Is Mary ONLY a Catholic doctrine?

[Gary]

Find in that Catechism (of the Catholic Church) where it says Mary was/is a goddess or Mary did not die as dogma?

CCC #966 - Assumption of Mary

Coronation of the Mary (Queen of Heaven)

:-?

 

[Lyric's Dad]

I have long consider Christianity Today to be a propaganda tool for the anti-Christ culture that calls itself Christianity.

A culture that finds its roots in the early apostate religions that have for centuries attempted to brand themselves as being of Christ.

The apple does not fall far from the tree, nor are the ways of the daughter harlots much different to their Mother.


Think about this,....

What would Satan's hidden spys/workers look like?

And if the Adversary's great counterfeit work is the apostate religious system, then what would be the work of this Adversary's spys/workers?


In love,
cj

LOL!!!! :

I love those conspiracy theories.

 

[thessalonian]

So you are making up what you think Paul said about Mary, is that correct?
No, you have missed the point. The point was made then glossed over, both of which were bypassed by you in your effort to insert words and motives.

I see, Gary, knowing that I have him on my ignore lists sees it as an apportunity to pull what I say out of context and distort it. A skill he learned from proof texting the Bible I am sure. OC has the point correct. It seems like making up what Paul didn't say makes you guilty of the same mistake you accuse me of.

Well I can make up my own gospel too. It's easy.
I know, I've seen you do it.

Thumbs OC.

I can say that Peter had seven wives and after Mary got married to Joseh, she had several affairs. Actually this is more in keeping with the bible than the notion that she was a virgin all her life because the bible says she had other children!
No, it says Jesus had brothers. There you go making up your own gospel again.

Well, that's why Jesus said he would build a Church and that Church is the pillar and support of the truth. Not individual speculations. Gary has proven time and time again he's in the speculative market.

The catholic church also makes up scripture and it works because dupes many people. This is called; adding scripture and making up false gospels. Again, the devil has a field day with people who like to do that.
Well, that was a whole lot of nothing said at peak volume. Your entire rant was based upon your myopic misperception of a simple premise: Just because Paul didn't write about it, we cannot assume that it was unimportant. I have given specific examples of this, and Thessalonian simply made it clear that Paul did not write exhaustively on every aspect of scripture. This is also demonstrably true.

So I wonder if Gary would say that what Paul wrote to the Romans he did not tell to the thessalonians. By his absurd way of looking at scripture it would seem that he would have to draw such conclusions. Why doesn't Paul give each place he goes all his teachings and the full Gospel? Or will Gary do some speculating that he won't allow of me. Is it unreasonable to think that Paul assumes a certain amount of knowledge in his various letters that shows that he or others gave a larger chunck of the story to the people than is written. If my wife tells me to go to the store for some milk, I guess it is speculation to think that I know where the store is and how to get there (i.e. get in the car, go up newton, down brookdale, etc. etc.). Once again I don't think I am the speculator. It would seem that one who has a book filled with conflicting theologies from a hose of different pastors of different denominations is more in the speculative theology market than muaw.

Blessings

 

[TruthHunter]

Find in that Catechism (of the Catholic Church) where it says Mary was/is a goddess or Mary did not die as dogma?

CCC #966 - Assumption of Mary

Coronation of the Mary (Queen of Heaven)

:-?

Yes, but what do those pictures have to do with The Catechism or the questions? Yes, Mary did die, and then her body was assumed into heaven, not nearly as cool as the story of Elijah though.

Yes, Mary was crowned Queen of heaven just like the Mother of Solomon and Daivd and all of the Mothers of the other Jewish Kings were crowned Queen. This still doesn'tmake her a Goddess, and you still haven't shown in the Catechism (Where you can read about what Catholic REALLY believe) where the false doctrines you claim are.

Peace,
Ben

 

[Orthodox Christian]

Yes, but what do those pictures have to do with The Catechism or the questions? Yes, Mary did die, and then her body was assumed into heaven, not nearly as cool as the story of Elijah though.

Yes, Mary was crowned Queen of heaven just like the Mother of Solomon and Daivd and all of the Mothers of the other Jewish Kings were crowned Queen. This still doesn'tmake her a Goddess, and you still haven't shown in the Catechism (Where you can read about what Catholic REALLY believe) where the false doctrines you claim are.

Peace,
Ben

Those are excellent questions, Ben, grounded in common sense. You will therefore likely be ignored.

You know, Mark's name is nowhere to be found in the second gospel, yet the very same ones who protest the tradition of Mary's bodily assumption, which is held by both East and West, offer no protest to the authorship of the Markan gospel.

Yet, when the capricious nature of Protestant adoption/rejection of Church tradition is pointed out, there is never even a nano-second of self-critique or introspection on the part of these self-appointed Guardians against Rome. Rather, they redouble the attack and/or change the subject.

A fascinating study in psychosis.

 

[Gary]

Poor ole Thessalonian.... thinks that Heidi is Gary.

You got it wrong yet again!

So guess who is distorting who/what yet again? Who has it out of context again? Who is speculating (incorrectly) yet again?

Thessalonian your anti-Protestant beam is blinding you again.

I see, Gary, knowing that I have him on my ignore lists sees it as an apportunity to pull what I say out of context and distort it. A skill he learned from proof texting the Bible I am sure. OC has the point correct. It seems like making up what Paul didn't say makes you guilty of the same mistake you accuse me of.

