Débatre Marie: Catholique vs Brahnamiste

Dernièrement, j'ai partagé une série d'échanges que j'ai eus avec une personne qui s'inscrit profondément dans la théologie Branhamiste. Et bien, récemment, il a partagé un nouveau point de contentieux entre leur système théologique et le système théologique catholique. Je cite le cœur de son opposition et j'y répondrai ci-dessous :

Ben-yamin Bashizi: "C’est seulement en 431, au concile d’Ephèse, que Marie a été déclarée “Mère de Dieu”. Après cela, on commença à lui donner différents titres comme: “Notre Dame”, “Reine du Ciel”, “Médiatrice”, “Celle qui secourt”, “Celle qui intercède”, “Mère de toutes grâces”, “Mère de l’Eglise”, et aussi “Celle qui a écrasé le serpent”, etc. etc. Beaucoup de ces désignations, qui se rapportaient à Christ, ont été transférées de Christ à Marie, et c’est la raison pour laquelle elles sont également antichrist."

Voici mes réponses:

1. Le Concile d'Éphèse en 431 (Théotokos = Mère de Dieu)

Le Concile d'Éphèse en 431 a proclamé Marie comme Théotokos, c'est-à-dire "Celle qui a enfanté Dieu" ou "celle qui porte Dieu" ou simplement, "Mère de Dieu" comme vous l'avait correctement indiqué. Cette déclaration visait à affirmer la nature divine de Jésus-Christ, en précisant que celui-ci est Dieu dès sa conception. Cependant, il est important de noter que le titre de Théotokos n'a pas été inventé lors de ce concile du 5eme siècle (AD 431), mais qu'il était déjà largement en usage bien avant 431. Par exemple, Saint Athanase d'Alexandrie, dans ses écrits au 4eme siècle (AD 360), utilisait ce terme pour décrire Marie. Dans son ouvrage contre les heresies Ariens, il appelle Marie, Theotokos à 4 reprises. En voici un example quand Il a écrit :

"He took flesh of the Virgin, Mary bearer of God [Theotokos /Mother of God], and was made man."

"Il a pris chair de la Vierge Marie, Mère de Dieu [Theotokos], et s'est fait homme." - Saint Athanase (AD. 360), Discours contre les Ariens, 3, 29.

Source: https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/28163.htm  

En outre, dans l'Évangile selon Luc, Élisabeth appelle Marie "mère de mon Seigneur" (Luc 1:43), ce qui est une reconnaissance explicite de son rôle unique et de l'identité divine de l'enfant qu'elle porte. Car le mot seigneur est cité 17 fois dans le chapitre premier de l'Evangile de saint Luc et à les 16 autre fois il est itulisé comme synonyme pour Dieu. Donc il est normale de comprendre que dans Luc 1:43, Seigneur fait aussi reference à Dieu incarnée en homme, à savoir Jesus Christ. Je recommende une video que j'ai faite dans le passé à ce sujet: "Marie, Mère de 'Dieu Avec Nous' (Emmanuel)" - voici le lien: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xQ8ZFVY8JNY&t=2s

2. Les Titres de Marie: Les divers titres donnés à Marie tels que "Notre Dame", "Reine du Ciel", "Médiatrice", etc., ont des fondements scripturaires et traditionnels. Ces titres reflètent différents aspects de son rôle dans l'histoire du salut et dans la vie de l'Église.

a) Notre Dame : Ce titre trouve ses racines dans l'Ancien Testament et les traditions du Proche-Orient ancien. Le terme "Notre Dame" peut être lié au titre de "Reine Mère" en Israël, connu sous le nom de Gebirah ou "Grande Dame". Dans la monarchie davidique, la mère du roi avait un statut élevé et était honorée comme la Gebirah. Par exemple, dans 1 Rois 2:19, Salomon fait asseoir sa mère Bethsabée à sa droite, un signe de grande estime et d'honneur. Puisque Jésus est présenté comme le successeur du roi David par Saint Luc lors de l'Annonciation de Gabriel (Luc 1:32-33), 

Luke 1:32-33  "Il [Jésus] sera grand et sera appelé Fils du Très Haut, et le Seigneur Dieu lui donnera le trône de David, son père. Il règnera sur la maison de Jacob éternellement, et son règne n'aura point de fin." 

Il en découle naturellement donc que Marie recevait sa vocation de mère du Roi d'Israël, aussi connut sous le nom de la "Gebirah" ou, en d'autres mots, "la (Grande) Dame". 

Le mot "Gebirah" (גְּבִירָה, gebı̂yrâh) apparaît six fois dans la Bible (voir eSword King James Concordance, H1377) : 1 Rois 11:19, 1 Rois 15:13, 2 Rois 10:13, 2 Chroniques 15:16, Jérémie 13:18, Jérémie 29:2. Selon l'encyclopédie Wikipedia , le mot "Gebirah" signifie: 

Version Anglaise [original]: "Literally translated, the title means '[Great] Lady', with the word being the feminine counterpart to gəḇīr (גְּבִיר), 'lord'. However, given that this title is most often attributed to a queen mother, the two have become synonymous, and therefore gəḇīrā is most often translated as 'Queen Mother'." 

