Mary in the Roman Catholic Church - intercession or idolatry?

Would it help if the words "Father" and "Son" were inserted - which is not unbiblical terminology? The Son intercedes with the Father. Father, Son and Spirit are distinct persons within the one Godhead so one can intercede with the other it would seem. Afterall, Jesus, although God, did pray to his Father on our behalf. He asked his father to "forgive them, for they know not what they do". Is this not intercession? God the Son interceding with God FatherYour thinking above could equally be applied to God sacrificing God in order to save man. But how can God sacrifice God? Again one needs to insert "Father" can sacrifice "Son" - which RC has no problem with. So why not Son intercede with Father?Questions follow:If Jesus can intercede on our behalf with the Father then what is the need for another intercessor?What use a lowlier intercessor if the best is available? Jesus is seated at the right hand of the Father afterall. He has the Fathers ear so to speak. Marys position in relation to the Father or Son is unknown. There is nothing to suggest that she has Jesus ear.

Aren't we forgetting the Holy Spirit here - who intercedes on our behalf too?I do wonder though what the biblical basis is for Mary interceding. As far as I know there is none. If one can step outside what the bible teaches: that God intercedes with God on our behalf then I suppose anything is possible be it intercession.idolatory etc.I do note that in the local RC church, that the statues of Mary are more elaborate, prominant and prayed at than those of
Jesus himself. Whether idolatory or not I don't know - but she seems to be a more significant intercessor of the two

---

"Jesus wept" John 11:35. It's the shortest verse in the Bible. What caused him to weep? Anothers death....

Are you applying "if it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck and looks like a duck..." theory here

---

"Jesus wept" John 11:35. It's the shortest verse in the Bible. What caused him to weep? Anothers death....

The difficulty with this discussion I suppose is that with RC a lot of stuff is permitted which doesn't have biblical backup (or may arguably be contra-bible). In being able to define things according to it's own authority RC can define things as it wants. If what occurs with Mary is said to be valid then valid it is - within the confines of RC - which is all that matters to RC.That there is no biblical warrant for the RC attitude to Mary is a case in point. It can quack all it likes to the outside world but that matters not.

The amount of athiests who believe nothing would I imagine be relatively few. Athiests believe in something - just not God.

An assertion which no doubt you cannot back up. But it does raise the interesting question: what is a Christian?It could be Brand X(a) debating Brand X(b) arises out of a conviction from Brand X(a) that Brand X(b) is not really able to wash whiter than white - despite what the advertising says.Close but no cigar so to speak?

This would seem to be a reasonable approach. But there are problems with it. Asking National Socialism whether genocide was genocide would have resulted in an answer in the negative "Ridding the world of vermin" would likely be the answer received. Does this mean National Socialism was objectively about vermin eradication. Don't read into the analogy as me comparing RC with NS. I don't mean it so. But it illustrates the problems of dealing internally with a particular belief system

I thought as much

I humbly withdraw my unfounded assertion. Now I'd ask you if you would like to substantiate your own unsubstantiated assertion. No probs if you prefer not to. But at least we can all bracket it as "unsubstantiated assertion despite request to do so" and consider its worth in that light..On second thoughts leave it. I'm starting to sound like CK. And it's not that I don't make unfounded assertion either...This message has been edited by iano, 11-Oct-2005 03:47 PM

I have a reasonable appreciation of Paisleys..er...less tolerant side. Apparently though (and it surprised me) he is an excellent preacher when he gets off the political stage. Hard to believe I know. That Hinn fella does give me the heeby jeebies alright.