What a Tangled Web They Weave

  • Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.

    You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Axehead

New Member
May 9, 2012
2,222
205
0
The Evolving Doctrine of Mary

A Case Study in the Progression of Error
By Randy Blackaby

Mary, the mother of Jesus, is one of the most interesting and important women found in Scripture. The Bible describes her magnificent faith from the time she becomes pregnant until she stands at the foot of the cross. Hers is a compelling story.

But Catholicism has developed the story of Mary over the centuries until today she is called sinless, “the gate of heaven,” and the mediatress between God and man. How did she evolve from the very holy woman of the Bible to a sinless, undying female mediator through whom men can approach God? The answer may help us understand how all error progresses.

Let’s start with reality. The story of Mary is a marvelous one. As a virgin she conceived the Christ child through the Holy Spirit, as prophesied 700 years before (Luke Isaiah 7:14). This woman was God’s instrument for bringing Jesus into the world in the flesh. Her strength is evidenced in the things she endured. Her story needs no mythological additions to make it wondrous, inspiring and faith-building.

But the fact that additions aren’t needed doesn’t prevent men from creating “cunningly devised fables” (2 Peter 1:16; 2 Timothy 4:1-4).

Fable Of The Immaculate Conception

Many presume the term “immaculate conception” refers to the fact Jesus was born without sin. But that is not the case. Catholic doctrine teaches Mary was born without sin. “When we say that Mary was conceived without sin we mean that from the very first moment of her existence she was free from original sin, she was full of grace” (Mary—Doctrine for Everyman, page 17).

We’re exploring how error evolves. So, did you catch in the Catholic explanation above about why they came to believe she was born without sin?

It’s because they believe another error—the idea that men are born in sin or inherit the sin of Adam through their parents.

But the birth and sinless nature of Jesus cast the doctrine of inherited depravity in grave doubt. If babies inherit the sinful nature of their parents, how did Jesus come to be born without sin? Why didn’t he “catch” or otherwise “pick up” all the sins of his ancestors through Mary?

So, Catholic scholars faced a choice. Repudiate the false notion of inherited sin or create an answer to the dilemma. They chose the latter route. On December 8, 1854, Pope Pius IX declared Mary had been born without sin. Thus, they explained Jesus’ sinless nature and held on to the doctrine of inherited sin.

But it makes one wonder. If Mary was sinless, why did she say, “my spirit has rejoiced in God my savior” (Luke 1:47-48)? Describing someone as your savior implies the need for salvation. Mary must have recognized she had sinned.

Fable Of Mary’s Perpetual Virginity
The Bible clearly states that Mary was a virgin who had never known a man sexually from the time she conceived until after the birth of Jesus (Matthew 1:18, 23-25; Luke 1:26-35). Thus, the birth of Jesus was absolutely unique. The manner of his birth helps depict the two-fold nature of our Lord, being man and God at once.

But why would the Catholic church contend that Mary remained a virgin for her entire life on earth? They contend she never had sexual relations with a man or had any other children. To quote their approved writings, “It is Catholic faith that Mary was a virgin before the divine birth; during it; and after it—Our Lady never had any other children” (Mary—Doctrine for Everyman, p. 14).

Like our first fable, this one is rooted in yet another false premise. The Catholic church teaches that abstinence from marriage and sexuality is a superior position spiritually. This is why priests, nuns and other church leaders take vows of celibacy.

But to maintain their doctrine on celibacy, the myth about Mary’s perpetual virginity runs headlong into conflict with the Bible. The Bible only declares that Joseph did not know his wife sexually “till she had brought forth her firstborn son” (Matthew 1:24-25). Jesus is declared to have had brothers and sisters (Mark 6:3; Matthew 12:46-50; Acts 1:14). And Hebrews 13:4 declares that marriage is honorable, including the sexual component (“the bed”).

The Apostle Paul taught that husbands and wives should not deprive or defraud one another of the sexual component of marriage (1 Corinthians 7:1-5) and the sexual union is a part of a man and woman becoming “one flesh” (Matthew 19:5-6).

It is interesting that the Catholic church will “annul” a marriage and say it never really existed if it isn’t sexually “consummated.” Did Mary’s marriage to Joseph never really exist?

What a tangled web is weaved when error is compounded by more error. But that is the nature of the evolution of false teaching.

