Salvation Through Mary?

Bard_the_Bowman

New member
And this, too, is fallible opinion. There is no need to speculate about Mary because she is not a focus of the scriptures - such is given to Jesus and no other.

Oh, I agree, of course Jesus is the focus.

But why are you changing your tune? Recently you asked me to focus on John the Baptist.

The difference of course is that Mary's role in scripture is minor so why bother to focus on her? You might consider John the Baptist more so: Matthew 10:11.

Why speculate about him?

How do you determine who and who is not a "focus of the Scriptures"?

And, since that isn't a biblical idea anyway, why should anyone follow that man-made idea?

The following is not opinion:

1. Jesus establishing His Church (Matthew 16)
2. Leaving it with His authority (Matthew 18, Matthew 28, Luke 10:16, 1 Tim. 3:15)
3. To be guided by the Holy Spirit (John 14)
4. and His promises to be with it always (Matthew 28)

Peace.
 

Bard_the_Bowman

New member

I suppose everyone gets to determine for themselves what and who is and is not a focus of the scriptures since that idea is not found in scripture nor are any parameters for determining "focus".

I don't know, though.

Giving birth to God. That's only gonna ever happen once. Mothering and raising the Savior. Pretty rare event.

Pretty amazing life for that one person who was chosen to do that.

As for me, since I know I cannot honor Mary any more than God already has, since I know I cannot love her more than Jesus already has, I will love and honor her as best I can knowing that it amounts to little compared to the blessings she has already been given.

Peace.
 
Last edited:

Bard_the_Bowman

New member
Hello. I am new to this site, as well as to this post.

Welcome!

I appear from time to time here...but not overly regularly.

Judging from your posts, as well as the original subject and title, you seem to be of a anti-catholic sentiment. Not saying that you hate them or wish them dead, but that you disagree with their teachings an doctrines.

Nobody hates here. Everyone loves Jesus. There are just differences in beliefs and it can make for interesting conversations and discussions.

I only jumped in on this one because of a misconception that was stated.

I think it is pretty well summarized in post #120.

I say that to extrapolate your most recent comment. If there is no need to focus on anything or anyone outiside of Jesus, then why have the NT letters? Why have the OT? Why have the Revalation of John? Are these all not focusing on aspects that are not Christ?

If focusing on disproving Catholic doctrines and dogmas not focusing on something other than Christ? (Granted, at this point I am veering off subject; but I wish to point out the redundancy of the aforementioned statement).

If a sermon such as Marian Devotion is losing a focus on Christ, then attention to Paul is just as unfocused.

To bring the subject back to its origin: attention given to Mary, Peter, Paul, John, etc., is giving attention to Christ. Through them, we grow in our knowledge of Christ. And Mary specifically points to the deity and humanity of Christ. To quote Tim Staples, "if you miss it on Mary, you miss it on Christ." And this is true. That is how Gnosticism and Mormanism develop. They deny various aspects of Scripture, and attributes of Mary, devolving into the sects that they belong to. To close this point, I leave a last comparison. Is attention to the Ark not a valid area of study and adoration? After all, King David did this. Mary is the new Ark. (If you want a list of comparisons and parallels, I can easily provide them). Therefore, attention and adoration to Mary is warranted and wholesome.

In Christ,

J

Peace.
 

Bard_the_Bowman

New member
Welcome, jstanford. You are right, I wish no one dead but I strongly disagree with the teaching which comes from the church at Rome.

Sure, we focus our attention on other things besides the Lord Jesus in our studies. But our focus is on what the Scriptures actually say.

And the Scriptures say "listen to the Church" (Matthew 18:17) because He left His Church with His authority (Matthew 18:18, Matthew 28:20, Luke 10:16).

That doesn't mean we don't read and obey the Scriptures. But it does mean that Jesus' gave His Church His own authority that He promised would continue through all ages.....before there even were any New Testament Scriptures even written.

In other words, Jesus' Church flourished even without a Bible.

I see nothing in Scripture to assume that that situation changed.