Traduction Française: "Traduit littéralement, le titre signifie '[Grande] Dame', le mot étant le pendant féminin de gəḇīr (גְּבִיר), 'seigneur'. Cependant, étant donné que ce titre est le plus souvent attribué à une reine mère, les deux sont devenus synonymes, et donc gəḇīrā est le plus souvent traduit par 'Reine Mère'". - Lien Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gebirah

Donc appellé Marie, Notre Dame (Gebirah) n'est pas une invention sournoise mais un simple fait de l'histoire biblique, car les reine-Mère Juifs étaient appellé, Gebirah, i.e Dame. Et puisque Jésus est roi, sa mère est automatiquement une Gebirah, notre Dame.

Source érudite : 

• Scott Hahn, "Hail, Holy Queen: The Mother of God in the Word of God"; 
• Brant Pitre, "Jesus and the Jewish Roots of Mary: Unveiling the Mother of the Messiah"; 
• Video produite par des protestants: "The Queen Mother in the Bible and Ancient Near East"  - lien youtube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZH_sLpLwG1c

b) Reine du Ciel : Cette expression trouve sa base dans l'Apocalypse (12:1), où Marie est souvent identifiée avec la femme couronnée d'étoiles. Le texte dit : 

"Un grand signe apparut dans le ciel : une femme vêtue du soleil, la lune sous ses pieds et une couronne de douze étoiles sur sa tête." 

Cette description est généralement interprétée comme une référence à Marie par les Catholiques et même quelques érudits biblique Protestants (Ben Witherington III; Chilton, etc.) car elle apparaît dans le ciel avec une couronne donc royauté dans le ciel, ce qui en fait logiquement la "Reine du Ciel".

c) Médiatrice et Intercesseuse: Je vais traité les 2 point ensemble puisqu'ils sont lié.

Il est important de comprendre que seul Christ est le médiateur d'une nouvelle et éternelle alliance:

Hébreux 9:15 : "Et c'est pour cela qu'il est le médiateur d'une nouvelle alliance, afin que, la mort étant intervenue pour le rachat des transgressions commises sous la première alliance, ceux qui sont appelés reçoivent la promesse de l'héritage éternel".

Cependant, les croyants jouent leur rôle de médiation de différentes manières, non pas en établissant une nouvelle alliance, mais en parlant aux hommes de Dieu (par la prédication, la proclamation, l'exhortation), et en parlant des hommes à Dieu (dans la prière d'intercession). En bref, en faisant office d'ambassadeur pour Christ:

"Nous faisons donc les fonctions d'ambassadeurs pour Christ, comme si Dieu exhortait par nous; nous vous en supplions au nom de Christ: Soyez réconciliés avec Dieu!" - 2 Corinthiens 5:20

 Un des aspects de cette médiation c'est l'interecession. Par exemple, Saint Paul exhorte les croyants à être des intercesseurspar leur prière:

"Je recommande donc, avant tout, qu'on fasse des supplications, des prières, des intercessions, des actions de grâces, pour tous les hommes" - 1 Timothée 2:1

"Faites en tout temps par l'Esprit toutes sortes de prières et de supplications. Veillez à cela avec une entière persévérance, et priez pour tous les saints. Priez pour moi, afin qu'il me soit donné, quand j'ouvre la bouche, de faire connaître hardiment et librement le mystère de l'Évangile". - Éphésiens 6:18-19

Il est donc normale de voir les croyants comme des médiateurs/médiatrices, intercesseuses, intercesseurs de par leur prières et par le fait qu'ils soient des ambassadeurs, des réconciliateurs entre Dieu et les hommes. Certe, la sainte Vierge Marie ne saurait être soustrait de cette noble tâche de médiatrice et intercesseuse.

d) Celle qui secourt : Tous ceux qui sont appelés à être co-ouvriers avec Dieu (1Corinthiens 3:9) deviennent des secouristes. 

Les croyants sauvent les gens dans leur détresse et de leurs multiples maux. La Bible dit dans Jacques 5 que les croyants sauvent les égarés : 

"qu’il sache que celui qui ramènera un pécheur de la voie où il s’égarait sauvera son âme de la mort et couvrira une multitude de péchés." - Jacques 5:20 

Dans 1 Timothée, le prédicateur de l'évangile se sauve et sauve d'autres : 

"En persévérant dans ces choses, tu te sauveras toi-même, et tu sauveras ceux qui t'écoutent." - 1 Timothée 4:16

Dans Galates 6 et Romains 13-14, les croyants se soutiennent mutuellement en portant leurs fardeaux les uns des autres : 

"Portez les fardeaux les uns des autres, et vous accomplirez ainsi la loi de Christ." - Galates 6:2

"Accueillez celui qui est faible dans la foi, et ne discutez pas sur les opinions." (Romains 14:1). 

Tout ces textes montrent le role de sécoure que donnent les croyants au prochains. Par conséquent, la Mère du Seigneur, Marie, ne saurait être exemptée d'être une de ces secouristes, surtout qu'elle a été la première à secourir le monde en disant "oui" à Dieu et en nous donnant un Sauveur, Maranatha!

e) Mère de toutes grâces : Marie est la Mère de toute grâce pour deux raisons. 

Premièrement, parce que son Fils Jésus-Christ est le détenteur de toute grâce, car "la loi a été donnée par Moïse, la grâce et la vérité sont venues par Jésus-Christ" (Jean 1:17). 