Fable Of The Assumption Of Mary Into Heaven
Some books call this the “great assumption.” That’s a pretty good description. This Catholic doctrine teaches that Mary never died but was taken directly to heaven like Enoch and Elijah. “When the course of our Lady’s life on earth was ended she was taken up body and soul into heaven” (Mary—Doctrine for Everyman, p. 34).

The Bible says absolutely nothing about Mary after reporting her and Jesus’ brothers assembling with the disciples after the Lord’s ascension (Acts 1:14). So, why did Catholics feel a need to create this doctrine?

Remember, error leads to error. Remember how the doctrine of original sin led to the development of the doctrine of immaculate conception? That doctrine didn’t end the problems Catholics had with the idea that men inherit sin from their forefathers.

By declaring Mary sinless, they created a new dilemma. Everyone who has read the book of Romans knows the Bible declares “the wages of sin is death” (6:23). But, wait a minute. If Mary had no sin, why would she die? Why would she receive the wages of a sinner when she hadn’t earned them?

Catholic doctrine had created a clear conflict. So, the choice was to repudiate the doctrines of the immaculate conception and original sin or “fix” the conflict with an explanation. Catholics chose the latter course.

In 1950, the year before I was born, it became official Catholic dogma that Mary didn’t die.

Fable Of Mary As Mediatress Or Mediatrix
If Mary was sinless and went straight to heaven without facing the judgment of our Lord, she certainly would be greater than the mighty lawgiver of old, Moses. She would be greater than Abraham, the model of faith. So, where does her “assumption” lead?

We really see how error evolves into complete and total blasphemy now. The Catholic church calls Mary a mediatress or mediatrix (feminine form of mediator). “The name mediatress is given her insofar as she exercises this influence in heaven” (Mary—Doctrine for Everyman, p. 40).

This is problematic because the Apostle Paul said, “For there is one God and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus” (1 Timothy 2:5). If Mary is a mediator, that makes “two” of them.

So, the Catholic church had a choice. Back away from this doctrine or develop it further. They chose the latter.

Calling her the “mother of God,” they also described her as the “gate of heaven” because, they say, no one can enter the blessed kingdom without passing through her.

So, Catholics pray to Mary. They claim that Jesus, as judge, is too harsh, but that Mary will not refuse anyone. Wow! That makes Mary sound more full of grace and mercy than even our Lord. And he’s the one who died for our sins on the cross.

Jesus taught his disciples to pray to God “in my name” (John 14:13-14). Jesus declared, “I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me” (John 14:6). Peter preached as the church first began, “Nor is there salvation in any other, for there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved” (Acts 4:12). He was speaking of Jesus, not Mary.

Jesus declared that “all power” had been given to him “in heaven and on earth” (Matthew 28:18). That wouldn’t leave any for Mary.

So, the Catholic church had a choice. It could repudiate this error and worship Jesus as Lord and only mediator, or it could develop this doctrine further. It chose to develop its error.

And that latter course is pure blasphemy, assuming for Mary the prerogatives of deity. In the same Catholic document previously quoted, it reads, “All power is given to thee (Mary—rb) in heaven and on earth” and “at the command of Mary all obey—even God.”

What? Even God obeys Mary?

“The whole Trinity, O Mary, gave thee a name…above every other name, that at thy name, every knee should bow, of things in heaven, on earth, and under the earth,” says the same Catholic document.

All that leaves a Bible believer with mouth agape.

Why Opposing Error Is So Important
Perhaps you are seeing not only the errors of Catholicism about Mary but the more important issue—how error evolves into monstrous and blasphemous false doctrine that totally repudiates the teaching of Scripture and elevates the human to the level of divinity.

Beginning with the doctrine of original sin, the myths and fables about Mary have grown until now she is viewed as sinless and virtually equal with Jesus. There has been a move afoot for several years now to declare her a co-mediator with Christ.

Her supposed assumption into heaven and associated doctrines make her equal in glory with Jesus and her declared mediation makes it seem she actually has greater influence than the Lord himself.

This article has explored the development of one area of false doctrine in one human denomination. But the principle applies in the Lord’s church as well. If we teach and believe error and then refuse to repent when it obviously conflicts with the clear teaching of scripture, then we can expect the error to evolve into much more egregious error.
 

