4 Biblical Reasons Mary Is The New Ark of the Covenant

An in depth biblical approach to Mary as the “New Ark of the Convenant.”

Mother Mary, New Ark of the Covenant, pray for us.

Listers, as with all Marian doctrine, a better understanding of Mary only serves to illuminate Christ Our Lord, because every grace she received and every role she held within salvation history  is rooted in Christ. Her role as the New Ark of the Covenant serves to reveal the true nature of Jesus Christ – one person with two natures: divine and human – and illuminate the purpose of the Incarnation within salvation history. The Old Testament is perfected by the New, and Mother Mary is the perfection of the old Ark of the Covenant.

“We never give more honour to Jesus than when we honour his Mother, and we honour her simply and solely to honour him all the more perfectly. We go to her only as a way leading to the goal we seek – Jesus, her Son.”
Saint Louis Marie de Montfort, True Devotion to the Blessed Virgin, #94

Credit & Notable Marian Works
Those looking for a deeper understanding of the Virgin Mary should consult the following works: for an academic but spiritual treatment within the dominican tradition SPL suggests Mother of the Saviour: And Our Interior Life by the keen mind of Fr. Garrigou-Lagrange, O.P., and for a seminal Marian devotional we suggest The True Devotion to the Blessed Virgin by one of the most famous proponents of mariology, St. Louis de Montfort, and finally, for a biblical and basic introduction to the Blessed Virgin – and an excellent primer for protestants – SPL suggests Hail, Holy Queen:The Mother of God in the Word of God by Scott Hahn. Overall, Hahn’s works offer Catholics and non-Catholics alike a wide-range of excellent theological primers, and his Hail, Holy Queen text greatly contributed to the last two points of this list.1

“The ark is verily the holy Virgin, gilded within and without, who received the treasure of universal sanctification. Arise, O Lord, from the Father’s bosom, to raise up again the ruined race of our first parent” (Orat. in Deip. Annunciat. Int. Opp. S. Greg. Thaumaturg) (Blessed Virgin, p. 89). St. Gregory Thaumaturgus (c. 213-c. 270)

“As Christ our priest was not chosen by hand of man, so neither was His tabernacle framed by men, but was established by the Holy Ghost; and by the power of God is that tabernacle protected, to be had in everlasting remembrance, Mary, God’s Virgin Mother” (S. Dionysius of Alexandria, Respons. ad Quoest. v. Pauli Samos) (Blessed Virgin, p. 81). St. Dionysius (died 264)

Both the Old Ark and the New Ark were “overshadowed” by the Holy Spirit. “The Annunciation” – Andrea del Sarto

1. Hail, Full of Grace

The Old Ark Was the Physical Dwelling Place of the Shekinah Glory
The New Ark Was the Physical Dwelling Place of the Word Incarnate

The Ark of the Covenant was the point of contact for the presence of God within the Holy of Holies.2

And the LORD said to Moses, “Tell Aaron your brother not to come at all times into the holy place within the veil, before the mercy seat which is upon the ark, lest he die; for I will appear in the cloud upon the mercy seat.

At the Annunciation, the Archangel Gabriel told Mother Mary she would be the Mater Dei, the Mother of God. In her womb God’s physical presence would dwell in a way never before seen: the second person of the Trinity was to take upon human nature, and become Incarnate.

And [the Archangel Gabriel] came to [Mary] and said, “Hail, full of grace, the Lord is with you!” But she was greatly troubled at the saying, and considered in her mind what sort of greetings this might be. And the angel said to her, “Do not be afraid, Mary, for you have found favor with God. And behold, you will conceive in your womb and bear a son, and you shall call his name Jesus.

How is Mary a More Perfect Ark?
The New Testament perfects the Old, and whereas the old Ark of the Covenant had been lost, God provided a new and more perfect one – an immaculate woman. The Ark moves from being a human artifact of wood and gold, to a the highest honored and highest human creature3 The presence of God is perfected insofar as the Second Person of the Trinity becomes Incarnate, and his mission is the forgiveness and satisfaction of mankind.

Why does the Angel say “Full of Grace?”
Entire bulwarks of the Catholic tradition are built upon this phrase, but a brief sketch is necessary to understand Mary’s unique role in salvation history. Grace – as we know it – did not exist before the victory of Christ; moreover, the Old Testament sacrifices forgave sins, but they could not offer proper satisfaction for them – they left man in an infinite debt due to sin. The angel stating “full of grace” points to Mary as Immaculate, the pure vessel of Christ’s Incarnation, the virgin and sinless flesh from which Christ would draw his human nature. Mary was “full of grace” because the was born without original sin and had remained sinless in order to be the New Ark of the Covenant, the Mother of God. It is important to note that Mary’s grace is still rooted in Christ, and is orientated toward the mission of salvation. Both Mary’s biblical roles as the New Ark of the Covenant and of the New Eve articulate a need for her to be perfect in relationship to Christ, not to mention the greatest need of all – it was from her Christ drew his humanity.

Tabernacle and Sacred Vessels 1728, Gerard Hoet (1648-1733), Wikicommons

2. The Contents of the Arks

Ark Contained the Commandments, Manna, & Aaron’s Rod
New Ark Contained Christ Our Lord: Logos, Bread of Life, King/Priest

The Old Testament Ark was said to contain three things: the stone tablets of the Ten Commandments carved by the finger of God, the priestly rod of Moses’ brother Aaron, and the heavenly manna that sustained Israel in post-Egyptian wandering.

While the old Ark is acacia wood wrapped in gold, the New Ark of the Covenant is the Immaculate Woman Mary. Since being overshadowed by the Holy Spirit, her womb became the dwelling place of God on Earth until the birth of Christ. As the New Testament is a perfection and fulfillment of the Old, so too is Christ’s Incarnation in the Virgin Mary a perfection of the Old Ark of the Covenant. The contents of the New Ark perfect the contents of the Old Ark insofar as Christ the Lord takes upon himself the roles of the former objects: Word of God, Bread of Life, & Eternal Priest.

Old & New Contents

The Word of God in the Stone Tablets 4
The Word of God Incarnate

And he took the [tablets of the] covenant and put it into the ark, and put the poles on the ark, and set the mercy seat above on the ark;

Christ’s perfection of the Tablets of the Covenant or more commonly called the Tablets of the Ten Commandments is multifaceted. The most complete perfection is the overall understanding the the primary “Word of God” is not Scripture, but Christ. Christ is the Living Word, the Logos.5

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. […] And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, full of grace and truth.

Moreover, the Tablets of the Covenant represented the old convenant and its laws. Christ comes and perfects those laws, most notably during his Sermon on the Mount.6 Changing the Laws requires the proper authority, and to change divine laws requires divine authority. Christ, as the Logos, the Second Person of the Trinity, obviously had the divine authority and he demonstrated it both as the Eternal King in the lineage of King David and as the Eternal Priest in the lineage of Melchizedek.7


Manna, the Life-giving bread of Heaven
Jesus Christ, the “Bread of Life”

It is fitting that the Book of Hebrews, which has at its core the goal to demonstrate the relationship between the Old Testament and the New Testament – especially in articulating Christ as our High Priest – would highlight the contents of the Old Ark.8

Behind the second curtain stood a tent called the Holy of Holies, having the golden altar of incense and the ark of the covenant covered on all sides with gold, which contained a golden urn holding the manna, and Aaron’s rod that budded, and the tables of the covenant.

Concerning the Old Ark and manna, Christ our Lord is the perfect “Bread of Life.” In the Gospel of John, Christ gives his famous “Eucharistic Discourse.” The entire latter half of the chapter is an in depth discussion on the Eucharist and Christ’s body and blood as the life giving sacrament.9

I am the living bread which came down from heaven; if any one eats of this bread, he will live for ever; and the bread which I shall give for the life of the world is my flesh. […] So Jesus said to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink his blood, you have no life in you; he who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day. For my flesh is food indeed, and my blood is drink indeed. He who eats my flesh and drinks my blood abides in me, and I in him.

Christ’s “Eucharistic Discourse” paves the way for the Institution of the Eucharist at the Last Supper. In speaking to his disciples, Christ says the following:10

Now as they were eating, Jesus took bread, and blessed, and broke it, and gave it to the disciples and said, “Take, eat; this is my body.”

Biblically, it is very clear that the manna of the OT is perfected by the Bread of Life, Jesus Christ, which is for us today the source and summit of the Catholic life, the Sacrament of the Eucharist.


Aaron’s Rod, the Sign of the Ancestral Priesthood
Christ, the Eternal Priest in the Order of Melchizedek

As in the aforesaid Hebrew’s verse, Aaron’s rod was placed within the Ark of the Covenant. The rod of Aaron was a sign of the priesthood. The book of Hebrews takes up as a main focus the eternal priesthood of Christ Jesus.11

So also Christ did no exalt himself to be made a high priest, but was appointed by him who said to him,

You are my Son, today I have begotten you;
As he says also in another place,

“You are a priest for ever, according to the order of Melchizedek.”

The subject of Christ as the Eternal Priest is exhausted by the book of Hebrews, and it speaks directly to the argument of how Christ’s priesthood could have perfected the ancestral lineage of the Old Testament priesthood – especially since Christ was not born into that lineage. The author highlights the High Priest Melchizedek, and the legitimacy of Christ’s eternal priesthood being rooted in the Order of Melchizedek.

King David plays the Harp before the Ark of the Covenant, source unknown.

3. Joy Before the Ark

King David & the Ark
Elizabeth & the New Ark

One intriguing aspect of Hebrew literature is the fact it does not give unnecessary details. Understanding this facet can illuminate certain passages, especially when one notes that the Hebrews were not concerned with many of the attributes the modern western mind expects of stories and history. Along this note, the Catholic tradition observes several OT passages and NT passages that utilize the same details and phrases. The Early Church fathers were quick to extract many of these comparisons, especially in the more broad sense of parallel ideas, e.g., St. Augustine seeing the Creation in Genesis allegorically as the new birth of a Christian soul from “formless and void” to the abundant earth. Other comparisons are more nuanced and exist on noticing exact repetitions of words or phrases within similar circumstances. One such detailed pericope contains the story of when King David received the Ark of the Covenant.12

And David arose and went with all the people who were with him from Ba’ale-judah, to bring up from there the ark of God, which is called by the name of the LORD of hosts who sits enthroned on the cherubim.

The passage then recounts the unfortunate story of Uzzah, the man who amongst the merriment put his hand on the Ark after an oxen stumbled. Uzzah was smitten by God, and David became afraid. However, Scripture records the detail of how much time David spent waiting after the death of Uzzah, and that time was three months.

And David was afraid of the LORD that day; and he said, “How can the ark of the LORD come to me?” So David was not willing to take the ark of the LORD into the city of David; but David took it aside to the house of O’bed-e’dom the Gittite. […] So David went and brought up the ark of God from the house of O’bed-e’dom to the city of David with rejoicing; and when those who bore the ark of the LORD had gone six paces, he sacrificed an ox and a fatling. And David danced before the LORD with all his might; and David was girded with a linen ephod. So David and all the house of Israel brought up the ark of the LORD with shouting, and with the sound of the horn. As the ark of the LORD came into the city of David, Michal the daughter of Saul looked out of the window, and saw King David leaping and dancing before the LORD; and she despised him in her heart.

In the Gospel of Luke, the evangelist records the story of when Mary went to visit Elizabeth. The passage utilizes some of the exact phrasing from the pericope in I Samuel, and even replaces the term “ark” with “mother of my Lord” when Elizabeth asks why Mary has come to her, as David did with the Ark.13 The similar language in both selections have been emboldened.

In those days Mary arose and went with haste into the hill country, to a city of Judah, and she entered the house of Zechari’ah and greeted Elizabeth. And when Elizabeth heard the greeting of Mary, the babe leaped in her womb; and Elizabeth was filled with the Holy Spirit and she exclaimed with a loud cry, “Blessed are you among women, and blessed is the fruit of your womb! And why is this granted me, that the mother of my Lord should come to me? For behold, when the voice of your greeting came to my ears, the babe in my womb leaped for joy. And blessed is she who believed that there would be a fulfillment of what was spoken to her from the Lord.

After Mary delivers her famous Magnificat, the passage ends telling the reader how much time has elapsed.

And Mary remained with her about three months, and returned to her home.

The similarities between these two passages demand attention. Both begin with the same phrase “arose and went,” both dwelt in the hill country of Judah, David speaks of his unworthiness before the Old Ark as Elizabeth does before the New Ark (even replacing the work ark with “mother of my Lord”), David dances and leaps before the presence of the Lord and John the Baptist leaps in joy within Elizabeth’s womb (often seen as Christ’s presence anointing John to be a prophet), and both remain the same amount of time: three months.14 While comments on Mary as the New Ark abound in Early Church literature, the following quote by Ambrose is especially insightful.

“The prophet David danced before the Ark.  Now what else should we say the Ark was but holy Mary?  The Ark bore within it the tables of the Testament, but Mary bore the Heir of the same Testament itself.  The former contained in it the Law, the latter the Gospel.  The one had the voice of God, the other His Word.  The Ark, indeed, was radiant within and without with the glitter of gold, but holy Mary shone within and without with the splendor of virginity.  The one was adorned with earthly gold, the other with heavenly” (Serm. xlii. 6, Int. Opp., S. Ambrosii) (Blessed Virgin, p. 77). St. Ambrose (c. 339-397)

“Our Lady of the Sign-Ark of Mercy” offers no middle ground between protestant and Catholic theology. St. Stanislaus, Chicago.

4. The Apocalypse of St. John

The Old Was Lost
The New Ark is Found

Many are under the false impression that the Ark of the Covenant was in the Temple during the time of Christ. Commenting on this misunderstanding, biblical scholar and popular writer Scott Hahn states, “around 587 B.C., the prophet Jeremiah concealed the ark in order to preserve it from defilement when Babylonian invaders came to destroy the temple.15

And Jeremiah came and found a cave, and he brought there the tent and the ark and the altar of incense, and he sealed up the entrance. Some of those who followed him came up to mark the way, but could not find it. When Jeremiah learned of it, he rebuked them and declared: “The place shall be unknown until God gathers his people together again and shows his mercy. And then the Lord will disclose these things, and the glory of the Lord and the cloud will appear, as they were shown in the case of Moses, and as Solomon asked that the place should be specially consecrated.”

It would be difficult to overestimate the importance of the Ark within Old Testament Judaism. Given its central role in worship and the fact it was lost, any mention of the Ark of the Covenant during the time it was lost was sure to be noteworthy. In St. John’s Revelation, he mentions the ark at the end of chapter eleven.16

Then God’s temple in heaven was opened, and the ark of his covenant was seen within his temple; and there were flashes of lightning, voices, peals of thunder, an earthquake, and heavy hail.

Scott Hahn delivers several astute observations regarding the mentioning of the Ark and the Jewish historical context in which St. John was writing. He says, “imagine you are a first -century reader, raised as a Jew. You have never seen the ark, but all your religious and cultural upbringing has taught you to long for its restoration in the temple… the dramatic tension [in John’s writing] becomes nearly unbearable. The reader wants to see the ark, as John sees it.”17 However as Hahn notes, St. John does not then go on to speak of the OT Ark (the switch in chapter from 11 to 12 should not import any concern, considering the original texts had no such distinctions). What John does begin to describe is a woman:

And a great portent appeared in heaven, a woman clothed with the sun, with the moon under her feet, and on her head a crown of twelve stars; she was with child and she cried out in her pangs of birth, in anguish for delivery.

As with all Marian doctrine, Christ is the center and he is the key to understanding Revelation 12. Christ is the child born unto the woman.

She brought forth a male child, one who is to rule all the nations with a rod of iron, but her child was caught up to God and to his throne,

The child is brought to God and his throne, which must be Christ. Moreover, the child rules with a “rod of iron,” which is a reference to King David, and Christ is the “Son of David” that will sit upon the Davidic throne forever.

The “Our Lady of the Sign-Ark of Mercy” is the largest Monstrance in the World.

Could the Woman be Israel?
While there could be certain traits – even beneficial ones – to understanding the woman as Israel, the Marian readings harmonizes best with the text and would still remain the primary reading. The latter half of St. John’s Revelation chapter reveals more about the woman.

And when the dragon saw that he had been thrown down to the earth, he pursued the woman who had borne the male child. […] Then the dragon was angry with the woman, and went off to make war on the rest of her offspring, on those who keep the commandments of God and bear testimony to Jesus.

Revelation 12 is an exhaustive Marian text, because Mary is the New Ark of the Covenant, the New Eve, and the New Queen of the Davidic Kingdom – and all three of those roles are demonstrated within the chapter as a whole. Within the given pericope, a special enmity is seen between the woman and the dragon, which recalls the reader’s mind to God’s words in Genesis regarding the enmity between Eve and the serpent. A “Israel” reading becomes confusing; Israel could be seen as the mother of Christ – though Mary has historically held the role of Mater Dei, Theotokos, the Mother of God without question – but it is a stretch to see Israel as the mother of Christians. If it is the “New Israel,” the Church, that could present an option, but again, the Church has never been referred to as the Mother of God – she is the Bride of Christ. Biblically speaking, Mother Mary fits the roles within Revelation 12, and for our purposes here, shows herself to be the New Ark of the Covenant.

“Be mindful of us, most holy virgin, who after childbirth didst remain virgin; and grant to us for these small words great gifts from the riches of they graces, O thou full of grace. Accept them as though they were true and adequate praises in they honor; and if there is in them any virtue and any praise, we offer them as a hymn from ourselves and from all creatures to thee, full of grace, Lady, Queen, Mistress, Mother of God, and Ark of sanctification” (Orat. In Deip. Annuntiat, nn. 13, 14. Int. Opp. S. Athanasii) (Blessed Virgin, p. 80). St. Athanasius (c. 296-373)

Mother Mary, New Ark of the Covenant, pray for us.

  1. Early Church Quotes on Mary as the New Ark of the Covenent: SOURCE []
  2. The Old Ark: Lev 16:2, RSV; Ex 25:10-22 – dimensions, look of the ark []
  3. Mary as the Highest Created Human: Often times protestants will errnoneously reject this claim based on Christ as the highest created human – this view is a heresy. The personhood of Christ already existed as the Second Person of the Trinity, and he took upon himself human nature; moreover, Christ’s personhood was not created. []
  4. Ex 40:20 []
  5. John 1:1, 14a []
  6. Matthew 5, 6, 7 []
  7. Christ as “Son of David” – Matt 1:1-2; 9:27-29; Mk 10:47, 48; Promise to King David –  I Chron 17:14; Ps 89:35-36; Luke1:31; Christ in the order of Melchizedek – Heb 4:14-5:10; 7; The ability, as the new Priest, to change the law: Heb 7:12 []
  8. The Contents of the Ark: Hebrews 9:4 (Tablets, Aaron’s Rod, Manna), however, I Kings 8:9 says only the tablets were inside the Ark. Contradiction theories aside, the discrepancy is easily explained by the fact I Kings was written early in the history of the People of Israel, and the rod and manna were simply added later. []
  9. Eucharistic Discourse: John 6:22-71 – There are protestant objections to this passage, which primarily try to state why Christ was not being literal. Outside the irony that this is one of the only passages the protestant tradition does not advocate a literal reading, the insistence of Christ and his disciples’ reaction to it is clear enough for a literal reading. Every time the disciples misunderstood a teaching, Christ scolded them, but he did not let them leave confused. At the end of this passage, many disciples leave Christ, and Christ not only lets them leave unhindered, but further presses the issue on his disciples. []
  10. Matthew 26:26 []
  11. Christ the High Priest: Hebrews 5:5,6 – 7:1-28 []
  12. King David and the Ark: II Sam 6:2-16 []
  13. Mary Visits Elizabeth: Gospel of Luke 1:39-56 []
  14. Comparison Credit: the comparison between II Sam 6 and Luke 1 is described in Scott Hahn’s work Hail Holy Queen (p.63-64), which is an excellent introduction to understanding the biblical roles of Mary, especially for those of the protestant ecclesial communities. []
  15. The Ark is Hidden: 2 Mac 2:5-8 []
  16. The Ark & Mary as the New Ark in Revelation: Revelation 11:19 – 12:17 []
  17. Hahn, 54 []
  • Bernadette Conklin

    Thank you for sharing this information. Presently, I am working with a young artist in Florida who is painting an image of “Mary, Ark of the New Covenant”, that has come to me through prayer. Please e-mail me if you are interested, and I will send you the image when it is done. Also, I had a Pittsburgh artist render an image of “Vessel of the Preborn Jesus” within the womb of Mary and would be glad to share it.
    Please contact me at PrebornJesusMinistry@zoominternet.net
    Most Especially LOve,
    To Jesus,
    Through Mary,
    Bernadette Conklin

    • Roshan P Koshy

      The Protestantss should blame the Early Christians like St.Augustine, St. Ambrose and St. Anthanius because they have pointed Mary as the ever Virgin and the Ark of the Lord. And St. Anthanius wrote a hymn about Mary. What more is He s telling She is the queen

      • Ignatius Antioch

        Protestants should blame the early christians from the Apostles to their disciples and the next generations of christian, because catholic doctrines came from them.

