Crucifix or Cross?
-
Originally posted by dumbdumb!:remmeber. i nv said i was a good christian. i nv said i was strong right now.
the most go to hell together lor, hv a good gang bang party.
-
i added somemore things. i ain't hypocritical to say life is great and all that. what i am posting now, is what i really am feeling now.Originally posted by NeonTetra: -
In the commandments we are not to forget we all have to honor the fathers and mothers as they are the ones who bring us up. Jesus has great respect for his mother, and Mother Mary is not like any other humans. We all fail sometime or another and refuse wilfully to the word of God. Instead, Mother Mary said yes when angel Gabriel asked her if she were to conceive Jesus, and all her life she had dedicated to God.
In the same context, we all also have great respect for great people like Ghandi, the Dalai Lama, and Mother Mary like them, ordinary people but has great faith in themselves or God most importantly. Even if she isn't the mother of Jesus, if we respect other people like your friends, Dalai Lama, Confucious, so much more should we respect Mother Mary who stayed by Jesus and God all her life. Even if she's not God, we shouldn't be insulting her, calling her names. What has Our Lady done to deserve this?
Even when people disapprove of the worship of Mary, it is the people who are doing the worship, not Mary. She did not allow herself to act on the behalf of God, but rather, always pointing to the people that the Messiah is Jesus. In John 2:5, Mother Mary said to the servents, "Do what he tells you". Like John the Baptist, Mother Mary points to Jesus who is the subject, not herself. Mary does not answer prayers, but like the Wedding at Cana, she speaks to Jesus of the needs of the people. But it is ultimately Jesus to do what is best.
Heng@ here is very right "your atttitude is the one which makes me doubt if u understand the true meaning of christianity.... understanding, tolerance... love thy fellow man..... because u sure sound pretty insolent... no matter what, remember u are being rude to his mother, by degratorily calling her "mum mary" so it fails to convince me how much u respect him....... if u are a christian, start behaving like one for "Christ"'s sake.
dumbdumb, allow me to remind you that it the Catholic theology that you are not convinced. To find the truth is to search into the Catholic theology, the Catechism, and look into these with a neutral point of view. Tackle the ball, not the man. "catholics cannot validate this with the word of the bible? as usual.. nothign they do can really validate anything. blah" Adapting a "religio-centric" point of view is going to mar your vision and not going to help things. If one starts saying things without ernestly finding out what that is closest to the truth, isn't this to "being a false witness against thy neighbor?"
If you really wish to know the truth, asking for the truth is the way, not to attack the faithful like that. Ask and answer yourself honestly if you have been fair making derogatory statements like that. I can see that you're obviously in a foul mood and probably angry over something. These are the times that as Christians [whether one is Protestant/Catholic], when we have to practice restrain and avoid hurting other people out of spite. Not that it help others, more importantly, by practicing restrain out of love in the name of God, we ourselves learn to free ourselves of hatred and many negative feelings, we change for the better as a person.
The commandments are commandments of love, and free us from our own bondages. Addiction to alcohol, sex, unnecessary anger, following the commandments as closely possible helps ourselves. When we are slowly being freed of these bondages, we also become joyful [though not necessarily happier], and God will see our efforts and reward us accordingly.
Neither am i a strong Christian, esp when i'm conscious of my sinfulness yet have little power and will to overcome and truly repent. But stay in faith, hang on to God, things will definitely turn for the better in ways we don't often notice. Everyone is suffering, that is only through God can our burdens be lightened. Godspeed. -
and one more thing. i said mum mary not as an insult. but its easier to type.
so don't jump into conclusion like u always do.
-
if u have little or no faith why even bother to argue on the side of protestents? if u have no faith u'd not even bother with this whole belfast issue...
-
The tone in which the above was written has indeed been somewhat harsh, though of course, I would respond with as much charity and understanding as much as I am able to. =)Originally posted by dumbdumb!:action speaks louder than words. i attended some catholic function, about wearing a rope with 2 piece of plastic on it. forgot the name. sorry.
then heard this talk.. regarding prayer confession, stuff like that.
everything oso point to some saint and mary
who is the one who defeated satan? mary. she crushed him with her feet. - by right its jesus
the speaker was talking abt his marraige with his wife, and he refered mary as the heavenly matchmaker..
and about fasting. the speaker was saying someone asked him if can take ribena or not, or milo or not (catholic fast = bread and water) the speaker said "u go ask saint joseph la, he behind the church there *refering to the statue*"
and also the speaker wife gave a lil talk also. and refered to st joseph, said that he everything oso pao ka liao ( everything oso can) he can answer any prayer request.
i mean. u catholics can claim whatever you want. i believe what i see. actions speaks louder than words.
in fact the only thing that refers to jesus is probably the lil baby jesus pic on the ropey thing.
oh ya, the priest blessing the ropey thing said that anyone who wears it is given unlimited grace, cuz mother mary said so to some monk, and is garrunteed can go heaven, and anyone can also wear it, doesn't hv to be christian..
so let me ask u, Jesus die for wat? for fun issit?