Arnie Manitoba

Well-Known Member
Mar 8, 2011
2,650
138
63
73
Manitoba Canada
I think most of us Hold Mary in high regard , and respect her as someone very special .
I feel the bible would have been explicit if we were to adore her as much as some traditions do.
I am always cautious , because to hold her that high requires me to lower the Lord a bit.
When I give an accounting of my life and if I am faulted for not holding Mary high enough , I will feel very guilty.
Yet I observe that the special 12 appointed Apostles tended to see themselves as lowly servants.
I also observe that powerful Angels quickly rebuked human prophets when they adored the angel.
Maybe those involved in "Mary-idolotry" have everything properly structured in their minds.
But it often appears they have crossed the line into mortal sin.
And that troubles me.
 

us2are1

Son Of Man
Sep 14, 2011
895
26
0
Mary was bothersome.
John 2
4 Jesus said to her, "Woman, what does your concern have to do with Me? My hour has not yet come."


Mary did not follow Christ or do the will of God.

47 Then one said to Him, "Look, Your mother and Your brothers are standing outside, seeking to speak with You."
48 But He answered and said to the one who told Him, "Who is My mother and who are My brothers?"
49 And He stretched out His hand toward His disciples and said, "Here are My mother and My brothers!
50 For whoever does the will of My Father in heaven is My brother and sister and mother."

The teachings of Christ are remembered.

37 He who loves father or mother more than Me is not worthy of Me. And he who loves son or daughter more than Me is not worthy of Me.
38 And he who does not take his cross and follow after Me is not worthy of Me.

Mary and Christ's brothers did not take their cross and follow Him.

Worshiping Mary is an abomination.

In the sight of God
 

Arnie Manitoba

Well-Known Member
Mar 8, 2011
2,650
138
63
73
Manitoba Canada
But why would the Catholic church contend that Mary remained a virgin for her entire life on earth? They contend she never had sexual relations with a man or had any other children. To quote their approved writings, “It is Catholic faith that Mary was a virgin before the divine birth; during it; and after it—Our Lady never had any other children” (Mary—Doctrine for Everyman, p. 14).

Further confirmation can be clearly seen in Matthew 1:[sup]24 [/sup]When Joseph woke up, he did what the angel of the Lord had commanded him and took Mary home as his wife. [sup]25 [/sup]But he had no union with her until she gave birth to a son. And he gave him the name Jesus

Clearly ... "union" .... indicates normal marriage intercourse for Mary after Jesus' birth ..... this goes against claims that Mary remained a perpetual Virgin. ..... Plus there are places where it tells of the other children Joseph and Mary had after Jesus.

......................................................
ps: Axehead .... I meant to thank you for the OP .... very informative.
 

jerzy

New Member
Sep 7, 2012
113
1
0
The first lie made in the Council of Ephesus generated few on the way to the finale one (one hopes) of 1950 whereby “someone must have seen her going to heaven in flesh”.

Hmmmm!!!!
 

Axehead

New Member
May 9, 2012
2,222
205
0
Further confirmation can be clearly seen in Matthew 1:[sup]24 [/sup]When Joseph woke up, he did what the angel of the Lord had commanded him and took Mary home as his wife. [sup]25 [/sup]But he had no union with her until she gave birth to a son. And he gave him the name Jesus

Clearly ... "union" .... indicates normal marriage intercourse for Mary after Jesus' birth ..... this goes against claims that Mary remained a perpetual Virgin. ..... Plus there are places where it tells of the other children Joseph and Mary had after Jesus.

......................................................
ps: Axehead .... I meant to thank you for the OP .... very informative.
The first lie made in the Council of Ephesus generated few on the way to the finale one (one hopes) of 1950 whereby “someone must have seen her going to heaven in flesh”.

Hmmmm!!!!

Your welcome, Arnie. I thought the brother's article was very well organized.

Mary was bothersome.
John 2
4 Jesus said to her, "Woman, what does your concern have to do with Me? My hour has not yet come."


Mary did not follow Christ or do the will of God.

47 Then one said to Him, "Look, Your mother and Your brothers are standing outside, seeking to speak with You."
48 But He answered and said to the one who told Him, "Who is My mother and who are My brothers?"
49 And He stretched out His hand toward His disciples and said, "Here are My mother and My brothers!
50 For whoever does the will of My Father in heaven is My brother and sister and mother."

The teachings of Christ are remembered.

37 He who loves father or mother more than Me is not worthy of Me. And he who loves son or daughter more than Me is not worthy of Me.
38 And he who does not take his cross and follow after Me is not worthy of Me.

