Mary?

I agree there were departures in the first century, but the greatest departure was around 313 AD, when Constantine made "Christianity" the state religion or Rome based upon the stanic influences in his life. He never did stop worshipping the sun god, even after his alleged conversion. The pagan priests, rather than Constantine getting rid of them, they were made priests in the new state religion, and with them came their paganism. None of the bishops of Rome were ever called "pope" or "vicar" until about the time of Gregory I, if I recall correctly.

MM

Articles and document evidence place Constantine's own mother as a Priestess, a deity of herself. She was worshiped and taught their paganism.

As a young couple, my husband and I rented a small home located on a rural property that was an official Roman Catholic Shrine. Lovely place. One evening, the head nun, also living on the property, was speaking religion to my husband. He explained to her how Mary was not a diety and unable to hear anyone's prayers. She heatedly explained that Mary never died and was assumed into Heaven. He asked her how she knew that. She replied "When they dug up Mary's grave, she wasn't in it."

My husband said "You mean, they buried her alive?"

The next morning we had a notice on our front door to get out within 48 hours.

We did.

In my theory, what the original RCC did (80-100 A.D.) was switch from the statues of the Roman-Greco gods to statues of Jesus, Mary, the Disciples, Saints when they converted. They did not change the [lifestyle] of looking upon idols to honor and pray to, they just created newer ones in the category of the New Testament. They kept rituals because the pagans were used to rituals. So ultimately, they [never] separated themselves from evil. And that evil not only exists within today's version, but it has a power of its own creation.

The way the RCC and today's Catholic's honor Mary is no different than how they honored Diana 2,000 years ago. The Catholic version of Mary is very similar to the trinity version the witch-maiden-crone of Hecate. Ultimately, like Diana existed in the same realm as Zeus, Mary exist to God in the RCC viewpoint.

The RCC and modern Catholic Church are practicing a form of Roman-Greco-Rituals using the Characters of the New Testament.

And didn't Semiramis, in order to retain her hold on power after her husband was killed, tell the people the expectant birth of Tammuz, would be the son born in the exact image and being as his father, Nimrod.

Some of my roman catholic friends were talking the other day about their Mary, and how she hears all their prayers and mediates between them and God.

This was confusing to me, so I didn't say anything to them at the time.

If their Mary can hear all their prayers, would that not ascribe to her attributes of deity, such as omnipresence (in the presence of all those people praying to her), which not even Satan has?

If their Mary can hear all their prayers, would that not ascribe to her attributes of deity, such as omniscience (knowing the very thoughts of the one praying, especially if it is only in their minds and hearts rather than out loud and verbal), which not even Satan knows?

If their Mary can exercise power in the lives of those praying to her, would that not ascribe to her attributes of deity, such as omnipotence (possessing the power of deity to exert her will in the affairs of this earth in the lives of those praying to her), of which Satan has limited influence, but that their Mary can overcome as being more powerful than Satan himself?

Where do scripture point out anywhere in all the 31,000+ verses of the Bible, revealing such attributes of deity to one woman, and based upon what?

[1 Timothy 2:5] For [there is] one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;

It would seem that the beliefs of my RCC friends is diametrically opposed to the very word of God itself, although they have told me that their traditions and "magisterium" teachings are above the Bible, and thus interpreting difficult passages into something they don't seem to be saying, even though they seem contradictory in spite of what sound like slight-of-hand interpretations to make the text of the Bible say what it doesn't.

Folks, I don't want to offend my RCC friends, but how do we reconcile what appears to be absolute polar opposites in meaning? They also ascribe to their other "saints" some of the same attributes. I have always understood "one" to be one, and only one. They don't believe that Jesus and Mary are "one" and the same, but rather two different entities. How, then, can their popish declarations from the past and present offer any measure of apologetic that can rectify this seemingly glaring set of inconsistencies for a doctrine that didn't even exist as official doctrine for them until the 19th century?

Can anyone help me with this?

MM

A Christian does not have to be a Catholic to know and acknowledge the role our Father God used the virgin mother to play in his plan of salvation for mankind. It saddens me to see people disparage her the way you have done in this post. Calling her their Mary is derogatory. We know how people respect, adore and hold in high esteem Presidents, Queens and Kings of this world, not to talk of their biological mothers. And, when it comes to honouring the virgin Mary, who gave birth to our saviour Jesus Christ, they talk nonsense.

