Mother Mary

balshan

Well-known member
The only ones who misunderstand the title are the Protestants.
That is a false claim. Unbelievers would be confused and they are very important. They are who the great commission is all about. Also we are to be careful that what we does not lead others astray etc.

1 cor 8

4 So then, about eating food sacrificed to idols: We know that “An idol is nothing at all in the world” and that “There is no God but one.” 5 For even if there are so-called gods, whether in heaven or on earth (as indeed there are many “gods” and many “lords”), 6 yet for us there is but one God, the Father, from whom all things came and for whom we live; and there is but one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom all things came and through whom we live.

7 But not everyone possesses this knowledge. Some people are still so accustomed to idols that when they eat sacrificial food they think of it as having been sacrificed to a god, and since their conscience is weak, it is defiled. 8 But food does not bring us near to God; we are no worse if we do not eat, and no better if we do.


This explains why we are not to eat food offered to idols. This warning would include the words we use.

1 Cor 10

23“I have the right to do anything,” you say—but not everything is beneficial . “I have the right to do anything”—but not everything is constructive. 24 No one should seek their own good, but the good of others.
 

Bonnie

Super Member
If you don't misunderstand, why do you assume that other Protestants will?
If the term was more to your liking, wouldn't that more likely cause other misunderstandings, such as how many Gods there are?
I was thinking more about unbievers investigating Christianity.

But the RCC version makes it sound as if she birthed the entire godhead!

So maybe the safest thing to do is scrap the title entirely.
 

mica

Well-known member
4Him said:
Since we are to preach the Gospel to them. Why would you not care what they think about what you would tell them about God? ...
In the sense of teaching
what does 'in the sense of ' teaching mean to you? is that pretending to teach something that you don't know or understand? or pretending to teach something that doesn't exist?

unbelievers
how do you determine who is an unbeliever?

who are open to the Gospel message?
what is the Gospel message in the rcc?

Then we just explain what we mean by the terms.
explain what terms?

But I was talking more about unbelievers who aren't open to our message. I do not care whether approve of us or not.

I am not here for your sake. I do not care whether you approve of Catholicism or not, and never have.

I am here for the sake of other Catholics.
why? you believe a lot of things they don't, and they believe a lot of things you don't.
that's just more cafeteria catholicism.
 

4Him

Administrator
Staff member
In the sense of teaching unbelievers who are open to the Gospel message? Then we just explain what we mean by the terms.

How do you support it with Scripture? You can't.
But I was talking more about unbelievers who aren't open to our message. I do not care whether approve of us or not.
You think the apostles only looked for those 'open to their message'?
I am not here for your sake. I do not care whether you approve of Catholicism or not, and never have.
Yes you do, otherwise you wouldn't be here trying, but failing to support your beliefs.
I am here for the sake of other Catholics.
Why? What need do they have for your posts?
 

pilgrim

Well-known member
I was thinking more about unbievers investigating Christianity.

But the RCC version makes it sound as if she birthed the entire godhead!

So maybe the safest thing to do is scrap the title entirely.
That's exactly what Protestants do. edit per mod
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Bonnie

Super Member
That's exactly what Protestants do. EDIT
Absolute nonsense. We do not "marginalize" her. We give Mary her proper due and love and respect her for what God accomplished through her. But we do not make more of her than God's holy word does. Why do Catholics? Jesus refused to give undue honor to His mother, so why should we? Shouldn't we use what Jesus did as an example?
 
Last edited by a moderator:

pilgrim

Well-known member
Absolute nonsense. We do not "marginalize" her. We give Mary her proper due and love and respect her for what God accomplished through her. But we do not make more of her than God's holy word does. Why do Catholics? Jesus refused to give undue honor to His mother, so why should we? Shouldn't we use what Jesus did as an example?
You do not give her her proper due, you take it away and say she is no different from anyone else.

Jesus honored His mother since He fulfilled the law perfectly. Well, how should God Incarnate honor His Mother? Shall He be outdone by sinful mankind? You seem to think so. Does equipping Mary to be a proper mother and her womb a new heaven for 9 months for the Son of God be of any concern at all for God? You seem to think not.
 

balshan

Well-known member
You do not give her her proper due, you take it away and say she is no different from anyone else.