  • Haiep R

    Blasphemy! The Lord Jesus Christ is our Savior, no one replaces Him, He is the Covenant, The King, The Messiah. No other can take his place and not his mother. There is only one Master, Creator, King, Warrior and it is not a woman! Do you not fear G_d? The first commandment is no other G_d for our G_d is a jealous G_d, and no graven images as heathens who worship before statutes and burn incense to them, sacrifice to them. There is only one Savior coming for his own and its not his mother. He is the one we look to no one else. All others are lies, no wonder many go to hell for false teachings.

    • Julia

      Did you even read the article? Were the Jews committing idolatry by building the original ark?

    • joe

      we are not trying to worship the Blessed Virgin Mary we worship what she carries in her womb almost the same as the old ark of the covenant they never worshiped the outside they worshipped its contense

    • nita

      Mary is THE ARK….. read the article……Christ is the Covenant…..learn the difference

  • dave gifford

    I think the last comment is off base,this person is to be prayed for he is a poor mis- guided secularist who is afraid the Catholics are right about Mary the mother of God . We do not look to Mary to save us but to intercead for us to the lord our God on our behalf. We do not pray to Mary we instead pray through Mary to Jesus Christ. We venerate Mary as the mother of God

  • prince.b.m.emmanuel

    i want to know how to do the ark of convenant,and be serving it.

  • nate

    The article above is full of abomination, it replaces the one and only true Savior Jesus who died for the sins of the earth. The virgin Mary should be remember for her role in the fulfillment of the scriptures and for fulfillment of Gods’ divine plan of salvation and in no way should she be worshiped. Its blasphemy of the highest, and idolatory. Jesus is the way the truth and the life and no one else.

  • Marturian

    Dear HHAmbrose,

    Thte Lord bless you and keep you and make His face to shine upon you.
    Your article really touched my heart. I am a Methodist, but after reading Scott Hahn’s ” The Supper of the Lamb, ” something stirred up in me.
    Your article on our Immaculate Blessed Virgin Mother really touched my heart. Even though I have read Rev 11:19 and 12 many times i was blind. Thank you for teaching me. I think the name Ambrose suits you.

    God bless you and never stop sharing the good news of our Mother of God.


  • John M. Phiri

    God honoured Mary first by chosing her to be the mother of his son. These same people who hate Jesus’ mother claim to have the Holy Spirit and they always say “The Spirit revealed to me…” If the same Spirit has never revealed to them about who Mary is, the mother of the Word Incarnate, then they just halucinate under the influence of their own imagination and mistake that to be the Holy Spirit. Jesus will never talk ill of his mother like some of these protestants do. How can you love the son and hate the mother for no apparent reason?

  • Rolando Cardenas Quispe

    Abominable… Satánico… Babilonia la madre de las rameras… Ha caído, ha caído, Babilonia porque ha dado a beber a todas las naciones con el vino del furor de su fornicación… No hay más palabras para expresar lo detestable de esta imagen.

  • Merle

    This idea of mary being more than what God has used her to be is disgusting.
    We all know how fast man can get deceived and start going after something else to worship.
    Fix your eyes on JESUS In Him alone is are salvation.

    • lln

      Mary points to Jesus and says, “listen to Him.” She is your heavenly mother too wether you believe or not. We were in Christ when He chose to creat us, it is a wonderful mystery as to why God chose to creat us eventhough some will reject Him all because of how He chose to become man born of a woman without origional sin.

  • Michael

    on this topic “Mary ark of the covenant” i can write a whole book in support of Mary, but i will wait to hear more from those who attack the doctrine.

  • All these protestors need to think about this. If you reject Mary, you reject Jesus. They are one. Of the same blood. Hail Mary Full of Grace!

  • Marcia

    Jesus and Mary are not “one”….are you kidding me? Read your Bible!

  • All those attacking the fact should not be blamed because Mary is link to Jesus physically and spiritually so as we talk about Mary we automatically is talking about jesus Christ

  • Vincent

    Thanks for a wonderful read! I love the blessed Mary Ever Virgin and Mother of God. :) Keep it up and God bless you!

  • Liz Lynch

    John M. Phiri- you assume much about protestants. Protestants take the Word of God as the truth. John 1:1-2 and verse 4 Good News Bible… In the beginning the Word already existed;the Word was with God and the Word was God. 4.) The Word was the source of life, and this life brought light to darkness, and the darkness has never been put out.
    The difference between Catholics ( may God bless them) and the Protestants ( may God bless them as well) : Catholics – in order to be Catholic they must equally place the Traditions of the Church and Scripture side by side. Protestants- however take the Word as from God ALONE and don’t trust the traditions that were passed down from generation to generation. Many Catholic traditions cannot be supported when you read the Word of God. Other than that… 99% of what the Catholic Church teaches matches the Protestant Church. I was raised Catholic- now I CHOOSE to be protestant because I have studied the Word of God. I love BOTH religions and whether you are Catholic or Protestant- if you accept Jesus as your Saviour- by including Him in YOUR life in all your decisions. IF He is your anchor, your center in life- it doesn’t matter which religion you choose. It matters most of what is in your heart. IF a person chooses not to believe that Mary the mother of God was a perpetual virgin- if true or not- that is a MINOR point.
    Also, why talk to Mary ( who is by the way womankinds best role model)if we can go directly to Jesus Himself? He is not too busy, His heart desires us to desire him. I find the more I come to know Jesus, the more I cannot turn away. He is my Truth, my way and my life. amen

    • Seth Bobbink

      Liz, I’m a protestant like you, but different, I was raised a protestant and am now considering on being a Roman Catholic. For the sake of conversation and to get you thinking, let me ask you a couple of questions. First you say that “Protestants take the Word of God as the truth.” I agree. However you go on to state that the Word found in John 1:1-2 is the same as the Scripture. Please correct me if I am wrong here. But if I am right, I would slightly challenge you here, while it is true that Scripture is the written word of God, it is not the Living Word of God, that being Jesus. My first question is: Would you agree with my distinction of the word of God and the Word of God? I hope you do.

      You go on to say this: “The difference between Catholics ( may God bless them) and the Protestants ( may God bless them as well) : Catholics – in order to be Catholic they must equally place the Traditions of the Church and Scripture side by side. Protestants- however take the Word as from God ALONE and don’t trust the traditions that were passed down from generation to generation. Many Catholic traditions cannot be supported when you read the Word of God. Other than that… 99% of what the Catholic Church teaches matches the Protestant Church.” Even as a Protestant right now I have many problems with this. First question with this statement is this: Where did we get the Scripture or the Bible? Was not the Gospel first an oral account before it became a written account? And if it was then are you not in fact trusting the very Tradition of the Roman Catholic Church of holding to the books of the New Testament as being actually inspired by God? I ask that question because within the New Testament we are never given an actual list for the New Testament, for instance in 1st Corinthians we don’t get a list that starts with Matthew and goes all the way listing off every book that is currently in the New Testament, on down to Revelation. Thus the very list of books of the New Testament, a.k.a the canon of the New Testament, is in fact completely based on the same Tradition that you say Protestants don’t trust. But you do trust it to a degree that you believe that the Roman Catholic Church was right with the Canon of the NT.

      You say that, “Many Catholic traditions cannot be supported when you read the Word of God.” I again make the distinction between word of God and Word of God as being separate things, but whatever. I would like to ask you which traditions are you thinking of?

      You say that you were Catholic but now due to reading the word of God the Bible you are a protestant, may I ask how you came to the conclusion that Catholicism is wrong based off of your reading of the Bible?

      Actually Catholicism and Protestantism are not religions they are denominations within Christianity, and within each of the denominations are different sects.

      I agree it doesn’t matter which denomination you choose, however what if one denomination’s truth claims are truer than the others?

      “Why talk to Mary if we can go directly to Jesus himself?” you ask. First yes we can go directly to Jesus himself. Catholics never deny that reality. But they also believe in the Communion of all the saints those on the ground and those who have gone before us in Heaven. Now if we who are still on the ground can ask each other to intercede on our behalf to the Lord Jesus Christ, then why not not ask those who have gone before us into Heaven, for they would be better intercessors than any of us on the ground. Now notice Jesus is still even within this understanding, our only mediator between us and God. Why? Because let us say that I asked you to intercede upon my behalf you would without thinking. You would go directly in prayer to our Lord Jesus Christ! Lets say I implore Mary in the same way as I implored you to intercede for me to the Lord Jesus Christ. Mary and the rest of the Church in Heaven would and is doing so even without me asking. But it doesn’t hurt to ask anyways! Jesus is central in Heaven. His Church on Earth and in Heaven is in intercession! and the saints in Heaven are better intercessors.

      Amen sister, He is my truth, my way, and my life.

      So I hope that gets you thinking. I hope you can think about my questions!

  • Liz Lynch

    BTW thank you for the article. Interesting thought about Mary as the New Arc of the covenant. I will have to think about that.

  • Mario

    In which part of the bible does it say that we need a link with Jesus through Mary? Or that the ark of the covenant was the link between God and his people.. The link between God and his people existed long before the ark. I believe the only one who should be exalted is Jesus, not Mary. Mary just did what she was meant to do, just like the prophets, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Moses, David and many others. The fact that they fulfilled their purpose does not make them worthy of praise or veneration. That would be idolatry. I haven’t found 1 verse of the bible in which people pray to Mary. Jesus said “I am the way and the truth and the light, no one comes to the Father except THROUGH ME”. John 14:6. Crystal clear

  • Mary is the Mother of ‘Jesus Christ’. (God)
    God honoured ‘her’ (Mary) first to bring ‘salvation’ (Jesus Christ) to the world; So, in emulasion and total submission to the will of God should we honour ‘her’ (Mary) in other to bring Jesus Christ into our heart.

  • Ok

  • david a wittenbrink

    when I pray I pray to mary the blessed mother of our lord jesus Christ the GOD of abrahmam iszac jacomb and saint joseph the foster father of our lord jesus Christ & all the angles& saints st. Anthony pacawa&st. tersa the little flower& st. mother teresa of Calcutta.st. john paul X 11 the great &st.pope john XX111 & st.bishop fulton shene & st. frank duff. then I make my request. d.a.w.

  • Victor Tellez

    I see far too many protestants here attacking Marian theology. Those of you who reject this article do not know your bible. The bible is full of places where Mary is given high veneration, not to be confused with worship. It is the very same place the church gives to Mary. Furthermore, If we were to look at the entire text of Revelation 12, there is a prophecy to be fulfilled everytime a protestant attacks our lady. If we read carefully, The woman cloth with the sunn (Mary) gives birth to a man child (Christ, Our Lord). When Satan cannot snatch the child he attacks the woman (Satan attacks Mary). When she is taken to heaven (The dogma of the assumption) Satan gets angry at the people of God and vomits a river to drown them. In John, we see that living waters is an expression to refer to the Holy Spirit. Here we see the Devil vomiting a river out of his mouth. In other words Satan starts attacking the church of God through a pirated image of the Spirit. The Spirit of Deception starts attacking God’s people when it cannot attack Our Mother. Hence, All these peope who cannot accept this article have been deceived by Satan.

  • Ann Teixeira

    Before Abraham was…she was! She was on God’s mind in Genesis 3:15; She was in God’s mind i Isa. 7:14; She was on God’s mind in Micah 5:3; she was certainly on God’s mind in Luke 1:42.

    Oh Holy Mary…..when wicked men blaspheme thee…..I’ll love and bless thy name (Luke 1;48).

    • Seth Bobbink

      Actually she was definitely not before Abraham since the Catholic Church is very clear that she was not divine. She was on God’s mind yes but she was not Before Abraham in literal existence form like God.

  • But God is beyond time…

  • Mike

    No comes to the Father but by me, said the Lord. Only the truth of the word of God in scripture comes by way of the indwelling of the Holy Spirit and only the Holy Spirit glorifies ‘Jesus.’ The mindset of man whose religious ideals whose goal is to equate Mary as the way to Jesus is not of the indwelling of the Holy spirit. The Holy Spirit does not lead one to glorify, venerate, revere or even to follow Mary. To change the Holy word of God to fit into Marion ideals is the condemnation that one will experience when adding or taking away from His Holy truth, no matter how religiously sweet or superficially holy Marion doctrines may appear. For as Lucifer can appear as an angel of ‘light,’ so, too, can man be possessed by an illuminating demonic spirit to alter the word of God by preaching another gospel not taught by the apostles. The serpent came to the woman and deceived her with what God had already told them(Adam & Eve) not to do, and yet the serpent cunningly misled Eve to rethink what was already given to her from out of the mouth of God. This is exactly the type of deception being transferred when teaching that Mary is the way to Jesus thru Catholicism. The example of the Father is only thru the Son, Jesus, for the Father said in Matthew 3:17 ‘And a voice from heaven said, “This is my Son, whom I love, with him I am well pleased.” Mark 1:11, “And there came a voice from heaven, saying, Thou art my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.” Prime example of a ‘voice’ that speaks from ‘heaven’ telling us in whom the Father is ‘pleased.’

    Jeremiah 718(NIV) The children gather wood, the fathers light the fire, and the women knead the dough and make cakes to offer to the Queen of Heaven. They pour out drink offerings to other gods to arouse my anger.
    Whose anger? God’s anger! The title of ‘queen of heaven’ is no different than giving Mary the title of ‘Holy Mother’ whom is offered by earthly beings celestial veneration and reverence by those whom faithfully and religiously trust that she has qualifications of intercession(like Jesus as mediator between God and man),healing powers(like Jesus)and is all knowing of the prayers given onto her world-wide,(like Jesus). These qualifications are solely the attributes that are of a god-like status and only God is ‘Omniscient’ and ‘Omnipotent’ – All knowing and All Powerful!!!! Therefore, when the scriptures are misinterpreted as what the serpent did to Eve in what was clearly declared from the mouth of God is equal to what is of the blasphemy that spews out of the minds and mouths of what is in the hearts of man by declaring that Mary is anything more than what the word of God simply states of her, a vessel and the woman that ‘rejoiced in her savior.’ Her only direction she declared to a servant at the wedding in Cana is found in John 2:5,”His mother said to the servants, “Do whatever he tells you.”
    Holy words from the inspiration of God tells us that we whom are the bride(believers in Christ) should be preparing for the wedding to take place with the groom, Jesus by doing what He alone says to do, for we should be faithful to Him whom is spotless and we, too, should be spotless. We should not cloud our hearts, minds and spirits with deceptions of religiosity that embellishes the simplicity and purity of God’s Holy truth. The mind of man seeks ‘favor’ of God with adding more to what was already declared as ‘pleasing’ to the Father in what His beloved Son has done. Jesus said, ‘My sheep hear my voice.’ When we hear ‘His’ voice we equally hear the voice of the Father, for He and the Father are ‘one.’

    Galatians 1:8 NIV
    But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach a gospel other than the one we preached to you, let him be eternally condemned!
    No apostle taught us to look to Mary but rather their testimony is all of whom they walked with as witnesses of Jesus.
    In Jesus’ name. Amen.

    • Ah……but before the apostles were……SHE was.

      Mary introduced her son to Elizabeth and John the Baptist(Luke1:41).
      She introduced her son to the shepherds (Luke 2:16)
      She introduced her son to the Magi….and thus the world.(Matt.2:10,11).
      She introduced her son to Jereusalem…..and Holy Simeon (Luke 2:25)….to Anna the prophetess (Luke 2:36).
      She introduced her son to Egypt and Nazareth.

      And she loved him……from womb to tomb…..to infinity and beyond!

      • Mike

        How pathetic to take scripture out of context and all for the idolatry of Mary. SHE must be the center of one’s heart to go as far a making another gospel out of the bible. Only at the day of judgement will the perverse nation of Mary idolators see their wicked ways.

        • Please love her! Jesus did….into existence.


          Jesus counselled with his Dad
          To save the human race
          To create the ‘woman’….a masterpiece
          And fill her with his grace

          So he designed the perfect Mom
          With the perfect brain
          To ponder Gabriel’s message
          When…to her…the angel came

          He gave her eyes to see him
          Ears to hear him cry
          Lips to kiss him, Arms to hold him
          A soul to magnify

          Perfect neck and shoulders
          That he could rest upon
          Perfect hands to fold in prayer
          When the day was done

          To sit and talk of God…his Dad
          He sat on her perfect knees
          And perfect feet took her
          To do God’s charities

          A faithful heart he gave her
          And perfect blood for spilling
          He entered in her perfect womb
          For our sake he was willing

          So….what does the perfect sacrifice
          Do with the perfect Mom
          He takes her to his home above
          And showers her….with love!

          • Mike
          • Mike

            Luke 10:25-27
            25 On one occasion an expert in the law stood up to test Jesus. “Teacher,” he asked, “what must I do to inherit eternal life?”

            26 “What is written in the Law?” he replied. “How do you read it?”

            27 He answered, “‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength and with all your mind’; and, ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’”
            28 “You have answered correctly,” Jesus replied. “Do this and you will live”

            To listen to Jesus is to listen to the Father and only Jesus is the perfection of love that we should seek. Again, we have Matthew 3:17 ‘And a voice from heaven said, “This is my Son, whom I love, with him I am well pleased.” Mark 1:11, “And there came a voice from heaven, saying, Thou art my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.”
            If the Father’s voice came onto the presence of others to declare that in His Son whom He ‘loves’ is ‘well pleased’ then it is Jesus whom is the perfect example of how to love the Father…..’not Mary.’
            How we, whom are led by the Holy spirit fight against this idolatry for Mary but the catholic church defies the word of God and instead manufactures an entire euphoric ideology to promote Mary as another way of a perfect love for Jesus. The Father’s voice did not state that in Mary He is well pleased. The voice of the Father points to Jesus. The Holy spirit glorifies Jesus and we trust in Jesus’ words that the way to eternal life is to love God with all our minds, souls, strength and spirit and not thru the fanciful, fabricated Marion teachings that corrupt the mind, soul, strength and spirit from the pure love that God alone is worthy of.

            To give Mary the equal love of the mind, soul, strength and heart is the same idolatry equal to the mythological ideals of ancient idolatry where they invented and believed in their gods and goddesses with all their mind, soul, strength and heart.
            Catholicism has substituted the Holy spirit in lieu of Mary as if she can led one to a more perfect love for Jesus.

  • Ann

    Again I see the problem….sola scriptura

    Before the Bible was…..the Church was! A fait accompli!

    The problem is some folk seem to think that Christianity was spread via

    a book, when it was the Apostles, disciples, christian families, and

    converts that traveled by land and sea, that carried the message.

    Mary, herself, traveled with John to Turkey.

    NB…The Bible was not put together until the 4th century. The printing

    press was not invented until the 14th century. Mass was learned and

    sung, and so passed on. Also, art was used to spread the faith, for

    literacy and language barriers were hindrances.

    God has his wonderful ways!

  • Ann

    Again, I see the problem. Sola Scriptura.

    NB……Before the Bible was…the Church was. A fait accompli.

    This confusion arises when folk seem to think that Christianity was

    spread via a book. NO! Christianity was carried by the Apostles,

    disciples, christian believers, and converts…. by land and sea.

    Mary, herself, went with John to (now)Turkey.

    NB…..The Bible was not put together until the 4th century. The

    printing press was not invented until the 14th century. The Mass

    was chanted, and the faith taught by song and art….hence the

    stained glass windows, statues, creches, mosaics and rosaries. These

    visuals overcame the literacy and language barriers.

    How beautiful are God’s ways!

    • Mike

      If giving one’s mind, soul, strength and heart means to be sola scriptura based on the written word of the bible being divine and holy inspired then Praise the Lord our God Almighty for being accused of taking the bible to be all HIS inspired LOVE. I would not trade one accusation of being guilty of sola scriptura because as there is only one bible that God breathed into existence, there is only ONE Lamb’s Book of Life in heaven where those whose names are being accused of sola scriptura are being written into holy eternity.