On the other hand, there is very little said about Mary in the Scriptures but Rome takes that scant information about her and turns a molehill into a mountain. And very little of what Rome teaches about her is supported by the Scriptures.

I disagree. There actually is quite a bit of information about Mary. Sure, less than some, more than others, but who developed that "criteria" for determining a person's importance anyways? It certainly isn't a criteria that can be found in the Bible so it is just a man-made idea.

Besides, bringing God into our world? Giving birth to the Savior? Raising Him? Mothering Him? Being the Mother to Jesus Christ? Being the Mother to the one who not only create her but everything?

That's no molehill. Mt. Everest is a molehill compared to that.

Did you read my Opening Post on this thread? I believe that what is said in that post proves that the Scriptures contradict what Rome teaches about Mary.

Please read post #120. You are simply incorrect in what you think the Catholic Church teaches about Mary.

Do you have anything that you might want to share with us about what I said there?

If you do then be my guest.

Thanks!


Peace.
 

Bard_the_Bowman

New member
2Th 2:5 Remember ye not, that, when I was yet with you, I told you these things?
2Th 2:6 And now ye know what withholdeth that he might be revealed in his time.
2Th 2:7 For the mystery of iniquity doth already work: only he who now letteth will let, until he be taken out of the way.
2Th 2:8 And then shall that Wicked be revealed, whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of his mouth, and shall destroy with the brightness of his coming:
2Th 2:9 Even him, whose coming is after the working of Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders,
2Th 2:10 And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved.

Hey keypurr,

I guess I will take that as my cue to leave. So I will.

I think post #120 pretty much answers the reason I jumped in here anyway.

I know it gets difficult, like in face-to-face conversations, because things started going in all different directions.

Peace to you.

I'm out.
 

keypurr

Well-known member
Why are you taking things personal? Are we not here to share and debate?
Stick around, I do not see you as a bad person.


Sent from my iPad using TOL
 

jsanford108

New member
Hello Bard. I obviously am in agreement with you. I only mentioned the "anti-catholic sentiment" as a means of establishing the other posters views. I did not intend to make it sound like he was hateful of others. I just know many attribute hatred to anything labeled "anti-."

Thank you to all for the welcome. I am glad to have a very intellectual atmosphere for discussing things greater than ourselves.
 

jsanford108

New member
With the statement of salvation through Mary from Pope Leo, vs that made by Peter, we must examine the wordplay. For this occurance, you utilize the phrase "Through" Mary to mean that she gives salvation. But when Peter says "the name" of Christ, that doesn't mean Christ's Name. Not only this, but Peter keeps saying "name." Does this mean that all we need is "the name" of Christ, not Christ Himself? Of course not.

Yet, when we know Christ came to us, through, aka bloodline and birth, Mary, this becomes an abstract, according to your reasoning. If Christ came to us, through Mary, Christ is our salvation, then the phrase "salvation through Mary" makes logical and rational sense. It does not say that Mary is salvation. It says it is through her. Mary is a vessel, not the substance. Is this explanation more clear and concise?
 

Jerry Shugart

Well-known member
With the statement of salvation through Mary from Pope Leo, vs that made by Peter, we must examine the wordplay. For this occurance, you utilize the phrase "Through" Mary to mean that she gives salvation.

Greetings jstanford!

One of the meaning of the word "through" is "by means of, by the agency of" (Merriam-Webster Collegiate Dictionary).

With that in mind let us look what Rome teaches about Mary again:

"Since faith is the foundation, the source, of the gifts of God by which man is raised above the order of nature and is endowed with the dispositions requisite for life eternal, we are in justice bound to recognize the hidden influence of Mary in obtaining the gift of faith and its salutary cultivation - of Mary who brought the "author of faith" into this world and who, because of her own great faith, was called 'blessed.' 'O Virgin most holy, none abounds in the knowledge of God except through thee; none, O Mother of God, attains salvation except through thee; none receives a gift from the throne of mercy except through thee" (ADIUTRICEM (On the Rosary), Encyclical of Pope Leo XIII, promulgated on September 5, 1895).​

Here we see that Rome teaches that no one can have the knowledge of God EXCEPT THROUGH HER. Earlier Pope Leo XIII speaks of the "the hidden influence of Mary in obtaining the gift of faith."

