I want to understand the Catholic faith so....

[LonelyPilgrim]

My goodness. You falsely accuse me of all manner of things and then say this? I don't believe you. If you had good intentions you would have taken responsibility for your error right away. Instead you deny it, make excuses for another, and continually judge against me as if I have no case for what I say.

You've got issues, sister. I'm sorry to do it, but I'm placing you on "ignore" now. I don't have the time or wish to argue with you.

 

[Magenta]

LOL. I get falsely accused a number of times, have my legitimate questions ignored, am lied to repeatedly, and then told I have issues. Typical.

 

[Billyd]

This doesn't explain why Luther or Calvin -- who had both the access to Scripture and the literacy to study it -- both fully affirmed it in faith; or why all the sixteen centuries of Christians that preceded them -- and there have always been Christians who could read Scripture, though not the common people -- did not reject it. Scripture, in fact, doesn't state the matter explicitly one way or the other. You presume from a starting point that it is false. Why? Your assumptions are not the assumptions of Christians of prior generations, who placed value in what the earliest Christians handed down to them.



I don't pray to Mary "rather than" directly to God. The intercession of the saints is a blessed help in addition to the faith to pray to God directly. Does your ability to pray directly to God eliminate the need, for you, to ask others to pray for you? Scripture itself teaches us the value of intercessory prayer (James 5:16, 2 Corinthians 1:11, Philippians 1:19, 1 Timothy 2:1, etc.). Do you dismiss this?

Thank you. I have no problem with intercessory prayer. IMHO, I believe that intercessory prayer is still between myself and God, and is my asking God to grant the need of the person I'm praying for. It is not praying to someone to pray to intercede on my behalf. That doesn't make sense to me. (James 5:16, 2 Corinthians 1:11, Philippians 1:19, Philippians 1:19, etc. seem to support my belief).

 

[Magenta]

Meanwhile you conveniently totally ignore the question. Doing as Scripture explicitly says cannot be equated with doing what Scripture does not say. Asking dead people to intercede on your behalf goes explicitly against what Scripture says, but you wish to pretend otherwise. Catholics make all manner of things up and you want to defend their right to do so, and then kvetch at those who call them on their heresies. You are as deceived as they are.

This. ....

 

[blondieindahouse]

This. ....

Youve done a good job of presenting scripture sis. Leave the rest to God. I pray for all RC to come to the truth and receive salvation. Amen

 

[Magenta]

Youve done a good job of presenting scripture sis. Leave the rest to God. I pray for all RC to come to the truth and receive salvation. Amen

Thank you Blondie, that is very kind of you to say. I am sometimes afraid telling the truth to Catholics is a dead end street, but to God goes the glory if ever they see the error of defending such an heretical institution as they do. Sometimes it is just impossible to sit idly by.

 

[PennEd]

Thanks for that. I do sincerely appreciate it. You are not my enemy, either.



I don't think I'm "twisting" anything. These Scriptures do clearly show the citizens of heaven interceding for us. How do you interpret them?

You seem, like many Protestants, to make much of the fact of "praying to" the saints, as if it were somehow the same as praying to God. But as a fallen-away Catholic, I am sure you understand that the content of "prayers to" the saints is nothing more than a request for intercession: pray for us. The fact that we even speak of "praying to" the saints at all is an accident of language: "pray," in its most literal sense, means to ask, request, beseech. There is nothing the saints can do for us but pray for us. They are not gods or divine or even any different than us, apart from their being with the Lord.

And are they "dead"? Is God not "the god of the living and not the dead" (Mark 12:27, etc.)? Are the "firstborn who are enrolled in heaven" "dead," or are "the spirits of just men made perfect" (Hebrews 12:23)? If we believe in the Resurrection at all, then these people are not "dead," but more alive than they ever have been. And why would they, who are united with the same Christ as we, be separated from us? And why would they, who were faithful to intercede in their lives on earth, cease to do so in the next?

I have never understood the Protestant opposition to the communion of saints. Even as a Protestant, I celebrated my loved ones who went on to their reward, and delighted in their care for me after going to the Lord. Your vehement rejection, to me, comes across as a rejection of faith in eternal life.

"Let [the sick widow] then make use of others to pray for her to the physician. For the sick, unless the physician be called to them by the prayers of others, cannot pray for themselves. The flesh is weak, the soul is sick and hindered by the chains of sins, and cannot direct its feeble steps to the throne of that physician. The angels must be entreated for us, who have been to us as guards; the martyrs must be entreated, whose patronage we seem to claim for ourselves by the pledge as it were of their bodily remains [relics]. They can entreat for our sins, who, if they had any sins, washed them in their own blood; for they are the martyrs of God, our leaders, the beholders of our life and of our actions. Let us not be ashamed to take them as intercessors for our weakness, for they themselves knew the weaknesses of the body, even when they overcame." (Ambrose of Milan [fourth century A.D.], On Widows 9.55)
​

The grace and peace of the Lord be with you.