      • Ann


        And scripture tells us Mary co-operated with God’s will and

        she, too, sacrificed her son. That was some powerful ‘YES’

        • Mike

          So, you’re going back to scripture for your claim that Mary co-operated with God? Reads like ‘sola scriptura’ is your defense then. If it complies with your need to support catholic doctrine or dogma you’ll run to the bible, but if it contradicts the catholic doctrine or dogma you’ll discredit the bible as the sole source, right? How convenient it must be for Rome to slip in and out of a state of confirmation or denial on biblical reference as needed.

          John 10:18
          No one can take my life from me. I sacrifice it voluntarily. For I have the authority to lay it down when I want to and also to take it up again. For this is what my Father has commanded.”

          The verse goes back to scripture on the willingness of the Son to ‘voluntarily’ give His life. So what if Mary experienced a suffering or pain in the loss of her son! What mother doesn’t? It was not up to her to declare that ‘she too’ willingly sacrificed her son. It would have happened with or without her emotional pain for it would still have been Jesus’ will to do as the Father commanded.
          Rome puts to much emphasis on Mary’s emotions as though they matter as much to expound and write a another gospel out of the limited biblical findings on her.

          Mark 3:20-21, ‘Then Jesus entered a house, and again a crowd gathered, so that he and his disciples were not even able to eat. 21 When his family heard about this, they went to take charge of him, for they said, “He is out of his mind.”
          Mark 3:31,’ Then Jesus’ mother and brothers arrived.

          So, shame on Mary to be in cahoots with her other children and go do something about the one they called, ‘out of his mind.’

          Is not ‘sola scriptura’ needed here? Where else can one find that she indeed was like minded with family to go take charge of the one that they claimed was ‘out of his mind?’
          Where’s the euphoria on that emotional reaction coming from Mary’s reasoning or lack there of? Why not exalt her on that part of scriptural reference on her conduct of agreement with the rest of the family?
          Why not pray to Mary,
          ‘ Oh holy mother of god,’ thou art a loving but a clumsy person from time to time. You should have instead kept yours and your families thoughts from reacting hastily and go take charge of the one that you knowingly would offer in sacrifice for. Oh, holy mother of god, we can trace thy steps to folly with your family in reacting to the one whom thyself and family called,’out of his mind’ by using the fundamentals of ‘sola scriptura.’ Oh, holy mother of god, would not this be an oxymoron to have gone by sight and not by faith that your son knew what he was doing?’

          Is not ‘sola scriptura’ needed here? Where else can one find that she indeed was like minded with family to go take charge of the one that they claimed was ‘out of his mind?’

          • Ann

            But Moms are like that. They hurt with their

            children. And I did use sola scriptura in my

            Nov.3rd post.

  • servant of christ

    I can not believe the war of “protestants” Christians vs Roman Catholics Christians.. all this arguing of who is right is pointless and PRIDEFUL! To do such a thing is such a disgrace and sinful in God’s eyes. Scripture since the beginning talks about the PROMISE of SALVATION through the Son. And if WE believe that JESUS IS THE SON than we have the PROMISE of SALVATION and that brings JOY AND PEACE and REJOICING. This sinful pride of arguing is war against God, his son, the holy spirit, Mary. You all need to open your eyes and QUIT acting like pherascies and name calling of who is blasphemy. Christ is UNITY. ITS time the CHURCH RISES TOGETHER AGAINST THE REAL ENEMY SATAN! Lay down the traditions and like good soldiers of God, put on your armor and fight with your sword (the word of God )! He is coming for ALL those who call themselves HIS! So GET READY! BC THIS IS WASTING TIME AND IS A DISTRACTION of our true calling! Remember JESUS SAID IT WAS FINISHED!

    • Mike

      Well, Servant of Christ, all reads great and it is true that the unity should be for the greater glory of our Lord and savior, Jesus the Christ, however, once you insert ‘Mary’ in your declaration is where there is need to protest this form of belief. If you lay down as you say, ‘the tradition’ of exalting Mary as part of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit, then we would have a greater unity of bearing spiritual arms against the enemy, but as long as she is given god-like worship, glorification and adoration only deserved of God then the distraction you mentioned is exactly why the argument will continue even until kingdom come.
      There should be no room in one’s heart, mind, strength and soul that detracts one to seek Mary for anything other than trust that she was simply a willing and obedient servant of God fulfilling the will of God. The preaching of the gospel by the apostles in the New Testament never discloses using Mary as a tool that leads one to a more perfect way to Jesus, however, teaching that she does is where this blasphemes against the active ‘spirit’ of God. So, if Mary is a replacement for His Spirit that leads one to have a more perfect love or relationship with Jesus then what do we need any other spirit filled testimony of the apostles of the bible that allegedly point to Jesus by way of their personal walk, testimony, conviction or martyrdom? Their testimony bears witness of their walk with Christ and of the indwelling of the Holy Spirit. The non catholic christian believers of the bible do not rely on Mary as a doctrine that points or perfects a love for Jesus. Nor do we accept that she is worthy of divine god-like omnipotence and omniscience that the Roman Catholic church attributes her with. She is not ‘all knowing’ like God. She is not ‘all powerful’ like god. She cannot hear the world of prayers by Catholics all over at once, for if she could then that constitutes an ‘all knowing’ (omniscient) divine celestial being. She cannot influence Jesus to act upon mans’ prayerful pleas by using mother like intervention, for if she could then she would and should be considered ‘all powerful’ as a goddess like Hera or Athena or any other mythical celestial being with omnipotent powers and Jesus would have to submit to her influencing because of her superiority mother-like status. For her to have influence because of prayerful people would declare her to be of a divine intercessor or mediator , however, it is clearly written by the inspired word of God that the ‘only mediator’ between God and man is Jesus. The heavenly mediation declared is of divine appointment and anointing and if Mary had any appointment or anointing to intercede or mediate from heaven then we should be reading clearly through biblical accounting and scripture as testimony from the apostles. She cannot perform miracles that only is attributed to the Almighty hand of God. If Catholics don’t worship, adore and glorify her then why exalt her and defend her and plea to non believers of Mariology to open their eyes at what is clearly a non biblical doctrine?
      The bible tells us only Jesus is the mediator between God and man, so, why call God a liar and ask Mary to intercede? The holy spirit glorifies Jesus as the bible says, so, therefore we whom are able to gather by 2 or 3 on earth and invoke the name of Jesus in prayer are in unity and trust that only He will receive our prayers and petitions to His ear. There is no marriage in heaven as the bible says. We will be like Him in spirit as the bible says. There is no mother figure before or within the throne of God. There is no other glory that belongs to a female celestial figure in bible but Catholic believers erroneously proclaim that Mary is ‘the woman’ of whom the book of Revelation refers to. The woman referred to in the bible is simply of prophetic purpose regarding Israel. But why attribute this ‘woman’ to Mary if she is not to be worshiped, adored or glorified as a goddess, past, present or future? If she is not a goddess then you need not worry that a non catholic speaks against this catholic teaching then. For to do so would not deter the purpose of the Holy Spirit being the source of leading one closer to Jesus by way of the indwelling of one’s temple, right? I mean, she can’t replace the indwelling of the Holy Spirit in one unless one is more prone to offer her a space in one’s heart like that for God; or replace the meditation of God in one’s mind with her; or by using one’s strength to call upon her name instead of claiming Christ as the ONE whom strengthens one to endure all, or to entrust her with all one’s emotional stamina that she can or will answer, intercede, intervene or perform a heavenly work like that when one entrusts in God alone to do,……..right?
      If she is not all that….then yes, we are one in ‘unity’ as you claim we should be, but as long as Mary is inserted and used in the same phrase as ‘God, His Son and the Holy Spirit then sadly,.. we will always be at odds. The 3(Father, Son and Holy spirit) are ONE God and there is no room for Mary as equal to be placed in the same phrase, unless one worships, adores and glorifies her equally to the Godhead.


  • Samuel musau

    Thank you for this insightful article on Our Blessed Mother of our Salvation. The blasphemy from our brothers the protestants is to be expected. They have never opened their hearts and let God be their teacher. Christ asks us to be like little children. ” thank you father for hiding this to the wise and the prudent and revealing it to the babe’s and the suckling” (free translation). In the Gospel of John. Christ teaches on His Body being the Bread of Life and insists on the same, that to have life ombre had to literally eat His Body and drink His Blood. Many of his disciples could not take it and they left. Lucifer was the first to protest. He certainly has his followers. The scriptures come to us by the Church father’s guided by the Holly Spirit. The article is very insightful on the place of Our Lady and references from scriptures on the same. Like the pharisees condemned by Christ when they claimed to have knowledge of His existence as the son of the carpenter so do the the’ knowledge of the protesters condemn them.
    With Saint Gabriel the Arch Angel will I perpetually greet the Great Queen of Heaven and Earth ” Hail Mary full of grace, the Lord is with thee, blessed art thou amongst women and blessed is the fruit of your womb Jesus, holy Mary mother of God, pray for us sinners now and at the hour of our death. Amen”

    • Ann

      It is spiritual warfare. In John 19:28, the apostle took Mary into his
      home. His ‘home’ was the ‘church’ at that time. He also took her with
      him to Ephesus(Turkey). Today….at Mass….we read Rev.2…the letter
      written by St. John about the church at Ephesus. In that letter..written
      almost 2,ooo years ago…Jesus said he would come and remove their
      lampstand, because they had forgotten their ‘first love’. Everyone’s
      first love is their mom.
      Today, the church at Ephesus is no more.
      Similarily….Mary has been removed from many churches and homes. Now…satan wants her removed from our hearts. Her virginity/chastity is a treat to his reign. And what has he replaced her with?????
      Birth control, condoms, narcissism, abortion, vulgar art/music/shows.
      And the sad result is self hatred, violence, diseases, slavery, child porn and murder.
      We must join Mary at the foot of the Cross, and take her into our homes
      and hearts. The lives of our children depend on us.a

      • Mike

        According to Jesus our first love should be God; with all our heart, mind, strength and soul. Not one’s mommy.

        True lovers of God rely on the spirit of the Lord to lead one to the ‘first’ love whom knew us before we were in the womb. If one keeps worshiping, adoring and glorifying Mary as though she is the creator like God then yes, she must be the first love and after loving your mommy first, then the position of 2nd fiddle goes to God. Way to go!

        We should love HIM as He loved us ‘FIRST.’ He is our First love, or to say the least, ‘should be.’ When we declare HIM as our FIRST love then we have the Holy spirit within us. This would testify of the word of God that declares that the Holy spirit glorifies Jesus.’ It all goes back to HIM. It comes into full circle when complete faith is relevant to His indwelling of one’s temple in ‘spirit’ alone.
        Satan can’t remove Mary from one’s heart but loving God ‘first’ will. Try it! You just might love God ‘first’ when you try not returning to the mommy theory.

    • Mike

      Jeremiah 7:18
      18″The children gather wood, and the fathers kindle the fire, and the women knead dough to make cakes for the queen of heaven; and they pour out drink offerings to other gods in order to spite Me. 19″Do they spite Me?” declares the LORD. “Is it not themselves they spite, to their own shame?” 20Therefore thus says the Lord GOD, “Behold, My anger and My wrath will be poured out on this place, on man and on beast and on the trees of the field and on the fruit of the ground; and it will burn and not be quenched.”…

      The fact that the title of ‘queen of heaven’ being practiced as part of one’s faith in the past, present or to be taught onto generations to come by way of devotional, dedication and active religiosity is why God said, ‘Thou shall not have any other gods before me.’
      As long as that title of ‘queen of heaven'(and earth)exists in the hearts, mind, strength and soul of the devotee, then may the word of God be true and every man a liar.

      God is the same yesterday, today and tomorrow. His word is true forever and ever, amen. Hallelujah!

      • Ann

        I hope you are not suggesting that God chose an evil ‘queen of heaven’ to be the Mother of his son!?

        • Mike

          You miss the point of God’s wrath upon those whom exalt through any form of religiosity titles that glorify any celestial being with the same equality of worship, adoration and glorification deserved only of HIM. Exalting the title given to Mary as ‘queen of heaven’ is no different of what was then, now and of the future since God does not change. At the day of judgment is when He will expose all those that worshiped, adored, glorified and exalted the title of ‘queen of heaven.’ Any exalted celestial being(outside of the Father, Son and HS) that is faithfully revered with attributes as that of the Godhead is a form of worship, adoration, glorification and exaltation.

          For the RCC to suggest or claim that God chose Mary to be exalted with a title as high as ‘queen of heaven’ is what is ‘evil.’ To equate her to the Godhead with reverence of such title-ship is to demean the supremacy of the ONE and only God that He alone is worthy of. Only Jesus holds the titles of royal symbolism that deserve any and all exaltation.
          If you understood the bible you would read that only the ‘queen of the south(Sheba)’ will rise up in judgement with the righteous against those whom are of an adulterous generation. Her biblical example is worthy of following. She came from afar to Salomon’s temple after hearing of King Salomon’s wisdom to test his wisdom and later believed in Him and she gave to Him such a great wealth that she is honored in scripture for her trust in Salomon’s God-given wisdom.
          She is noted as sitting among those whom are of the righteous in heaven and will judge all whom are of an adulterous generation. She is noted as ‘queen of the south’ but she is not noted with any personal name for it is only of symbolic purpose that we read that her title-ship is exemplary of her earthly royal status whom sought the wisdom of the God appointed King.
          If those whom call themselves believers in Christ, then we must humble ourselves and listen to the wisdom of the King of Kings and Lord of Lords and believe that only ‘HE’ alone holds all titles of earthly and heavenly worship. There will be no ‘queen of heaven’ that we will exalt in heaven and much less should any true believer exalt any title of queen of heaven here on earth.
          The fervent love for Mary as ‘queen of heaven’ is the adulterous generation that gives their heart to that title and will stand in judgment on the appointed day before God.

          • Ann

            In Luke 2:51&52, it clearly says that ‘Jesus was obedient to them (Mary and Joseph); and his Mother kept all these things carefully in her heart. And Jesus grew in wisdom and age and grace before God and man’. To my mind, God had total trust in Mary and Joseph. I can’t imagine a greater honor.

  • Mike

    Jesus was obedient to both parents on the trip to Nazareth because of what happened on the previous trip to Jerusalem. Get that straight and don’t mix the context of the scripture just fit in with the RCC’s theory on elevating Mary to any queenly status.
    Jesus was also obedient to the Father when He was lost for 3 days acquiring wisdom and knowledge in Jerusalem so why not imagine that a ‘greater honor?’ God did. Scripture tells us that this is what led Jesus to be found in favor with God and man at that early age. That’s how we are supposed to read that particular area of scriptures. Mary kept these things in her heart because scriptures tell us that she did and not because we should imagine any more into her life. She kept these things in heart because there were other experiences both her and Joseph marveled at in Jesus even before. Scripture tells us so.

    • Ann

      Jesus himself honored her at the wedding of Cana. What good reason was there for him to turn water into wine, except in obedience to her wishes?? Lack of wine at a wedding is not a sin….is it??

      • Mike

        Lack of wine at a wedding is not a sin but adding and subtracting to the scriptures as you’ve done is.
        By your philosophy to the account in Cana, the miracle took place solely because Jesus was subservient to His mommy’s wishes. As per quote,’what good reason(except in obedience to her wishes.) However, if one simply sticks to the Holy ‘truth,’one can read in context that the text defines the account as the ‘first’ of his many signs and that the servants were simply told by a guest at the wedding to follow any instructions by another guest regarding the desperate measures of the moment. Mary was not a mind reader nor had she or anyone seen Jesus perform any miracles, so, she couldn’t have fathomed that He would perform one at that moment. All she did was tell Jesus that they were out of wine. If you knew Jewish traditions of that day you would know that those weddings take days to complete and having plenty of wine was a must. So, without ever witnessing a miracle she could not have foretold what Jesus was going to do. Unless you are making out Mary to be a seer of the future then that might be something you can fathom, but according to the bible, there is nothing to indicate that Jesus converted the wine out of being obedient to Mary either as you want to believe.
        Again, without ever seeing any miracles from Jesus, for all she knew after alerting Jesus of there being no wine, she could’ve thought that maybe Jesus would somehow go and get some wine. After all, she was aware of His influence with people being that she kept things in her heart from what she did witness in Him……His growing up in wisdom and grace before God and man. That part of reflection is in Luke and it can be used to affirm in John that Mary could only assume that Jesus would get the wine somehow. But as far as knowing of any miracle to take place…….she could never have foretold that since she did not practice any art of witchcraft to see the future.
        As far as telling the servants to ‘do what ever He says’ is simply an instruction to the servants by her, a guest, and out of obedience the servants are expected to obey. That’s all. The focus of the story is to emphasize that the miracles of Jesus had begun thus revealing His glory and making His disciples believe in Him.

        Your attempt is to elevate Mary and position Jesus as subservient to her because the RCC fancies them out of the holy biblical context with which the spirit of God wrote it.

        Colossians 2:8
        See to it that no one takes you captive through hollow and deceptive philosophy, which depends on human tradition and the elemental spiritual forces[a] of this world rather than on Christ.

        • Ann

          I totally agree with you that Mary did not practice any art of witchcraft to see the future. I do not think God would have entrusted his son to a witch. The only one at the wedding of Cana who had any control over ‘time’ was Our Lord. And he said, ‘…my hour has not yet come.’ But….he did the first miracle anyway.
          So….did he adjust ‘time’ for her, and why?? And…then…these words were repeated in John 8:20, ‘…and no one seized him because his hour had not yet come.’ He didn’t change ‘his hour’ there.

          There was one Jewish custom you failed to mention….there was no mingling between men and women. That is very futuristic, don’t you think??

          • Mike

            I wouldn’t know about Jesus adjusting time for Mary since scripture does not allude to it. However, I do know and take as everlasting truth when God said that His word will never change and those whom worship heavenly titles such as ‘queen of heaven’ and titles in reference to any celestial entity that compete in religious devotion to the Godhead will bear His wrath in the end. This is undeniably true as it is written by the Holy inspiration of God.
            Praise the Lord Jesus for His biblical truth. Hallelujah!!!

  • Ann

    And may all generations call her Blessed! (Luke 1:48).

    • Mike

      She is blessed according to the biblical account, however, the RCC has taken upon herself to add more to her biblical status and exalted her to ‘queen of heaven'(and earth) status. The same ancient Babylon title bestowed upon Mary is the same entity of worship glorified by the RCC. Its amazing how all her worshipers don’t heed the warning of such idolatry found in Jeremiah 7:18, 44:17, 44:18, 44:19, 44:25 and fear the Lord’s wrath. Nothing is new under the sun according the word of God and the ‘queen of heaven’ body of ancient doctrine is rehashed under Roman Catholicism and her RCC defenders stand proud in religious defiance to the God whom will judge the ‘queen of heaven’ believers.
      Only Jesus bears all royal heavenly titles. No other religious entity bearing heavenly titles is worthy of any glorious exaltations.

  • Ann

    All that you say could be true, except……………

    Mary was God’s idea…not the Catholic Church’s.

    You have to assume that God caused Mary to be pregnant with the Messiah, and left her on her own…helpless…to deal with a satan\…who wanted her child dead.

    Then…there is Rev. 11:19, and 12:1.

    Mary is of the royal line of David.

    • Mike

      The ark of the covenant is the same before, today and forever in Jesus the Christ. There is nothing in scripture that God’s holy inspired word suggests that He has planned for an alleged new ark of the covenant. God’s word will ‘never, ever change.’ His truth is eternal. How the RCC invented this ideology and claim this as God’s truth couldn’t be any farther from God’s truth. The covenant between God and man is in Jesus as the Godhead has planned. The plan of God cannot be changed by introducing Mary as a ‘new’ replacement.
      In the name of Jesus the ‘true’ and only eternal ‘ark of the covenant’ may His word never come back void. Amen.