The RCC respect , honour, reverence her because our Father God first honoured, blessed and favoured her above all women. What is wrong with this? I am very sure the Catholics do not worship Mary and she has never been an object of their worship as a deity. Just as we read the scriptures sometimes and believe we have understood what we have read and we run with that, not knowing that our understanding is below par, so, we see some of their practices, we form opinions believing we understand. Even, some Catholics themselves, unfortunately, do not have a good grasp of what they do but this is not peculiar to them. It cuts across denominations. There is so much ignorance of the way of the cross even among us here in CC. But we take solace in the fact that knowledge and understanding is "progressive". We grow in grace.

Yes, I know the Catholics ask for her intercessions in prayers. I do not know why we find this strange. How does this remove the fact that Jesus is the only saviour of the world and our mediator as it is written, which they believe also. If you read your bible well, you will see that even Paul encouraged his gentile converts to always pray for him and the Ministry and he constantly prayed for them as well. When our children get sick for instance, what do we do? we pray for their quick recovery even if we take them to the hospital. Pastors pray on behalf of people as well. These are all intercessory prayers, not different from what the RCCs do in relation to the virgin mother. They request her to pray for them. People say, the difference is that she is dead. Search the scriptures and you will see that it is written, God is not the God of the dead but of the living for all who died in him live unto him. Jesus gave the example of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. Or, do we talk about the presence of Elijah and Moses during his transfiguration.

Whether we know and acknowledge it or not, she is continuing to intercede for us the way she interceded at that wedding at Cana in Galilee where there was no wine, nobody asked for it, she saw the lack and besought her son, our Lord Jesus Christ. Even if it was not his time, he listened to her voice and made abundantly available wine that was sweeter than honey and everybody drank and was satisfied.

For me, she is truly worthy to be called our Queen mother (why not). The queen of heaven and earth and we accord her all the respect, honour, reverence and blessings our Lord God bestowed on her.

Some of my roman catholic friends were talking the other day about their Mary, and how she hears all their prayers and mediates between them and God.

This was confusing to me, so I didn't say anything to them at the time.

If their Mary can hear all their prayers, would that not ascribe to her attributes of deity, such as omnipresence (in the presence of all those people praying to her), which not even Satan has?

If their Mary can hear all their prayers, would that not ascribe to her attributes of deity, such as omniscience (knowing the very thoughts of the one praying, especially if it is only in their minds and hearts rather than out loud and verbal), which not even Satan knows?

If their Mary can exercise power in the lives of those praying to her, would that not ascribe to her attributes of deity, such as omnipotence (possessing the power of deity to exert her will in the affairs of this earth in the lives of those praying to her), of which Satan has limited influence, but that their Mary can overcome as being more powerful than Satan himself?

Where do scripture point out anywhere in all the 31,000+ verses of the Bible, revealing such attributes of deity to one woman, and based upon what?

[1 Timothy 2:5] For [there is] one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;

It would seem that the beliefs of my RCC friends is diametrically opposed to the very word of God itself, although they have told me that their traditions and "magisterium" teachings are above the Bible, and thus interpreting difficult passages into something they don't seem to be saying, even though they seem contradictory in spite of what sound like slight-of-hand interpretations to make the text of the Bible say what it doesn't.

Folks, I don't want to offend my RCC friends, but how do we reconcile what appears to be absolute polar opposites in meaning? They also ascribe to their other "saints" some of the same attributes. I have always understood "one" to be one, and only one. They don't believe that Jesus and Mary are "one" and the same, but rather two different entities. How, then, can their popish declarations from the past and present offer any measure of apologetic that can rectify this seemingly glaring set of inconsistencies for a doctrine that didn't even exist as official doctrine for them until the 19th century?

Can anyone help me with this?

MM

A Christian does not have to be a Catholic to know and acknowledge the role our Father God used the virgin mother to play in his plan of salvation for mankind. It saddens me to see people disparage her the way you have done in this post. Calling her their Mary is derogatory. We know how people respect, adore and hold in high esteem Presidents, Queens and Kings of this world, not to talk of their biological mothers. And, when it comes to honouring the virgin Mary, who gave birth to our saviour Jesus Christ, they talk nonsense.