What is said here confirms that the meaning of the word "through" as used in this statement is indeed "by means of, by the agency of."

Since it is by "faith" that a person comes to the knowledge of God then Rome is teaching that no one can have faith except by the means of Mary and hence no one can be saved except by her. That is why we read:

"None, O Mother of God, attains salvation except through thee."

But when Peter says "the name" of Christ, that doesn't mean Christ's Name. Not only this, but Peter keeps saying "name." Does this mean that all we need is "the name" of Christ, not Christ Himself? Of course not.

What is said prior to that makes it plain that "Neither is there salvation in any other." Rome teaches that no one can be saved apart from the means or agency of Mary. And that idea directly contradicts Peter's words that there is no salvation in any person other than the Lord Jesus Christ.

Yet, when we know Christ came to us, through, aka bloodline and birth, Mary, this becomes an abstract, according to your reasoning. If Christ came to us, through Mary, Christ is our salvation, then the phrase "salvation through Mary" makes logical and rational sense. It does not say that Mary is salvation. It says it is through her. Mary is a vessel, not the substance. Is this explanation more clear and concise?

No, that idea is not found in the words of Pope Leo XIII. I have already given the meaning of the word "through" and that meaning matches exactly the words which speak of "the hidden influence of Mary in obtaining the gift of faith."
 

Jerry Shugart

Well-known member
He even says it right there at the end of the passage you quoted:

those things are “…sanctified by their adoption into the Church.”

Hi Bard the Bowman!

Cardinal Newman also said this:

"Confiding then in the power of Christianity to resist the infection of evil, and to transmute the very instruments and appendages of demon-worship to an evangelical use, and feeling also that these usages had originally come from primitive revelations and from the instinct of nature, though they had been corrupted; and that they must invent what they needed, if they did not use what they found; and that they were moreover possessed of the very archetypes, of which paganism attempted the shadows; the rulers of the Church from early times were prepared, should the occasion arise, to adopt, or imitate, or sanction the existing rites and customs of the populace, as well as the philosophy of the educated class."

The church at Rome took the things of demon-worship and put them to evangelical use but the early Christians burned the things in regard to demon-worship:

"Many of them also which used curious arts brought their books together, and burned them before all men: and they counted the price of them, and found it fifty thousand pieces of silver"
(Acts 19:19).​
 

jsanford108

New member
Jerry,

You make excellent points. And I appreciate that you keep posting your original quotes (it makes it easier for quick references).

What you have derived from this Letter of Pope Leo is still a bit abstract. You are taking his words in the strictest literal meaning and weighing them against metaphorical meanings. But doing the reverse with Peter's words. That was what I was attempting to illustrate. Furthermore, as our friend Bard pointed out, the issue seems to be that because Mary isn't described this way verbatim in the Bible, it can't be true and is Rome's invention. But let us compare that if we may to other dogmas that I believe you accept.

The Trinity is never mentioned in Scripture. The word is never found. It is alluded to, as in when Christ says "I and the Father are one," but nowhere is it explicitly stated that God is a Triune deity. With this knowledge, can we discount anything not explicitly stated in Scripture?

Alas, in my opinion, the base of your arguments are in the interpretation of single words and phrases. But the interpretations, as in how strict you are to literal interpretation, waxes and wanes depending on the source from which it comes. Please correct me if I am wrong there.
 

Jerry Shugart

Well-known member
What you have derived from this Letter of Pope Leo is still a bit abstract. You are taking his words in the strictest literal meaning and weighing them against metaphorical meanings.

Hi jsanford,

I see nothing in Pope Leo's statement that even hints that what he said is not to be taken literally. What did he say which made you think that that he was only speaking metaphorically?