      If you truly love God with all your heart, mind, strength, soul and fear God then continue reading what is of sound doctrine and relevant to ‘HIS’ holy truth and eternal plan of the bible in the following:

      Revelation 12: Who Are the Woman, Child and Dragon?
      by David Treybig
      Revelation 12 provides an overview of three major players in the world today. What can we learn from this prophetic section of Scripture?
      Revelation 12: Who Are the Woman, Child and Dragon

      The book of Revelation is a vision from Jesus Christ, given to Him by God the Father, which reveals what is going to happen before His return to establish the Kingdom of God on earth. This fascinating book is primarily written in a chronological style with occasional breaks for overviews of specific subjects. Revelation 12 is one of these overviews, providing a history stretching from the time before humans existed until the time just before Christ’s return as King of Kings and Lord of Lords.

      Revelation 12 begins with the statement: “Now a great sign appeared in heaven” (verse 1). The word “sign” comes from the Greek word semeion, meaning “a sign, mark, token … an unusual occurrence, transcending the common course of nature” (Thayer’s Greek Definitions). The first great sign is a vision of a woman who gave birth to a child (verse 1).

      Then in verse 3 we read, “And another sign [semeion] appeared in heaven.” We thus understand that these three symbols—a woman, a child and a dragon—represent things beyond the ordinary events of nature. As we are going to see, these three figures symbolize three major spiritual forces that have been at work for several thousand years.

      In order to understand this chapter, we now need to understand the symbols. What do the woman, the child and the dragon represent?
      The woman

      The woman—described as being “clothed with the sun, with the moon under her feet, and on her head a garland of twelve stars” (verse 1)—represents Old Testament Israel. In the Old Testament, God referred to His people as a woman whom He had dressed in honor and splendor (Ezekiel 16). The garland with 12 stars may be symbolic of the 12 tribes of Israel (Genesis 37:9-10).

      Throughout Revelation 12 we note that the “woman” is repeatedly protected by God (verses 6, 14-16), especially as the time approaches for the “kingdom of our God” to be established on earth (verse 10).

      In the New Testament, God’s Church is symbolized as a woman; and its members are likened to virgins (Matthew 25:1-13; Revelation 14:4; Revelation 19:7). The New Testament Church is called “the Israel of God” (Galatians 6:16) and likened to “Jerusalem above,” which is called “the mother of us all” (Galatians 4:26, also see Hebrews 12:22-23). Members of the Church are described as “a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, His [God’s] own special people” (1 Peter 2:9).

      When Christ returns to earth, He is going to marry the Church, which is called “His wife” in Revelation 19:7. Based on these passages, it is clear that the woman in Revelation 12 represents God’s people. Incidentally, it is also interesting to note that the imagery of a dishonorable woman—one called “the great harlot”—is used in Revelation 17:1 to depict a false church that deceives many.
      The Child

      The woman (God’s chosen nation of Israel) is described as giving birth to a “male Child who was to rule all nations with a rod of iron” (Revelation 12:5). Indeed, Christ was born into this nation. The verse continues, “And her Child was caught up to God and His throne.” The language here makes it clear that Jesus is the “Child.”

      Jesus is the One who is prophesied to “strike the nations. And He Himself will rule them with a rod of iron” (Revelation 19:15). He is also the One who, after His resurrection, was taken up in a cloud to heaven (Acts 1:9-11).
      The dragon

      The third symbol of Revelation 12—“a great, fiery red dragon” (verse 3)—is described as having drawn “a third of the stars of heaven” and standing “before the woman who was ready to give birth, to devour her Child as soon as it was born” (verse 4). A few verses later, this dragon is clearly identified as Satan: “So the great dragon was cast out, that serpent of old, called the Devil and Satan, who deceives the whole world” (verse 9).

      As for the dragon drawing “a third of the stars of heaven,” this reference apparently represents Satan leading a third of the angels in a rebellion against God. Other passages show stars represent angels (Revelation 1:20).

      The Bible also explains that Satan had been involved in a rebellion against God in which he attempted to exalt his “throne above the stars of God” and “be like the Most High” (Isaiah 14:13-14). Satan then began his work as “that serpent of old [the one who tempted Eve in the Garden of Eden], called the Devil and Satan, who deceives the whole world” (Revelation 12:9, emphasis added throughout). For a more extensive explanation of Satan’s rebellion, see “God vs. Satan.”

      Just as God has ministers of righteousness, Satan has his “ministers”—spirit beings who appear to be righteous yet who influence humans to sin (2 Corinthians 11:15). Jude further describes these fallen angels or demons as “angels who did not keep their proper domain” and who are now “reserved in everlasting chains under darkness for the judgment of the great day” (Jude 1:6).

      Revelation 12:3-17 is a concise history of Satan’s efforts to thwart God’s plan to bring many humans to glory as part of His eternal family. Satan’s actions included convincing a third of the angels to follow him in his attempt to make himself like God, attempting to have Christ killed as a child (Matthew 2:13-18), working to deceive the entire world and persecuting God’s people. Let’s now consider in greater detail Satan’s attempts to derail God’s plan.
      The dragon vs. the Child

      In Revelation 12:4 we read that “the dragon stood before the woman who was ready to give birth, to devour her Child as soon as it was born.” This appears to be a historical reference to King Herod’s effort to destroy Jesus as a young child by ordering the deaths of all male children from two years old and under who lived in and around Bethlehem (Matthew 2:13-18). But an angel had warned Joseph to flee to Egypt with his wife and Jesus to keep the Child from being destroyed (verse 13).

      Even though Satan’s attempt to destroy Jesus when He was a child failed, the devil did not give up. Prior to the beginning of Jesus’ ministry, “Jesus was led up by the Spirit into the wilderness to be tempted by the devil” (Matthew 4:1). During this temptation, Satan tried to get Jesus to violate God’s law and worship him instead of God. The devil offered Jesus “all the kingdoms of the world and their glory” (verse 8) if Jesus would worship him. But Jesus did not do so.

      When Jesus’ ministry was fulfilled and it was time for Him to give His life as payment for humanity’s sins, Satan was there once again. On this occasion, Satan was the one who “put it into the heart of Judas Iscariot, Simon’s son, to betray Him” (John 13:2). Although Satan was clearly involved in the crucifixion of Jesus, this was actually part of God’s plan for the redemption of mankind.

      As Genesis 3:15 had predicted, there would be ongoing “enmity” between the serpent (Satan) and the woman (God’s people) and the “Seed” (Jesus) who would come from the woman. Furthermore, this passage indicated that Satan would have limited success in being able to “bruise” Christ’s heel by influencing the man who would betray Jesus and that Jesus would “bruise” Satan’s head by resisting his temptations and qualifying to replace him as the ruler of this world.

      So why did Satan expend so much effort in his attempts to destroy Jesus? Because if there had not been a perfect Savior to pay the penalty for humanity’s sins, God’s plan would have been thwarted. Without a Savior, humans could not be forgiven of their sins nor could they live forever in God’s eternal family.
      The dragon vs. God’s people

      In addition to his efforts to destroy Jesus, Satan has a long history of persecuting God’s people, especially members of God’s Church, represented by the woman in the latter portions of Revelation 12. Although there was fierce persecution from the earliest days of the New Testament Church, God allowed the woman to flee “into the wilderness, where she has a place prepared by God, that they should feed her there one thousand two hundred and sixty days” (verse 6).

      This verse indicates that the true Church was protected by God for 1,260 years (see Numbers 14:34 and Ezekiel 4:6, showing that a day can represent a year). During this time—which may have continued through the Middle Ages—the Church was protected from its enemies, including the Roman Empire and false Christianity.

      The next two verses then explain that “war broke out in heaven” between Satan and his angels and Michael and his angels. As a result of this war, John, in vision, saw that a place for Satan and his angels was not “found for them in heaven any longer” and they were “cast to the earth” (Revelation 12:7-9). This battle is different from Satan’s original rebellion, which is described in verse 4 and which occurred long before the birth of Christ.

      The setting for this battle, described in verses 7-9, and its significance is then announced by a loud voice in heaven (verses 10-12). This battle is an indicator that “the kingdom of our God, and the power of His Christ have [or will soon] come” (verse 10). Prior to this event, Satan has had access to God’s presence to accuse His people (Job 1:6-7; Job 2:1-2). Now he and his angels no longer have this access and are cast down to the earth.

      Realizing the significance of this event, Satan now has “great wrath, because he knows that he has a short time” (Revelation 12:12) before Christ returns to establish the Kingdom of God on earth. He then directs his rage toward God’s people, the ones who are the continuation of the woman who gave birth to the male Child (verse 13).

      God, however, will not allow Satan to destroy His people. Jesus had promised that the “gates of Hades [the grave]” would not prevail against it (Matthew 16:18). To protect His people, the woman is “given two wings of a great eagle,” meaning she is safely taken into “her place,” where she will be protected for “a time, and times and half a time [apparently 3½ years], from the presence of the serpent” (Revelation 12:14).

      Even though Satan will spew “water out of his mouth like a flood,” to try to get at the woman, he will not be successful (verses 15-16). In this passage, the concept of a “flood” likely represents armies (see Isaiah 59:19; Jeremiah 46:7-8).

      Satan then goes to “make war with the rest of her [the woman’s] offspring, who keep the commandments of God and have the testimony of Jesus Christ” (Revelation 12:17). From this passage we note that while some members of God’s true Church will be protected from Satan’s wrath during these end times prior to Christ’s return, others will not. Those not in the place of protection will need to prove their allegiance to God the Father and Christ in the face of Satan’s intense persecution.
      The dragon vs. you

      Whether you realize it or not, Satan also hates you and will do everything possible to keep you from loving and obeying your Creator. His anger is not just against Jesus and the Church. Why is he angry at you? Apparently, because he realizes that humans were created by God with the potential to be higher than he was (Hebrews 2:6-8).

      Because of his sick, twisted and unsound thinking, Satan has taken on the role of being an adversary against those seeking to love and obey their Father in heaven. Writing to the people of God, Peter cautioned, “Be sober, be vigilant; because your adversary the devil walks about like a roaring lion, seeking whom he may devour” (1 Peter 5:8).

      In communicating with the brethren in Corinth, Paul described the true gospel as being “veiled” or hidden because of Satan, “the god of this age,” who had blinded the minds of unbelievers (2 Corinthians 4:3-4). The good news is that this “veil is taken away in Christ” (2 Corinthians 3:14).

    • Mike

      If the alleged woman in Rev. 12 is Mary then according to these scriptures in verse 5, the past tense is that ‘she bore a child,’ but then her child was caught up to God and His throne. This suggests that the child is no longer on earth but with God. If verse 6 tells us that Mary fled to the wilderness where God would keep her safe and feed her for a period of time then how can Mary come back when the final days of Jesus’ return have not taken place and only then will He and His bride return? The order with which God has planned for the return of Jesus does not allow one single person to return to earth until the appointed time. So, how do you account for Mary leaving heaven? And how do you account for the dragon making war with the rest of her offspring on earth whom kept the commandments of Jesus if prior she had been in heaven? Did she go to heaven leaving offspring and then come back and witness the persecution of the offspring? Why didn’t her ‘queen of heaven and earth’ position do more on her behalf? It seems that any title of such royal glory would have some level of influence with God against the dragon unless it was stripped from her? But then it begs to question why and how she no longer bears those titles once back on earth according to the RCC’s interpretation of the woman in Rev. 12.
      It makes God a liar to believe in the RCC’s interpretation of whom the woman is in Rev 12.

      What scriptures reveal that the woman(alias:queen of heaven) is no longer the queen of heaven but without a title and back on earth and where God would strip her of her title? I mean, if you believe that she has rightfully earned the ‘queen of heaven and earth’ titles then what would have provoked God to strip the titles away and let her descend back to heaven?

    • Mike

      What scriptures reveal that the woman(alias:queen of heaven) is no longer the queen of heaven but without a title and back on earth and where God would strip her of her title? I mean, if you believe that she has rightfully earned the ‘queen of heaven and earth’ titles then what would have provoked God to strip the titles away and let her descend to earth before the appointed time?

    • Mike

      Ann says:

      Dec 21, 2014

      All that you say could be true, except……………

      Mary was God’s idea…not the Catholic Church’s.

      You have to assume that God caused Mary to be pregnant with the Messiah, and left her on her own…helpless…to deal with a satan\…who wanted her child dead.

      Then…there is Rev. 11:19, and 12:1.

      Mary is of the royal line of David.

      God left Mary on her own….pregnant….? In the time of Herod or in heaven? Did the birth occur twice?
      Help me understand where Mary is in this point of your understanding the bible.
      Is the bible revealing a future event of another pregnancy after Herod’s time or is it the same one? I read that God led Mary, Joseph and the child to Egypt to escape Herod’s murderous hand but is there another flight that Mary is taking where she is ‘alone’ without Joseph and not in Egypt but in some unknown(no name) wilderness where at some time and place other offspring from her (and perhaps Joseph) are being persecuted? I’m just trying to see your logic as to Mary fitting into both the context of the first 4 gospels of the New Testament and in Revelation 12.
      How does she slip back and forth and at some point of being forsaken by God being left on her own…helpless…to deal with a satan when it is also of the RCC’s attempt to tell the world that Mary was ‘assumed.’ Was Mary assumed into heaven while pregnant? Because in Rev. 12v2 it reads, ‘Then being with child, she cried out in labor and in pain to give birth. But in Rev. 12v1 it reads,’Now a great sign appeared in heaven: a woman clothed with the sun, with the moon under her feet, and on her head a garland of twelve stars.
      So, according to the RCC’s claim on her assumption and with the claim of the woman in Rev.12, this tells us that Mary was ‘assumed’ into heaven from earth and appeared with such glorification and also being with child and then gave birth.
      So this same Mary you are placing as the woman in Revelation 12 is the same Mary that left this world pregnant….Right?

  • Ann


    This is just what the Catholic Church has been trying to say!! Mary conceiving and giving birth to the Messiah is a heavenly affair!! It would have been humanly impossible for Mary and Joseph, on their own, to protect the Baby Jesus from satan!! Remember…in Luke 1:37…the angel says, ‘…for nothing is impossible with God.”

    Think of how hard it is for us to raise our own children…when satan is always after them. Without God’s grace….we are all sunk!!

    • MIke

      It is of the RCC that has made a fanciful story of what it wants to make out of the bible. You pick and choose what part of scripture to fit into your make-believe fables and try to pass it off as though God has appointed it so, but what you’ve contributed to is the adding and subtracting of your imagery of religious philosophy to the bible and you have no fear of the consequences of God’s wrath. You want to equate your ideals on how humans live on earth and make give an appearance as though heaven is governed the same way, but what you keep dismissing is that God’s thinking and man’s thinking is not the same. The RCC and including you do not have the things of God in mind as Jesus declared to those whom opposed Him when revealing His plan of sacrifice. He also said, ‘get thee behind me Satan’ when confronting those whom are led of the carnal flesh. Your form of thinking only equals to that of what is of the carnal flesh because you keep applying human feelings to base your scripture interpretation and that is why you are led by ‘sight’ and not by faith. Your type of faith is that of the blind leading the blind whose only understanding of the bible is of a counterfeit faith. Eve’s false faith of what she entertained in her ‘mind’ is that she listened to a serpent whose cunning words influenced her fleshly attributes and distorted the original understanding that came in the form of ‘spiritual truth.’ Your perception of the bible is the same as what took place in the Garden of Eden. You have the scriptures to read but not the spiritual essence with which to understand it with. You keep pointing back to Rome’s ideology instead of understanding the spiritual factor for whom the interpretation points to and that being the ‘throne of David.’

      I’m sticking only to what is relevant to the spiritual truth according to the prompting of the Holy Spirit, however, your prompting is to stick to what exalts the religious philosophy of roman ideology. What you don’t realize or rather do not want to accept is that Rome is not where God’s plan is based upon. His plan was, is and will be that Jesus will return to sit on the ‘throne of David’ and its location is in Israel and not on Rome and what Rome keeps doing is pointing back her religious finger to herself as though the interpretation of the bible rested on Rome.
      It is clear that you don’t know how to test the spirit of Rome’s philosophy on biblical/scriptural interpretation. If you understood you would then know that the ideology of Rome will be among the 7 churches judged at the appointed time according to God’s plan in the Book of Revelation.

      • Ann

        So…..what don’t you agree with??? That Mary giving birth to Jesus is a heavenly affair or Luke 1:37(…for nothing is impossible for God)???

        And about Israel being the ‘throne of David!’ Do you think Jesus mis-spoke when he said in John 18:36, ‘…but my kingdom is not of this world’???

        • Mike

          Where does the throne of David and the kingdom not of this world support your worship for Mary? You are implying that in order to exalt Mary to the state of worship you would have to take parts of biblical scripture and use it where it best supports the defense of Rome’s worship for her, right? You seem to do a great job of looking for any scripture at every turn in her defense just so that you find yourself in a righteous and biblical defense of her. You use the Holy inspired word of the bible to exalt her and then deny any worship. That is what is called, ‘Worship.’ If you don’t worship her then why look for ways to twist the bible into what is a man made theology on Mary simply to deny that you don’t worship her? You play religious mind games with yourselves.

          As far as agreeing or disagreeing….Rome worships Mary and then denies it. That’s what you seem to agree within yourselves. Very little scripture is written on her and yet only Rome makes an issue of designing an entire theology on her and you pick out scripture to support that same theology and then deceive yourselves with claiming that you don’t worship her. The problem lies within the kingdom of deception that Rome has created and its followers that have fallen for it and then denies any intent of worship.
          The kingdom of is not of this world, yes, however, you imagine a kingdom with Mary as ‘queen of heaven’ when there is none. God has spoken against it and God’s truth does ‘not’ change. Why do you go against God when it is plain and clear that He does ‘not’ change?

          Read the following:
          Question: “Who is the Queen of Heaven?”

          Answer: The phrase “the queen of heaven” appears in the Bible twice, both times in the book of Jeremiah. The first incident is in connection with the things the Israelites were doing that provoked the Lord to anger. Entire families were involved in idolatry. The children gathered wood, and the men used it to build altars to worship false gods. The women were engaged in kneading dough and baking cakes of bread for the “Queen of Heaven” (Jeremiah 7:18). This title referred to Ishtar, an Assyrian and Babylonian goddess also called Ashtoreth and Astarte by various other groups. She was thought to be the wife of the false god Baal, also known as Molech. The motivation of women to worship Ashtoreth stemmed from her reputation as a fertility goddess, and, as the bearing of children was greatly desired among women of that era, worship of this “queen of heaven” was rampant among pagan civilizations. Sadly, it became popular among the Israelites as well.

          The second reference to the queen of heaven is found in Jeremiah 44:17-25, where Jeremiah is giving the people the word of the Lord which God has spoken to him. He reminds the people that their disobedience and idolatry has caused the Lord to be very angry with them and to punish them with calamity. Jeremiah warns them that greater punishments await them if they do not repent. They reply that they have no intentions of giving up their worship of idols, promising to continue pouring out drink offerings to the queen of heaven, Ashtoreth, and even going so far as to credit her with the peace and prosperity they once enjoyed because of God’s grace and mercy.

          It is unclear where the idea that Ashtoreth was a “consort” of Jehovah originated, but it’s easy to see how the blending of paganism that exalts a goddess with the worship of the true King of heaven, Jehovah, can lead to the combining of God and Ashtoreth. And since Ashtoreth worship involved sexuality (fertility, procreation, temple prostitution), the resulting relationship, to the depraved mind, would naturally be one of a sexual nature. Clearly, the idea of the “queen of heaven” as the consort or paramour of the King of heaven is idolatrous and unbiblical.

          There is no queen of heaven. There has never been a queen of heaven. There is most certainly a King of Heaven, the Lord of hosts, Jehovah. He alone rules in heaven. He does not share His rule or His throne or His authority with anyone. The idea that Mary, the mother of Jesus, is the queen of heaven has no scriptural basis whatsoever, stemming instead from proclamations of priests and popes of the Roman Catholic Church. While Mary was certainly a godly young woman greatly blessed in that she was chosen to bear the Savior of the world, she was not in any way divine, nor was she sinless, nor is she to be worshipped, revered, venerated, or prayed to. All followers of the Lord God refuse worship. Peter and the apostles refused to be worshipped (Acts 10:25-26; 14:13-14). The holy angels refuse to be worshipped (Revelation 19:10; 22:9). The response is always the same, “Worship God!” To offer worship, reverence, or veneration to anyone but God is nothing short of idolatry. Mary’s own words in her “Magnificat” (Luke 1:46-55) reveal that she never thought of herself as “immaculate” and deserving of veneration, but was instead relying on the grace of God for salvation: “And my spirit rejoices in God my Savior.” Only sinners need a savior, and Mary recognized that need in herself.