Yes, I agree that actions speak louder than words, but then again, the truthfulness of this cliched epithet extends only so far, in matters of intellectual inquiry. To defend and rationally prove the veracity of one's opinions via the argumentum ad hominem (to attack the characters and behavioral actions of the people instead of the beliefs) is a false mode of argument indeed. Why..?
Just because there are indeed aberrant actions on the part of people does not prove or disprove the truthfulness of a philospophical system or worldview. With all due respect, just because I have met numerous and many compassionate and nice people who are practising Buddhists does not prove or disprove the philosophical or theological endeavor of Buddhism at all. Just because I have seen and experienced good and nice Mormons, Jehovah Witnesses (etc etc), does not mean anything.
Emotionally, actions speak louder - yes. As an apologetic polemic, it does not.
Besides, the numerous Catholics I have met in Singapore are ill-informed, lack theological and biblical instruction, and many a time, even misunderstand the entire dogma of the Catholic Church all together.
Who crushed Satan..? Christ, of course. It was the Son of God, who was born of a woman (Blessed Mary), who "crushed" the serpent...figuratively pointing to the crucifixion of our Lord and Savior on the Cross. Death via crucifixion comes from strangulation and lack of air, as the weight of the body continue to be dragged down. Soon, the victim has to use his heels to push up, just to have more air - thus the usage (bruise his heels).
Jesus die for what? He did not die for fun.
He died on the cross for the redemption of mankind. -
The tone in which the above was written has indeed been somewhat harsh, though of course, I would respond with as much charity and understanding as much as I am able to. =)Originally posted by dumbdumb!:action speaks louder than words. i attended some catholic function, about wearing a rope with 2 piece of plastic on it. forgot the name. sorry.
then heard this talk.. regarding prayer confession, stuff like that.
everything oso point to some saint and mary
who is the one who defeated satan? mary. she crushed him with her feet. - by right its jesus
the speaker was talking abt his marraige with his wife, and he refered mary as the heavenly matchmaker..
and about fasting. the speaker was saying someone asked him if can take ribena or not, or milo or not (catholic fast = bread and water) the speaker said "u go ask saint joseph la, he behind the church there *refering to the statue*"
and also the speaker wife gave a lil talk also. and refered to st joseph, said that he everything oso pao ka liao ( everything oso can) he can answer any prayer request.
i mean. u catholics can claim whatever you want. i believe what i see. actions speaks louder than words.
in fact the only thing that refers to jesus is probably the lil baby jesus pic on the ropey thing.
oh ya, the priest blessing the ropey thing said that anyone who wears it is given unlimited grace, cuz mother mary said so to some monk, and is garrunteed can go heaven, and anyone can also wear it, doesn't hv to be christian..
so let me ask u, Jesus die for wat? for fun issit?
Yes, I agree that actions speak louder than words, but then again, the truthfulness of this cliched epithet extends only so far, in matters of intellectual inquiry. To defend and rationally prove the veracity of one's opinions via the argumentum ad hominem (to attack the characters and behavioral actions of the people instead of the beliefs) is a false mode of argument indeed. Why..?
Just because there are indeed aberrant actions on the part of people does not prove or disprove the truthfulness of a philospophical system or worldview. With all due respect, just because I have met numerous and many compassionate and nice people who are practising Buddhists does not prove or disprove the philosophical or theological endeavor of Buddhism at all. Just because I have seen and experienced good and nice Mormons, Jehovah Witnesses (etc etc), does not mean anything.
Emotionally, actions speak louder - yes. As an apologetic polemic, it does not.
Besides, the numerous Catholics I have met in Singapore are ill-informed, lack theological and biblical instruction, and many a time, even misunderstand the entire dogma of the Catholic Church all together.
Who crushed Satan..? Christ, of course. It was the Son of God, who was born of a woman (Blessed Mary), who "crushed" the serpent...figuratively pointing to the crucifixion of our Lord and Savior on the Cross. Death via crucifixion comes from strangulation and lack of air, as the weight of the body continue to be dragged down. Soon, the victim has to use his heels to push up, just to have more air - thus the usage (bruise his heels).