Mary and Christ's brothers did not take their cross and follow Him.

Worshiping Mary is an abomination.

In the sight of God

Exactly, Son of Man! Mary also had to learn to abide in Christ and submit her will to God (Jesus Christ). Nothing was automatic for her or any other child of Adam. All have to come through the door (Jesus), repent of their sins and begin to abide in the Lord and continue IN HIM. Mary was no different. She had to be born of the Spirit, also. She was not divine but rather a mortal, human being. She would have been much older than any of the Apostles (at least 2 decades or so) and would have died before they did. There is no mention whatsoever in the Bible of any of the outlandish things spoken about her by the RCC. Notice, all of those doctrines about Mary come for "other" sources but not a peep from the NT which was penned by the NT Apostles who would have known about her life and death. NOT ONE WORD ABOUT HER.

Axehead
 

jerzy

New Member
Sep 7, 2012
113
1
0
Interestingly, the Mariology began in Ephesus where Paul almost lost his life over the goddess Diana and of the image which fell down from Jupiter?

Does this ring a bell?
 

epostle1

Well-Known Member
Sep 24, 2012
3,326
508
113
73
Essex
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
Debate on the Doctrine of Mary – John Salza versus Randy Blackaby


In the following exchange, Catholic Apologist, John Salza takes critical issue with Protestant, Randy Blackaby, on the Church's doctrine regarding, Mary, the Mother of God. HERE is their exchange:
 

Axehead

New Member
May 9, 2012
2,222
205
0
Thank you for that link, kepha31. Some very interesting statements.

Catholic Apologist J. Salza says:

The belief in the Immaculate Conceptions goes all the way back to the Scriptures themselves. When the angel Gabriel appeared to Mary, he did not call her "Mary." He called her "full of grace" (in Greek, kecharitomene)(Lk 1:43). The word kecharitomenemeans that Mary received a complete and perfect endowment of grace from God. This perfect endowment occurred at Mary's Immaculate Conception, when she was created by God without sin. Only one other person in Scripture is described as "full of grace," and that person is Jesus Christ (John 1:14).

To demonstrate the perennial belief in the Immaculate Conception of Mary, here are some quotes from the early Church fathers from the first five centuries of the Catholic Church:

He was the ark formed of incorruptible wood. For by this is signified that His tabernacle was exempt from putridity and corruption." Hippolytus, Orations Inillud, Dominus pascit me (ante A.D. 235).

"This Virgin Mother of the Only-begotten of God, is called Mary, worthy of God, immaculate of the immaculate, one of the one."Origen, Homily 1(A.D. 244).

"Let woman praise Her, the pure Mary." Ephraim, Hymns on the Nativity, 15:23 (A.D. 370).

"Thou alone and thy Mother are in all things fair, there is no flaw in thee and no stain in thy Mother." Ephraem, Nisibene Hymns, 27:8 (A.D. 370).

"O noble Virgin, truly you are greater than any other greatness. For who is your equal in greatness, O dwelling place of God the Word? To whom among all creatures shall I compare you, O Virgin? You are greater than them all O Covenant, clothed with purity instead of gold! You are the Ark in which is found the golden vessel containing the true manna, that is, the flesh in which divinity resides."Athanasius, Homily of the Papyrus of Turin, 71:216 (ante AD 373) .

"Mary, a Virgin not only undefiled but a Virgin whom grace has made inviolate, free of every stain of sin." Ambrose, Sermon 22:30(A.D. 388) .

"We must except the Holy Virgin Mary, concerning whom I wish to raise no question when it touches the subject of sins, out of honour to the Lord; for from Him we know what abundance of grace for overcoming sin in every particular was conferred upon her who had the merit to conceive and bear Him who undoubtedly had no sin."Augustine, Nature and Grace,4 2[36] (A.D.415) .

"As he formed her without any stain of her own, so He proceeded from her contracting no stain." Proclus of Constantinople, Homily 1 (ante A.D. 446) .

"A virgin, innocent, spotless, free of all defect, untouched, unsullied, holy in soul and body, like a lily sprouting among thorns."Theodotus of Ancrya, Homily VI:11(ante A.D. 446) .