I guess as long as you keep these heresies to the catholic thread you won't be banned. I don't know what the heck that passage is but I KNOW it aint from the Bible. I lift up my brothers and sisters who stay faithful to the Gospel of Grace alone, and stand firm, in love, against these heresies.

I believe the Holy Spirit is telling me there is no fruit here, and I don't want to get frustrated and fall into unloving contention. Peace, love, and Grace to you In Jesus Name.

 

[1faith]

The greatest LOVE is for our Father.
Jesus also pointed out the Pharisees ignorance calling them brood of vipers.
Truth must stay truth, not Maligned.

 

[blondieindahouse]

Thank you Blondie, that is very kind of you to say. I am sometimes afraid telling the truth to Catholics is a dead end street, but to God goes the glory if ever they see the error of defending such an heretical institution as they do. Sometimes it is just impossible to sit idly by.

Its not ever a dead end street if God is directing your steps. Sometimes I have found with myself that I expect harvest right away! Ive been called to plant seed or water seed. God is the harvester. Its Gods will be done and in Gods time. His ways are higher than our ways. Lord bless you

 

[Magenta]

The greatest LOVE is for our Father.
Jesus also pointed out the Pharisees ignorance calling them brood of vipers.
Truth must stay truth, not Maligned.

He called them liars, also... among other things. And they wanted to kill Him.

 

[Magenta]

Its not ever a dead end street if God is directing your steps. Sometimes I have found with myself that I expect harvest right away! Ive been called to plant seed or water seed. God is the harvester. Its Gods will be done and in Gods time. His ways are higher than our ways. Lord bless you

That is true, Blondie. Thank you again, sister...

May God bless you and increase your wisdom

 

[LonelyPilgrim]

Peace, love, and Grace to you In Jesus Name.

Thank you, brother. I will also pray for you, especially for the sake of your mother. The peace and grace of the Lord be with you.

 

[Magenta]

Bottom line: it's not. It personally means nothing at all to my faith in God or Christ whether or not Mary was a perpetual virgin. I believe it and defend it only because it is a truth that has been handed down from the beginnings of our heritage of faith -- that no orthodox Christian -- not even Luther or Calvin -- seriously challenged or questioned until our modern era.

And what benefit do I gain by addressing my prayers to her? The same benefit I get by asking anyone to pray for me: intercession. And as our sister in faith who was closer in the flesh to our Lord than any other person, I consider her intercession particularly valuable -- and my experience, and the experiences of many other people. have borne that out.

Why do you continue to answer questions posed to Catholics?

You believe that Mary mediates between God and man?

I see you do need to have Scripture quoted to you.

... there is one God and one mediator between God and mankind, the man Christ Jesus,

 

[fordman]

You have already condemned yourself and your church. No one is born again through baptism, and especially not infant baptism. That is to put the Holy Spirit under the control of the church, and is one of your major heresies. What you describes is simply NOT the Bible way. If you see your baptism as the source of your life in Christ, then you have no life. You have given yourself away already.

Yes the water from above. And what is the water? It is not the water of baptism (any more than the water in John 4.10-14 is the water of baptism). It is using the prophetic picture of rain falling from Heaven giving life. (Isaiah 32.15; 44.1-5; 55.1-13). The only baptism Nicodemus knew about was the baptism of John. And that was non-effective as regards the Holy Spirit. It pointed ahead to what the Messiah would do.

Here Jesus spoke of being 'born of water, even of the Spirit'. In other words rain symbolised the Spirit.

There is absolutely no reason for seeing the dove returning to the Ark as the Holy Spirit. That is Roman Catholic manipulation. It says absolutely nothing about the baptism of Jesus.

Firstly we note that Jesus was baptised as an adult. It does NOT show us what happens at our baptism. That is a fallacy. None of the others who were baptised received the Holy Spirit. You Roman Catholics will clutch at any straw to support your false teachings.

As I have demonstrated it does not refer to baptism. 1 Peter says that the water which bore up the Ark, lifting it up to God, symbolises the answer of good conscience towards God. He stresses that it does NOT cleans us from the filthiness of the flesh.

