Can You Pray to Whoever You Want to?

The same way you tell the difference in matters other than prayer. The ancient Hebrews that made a golden calf and gave burnt offerings to it and called it "the god that brought you up out of Egypt" were worshipping that golden calf. Those Hebrews who just had golden trinkets that they thought were pretty were not worshipping those trinkets. I guess the worst cases of worshipping a false God are when that worship involves immoral acts like fornication or human sacrifice. That is what idolatry is and was, especially in biblical times when many of the "other gods" of the time required such immoral acts of worship. Something that causes one to reject the commandments of the one true God. Today people can make an idol of their work, or the pursuit of money, to the extent that such pursuit leads them to sin against God. I'm not aware of any prayer to Mary that demands that one stop believing in God. The prayers to Mary are always made in recognition of her special relation with her son. I can see that if one denies that special relationship they might see prayer to Mary as idolatrous. But that is not a problem for us because we don't deny that special relationship.
So with her "Special relationship", why did Mary think Jesus had gone INSANE when He started his ministry??? Why did she (and her other kids) try to get Jesus OUT OF THE PUBLIC EYE, and get Him back home. (Mark 3:20-21, 31-35). Mary and her family, until AFTER the Crucifixion/Ressurection, didn't even have a CLUE what Jesus was all about. READ IT FOR YOURSELF!!!
 
Jesus left the Pope in charge of His church until his return. See Matthew 16.

False. We have discussed this ad infinitum on here. Why don't you ever remember? Your church has been lying about this for centuries, to boost its power and control over its constituents.

Now, kindly answer my question: did Jesus ever SAY "Whoever listens to the Pope listens to me"? Yes or no?

Did Jesus ever say that scripture alone is the final/sole authority for his church?
Did Jesus ever make man-made teachings equal to the Scriptures? Did He ever approve of that? Remember when He lambasted the Pharisees for making man-made doctrines trump Scripture? "In vain do they worship Me, teaching for doctrine e the precepts of men."
Remember?

He said that God's word is truth--not man's words.

Now, when are you going to answer my question about the context of when Jesus said that whoever listens to "you" listens to Him. Who is "you" here in this verse? What is the context? Care to tell us?
 
Last edited:
No matter how much you desire to usurp Christ's throne, He reigns in His church!

Christ is the Head....the One in charge....of His Body.

When Catholics publicly admit that they do not acknowledge that Christ is NOT in charge of their sect, I believe them!

I have yet to see any Catholic acknowledge that Christ is not in charge of the Catholic Church. Where did you get this from?
 
What is the context when He said this? We have been over this before. Catholics must have a list of canned talking points they get from their church, that they trot out, when non-Catholics bring up certain points to them, and Bible verses?
Buzzard (I believe) has been posting 'em. ? "Catholic Responses 101"

--Rich
 
So with her "Special relationship", why did Mary think Jesus had gone INSANE when He started his ministry??? Why did she (and her other kids) try to get Jesus OUT OF THE PUBLIC EYE, and get Him back home. (Mark 3:20-21, 31-35). Mary and her family, until AFTER the Crucifixion/Ressurection, didn't even have a CLUE what Jesus was all about. READ IT FOR YOURSELF!!!
This is an example of another flawed interpretation of Scripture. Here is the correct interpretation:

The term "brothers and sisters" is more general than blood siblings. The term is used throughout the bible to refer to an extended relation. In Matthew 13:55, James, Joseph, Simon, and Judas are called his "brothers". However Matthew 27:55 tells us something about the women who were present at the foot of the cross as Jesus was dying there. Among them were were Mary Magdalen, Mary the mother of James and Joseph, and the mother of the sons of Zebedee. If James and Joseph from 13:55 were truly siblings of Jesus, then this "Mary the mother of James and Joseph" would actually be Mary the mother of Jesus. But there is more.

A few verses later in Matthew we learn that after the stone was rolled across the entrance of the tomb, Mary Magdalen and the "other Mary" remained sitting there facing the tomb. Who is this "other Mary"? It can be none other than the "other Mary" that Matthew mentioned in verse 55, who is "Mary the mother of James and Joseph". But it is unthinkable that Matthew would refer to Jesus's mother as "the other Mary" as she sat facing the tomb container he son. But there is more.

St. Paul tells us:

Then after three years I went up to Jerusalem to visit Cephas, and remained with him fifteen days. But I saw none of the other apostles except James the Lord’s brother (Gal. 1:18-19).