"The angel took not the Virgin from Joseph, but gave her to Christ, to whom she was pledged from Joseph, but gave her to Christ, to whom she was pledged in the womb, when she was made." Peter Chrysologus, Sermon 140 (A.D. 449) .
"[T]he very fact that God has elected her proves that none was ever holier than Mary, if any stain had disfigured her soul, if any other virgin had been purer and holier, God would have selected her and rejected Mary." Jacob of Sarug (ante A.D. 521) .

Axehead
 

epostle1

Well-Known Member
Sep 24, 2012
3,326
508
113
73
Essex
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
I'm really glad you took the time to read the link, Axe. Most people don't read links in forums. You are an upstanding intellectual.
 

Axehead

New Member
May 9, 2012
2,222
205
0
Further confirmation can be clearly seen in Matthew 1:[sup]24 [/sup]When Joseph woke up, he did what the angel of the Lord had commanded him and took Mary home as his wife. [sup]25 [/sup]But he had no union with her until she gave birth to a son. And he gave him the name Jesus

Clearly ... "union" .... indicates normal marriage intercourse for Mary after Jesus' birth ..... this goes against claims that Mary remained a perpetual Virgin. ..... Plus there are places where it tells of the other children Joseph and Mary had after Jesus.

......................................................
ps: Axehead .... I meant to thank you for the OP .... very informative.

Thank you, Arnie. And thanks to Jerzy and Son of Man for their contributions, too.

Here is something else that you may find informative.


Regarding "Evolving Doctrines", here is a quotation that one cannot repeat too many times:
"If only one instance could be given in which the Church ceased to teach a doctrine of faith which she had previously held, that single instance would be a death-blow to her claim of infallibility" (Faith of Our Fathers, Gibbons, 61)

Many of the Popes have been astrologers, (would you like me to show you?) and yet the Catholic Church says, "All forms of divination are to be rejected: recourse to Satan or demons, conjuring up the dead or other practices falsely supposed to "unveil" the future.." (Catholic Catechism, paragraph 2116)

"But in dealing with everything that can be urged against her the Catholic Church never finds herself compelled to unsay anything. In answering difficulties from the most diverse points of view, even the most contradictory, she never contradicts herself, having to unsay to one opponent what she has maintained in her replies to another." (Catholic Apologetics Online, Radio Replies, III, XII)

The Roman Catholic Church Acknowledges Erroneous Teaching
"And history shows only too plainly that the Church, in their sense of the term, has varied in its doctrine, taught dogmas at various times and at various places at the same time, inconsistent with each other, and therefore to a considerable extent erroneous" (Plain Facts, Geo. M. Searle, Paulist Press, N.Y., 1915, p. 34).


Axehead
 

Hepzibah

Well-Known Member
Aug 13, 2012
1,377
1,034
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United Kingdom
The errors on both sides of the dispute come through men thinking with carnal minds and therefore not understanding spiritual laws governing the spiritual development of men/women in becoming united with God. Mary was no different to those who reach this perfection, apart from her special role in bearing and raising the Son of God. She was indeed born without sin, as are all men, and like all men, became a sinner, in accordance with the scriptures we are given, when she reached the age of accountability. At a later date, due to the Holy Spirit`s conviction of sin and in conforming her will to absolute submission to her Maker, the eternal work of Christ on the cross became effective in her and she was delivered from the sin nature she had developed, becoming sinless like others before and after her.

The scripturtes record that this had already taken place and she was full of grace when the angel spoke to her.

Another misunderstanding is that one will remain in that state. It is recorded that she had indeed fallen from it when her son had to rebuke her. Indeed it is recorded that certain apostles also had occasion of falling. John Wesley spoke of this, and that those who had been entirely sanctified in his day, would generally be restored though it must never be taken for granted. It is not easy to retain the blessing as it depends entirely on the power of God both to enter in and stay in. I have fallen from it myself twice.

She may have been assumed into heaven, we don`t know but as it has occured before, it may well have happened.

I do not think that she was a young woman. Her cousin Elisabeth was elderly and they had a close relationship. She went to stay with her cousin during her pregnancy with John which may have been something not done in those days by a young girl who would be needed in her home to help with the family. She also sounded like a mature woman to me, and it is not usual for perfection to occur at an early age. The fact that she had not married, moreover, suggests that she was perhaps not very attractive, which would be in stark contrast to the way she is portrayed by the RCC.

There is also the point that mothering skills are much more developed in an older woman. She would certainly need these skills and spiritual warfare proficiency to protect her child who would be very exposed to evil attacks. There are many examples in scripture like Elizabeth where God choses a woman past childbearing age to mother a special prophet.