Deuxièmement, l'ange Gabriel, en annonçant son rôle futur de devenir la mère du Roi Jésus, la salue comme étant "Pleine de grâce" [charitoo] ou "celle qui a trouvé grâce" (Luc 1:28, 30). Donc, il n'y a aucune raison d'avoir un malaise à ce sujet.

f) Mère de l’Église : Si nous nous rappelons dans Apocalypse 12, Marie est introduite comme Reine du Ciel au verset 1, ayant une couronne et apparaissant au ciel. Elle est aussi présentée comme enfantant un Fils qui régnera sur le monde, le Messie (verset 5). Donc, elle est la Mère de Jésus le Messie, et elle est aussi présentée comme étant la mère de ceux qui croient et qui sont persécutés par le dragon, Satan, dans Apocalypse 12:17 : 

"Et le dragon, irrité contre la femme, s'en alla faire la guerre au reste de sa postérité, à ceux qui gardent les commandements de Dieu et qui ont le témoignage de Jésus."

Ceux qui gardent les commandements de Dieu et le témoignage de Jésus sont évidament membre de l'Eglise, sont aussi appelé la postérité de la femme, la même femme qui enfantant le Christ Jésus (verset 5). Donc elle est la mère de Jesus, et aussi la mère de son corps mystique (la communauté de croyants), donc la mère de l'Eglise. On ne devrait pas ce tiré les cheveux pour cette appelation. D'après tous st. Jean lui me mêest à l'aise avec cette nouvelle forme de filiation spirituel (Jean 19:26-27).

e) Celle qui a écrasé le serpent : Pourquoi sommes-nous étonnés qu'elle ait écrasé le serpent ? N'est-ce pas le langage biblique de ceux qui parviennent à vaincre Satan ? 

Jésus dit aux disciples qu'il leur a donné,

"Voici, je vous ai donné le pouvoir de marcher sur les serpents et les scorpions, et sur toute la puissance de l'ennemi; et rien ne pourra vous nuire." - Luc 10:19

Saint Paul dit aussi aux Romains que bientôt, 

"Le Dieu de paix écrasera bientôt Satan sous vos pieds. Que la grâce de notre Seigneur Jésus soit avec vous !" - Romains 16:20

Pourquoi penser donc que la mère de notre Seigneur serait exemptée de cette expérience de victoire sur le diable, elle qui est l'image même du prémier chrétien, disciple de Jésus.

En conclusion: 

Je suis d'avis contraire à ceque vous avez posté ci-haut. La théologie catholique sur Marie est profondément ancrée dans la tradition biblique et une coherente réflection théologique par l'Eglise sur son rôle. Certe, nous differont sur nos interprétation des sainte écritures, mais divergence sur l'interpretation ne veut dire guerre que nos croyances manques de fondement biblique. Quand les divers titre mariale son bien comprise, on remarque qu'elle ne diminue en rien la centralité de Jésus-Christ, mais au contraire, elle éclaire et enrichit la compréhension du mystère de l'Incarnation et de la Rédemption en nous montrant comment nous devenons participants à la nature divine (2 Pierre 1:4). 

Par conséquent, ces titres et honneurs ne sont ni des exagérations ni des innovations, mais des reconnaissances appropriées du rôle unique de Marie dans l'histoire du salut, et une image de notre rôle de chrétiens dans l'histoire du salut.

Why God: All Your Old Testament Killings and Decisions (Part 2)

Here is the second part of my commentary to the post that was entitled "Questions to God/Allah/ or whoever is in charge". See Part 1 here.

Question 3: According to the bible and many other books, You asked people to go kill others. Like when you asked Joshua to conquer Jericho remember? You had just given the 10 commandments where it clearly stipulates : Though shall not kill… Then you sent people to kill… Why not do it yourself? You could literally just snap a finger and have this whole earth gone in half of a millisecond. So if you Really needed that whole city gone you could have done it without having humans do that. So is there a reason they had to do that? Was it to prove to you that they were faithful? Was there no other way to test their faith?

In dealing with morality or the divine moral command issued to humanity, there is a principle that runs through out the Bible that could be framed as this, 'God does not contradict Himself'. In 2 Timothy 2:13, we read that "If we are faithless, He [God] remains faithful, for [God] cannot deny Himself." This lead us to the biblical text you mentioned which was spoken in mount Sinai by God to Moses stating in the book of Exodus 20:13, "Thou shalt not kill." Let me remark that the word used for "kill" literally means "murdering". The Greek version of the original text for the word 'kill' use the word "phoneuō" which means literally "to be a murderer". Many biblical versions of this verse keep that nuance such as this one from the Bible Basic English (BBE version), "Do not put anyone to death without cause." This defang the argument that those God ordered the execution or put to death in the Old Testament were about innocent killing. God never ordered a murder for it goes against the ethical construct He has advocated to the Israelite.

You raised two questions. Let me answer answer them by order:

a) Why order Killing

With this in mind, we are now capable of exploring the primordial example you raised about the killing that happened in Jericho as a mirror image of all the others. Historically, Jericho was not a citizen city but a military outpost. Those in the Jericho city were in modern language enemy combatant.  Moreover, Jericho was part of the Canaanite territorial land that God sent Israel to take over. Why then did God ordered the removal of the first inhabitants of the land while destroying their military forces? The answer for that is found four hundred years before the destruction of Jericho, for God informed Abraham that the land that his posterity will inherit was currently inhabited by a nation of Amorites which unfortunately were accruing their evilness and sins. It is clear from the text that God would only remove that nation from that land if  their evilness reaches a irredeemable peak and not anytime sooner than that. As Professor Paul Copan from Palm Beach Atlantic University put it and i quote, "God was willing to wait over 400 years because 'the sin of the Amorite was not yet filled up' (Genesis 15:16)".