Jesus die for what? He did not die for fun.
He died on the cross for the redemption of mankind. -
The tone in which the above was written has indeed been somewhat harsh, though of course, I would respond with as much charity and understanding as much as I am able to. =)Originally posted by dumbdumb!:action speaks louder than words. i attended some catholic function, about wearing a rope with 2 piece of plastic on it. forgot the name. sorry.
then heard this talk.. regarding prayer confession, stuff like that.
everything oso point to some saint and mary
who is the one who defeated satan? mary. she crushed him with her feet. - by right its jesus
the speaker was talking abt his marraige with his wife, and he refered mary as the heavenly matchmaker..
and about fasting. the speaker was saying someone asked him if can take ribena or not, or milo or not (catholic fast = bread and water) the speaker said "u go ask saint joseph la, he behind the church there *refering to the statue*"
and also the speaker wife gave a lil talk also. and refered to st joseph, said that he everything oso pao ka liao ( everything oso can) he can answer any prayer request.
i mean. u catholics can claim whatever you want. i believe what i see. actions speaks louder than words.
in fact the only thing that refers to jesus is probably the lil baby jesus pic on the ropey thing.
oh ya, the priest blessing the ropey thing said that anyone who wears it is given unlimited grace, cuz mother mary said so to some monk, and is garrunteed can go heaven, and anyone can also wear it, doesn't hv to be christian..
so let me ask u, Jesus die for wat? for fun issit?
Yes, I agree that actions speak louder than words, but then again, the truthfulness of this cliched epithet extends only so far, in matters of intellectual inquiry. To defend and rationally prove the veracity of one's opinions via the argumentum ad hominem (to attack the characters and behavioral actions of the people instead of the beliefs) is a false mode of argument indeed. Why..?
Just because there are indeed aberrant actions on the part of people does not prove or disprove the truthfulness of a philospophical system or worldview. With all due respect, just because I have met numerous and many compassionate and nice people who are practising Buddhists does not prove or disprove the philosophical or theological endeavor of Buddhism at all. Just because I have seen and experienced good and nice Mormons, Jehovah Witnesses (etc etc), does not mean anything.
Emotionally, actions speak louder - yes. As an apologetic polemic, it does not.
Besides, the numerous Catholics I have met in Singapore are ill-informed, lack theological and biblical instruction, and many a time, even misunderstand the entire dogma of the Catholic Church all together.
Who crushed Satan..? Christ, of course. It was the Son of God, who was born of a woman (Blessed Mary), who "crushed" the serpent...figuratively pointing to the crucifixion of our Lord and Savior on the Cross. Death via crucifixion comes from strangulation and lack of air, as the weight of the body continue to be dragged down. Soon, the victim has to use his heels to push up, just to have more air - thus the usage (bruise his heels).
Jesus die for what? He did not die for fun.
He died on the cross for the redemption of mankind. -
The tone in which the above was written has indeed been somewhat harsh, though of course, I would respond with as much charity and understanding as much as I am able to. =)Originally posted by dumbdumb!:action speaks louder than words. i attended some catholic function, about wearing a rope with 2 piece of plastic on it. forgot the name. sorry.
then heard this talk.. regarding prayer confession, stuff like that.
everything oso point to some saint and mary
who is the one who defeated satan? mary. she crushed him with her feet. - by right its jesus
the speaker was talking abt his marraige with his wife, and he refered mary as the heavenly matchmaker..
and about fasting. the speaker was saying someone asked him if can take ribena or not, or milo or not (catholic fast = bread and water) the speaker said "u go ask saint joseph la, he behind the church there *refering to the statue*"
and also the speaker wife gave a lil talk also. and refered to st joseph, said that he everything oso pao ka liao ( everything oso can) he can answer any prayer request.
i mean. u catholics can claim whatever you want. i believe what i see. actions speaks louder than words.
in fact the only thing that refers to jesus is probably the lil baby jesus pic on the ropey thing.
oh ya, the priest blessing the ropey thing said that anyone who wears it is given unlimited grace, cuz mother mary said so to some monk, and is garrunteed can go heaven, and anyone can also wear it, doesn't hv to be christian..
so let me ask u, Jesus die for wat? for fun issit?
Yes, I agree that actions speak louder than words, but then again, the truthfulness of this cliched epithet extends only so far, in matters of intellectual inquiry. To defend and rationally prove the veracity of one's opinions via the argumentum ad hominem (to attack the characters and behavioral actions of the people instead of the beliefs) is a false mode of argument indeed. Why..?