Well, that's why Jesus said he would build a Church and that Church is the pillar and support of the truth. Not individual speculations. Gary has proven time and time again he's in the speculative market.

So I wonder if Gary would say that what Paul wrote to the Romans he did not tell to the thessalonians. By his absurd way of looking at scripture it would seem that he would have to draw such conclusions. Why doesn't Paul give each place he goes all his teachings and the full Gospel? Or will Gary do some speculating that he won't allow of me. Is it unreasonable to think that Paul assumes a certain amount of knowledge in his various letters that shows that he or others gave a larger chunck of the story to the people than is written. If my wife tells me to go to the store for some milk, I guess it is speculation to think that I know where the store is and how to get there (i.e. get in the car, go up newton, down brookdale, etc. etc.). Once again I don't think I am the speculator. It would seem that one who has a book filled with conflicting theologies from a hose of different pastors of different denominations is more in the speculative theology market than muaw.

Blessings

Thanks for the blessings. That is about the only part worth anything in your post! You often bless me..... your insults and false accusations are a real blessing.

Thanks again!



You speculated about what Paul would have said about Mary. What did he WRITE about Mary? Any clue yet?

 

[Gary]

Find in that Catechism (of the Catholic Church) where it says Mary was/is a goddess or Mary did not die as dogma?

CCC #966 - Assumption of Mary

Coronation of the Mary (Queen of Heaven)

:-?

Yes, but what do those pictures have to do with The Catechism or the questions? Yes, Mary did die, and then her body was assumed into heaven, not nearly as cool as the story of Elijah though.

Yes, Mary was crowned Queen of heaven just like the Mother of Solomon and Daivd and all of the Mothers of the other Jewish Kings were crowned Queen. This still doesn'tmake her a Goddess, and you still haven't shown in the Catechism (Where you can read about what Catholic REALLY believe) where the false doctrines you claim are.

Peace,
Ben

Peace Ben.

You may want to give Scriptural support for the dogma of the Assumption of Mary.

Read about it in CCC #966.

CCC = Catechism of the Catholic Church.

Find any references to Scripture (chapter/verse) there?

Peace again Ben

 

[Orthodox Christian]

How about some scriptural evidence for the Protestant-held dogma that Mark is the author of Mark?

Never mind, just continue ignoring the questions that require introspection.

 

[Gary]

As an ex-Protestant pastor/minister (??) ... I was sure you would have known that answer!

What seminary did you attend? You seem very confused about Protestant theology and practice. I have read several of your posts which show a real misunderstanding of Evangelical theology. You even admitted that your previous minister said very little about Mary. Did you not have Bible study or small group study?

 

[Orthodox Christian]

As an ex-Protestant pastor/minister (??) ... I was sure you would have known that answer!

What seminary did you attend? You seem very confused about Protestant theology and practice. I have read several of your posts which show a real misunderstanding of Evangelical theology. You even admitted that your previous minister said very little about Mary. Did you not have Bible study or small group study?

I have the answer, Gary, but I didn't ask myself, now did I?

You still dodging the point that your own sources admit you are disconnected from Mary.

Please feel free to prove where I have misunderstood Evangelical theology, Gary. You've been /pwned six ways from Sunday on this matter on this very thread by your own sources. Feel free to pour gas on the flames.

Keep squirming, Gary, even if it includes implying through guile that I am a liar.

When you have answered the questions you are running from on this thread, then we will discuss my post-graduate studies and degrees.

 

[Gary]

Should we ask J.I. Packer?

Or William Lane?

:D

 

[Orthodox Christian]

Should we ask J.I. Packer?

Or William Lane?

:D

Why don't you stop stalling and get to it, Gary...I ain't getting any younger, and neither is your act.
Thanks a bunch.

 

[Gary]

Do you still think that J.I Packer is not representative of Evangelical theology?

What about William Lane?

Who is your favourite Protestant/Evangelical theologian?

Ever read John MacArthur?

 

[Gary]

How about some scriptural evidence for the Protestant-held dogma that Mark is the author of Mark?

Never mind, just continue ignoring the questions that require introspection.

Nope. I keep ignoring your posts which are red herrings and which have nothing to do with the thread. In fact, I ignore MOST of your posts.

Remember your little J.I Packer red herring?

 

[Orthodox Christian]

Do you still think that J.I Packer is not representative of Evangelical theology?

What about William Lane?

Who is your favourite Protestant/Evangelical theologian?

Ever read John MacArthur?

Are you planning on answering the questions at any conceivable point in the future?

Ahh, nevermind, I see you have politely let yourself off the hook. : :

Do you know what this acronym means, Gary?
TLTBW

 

[Gary]

Are you planning on answering the questions at any conceivable point in the future?

No....

:wink:

 

[Orthodox Christian]

No....

:wink:

And neither am I going to tell you.

touche'

 

[Gary]

touche'

Thanks! It was easy.

:bday:

 

[thessalonian]

If I were handicapped I suppose then Gary might find it sporting to insult me. :-D Haven't seen peace4all around here lately. Yes gary I was not logged in and I saw your fine, intelligent post. I have to say it was one of your better ones. You can take that as an inult if you like or perhaps just see yourself as the object of some humor. :

 

[Orthodox Christian]

touche'

Thanks! It was easy.

:bday:

It generally is easy to avoid and deflect. Much harder to actually say or do something of substance.