley, Grand Rapids, Michigan: Eerdmans, 1985; 567), an impeccable and widely-used linguistic (non-Catholic) source, states: “In Heb. 12:1 the witnesses watching the race seem to be confessing witnesses (cf. 11:2), but this does not exclude the element of factual witness.”

    So our four non-Catholic language references all confirm that the element of “spectatorship,” which lends itself to the Catholic notion of communion of saints, where saints in heaven are aware of, and observe events on earth, is present in Hebrews 12:1, and cannot be ruled out by any means, on the basis of a doctrinal bias.
    Read more at "Witnesses" of Hebrews 12:1 (Communion of Saints)

    Hebrews 12:1 tells us the saints in heaven are aware of, and observe events on earth. This is well established by 4 non-Catholic sources. One verse is not intended to give a comprehensive treatise on a doctrine that took centuries to develop, beginning with Judaism. Heb. 12:1 lends itself to the Catholic notion of communion of saints, nothing more. If your heaven is a retirement home for Christians to do nothing but play harps and float on clouds...well...good for you.
    Those are imprecatory prayers, not prayers of intercession. But you are such an expert on prayer, I'm sure you know the difference.
    I don't like the term "created elements" and what that implies.
    It means God's creation gives Him glory by virtue of their existence. Your non sequiturs are getting worse.
    You have not debated a reputable apologist, just amateurs that you can bully.

    It is impossible for any pope to teach new revelation that is not in the deposit of faith, unlike the so called reformers that invented SS that's nowhere in the Bible. You keep shifting time frames from the 1st to the 21st centuries.
    That looks like Bible worship propaganda. How can apostolic preaching be tested against a canon that didn't exist for 4 centuries?

    It is true that any proposed tradition which contradicts Apostolic Scripture is a false tradition and must be rejected, but this does not make Apostolic Tradition inferior to Scripture for that reason. It is also true that any proposed scripture which contradicts Apostolic Tradition is a false scripture and must be rejected.

    This was, in fact, one of the ways in which the canon of the New Testament was selected. Any scriptures which contained doctrines which were contrary to the Traditions the apostles had handed down to the Church Fathers were rejected. Between the Gnostic gospels (like the Gospel of Thomas) or Marcion's edited version of Luke and Paul's epistles, there were a lot of heretical writings that different groups wanted to see in the New Testament. But the Fathers said, "No, this contradicts the faith that was handed down to us from the apostles. Thus it must be a forged writing."

    So while tradition must be tested against Scripture to see if the tradition is apostolic, it is also true that scripture must be tested against Tradition to see if the scripture is apostolic. There is complementarity here, and one mode of teaching is not automatically inferior to the other.
    INFO: The sources of theology


    A non sequitur. You are re-defining infallibility. "sola Roma" is a joke.

    Again, you are re-defining infallibility. It is my opinion that SS's can't comprehend it.
    Actually, it's there, you just can't remove your Protestant welding goggles long enough to see it.
    I posted several, you just don't like them.
    Your denial of the Bereans being Greeks is absurd.

    The Protestant patristics scholar J. N. D. Kelly writes: "It should be observed that the Old Testament thus admitted as authoritative in the Church was somewhat bulkier and more comprehensive than the [Protestant Old Testament] . . . It always included, though with varying degrees of recognition, the so-called Apocrypha or deuterocanonical books. The reason for this is that the Old Testament which passed in the first instance into the hands of Christians was . . . the Greek translation known as the Septuagint. . . . most of the Scriptural quotations found in the New Testament are based upon it rather than the Hebrew.. . . In the first two centuries . . . the Church seems to have accept all, or most of, these additional books as inspired and to have treated them without question as Scripture.[/quote]
    A Protestant patristic scholar is a propagandist too?
    James Akin
    I'm waiting for an explanation of how they got the prayers in the first place.
    Scroll up to the green text where your man made "Berlin Wall" between heaven and earth is exposed as a false tradition, and contrary to the Scriptures provided.
    The prayers of Jesus and Peter to raise the dead don't count as prayers to you, but they do to me.
    Since you reject all my proof texts I suppose appealing to the Early Church Fathers is pointless, since you have nothing to do with them.
    Then site an apologist. There are no professional apologists in this forum, just hobbyists. If a real Catholic apologist takes you out of context, then prove it. It's all on line. You have no publicized debates, just forum noise.
    Angels and saints are not elements. Most likely your "logic" is another non sequitur. Many Calvinists claim miracles (in any Christian context) are caused by satan, is that your position?
    Oral tradition is what discerned authentic Scripture from fake scripture. The conflict between oral Tradition and Scripture is a man made tradition stemming from the man made tradition of SS. Tradition, (perpetually redefined by Protestants), Scripture and the Magisterium (that you have redefined) is the biblical rule of faith. All are in harmony and one is not over the other, contrary to the myths of anti-Catholics.
    Sheer nonsense.
    More sheer nonsense.