Just because there are indeed aberrant actions on the part of people does not prove or disprove the truthfulness of a philospophical system or worldview. With all due respect, just because I have met numerous and many compassionate and nice people who are practising Buddhists does not prove or disprove the philosophical or theological endeavor of Buddhism at all. Just because I have seen and experienced good and nice Mormons, Jehovah Witnesses (etc etc), does not mean anything.
Emotionally, actions speak louder - yes. As an apologetic polemic, it does not.
Besides, the numerous Catholics I have met in Singapore are ill-informed, lack theological and biblical instruction, and many a time, even misunderstand the entire dogma of the Catholic Church all together.
Who crushed Satan..? Christ, of course. It was the Son of God, who was born of a woman (Blessed Mary), who "crushed" the serpent...figuratively pointing to the crucifixion of our Lord and Savior on the Cross. Death via crucifixion comes from strangulation and lack of air, as the weight of the body continue to be dragged down. Soon, the victim has to use his heels to push up, just to have more air - thus the usage (bruise his heels).
Jesus die for what? He did not die for fun.
He died on the cross for the redemption of mankind. -
too bad most catholics think mary did.
nothing against mary. really.. she was one who obeyed God, more than i did. but she ain't a diety. and i sure ain't gonna go find "saint joseph" in the church backyard made of limestone and ask him things.
and confession of sins have nothing to do with mary, so i dun see why i should recite her name 1000 times everytime i post in sgforums
and neither am i praying to her, cuz she is some "interccesor" between me and jesus, on the basis that jesus would be more willing to listen to her than me, becuz she is his mum..
he's the interccessor and i already seldom pray to him liaoz.
and i'm not going to turn into some braggart who can only tell others how many churches my denomination has all over the world, and how many books i can type out in 1 minute
oh. and i also refuse to believe that mary was the one who crushed satan, as many catholics told me, that cuz mary gv birth to j.c. and if she didn't, he wouldn't have been borned. so she deserved the title.
so i guess, if i make a big impact in the kingdom, 100 years down the road, i should expect ppl worshipping me, then tell others, actually they dun worship me, but cuz i deserve the title and saying "hail dumbdumb" for sins? -
becuz no matter how faithless i am. its becuz of the dissappointments, not the untruth that i know.Originally posted by HENG@:if u have little or no faith why even bother to argue on the side of protestents? if u have no faith u'd not even bother with this whole belfast issue...
and becuz i really am pissed with catholics, their self righteousness in their works *books and church numbers*
and them not letting my grandmother receive Christ on the basis that she cannot memorise some stuff, and hving to drag around sending letters to the pope.
oh, and hving to make her attend classes of cathe watevr. instead of just telling her what Jesus did. and whether she wants to or not.
-
hope u're right abt that.. now i see with my eyes, since i am faithless now. and what i see ain't pretty and i don't need catholics telling me all over again on how they don't worship mary, but actions prove otherwise.Originally posted by SoliDeoGloria:The tone in which the above was written has indeed been somewhat harsh, though of course, I would respond with as much charity and understanding as much as I am able to. =)
Yes, I agree that actions speak louder than words, but then again, the truthfulness of this cliched epithet extends only so far, in matters of intellectual inquiry. To defend and rationally prove the veracity of one's opinions via the argumentum ad hominem (to attack the characters and behavioral actions of the people instead of the beliefs) is a false mode of argument indeed. Why..?
Just because there are indeed aberrant actions on the part of people does not prove or disprove the truthfulness of a philospophical system or worldview. With all due respect, just because I have met numerous and many compassionate and nice people who are practising Buddhists does not prove or disprove the philosophical or theological endeavor of Buddhism at all. Just because I have seen and experienced good and nice Mormons, Jehovah Witnesses (etc etc), does not mean anything.
Emotionally, actions speak louder - yes. As an apologetic polemic, it does not.
Besides, the numerous Catholics I have met in Singapore are ill-informed, lack theological and biblical instruction, and many a time, even misunderstand the entire dogma of the Catholic Church all together.
Who crushed Satan..? Christ, of course. It was the Son of God, who was born of a woman (Blessed Mary), who "crushed" the serpent...figuratively pointing to the crucifixion of our Lord and Savior on the Cross. Death via crucifixion comes from strangulation and lack of air, as the weight of the body continue to be dragged down. Soon, the victim has to use his heels to push up, just to have more air - thus the usage (bruise his heels).
Jesus die for what? He did not die for fun.