          Furthermore, Jesus Himself issued a mild rebuke to a woman who cried out to Him, “Blessed is the mother who gave you birth and nursed you” (Luke 11:27), replying to her, “Blessed rather are those who hear the word of God and obey it.” By doing so, He curtailed any tendency to elevate Mary as an object of worship. He could certainly have said, “Yes, blessed be the Queen of Heaven!” But He did not. He was affirming the same truth that the Bible affirms—there is no queen of heaven, and the only biblical references to the “queen of heaven” refer to the goddess of an idolatrous, false religion.

          Read more: http:www.gotquestions.org

          Love God with all your ‘heart, mind, strength and soul.’ These are words of Jesus.

          Your words, Ann, are as such from a past post: ‘Please love her!
          Your plead to ‘love her’ is completely in line with ‘idolatry,’ and that constitutes ‘worship.’
          Jesus did not love her into ‘existence’ as you want others to believe and yet you use the name of Jesus as a crutch to support your plea. Using the name of Jesus in such a term to persuade one into thinking that it makes it right to love her is why Jesus said to his emotionally driven companions,’ Get thee behind me, Satan. You do not have the things of God in mind but on the things of man.’ Matt.16:23,Mark 8:33.
          The things in ‘mind’ for you is to ‘love’ her, but that is where your mind holds the truth of where your heart, strength and soul for Mary lays.
          You and Rome have proven that it is of your heart, mind, strength and soul to seek any and all biblical scripture to defend and exalt Mary as ‘queen of heaven.’ If your ‘mind’ is set on her then your heart, strength and soul follows for that is how Jesus declares what is inclusive of a complete love for God.

          • Ann

            I love Mary because she said, “Be it done to me..etc.” And she brought forth my Savior.

            My love for her does not lesson my love for God…in fact, it enhances it, since SHE was his idea (not the Catholic Church’s).

  • Mike

    You are soooooooo wrong!!!!!!!!!!!

  • Mike

    Matthew 10:37
    37 “Anyone who loves their father or mother more than me is not worthy of me; anyone who loves their son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me. 38 Whoever does not take up their cross and follow me is not worthy of me. 39 Whoever finds their life will lose it, and whoever loses their life for my sake will find it.

    You cannot reason with the word of God. Jesus covered all members of the family unit. You cannot love Mary in any manner( great or small) or you are not worthy of following Jesus.
    The commandment to love God with all your heart, mind, strength and soul is or should be 1st priority for a believer and follower or Jesus. Any religious side-step to make Mary worthy of any inspirational love is not of Jesus’ commandment but of the mind of man. As much as the religious mind and heart of man wants to exalt and love Mary it is out of rebellion towards Jesus’ that Rome does this since man cannot claim to love Jesus and at the same time accredit Mary with enhancing a love for God and still pretend to carry his/her own cross. Can’t have it both ways.

    5th Commandment:Honor your father and your mother, so that you may live long in the land the Lord your God is giving you.
    Even if you pretended to understand the 5th commandment of the law of the old testament you would still have to respect that the commandment to love God in the new testament is based on how Jesus fulfilled all the Laws, so, with this in mind, where is there New Testament scripture that alludes or bears testimony of Jesus commanding all believers to honor Mary with a title as ‘queen of heaven?’ This sort of title just wouldn’t slip past Jesus, now would it? If He(Jesus) is pure in word and deed then there must be something one can read that reveals His followers to exalt this grandiose and regal title directly from His words. He would have also told all His followers to accept His mother as the new ark of the covenant. This would have been a great revelation while He was still among the people and the apostles would have written on it. After all, He did tell us that He would have to return to His Father so that the Holy Comforter would come and be with us and we all know that this information is of Holy divine inspiration. So, would He simply just flippantly forget about telling us of exalting the ‘queen of heaven?’ No, he wouldn’t have forgotten cause its a big lie, that’s why!!!! The only queen of heaven and alleged new ark of the covenant is in the blasphemies that Rome devises and spews out.

    • Ann

      I have tried and tried to understand people who don’t understand how we, Catholics, can love God plus his Holy Mother.
      This is my theory….they don’t have the Holy Eucharist. In the Holy Eucharist, we Catholics receive his body….his love…his DNA….which is love. Remember, Jesus did not die for his friends only, he also died for his enemies. And he commands us to love our enemies. So….how can us poor humans, love like Jesus? He empowers us with his DNA….his body…..in Holy Communion.
      Maybe, that is why, Mike, you cannot understand Catholic love for the Holy Family, our saints and clergy, our neighbors, and yes….even our enemies.

      • Mike

        I was brought up catholic, Anne, and then I decided to test the spirits of what was being taught in the church and it didn’t match what the truth stated in the bible, so, its not like I don’t know what you’re feeling or thinking as a catholic. To love like the Lord said is biblical guidance while we are on earth and to serve as testimony of the indwelling of the Holy Spirit within one’s temple but the love of the believer is to lead one to Jesus by way of the Holy spirit and not by the dogmas of Mary. The authors of these dogmas may have cleverly used biblical scripture to formulate many a theory but they are still not of actual biblical text. As far as the body in communion, well, there’s a problem you’ve encountered as a catholic and that is that you prefer to accept the idea that Jesus’ DNA actually is contained in the bread and wine at communion. The bread and wine of communion are symbolic of His body and blood and not that it is transformed(transubstantiation) into His ‘real’ body and blood, thus you are eating His DNA. We do not fight against flesh and blood but against spirit and so, also, we partake of His body and blood in ‘spirit’ during communion.

        Jesus said to love God with all your heart, mind, strength and soul and to love your neighbor as yourself. He did say to love your enemies, too, but He didn’t say to love Mary and exalt her to the status of titling her with ‘queen of heaven,’ did He? No, He did not. If He did then please find the words from Jesus that declares and commands us to do so.
        There isn’t any scripture by any apostle that testifies of any such ideology, however, you will find the link below very interesting on what some early church clergy declared on the dogmas of Mary.


        • Ann

          Thank you for the link on the early thoughts on Our Blessed Mother. While they provided the arguments for and against the reverence of Holy Mary, this is a settled teaching. And nowhere in the Bible does it say,
          “Honor your Father and thy Mother….except Mary.”
          Then….there is the words of Jesus himself from the Cross, “Woman behold thy son!” (John 19:27)….NB…John’s natural Mother was still alive.(Catholic tradition says that Jesus had to blink the blood from his eyes to look at her). It seems to me that ‘son’, ‘daughter’, ‘brother’, ‘mother’, are not used as we do today. Have you considered that Mary might have ‘foster-mommed’ a bunch of kids? Look how generously she gave of herself in Luke 1:39.
          Then…in Luke 11:28, Jesus said, “Blessed are those that hear the word of God and obey it”….which Mary did.

  • Mike

    The full meaning of Luke11:28 begins in verse 27, “As Jesus was saying these things, a woman in the crowd called out, “Blessed is the mother who gave you birth and nursed you.”

    28 He replied, “Blessed rather are those who hear the word of God and obey it.”
    Jesus ‘rebuked’ the woman and stated that ‘rather’ is the blessing bestowed upon those who hear the word of God and obey it.
    The bible is not pointing to Mary being obedient to this verse. You don’t even know how to read it in context of what Jesus is referring to. The woman was elevating a ‘person’ for what was not worthy of bestowing a blessing and Jesus rebuked her on it. That is why He used the word ‘rather’ to shift the focus off the ‘person’ and direct the listeners that the blessing is upon those whom ‘hear’ the word and ‘obey’ it. The scripture is absolutely clear that Jesus did not want the ‘person’ whom nursed him to be subject of any reverence which is why His next verse was a ‘redirection’ of what we should be focusing on. You must read the bible in context of its spiritual meaning. The point of not focusing on the woman that nursed Him was so that the people would not mislead themselves into venerating an ideology of the woman. People of that time were prone to fall prey to idolatry. An example on how to understand this weakness for idolatry is in Matthew 17 when Jesus took Peter, James and John up high onto a mountain and there Jesus was transfigured and Moses and Elijah also appeared in their presence. Then Peter said to Jesus that they should build shelters(altars)for all 3 of them but while Peter was still speaking a bright cloud covered them and a voice in the cloud said, “This is my Son, whom I love; with him I am well pleased. Listen to him!” If that didn’t stop Peter from planning on any alters then I don’t know what could have. So, you see? The focus of what the voice of God said was to listen to His Son whom He ‘loves’ and is well pleased. The voice in the cloud is clearly the voice of the Father and He is bringing attention to the men on the mountain to ‘focus’ on His Son and to ‘listen’ to Him. All that the apostles wrote never emphasized on anything more than what they basically wrote on Mary and they never had other hidden mysteries to reveal about her. This why Jesus redirected the focus off the idea to bless the woman for nursing Him. If people focus on these insignificant ideals then these ideal become a form of focus and then the essence of the holiness of God’s spirit is not grasped which leads to not having the ‘full’ worship God deserves. This again, is where the ‘heart, mind, strength and soul must be redirected wholly onto God and no where else…..not even Mary. There is no account in any scripture where Jesus focuses on Mary as much as the traditions of the catholic church does. If you are of His sheep then you will ‘hear’ His voice and you will ‘obey’ as Jesus said in Luke:28.
    Replying to your family issue: The fact that son, daughter, brother, mother and father is the same as before, now and will always be until kingdom come. Just like God, His word will never change. Mary had other children according to scripture. It is not of tradition that the bible speaks of but of Holy truth and the holy truth says that she had other children. You and the catholic church have no business changing what is of God’s truth unless you are wanting to call God a liar.
    As far as Jesus blinking blood out of His eye via catholic tradition, well, this is just another attempt to lessen the moment of holy spiritual redemption and make it into a carnal moment for Mary. Your tradition alleges a scenario of Jesus focusing his attention on Mary instead of the Father while on the cross. Again, your tradition turns the focus onto Mary instead of what the bible is truly conveying. Your traditions tend to add ideas of probabilities to what was and is already a final written gospel. You say it is a settled teaching but it is only a settled teaching within roman catholicism and not of true biblical interpretation. If it were so, you would not need to resort to traditions to validate the interpretation of the bible for the bible interprets itself.

    • Ann

      I am looking at the scriptures through the eyes of love.

      I can see Luke 11:28 as flattery for Our Lord….interpreted in today’s language like, “Your Mom should be proud of you.”

      In John 19:27….are you suggesting that John became Mary’s maternal son??

      Do you doubt that when the thorns were placed on Jesus’ head…that he bled?? Would the blood have run into his eyes??

      Are we to obey the 4th commandment, but accept that Jesus didn’t do the same??

      May I refer you to John 21:25.

      • Mike

        Well don’t look at the scriptures through the eyes of love but read them with a spirit of discernment and focus on what is written and not with what your emotions want it to say. You need to ‘renew’ your mind as Paul tells us. You want to interpret Luke 11:28 with an emotional ideal of what you prefer it to say just so that it fits into the imagery of what Mary might be feeling. You cannot get ‘your mom should be proud of you’ out of the text when it doesn’t even refer to anything of that imagery. To add your spin to the text would be ‘out of context.’ You only think that it could be that way and force the issue as though it does read that way when it doesn’t exist. Again, you cannot add your spin into the text. So, what if the blood ran down His head and face? Where does scripture identify any blood in His eyes as though one should read that He blinked blood out of His eyes? What is the point to add that to the scripture unless you want to insert another imagery on where to elevate Mary within the context of scripture? And even if Jesus did get blood in His eyes, so what?!!!! The bible has no point to make anything of it if it did happen. You only assume that that could be possible and with that you go off on making another unwarranted, unmerited, unnecessary point to focus the attention on Mary by inserting thoughts of such an imagery taking place. As Perry Mason would say, ‘its illogical, immaterial and irrelevant.’
        Explain your purpose on John 19:27, ’cause you’ve thrown me off with your flippant scripture use on your irrelevant points.
        Your question on the 4th commandment is illogical. My question to you is ‘have you not read that Jesus has come not to abolish the Law but to fulfill them?’ What part of scripture tells us that each commandment was individually and explicitly described as being practiced by Jesus? For you to ask me if Jesus didn’t do the same is just not worthy of any answer since we can clearly read that above all commandments He has said that we love God with all our heart, mind, strength and soul and love they neighbor as our selves. All commandments are based on what the testimonies of what is clearly written, but you deliberately want to see Mary into every sentence of the bible and insert any imagery of her by using selective verses of scripture along with the suggestive possibilities of traditional catholic ideologies when the bible was never based on being interpreted that way. And now you throw in John 21:25 to suggest that anything your thoughts imagine goes. Again, that is throwing in your spin on what is actually being revealed and conveyed and using scripture just to support your ideology.
        There is nothing to suggest within the context of that particular scripture that what you call a ‘tradition’ should be processed as biblical based fact and then claim that it could’ve happen that way just cause you’ve selected that scripture to back up the concocted roman catholic tradition. Your tradition doesn’t prove the bible. The bible is not written to be proven to support any roman catholic tradition.
        I now ask you this: What scripture tells us to do the tradition of the rosary then?
        We know Jesus said not to do repetitious prayers like the pagans do, so why do catholics repeat the tradition of bead prayers when it strictly in line with paganism tradition? Even Muslim and Hindu followers do bead prayers and they are considered as pagans since they do not regard Jesus as the Son of God, the Father nor do they call themselves Christian. So why not stop with the ‘traditions’ of pagans and be obedient to the words of Jesus. You may find a verse within your tradition to do such bead prayers but it is still of biblical based fact that if you do it you are just as equal to the ideology of a pagans religious beliefs.

        • Ann

          I can look at the Gospels through the eyes of love, because I am fed the Body of Jesus( who is all love), in Holy Communion.
          Saying the Rosary is saying the story of Jesus through the eyes of his Holy Mother…..who herself loved him…. from womb to tomb….to infinity and beyond…………..
          who lived with him, and kept things in her heart. She, herself, shared his DNA.
          About repetitive prayer…have you only said the ‘Our Father’ one time? And what about the psalms? Those are wonderful prayers that should be said often….most from the mouth of King David….who God dubbed ‘of my own heart’.

          • Mike

            What biblical scripture tells man to do the rosary?

  • Mike


    Question: “Is praying the rosary Scriptural?”

    Answer: While much of what the prayer of the rosary contains is scriptural, the whole second half of the “Hail Mary” and portions of the “Hail, Holy Queen” are blatantly unbiblical. While the first part of the Hail Mary is almost a direct quotation from Luke 1:28, there is no scriptural basis for (1) praying to Mary now, (2) addressing her as “holy” Mary, or (3) calling her “our life” and “our hope.”

    Is it right to call Mary “holy,” by which the Catholic Church means that Mary never sinned nor had any taint of original sin? The believers in the Bible were called “saints,” which can be interpreted as “set-apart ones” or “holy ones,” but the understanding of Scripture is that the righteousness that believers in Christ have is an imparted righteousness from Christ (2 Corinthians 5:21) and that while in this life, they are not yet sanctified from sin in practice (1 John 1:9-2:1). Jesus is called our Savior repeatedly in Scripture because He saved us from our sin. In Luke 1:47, Mary calls God her “Savior.” Savior from what? A sinless person does not need a Savior. Sinners need a Savior. Mary acknowledged that God was her Savior. Therefore, Mary was acknowledging that she was a sinner.

    Jesus said that He came to save us from our sins (Matthew 1:21). The Roman Catholic Church claims that Mary was saved from sin differently from everyone else–that she was saved from sin through the immaculate conception (her being conceived free of sin). But is this teaching scriptural? The Roman Catholic Church openly admits that this teaching is not found in Scripture. When a young man addressed Jesus as “good Master” (Matthew 19:16-17), Jesus asks why he calls Him “good” since there is none good but one, God. Jesus was not denying His own deity, He was trying to make the young man aware that he was using the term too loosely without thinking about what he was saying. But Jesus’ point is still valid or He would not have said it–there is none good but God. This excludes all but God, including Mary! This ties in with Romans 3:10-23; Romans 5:12; and countless other passages that stress the fact that in God’s eyes no one measures up. Never is Mary ever excluded from such all-encompassing statements!

    What of the question of praying to Mary or to anyone else besides God? We are never told in the Bible whether anyone else in heaven can even hear us. We do know that God alone is all-knowing, all-powerful, and all-present. Even the angels, with whatever great abilities they may have, seem to have their limitations and can’t always make it to help us as they might like (Daniel 10:10-14). When Jesus taught His disciples to pray, He gave them what is commonly called the “Our Father.” He teaches us to address our prayer to God. Whenever prayer is addressed to anyone, it is done to God! Never can you find a single example of someone praying to any “saint” or angel or anyone else (besides prayers to false gods). Further, any time that any pious person prostrates himself (in a religious setting) to honor someone else besides God (chiefly to the apostles or angels), he is told to get up, to stop it (Acts 10:25-26; Acts 14:13-16; Matthew 4:10; Revelation 19:10; Revelation 22:8-9). The Roman Catholic Church states that it worships God alone but that it “venerates” Mary and the saints. What is the difference? A person praying the rosary spends more time calling out to Mary than to God! For every one praise of God in the rosary, there are 10 praises of Mary!

    The Bible states that Jesus is our Redeemer (Galatians 3:13; 4:4-5; Titus 2:14; 1 Peter 1:18-19; Revelation 5:9). The “Hail, Holy Queen” calls Mary our “most gracious advocate,” but the Bible calls Jesus our Advocate to the Father (1 John 2:1) and our one Mediator (1 Timothy 2:5). The only time in Scripture that the title “Queen of Heaven” is found it is in a negative way (Jeremiah 7:17-19; 44:16-27). The whole of Scripture teaches us to pray to God alone. Never once can you find an example or admonition to pray to anyone else! The only basis for the idea of getting to God through Mary is the biblical story of Mary coming to Jesus to ask for his help at a wedding feast (John 2). But in light of all of the other verses, including Jesus’ own instruction on how we are to pray, is it taking this passage in context to use it to teach that we ought to continue to go through Mary to get to God?

    Likewise, is it appropriate to call Mary our “life” and “hope”? Again, these are terms that are used of God alone in Scripture, particularly God the Son, Jesus Christ (John 1:1-14; Colossians 3:4; 1 Timothy 1:1; Ephesians 2:12; Titus 2:13). Thus, the practice of saying the rosary goes contrary to Scripture in a number of ways. Only God can hear our prayers. Only God can answer our prayers. The Bible nowhere instructs Christians to pray through intermediaries, or to petition saints or Mary (in Heaven) for their prayers.

    Recommended Resources: The Gospel According to Rome: Comparing Catholic Tradition and The Word of God by James McCarthy and Logos Bible Software.

    Read more: http://www.gotquestions.org/praying-rosary.html#ixzz3ObQZ5JUa

  • Mike

    In Mark 7, Jesus rebuked some of those that put Jesus to the test on observing traditions. It is clear that the example Jesus offered on the ‘commandment’ to honor thy parents were not met as they reasoned or justified their denying the honoring of the parents for seeking ‘tradition’ as more honorable. Here is the prime example of the how the catholic religion justifies and reasons doing the rosary with their following ‘tradition’ as more respectable and religiously honorable to the way of the catholic belief system. The fact that Jesus referred to the prophet Isaiah in the New Testament is reflective of how Jesus upholds the Old Testament to prove the hypocrisy of those whom do not truly honor God but vainly go through the religious motions using ‘lip service.’ He goes on to address that the ‘teachings’ (meaning traditions) they follow are merely of man made basis. This quote that Jesus offers is based on how He directly strikes at the core of man’s heart with their attempts to use man made ‘tradition’ and as an equivalent form of worship when He clearly declares it as a ‘vain’ attempt. The catholic church is equal in her ‘vain’ attempt to uphold catholic ‘tradition’ as honorable before God when in truth they ‘nullify’ the word of God according to Jesus’ quote in Mark 7. He also stated that they do many more things like that, meaning that their list of traditions are extensive. This says a lot about how the catholic church prides herself with honoring and upholding the many ways of their traditions and where the traditions come in conflict with the biblical scriptures. The rosary is the prime example of nullifying the word of God where Jesus commands man not to use vain repetitious prayers and where the catholic ‘tradition’ of applying the rosary for prayer with repetitive prayers.
    Therefore, if the rosary is of repetitious prayers and biblical scripture tells us not to do as the ‘pagans’ or ‘heathens’ do but the rosary is still done, then Jesus is correct in declaring that the ‘lip service’ with which the rosary is done is in ‘vain.’ It only serves to fulfill catholic tradition(human rules) as Jesus declares.