The RCC respect , honour, reverence her because our Father God first honoured, blessed and favoured her above all women. What is wrong with this?

I am very sure the Catholics do not worship Mary and she has never been an object of their worship as a deity. Just as we read the scriptures sometimes and believe we have understood what we have read and we run with that, not knowing that our understanding is below par, so, we see some of their practices, we form opinions believing we understand.

Even, some Catholics themselves, unfortunately, do not have a good grasp of what they do but this is not peculiar to them. It cuts across denominations. There is so much ignorance of the way of the cross even among us here in CC. But we take solace in the fact that knowledge and understanding is "progressive". We grow in grace.

Yes, I know the Catholics ask for her intercessions in prayers. I do not know why we find this strange. How does this remove the fact that Jesus is the only saviour of the world and our mediator as it is written, which they believe also.

If you read your bible well, you will see that even Paul encouraged his gentile converts to always pray for him and the Ministry and he constantly prayed for them as well. When our children get sick for instance, what do we do? we pray for their quick recovery even if we take them to the hospital. Pastors pray on behalf of people as well. These are all intercessory prayers, not different from what the RCCs do in relation to the virgin mother. They request her to pray for them. People say, the difference is that she is dead. Search the scriptures and you will see that it is written, God is not the God of the dead but of the living for all who died in him live unto him. Jesus gave the example of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. Or, do we talk about the presence of Elijah and Moses during his transfiguration.

Whether we know and acknowledge it or not, she is continuing to intercede for us the way she interceded at that wedding at Cana in Galilee where there was no wine, nobody asked for it, she saw the lack and besought her son, our Lord Jesus Christ.

For me, she is truly worthy to be called our Queen mother (why not).

The queen of heaven and earth and we accord her all the respect, honour, reverence and blessings our Lord God bestowed on her.

My Catholic relatives have shrines to Mary containing statues (idols) in many rooms in their homes and in their gardens outside. They pray on rosary beads and ask her to intercede for them. This is idol worship, necromancy and it is forbidden. These practices are part of the false church/religious system known as Babylon, which God hates.

Jesus honored His earthly mother, leaving John in charge of her care when He was gone to Heaven. As for a special place of honor for her in heaven, her reward is likely in line with every saint, the least here, will be first there. Worship and glory and honor belong to the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit. Nowhere in Scripture is there a diety deserving our devotion and prayers, other than the triune Godhead.


Matt 10:37 He who loves father or mother more than Me is not worthy of Me; and he who loves son or daughter more than Me is not worthy of Me.

Disparage her? Why sensationalize what I said into that arena? Does that somehow lend more credibility to your accusation? Does it remedy the problems they create with all the various teachings about her that have become deeply entrenched into their belief system? There is so much more to all this than you have allowed into your vastly limited position.

I believe by calling her "their Mary", you belittled her. That was my perception. However, if that has wounded your ego, or pained your heart, accept my apology.

Well, I only attended to the issues you raised in your post. You tend to see problems where there is none.

Did you notice the differing terms in your statements? You said that its the RCC that pays "reverence" to their Mary, but not God. There's no argument that Mary was indeed blessed above other women:

Reverence has different meanings. check your dictionary and take the one that suits my line of thought and not yours.

Luke 1:28 And the angel came in unto her, and said, Hail, [thou that art] highly favoured, the Lord [is] with thee: blessed [art] thou among women.
Notice that she was blessed AMONG women, but favored above them for...bearing the physical vessel the eternal Son inhabited. Yes.

Search the scriptures more to see what the Holy Spirit says about her.

However, the issues and problems do not stop there. If that were the only extent to what is accorded to her, then we would not be having this conversation. It would be a non-issue, but pretending this is the extent in totality...no. It's far more than this.

Again, I attended only to the issues you raised in your op

There is a difference. Where scripture is concerned, we are told this:

1 John 2:26-27

26 These [things] have I written unto you concerning them that seduce you. 27 But the anointing which ye have received of him abideth in you, and ye need not that any man teach you: but as the same anointing teacheth you of all things, and is truth, and is no lie, and even as it hath taught you, ye shall abide in him.