He died on the cross for the redemption of mankind.
oh, to be fair. i met only 2 nice catholics in my life. my lack of exposure haha..
but my catholic aunt told me * when i was a buddhist turned christian* that guan yin is actually a saint. i hv no idea on which basis on the Word that made her say that.
but thats what i mean. most catholics just assume things, without consulting the Word. coming up with all kinds of their own theology
thus u see all kinds of.. practices, for the lack of a not better word, but nicer word -
"A gentle answer turns away wrath, but a harsh word stirs up anger" Proverbs 15:1 "But one whom you forgive anything, I forgive also; for indeed what I have forgiven, if I have forgiven anything, I did it for your sakes in the presence of Christ" 2 Corinthians 2:10
Cross or Crucifix, It's symbolism of death to Sin. And the empty tomb, our new life in God.
-
actually if u ask me, crucifix is more on the death, but the cross speaks of life.
-
Originally posted by dumbdumb!:action speaks louder than words. i attended some catholic function, about wearing a rope with 2 piece of plastic on it. forgot the name. sorry.
then heard this talk.. regarding prayer confession, stuff like that.
everything oso point to some saint and mary
who is the one who defeated satan? mary. she crushed him with her feet. - by right its jesus
the speaker was talking abt his marraige with his wife, and he refered mary as the heavenly matchmaker..
and about fasting. the speaker was saying someone asked him if can take ribena or not, or milo or not (catholic fast = bread and water) the speaker said "u go ask saint joseph la, he behind the church there *refering to the statue*"
and also the speaker wife gave a lil talk also. and refered to st joseph, said that he everything oso pao ka liao ( everything oso can) he can answer any prayer request.
i mean. u catholics can claim whatever you want. i believe what i see. actions speaks louder than words.
in fact the only thing that refers to jesus is probably the lil baby jesus pic on the ropey thing.
oh ya, the priest blessing the ropey thing said that anyone who wears it is given unlimited grace, cuz mother mary said so to some monk, and is garrunteed can go heaven, and anyone can also wear it, doesn't hv to be christian..
so let me ask u, Jesus die for wat? for fun issit? -
]Originally posted by dumbdumb!:action speaks louder than words. i attended some catholic function, about wearing a rope with 2 piece of plastic on it. forgot the name. sorry.
then heard this talk.. regarding prayer confession, stuff like that.
everything oso point to some saint and mary
who is the one who defeated satan? mary. she crushed him with her feet. - by right its jesus
the speaker was talking abt his marraige with his wife, and he refered mary as the heavenly matchmaker..
and about fasting. the speaker was saying someone asked him if can take ribena or not, or milo or not (catholic fast = bread and water) the speaker said "u go ask saint joseph la, he behind the church there *refering to the statue*"
and also the speaker wife gave a lil talk also. and refered to st joseph, said that he everything oso pao ka liao ( everything oso can) he can answer any prayer request.
i mean. u catholics can claim whatever you want. i believe what i see. actions speaks louder than words.
in fact the only thing that refers to jesus is probably the lil baby jesus pic on the ropey thing.
oh ya, the priest blessing the ropey thing said that anyone who wears it is given unlimited grace, cuz mother mary said so to some monk, and is garrunteed can go heaven, and anyone can also wear it, doesn't hv to be christian..
so let me ask u, Jesus die for wat? for fun issit?
a -
ased
-
in other words.... u're angry. oh it could have so easily been the other way around, that whoever brings u salvation is the side u are on....Originally posted by dumbdumb!:becuz no matter how faithless i am. its becuz of the dissappointments, not the untruth that i know.
and becuz i really am pissed with catholics, their self righteousness in their works *books and church numbers*
and them not letting my grandmother receive Christ on the basis that she cannot memorise some stuff, and hving to drag around sending letters to the pope.
oh, and hving to make her attend classes of cathe watevr. instead of just telling her what Jesus did. and whether she wants to or not.
you're basing your arguments on anger and disappointment... not on your beliefs...... how do u even expect anyone to take u seriously?
as for self righteousness..... don't even try to talk about the caths.... because protestents are no better/worse. This certain protestent church? come on u are generalising.... that some caths are self righteous = all caths are self righteous? then THAT particular protestant church is self righteous = all pros are self righteous. For that matter, some buddhists are self righteous = all buddhist are self righteous, some muslims are self righteous = all muslims are self righteous.... and yada yada.... u get the picture....