From this historical perspective, God's command to remove the Canaanite including Jericho was based on a judgement and not on a capricious divine acts. The sins refereed above in Genesis of the Canaanites were as follow: Idolatry, Incest, Adultery, Child sacrifice, Homosexuality, Bestiality among other sexual deviations. An academic paper on it was written and can be read in full here. The punch-line here is that this was no innocent killing or murdering of the innocent, but rather a form of an old fashion capital punishment.

b) Why using Humans?

The subsequent question raised was why not do it Himself. Why use human being to serve moral judgement? The answer to this is not that God doesn't act to execute judgement Himself, He does sometimes. But in all culture and societies, God has always partnered with humans in order to bring law and order in any given society. We are reliably informed in the Bible that, "Let everyone put himself under the authority of the higher powers, because there is no power which is not of God, and all powers are ordered by God. For which reason everyone who puts himself against the authority puts himself against the order of God: and those who are against it will get punishment for themselves." - Rom 13:1-2

And this divine collaboration with humanity when it comes to executing judgement with the sword was forcefully expressed in this manner two thousand years ago:

 
"For rulers are not a cause of fear to the good work but to the evil. If you would have no fear of the authority, do good and you will have praise; For he is the servant of God to you for good. But if you do evil, have fear; for the sword is not in his hand for nothing: he is God's servant, making God's punishment come on the evil-doer"  - Romans 13:3-4 (BBE)

Question 4:While we are still on the Israelites, why did you leave them to be slave for so many years? Were they being punished? For what? And when you decided to save them , Why all that struggle? Like you knew the pharaoh wouldn’t believe the plagues you sent, You could have sent an angel to talk him, better yet, you could have talked to him you know, like you used to with Abraham. Annnd then when the Israelites were free, again you let them struggle to get to Canaan. You couldn’t have transported them , like in the Harry potter books, Poooof and reappear at the desired location?

a) How did Israel became slave?

Israel became slave for no fault of themselves. Actually, Israel as a nation grew and even prospered in Egypt under different Pharaohs because of the good memories of the service of a particular Israelite called Joseph offered to the kingdom of Egypt. But history being what it is, good deeds get forgotten with time and ignorance tends to precipitate unlearned leaders to take devastating decisions. This is exactly what happened in Egypt. Here is a brief account of it that might interest you in the Book of Exodus 1:8-11

"Now a new king came to power in Egypt, who had no knowledge of Joseph. And he said to his people, See, the people of Israel are greater in number and in power than we are: Let us take care for fear that their numbers may become even greater, and if there is a war, they may be joined with those who are against us, and make an attack on us, and go up out of the land. So they put overseers of forced work over them, in order to make their strength less by the weight of their work. And they made store-towns for Pharaoh, Pithom and Raamses." 

 b) Why did God took time before the rescue?

This is a difficult one since God's way of thinking is mind-boggling to us but when looked from the rear-view of history it all make sense, however without the benefit of hind-sight it just doesn't make much sense to us who makes our judgement mostly based with immediate information with no broader political, cultural, economical and geographical context.

Long before Israel came into existence, God predicted the outcome of the future enslavement of Israel to their founding father Abraham in a night vision.

"And [God] said to Abram, Truly, your seed will be living in a land which is not theirs, as servants to a people who will be cruel to them for four hundred years; But I will be the judge of that nation whose servants they are, and they will come out from among them with great wealth." - Genesis 15:13 

It would be preferable that Israel simply grew in power and wealth in Egypt until they were order to go to Canaan to possess it after the Canaanite sins had reached their paroxysm. However, God also predicted that their incubation process would not be painless as He correctly anticipated the advent of a new pharaoh who will not be kind to the Jews. Tactically, it probably would have made sense for God to do most of what you suggested but it would not have made sense from a strategic point of view. For when Israel left Egypt, they had learned so many lessons about wealth possession and dispossession, about being welcomed as a foreigners and what it means to be outcast as a foreigner, the value of having a land that you call your own and etc. All these lesson which could have never been seared in their national consciousness just through a good life. We can all relate to it as we know that most of the successful people tell us that it is through their hardship that they became who they are and that without that they would have never be nor accomplish a fraction of what they have. 

c) God's method works?

Finally, God's methods have more far reaching impact than the immediate feel good experience that we all crave but that have no redemptive value to our souls and future. Here is how God put it Himself about their walk in the desert instead of being pouff up like Harry Potter in Canaan. 

"And keep in mind the way by which the Lord your God has taken you through the waste land these forty years, so that He might make low your pride and put you to the test, to see what was in your heart and if you would keep his orders or not. And he made low your pride and let you be without food and gave you manna for your food, a thing new to you, which your fathers never saw; so that he might make it clear to you that bread is not man's only need, but his life is in every word which comes out of the mouth of the Lord. Through all these forty years your clothing did not get old or your feet become tired. Keep in mind this thought, that as a son is trained by his father, so you have been trained by the Lord your God. " - Deuteronomy 8:2-5

God is not in the magical business. He does miracles not magic tricks. God is interested in training us and only through diverse forms of experiences can He draw the best out of us and teach us meaningful lessons about life and His intended destiny for us. This logic is the same as the one used for humbling the hardened heart of Pharaoh through a series of miracles, and His prodigious miracles in Egypt is still spoken about up-to this day as a lesson on God's power and greatness. It also gave certainty to the witnesses that what was wrought wasn't just the results of sheer chance, or mere bad luck that had happened to Pharaoh or any other naturalistic explanation that could have crept in with time in the minds of the Israelite making them to doubt the existence of God's power.