It is an accepted fact that the Holy Spirit can speak same thing to two different people and their reception of the message differs for many reasons, One could be the level of their spirituality or grossiness of their heart

When it comes to the catechisms and the observed practices, there is no need for divine interpretation for understanding, so trying to align the two as if they are a parallel to one another is an exercise in futility. The three Hebrew boys who were thrown into the furnace for their refusal to give even the APPEARANCE of evil, that speaks loud volumes to the compromises and downright evils that are presented in the overall panorama of what we can see in what is written, said, prayed and done in her name within the RCC.

You really assume too much. be careful what you allow into your head and heart for falsehood kills.

Who are you? Have the members of the RCC made you their spokesperson? You certainly aren't speaking from the scriptures:

I am a Christian.

Ephesians 2:8 For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: [it is] the gift of God:

Who told you the RCCs do not know this; that you are the only one that knows? Too much assumptions on your part!

Perhaps YOU are trying to "grow in grace," but I and many others have already received it in full, with it having been bestowed upon us to the full extent of salvation without any question for the assumed need for purging. The Jesus described within the pages of the Bible is not the same Jesus they teach and revere. The Jesus of the Bible, said, "It is finished." The RCC adds to the words of Jesus by teaching, "It was only finished to the extent of salvation, but not complete remission and cleansing away of all sins." The Jesus of the Bible does not need a co-mediator:

Truly I am still growing in grace and I recognise this. Good for you for your perfect wisdom, knowledge and understanding!.

John 14:6 Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.

Nowhere in that context do we see the Lord and Creator of us all including Mary as a mediator. They have subjectively added her as another avenue. Why? If you speak for them, then perhaps you can answer that.

You have filled your head with the word mediator and you assume that, what you think they do is what they do. You may have to rethink.

Making that desire for "intercession" into a minimal item of concern in an attempt to trivialize the objections is just another manipulative tactic that doesn't work on me. You either believe what Jesus said, or you do not. That's the dividing line. Trying to paint around the confines of Christ alone, in yellow stripes, in order to try and expand the intermediary borders around where Christ alone is our mediator. that only highlights your own lack of understanding and discernment.

Too much assumptions without facts are dangerous. Do not think you know in areas you are wallowing in ignorance.

You make it sound so innocent and easy, as if it were no big deal to include Mary as a mediator. Well, we both know Mary is not the only one they pray to. Your skills at minimalizing vastly important issues that have ramifications far beyond what you attribute to them in relation to the Bible only shows that YOU obviously don't read your Bible well.

Because it is so easy to understand but you seem to like this word mediator a lot and you continue to use it even where explanations have been given to you.

Seriously? Why is it that YOU don't accept what the Bible says? Please show me where Paul encouraged ANYONE to pray to Mary or any of the other dead people (yes, they are dead...to this world, obviously) who the RCC subjectively "sainted." Where does the word of God encourage us to ask those who are gone from this world to intercede or do anything on our behalf.

You may have to read my post on this again to understand my meaning.

Beyond that, please explain to us how it does not attribute to Mary and the others the powers and nature of God for them to hear every person on this earth who prays to them (omnipresence and omniscience). How do you know they have those abilities? Do you believe that because the RCC teaches it? Pretending that this is all harmless and of no consequence only betrays your lack in any desire to allow scripture to speak for itself in an authoritative foundation for truth.

There is nothing to explain because this is just your conjecture. There is no truth in what you have written above.

And He THEN asked her: John 2:4 Jesus saith unto her, Woman, what have I to do with thee? mine hour is not yet come.

She clearly was out of line, and He explained why, although he honored her and the wedding party with the best wine they had ever drank. You can speculate all you want about the reasons why He went ahead and honored the request and the wishes of the other people there, but to try and transplant that off into eternity the idea that RCC people's prayers are heard and expressed by her in like manner to Jesus is nothing more than human ingenuity for invention of doctrine.

The reason is very clear but when the heart is very hardened towards a particular course, it becomes difficult to change.

No, the question is WHY? That's of pagan origin, the concept and designation "queen of heaven." Why paganize Mary with a title originating and couched in that type of positional accolade? Why would you or anyone else do that to her?

To you, it has a pagan origin. To me Queen is an english word. Go and check the meaning and please take the appropriate meaning that aligns with my line of thought .

Again, why? She was not sinless, and was therefore in need of a Savior just like all the rest of us. Why believe what is contrary to the written word of God?

Just your assumptions.

MM

My response marked in red