there are pros who have pissed others off with their self righteousness just as there are caths who have pissed u off in the same way... come on there are lots of ppl who piss others off in the same way... i can tell u YOUR religion is no less guilty compared with catholism, just as they are no less guilty compared to yours. so chill out and stop letting your past haunt you and fuel the whole argument. because all u are doing is bringing the hate into the discussion. if there should really be a debate on diff christian trachings,(and there shouldn't be. i can imagine how dissapointed God must be) and if theres anyone who should be arguing on Protestants' behalf, it ain't u buddy.... because u sure give them a bad name. -
and u give whoever u represent a good name?Originally posted by HENG@:in other words.... u're angry. oh it could have so easily been the other way around, that whoever brings u salvation is the side u are on....
you're basing your arguments on anger and disappointment... not on your beliefs...... how do u even expect anyone to take u seriously?
as for self righteousness..... don't even try to talk about the caths.... because protestents are no better/worse. This certain protestent church? come on u are generalising.... that some caths are self righteous = all caths are self righteous? then THAT particular protestant church is self righteous = all pros are self righteous. For that matter, some buddhists are self righteous = all buddhist are self righteous, some muslims are self righteous = all muslims are self righteous.... and yada yada.... u get the picture....
there are pros who have pissed others off with their self righteousness just as there are caths who have pissed u off in the same way... come on there are lots of ppl who piss others off in the same way... i can tell u YOUR religion is no less guilty compared with catholism, just as they are no less guilty compared to yours. so chill out and stop letting your past haunt you and fuel the whole argument. because all u are doing is bringing the hate into the discussion. if there should really be a debate on diff christian trachings,(and there shouldn't be. i can imagine how dissapointed God must be) and if theres anyone who should be arguing on Protestants' behalf, it ain't u buddy.... because u sure give them a bad name. until now i didn't make a personal attack on you. while u did so? u tell me, if u are a better person.
its easier to talk while u are the 3rd party. but when u're involved its different. and yes protestants sucks too. nv said they were exactly cool, but at least they know where they stand. instead of coming up with their own theory. i can name at least 2 protestant grps which sux arse.
you said i don't know the true meaning of christianity, why don't you tell me what that is?see if u walk the talk or talk the walk
and its not exactly true about what you said about me. if i were to just rail about catholics without rhyme or reason due to a bad experience, maybe meeting ppl who pisses me off, fine. what u said is right.
but i'm quoting experiences, plus their teachings.
and everything in this world is generalized. statistics for example. i met more than 50 catholics who act the same way who are all from different churches watsoever. should i take every opinion of every catholic in singapore, say 500 000 of them before making a safe comment?
besides, to back my point of being involved, u are getting pissed cuz u are involved now when i said mum mary, which was not meant as an insult. its not easy to keep your cool isn't it? so don't tell me how i should act with pretentious catholics, unless u yourself can handle it.
don't like what i post? validate my experience, whether it was right of u ppl. -
dumbdumb, try to forgive the people involved in the incident between them and your grandma ok? salvation is a personal decision, no-one should have a say in it
back to topic. cross or crucifix, which is more important? i'd say none is.. it's the act of obedience that is (critical). that is what Christ did. nothing else matters. -
Actually, this is also one amongst the many misrepresentations which Protestant believers caricature of the Catholic faith.Originally posted by dumbdumb!:actually if u ask me, crucifix is more on the death, but the cross speaks of life.
Just because there is a figure of Christ on the cross does not mean that Catholics uphold the suffering and death of Christ more than that of His resurrection. It does not mean Catholic theology do not subscribe to the Resurrection of our Lord and Savior. Besides, it was Catholic theologians - the Early Church Fathers, in one of their councils, which affirm the doctrine as essential to the Faith.
This is what many Protestants assume, and think, contrary to all reason. To bring the argument the other way, does that mean Protestants do not believe in the atonement and death of Christ? Nay.
Some also accuse the Catholic Church of idolatry, via the figure of Christ on the cross.
Let's see. Sometimes, an ignorance of history can be dangerous.
During the medieval ages, literacy was sparse and few, amongst the peoples of the world. Prior to the Gutenberg press, there wasn't the mass distribution of literature which we know and have today. One of the many practical reasons in which the figure of Christ was carved onto the cross was to provide a pictorial understanding of the atonement of Christ to the masses, who cannot read. Thus the many paintings and icons we see in a Catholic church. They not only add aesthetic value to experiencing spirituality, they served as a picture "bible" to the illiterate masses of those times.
The "3-D" carving of the figure of Christ aids the blind as well, in feeling the actual figure of Jesus, helping them to visualize the idea of the atonement better.