I dont think she had more children but I think that Joseph already had children from a previous marriage - probably widowed. Joseph died before Jesus entered ministry, pointing again to Him having two elderly parents.
 

Mungo

Well-Known Member
May 23, 2012
4,332
644
113
England
Faith
Christian
Country
United Kingdom
What is the point of the following quotations?


Regarding "Evolving Doctrines", here is a quotation that one cannot repeat too many times:
"If only one instance could be given in which the Church ceased to teach a doctrine of faith which she had previously held, that single instance would be a death-blow to her claim of infallibility" (Faith of Our Fathers, Gibbons, 61)

Is that the official teaching of the Catholic Church?


Many of the Popes have been astrologers, (would you like me to show you?) and yet the Catholic Church says, "All forms of divination are to be rejected: recourse to Satan or demons, conjuring up the dead or other practices falsely supposed to "unveil" the future.." (Catholic Catechism, paragraph 2116)

If true that only makes some Popes sinners.

[font=Trebuchet MS']"But in dealing with everything that can be urged against her the Catholic Church never finds herself compelled to unsay anything. In answering difficulties from the most diverse points of view, even the most contradictory, she never contradicts herself, having to unsay to one opponent what she has maintained in her replies to another." [/font][font=Trebuchet MS'](Catholic Apologetics Online, Radio Replies, III, XII)[/font]

Is that the official teaching of the Catholic Church?

The Roman Catholic Church Acknowledges Erroneous Teaching
"And history shows only too plainly that the Church, in their sense of the term, has varied in its doctrine, taught dogmas at various times and at various places at the same time, inconsistent with each other, and therefore to a considerable extent erroneous" (Plain Facts, Geo. M. Searle, Paulist Press, N.Y., 1915, p. 34).

Who is this Geo M Searle?

Why should we take any notice of what he says?

Where is the evidence to back up his opinions?

Axehead,

You seem to specialise in irrelevant quotations about the Catholic Church.

Do you a have a special book "1001 irrelevant quotations about the Catholic Church"?

What is the point of all this?
 

epostle1

Well-Known Member
Sep 24, 2012
3,326
508
113
73
Essex
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
I think most of us Hold Mary in high regard , and respect her as someone very special .
I feel the bible would have been explicit if we were to adore her as much as some traditions do.
I am always cautious , because to hold her that high requires me to lower the Lord a bit.
When I give an accounting of my life and if I am faulted for not holding Mary high enough , I will feel very guilty.
Yet I observe that the special 12 appointed Apostles tended to see themselves as lowly servants.
I also observe that powerful Angels quickly rebuked human prophets when they adored the angel.
Maybe those involved in "Mary-idolotry" have everything properly structured in their minds.
But it often appears they have crossed the line into mortal sin.
And that troubles me.

It shouldn't.

"...In Scripture, the term "worship" was similarly broad in meaning, but in the early Christian centuries, theologians began to differentiate between different types of honor in order to make more clear which is due to God and which is not.
As the terminology of Christian theology developed, the Greek term latria came to be used to refer to the honor that is due to God alone, and the term dulia came to refer to the honor that is due to human beings, especially those who lived and died in God’s friendship—in other words, the saints. Scripture indicates that honor is due to these individuals (Matt. 10:41b). A special term was coined to refer to the special honor given to the Virgin Mary, who bore Jesus—God in the flesh—in her womb. This term, hyperdulia (huper [more than]+ dulia = "beyond dulia"), indicates that the honor due to her as Christ’s own Mother is more than the dulia given to other saints. It is greater in degree, but still of the same kind. However, since Mary is a finite creature, the honor she is due is fundamentally different in kind from the latria owed to the infinite Creator."
source

Mary was bothersome.
John 2
4 Jesus said to her, "Woman, what does your concern have to do with Me? My hour has not yet come."

"what does your concern have to do with Me" is a Hebrew idiom that means deference to authority. This same idiom is found in Matthew 8:29, when the demons deferred to the authority of Jesus. This same idiom is found in other ancient writings. Therefore, what Jesus is saying here is, "I defer to your authority as queen, My hour has not yet come.

1 Kings 2:17, 20 - in the Old Testament Davidic kingdom, the King does not refuse his mother. Jesus is the new Davidic King, and He does not refuse the requests of his mother Mary, the Queen.