Jesus honored His mother since He fulfilled the law perfectly. Well, how should God Incarnate honor His Mother? Shall He be outdone by sinful mankind? You seem to think so. Does equipping Mary to be a proper mother and her womb a new heaven for 9 months for the Son of God be of any concern at all for God? You seem to think not.
No it is RCs that do not give her proper due, they promote her in a way that would mortify her. You are just constantly making false claims about the belief of others without looking at the faults in your own belief system.
 

Bonnie

Super Member
You do not give her her proper due, you take it away and say she is no different from anyone else.

Show me how I did that by what I wrote.
Jesus honored His mother since He fulfilled the law perfectly. Well, how should God Incarnate honor His Mother?

He did not pray to her, or call her the "only hope for sinners," that's for sure!
Shall He be outdone by sinful mankind? You seem to think so. Does equipping Mary to be a proper mother and her womb a new heaven for 9 months for the Son of God be of any concern at all for God? You seem to think not.
This is just a lot of emotional rhetoric to make it it appear that I am guilty of dishonoring Mary...won't work, pilgrim.

Explain to me how what I wrote makes you think I think that God wasn't concerned about "equipping" Mary to be Jesus' mother....
 

Bonnie

Super Member
Anything less than praying to her would be marginalizing her in the minds of the RCC.
I guess so. Sad, isn't it? Catholics seem to think refusing to pray to Mary as we would to God, for help, salvation, succor, etc. Is disrespecting her.

It is what Catholics have done to the humble and gentle maid of Nazareth that truly disrespects Mary.
 
Last edited:

Bonnie

Super Member
No, you don't. You just think Catholics misunderstand the title.

False.
Since when have Christians ever been concerned with what unbelievers think?

So, teaching something to unbelievers that isn't in Scripture is okay?
And--why should Catholics care what nonRCC's think?

Why, indeed? Why should nonRCCers care what Catholics think? But this is the Catholic board, where non-Caths and Catholics can debate all things Catholic, no?
You mean like--say----for instance----when the bishops at Nicaea approved the use of an unbiblical word to describe the nature of the relationship between God the Father and God the Son? You mean--like that?

Except that that relationship is found in the Bible. While the word "Trinity" isn't in the Bible, the concept is--ALL three Persons in the Godhead are clearly called "God" yet repeatedly the Bible says there is only one God and that God is one. But there is nothing in the Bible that remotely supports, directly or indirectly, the Mariolatry that permeates the RCC.

But there are lots of labels we use to describe a teaching found in the Bible--Virgin Birth, vicarious atonement, Hypostatic union, to name a few....but at least the concepts for these labels are found in the Bible. Mariolatry is not.
If all Christianity is--is just making sure our after-life insurance policy is in place--then I guess so.
No, it is more than that. Though I see you dodged what I quoted about how we are saved. But we don't need to believe the 4 Marian Dogmas in order to be saved. Nor any of the other Marian claptrap that the RCC perpetuates. We go by what the Bible has revealed about the Biblical Mary--not the gross caricature the RCC has made out of the lady.
 
Last edited:

romishpopishorganist

Well-known member
Why, indeed? Why should nonRCCers care what Catholics think? But this is the Catholic board, where non-Caths and Catholics can debate all things Catholic, no?
You shouldn't care. For some reason you do care. Why else would these boards exist? For some reason, Protestants are not content to peacefully coexist with Catholics.
Except that that relationship is found in the Bible. While the word "Trinity" isn't in the Bible, the concept is--ALL three Persons in the Godhead are clearly called "God" yet repeatedly the Bible says there is only one God and that God is one. But there is nothing in the Bible that remotely supports, directly or indirectly, the Mariolatry that permeates the RCC.
I wasn't talking about the Trinity. I was talking about the word "homoousious." Some of the bishops objected to the use of that word becasue that word is not used in the Bible.
But there are lots of labels we use to describe a teaching found in the Bible--Virgin Birth, vicarious atonement, Hypostatic union, to name a few....
Right; just like Mother of God.
but at least the concepts for these labels are found in the Bible. Mariolatry is not.
If by "Mariolatry" you mean "Mary worship" then I agree. The Bible nowhere commands anyone to worship Mary. We are commanded to worship God and God alone.
No, it is more than that. Though I see you dodges what I quoted about how we are saved. But we don't need to believe the 4 Marian Dogmas in order to be saved.
Do I need to believe the doctrines of Sola Scriptura and Sola Fide to be saved?
 

Bonnie

Super Member
You shouldn't care. For some reason you do care.