One other thing. Many assume that the Mass is a reiteration of the Sacrifice of Christ. This the Church disagrees too. In the catechism of the Church, one can easily read the denouncement of a repeated sacrifrice, which the Epistle to the Hebrews forbade, for Christ has finished the sacrifice, once and for all. Thus perhaps the use of a crucifix, or so the protestants believe.
That is not true. The mass is a memorial to perpetuate the Sacrifice of Christ, more of a larger scale Eucharist (Communion). It does not express the notion of an unfinished work of Calvary which has to be repeated. -
apologies for my previous posts which seemed nonsensical. I thought my posts did not go through, thus I was testing whether or not they work. Tried deleting them, but not able.
-
There are some clarifications to be made. Besides, as I believe you are accessible to a catechism of the Catholic Church, it can be easily known that in matters of dogma and doctrine, the adoration of the Church is directed only to God alone, who is worthy of worship (hyperlatria). The veneration of Mary and the saints (hyperdulia) are interpreted in terms of honor and respect.Originally posted by gasband:She remained a virgin after the birth of Christ (Catechism of the Catholic Church, paragraph 510).
She is "The mother of the members of Christ" (Catechism of the Catholic Church par. 963).
She was "Preserved free from all stain of original sin" (Catechism, par. 966).
She is "Queen over all things" (par. 966).
By MaryÂ’s prayers, she delivers souls from death (par. 966). Mary, "...by her manifold intercession continues to bring us the gifts of eternal salvation.... Therefore the Blessed Virgin is invoked in the Church under the titles of Advocate, Helper, Benefactress, and Mediatrix" (par. 969).
"The liturgical feasts dedicated to the Mother of God and Marian prayer, such as the rosary, are an ‘epitome of the whole Gospel,’" (par. 971).
Mary, "...when the course of her earthly life was completed, was taken up body and soul into the glory of heaven..." (par. 974).
"...when she [Mary] is the subject of preaching and worship she prompts the faithful to come to her Son..." (Vatican Council II, p. 420).
"Mary has by grace been exalted above all angels and men to a place second only to her Son" (Vatican Council II, p. 421).
I really do not know much so I do not dare to challenge you so please do clarify with me and tell me I read the wrong thing.
Anyway, in dealing with the above quotes, let me try my best to clarify certain issues.
What you have read, of the above, do not teach or imply the divinity of Mary. They are part of what the Church teaches as the Marian dogmas. I know that many of the concepts are difficult to digest and understand, especially when as a Protestant, we have already uphold certain bias and perspectives already. Do keep an open mind in attempting to comprehend them.
The marian dogmas are briefly:
1) The perpetual virginity of Mary
2) The Immaculate Conception
3) The Assumption
4) The veneration of Mary as Queen of heaven
5) Mary as Mother of God (theotokos)
The Catholic church hold that Mary, even after giving birth to Jesus, remained a virgin till her demise from the earth.
As a Protestant, our tendency to reject this doctrine holds from a few issues. One is our propensity to uphold the primacy of Christ in our worship, by putting all others to a secondary status. We want to show that Mary, however, blessed and highly favored she is, was simply a human vessel which God used. That's all.
However, there are a few objections to the Protestant view. Besides, Martin Luther himself, the father of the Reformation, subcribed to the Catholic view.
1) When the angel Gabriel appeared to Mary, and announced to her that she will bore a son, who will be Savior to her people, note that at that time, she was already bethrothed to Joseph. Note also that Gabriel's first announcement did not include the supernatural mode in which she will conceive. That comes later. Now, it is very natural, when someone comes to you, and tell you that you will have a child (esp. when you are already engaged), that you will assume that the child would arrive via natural means, that you will get married to your fiance, and then have marital relations, in which you will conceive that child.
But notice what Mary responded? She told the angel Gabriel that how is it possible that she can conceive..since she is a virgin? Of course she was then still a virgin. But she is going to be married to Joseph. Why the discrepancy? Only then did Gabriel told her the supernatural manner in which she will conceive the child.
Thus the implication from Scripture that there was a vow she had made to God, a vow of virginity before God.
2) Is it natural to remain a virgin after marriage? Hmm..it is not normal and typical, but nothing disproves the notion that it cannot be done. It is still a normal functioning family, with Joseph leading and taking care of the family. Marriage do not presume conjugal relations. Besides, according to Catholic teaching, Mary is a type of the Ark of the Covenant. Just as the Ark is set apart for God's use (noone can touch it and live), to contain the word of God and the glory of God, Mary is the Ark, used by God to contain the living Word of God made flesh. Thus it is a natural consequence of that sanctification to even set apart her body for holy use.