"Has God ever before taken a nation for himself from out of another nation, by punishments and signs and wonders, by war and by a strong hand and a stretched-out arm and great acts of wonder and fear, as the Lord your God did for you in Egypt, before your very eyes?  All this he let you see, so that you might be certain that the Lord is God and there is no other." - Deuteronomy 4:3-35

 And Israel did also benefit of this divine reputation of what God did in Egypt later on as they were conquering their enemy combatant land. For all wars are waged both physically with material logistic as well as psychologically to weaken the enemy resolve. We have a testimonial of some of the Canaanite tribes who refused to fight against the Israelite and preferred to make an alliance with them so that they could live together. What do you think made that conquering easy? Hear the Canaanite from Hivites explain their reasons in their own words:

"And the men of Israel said to the Hivites, It may be that you are living among us; how then may we make an agreement with you? And they said to Joshua, We are your servants. Then Joshua said to them, Who are you and where do you come from? And they said to him, Your servants have come from a very far country, because of the name of the Lord your God: for the story of his great name, and of all he did in Egypt has come to our ears," - Joshua 9:7-9

We see through this that in the end that whatever God initiated in Egypt was working and made the conquest of the land easier, cost effective and less time consuming. God knows what He does even if at first glance it doesn't makes sense to our collective human brain. Allow me to end this with this quote:

"O how deep is the wealth of the wisdom and knowledge of God! no one is able to make discovery of his decisions, and his ways may not be searched out. Who has knowledge of the mind of the Lord? or who has taken part in his purposes? Or who has first given to him, and it will be given back to him again? For of him, and through him, and to him, are all things. To him be the glory for ever. So be it." - Romans11:33-36

or as this other version puts it: 

"Yes, God's riches are very great! His wisdom and knowledge have no end! No one can explain what God decides. No one can understand his ways. As the Scriptures say, "Who can know what is on the Lord's mind? Who is able to give him advice?" "Who has ever given God anything? God owes nothing to anyone." Yes, God made all things. And everything continues through him and for him. To God be the glory forever! Amen."

P.S: I think that the reading of books like this could assist for detail on Holy Wars in the Bible.

Why I Am A Catholic

This isn't my personal proclamation. I should actually come around and make my personal case on why i am a catholic since people keeps asking me. But while i make you wait for that piece, this can already give folks an idea on the likely avenue i may take while writing my own personal piece. My friend Dr. Thierry L. has made his case in response to an article that challenged the christian-hood of all Catholics. My approach has always been slightly different to Dr. T, as we debated some issues on our shared catholicism in 2008 .. but we usually see things the same way. So i recommend his personal apolgia on why he is a catholic.

Hope you find Dr. T responses enlightening, new and interesting.

P.S: Don't forget to check out my book - Help Me Understand Jesus. Check My Book by clicking here or more here  

...

Dear brethren, I great you in the name of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, and hope that these few words will open you up to another perspective that is worth considering and thinking about.

I am a catholic and consider myself a Christian. In fact the two terms were interchangeable until the 16^th century, and the word catholic means universal, to emphasize the universal nature of the covenant that God wants to make with everyone (1 Tim 2:4) through Christ. And the term was used to separate those who subscribed to apostolic teaching from those who deviated from it (the heresies). Therefore, the answer to the title of your article that I would like to suggest will differ from yours: I am a Christian because I am a follower of Jesus Christ (this is the biblical definition by the way: Ac 12:26).

It is also important dear brethren to make sure that you understand what the Catholics believe accurately and the reason they believe what they believe before making such judgements about them; otherwise you may be attacking a straw man: This is a basic error in logic.

Another thing I would like to mention before addressing some of the specifics of your comments, is the problems in your equation: A billion truths+ a trillion truths+ 0.001 lie = LIE

-  It presumes that the beliefs of Catholics are lies rather than a genuine different interpretation of the apostolic teaching. It betrays already the same old anti-Catholic bias accusing us of I don’t know what. We may be wrong in some of our beliefs, but didn’t it ever occur to you that maybe it is just a misunderstanding or a misinterpretation, and not a lie (with all the assumptions and implications you attach to this word)?

-    If you see lies in every doctrinal differences, this logically means that everywhere you disagree with another Christian (a non-catholic that is) on a doctrine, it means that one of you (probably him or her) believes a lie, and therefore his entire belief system is a lie according to your equation.

As you know non-catholic Christians don’t agree on everything, in fact there are tens of thousands of Christian denominations. Do you realise the implications of your equation in this context. I wonder who would be the only people who are Christians if you follow your reasoning to its logical conclusion, the members of your congregation perhaps.

Furthermore I feel you contradict yourself when you say “some catholic are saved” and at the same time “a little wrong belief contaminates the whole thing”. Those catholic that you claim are saved do believe in little things that you consider “lies” therefore contaminating the whole thing!?!? Please make up your mind.

I believe we should have enough humility to recognize that as St Paul says “we see through a glass darkly” (1 Co 13:12), and it is therefore possible to be brethren in Christ agreeing on core beliefs, while disagreeing on specifics or on how a belief is applied without neglecting the importance of these differences.

Now let me briefly address some of your comments:

Salvation: The Roman Catholic Church teaches that salvation is by baptismal regeneration and is maintained through the Catholic sacraments unless a willful act of sin is committed that breaks the state of sanctifying grace. The Bible teaches that we are saved by grace which is received through simple faith (Ephesians 2:8-9), and that good works are the result of a change of the heart wrought in salvation (Ephesians 2:10; 2 Corinthians 5:17) and the fruit of that new life in Christ (John 15).