And once again Pop's, all we have here is your personal opinions, and personal interpretation of Scripture.... nothing more. Until you can prove that they (personal opinions/personal interpretation of Scripture) are absolute and without error, thats all they will ever be. Sorry.

However ol' timer.... all is not lost, with these personal opinions, and personal interpretation of Scripture, along with a six penny bit, you may be able to get yourself a spot of tea at Piccadilly Circus.
　
　


Pax Christi

 

[Magenta]

And once again Pop's, all we have here is your personal opinions, and personal interpretation of Scripture.... nothing more. Until you can prove that they (personal opinions/personal interpretation of Scripture) are absolute and without error, thats all they will ever be. Sorry.

You could say that about anyone's understanding, including the popes.

 

[LonelyPilgrim]

Thank you. I have no problem with intercessory prayer. IMHO, I believe that intercessory prayer is still between myself and God, and is my asking God to grant the need of the person I'm praying for. It is not praying to someone to pray to intercede on my behalf. That doesn't make sense to me. (James 5:16, 2 Corinthians 1:11, Philippians 1:19, Philippians 1:19, etc. seem to support my belief).

To "pray," in the plainest sense of the word, is simply to "ask." Do you ask others, your Christian brothers and sisters, to pray for you? This is the example we have in Scripture.

It occurred to me on the way home from work to sum up, briefly, why I have faith in the communion of saints:

1. I believe in eternal life and the resurrection of the dead. I do not believe that any of our blessed brothers and sisters in the Lord are "dead" in any spiritual sense.
2. Belief that the martyrs and saints who have passed to glory in Christ are still one in His Body of Christ with us, and interceding for us, is part of the most ancient deposit of faith, indicated in Scripture (cf. Revelation 5) and plainly attested in other early Christian writings as early as the turn of the second century.
3. Keeping the example of the saints in front of us is a constant source or encouragement and inspiration. As a Protestant, I found this example and this connection to all of the ages of the faith sorely lacking.
4. The intercession of the saints is a constant source of comfort, knowing always that there are dear ones interceding for me, especially those who have experienced suffering and found victory in Christ; and a constant help, in ways that have yielded much fruit in my life.

And you also asked about the perpetual virginity of Mary. Here is why I believe in it:

1. The earliest Christians believed it universally, in both the East and West, from the very earliest records we have. Every early author who addressed the matter expressed confidence that Mary had no other children but Jesus and remained a virgin her whole life (with only one exception, Tertullian, whose argument against it is only more evidence that it was widely believed in his time, and who fell into heterodoxy in other ways toward the end of his life).
2. Scripture supports it. There are two passages more than any other that convince me of the truth: (a) from the Cross, Jesus committed his mother into the care of the "beloved Apostle" John (John 19:25-27); this would have been an offense to her other living children had she had any. (b) The other people who are called the "brothers" of the Lord (e.g. Mark 6:3) are elsewhere named as the children of somebody other than Jesus's mother (e.g. Mark 15:40); the word "brother" in Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek can denote any close kinsman.
3. It is fitting with the exegesis of the majority of Christian teachers, who find types of Mary in the Ark of the Covenant (cf. Revelation 11:19-12:1), the sacred and inviolable space by which God came to dwell with us. The tradition of teaching, from the likes of Irenaeus, Augustine, Bernard, and many others, is beautiful and edifying and adds depth and intention to the plan of God's grace and salvation. I could recommend books if you would be interested in reading more.

The bottom line: I trust the unanimity of early Christians far more than I trust skeptical modern interpreters. My faith as a Catholic is far richer, more graceful, and more fruitful than it ever was as a Protestant. The grace and peace of the Lord be with you.

 

[Magenta]

And you also asked about the perpetual virginity of Mary. Here is why I believe in it:

1. The earliest Christians believed it universally, in both the East and West, from the very earliest records we have. Every early author who addressed the matter expressed confidence that Mary had no other children but Jesus and remained a virgin her whole life (with only one exception, Tertullian, whose argument against it is only more evidence that it was widely believed in his time, and who fell into heterodoxy in other ways toward the end of his life).

Another Catholic lie. Mary's perpetual virginity is nowhere mentioned in Scripture.

The idea of the perpetual virginity of Mary comes from a dubious apocryphal book written well after the New Testament. The book is called theInfancy Gospel of James, The Protoevangelium of James, or sometimes simply Protoevangelium, and it is estimated to have been written in the middle part of the second century.

 

[fordman]

LOL I am pleased to see that at last you recognise the fallacies of your faith.