    Mark 7
    7 The Pharisees and some of the teachers of the law who had come from Jerusalem gathered around Jesus 2 and saw some of his disciples eating food with hands that were defiled, that is, unwashed. 3 (The Pharisees and all the Jews do not eat unless they give their hands a ceremonial washing, holding to the tradition of the elders. 4 When they come from the marketplace they do not eat unless they wash. And they observe many other traditions, such as the washing of cups, pitchers and kettles.[a])

    5 So the Pharisees and teachers of the law asked Jesus, “Why don’t your disciples live according to the tradition of the elders instead of eating their food with defiled hands?”

    6 He replied, “Isaiah was right when he prophesied about you hypocrites; as it is written:

    “‘These people honor me with their lips,
    but their hearts are far from me.
    7 They worship me in vain;
    their teachings are merely human rules.’[b]

    8 You have let go of the commands of God and are holding on to human traditions.”

    9 And he continued, “You have a fine way of setting aside the commands of God in order to observe[c] your own traditions! 10 For Moses said, ‘Honor your father and mother,’[d] and, ‘Anyone who curses their father or mother is to be put to death.’[e] 11 But you say that if anyone declares that what might have been used to help their father or mother is Corban (that is, devoted to God)— 12 then you no longer let them do anything for their father or mother. 13 Thus you nullify the word of God by your tradition that you have handed down. And you do many things like that.”

  • Ann

    It is clear that you will not call Holy Mary blessed….but you are missing out. And yes, she is ‘Holy’, for she carried the son of God in her womb. If you can find a way to separate Mary from her womb…then go for it.

    I can cite many times Our Lord encourages repetitive prayer, but my favorite is Luke 11:5-13…where Our Lord asks us to keep knocking for the door to be opened to us. Knocking is a repetitive action.

    In Luke 15:7, there is great celebration in heaven when one sinner repents, and in Rev.5:8, the prayers of the saints are before the throne of God. I don’t think they will be praying for themselves because they are in heaven….what is there to pray for??

    Mary was saved by a special grace….the grace we pray for when we say in the Lord’s prayer, “Lead us not into temptation…etc”.

    And….my favorite topic…Blessed Herman the cripple, who wrote the ‘Hail Holy Queen’, also called ‘Salve Regina’. Here was a child…born totally disabled….who grew up in a Benedictine monastery. To him…Our Blessed Mother Mary was all he had….his life, his sweetness, and his hope….of her he wrote. It would be worth your while to see the blessings/the genius that was poured down from heaven on this boy. Spoke Arabic, Greek, Latin…wrote treaties on math and geometry. Constructed an ancient computer, an astrolabe. Wrote songs, enough books to fill a library, poems and on and on. And all this while losing his sight. He lived from 1013-1051 AD.

    • Mike

      Ann, please quote me where I’ve mentioned my unwillingness to call Mary blessed? I’ve not mentioned her by ‘holy Mary’ I admit, but I have only addressed the issue of your tradition to elevate her, titling her with ‘queen of heaven’ and pointing to the fact that although she is spiritually invoked for heavenly godlike attributes by the RCC while her members deny she is a goddess and providing biblical scripture where Jesus Himself goes against the man made(human rules)religious traditions that resemble the RCC’s supreme regard for tradition above biblical scripture.
      So where is my statement of not considering her ‘blessed’ as you state?

      • Ann

        Sorry if I mis-interpreted anything you said.

        • Mike

          Just wanting to make sure that you understand my understanding of what is ‘holy’ inspired is based by what is appointed by God’s written word in the bible. The bible said that Mary’s cousin Elizabeth said that Mary is ‘blessed’ above all women but only because the bible says Elizabeth was filled with the Holy Spirit. However, there is no reference to her as being titled as ‘holy mother’ that would require or lead anyone to elevate her beyond the ‘blessed’ status. Mary herself said that all generations will call her ‘blessed,’ but she did not say that generations will call her ‘holy mother.’ The angel Gabriel said that she was found with favor but we can also read in scripture that Rahab was found with favor also for agreeing to harbor safety for the children of Israel against the enemy. So even though Rahab,a woman known of ill repute, did not birth the salvation of man she did engage in the plan of God and thus has a place in everlasting eternity. My point is that why doesn’t the catholic church refer to Rahab as ‘Saint Rahab?’ Obviously the saints in the new testament have mentioned her effort of support for God’s plan several times. They most certainly believed that she performed a miraculous work in the spiritual warfare against the spies in the book of Joshua.

          As far as holy mother goes, if we are to be holy for ‘He’ is holy as Jesus said, then all of us should be holy. Should I call you ‘holy Anne’ and you call me ‘holy Mike?’ Or should we call each other as ‘Saint Anne’ and ‘Saint Mike’ since the bible refers to all whom are believers/followers of Christ as ‘sanctified?’ When we take the bible as ‘holy’ is it because the book itself is ‘holy?’ or the inspired message behind the testimonies are holy? All these questions I place to you are for the recognition of what was pre-Roman Catholic Church tradition inspired. God does not need the Roman Catholic tradition to interpret the bible as to whom is blessed, holy or a saint. Anyone can read for themselves of what is pertaining to biblical fact without misinterpreting the facts, however, it is a matter of trusting that what we read is worthy of calling the testimonies as ‘holy.’ So, if the message and messenger is of holy inspiration then what we read is based on the interpretation that the inspiration is divinely appointed as well. So with adding ‘divine’ as part of the inspired understanding of what is the message of the bible, ‘where does the bible call Mary ‘holy mother’ or ‘queen of heaven?’ The basis for a Roman Catholic member to answer that it is of ‘catholic tradition’ to call her by these titles cannot be regarded as ‘holy inspired’ since the message and messenger of the bible does not refer to Mary with any of the titles that the catholic church uses. So where does the RCC get this sort of inspiration?

          Mary also said in Luke 1:52, ‘he has brought down the mighty from their thrones
          and exalted those of humble estate’
          We can take for granted that when Mary addresses this point that she is referring to God, and her belief is that she is also regarding all that she knows of her past through her lineage of David( as she is a descendant of David) and all the way back to Abraham. We know this because she said in v55, ‘as he spoke to our fathers,
          to Abraham and to his offspring forever.”
          But before this declaration of knowing her history of the fathers and especially Abraham, she acknowledges in v54, ‘He has helped his servant Israel,
          in remembrance of his mercy.
          The fact that Mary declares that God has helped his servant Israel is based on her acknowledgment on knowing whom Israel was.
          I now supply to you this understanding from a website that is offering the meaning of the Hebrew name ‘Israel’ (http://eteacherhebrew.com/Hebrew-Names/israel-yisrael-yisrael) and it says: According to the Biblical explanation, the first part of the name “Israel” is derived of the verb לִשְׂרות (lisrot, “wrestle”); the second half of the name is אֵל (El, “God”). This name was given to Jacob because he wrestled with God’s angel.
          The holy inspired word of God tells us truthfully that ‘he’ wrestled with God, but who told Jacob that he was no longer to be called Jacob but instead ‘Israel?’ The man whom Jacob struggled with was a messenger from God. Jacob would not let go of the messenger until ‘he’ received a blessing. The blessing that came from God via the messenger is the entitlement of being called ‘Israel,’ and the bible is telling us that it was God whom bestowed the blessing and the new name of Israel upon Jacob. It also goes on to read in Genesis 32:30, ‘And Jacob called the name of the place Peniel: for I have seen God face to face, and my life is preserved.
          Jacob saw the face of God and we know that his name will be regarded as ‘Israel.’ So with this in mind why would the tradition of the catholic church supersede the holy and divine word of God and make Mary appear as the woman in Rev. 12 when we have a biblical account where Mary acknowledges that she gives God the glory for helping his servant Israel in remembrance of His mercy? She is declaring that God’s mercy on Israel is solely due to understanding what she has been taught through the prophets. She remembers her teachings but she also mentions ‘offspring’ as being forever in the promise of God’s mercies. This suggests that Mary’s knowledge of Israel’s future was of prophetic basis and if she understood and acknowledges prophecy then she must have also understood that she would be prophesied as ‘queen of heaven’ if we are to look at Mary through catholic tradition. Where can we read in biblical scripture that she knows of such entitlement?
          Genesis 32:28 is revealing a prophecy of Israel prevailing and we know that only Jacob was uniquely blessed with seeing God face to face and whose name was changed to Israel. What we continue to read is that throughout the rest of his account he is still biblically referred to as Jacob. This means that the Israel we read in Genesis is of prophetic purposes that are also being revealed of its fruition in Rev. 12. because of the word that tells us of the ‘prevailing’ outcome within the meaning of the blessing bestowed. He wrestled with God not Mary. He was blessed explicitly by holy and divine appointment. The prevailing outcome is the prophecy focusing on the result of God’s defeat over the adversary. In whom shall we offer our rejoicing for the defeat over the adversary? To God or to Mary? If she declares that God has looked upon her humble state then we should also read where God has taken her humble state and exalted her to prophetic status if we are to consider Rome’s version of the woman in Rev.12, but instead we read where Jacob’s name has been prophetically changed for the fulfillment of what even Mary has prophetically declared in Luke 1:46.
          She also said in Luke, ‘he has brought down the mighty from their thrones
          and exalted those of humble estate.’ This means that she recounts the history of God’s hand in the lineage of her past and at the same time she is rejoicing for the things to come. According to the holy and divine written word, we have out of the mouth of Jacob and out of the mouth of Mary prophetic declarations on what God will do. So, how is it that the RCC adds to the holy and divine prophetic word of God and account of Mary as being the ‘woman’ in Rev. 12 when we have a prophecy revealing Israel as the ‘offspring’ whom will prevail in the outcome of God’s plan?
          Again, the only purpose to follow catholic tradition with exalting Mary is to spiritually glorify her with entitlements not of God’s holy and divine inspiration but only out of traditions that serve the human rules that do away with the commandments of God and nullify His written word according to Jesus.
          The commandment to love God with all your heart, mind, strength and soul and to love thy neighbor as thyself is above all the commandments that fulfill all the commandments of the old law. Jesus was the walking testimony of those commandments and thus would not have exalted His mother and declare her an entitlement of ‘holy mother.’ He never called her mother according to biblical scripture. He referred to her as ‘woman.’ He also said to those that were before Him listening to His teachings in Mark 3:31-35, Then Jesus’ mother and brothers arrived. Standing outside, they sent someone in to call him. 32 A crowd was sitting around him, and they told him, “Your mother and brothers are outside looking for you.”

          33 “Who are my mother and my brothers?” he asked.

          34 Then he looked at those seated in a circle around him and said, “Here are my mother and my brothers! 35 Whoever does God’s will is my brother and sister and mother.”
          The body as a whole is intertwined as the family unit. So why should I regard Mary as holy mother when Jesus said that those that do the ‘will’ of the Father are His mother, brothers and sisters? If He didn’t call her holy mother then I don’t have to either and nor am I to love her beyond scriptural value. My discredit for her adoration is based on catholic tradition and not in biblical inspiration or interpretation or lack thereof. If the holy divine word of God says to love her to the degree that it takes me to a spiritual euphoria then we would have read Jesus doing the same but what is evident is that the religious philosophy of Rome and her members will equate loving Mary with the same human attributes of heart, mind, strength and soul required for God. This why I and millions of other non catholic Christians separate fact from traditional catholic fiction and do not exalt Mary out of biblical context. We just don’t add on or subtact to what cannot be changed biblically, otherwise we will experience the wrath of God.

  • Ann


    You have managed to separate or…your word…’subtract’ Mary from her womb, just because you have some mis-guided idea about the Catholic Church. Like I keep telling you….Mary was God’s idea, not the Catholic Church’s. And to set the record straight….didn’t Mary bow to the ‘will’ of God?? You have to get over yourself.

    • Mike

      Its not about me. It’s about Jesus and only Jesus. Mary did bow down to the will of God according to biblical scripture, but the catholic church has made her bow and be a host of other added religious acrobatics thru tradition that are not warranted in the preaching of the gospel of our Lord and savior. Praise be onto Jesus forever and ever. Amen

  • Mike

    Luke 11:5-13 are examples of what the Father will do when we ask of Him. Jesus said in v:9-10 ““So I say to you: Ask and it will be given to you; seek and you will find; knock and the door will be opened to you. 10 For everyone who asks receives; the one who seeks finds; and to the one who knocks, the door will be opened.
    The evidence on Jesus’ instructions on prayer are inclusive in ‘asking,’ seeking and knocking.’ You singled out ‘knock’ in the verse as though it suggests ‘repetitive’ prayer which it doesn’t. Reading the entire context is what Jesus would tell you since He’s the one whom said it. The word of God says ‘pray without ceasing’ but according to Jesus we are still not to use vain repetitious words and bead prayers that recite decade prayers is not in obedience to Jesus’ command. Only Jesus is mediator between God and man so any other prayers that are offered onto another heavenly entity would qualify under ‘vain lip service’ according to the Jesus’ very own words.

    Now going back to calling Mary holy…….why is she ‘holy?’ Please refer to biblical scripture where she is called holy or even holy mother? What was so holy about her that you believe that only under that condition could she carry God’s one and only beloved Son? The prophecy in Isaiah 7:13-14 says that the Lord will provide a sign from the house of David, a virgin whom will conceive and bear a Son and call His name Immanuel. There’s nothing in prophecy or scripture that the only way that God could have used her was because she was of holy character. Mary went as far as saying ‘My spirit rejoices in God my savior.’ We both agree with scripture that she carried our Lord and savior, but we must also both be in accord that we cannot go back into history and rewrite into biblical scripture that Mary was holy since it would only uphold our purpose to conduct ourselves in a holy manner as Jesus said by not trying to insert a title onto Mary where God did not offer her one. On that note, we would be in obedience to Jesus’ command to us, ‘Be holy for I am holy.’

    Where is there biblical reference that says Mary was saved by a ‘special grace’ as you put it?
    What the bible refers to being saved by faith thru grace is for all whom believe and trust in the saving work through Jesus Christ. God made no special grace for only Mary. What you are conveying is that her salvation came not through the sacrifice of Jesus but through another way not through Jesus Christ’s blood sacrifice. Grace means ‘unmerited favor,’ so if a special grace was applied onto Mary even though the bible says that there is no one without sin, then what we are to believe through catholic tradition is that her salvation came from something opposite the general ‘unmerited favor’ all mankind is under. That opposite unmerited favor must mean that the special grace she experienced was given for her meritorious qualifications. Do you have biblical scripture enlightening us on that special qualification? I don’t mean just picking scriptures here and there just to support your catholic tradition but something expounding the nature of Mary from a written gospel by the witnesses in the New Testament.
    I was under the biblical and spiritual impression that God knew what He was doing when He sent His only begotten Son for the sins of all mankind but perhaps the spiritual caveat provided for Mary is where the blood of Christ would be of non effect, at least on her anyway.
    I know I’m being facetious but there’s a difference with being blasphemous and rewriting the ‘holy’ word of God through catholic tradition.
    I don’t see or understand your purpose of referring to Luke 15:7 in the scope of repetitious prayer, however, do you even know how Rev.5 fits in the order of the bible ? The verse in Rev.5 you’ve selected bears only a symbolism of what is happening in the glory of heaven, but what you have not understood is that the time frame in the entire book of Revelation is not of our time frame as you perceive. So, to use this portion of scripture in support of repetitious prayer would still be of non-effect. First, there is no repetitious prayer permitted as Jesus said. Secondly, the scripture on Rev.5 is of a period yet to take place. It has not happened yet so this cannot affirm your catholic tradition of the rosary. When you read Revelation in spirit and in truth you will see that the chapters/scriptures prior to ch5 are of Jesus’ letters of judgement to the 7 churches. After that, there are no further scriptures regarding the churches throughout Revelation which means that the churches are not of biblical issue anymore. The churches experience a time of ‘judgement’ and then the event on the rest of the world is taking place. This means that the rapture has taken place and the trials and tribulations on the earth and inhabitants are in effect. The prayers you believe in verse 8 are of those whom are under the effect of the tribulation. So you see, there is no way that the catholic tradition for rosary beads are worthy of any purpose since the tradition does not fit into the order of what has already been established since before the foundation of the earth. However, the words of Jesus has declared that vain lip service nullify the word of God in lieu of man made traditions. This will never change.

    • Ann

      May I suggest that you re-read the title and subject of this blog. Then, maybe you will see the case for Mary being the New Holy of Hollies, since she carried in her womb Jesus….the Bread of Life, the Word of God, and the Rod of Aaron. After you have re-read the above, and you still don’t see it, then God help you…..

      Incidentally, his blood is her blood.

      There is no part of the Gospels that Jesus called Mary ‘Holy Mother’; as a matter of fact the only recorded time that he called her ‘Mother’, was at the foot of the Cross, when he told John, “Behold your Mother!”

  • Mike

    I know what the blog is about and what it is conveying. The ideology of paralleling Mary to Jesus is what the blog is about, Ann. Its as though she deserves to be entitled as equal in all that Jesus did through His work of salvation for mankind. God has helped me to see that the word of God has been changed through catholic tradition. Her blood is not her blood. If she is to be revered for His blood being her blood then there is conflicting testimony against her, for she is guilty of sin along with her family in the following scriptures: Mark 3:20-21 and verses 31-32:

    20Then Jesus entered a house, and again a crowd gathered, so that he and his disciples were not even able to eat. 21When his family heard about this, they went to take charge of him, for they said, “He is out of his mind.”

    31Then Jesus’ mother and brothers arrived. Standing outside, they sent someone in to call him. 32 A crowd was sitting around him, and they told him, “Your mother and brothers are outside looking for you.”

    Would the one that is of his blood in her blood have the unholy sinful gall to be of equal mindset as with her other children and declare that Jesus is ‘out of his mind?’ Scripture doesn’t lie. She of ‘his blood’ seems to be in conflict with what should be of pure and holy countenance and spirit according to catholic tradition. If she is so holy then why did she sin against the character of the Son of God? This why scripture is of fact and tradition is of human rules.
    You’re right to refer to the gospels that there is no part that Jesus called Mary ‘Holy Mother,’ however, the ‘mother’ issue you’ve pointed to starts with John 19v26. His instruction to his mother was “Woman, behold your son” and v27 is directed to his disciple, “Behold your mother.” He is in no way directly addressing her as mother for He was talking to his disciple with regards to taking care of her. We know this because v28 says, And from that hour that disciple took her to his own home.
    So, there is still no scriptural evidence of Jesus ever addressing Mary ‘directly’ with ‘mother.’
    Here’s some videos for you on what is of tradition and of biblical fact on Mary in 3 parts. I do pray in Jesus name you truly are seeing what the blog is about through these videos, Anne.


    In Christ, Mike

  • Mike

    Pardon me. It should read ‘His’ blood is not her blood.

    • Ann

      Well…..where did Jesus get his blood from???

      Why would Jesus worry about Mary’s welfare?? Didn’t he say, ‘tear down this Temple, and in three days I will raise it up’….John 2:19???????
      He knew he would be back. And didn’t he caution us about the futility of worry?? (Luke 12:22-26).
      ‘Church’ in that time was kept in homes, e.g the upper room….and Our Lady did go with John to Asia.
      And in Mark 3:31-35….I don’t see it like you do. Jesus used his Mother’s visit to teach on his spiritual relationship with his followers.

      • Mike

        Blood rebuttal:
        His blood was not her blood. If you think that then you don’t understand that the conception was not carnal but of spirit, which is why the temple was not to be defiled by that of knowing man, so, blood has nothing to do with her mixing with His. Also, if you still don’t understand the sacrifice on the cross then you have not been cleansed by the blood of Christ. You should also understand that His pure sinless blood was due to His sinless nature which is why only HIS blood cleanses all manner of sin of the world by way of offering Himself as the Lamb of God. Nothing in scripture points to Mary worthy of paralleling her to any saving work in salvation. All she did was agree to fulfill the prophecy which was already planned from before the foundation of the earth. Mary was a sinner, so, she would not qualify as having anything worthy of elevating her to being the new ark of the covenant which what this blog blasphemes on. Mary’s temple was of virgin status(which was a prerequisite and based on prophecy) but only for the purpose of receiving a spiritual conception, don’t you understand? Blood was not of issue with God. Her being unknown to man of her temple was symbolic of housing the offering in a pure temple, but only until the birth. After that, scripture tells us that Joseph ‘knew’ her. The fact that she was of lineage of the house of David was simply that the plan of God was in place as prophesied.
        Once the birth of Jesus took place then it was life as normal for Mary and Joseph to be fruitful and multiply. She did not remain a virgin as catholic tradition misguides. Why would it be of any matter that catholic tradition project her as a perpetual virgin other than to offer spiritual adoration, worship and glorification within the temple of her followers’ hearts, minds and souls?