1 Kings 2:18 - in the Old Testament Davidic kingdom, the Queen intercedes on behalf of the King's followers. She is the Queen Mother (or "Gebirah"). Mary is our eternal Gebirah.

1 Kings 2:19 - in the Old Testament Davidic kingdom the King bows down to his mother and she sits at his right hand. We, as children of the New Covenant, should imitate our King and pay the same homage to Mary our Mother. By honoring Mary, we honor our King, Jesus Christ.

1 Kings 15:13 - the Queen Mother is a powerful position in Israel's royal monarchy. Here the Queen is removed from office. But now, the Davidic kingdom is perfected by Jesus, and our Mother Mary is forever at His right hand.

2 Chron. 22:10 - here Queen Mother Athalia destroys the royal family of Judah after she sees her son, King Ahaziah, dead. The Queen mother plays a significant role in the kingdom.

Neh. 2:6 - the Queen Mother sits beside the King. She is the primary intercessor before the King.
source

Mary did not follow Christ or do the will of God.

47 Then one said to Him, "Look, Your mother and Your brothers are standing outside, seeking to speak with You."
48 But He answered and said to the one who told Him, "Who is My mother and who are My brothers?"
49 And He stretched out His hand toward His disciples and said, "Here are My mother and My brothers!
50 For whoever does the will of My Father in heaven is My brother and sister and mother."

If Mary did not do the will of God, then Jesus would not have been born.
Jesus is making a unity where you make a distinction. Every time you do the will of God you are His mother and brothers. Mary is the perfect model of faith. What you are saying here is that Jesus is violating the 4rth commandment by denigrating His mother. If you and I were in the presence of my mother and you spoke of my mother with the same tone, I might lose it and punch you in the mouth. What is Jesus going to do with you when you face him on judgement day when you have spoken about His mother in such a shameless fashion?


Further confirmation can be clearly seen in Matthew 1:[sup]24 [/sup]When Joseph woke up, he did what the angel of the Lord had commanded him and took Mary home as his wife. [sup]25 [/sup]But he had no union with her until she gave birth to a son. And he gave him the name Jesus

Clearly ... "union" .... indicates normal marriage intercourse for Mary after Jesus' birth ..... this goes against claims that Mary remained a perpetual Virgin. ..... Plus there are places where it tells of the other children Joseph and Mary had after Jesus.
......................................................
ps: Axehead .... I meant to thank you for the OP .... very informative.

Mary having other children is recent fad theology, contradicted by all the early reformers.

Matt. 1:25 - this verse says Joseph knew her "not until ("heos", in Greek)" she bore a son. Some Protestants argue that this proves Joseph had relations with Mary after she bore a son. This is an erroneous reading of the text because "not until" does not mean "did not...until after." "Heos" references the past, never the future. Instead, "not until" she bore a son means "not up to the point that" she bore a son. This confirms that Mary was a virgin when she bore Jesus. Here are other texts that prove "not until" means "not up to the point that":

Matt. 28:29 - I am with you "until the end of the world." This does not mean Jesus is not with us after the end of the world.

Luke 20:43 - Jesus says, "take your seat at my hand until I have made your enemies your footstool." Jesus is not going to require the apostles to sit at His left hand after their enemies are their footstool.
source

The first lie made in the Council of Ephesus generated few on the way to the finale one (one hopes) of 1950 whereby “someone must have seen her going to heaven in flesh”.

Hmmmm!!!!

The "lie" at the Council of Ephesus was to defend the Incarnation against the heresy of Nestorius. He taught disunity between Jesus' divinity and His humanity. Either you believe that Jesus is fully God and fully man born of a woman, or you reject the Council of Ephesus. Jesus is the Divine Logos. Mary is his mother. Your objections are illogical.

Interestingly, the Mariology began in Ephesus where Paul almost lost his life over the goddess Diana and of the image which fell down from Jupiter?

Does this ring a bell?
No, it doesn't.

Opponents of the Church often attempt to discredit Catholicism by attempting to show similarities between it and the beliefs or practices of ancient paganism. This fallacy is frequently committed by Fundamentalists against Catholics, by Seventh-Day Adventists, Jehovah’s Witnesses, Mormons, and others against both Protestants and Catholics, and by atheists and skeptics against both Christians and Jews.
Is Catholicism Pagan?