But doing the reverse with Peter's words. That was what I was attempting to illustrate. Furthermore, as our friend Bard pointed out, the issue seems to be that because Mary isn't described this way verbatim in the Bible, it can't be true and is Rome's invention.

Not only is Mary not described verbatim in the way Rome describes her but nothing in the Scriptures even hints that what Romes says about her is true. In the doctrinal epistles there is not even one explicit mention of her. If she plays such an important role in the salvation of people then there can be absolutely no doubt that the epistles which speaks of the doctrines in regard to salvation would be full of her role which Rome says that she plays in salvation.

Those epistles will be searched in vain for any explicit mention of Mary.

The Trinity is never mentioned in Scripture. The word is never found. It is alluded to, as in when Christ says "I and the Father are one," but nowhere is it explicitly stated that God is a Triune deity. With this knowledge, can we discount anything not explicitly stated in Scripture?

The Bible is loaded with evidence that demonstrates that a Trinity exists within the Godhead. There is no evidence that demonstrates that Mary has any role in people's salvation. No, not even one verse.

Alas, in my opinion, the base of your arguments are in the interpretation of single words and phrases. But the interpretations, as in how strict you are to literal interpretation, waxes and wanes depending on the source from which it comes. Please correct me if I am wrong there.

Why should we think that what was said should be understood in any way but literally? I think you see that there is a HUGE problem with what Rome teaches about Mary so the only thing which you can think of to say is that we should not take it literally.
 

God's Truth

New member
The church at Rome teaches that no one attains salvation except through Mary:

"Since faith is the foundation, the source, of the gifts of God by which man is raised above the order of nature and is endowed with the dispositions requisite for life eternal, we are in justice bound to recognize the hidden influence of Mary in obtaining the gift of faith and its salutary cultivation - of Mary who brought the "author of faith" into this world and who, because of her own great faith, was called 'blessed.' 'O Virgin most holy, none abounds in the knowledge of God except through thee; none, O Mother of God, attains salvation except through thee; none receives a gift from the throne of mercy except through thee" (ADIUTRICEM (On the Rosary), Encyclical of Pope Leo XIII, promulgated on September 5, 1895).​

That teaching is contradicted by what the Apostle Peter said here:

"Be it known unto you all, and to all the people of Israel, that by the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom ye crucified, whom God raised from the dead, even by him doth this man stand here before you whole. This is the stone which was set at nought of you builders, which is become the head of the corner. Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved"
(Acts 4:10-12).​

Why can't those who attend the church at Rome understand that salvation comes from the Lord Jesus Christ alone?

Catholic Popes teach Catholics to elevate Mary. There is no such command in the Bible, nor are there any examples of such an act in the Bible. Mary would not want to be exalted in such a way. In fact, a woman in the crowd called out, “Blessed is the mother who gave you birth and nursed you.” Jesus replied, “Blessed rather are those who hear the word of God and obey it.” See Luke 11:27-28. Does that sound like Jesus wanted Mary exalted to the level that the Catholic Church has exalted her? No. Someone told Jesus, “Your mother and brothers are standing outside, wanting to see you.” Jesus replied, “My mother and brothers are those who hear God’s word and put it into practice.” See Luke 8:20-21. Does it sound like Jesus wants us to elevate and worship his mother? No!
 

jsanford108

New member
Catholic Popes teach Catholics to elevate Mary. There is no such command in the Bible, nor are there any examples of such an act in the Bible. Mary would not want to be exalted in such a way. In fact, a woman in the crowd called out, “Blessed is the mother who gave you birth and nursed you.” Jesus replied, “Blessed rather are those who hear the word of God and obey it.” See Luke 11:27-28. Does that sound like Jesus wanted Mary exalted to the level that the Catholic Church has exalted her? No. Someone told Jesus, “Your mother and brothers are standing outside, wanting to see you.” Jesus replied, “My mother and brothers are those who hear God’s word and put it into practice.” See Luke 8:20-21. Does it sound like Jesus wants us to elevate and worship his mother? No!
 

