really not praying to Mary???

[catlover]

The bible doesn't say that. The Bible is God's indesputable word. Jesus taught us all we need to know to do three things 1) Know, love and serve God, 2) Live in this world, and 3) Get to heaven. The bible doesn't have to say that, in fact how could the bible say that that, as when it was compiled there was not one author. However, the source of all we need to know, from God's perspective, is the Bible. Any circumstance in life that you confront can be answered in the Bible.

------------------------------------
Wrong it says love God and your neighbor as yourself.

 

[bagshome]

The bible doesn't say that. The Bible is God's indesputable word. Jesus taught us all we need to know to do three things 1) Know, love and serve God, 2) Live in this world, and 3) Get to heaven. The bible doesn't have to say that, in fact how could the bible say that that, as when it was compiled there was not one author. However, the source of all we need to know, from God's perspective, is the Bible. Any circumstance in life that you confront can be answered in the Bible.

------------------------------------
Wrong it says love God and your neighbor as yourself.

I'm not sure what it is that you are claiming is wrong. You are correct that the Bible says we are to love God and our neighbor as ourselves. It says a great deal more as well. If you feel I am in error, please cite specifics. I would give you the same respect. If you know the Bible then you cannot dispute that it provides all that we need to know to 1) know, love and serve God (because Jesus taught that), 2) all we know to live in this world (again, taught by Jesus and expounded upon by Paul and others, and 3) all we need to know to get to heaven (Jesus was very specific about that. Let me know whatever it is that you think is wrong in that and I will clarify for you.

 

[catlover]

From what I have read it says nothing about knowing God. How are people to know God? I think we can love and serve God but we can't really know Him. Just my opinion of course.

 

[mike1reynolds]

The Bible was compiled using Apostolic Tradition. The early Christians interpreted Apostolic Tradition in order to decide which books would be included in the Bible and which books would be destroyed. In my opinion, if you reject Apostolic Tradition and only embrace the Bible, you are rejecting Jesus Himself. This was His Tradition that He passed down to us.

The NT is the size of a pamphlet compared to the scriptures of any other religion. The Roman Empire hunted them down wherever they could and only one of the 12 disciples was not eventually found and executed. They were constantly on the run for their lives and unfortunately didn’t have much time to write anything other than letters of evangelization.

In light of this, if you insist on throwing out Jesus’ Tradition, then you are throwing out half of what we know about Jesus. That is not exactly treating Jesus with respect.

 

[pgp_protector]

Why wouldn't they rever her? This may point to ever-virgin, maybe it is comparing her with one, whatever. Yes she is definitly a beginning of the Faith, i would liken her to Abraham's wife, Sarah, definitly a mother in the Faith, she may have laid hands on people and been a miracle worker in her life on earth, but that does not point to having anything to do with the omnipresent, Holy Spirit-like powers that certain peoples think she has now in Heaven, i do not see Ignatius saying that at all.

Romans 4:16 (NIV)

16Therefore, the promise comes by faith, so that it may be by grace and may be guaranteed to all Abraham's offspring—not only to those who are of the law but also to those who are of the faith of Abraham. He is the father of us all.

 

[pgp_protector]

From what I have read it says nothing about knowing God. How are people to know God? I think we can love and serve God but we can't really know Him. Just my opinion of course.

Though how can you Love someone that you do not know.

 

[mike1reynolds]

Name a single "power" that Mary has, which no other saint in Heaven has, other than being able to make a maternal appeal to her son?

 

[mike1reynolds]

Here is another point, Jehovah’s Witnesses read the Bible intently every day, and yet they are not allowed on this forum because they reject the Apostle’s Creed (Nicene Creed). Everything about Christianity is most definitely not contained exclusively within the Bible.

 

[lionroar0]

Mary's Powers?


Name a single "power" that Mary has, which no other saint in Heaven has, other than being able to make a maternal appeal to her son?

The power to make people think that Catholics and others "worship" her.

Peace

 

[livingword26]

Here is another point, Jehovah’s Witnesses read the Bible intently every day, and yet they are not allowed on this forum because they reject the Apostle’s Creed (Nicene Creed). Everything about Christianity is most definitely not contained exclusively within the Bible.

The Jehovas Witnesses have their own bible. It was written specifically to refute the doctrine of the trinity. For example in our bible:

John 1:1
1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
KJV

Every common bible version agree's with this one, excep the Jehova's Witnesses, aka The New World Bible. Here is theirs:

1 In [the] beginning the Word was, and the Word was with God, and the Word was a god.
Everything about Christianity may not be contained in the bible, but anything that the bible disagrees with is not Christianity

 

[mike1reynolds]

I had no idea they had their own Bible.

 

[HisKid1973]

Yep..It's their own version..K

 

[WarriorAngel]

LOL Lion.

Yep, the JW's had 'scholars', who knew that the Apostles meant to say something else, fix their Bibles. OY!

 

[WarriorAngel]

I challenge you to provide me with a real-life scenario for which an answer cannot be found in the Bible. The Bible does not need to specify what it is, and what it is not. If you know God's word, you know that it alone provides for all of our spiritual needs. Traditions are established by men, and if they do not correlate with scripture should be avoided.