        Mother issue:
        I only brought up the foot of the cross issue in my past post because you previously incorrectly misused the verse in John 19 to support your statement that Jesus called Mary mother when He instead referred his disciple to regard her as his mother. That disciple is shown that he took Mary into his home from that hour on at the cross as scripture declares.
        So, why you claim that I stated Jesus was worried about her welfare is beyond me and why you refer to John 2:19 and Luke 12:22-26 within the dialogue of the mother calling issue is also unknown. And why you bring up that church was kept in homes as in your example ‘the upper room’ with regard to the mother dialogue seems pointless.

        As far Mark3:31-35: You are claiming that you’ve perceived it as Mary’s visit reflects Jesus teaching on his spiritual relationship with his followers. Sorry, but your perception is incorrect. You must first understand how to read Mark 3 in context. You cannot claim that Jesus was allegedly teaching on spiritual relationships to his followers in verse 31-35 when it does not allude to it by choosing it be so based on just using those verses on their own. The entire chapter deals with accusations and division and of Jesus proclaiming that his family are of those that ‘do the will of God.’ The purpose of the chapter’s teaching is to make aware that Jesus’ works were scrutinized by those whom did not accept His authority(including religious leaders and his family) and that division within constitutes a poor foundation on perceiving God’s pure and holy spiritual work. This why He regards His family as those whom ‘do the will of God.’ Division of the body(including family)is not of God’s will and it cannot function correctly to subdue the enemy.
        If as you claim that the end of Mark 3 regarding the family of Jesus teaches on spiritual relationships with his followers based on what you perceive as a visit from Mary, then you are completely dismissing Jesus’ message on the spiritual division and weakness of effective battle that takes place ‘because’ of those that do not understand nor accept Jesus’ representation of the Father’s authority on earth. Even Mary and her other children are accountable for this division as they were of equal mindset that ‘He'(Jesus) was out of his mind and were to on their way to ‘take charge of him.’ That’s what the scripture is revealing and not as ‘you’ see it. Don’t you understand that Mary is shown to disregard Jesus’ authority and treat him like a child whom needs to be taken control of? But why did she and her other children react to this? Because they were led by their emotions instead of the spirit and did not accept that He knew what He was doing. So, does Mary deserve to be called ‘holy?’ No!!!! Only a holy person would perceive the spirit of God within Jesus doing works by the ‘holy spirit,’ but instead she thinks ‘he is out of his mind.’
        Again, if Mary is squeezed into scriptures at every point then obviously it is only out of idolatry for her that it is being done thus making the word of God non effect for the sake of man made tradition. In this case, catholic tradition.

        In Christ, Mike

        • Ann

          You seem to forget that Jesus was human. Didn’t he keep referring to himself as ‘…son of man’ in Mark 2:28 e.g.

          He might have shed ‘spiritual blood’ for you, but for me he shed real human blood….which he got from his mother….Holy Mary!

  • Mike

    Not disputing that Jesus was human. Your argument is that His blood is mixed into Mary’s blood and thus you find a loophole to make Mary worthy of any and all glorious attributes thru your form of a man made religious tradition. My point is that his blood is not her blood for his blood was distinctively of pure and spiritual origin and conception where as Mary was of natural/carnal breeding. Her temple was not defiled by the knowledge of sex, therefore providing a place for a pure conception because of prophecy (lineage from the house of David and of the prophecy of salvation joining together)being fulfilled. And yes, his blood is ‘spiritual’ blood for at the moment he shed blood by the whippings he took we have healing. By his stripes we are healed. The blood shedding on the cross also is of spiritual shedding for this is the atoning blood that was offered for the sins of the world. Did the blood touch all the world in a physical sense? No! It covered the sins of the world ‘spiritually.’ But one must know of the atonement to understand what spiritually took place on the cross. We receive his blood only as a spiritual cleansing unless you have some of his physical blood in a bottle and are dipping and blotting/spaying it onto man as if it here holy water. He was human but his atonement was spiritual. He was God in the flesh. His physical body was on the cross, but His sacrificial cleansing was of ‘his’ blood alone and not that of Mary. To assume that their blood mixed is why you want Mary so highly elevated to deity status.

    Romans 5:8New International Version (NIV)

    8 But God demonstrates his own love for us in this: While we were still sinners, Christ died for us.

    Was any physical blood touching those that were yet still sinning when Christ died? NO! But we have an atoning sacrificial blood that when we
    hear the gospel of Christ we can choose to receive the gift of his salvation and be counted as saved thru grace by faith. The spiritual blood cannot be claimed as being mixed with she whom ‘rejoices in God her savior.’ Only a ‘sinner’ acknowledges a savior.

    Question: “What does it mean that Jesus is the Son of Man?”

    Answer: Jesus is referred to as the “Son of Man” 88 times in the New Testament. A first meaning of the phrase “Son of Man” is as a reference to the prophecy of Daniel 7:13-14, “In my vision at night I looked, and there before me was one like a son of man, coming with the clouds of heaven. He approached the Ancient of Days and was led into his presence. He was given authority, glory and sovereign power; all peoples, nations and men of every language worshiped him. His dominion is an everlasting dominion that will not pass away, and his kingdom is one that will never be destroyed.” The description “Son of Man” was a Messianic title. Jesus is the One who was given dominion and glory and a kingdom. When Jesus used this phrase, He was assigning the Son of Man prophecy to Himself. The Jews of that era would have been intimately familiar with the phrase and to whom it referred. Jesus was proclaiming Himself as the Messiah.

    A second meaning of the phrase “Son of Man” is that Jesus was truly a human being. God called the prophet Ezekiel “son of man” 93 times. God was simply calling Ezekiel a human being. A son of a man is a man. Jesus was fully God (John 1:1), but He was also a human being (John 1:14). First John 4:2 tells us, “This is how you can recognize the Spirit of God: Every spirit that acknowledges that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is from God.” Yes, Jesus was the Son of God—He was in His essence God. Yes, Jesus was also the Son of Man—He was in His essence a human being. In summary, the phrase “Son of Man” indicates that Jesus is the Messiah and that He is truly a human being.

    Read more: http://www.gotquestions.org/Jesus-Son-of-Man.html#ixzz3POfvybuC

  • Ann

    Bottom line is this….I see Mary as saved from sin for God’s purpose and will….like Job 1:8-11.

    You see Mary as a sinner. Period!

    We will never agree….Bye!

    • Mike

      Of course I see her as a sinner, she herself said she rejoices in God her savior. Only a sinner professes the acknowledgment of a ‘savior.’ What type of demon tells you she isn’t a sinner when the Holy word of God has already spoken the everlasting truth?
      If you’re going to revert to using biblical scripture to support elevating Mary then please support the exact words where God, the Father has spoken specifically and is quoted that ‘He is very pleased in her and to listen to her’ just as He did a couple of times for His only beloved Son, Jesus and perhaps I may consider that she is worthy of a hail Mary or two.

  • Mike

    The word of God is everlasting. He does not change. It is written. He’s the author and the finisher. Period!
    What catholic tradition has done is change the truth of God to fit into Rome’s theology. The deception will be her own undoing on the day of judgment.
    Only Jesus holds the government on His shoulders according to scripture, but what Rome and her members have pushed for is for Mary to carry governorship on her head with celestial royal titles. That is blasphemous and demonic doctrine. The misguided religious emotional guidance is a spirit that does not regard the ONE true God as supreme ruler by himself. Instead, there is a female entity that is being elevated to heaven’s highest seat and regards her with attributes of power befitting only a god.
    It’s up to you if you want to worship Mary but it’s your own heart that deceives you by denying that you don’t when you already do by inserting her in every turn of scripture. You see her as sinless so you see her in every part of scripture. That’s worshiping her for her alleged sinlessness. However if you truly love and worship only Jesus, then you would see His sinlessness in every point of scripture instead of running Mary neck a neck with Jesus. Ark of the covenant is scripturally based on Jesus and Jesus alone. But the worship of Mary has revealed that she should be regarded as the ‘new’ ark of the covenant. There’s no need to bestow her to a new higher level of stardom if she is not worthy of worship, don’t you think? There is not one single verse in scripture that is God breathed that He had, has or is planning on any elevation for Mary to be anymore than just the ‘blessed’ woman of scripture as God Himself bestowed upon her.
    In Christ’s truth. Amen.

    • Ann

      Thank you for saying she is ‘Blessed’!

      • Mike

        Absolutely she’s blessed among all women! For she was found with favor before God and in agreement to fulfill His plan. She rejoiced in God her savior. These biblical references on Mary’s character are strictly based on what is of ‘holy inspiration’ found only in the bible and no where else. No other hype through word or deed should be added to the humble servant of God or even more to the finished word of God lest we boast of ourselves through man made traditions or philosophies and solely for the upholding of man made traditions and philosophies. My disagreement is that she is not worthy of man bestowing Mary with man made religious titles equal in power, holiness, sovereignty, mediation, intercessor and any biblical title that one would bow down to and as reserved for Jesus or The Father only.

        We either bow to His Holy written word in Jesus or we bow down to the man made religious title such as ‘Queen of heaven.’ We cannot have 2 celestial governing entities lest we have division among the brethren and thus far in this blog, we do.

        Praise be to the Lamb of God whose name is Yeshua forever and ever! Amen!!!!

      • Mike

        The character with which Mary is depicted with in the bible is only accountable to the spirit of God’s holy judgment. The word of God has only revealed the humility of one whom is in agreement to carry on the task of the salvation of mankind. According to the biblical scriptures, only the glory of being called ‘blessed’ is the extent of the glory with which the humble servant has declared of herself. Her praise in magnifying the Lord is based on her ‘soul’ and her spirit ‘rejoices in God her savior’ as she is quoted. Her ‘soul’ is part of the attributes that mankind is given. These attributes are only motivated by spirit and the spirit of God will only reflect onto Himself.
        Heart, mind, strength and soul as offered by Jesus Himself in scripture and are what we must fully direct thru holy spiritual guidance according to the foundation of the holy written word of the bible. Spirit is what is of the essence of man that permits man to ‘be.’ Spirit will either reflect God or deflect Him. The Holy spirit always glorifies Jesus as biblical scripture declares. Therefore, when we read Mary’s account in Luke 1:46, she is speaking of the humble character that is of God’s approval according to the angels’ words in verse 28. The observation of God in Mary’s character is that we must accept that when the angel speaks he speaks within and under the authority of the spirit of God. The angel is obedient to declare that which is of holy appointed declaration and no more of the character is offered by God’s messenger onto the humble or favored state of the servant of God.
        The fact that we have biblical scripture of the messengers declaration is of direct reflection of the spirit that authorized the announcement to be declared. When the mindset of man adds to the character of Mary as being more than what the Lord, God has permitted then the ‘favor’ with which God has characterized her with is no longer within ‘His’ holy judgement. This means that when the biblical account is embellished with greater observations upon Mary, man has taken her out of the character which God deemed as only a favorable character. Mankind is then doing God’s thinking and takes for granted that the exaltation is acceptable onto the alter of God as an honorable act of worship onto HIM. The essence of the spirit of man is therefore not in line with His holy prompting but instead by the prompting of what is favorable to man’s self appointed religious glory. The essence of the purity of the spirit whom found her with favor is no longer a direct point of worship as scripturally written but instead is directed onto the ideology of religious embellishment added after the fact of God’s authorized declaration through His messenger. This is why God is the ‘author’ and the ‘finisher.’ Humans may feel, see and think that they may religiously do what is righteous before God but when we put man’s promptings of religious thinking and actions to the biblical test we will find that the spirit behind man’s promptings are either holy inspired or not.
        The spirit that prompts me to revere Mary as a humble servant and a sinner is based on trusting the words of holy inspiration found only in the bible and not on the ideology of religious embellishments after the fact. The worship offered onto the Lord is therefore in line with His spiritual prompting as the spirit will only regard that which is of holy inspiration. This is why we should base our worship on the testimonies found only in the bible and not on traditions or philosophies of man. Sola scriptura is the essence of God’s spirit reflecting only onto Himself and not on religious ideologies that negate His holy spirit and biblical truth.

        Praise be to the words of the Almighty and Holy written word of the bible. Hallelujah! Amen
        In Christ, Mike

        • Ann

          You have put God in a box….namely the Bible. So….if it isn’t in the Bible, then God cannot do it e.g airplanes aren’t in the Bible.
          However…..using sola scriptura…..God did make Adam and Eve without sin. And….in Job 1:10…..he put a fence around his servant Job.
          I happen to believe the angel in Luke 1, when he said, “Hail…full of grace!”

  • Mike

    That’s why your tradition is not of holy inspiration as it is designed outside the realm of the narrow path defined in the bible.
    The box that you want does not offer the ideology that you prefer to serve, which is why indoctrination to believe in tradition is paramount to be considered faithful to Rome rather than to the God of the narrow path.
    And the word ‘trinity’ is not in the bible yet you know whom this word represents, so, why select airplanes out of thin air when the bible is of spiritual matters and not about the materials that are bi-products of man’s God-given intellect? You’re right to refer to the bible about God creating Adam/Eve without sin, but He also created them with a will and He knew from before the foundation of the earth of what would happen, therefore, He created a way out for us through His Holy sacrificial Lamb. In fact, Jesus saw Satan fall like lighting, so, if Jesus was there then the bible that testifies of Jesus must be truthful enough to believe in alone. Sola Scriptura. I don’t need catholic tradition to tell me how to know and understand His Holy plan.

    You pleaded to me at one point……’Please love her, Jesus did…into existence.’ But this is where ‘you’ are very wrong. Jesus loved me into existence since He truthfully said that He knew me before I was in the womb. This means that I was an original thought even before He created Adam and Eve. This is why I seek a personal and intimate relationship with Him and not Mary. This is why I don’t owe Mary any love since she too is a sinner whom acknowledged of herself a ‘savior.’
    If I find a need to love her then I would have to start believing that she, too, can do spiritual works and that love would have to grow and it would eventually constitute a spiritual worship. I would not want to be unfaithful to the groom by permitting any chamber of my heart to seek the love of another in any spiritual capacity. I know how the heart can deceive, so, I would prefer to arrest any misguided emotion and not let it dominate me. My will is surrendered to the will of God. Had Jesus not gone through with laying down His life, then all that was of the mind of God for the salvation of man would have been in vain.
    For all that He has done for me I rejoice in God my savior and because I do not deserve any salvation due to the sin nature of mine and all of mankind, including Mary’s, I am saved by grace through faith. And I truly humble myself as Mary did and I can now count myself as blessed with knowing that God loved me into existence to be a testimony of His perfect salvation in the name of Jesus. Amen.

    I also believe in the angel in Luke 1 when He said, ‘Greetings, you who are highly favored! The Lord is with you. But I do not embellish the salutation as though there is another meaning behind it. What I worship the Lord for is that He is revealing to the reader that He is preparing the temple for the Lamb of God and that the foretold prophecy is being fulfilled. The act of love for the salvation of man(including Mary) is taking effect. No one is without sin said the holy inspired word of God. Anyone whom claims that a special grace was made for Mary is calling God a liar for God’s word cannot be changed!
    Any anyone whom does not believe that God did not say that all have fallen short of the glory of God(including Mary) will be eternally ‘sorry!’
    I do not lose anything for not loving Mary but I have eternity to gain for professing only what is of biblical testimony!!!!
    We either believe Him at His word in the bible or we believe something that is not preached in the bible and condemn ourselves. I prefer to lose my life for the sake of the bible alone than to gain favor of man for a man made religious tradition.
    I choose the bible for it is of God’s Holy truth.
    Hallelujah! Amen.
    In Christ, Mike

  • Mike

    If any of these attributes listed in the link resemble that which has been assigned to the virgin of the bible through a man made tradition then we have another deity to exalt.


  • Mike

    noun \ˈwər-shəp also ˈwȯr-\

    : the act of showing respect and love for a god especially by praying with other people who believe in the same god : the act of worshipping God or a god

    : excessive admiration for someone
    True or False? Play our trivia
    game for a fun break. »
    Full Definition of WORSHIP
    chiefly British : a person of importance —used as a title for various officials (as magistrates and some mayors)
    : reverence offered a divine being or supernatural power; also : an act of expressing such reverence
    : a form of religious practice with its creed and ritual
    : extravagant respect or admiration for or devotion to an object of esteem
    See worship defined for English-language learners »
    See worship defined for kids »
    Examples of WORSHIP

    worship of gods and goddesses
    Worship services are held daily.
    the media’s worship of celebrities

    Origin of WORSHIP
    Middle English worshipe worthiness, respect, reverence paid to a divine being, from Old English weorthscipe worthiness, respect, from weorth worthy, worth + -scipe -ship
    First Known Use: before 12th century
    Related to WORSHIP

    adulation, deification, hero worship, idolatry, idolization, worshipping (also worshiping)

    Other Forms of Address Terms
    appellation, beatitude, brethren, emeritus, esquire, sire, sous

    : to honor or respect (someone or something) as a god

    : to show respect and love for God or for a god especially by praying, having religious services, etc.

    : to love or honor (someone or something) very much or too much
    worshiped also worshiped worship·ping also worship·ing
    Full Definition of WORSHIP
    transitive verb
    : to honor or reverence as a divine being or supernatural power
    : to regard with great or extravagant respect, honor, or devotion
    intransitive verb
    : to perform or take part in worship or an act of worship
    — wor·ship·per or wor·ship·er noun
    See worship defined for English-language learners »
    Examples of WORSHIP

    Many ancient cultures worshipped the sun and moon.
    They worship at this temple.
    I worship God in my own way.

    First Known Use of WORSHIP
    13th century
    Related to WORSHIP

    adore, deify, glorify, revere, reverence, venerate

    abhor, abominate, despise, detest, execrate, hate, loathe

    See Synonym Discussion at revere

    • Ann

      I just don’t understand your thinking….and I guess you don’t understand mine.
      Yesterday….the Catholic Church mourned the legalization of abortion. I never understood how motherhood could be so reduced by men’s words. And it all started in the 19th century….with the degrading of the Holy Mother. (To my mind, satan’s last gasp).

      Mary was always a part of the Church….even Martin Luther and Calvin preached on her perpetual virginity….and honored her.

      Now, she is just one of many virgins….nothing special….full of sin….just needed for her ability to give birth, then she can resume her ‘normal’ life; not to have anything to do with the rearing of Jesus….except….maybe….to take him for circumcision.

      So….now…..Mary is just a vessel….used and discarded. So she might feel pain at her son’s death….so what! So she did the will of God…well….she needs to get over her sinful self.

      Well….I love and honor her….and the rest of the world be dammed!