jsanford108

New member
“Catholic Popes teach Catholics to elevate Mary. There is no such command in the Bible, nor are there any examples of such an act in the Bible. Mary would not want to be exalted in such a way. In fact, a woman in the crowd called out, “Blessed is the mother who gave you birth and nursed you.” Jesus replied, “Blessed rather are those who hear the word of God and obey it.” See Luke 11:27-28. Does that sound like Jesus wanted Mary exalted to the level that the Catholic Church has exalted her? No. Someone told Jesus, “Your mother and brothers are standing outside, wanting to see you.” Jesus replied, “My mother and brothers are those who hear God’s word and put it into practice.” See Luke 8:20-21. Does it sound like Jesus wants us to elevate and worship his mother? No!”-God’s Truth

Let us read what the Catholic Church actually teaches. According to the Catechism, lines 970-971, "Mary's function as mother of men in no way obscures or diminishes this unique mediation of Christ, but rather shows its power. But the Blessed Virgin's salutary influence on men . . . flows forth from the superabundance of the merits of Christ, rests on his mediation, depends entirely on it, and draws all its power from it. No creature could ever be counted along with the Incarnate Word and Redeemer; but just as the priesthood of Christ is shared in various ways both by his ministers and the faithful, and as the one goodness of God is radiated in different ways among his creatures, so also the unique mediation of the Redeemer does not exclude but rather gives rise to a manifold cooperation which is but a sharing in this one source."
"’All generations will call me blessed’: ‘The Church's devotion to the Blessed Virgin is intrinsic to Christian worship.’ The Church rightly honors ‘the Blessed Virgin with special devotion. From the most ancient times the Blessed Virgin has been honored with the title of 'Mother of God,' to whose protection the faithful fly in all their dangers and needs. . . . This very special devotion . . . differs essentially from the adoration which is given to the incarnate Word and equally to the Father and the Holy Spirit, and greatly fosters this adoration.’ The liturgical feasts dedicated to the Mother of God and Marian prayer, such as the rosary, an ‘epitome of the whole Gospel,’ express this devotion to the Virgin Mary.”
But these quotes mean nothing to those who hold a disdain for the Catholic Church. So let us look to the Bible.

“Those epistles will be searched in vain for any explicit mention of Mary.” –Jerry
Granted, I do not recall off the top of my head a quote from the epistles. So excellent argument, Jerry. But, is Mary ever elevated outside of the epistles? We could pour over the book of Revelation. It is full of references to the Mother (Rev, Chapter 12). This is a clear, concise, and rather important reference to Mary. God’s Truth charged, there are no examples of Mary being elevated in the Bible (paraphrased). What would you say about the greeting of the angel, announcing the Conception of Christ? He greeted her with “Hail, full of Grace.” As it has been pointed out before in the discussion, we want to take the Bible literally. So let us do that with this greeting. “Full of,” means that there could not possible be room for more. Thus, she is completely full of God’s perfect favor and love. No other human has ever been greeted in this manner, or with these words. No other human created has ever been created in fullness of God’s grace, except for Adam and Eve, but they lost it and fell from this grace. This is why Mary is referred to as the new Eve. She is what creation was meant to be. Obviously, she is not worshiped in the same way that Christ is because He is the source of all grace, whereas Mary is full of grace.

Allow me to continue addressing God’s Truth’s charge, via a tangent, which will come full circle. When Christ was on the cross, he spoke a total of seven times. When He said, “I thirst,” (John 20:28) what did He mean? According to Jerry, this must be literal. Therefore Christ was just thirsty. However, very few Christian believe “I Thirst” to be only literal human thirst, but a divine meaning. A thirst for souls. What about verses 26 and 27?
“When Jesus therefore saw his mother, and the disciple standing by, whom he loved, he saith unto his mother, ‘Woman, behold thy son!’ Then saith he to the disciple, ‘Behold thy mother!’ And from that hour that disciple took her unto his own home.”
The crucifixion was the pinnacle of creation. All prophecies and events of the Bible point forward to it. All history will remember it and tremble with the power of it. God, and therefore, Christ, knows this. Wouldn’t a logical and rational mind conclude that anything spoken during this event would bear great weight and meaning? So why, would Christ, who has been preaching to His disciples for years to take care of sick, infirm, widows, etc., give such a command? Would the disciple not have already assumed the care of the mother of God Incarnate? Taking all of this into account, is this not an elevation? Just as “I Thirst,” Christ had a deeper and more divine meaning in “Behold thy mother.”