Could or should I have worded it differntly? Yes, but your childish "LOL" shows you knew exactly what I meant. Which makes me wonder Pop's....Are all Brits in your age group as immature you are, or are you just the exception? If the latter is the case, you should really grow up ol' timer, it's very unbecoming for a man of your advanced years.
　



Pax Christi

 

[Magenta]

And you also asked about the perpetual virginity of Mary. Here is why I believe in it:

1. Scripture supports it. There are two passages more than any other that convince me of the truth: (a) from the Cross, Jesus committed his mother into the care of the "beloved Apostle" John (John 19:25-27); this would have been an offense to her other living children had she had any. (b) The other people who are called the "brothers" of the Lord (e.g. Mark 6:3) are elsewhere named as the children of somebody other than Jesus's mother (e.g. Mark 15:40); the word "brother" in Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek can denote any close kinsman.

Scripture does not support the perpetual virginity of Mary.

Two different Gospels accounts state Mary had other sons and daughters.
These accounts even give the names of the sons.

“Is this not the carpenter’s son? Is not His mother called Mary? And His brothers James, Joses, Simon, and Judas? And His sisters, are they not all with us? Where then did this Man get all these things?” (Matthew 13:55–56)

​

“Is this not the carpenter, the Son of Mary, and brother of James, Joses, Judas, and Simon? And are not His sisters here with us?” So they were offended at Him. (Mark 6:3)

Some have suggested these brothers and sisters were cousins or more distant relations. If true, why didn’t the writers use the Greek term for cousins (anepsios)? The Greek word did exist and was used in Scripture (Colossians 4:10). If they were more distant relatives, then why not use a Greek word that meant relatives (suggenes), such as the one describing Mary and Elizabeth’s relational status in Luke 1:36? Why did Matthew and Mark use the words most commonly translated as brothers (adelphos) and sisters (adelphe)? In any other context no one would have questioned this meaning.

The Apostle Paul also claimed that Jesus had at least one brother. Concerning his first trip to Jerusalem after his conversion, Paul wrote, “But I saw none of the other apostles except James, the Lord’s brother” (Galatians 1:19).

The first chapter of Acts tells how the disciples met to select a replacement for Judas. Luke specifically singled out Mary and the brothers of Jesus.

To claim Mary was a perpetual virgin even after Christ was born is to deny the words of the Apostle Matthew, who wrote, “Then Joseph, being aroused from sleep, did as the angel of the Lord commanded him and took to him his wife, and did not know hertill she had brought forth her firstborn Son. And he called His name JESUS” (Matthew 1:24–25).

“Knew” was a modest way of describing sexual relations in ancient times. For example, Adam knew Eve, and she conceived Cain, and he knew her again, and she bore Seth (Genesis 4:1, 25). Cain knew his wife, and she bore Enoch (Genesis 4:17). If Joseph never knew Mary at all, the phrase “till she had brought forth her firstborn Son” is pointless. Obviously, Joseph did not sleep with Mary until after she gave birth to Jesus, fulfilling both parts of the prophecy (virginal conception and virgin birth, as Isaiah 7:14 states, “the virgin shall conceive and bear a Son,”).

But this means Joseph did know her after she gave birth to Jesus, so she was no longer a virgin.

In fact, sex within marriage is not a sin but is a creation ordinance within marriage that existed prior to sin and the Curse. Jesus quoted Genesis 2:24 in Matthew 19:5–6, reiterating “the two shall be one flesh.”

Consider that God commanded people to be fruitful and multiply in Genesis 1:28 and twice in Genesis 9 (verses 1 and 7). Malachi 2:14–15 indicates one reason for marriage is to have godly offspring. Why would Mary be disobedient to God? Since she was truly a godly woman, she would have respected His commands and honor them. Having at least two daughters and five sons would indeed be fulfilling God’s commands to be fruitful and multiply.

The following Gospel account provides more evidence Jesus had siblings:

While He was still talking to the multitudes, behold, His mother and brothers stood outside, seeking to speak with Him. Then one said to Him, “Look, Your mother and Your brothers are standing outside, seeking to speak with You.”
​

https://answersingenesis.org/bible-characters/is-the-perpetual-virginity-of-mary-a-biblical-view/

 

[Magenta]

Could or should I have worded it differntly? Yes, but your childish "LOL" shows you knew exactly what I meant. Which makes me wonder Pop's....Are all Brits in your age group as immature you are, or are you just the exception? If the latter is the case, you should really grow up ol' timer, it's very unbecoming for a man of your advanced years.
　
Pax Christi

Please explain the immaturity level of "LOL." I think it rude you calling someone Pops. If ad homs are all you've got, it shows you have nothing of import to add to the discussion.