Archived Every major European city once we get our shit together. (i.imgtc.com)
submitted ago by Dumb_Comment_Bot
Posted by: Dumb_Comment_Bot
Posting time: 3.6 years ago on
Last edit time: never edited.
Archived on: 8/9/2017 10:00:00 AM
Views: 1742
SCP: 141
144 upvotes, 3 downvotes (98% upvoted it)
Archived Every major European city once we get our shit together. (i.imgtc.com)
submitted ago by Dumb_Comment_Bot
view the rest of the comments →
[–] Dumb_Comment_Bot [S] 0 points 2 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago
I figure since you PM'd me this, you want me to respond to it, but I recently made a personal rule not to argue with protestants.
If you want to learn more about Mary, do a quick read through of this: http://www.catholicscomehome.org/your-questions/church-teachings/mary-the-saints/
[–] thats_disinfo 1 point 0 points 1 point (+1|-1) ago (edited ago)
Part 2
Now, on to the QA part.
Question 1:
Their making the claim that we all share in Jesus' roles as the body of Christ in an attempt to defend Mary being "Mediatrix" (CCC 969. Notice the captial M) in Roman Catholicism is purely dishonest. They claim that Jesus is the Foundation, but there are multiple foundations; Jesus is Lord, but there are multiple lords; and that Jesus is the Judge, but there are multiple judges, since the Christian Church is the Body of Christ.
The Roman Catholic church doesn't just claim that "Mary could play a role as a small M mediator, since she's part of the Body of Christ". No. They claim that she's the "Mediatrix" that she "brings us the gifts of eternal salvation":
And that she "delivers us from death by her prayers":
That's not lower case m mediation, that's upper case, as evidenced by their use of "Mediatrix". Jesus is the only Mediator:
Mary doesn't mediate anything, she doesn't bring us anything or deliver us from anything, and to hold to something so extreme and bizarre when it's absolutely nowhere in the Bible is simply crazy and/or evil.
Question 2:
They compare Paul's quoting from Psalms 14 and his declaration made by inspiration of God (2 Timothy 3:16) to try to twist them to somehow support that someone could be sinless, even though we were just told that no one is in Romans 3:23. Then they claim that babies haven't sinned, so "for all have sinned" isn't really saying what it seems to be saying. Really? That's either one of the dumbest things I've ever read, or one of the most dishonest. Most likely both.
No, it isn't. Mary was a sinner.
Question 3:
Here they try to evade the fact that worshipping Mary the "queen of heaven" was originally a pagan practice. To support this claim, they claim that we see the "queen of heaven" in Revelation 12:1:
Let's look at Revelation 12:
That isn't the "queen of heaven", unless the great red dragon that wanted to devour her baby is the "king of heaven". It's pretty obvious why they stopped at verse 1.
Mary isn't the queen of anything, and her being the "queen of heaven" (which is obviously nowhere to be found in the Bible) is completely pagan:
Question 4:
The Bible tells us explicitly that Mary did not remain a virgin. In Matthew 1:24-25, we're told:
"To know" someone is a Jewish idiom for sexual intercourse. (https://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/lexicon/lexicon.cfm?Strongs=G1097&t=KJV)
Joseph "knew" Mary after she gave birth to Jesus, as Matthew 1:25 clearly tells us with "And knew her not till she had brought forth her firstborn son."
To defend their unbiblical doctrine of Mary remaining a virgin her entire life, they claim that Abraham and Lot were cousins, so every time you see "brother" or "sister" in the Bible, it could mean cousins too. But what if "cousin" exists in Greek and was actually used in the Bible? It does, and it was:
"Sister's son" is "anepsios", the Greek word for "cousin":
So "cousin" existed in Greek, but they didn't use it.
Also, why would they mention Jesus' parents and His brothers and sisters, if they were referring to His cousins?
Why would His cousins just be walking around with His parents? That doesn't make any sense at all, and anyone can see that Jesus had brothers and sisters without even needing to bring a lexicon into it. It's just Catholic dishonesty that necessitated it.
Jesus had brothers and sisters. Mary was not a virgin her whole life.
It's sad that a novice like me on Voat can absolutely deconstruct heretical Roman Catholic doctrine that millions hold to with only minor research. And besides that, you've ignored the fact that your "church" has murdered 50,000,000+ people, has tortured countless people horrifically, and blatantly disobeys Jesus with the title of your leader.
[–] thats_disinfo 1 point 0 points 1 point (+1|-1) ago (edited ago)
Part 1
Before getting into anything else, let me demonstrate how easy it is to refute the claim that Mary was a virgin her entire life:
"To know" is a Jewish idiom for sexual intercourse. (https://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/lexicon/lexicon.cfm?Strongs=G1097&t=KJV)
Matthew 1:25 tells us explicitly that Joseph "knew" Mary after she had given birth to Jesus. This single-handedly refutes all of their Mary false doctrine.
As typical for Roman Catholic attempts at theology, the amount of dishonesty in your link is jaw-droppingly shocking. I'll get to that in a moment, but first, let's look at some of their initial claims in the hard to read part over St. Peter's Basilica (which was paid for by the insane amount of money they made selling "indulgences", or paying to get out of "purgatory" (which is also nowhere to be found in the Bible) early):
Mary's the model of perfect love? Excuse me? Did she leave Heaven to come to earth to die on a cross for us when we were still sinners? I didn't think so. Mary is hardly in the Bible at all. She gave birth to Jesus, then followed Him later. To call her "the model of perfect love" when she's almost completely absent from the Bible, except for giving birth to Jesus and then being mentioned by name a few times later, is an absolute insult to Jesus, the Real Model of Perfect Love, and also ridiculous. In fact, this is so ridiculous given the actual Mary in the Bible that heresy and corruption of some kind in the Roman Catholic church is apparent.
No, He didn't. That's not in the Bible. What is in the Bible is this:
Since Jesus is God (John 1:1, John 10:30, John 20:28-29, Revelation 1:8, Acts 20:28, Philippians 2:5-6, Titus 2:13), only He remained sinless. Mary was a sinner, just like everyone else.
The "mother" of God? Excuse me? How is Mary, who was created by Jesus, the Creator of Everything (Colossians 1:16), the "mother of God"? And how would this make her our "mother"? If God is our Father, they're making Mary on par with God by saying this. They say she's not equal with God one second and the next say something that means she is equal or even greater than God.
See? This isn't surprising since nothing Catholic literature says is actually logical and makes sense. It can't be since it's full of lies.
Also, they're lying. Here's what the Catecheism of the Catholic church says:
Here's where the Catholic version of Mary came from: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Queen_of_heaven_%28antiquity%29
Paganism.
Also, if Mary "delivers our souls from death" "by her prayers", this makes her co-Mediator with Jesus, as they also make clear here:
And here (among other places):
Please go read your Bible and see how small of a role Mary plays it in. She speaks a total of 4 times in the entire Gospel. All of this stuff is wildly made up and absolutely crazy. How can you support this?
Also notice how they give absolutely zero Scriptural support for their claims. Because obviously none of it is anywhere to be found in the Bible.