The Church in no way worships Mary. Does it hold her in reverence? Yes. Does it adore her and honor her? Absolutely. Is this unjust or unchristian? In no capacity. The Church obeys the command of Christ on the cross, follows the actions of the angel, and exhibits reverence and love to His Mother. In the adoration of Mary, we observe the fulfillment of Christ’s last command as a mortal, which in turn glorifies Him eternally.
 

God's Truth

New member
“Catholic Popes teach Catholics to elevate Mary. There is no such command in the Bible, nor are there any examples of such an act in the Bible. Mary would not want to be exalted in such a way. In fact, a woman in the crowd called out, “Blessed is the mother who gave you birth and nursed you.” Jesus replied, “Blessed rather are those who hear the word of God and obey it.” See Luke 11:27-28. Does that sound like Jesus wanted Mary exalted to the level that the Catholic Church has exalted her? No. Someone told Jesus, “Your mother and brothers are standing outside, wanting to see you.” Jesus replied, “My mother and brothers are those who hear God’s word and put it into practice.” See Luke 8:20-21. Does it sound like Jesus wants us to elevate and worship his mother? No!”-God’s Truth

Let us read what the Catholic Church actually teaches. According to the Catechism, lines 970-971, "Mary's function as mother of men in no way obscures or diminishes this unique mediation of Christ, but rather shows its power. But the Blessed Virgin's salutary influence on men . . . flows forth from the superabundance of the merits of Christ, rests on his mediation, depends entirely on it, and draws all its power from it. No creature could ever be counted along with the Incarnate Word and Redeemer; but just as the priesthood of Christ is shared in various ways both by his ministers and the faithful, and as the one goodness of God is radiated in different ways among his creatures, so also the unique mediation of the Redeemer does not exclude but rather gives rise to a manifold cooperation which is but a sharing in this one source."
"’All generations will call me blessed’: ‘The Church's devotion to the Blessed Virgin is intrinsic to Christian worship.’ The Church rightly honors ‘the Blessed Virgin with special devotion. From the most ancient times the Blessed Virgin has been honored with the title of 'Mother of God,' to whose protection the faithful fly in all their dangers and needs. . . . This very special devotion . . . differs essentially from the adoration which is given to the incarnate Word and equally to the Father and the Holy Spirit, and greatly fosters this adoration.’ The liturgical feasts dedicated to the Mother of God and Marian prayer, such as the rosary, an ‘epitome of the whole Gospel,’ express this devotion to the Virgin Mary.”
But these quotes mean nothing to those who hold a disdain for the Catholic Church. So let us look to the Bible.

“Those epistles will be searched in vain for any explicit mention of Mary.” –Jerry
Granted, I do not recall off the top of my head a quote from the epistles. So excellent argument, Jerry. But, is Mary ever elevated outside of the epistles? We could pour over the book of Revelation. It is full of references to the Mother (Rev, Chapter 12). This is a clear, concise, and rather important reference to Mary. God’s Truth charged, there are no examples of Mary being elevated in the Bible (paraphrased). What would you say about the greeting of the angel, announcing the Conception of Christ? He greeted her with “Hail, full of Grace.” As it has been pointed out before in the discussion, we want to take the Bible literally. So let us do that with this greeting. “Full of,” means that there could not possible be room for more. Thus, she is completely full of God’s perfect favor and love. No other human has ever been greeted in this manner, or with these words. No other human created has ever been created in fullness of God’s grace, except for Adam and Eve, but they lost it and fell from this grace. This is why Mary is referred to as the new Eve. She is what creation was meant to be. Obviously, she is not worshiped in the same way that Christ is because He is the source of all grace, whereas Mary is full of grace.