Baptism: In the New Testament baptism is ALWAYS practiced AFTER saving faith in Christ. Baptism is not the means of salvation; it is faith in the Gospel that saves (1 Corinthians 1:14-18; Romans 10:13-17). Christ on the cross told the repentant criminal that that day they’d be together in paradise. That thief was saved because he believed, not because he was baptized in water.

1. It is true that the Roman Catholic Church teaches that we are saved by baptismal regeneration, but you don’t seem to know what the requirements for baptism are, check your facts before attacking a faith you don’t seem to understand. It teaches that there are three requirements for slavation: (1) REPENTANCE (Mat 3:11; Acts 2:38; Acts 17:30; Acts 26:20; etc.), (2) FAITH (Eph 2:8; Gal 5:6; Heb 11:6; etc.) and (3) BAPTISM (John 3:5; Acts 2:38; 1 Peter 3:21; Acts 22:16; Rom 6:3-4, Col 2:11–12).

Let’s examine one text: Acts 2:37-38: “When the people heard this, they were cut to the heart and said to Peter and the other apostles, “Brothers, what shall we do?” Peter replied, “Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins. And you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.”

It is interesting to notice that when Peter preached his powerful sermon at Pentecost, when people ask what they should do, he focused on Repentance and Baptism. I am convinced that it is not to downplay Faith which is obviously implied (You can only be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ if you have Faith in Him) and you can only understand that if you look at the entirety of the biblical data rather than one verse here and one verse there. It is called 'proof texting' and it is a very dangerous practice because you can prove almost anything using one verse of the bible here or another there. As for baptismal regeneration, again, refer to these different verses on baptism that either say explicitly or imply it.

2. When you say the Bible teaches that we are saved by grace which is received through simple faith (Ephesians 2:8-9): I would correct you in saying that the Bible says through ‘Faith’, not ‘simple Faith’. If you want to add qualifiers to the word ‘Faith’, it would be better to stick with the biblical ones: E.g. “Faith working through Love” (Gal 5:6). Furthermore it is obviously not clear in this passage alone what the means of receiving this grace are, and what is meant by Faith (Faith is not just intellectual assent, it is a commitment to trust that can only be seen in the way you act: This is why to repeat myself, St Paul says that: “For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision has any value. The only thing that counts is faith expressing itself through love.” Gal 5:6).

3. Ephesians 2:10; 2 Corinthians 5:17 do emphasize the change of heart as a result of salvation, but these two verses don’t mean that you automatically become perfect at your new birth. Yes the dispositions of your heart have changed, but this becomes concrete in your life through a lifelong process that is only made possible by the grace of God provided that you progressively put all your will to it by completely surrendering and completely trusting Him. That is why the same person who wrote these two verses you cited, also wrote to the Philippians “… continue to work out your salvation with fear and trembling,for it is God who works in you to will and to act in order to fulfil his good purpose” (Phil 2:12-13). God does most of it but we must cooperate but trusting and surrendering in the way we leave and act (with fear and trembling), not just mentally.

4. Don’t confuse general mean given by Christ and his apostle as seen in the Bible (repentance, faith and baptism) with God’s power to save anybody in special circumstances, because of the Cross of Christ. Among those special circumstances we have the case of the Good thief who obviously didn’t have the time for baptism. This is why the term Baptism is quite broad in the catholic faith; there is what we call "baptism of desire" for instance. But it is undeniable that the general mean by which one enters the family of God according to the Bible, is through these three, even though the sovereign God that we serve is not limited by the means he gives us.

Assurance of salvation: The Roman Catholic Church teaches that salvation cannot be guaranteed or assured. 1 John 5:13 states that the letter of 1 John was written for the purpose of assuring believers of the CERTAINTY of their salvation.

What is meant by that is that salvation is available as long as we cooperate. When we convert to Christ, we are the children of our Heavenly Father, but because of our free will that can be influenced by all sorts of circumstances, it is possible to decide like the prodigal son (1^st part of the story) to leave the house and therefore stop believing in Christ as required in John 3:16 (the act of believing suggest a continuous act, not just at one point in time), and our heavenly Father who respects our free will, will not force us to stay home. And this is biblical: Rom. 11:22; Heb. 10:26–29, 2 Pet. 2:20–21. Please read these verses carefully and you will understand that we are not limiting the grace of God, but we are recognising that our will is crucial not only at the moment of our conversion, but throughout our Christian life.

Purgatory: There is nowhere in the Bible where it mentions the opportunity to cleanse the soul of the sins committed while alive, in this “holding place”. This one has got to be one of the biggest lies taught in Catholic doctrine.

The purgatory issue only arises because we have a different understanding of salvation. For Catholics, salvation is the full blown reality of becoming a child of God, not just in name but by nature, “until we all reach unity in the faith and in the knowledge of the Son of God and become mature, attaining to the whole measure of the fullness of Christ” Eph 4:13. We as Catholics believe that when Jesus said: “Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect.” (Mat 5:48), He meant exactly what he said. I don’t know about you, but I am not there yet. In fact even the great Paul at some point acknowledged that he didn’t get their yet (Phil 3:12).

So the way we see salvation, God doesn’t just look at the righteousness of Christ and say because you believe in him I declare you just, he does that but but much more: In addition he gives us the grace to live a new life until we are like Christ himself, indeed our Master and Teacher said: “The student is not above the teacher, but everyone who is fully trained will be like their teacher.” (Lk. 6:40). So we have to get there. Now what happens to those that don’t reach this final state before they die? Remember that “nothing unclean will ever enter heaven” (Rev 21:27). So what happens?

