Okay, I am back.
First off, this discussion got a little ugly and that wasn't the direction I wanted to go. I am sorry for my part, I would like to keep it out of that realm this time around.
Secondly, to clearify, yes, I use Catholic Answers. Yes, they are a reputable source. No, I do not just quote them verbatum and use that as my basis. Yes, I have cross checked there possitions both with those of the Bible and those that I have ben able to reason myself (Catholic Answers' point's acctually brought me back into Catholicism when I was drifting away because I believed, at the time, that the Catholic Church was not in adherance to Biblical teachings).
Thirdly, I honestly get the feeling that you are not reading my points, since I keep agreeing with you on several points, and then trying to explian the Church's possition and you keep going on as if I were denying you.
That being said, let us rebegin...
Recounting this entire thread, I could count 14 real objections to what you had to say.
1. Mary as Mother of God because she was "Full of grace"
The Greek word for grace, when referred to Mary, is not the same etymological word when spoken of in verses as Rom 5
[15]But not as the offence, so also is the free gift. For if through the offence of one many be dead, much more the grace of God, and the gift by grace (charis), which is by one man, Jesus Christ, hath abounded unto many
[16] And not as it was by one that sinned, so is the gift: for the judgment was by one to condemnation, but the free gift is of many offences unto justification.
[17] For if by one man's offence death reigned by one; much more they which receive abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness shall reign in life by one, Jesus Christ.)
[18] Therefore as by the offence of one judgment came upon all men to condemnation; even so by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life.
Grace comes from Jesus's sacrifice alone, what I repeated to you again and again.
When grace refers to Mary, the word simply is a warm greeting from the messenger to the earthly virgin mother of Jesus, with none such other meaning.
I agree with
everything you say here, and o does the Church. As I have said numerous times "Grace comes only through God". I could not have been more clear on this point.
The Church does not dispute this. We believe that, just as the prayers of those around us can have a profound affect on God, so too can those in Heaven. Mary does not give grace at all. However, she can pray for us, before God. As the Mother of God (which I have no idea why you are so opposed to this title, as she was the mother of Christ, who is God) we believe that her prayers are partticularly strong.
As for the greeting of Gabriel, you either, I don't think you understand what I meant. What I was saying was not that Mary was full of the power to give grace, rather that, becauseof the greeting, we are shown that she was not just some random person, chosen to have Jesus. Rather, she was filled by God's grace, then, and always. She was choosen by God, with a purpose, and that purpose was intended. She was special,and we are meant to think that she is special.
First off, 503 is refering to the Gospels. It is John 19:25.
Secondly, I see nothing in this that leads to your belief that Mary is capable of giving grace, it simply says that she is an important part of God's plan, the Mother of the Church and prays for the Church, always.
So what if it is. Does John not tell us that all that happened has been recorded in the scriptures? If the Gospels were all definitive, then why have 4? Why not just create one that told the whole story, and could not be refuted? The answer is because those who created the Bible understood that each writer was telling the story from a different point of view and different facts were important to different writters. Thus, none of them got the whole picture.
So? I fail to see how this is conclusive of anything.
What? First off, how was my use of John deceptive? It says what it says. And you never really do bother to address what is so deceptive about it.
Secondly, Jesus doesn't interceed in the way we are talking about. He acts. He does. The other people pray.
Accordng to dictionary.com, the first, most common use of the "intercede" is "To plead on anothers behalf". That is the definition we use in describing what the saints do.
It would be helpful if you would quote chapters every once in a while. So that way, I could acctually know where to look for this stuff.
Now, I find that this is in Romans 8. Anyway, I needed not waste my time finding it, because it is obvious that we are talking about different definitions here. The definition being used here is to act dirrectly.
Common of the anti-Catholic attack, you choose to nit-pick at little definitions in a effort to throw me off. It is clear by the context of this passage that the meaning of interced is to act. This is not the same concept as what we are talking about.
Of course, Christ is the ultimate intercessor. No one denies this to be the case. That does not mean that others cannot be involved. In fact, Christ commands that others be involved in this.