Because we want Catholics to see the truth, so the truth will set them free to worship God in Christ Jesus our Lord, and focus on HIM, and not Mary. So they will put their trust and faith ONLY in Him for salvation, not in Mary and not in membership in their church.
Why else would these boards exist? For some reason, Protestants are not content to peacefully coexist with Catholics.

No one is going to war against Catholic posters on here. It is the many unbiblical doctrines in your church that we cannot co-exist with. We MUST point out errors--we are commanded to, in Scripture and as your supposed first pope, Peter said,, "It is better to obey God than man." So, why should we obey your popes, when they have so often taught errors?
I wasn't talking about the Trinity. I was talking about the word "homoousious." Some of the bishops objected to the use of that word becasue that word is not used in the Bible.

Oh, I see. But it does describe something found in the Bible--Jesus and His Father are One. He who has seen Jesus has seen the Father--He is the exact image of His Father, and bears the very stamp of His nature. Ergo, of one "substance.' The "substance" of deity, so to speak, is how I see it.
Right; just like Mother of God.

No, because that title is not biblical. It would be better to say Mother of the Incarnate God--or better yet, Mother of the Son of God Incarnate. But then, we don't really need that title--do we? OR to believe the other 3 Marian dogmas in order to be saved--do we? Remember what Jesus said in John 3:16? What Paul told the Philippian jailer in Acts 16:30-32? And in Romans 10:8-10?
If by "Mariolatry" you mean "Mary worship" then I agree. The Bible nowhere commands anyone to worship Mary. We are commanded to worship God and God alone.

I mean the whole enchilada about Mary--praying to her for help, succor, salvation, as one would pray to God; ascribing powers, glory, and praises to her that rightfully belong ONLY to her Son--making a gross caricature of the gentle lady of Nazareth.
Do I need to believe the doctrines of Sola Scriptura and Sola Fide to be saved?
See above about what is in those three Bible verses I put down. Look them up and then get back to me as to how we are saved--and while you are at it, see if any of them mentions believing the 4 Marian Dogmas is necessary for salvation.
 
Last edited:

pilgrim

Well-known member
Because we want Catholics to see the truth, so the truth will set them free to worship God in Christ Jesus our Lord, and focus on HIM, and not Mary. So they will put their trust and faith ONLY in Him for salvation, not in Mary and not in membership in their church.


No one is going to war against Catholic posters on here. It is the many unbiblical doctrines in your church that we cannot co-exist with. We MUST point out errors--we are commanded to, in Scripture and as your supposed first pope, Peter said,, "It is better to obey God than man." So, why should we obey your popes, when they have so often taught errors?


Oh, I see. But it does describe something found in the Bible--Jesus and His Father are One. He who has seen Jesus has seen the Father--He is the exact image of His Father, and bears the very stamp of His nature. Ergo, of one "substance.' The "substance" of deity, so to speak, is how I see it.


No, because that title is not biblical. It would be better to say Mother of the Incarnate God--or better yet, Mother of the Son of God Incarnate. But then, we don't really need that title--do we? OR to believe the other 3 Marian dogmas in order to be saved--do we? Remember what Jesus said in John 3:16? What Paul told the Philippian jailer in Acts 16:30-32? And in Romans 10:8-10?


I mean the whole enchilada about Mary--praying to her for help, succor, salvation, as one would pray to God; ascribing powers, glory, and praises to her that rightfully belong ONLY to her Son--making a gross caricature of the gentle lady of Nazareth.

See above about what is in those three Bible verses I put down. Look them up and then get back to me as to how we are saved--and while you are at it, see if any of them mentions believing the 4 Marian Dogmas is necessary for salvation.
Are you the pillar and foundation of the truth? No? Then why should we do as you say? To give up my faith for yours is akin to giving gold for lead. No thanks.
 

pilgrim

Well-known member
Show me how I did that by what I wrote.


He did not pray to her, or call her the "only hope for sinners," that's for sure!

This is just a lot of emotional rhetoric to make it it appear that I am guilty of dishonoring Mary...won't work, pilgrim.

Explain to me how what I wrote makes you think I think that God wasn't concerned about "equipping" Mary to be Jesus' mother....
Tell us how Mary's soul magnifies the Lord. Tell what great things He has done for her. All I hear from protestants is that she was a "birthing vessel " and no more special than anyone else. In fact, protestants seem to think that the times that the Lord spoke to or of His mother in Scripture were all rebukes and she was given away at the last second of His life like an afterthought. How exactly do you think Jesus honored His mother before others?
 
Top