Notice, the James of whom St. Paul speaks was both a “brother of the Lord” and an “apostle.” There are only two apostles named James among the twelve. The first James is revealed to have been a son of Zebedee. He would most likely not be the James St. Paul speaks of in Galatians, because this James, the brother of John, was martyred early on, according to Acts 12:1-2. And even if it were him, his father was Zebedee. If he were the blood brother of the Lord, his father would have been Joseph, and thus not a blood sibling of Jesus. The second apostle named James, according to Luke 6:15-16, is most likely to whom St. Paul refers, and his father was Alphaeus, not Joseph, and again not a blood brother of Jesus, despite being called "The Lord's brother". If you think that Paul was referring to "apostle" in a weaker sense, consider that when Paul wrote about going “up to Jerusalem” to see St. Peter, he was writing about an event that occurred many years earlier, shortly after he had converted. He was basically going up to the apostles to receive approval lest he “should be running or had run in vain.” It would be more likely he would have here been speaking about apostles proper, or the Twelve. But there is more.

In 1 Cor 15:6 we read "After that, he appeared to more than five hundred brothers at once, most of whom are still living, though some have fallen asleep." These are obviously not all blood siblings.

For all these reasons, there is no reason to think that "brother" always means blood brothers, and in particular, that Jesus had any blood brothers or sisters.

Who, then, is "Jesus's family" referred to in the passage you misinterpret (Mark 3:20-21, 31-35)? They are likely his cousins who probably were part of the crowd that rejected him in Luke 4:29. There is no indication that Mary thought her son insane. None whatsoever.
 
This is an example of another flawed interpretation of Scripture. Here is the correct interpretation:

The term "brothers and sisters" is more general than blood siblings. The term is used throughout the bible to refer to an extended relation. In Matthew 13:55, James, Joseph, Simon, and Judas are called his "brothers". However Matthew 27:55 tells us something about the women who were present at the foot of the cross as Jesus was dying there. Among them were were Mary Magdalen, Mary the mother of James and Joseph, and the mother of the sons of Zebedee. If James and Joseph from 13:55 were truly siblings of Jesus, then this "Mary the mother of James and Joseph" would actually be Mary the mother of Jesus. But there is more.

A few verses later in Matthew we learn that after the stone was rolled across the entrance of the tomb, Mary Magdalen and the "other Mary" remained sitting there facing the tomb. Who is this "other Mary"? It can be none other than the "other Mary" that Matthew mentioned in verse 55, who is "Mary the mother of James and Joseph". But it is unthinkable that Matthew would refer to Jesus's mother as "the other Mary" as she sat facing the tomb container he son. But there is more.

St. Paul tells us:

Then after three years I went up to Jerusalem to visit Cephas, and remained with him fifteen days. But I saw none of the other apostles except James the Lord’s brother (Gal. 1:18-19).

Notice, the James of whom St. Paul speaks was both a “brother of the Lord” and an “apostle.” There are only two apostles named James among the twelve. The first James is revealed to have been a son of Zebedee. He would most likely not be the James St. Paul speaks of in Galatians, because this James, the brother of John, was martyred early on, according to Acts 12:1-2. And even if it were him, his father was Zebedee. If he were the blood brother of the Lord, his father would have been Joseph, and thus not a blood sibling of Jesus. The second apostle named James, according to Luke 6:15-16, is most likely to whom St. Paul refers, and his father was Alphaeus, not Joseph, and again not a blood brother of Jesus, despite being called "The Lord's brother". If you think that Paul was referring to "apostle" in a weaker sense, consider that when Paul wrote about going “up to Jerusalem” to see St. Peter, he was writing about an event that occurred many years earlier, shortly after he had converted. He was basically going up to the apostles to receive approval lest he “should be running or had run in vain.” It would be more likely he would have here been speaking about apostles proper, or the Twelve. But there is more.

In 1 Cor 15:6 we read "After that, he appeared to more than five hundred brothers at once, most of whom are still living, though some have fallen asleep." These are obviously not all blood siblings.

For all these reasons, there is no reason to think that "brother" always means blood brothers, and in particular, that Jesus had any blood brothers or sisters.

Who, then, is "Jesus's family" referred to in the passage you misinterpret (Mark 3:20-21, 31-35)? They are likely his cousins who probably were part of the crowd that rejected him in Luke 4:29. There is no indication that Mary thought her son insane. None whatsoever.
Context! Sometimes brothers and sisters mean just that--siblings. But it depends upon the perfect, God-given immediate context, and the most obvious and natural way to interpret these verses is that Jesus' brothers are His half-brothers.
If they were His actual cousins, then why did the Gospel writer not use the Greek word for cousin--anepsios? It is found in the Bible, used of John Mark, who was Barnabas' cousin.

No one said that brothers in the Bible ALWAYS mean blood siblings. That is a straw man you have set up.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top