  • Mike

    The rest of the world is damned, you’re right. The bible tells us that the earth will pass but the word of God shall ‘never’ pass. But the damnation will be due to man’s way of thinking. Man will equate his thinking as though God approves of all that man does. The bible is a complete guide and rule book, however, man does not abide by the guide books’ rules which is why the bible reveals of a day that 7 churches will be judged. What ever Luther and Calvin may have preached does not mean that they wrote the bible, nor did the catholic church and even if it appears that you can use Luther as support for what you believe about Mary then why not use Luther for support on what is also based on what he protested the catholic church on? Do you believe that he is part right and most wrong? If you believe that Luther is worthy of using as support on the virginity issue, does that mean that you would support other matters that he based his protests on? Obviously you trust that there is validity in what you allege he supports on Mary, so what about other things he protested on? After all, what better authority on catholic issues than Luther since he was part of the clergy?
    I’d also like to ask you if you’ve studied on all that has been of corrupt matters within the history of the Roman catholic church? I’m going to throw in the crusades here to prove a point but we’ll go back to Mary in a bit.
    Do you believe that the history of the crusades where brutal and blood shedding was the form of making non Roman catholic people Catholic? Jihad means religious wars and this is the same as forcing others to believe as you do. So, would you agree that the catholic church was under the impression that they were guided by God to send religious militants to carry a bloody campaign for the sake of catholicism?
    As it is now, there are radical idiots whom believe that they are justified in decapitating human beings in the name of Islam, so would you agree that there is a great similarity between the two forms of radical religiosity of catholicism of the crusades and Isis of today? I know what Isis represents and they are a fake according to the true Islam believer, but can you say that the church whom approved of the crusades were a fake and did not truly represent the true meaning of what the catholic church stood for? If you agree then to what can you attribute their heinous crimes to? In the history of the catholic church there is also the era of the inquisition and we can read so much on what took place and whom was affected. The atrocities of the catholic inquisition is based on fact and truth, so, there’s no denying that this why we now have a separation between church and state for fear of the tyranny of radical religiosity. I’m sure you will say that the church is no longer of that mindset and recognizes her mistake and made a public apology for the church’s history of blood shedding, so, with this in mind…….why should anyone believe that the church is ‘now’ on the right path with such a history of blood shedding?
    So, if the church found herself apologizing for her heinous religious crimes then it is still of opportunity to question her method of understanding what is ‘truly’ God’s guidance. After all, they claimed to be God’s one true holy apostolic church and in the inquisition there were Jews whom were forcibly converted or murdered under that title of authority to carry out her religious campaign. We already know what Hitler did to the Jews but how is it that both Hitler and the Roman Catholic church are historically accountable for having a hand in killing Jews and yet the catholic church is still under the impression that she is correct in how she professes the interpretation of the bible?
    So if the catholic church believed that the ‘spirit’ of God led them to shed blood in her campaign for catholicism, then it is also of the misguided spirit that the church has changed Mary’s biblical account of birthing more children and making her into a perpetual virgin.

    Matt 1 24 When Joseph woke up, he did what the angel of the Lord had commanded him and took Mary home as his wife. 25 But he did not consummate their marriage until she gave birth to a son. And he gave him the name Jesus.

    What part of ‘consummate’ is not understood from the biblical stand point or even within common sense’s stand point? The obedience of the Jewish married couple is to be fruitful and multiply. If the bible says Joseph consummated the marriage then there is no reason to call God a liar by substituting His truth for the theology that Mary remained a virgin.

    Are you going to dismiss the blood shedding of the RCC in history and make light of it knowing that the blood of Jews that the catholic church shed cries out from the ground? Abel’s blood cries out and God’s word shall never pass, so if there will be justice for him then there will be justice for the Jews that were murdered under the Roman Catholic campaign of the crusades and inquisition as well as Hitler’s campaign to rid the world of the Jewish nation.
    So, will only the part of Luther that fits with catholicism be top list and all the rest be ‘damned?’
    Its either all of the bible is correct or not. You can’t have it both ways.
    Mary was not always a part of the church and I gave you a link on the issue. I suggest you sincerely question your church’s theology and read into the link below.


  • Mike
    • Ann

      I used Luther to prove that Mary was always a part of the Church until the 19th century. But…like I said…. I think this turning away from Our Blessed Mother, is satan’s last gasp. And what a gasp…world wars,terrorism, assault on women and the family….abortion, euthanasia, divorce, drugs, porn and diseases.

      Now….about the blood-letting of the RCC. I could never deny or defend it….I WASN’T THERE! NEITHER WAS FOX NEWS OR CNN!
      If you are asking me to accept books of the Crusades, and Inquisitions….written by men in the 20th century, then I must pass.
      You will have to prove to me that a band of Catholics….with no army, and no guns….managed to kill hundreds of thousands of people in face to face battle….with no resistance.(Guns didn’t exist during the crusades or the reformation, or the inquisitions). But….you can go now to England, and still see the dungeons, and historical places, where Catholics were stretched and quartered.
      However…..I can look at Acts in the Bible….and see the persecution of the evil Jews for the Christian Jews….even Saul of Tarsus (Acts 9:1-2).

  • Mike

    And the reason I refer to those historical events that we can read in history books is solely due to facts that cannot be denied, just like the Holocaust. However, if the books that were written by 20th century men then you can also accept that the catholic church wrote what it wanted to write in past centuries under misguided ideals, too.
    Whether they used a rock and sling, swords, spears or daggers does not change the historical fact of religious domination over humans that were led by the ruling imperialistic church of the time.
    The church whom authorized the crusades and the inquisition were done under the guise of a religion calling herself the sole authority of God is what I’m referring to and so my question is, what spiritual guidance were those atrocities done under?
    If you believe that catholics were put under the same purpose in England then can you provide more actual facts as to what they were murdered for? I provided the basis of what premiss the catholic church used and it seems that they believed that their campaign was God approved. Unless you can find some other historical basis for those catholic atrocities.
    Acts is of many Jews persecuting Christian Jews? Or are you referring to just Saul of Tarsus whom asked of a high priest for letters to synagogues of Damascus? Do you even believe that this took place just by reading that scripture? I’m not disputing this scripture but if you want to point to a scripture for to measure up to your point then lets see where we can seriously take God at His word.
    Perhaps if you just read the scripture that says that Joseph consummated his marriage to Mary you will believe that she was no longer a virgin. So, is there any reason to use scripture and then deny that it took place? I surely don’t want to deny that Saul persecuted the disciples of the Lord but will you also not accept that God is not a liar when His word says that Mary and Joseph consummated(Matt 1:25) their marriage after the birth of the Christ child?
    You see? I’m willing to surrender the catholic atrocities issue if you just simply take God’s biblical word for ‘Holy’ truth that it is. Mary was a sinner with no special grace and she was not a perpetual virgin either, lest you call God a liar. As long as you serve the misguided ideology of catholicism then the word of God becomes of non effect when trusting more on the traditions of Rome when it contradicts God’s holy biblical truth. The bible doesn’t need Rome but Rome needs the bible to defend her ideology where ever it picks and chooses. That’s why if the preaching of Mary being a perpetual virgin and allegedly being sinless is not in the bible then where did it come from? It wasn’t appointed by the apostles to write those ideal into scripture, so why add to what is not there? They most certainly did not allude to any such notion in their letters.

    In Matt 10:38 Jesus said that we are not worthy to follow Him if we do not bear or take up our own cross? Do you agree with this scripture?
    If the cross He mentions is in ch 10 but the crucifixion takes place in ch 27 then apparently He is alluding to what His followers would be persecuted for by being a follower of His. He is truly not claiming that His followers must be put onto a cross to bear the sins of the world, is He? No. His word is about what are the consequences of being a disciple. With this in mind, does it really value the reader to insert a different ideal of what the verse is truly referring to? No.
    So why make something out of Mary when scripture never alludes to her being anything more than a humble servant whom generations will simply regard her as ‘blessed?’
    Praise be to His holy truth as divinely written. Amen!

  • Ann

    Satan’s last gasp!

    • Mike

      Satan can’t take what isn’t there, but you give him credit anyway, now that’s really sad. It’s clear that Jesus is not the one whom you would bear a cross for.
      Better yet, praise Jesus for He has conquered Hell, Death and the grave and He did it for the sins of man, so that all that call upon His name for salvation shall be saved.

      Oops! This blog is about those whom call upon the name of Mary for salvation.

  • Ann

    Clearly, Satan’s last gasp!

    • Mike

      God’s word is of divine, holy and righteous inspiration and He will not be mocked by man’s religious ideologies. It is ‘clearly’ written that Mary rejoiced in her savior which means that she is no different from all mankind in the sinful nature with what all mankind inherited from Adam and Eve.
      Romans 3:23 ‘for all whom have fallen short of the glory of God’ even more we have God’s holy truth in His written word in both Old and New testaments providing His judgment on what is of the sin nature of man in the following:
      1 Kings 8:46
      “When they sin against you–for there is no one who does not sin–and you become angry with them and give them over to their enemies, who take them captive to their own lands, far away or near;

      2 Chronicles 6:36
      “When they sin against you–for there is no one who does not sin–and you become angry with them and give them over to the enemy, who takes them captive to a land far away or near;

      Job 15:14
      “What are mortals, that they could be pure, or those born of woman, that they could be righteous?

      Proverbs 20:9
      Who can say, “I have kept my heart pure; I am clean and without sin”?

      Jeremiah 2:35
      you say, ‘I am innocent; he is not angry with me.’ But I will pass judgment on you because you say, ‘I have not sinned.’

      John 8:44
      You belong to your father, the devil, and you want to carry out your father’s desires. He was a murderer from the beginning, not holding to the truth, for there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks his native language, for he is a liar and the father of lies.

      Romans 3:10
      As it is written: “There is no one righteous, not even one;

      James 3:2
      We all stumble in many ways. Anyone who is never at fault in what they say is perfect, able to keep their whole body in check.

      1 John 2:4
      Whoever says, “I know him,” but does not do what he commands is a liar, and the truth is not in that person.

      1 John 4:20
      Whoever claims to love God yet hates a brother or sister is a liar. For whoever does not love their brother and sister, whom they have seen, cannot love God, whom they have not seen.

      2 John 1:2
      because of the truth, which lives in us and will be with us forever:

      Romans 3:9
      No One Is Righteous

      9What shall we conclude then? Do we have any advantage? Not at all! For we have already made the charge that Jews and Gentiles alike are all under the power of sin. 10As it is written:

      “There is no one righteous, not even one;

      11there is no one who understands;

      there is no one who seeks God.

      12All have turned away,

      they have together become worthless;

      there is no one who does good,

      not even one.”

      13“Their throats are open graves;

      their tongues practice deceit.”

      “The poison of vipers is on their lips.”d

      14“Their mouths are full of cursing and bitterness.”e

      15“Their feet are swift to shed blood;

      16ruin and misery mark their ways,

      17and the way of peace they do not know.”f

      18“There is no fear of God before their eyes.”g

      19Now we know that whatever the law says, it says to those who are under the law, so that every mouth may be silenced and the whole world held accountable to God. 20Therefore no one will be declared righteous in God’s sight by the works of the law; rather, through the law we become conscious of our sin.

      Righteousness Through Faith

      21But now apart from the law the righteousness of God has been made known, to which the Law and the Prophets testify. 22This righteousness is given through faith in Jesus Christ to all who believe. There is no difference between Jew and Gentile, 23for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, 24and all are justified freely by his grace through the redemption that came by Christ Jesus. 25God presented Christ as a sacrifice of atonement,i through the shedding of his blood—to be received by faith. He did this to demonstrate his righteousness, because in his forbearance he had left the sins committed beforehand unpunished— 26he did it to demonstrate his righteousness at the present time, so as to be just and the one who justifies those who have faith in Jesus.

      27Where, then, is boasting? It is excluded. Because of what law? The law that requires works? No, because of the law that requires faith. 28For we maintain that a person is justified by faith apart from the works of the law. 29Or is God the God of Jews only? Is he not the God of Gentiles too? Yes, of Gentiles too, 30since there is only one God, who will justify the circumcised by faith and the uncircumcised through that same faith. 31Do we, then, nullify the law by this faith? Not at all! Rather, we uphold the law.

      When you do not follow nor ‘RESPECT’ His divine truth that was already a thoughtful concept from the holy mind of the Almighty and eternal righteous wisdom of God then you call Him a ‘LIAR’ and thus the character is of equal character to the spirit nature of Lucifer whom decidedly planned to defy God and be higher than God. Rome’s arrogance to spiritually inflate her theology of tradition is of the inspiration of the enemy whom continues to seek his glory in the twisting and perverting of God’s divine and holy truth. God’s inspired word declares that Mary rejoiced in her savior and Joseph consummated the marriage with Mary after the birth of the only Son of God, the Father.
      To change ‘His truth’ that Mary was sinless and a perpetual virgin is to call God a ‘LIAR!!!!!!!!!!!!!’
      You and Rome worship a goddess named ‘Queen of Heaven.’ The tradition for Rome is already in the grasp of Satan from the onset in the ideology and religious philosophy with making Mary sinless and a perpetual virgin when the word of God declares otherwise.

      Please provide direct written divine and holy biblical scripture that declares Mary is sinless and is a perpetual virgin.
      If you find any direct declaration from the written word of God then you are of His fold, but if not, then you are of your father the devil.

      Praise the word of God as clearly and plainly written for ever and ever! May those whom change His holy truth for the sake of a man made religious tradition be set free from the clutches of Satan’s hand.
      In Christ, Mike

  • Mike
  • Ann

    saean’s last gasp….for sure

    • Mike

      Take the time to study the bible and search the biblical scriptures to see if you can find God’s divine inspiration contradicting Himself in His holy writ:
      Luke 1:46 And Mary said:“My soul glorifies the Lord 47 and my spirit rejoices in God my Savior,

      Mary obviously recognizes that her ‘savior’ will be her redeemer for the sin nature she has inherited from the sin committed by Adam and Eve.
      Matt 1:24 When Joseph woke up, he did what the angel of the Lord had commanded him and took Mary home as his wife. 25 But he did not consummate their marriage until she gave birth to a son. And he gave him the name Jesus.
      Here is where Holy writ tells us to believe and take as holy divine truth that Joseph and Mary consummated their marriage ‘after’ the birth of the Christ child.

      The Jewish couple would have been obedient to be fruitful and multiply, but the command to be obedient onto the Lord by those whom read His holy writ and to not add to His biblical scriptures is also a matter of Holy integrity and respect onto His testimony. So, please provide biblical scriptures that prove that Mary was sinless and also a perpetual virgin.

      I am willing to become a catholic member if you can biblically find direct scripture from the prophets or apostles that we are to take for granted that instead of reading what is of divine appointed testimony that we can re-write the given scriptures I’ve provided in lieu of your tradition.

      Also, take the time to look at this video in the link below on the atrocities of the Roman catholic church throughout recorded history so that you may be better informed on what you originally dismissed as simply from 20th century writings. Your request that I prove my point in my claim of such atrocities is also a matter of your intellectual and Christian integrity with which your request of proof originated from. If you are not ready for a challenge then you shouldn’t request that anyone provide proof of their claims. With this in mind, I have requested that you provide biblical proof declaring from the plan of God that Mary was sinless and she was to remain a virgin. This request is not unreasonable if your defense to support catholic tradition is based on the use of Holy writ. If the tradition is to be believed and upheld then you as a member of the RCC must provide the burden of proof on the claims that the sinlessness of Mary and her perpetual virginity even for yourself to accept as God’s holy truth. So, if you can support your defense then you should be able to pin point which biblical text contradicts my biblical findings on Mary being a sinner and of Joseph and Mary’s marriage being consummated.

  • Ann

    satan’s last gasp, definitely!

    • Mike

      You give Satan credit and you give Mary the undeserved glory. Seems like the grasp has got a hold of you when all that I’ve presented are facts on the truth of Mary being a ‘sinner’ and of the marriage being consummated. If the holy spirit dwells in your temple then there must be evidence of holy discernment that should lead you to refer to scripture as truth, so, if you’re of the mindset to deny biblical truth and contradict that Mary is depicted with rejoicing in God her ‘savior’ and Joseph consummating the marriage then it is you whom is held captive in Satan’s stronghold. You will not let him release you for the sake of your tradition. Jesus spoke of how religious men prefer their tradition than to obey the commandments of God. You love Mary for traditions’ sake instead of loving Jesus for eternities’ sake for the true Holy of Holies He represents. Instead your religion substitutes the eternal truth with a counterfeit ‘ark and holy of holies’ in Mary. This is the worship for her that you and your church deny having. If and when you start fearing the Lord will be the day you will truly be set free of Satan’s grasp.
      In Christs’ truth.

  • Ann

    satan’s last gasp

  • Mike

    A saved spirit will always give glory to the truth found in the bible for the Holy Spirit indwells within. If you find Mary is accountable as ‘sinless’ and a ‘perpetual virgin’ in biblical scripture, then please be a servant of the Lord your God whom created you in His image and bear witness to His truth as it is written. What scripture declares Mary as such?
    To reply with the name of the enemy only affirms and confirms that God’s truth is not engraved in your heart.

  • Ann

    Aide to satan’s last gasp

    Lovely Lady…dressed in ble
    Teach me how to pray!
    God was just your little Boy,
    Tell me what to say!

    Did you lift Him up sometimes,
    Gently on your knee?
    Did you sing to Him the way
    Mother does to me?

    Did you hold His hand at night?
    Did you ever try
    Telling stories of the world?
    Oh! And did He cry?

    Do you really think He cares
    If I tell Him things…
    Little things that happen?
    And do angel’s wings
    Make a noise?

    And can He hear me if I speak low?
    Does he understand me now?
    Tell me….for you know

    Lovely Lady dressed in blue,
    Teach me how to pray!
    God was just your little Boy,
    And, you know the way!

  • Mike

    Again, you still resort to invoking a female entity of your religion.

    It is of great importance to your spirit and soul’s salvation that you understand what the commandments of God mean and the consequences when you spiritually partake in the invoking of spiritual and celestial entities such as your ‘lovely lady.’ The engraved imagery in your heart for a goddess in whom you entrust to do your bidding by exercising a spiritual invoking and with the much devoted faith that she will hear your petition is the concept of your religion that you perform against the God whom warned against such spiritual practices.

    And God spoke all these words:

    2 “I am the Lord your God, who brought you out of Egypt, out of the land of slavery.

    3 “You shall have no other gods before[a] me.

    4 “You shall not make for yourself an image in the form of anything in heaven above or on the earth beneath or in the waters below. 5 You shall not bow down to them or worship them; for I, the Lord your God, am a jealous God, punishing the children for the sin of the parents to the third and fourth generation of those who hate me, 6 but showing love to a thousand generations of those who love me and keep my commandments.

    God does not listen to the voice of those whom do not worship Him in spirit and in truth. If you love God you will serve Him and He ‘alone’ without the spiritual invoking of other names that are not worthy of spiritual elevation. The enemy has misled you to practice that which God has declared as an act of ‘hate’ towards Him.
    Ancient pagan mythology is what you’re practicing with invoking other names up to the heavens. You serve the high priestess of modern roman religion and your practice is the ‘rebellion’ equal to the Creator’s enemy. You also belittle the spiritual divinity of the Lord our God by emotionally positioning Him as a ‘little boy’ when He is not to be imagined as any form of man’s thinking. Your religion as corrupted the majestic Holiness of His supreme deity by lowing His glory to your paganistic ideology.

  • Mike

    Your religion ‘has’ corrupted the majestic Holiness of His supreme deity by lowing His glory to your paganistic ideology.

    • rocky

      You can post all you want from various obscure protestant apologetics websites. But unless you can find one that does a better job with reality and does not pervert history, you will not be listened to by most knowledgeable Christians or those of goodwill. [I am only too familiar with Keith Thompson’s work (that you gave just above on the inquisition). I have duly noted his “scholarship”. You can see y answers posts to him as rockypath on YouTube. He is a litte better than a Rob Zins, though somewhat better than Jack Chick.]

      It does not take a rocket scientist to figure out that most protestant apologetics is based on shoehorning latter day reformed doctrine into the early apostolic Church and the bible itself. It won’t stand and so most of the protestant apologetics sites I have seen used are mostly about obfuscation and some (many) are only too happy with a false history that convicts the Catholic Church. And that ain’t real scholarship my friend.

      What follows is the real litmus test that largely determines who is on the correct path. Or, if you like, who it is that is more outside His Divine Will.

      1)HISTORICAL FACT. The entire early Church was entirely REAL Presence Eucharistic in its faith gatherings.

      2) You do NOT need the bible to consider the truth of a given historical reality. The weight of evidence is well….self evident. The best of Protestant scholars do not deny this because to do so would be tantamount to a lie.

      3) If the early Church was NOT REAL Presence Eucharistic in its entire belief, JUST WHERE in the historical process did the ENTIRE church become REAL PRESENCE EUCHARISTIC in its faith gatherings. It certainly was completely so before Calvin and Zwingli came along.

      4) All the earliest Christian communities throughout Asia, Africa and Europe were Real Presence Eucharist. It was the focus of their communion breaking of bread/faith worship from their very roots.

      The real truth is that the entire early Church was Real Presence Eucharistic Mike because this was taught to them by the apostles. Who got it straight from Jesus.

      Early Church Real Presence Eucharistic faith illuminates John 6 completely and John 6 corroborates the Eucharistic sacrament that was practiced by ALL.

      Most of your reformed assemblies clearly rejected the Eucharistic faith that was given to the early Church by the apostles.

      Are you yourself a member of a Eucharistic Church Mike?

      You should be. Because that was the apostolic faith; the faith which was once for all delivered to the saints [jude 1:3].

      I am interested in your honest deliberations on this.

  • MIke

    Great true teachings about how and what man believes.


    Biblical reference on how to understand the names of God.