The answer to that question is found in 1 Co 3:10-15: “By the grace God has given me, I laid a foundation as a wise builder, and someone else is building on it. But each one should build with care. For no one can lay any foundation other than the one already laid, which is Jesus Christ. If anyone builds on this foundation using gold, silver, costly stones, wood, hay or straw, their work will be shown for what it is, because the Day will bring it to light. It will be revealed with fire, and the fire will test the quality of each person’s work. If what has been built survives, the builder will receive a reward. If it is burned up, the builder will suffer loss but yet will be saved—even though only as one escaping through the flames.”

In the last part of this passage of Scripture, St Paul speaks about those who have built on the right foundation: Jesus Christ, but whose quality (their life) was tested and it were burned up. This can be that one is converted, but there is still a little hypocrisy, white lies, etc. though he is a follower of Jesus. And Paul says that they will “suffer loss” but “they will be saved only as through the flames” This is what we call purgatory. If you don’t like the term (especially because of the past abuses attached to it) drop it, but you cannot deny that the reality is biblical under this particular interpretation of the texts. You can accuse us of being wrong in our interpretation (and this is another debate all together: that of authority), but you cannot accuse us of lying as if the Church deliberately misleads people, this dear brethren I find very offensive and I consider as a lack of show of Christian Charity.

Good Works: The Roman Catholic Church states that Christians are saved by meritorious works (beginning with baptism) and that salvation is maintained by good works (receiving the sacraments, confession of sin to a priest, etc.) The Bible states that Christians are saved by grace through faith, totally apart from works (Titus 3:5;Ephesians 2:8-9; Galatians 3:10-11; Romans 3:19-24).

Two comments:

-    Again you misunderstand the Catholics, we just believe that certain actions that Christ commended us to do are carriers of grace because he told us to do them: We don’t have faith in faith, we have faith in Jesus, and therefore, we do what he tells us to do. Just like prayer (the sinner’s prayer in particular that I am sure you are familiar with), fellowship, Bible reading etc. You can’t label those meritorious works the same way when you do your sinner’s prayer, it is not meritorious work. It is the way you express your Faith, trust and obedience in God, you do what you believe he told you to do to be saved. We receive baptism (Mat 28:19; Mc 16:16; Acts 2:38) and confession because Jesus told us to (John 20:21–23, Mat 10:40). A mandate given to the apostles, and now to their successors (the bishops: 1 Tim 3:1-7), who established and delegated elders or presbyters (from the Greek presbuteroi from which we get the word priest: E.g. 1 Tim. 5:17–22; Jas. 5:14–15, Titus 1:5). How can you label us non-Christian for doing what the Lord Jesus told us to do???  

-          As for confession, we don’t confess to a priest as such, we confess our sins to God, and the priest is there as a servant to guide us through that process, he points us to the Love and Mercy of God through the person and work of Jesus Christ, and Jesus gives them the authority to tell us that we are indeed forgiven (John 20:21–23). This sacrament is even referred to as the sacrament of Love where you need someone to remind you of the Love of God and his forgiveness when you confess your sins.

-     As for the merit issue, again don’t attack a caricature of what Catholics affirm: The only merit given to us is when we surrender to the One who can do it all in us. It is like a little girl who asks her father to give her money and to drop her to the mall so she can buy him a birthday gift. All that she gave her father was possible because he gave her the money, a lift, maybe went with her to the shop, etc.

A great catholic teacher once said: “In order to merit, it is enough to know that our merits do not suffice for us.” Our merit, our glory is God’s recognition of what we do with the grace he gives us as eloquently described in the parable of the talents: “Well done, good and faithful servant! You have been faithful with a few things; I will put you in charge of many things. Come and share your master’s happiness!” (Mat 5:21,23). This is the context in which the whole language of merit should be understood. And I acknowledge that in the history of the Church, there has been a misuse of this concept, and that even today some Catholics misunderstand it the way you do.  But a well informed bible believing Catholic who is committed to the teaching of his Church knows better. 

Prayer: The Roman Catholic Church teaches Catholics to not only pray to God, but also to petition Mary and the saints for their prayers. Contrary to this, we are taught in Scripture to only pray to God (Matthew 6:9; Luke 18:1-7). In fact, praying to anyone else besides God is idolatry, be it Mary, the dead saints or anyone. Prayer has to be to God alone. By the way, you don’t have to dead to be ordained a saint, all believers, dead or alive are saints, and not just the dead Pope.

1. Here again you do 'proof texting', and you do it wrong because this has nothing to do with an interdict to prayer to the Saints. In fact this prayer to our Heavenly Father is one that Catholics know above any and are much more attached to it than most other groups. All that this text does is to show us how to pray to our Heavenly Father.
2. Praying for some may be intimately associated to worship, but the word simply means ‘asking’. And this is how it is used in the Catholic Church. The real issue is our different understanding of death. We believe that the dead in Christ are with God and can intercede for us. Indeed we believe so because Rev 5:8 says that “they were holding golden bowls full of incense, which are the prayers of God’s people.” We are told in the letter to the Hebrew that “you have come to Mount Zion, to the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem. You have come to thousands upon thousands of angels in joyful assembly, to the church of the firstborn, whose names are written in heaven. You have come to God, the Judge of all, to the spirits of the righteous made perfect, to Jesus the mediator of a new covenant, and to the sprinkled blood that speaks a better word than the blood of Abel.” Heb 12:22-24. Etc.