3) Another common objection by Protestants would be the use of the word "firstborn". The bible uses the word "firstborn" in describing the child Jesus - Mary's firstborn. Protestants would always assume that the word "firstborn" would presume many more children. But that is an assumption which has no warrant at all. To the Jewish people, one's first child is the firstborn, regardless of whether or not there would be anymore children. The child who opened up the womb would be the Firstborn. Thus the word does not disprove anything.
4) The bible also used the word "brethren" and "brothers" to describe many of Jesus' acquaintances. Now, the word brother, or brethren, has many meanings in the Bible. Not just the conjugal, per se. Brethren can speak of cousins, relatives, fellow Jew, fellow Christian, etc etc. This still does not disprove conclusively the Catholic view. Note that everytime these alleged brothers of the Lord were named, they were so called in relation to Jesus - "brethren of the Lord". "the brothers of Jesus", etc etc. Nowhere can we find Mary's sons, or Mary's children. In relation to Mary, there is always only one son - Jesus Himself.
5) Now, let's assume that Jesus had brothers. They would all be younger than He was, right? When the family went to Jerusalem for the Passover feast, as depicted in the Gospel of Luke, only Jesus the boy, was present. He was already 12. Now, in Jewish custom, they do not leave any of their children behind when participating in the Feast. But in Luke's account, it is apparent that only the boy Jesus was present with them. This could mean that if he indeed has a brother, there would be at least a 12 year age gap. It is obvious during that time, Mary has not other children.
Now, most of Jesus' acquaintances, as well as cousins, such as James and John, Judas (not Iscariot), etc, who were labelled "brethren" in the bible, were of similar age with Jesus. Besides, Jesus died at around 32. He started His ministry at age 30, estimately. This would mean his next younger brother would be 18 (12 years difference). Obviously, many of Jesus' "brethren" were not of such tender age then.
One other point. Jewish culture forbids the younger from giving advice to the elder. That is disrespect. But we can read in Scripture incidents whereby Jesus was receiving advice from his "brethren", which implied they were of older age. This cannot be, if they were biological brothers - as Jesus was the oldest, the firstborn. (I cannot recall the account firsthand. But trust me on this. Check it up. Use a concordance even.)
I will continue with the other Marian dogmas in another post. -
I agree with you that many of the practises we see in the Holy Mother Church today has stumbled many, especially the Protestant brethren. However, seek to understand those practises and actions, the orthodoxy (right theology) behind the orthopraxy (right actions). By simply condemning Catholicism, without ever attempting to do a thorough investigation into the claims of the faith, is a very unfair treatment in scholarship.Originally posted by dumbdumb!:hope u're right abt that.. now i see with my eyes, since i am faithless now. and what i see ain't pretty and i don't need catholics telling me all over again on how they don't worship mary, but actions prove otherwise.
but thats what i mean. most catholics just assume things, without consulting the Word. coming up with all kinds of their own theology
thus u see all kinds of.. practices, for the lack of a not better word, but nicer word
There is also a trend in which I am seeing in Christendom today, esp. in the States. The majority of the Catholics who convert to the Protestant tradition are ill-informed and cultural Catholics, who under the barrage of biblical injunctions by their more educated brethren, fall under the veil.
But there are numerous Protestants in America today, who convert to the Catholic faith, not out of emotional or psychological reasons, but conversions which are intellectual, rational and theologically based.
Examples include Gerry Matatics, a former Presbyterian minister, Philosophy scholar and anti-Catholic, who after giving Catholicism a fair trial, crossed the tiber to the Holy Mother Church, to the consternation of many. He is now a fervent and skilled apologist for the Church.
Scott Hahn is also another prime example. He is a seminary friend of Matatics, who first examined the claims of Catholicism, and sought his friend (Matatics) for help. Instead of disproving and debunking the Catholic faith, Matatics embraced it, along with Hahn.
In a previous generation was John Henry Newman, an Anglican theological giant who, along with a few others, founded the Oxford movement. In his later life, he pledged his allegiance to the papacy and of the Catholic church, after years of intellectual debate against the Faith.
There are many more others, include the late Mortimer J. Adler (Philosopher and thinker, former chairman of Britannica Encyclopedia); G.K Chesterton; Malcolm Muggeridge; etc etc.
Besides, in regards to what you stated, in consulting the Word, there is the premise of Sola Scriptura which is the issue. When the nexus of Sola Scriptura falls, the whole Protestant ethos crumble. That can be discussed elsewhere and is not the scope of this post. -
wow.....