    [​IMG]
    Catacomb of St. Sebastiano with chards of prayers to saints

    From as early as the second century (between 100 AD- 200 AD) to the fourth century the evidence from the catacombs make an overwhelming argument that such a practice stemmed from ancient Judaism and passed down by Peter and Paul, the prayers were very similar as in the Scriptures.
    The Most Powerful Evidence To Prove That Prayers To Saints Is Part Of Christianity

    https://heroicvirtuecreations.com/2009/07/24/response-to-james-white-on-the-communion-of-saints/

    StayCatholic.com - ECF Intercession
    (but you have nothing to do with THAT church.)

    Dave Armstrong Debates James White (1995) : Is Catholicism Christian?

    [​IMG]
     
    Last edited: Aug 10, 2017
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Winner Winner x 1
    • List
  7. amariselle

    amariselle Jesus Never Fails

    +4,132
    United States
    Christian
    Married
    CA-Conservatives
    Why would anyone say our salvation is in her hands? (That she is the "Mediatrix/Dispenser of All Graces"?)
     
  8. OrthodoxyUSA

    OrthodoxyUSA Well-Known Member Supporter

    +2,340
    United States
    Eastern Orthodox
    Married
    US-Republican
    I'm still waiting for what year intersession to the Theotokos was introduced.

    Forgive me...
     
  9. amariselle

    amariselle Jesus Never Fails

    +4,132
    United States
    Christian
    Married
    CA-Conservatives
    Why does everyone automatically call disagreeing with Catholic doctrine and tradition "bashing"?
     
  10. amariselle

    amariselle Jesus Never Fails

    +4,132
    United States
    Christian
    Married
    CA-Conservatives
  11. Thursday

    Thursday Well-Known Member

    +1,517
    Catholic
    Married

    So what? Read it in the light of Catholic Doctrine. Nothing wrong with it at all.
     
  12. OrthodoxyUSA

    OrthodoxyUSA Well-Known Member Supporter

    +2,340
    United States
    Eastern Orthodox
    Married
    US-Republican
    Fake mod hat on.

    "Contemptuous remarks regarding Christianity or Christian practices are not allowed."

    Fake mod hat off.

    Forgive me...
     
  13. Thursday

    Thursday Well-Known Member

    +1,517
    Catholic
    Married

    Disagreeing is fine. Lying about what Catholics believe is not.
     
  14. Phil 1:21

    Phil 1:21 Well-Known Member

    +4,329
    Christian
    Married
    We were taught that Mary was assumed, body and soul, into heaven. Nothing about her having been buried.

    The assumption of Mary was defined as official RC dogma by Pope Pius XII while claiming papal infallibility on November 1, 1950.
     
  15. OrthodoxyUSA

    OrthodoxyUSA Well-Known Member Supporter

    +2,340
    United States
    Eastern Orthodox
    Married
    US-Republican
    I didn't see your reply. Sorry.
    So, what does that do to St. Luke being the first Christian Iconographer and his choice of subject?

    Forgive me...
     
  16. amariselle

    amariselle Jesus Never Fails

    +4,132
    United States
    Christian
    Married
    CA-Conservatives
    How about we read it in light of the inspired word of God?

    Then it becomes clear that there is everything wrong with it.
     
  17. OrthodoxyUSA

    OrthodoxyUSA Well-Known Member Supporter

    +2,340
    United States
    Eastern Orthodox
    Married
    US-Republican
    That is a difference between RCC and EO.

    Forgive me...
     
  18. amariselle

    amariselle Jesus Never Fails

    +4,132
    United States
    Christian
    Married
    CA-Conservatives
    You asked when the bodily assumption of Mary was declared official Catholic doctrine. That's what I was referring to.
     
  19. Thursday

    Thursday Well-Known Member

    +1,517
    Catholic
    Married

    The bible is Catholic Doctrine. You wouldn't have the bible without the Church.
     
  20. OrthodoxyUSA

    OrthodoxyUSA Well-Known Member Supporter

    +2,340
    United States
    Eastern Orthodox
    Married
    US-Republican
    Way way way before that...

    Forgive me...
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
Loading...