You are correct. the Bible does NOT need to specify.

In fact, it eludes to Tradition.
WHY?

We live in a different time and culture. Whereas the first Christians assumed everyone knew what they were referring to....so after 2000 years, things can only be eluded to. Because we cannot ascertain by limited knowledge what exacting pieces mean except thru what has been written thru all writings [unchanging from one father to the next BTW].

BUT alas, God gave us Apostolic Succession.

What does that mean?
It means that what they were referring to was left in the capable hands of their priests and Bishops who wrote down what they meant....AND were ordained BY the Apostles to hand down that ordination...given to them by Christ Himself.
SEE laying of hands.

WE call them the Early Church Fathers.

Apostolic Succession is eluded to.... but the term isnt there.

Many terms were not in place until defined. And the Church defined them through the knowledge left them thru scriptures, and ECF's writings.

Nothing in Tradition is left without some concrete writing to ensure the Church always knows.

The New Testament was DECIDED by the Church. To know which was inspired and which was 'they felt' unnecessary to use as scripture for all the Churches.

THIS is WHY we have a Bible. It was put together for the CHURCH's use.
So all the Church's would have all the Epistles in one place per UNIVERSAL [CATHOLIC] Church....so they could be 'quoted' from the Apostles.

The Church almost decided to put in the ECF's as well as the Apostles, but decided to only add in the Gospels [written also by other disciples. dictated by Apostles] and the Apostles journals. [Epistles...letters]

The only thing I can say about 'men' making traditions is when they do not follow the Apostolic Traditions.

There is quite a difference between God's Traditions, and mens traditions.

Doctrines are laws of God.
Traditions keep those dotrines intact even over time.

And traditions are when men decide what should be truth...or necessary.

BTW, the term Rapture is not in the Bible.
That is a new found tradition that not ONE ECF ever wrote about.

 

[Iollain]

The ways of God are a mystery to us but yet you claim that you know what He thinks.

I find this odd.

Peace

And your denomination claims to know that God would approve of Mary statues being set up knowing full well what people would do with them, and lets not forget your church thinks God approves of Total Consecrations to Mary. And that is odder.

 

[mike1reynolds]

This has nothing to do with an particular denomination, it has to do with Apostolic Tradition as adhered to by a majority of the Christian world, which includes EOs, OOs, Anglicans and RCs.

So you are saying that the majority of Christians are wrong and your little sect is right?

What is this total consecration to anything business? It doesn't make any sense in the context of the word consecrate:

con·se·cra·tion

1. The act, process, or ceremony of consecrating.
2. The state of being consecrated.

consecrate
verb [T]
1 to officially make something holy and able to be used for religious ceremonies:
The new cathedral was completed and consecrated in 1962.

2 to officially give someone the title of bishop in the Christian Church in a religious ceremony

consecrated
adjective
consecrated bread/wine/ground

consecration
noun
the consecration of the new bishop

 

[WarriorAngel]

And your denomination claims to know that God would approve of Mary statues being set up knowing full well what people would do with them, and lets not forget your church thinks God approves of Total Consecrations to Mary. And that is odder.

That is mere speculation...in fact it is liable speculation.
No one does anything with statues.

I find the 'insinuations' and the 'accusations' maddening.
May I be so bold as to say 'IF' ppl do anything with statutes it would be out of ignorance. And few and far between.

Statutes, not unlike photographs, remind us of those we love. Whether those who have passed on, or those with us....our most cherished possessions, BESIDES the person themself, is our memory of them in a tangible picture.

And in broader terms, those we wish we could emulate.
Imitation is flattery.....hence the new phrase...WWJD.

Mary is the most significant role model that every woman [and man] should aspire to.
Humility, chastity, obedience. These are the perfect virtues that MOST please the Lord.

As for myself...I shall keep statutes of Mary...for she is in Heaven. And we are to think of Heavenly things.
To aspire for perfection, and what better reminder than Our Lady?

I also keep statutes of Jesus. And a crucifix. For I am not ashamed of the love Christ shared in His death. A constant reminder.

AND let me be so bold to ask......
DO YOU OWN OR VIEW any Nativity scenes??
Made with statues?

 

[Iollain]

Yes i own a Nativity scene, and you have just anathemaed yourself from the RCC.......well if you were a priest you would be anyways.

Statues are to venerate and whatever 'veneration' is given them is passed on to the one it represents in Heaven.

 

[mike1reynolds]

Why is this all about the RCC, Iollian? How come you have nothing to say about OOs, EOs and Anglicans who all do the same thing? I don't think that this has anything at all to do with the issue that you claim, I think it has more to do with a personal dislike of one denomination, even though there are 3 others that are identical or even more emphatic in all of the regards that you object to, especially EOs.

 

[mike1reynolds]

Yes i own a Nativity scene, and you have just anathemaed yourself from the RCC.......well if you were a priest you would be anyways.

That is ridiculous, Marion veneration is 100% optional in the RCC.