Allow me to continue addressing God’s Truth’s charge, via a tangent, which will come full circle. When Christ was on the cross, he spoke a total of seven times. When He said, “I thirst,” (John 20:28) what did He mean? According to Jerry, this must be literal. Therefore Christ was just thirsty. However, very few Christian believe “I Thirst” to be only literal human thirst, but a divine meaning. A thirst for souls. What about verses 26 and 27?
“When Jesus therefore saw his mother, and the disciple standing by, whom he loved, he saith unto his mother, ‘Woman, behold thy son!’ Then saith he to the disciple, ‘Behold thy mother!’ And from that hour that disciple took her unto his own home.”
The crucifixion was the pinnacle of creation. All prophecies and events of the Bible point forward to it. All history will remember it and tremble with the power of it. God, and therefore, Christ, knows this. Wouldn’t a logical and rational mind conclude that anything spoken during this event would bear great weight and meaning? So why, would Christ, who has been preaching to His disciples for years to take care of sick, infirm, widows, etc., give such a command? Would the disciple not have already assumed the care of the mother of God Incarnate? Taking all of this into account, is this not an elevation? Just as “I Thirst,” Christ had a deeper and more divine meaning in “Behold thy mother.”

The Church in no way worships Mary. Does it hold her in reverence? Yes. Does it adore her and honor her? Absolutely. Is this unjust or unchristian? In no capacity. The Church obeys the command of Christ on the cross, follows the actions of the angel, and exhibits reverence and love to His Mother. In the adoration of Mary, we observe the fulfillment of Christ’s last command as a mortal, which in turn glorifies Him eternally.

Your mere denial means nothing when it comes to the Truth.

I was born and raised Catholic.

I know what Catholics teach and do.

Mere denial is not a defense.
 

jsanford108

New member
I am a Catholic. I was raised Baptist. I wasn't making a denial; I was demonstrating a more concise representation. I responded to the charge of Biblical examples, with quotes from the Bible. You may have been Catholic. You may currently be Protestant. That doesn't render any argument you make to be inherently true or false. Just making the statement, such as "mere denial means nothing when it comes to the Truth," doesn't even convey truth. Could I not just counter with that you are in denial? Such arguments are trivial and counter productive.
 

God's Truth

New member
I am a Catholic. I was raised Baptist. I wasn't making a denial; I was demonstrating a more concise representation. I responded to the charge of Biblical examples, with quotes from the Bible. You may have been Catholic. You may currently be Protestant. That doesn't render any argument you make to be inherently true or false. Just making the statement, such as "mere denial means nothing when it comes to the Truth," doesn't even convey truth. Could I not just counter with that you are in denial? Such arguments are trivial and counter productive.

No, it is not just because you say so.

All you did is deny

By the way, I am not a protestant.
 

jsanford108

New member
God's Truth, (may I call you GT?) could you provide me a quote of me denying a charge, and not countering with reasonable proof or evidence that supported my claim?

Forgive me for making the assumption of protestant. In my defense, I say "may be Protestant," allowing room for other possibilities.
 

God's Truth

New member
God's Truth, (may I call you GT?) could you provide me a quote of me denying a charge, and not countering with reasonable proof or evidence that supported my claim?

Forgive me for making the assumption of protestant. In my defense, I say "may be Protestant," allowing room for other possibilities.

You can use those initials when replying to me. Thank you for asking.

You did merely deny that the Catholics exalt Mary to a place she does not belong.

Mary is not co-redeemer.

She is not the one who is to intercede between God and humans.

I will give you scriptures where only Jesus are those things.

Just because you deny something about your denomination, it does not make it true.

I would love to talk to you more about the Catholic religion.
 
Top