Priesthood: The Roman Catholic Church teaches that there is a distinction between the clergy and the “lay people,” whereas the New Testament teaches the priesthood of all believers (1 Peter 2:9).

Your distinction is wrong: the difference between clergy and lay people doesn't mean the difference between believers and priests. Again, please check your facts. It is true that there is a difference between the people of God (lay people), and those within the people of God that He has called to be servants of the people of God (clergy). In the New Testament there was a clear difference between the [Apostle, bishops, elders and deacons] and the [people of God], and the first group (the clergy) was there to serve the second. Today, whatever your Christian denomination, there is a difference between those in the pew (people of God) and the Pastors (clergy).

That is why we differentiate the ministerial priesthood from the priesthood of the faithful. All those in Christ are priests in the second sense, but also prophets and kings, but only those who have been chosen among the people to continue the work of the apostles (in serving the people of God by preaching, catechizing, teaching, giving the sacraments, etc.) are ministerial priests. The difference is only functional (to determine who does what, but we are all priests).

Mary: The Roman Catholic Church teaches, among other things, that Mary is the Queen of Heaven, a perpetual virgin, and the co-redemptress who ascended into heaven. In Scripture, she is portrayed as an obedient, believing servant of God, who became the mother of Jesus. None of the other attributes mentioned by the Roman Catholic Church have any basis in the Bible.

The idea of Mary being the co-redemptress and another mediator between God and man is not only extra-biblical (found only outside of Scripture), but is also unbiblical (contrary to Scripture). Acts 4:12 declares that Jesus is the only redeemer. 1 Timothy 2:5 proclaims that Jesus is the only mediator between God and men. Christ alone is able to save, he doesn’t need an assistant!

Whatever I say about Mary, I know how difficult it will be for you to accept my point of view, but let me however say something: For lack of time I will deal with only two of the titles that you scorn to show you that all this titles have an explanation and if one wants to disagree with them, one should at least do so in the terms in which the ideas are articulated rather than a caricature. Please note that the Catholic Church is not trying to deify Mary at all; it is simply acknowledging the special place that she has been given by God in Salvation history. By the way when she prophesizes that “all generations will call me blessed” (Lk. 1:48), I wonder if you at least fulfill that prophesy by explicitly recognizing that special grace God gave her, otherwise, in some way you are going against an explicit prophecy in the Bible?

Queen of Heaven:

Many things can be said to support that, let me just mention a few:

-       First of all her Queen ship shouldn't be a problem because of her belonging to Christ: as all in Christ are a royal priesthood.

-      Second since Jesus came to restore the Kingdom of David (The main theme of the Gospel according to Matthew) or actually that the Kingdom of Israel in the Old Testament was a foreshadow of Christ's true Kingdom, an important person in that Kingdom was the Queen Mother (Since Solomon and Basheba onward) who had special favors from her Son the King. And this is why though his time did not yet come, he accepted to do a special favor for his mother at the wedding in Cana (Lk 2:1-11). So Jesus being the King of the universe, his mother receives a special privilege in the Kingdom (not deity, Queen ship)  

-      The other reason for her Glory and maybe the most important is her ‘YES’, her total and unconditional obedience to God, even when her Son was hard on her sometimes.

-         Queen of Heaven does not mean goddess. God’s aim is to share his Glory with humanity, so there is nothing wrong with making the one he favored to bear his Son, and the one who has been faithful all her life with such a privilege.

There are other reasons but I will stop there. Again you may disagree with us, but don’t treat us of liars just because our interpretation of the Biblical data lead us to different conclusions than yours, the only charitable conclusion you can come up with is that we are mistaken. But again, this is another debate all together: Whose interpretation is the best?

Co-Redemptrix:

As soon as people hear this word they immediately without inquiring further, assume that this term means that we are saved by the work of both Mary and Jesus. But this is not what the term means. All it means is “the one who is with the redemptor”, as she stood at the feet of the cross while he was dying. All it says is that she was there, and as a mother when you see your only son being treated like this and you faithfully accept it, this is something that is worth recognizing. It boils down to how faithful she was and how good a model of faith she is to inspire Christian to imitate her, and therefore imitate Christ.

Conclusion:

In conclusion, I urge you to review your conclusions: We may differ on these important issues, but we both affirm Jesus as Lord and Savior, we both affirm that “Salvation is found in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given to mankind by which we must be saved.” Act 4:12, we both affirm the inspiration of Scripture, etc. This should make us brethren in Christ, separated brethren, but brethren nonetheless. If you disagree with a doctrine from another group, try to look at the doctrine as articulated by the group, and try to get as much info on the reasons behind them, before making any pronouncements.

And we should have conversation between us to understand each other’s beliefs, instead of criticizing what we hear from the outside and labeling each other. Let’s be humble enough and leave to God the task of deciding who is saved and who is not, let’s rather radiate the love of Christ to a world that really needs Him, and continue to exchange in a productive way so as to arrive to that unity of Faith very dear to our common Master (John 17).

I hope this will give you enough food for thoughts and I hope the end of this lengthy response to your article, will find you in the Love, Peace and Joy of Jesus.

A brother in Christ, who cares.

“For God, who said, “Let light shine out of darkness”, made his light shine in our hearts to give us the light of the knowledge of God’s glory displayed in the face of Christ.” 2 Co 4,6