Today we’re going to cover the Virgin Mary, and why worship or prayers directed towards her is not Scriptural. Mary is not the co-redeemer, nor is she anything more than a woman. She was blessed to carry and give birth to the flesh of the Lord, but she is in no way the mother of God. She is not the Queen of Heaven, but instead worships the Lord there as a servant, as we all will when we get to Heaven.

Mary is put on a pedestal in the Catholic Church it would seem. Mary is one of the most obvious symbols of the Church, and images of her are replete through history, and even our modern times.

Mary ‘worship’ is not part of official doctrine, but is engaged in and encouraged in the Catholic Church.

The Catechism says that Mary was born without the stain of the original sin. This is not Biblical. Bible Time! (Luk 1:46) And Mary said, My soul doth magnify the Lord, (Luk 1:47) And my spirit hath rejoiced in God my Savior. Mary realized she needed a Savior, that she was not exempt from the original sin.

Let’s continue a verse, since I will invariably be hit on this one. (Luk 1:48) For he hath regarded the low estate of his handmaiden: for, behold, from henceforth all generations shall call me blessed. Bless Mary for without her, there would be no Jesus. She is not above Jesus.

Now let me hit back. (Luk 1:49) For he that is mighty hath done to me great things; and holy is his name. She said she was just a woman, but she received a great honor in bringing Jesus to fleshly birth, but holy is his name! Not her own. She glorified God and not herself.

The next seven verses are heaping praises on God and Christ. After it talks about the birth of John the Baptist, and how he will prepare the way for the most High, Jesus.

Mary was not exempt to sin else she would need no savior.

Next we see that Mary is claimed to be sinless. How can this be? (Rom 3:10) As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one. The only ‘one’ is Jesus. This verse excludes Him since He was more than man.

Let’s see where Mary is listed to be sinless. Hmm, can’t find it. Let’s see where Jesus was the only one sinless. (Heb 4:14) Seeing then that we have a great high priest, that is passed into the heavens, Jesus the Son of God, let us hold fast our profession. (Heb 4:15) For we have not a high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin.

(2Co 5:21) For he hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him. Now we see that Jesus is without sin, He knew no sin. Mary does not have any declarations thereof. If it was so, it would be noted. Mary being sinless would be hugely important due to Romans 3:10.

We can see as well who is sinless and worthy in the Book of Revelation. (Rev 5:4) And I wept much, because no man was found worthy to open and to read the book, neither to look thereon. (Rev 5:5) And one of the elders saith unto me, Weep not: behold, the Lion of the tribe of Judah, the Root of David, hath prevailed to open the book, and to loose the seven seals thereof. No one could open it, not Mary, not anyone other than Jesus. This seems to indicate the importance of Christ, and show that if Mary was sinless like Jesus was, she should have been able to open the book.

The Catechism says that Mary was a perpetual virgin. This is one of the more strange thoughts of the Church in my opinion. Why would Mary need to remain a virgin? What significance does that have?

No matter, it is not Biblical anyway. (Mat 1:25) And knew her not till she had brought forth her firstborn son: and he called his name JESUS. If he did not ‘know her’ until after she gave birth to Jesus, that would indicate that he did ‘know her’ at some point.

He even had siblings! (Mat 13:55) Is not this the carpenter’s son? is not his mother called Mary? and his brethren, James, and Joses, and Simon, and Judas? Here the Bible gives names!

The word ‘brethren’ in Greek means ‘brother’, not any other form of family like cousins or close friends of the family. There are other words for other kinds of family members. Cousin for example pulls up two different possible words. So brother is brother.

Another good set of verses goes like this: (Mat 12:46) While he yet talked to the people, behold, his mother and his brethren stood without, desiring to speak with him. (Mat 12:47) Then one said unto him, Behold, thy mother and thy brethren stand without, desiring to speak with thee. (Mat 12:48) But he answered and said unto him that told him, Who is my mother? and who are my brethren? (Mat 12:49) And he stretched forth his hand toward his disciples, and said, Behold my mother and my brethren! (Mat 12:50) For whosoever shall do the will of my Father which is in heaven, the same is my brother, and sister, and mother.

So Jesus’ mother and brothers wanted to see Him, and have a little family get together I imagine, and He was busy teaching. Someone pointed out His earthly family were waiting to speak to Him, and how does He answer? He says that His disciples were His brothers, which would show that the word does not mean ‘close friend’ else the disciples would have been considered brethren from the beginning. Then Jesus declares that anyone that does the Father’s will is a child of God, as He is the Son. Don’t confuse this though with the ‘little gods’ teachings that we are equal to Christ.

(Joh 2:12) After this he went down to Capernaum, he, and his mother, and his brethren, and his disciples: and they continued there not many days. Here again, if brethren meant close friends or the similar, either the disciples or the brothers would not have been named separately.

Acts 1:14, and Galatians 1:19 are two other verses dealing with the Lord and His brothers.

Next we see one of the more painful doctrines: Mary as the mother of God.

Jesus was God and man. (Joh 10:30) I and my Father are one. (1Ti 2:5) For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus. Jesus was fully man, and fully God. He was God in flesh. Mary was the mother of the flesh. Nothing more, nothing less. She was NOT the mother of Jesus the God.

(Heb 1:2) Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds. Take note of the ‘by whom’ in that verse. It is possible that Jesus was the actual agent in creation, if not, He was involved, and therefore was in existence long before Mary’s birth.

(Col 1:16) For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him. Again, Jesus was around before Mary, so Mary cannot be the mother of God in any sense! We also have confirmation of Christ being referred to, just in case someone is trying to counter with a Father/Son argument. (Col 1:19) For it pleased the Father that in him should all fullness dwell. The Son is the subject, since the Father is pleased by the things mentioned in the previous verse.

Mary’s assumption is another interesting notion. What this means is that Mary was taken to Heaven body and all. This is clearly not Biblical, since anytime we see someone going to Heaven it is mentioned, and there is no mention of Mary’s assumption at all. Surely we would have seen it had it been true. It would have been a big enough deal to make the Bible.

I have gathered the following from a former nun. There is a problem with the assumption, that being that the early Church declared in heresy in the 490’s. It was a condemned teaching that could land you in hot water should you be caught teaching it.

The problem falls in this: Pope Pius XII declared the assumption to be dogma. Now if the Pope is infallible, we have one infallible Pope declaring something is wrong, only later to have another declare it is right.

Infallibility does not allow for errors, that’s kind of the whole point. But, in this situation, one of the two must be wrong. The only way this is not true is if you do a lot of fast-talking, logic leaping doublespeak.

The Catechism tells the Catholic that Mary is a co-redeemer in whom we can trust all our cares and petitions. (1Ti 2:5) For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus. Is that a verse from the Bible? Yup. Is Mary’s name in there? Nope.

(Heb 7:25) Wherefore he is able also to save them to the uttermost that come unto God by him, seeing he ever liveth to make intercession for them. So Jesus is able to save us to the most extreme, to the furthest extent, to the absolute best so that we might be with God. He again is also a mediator here, making intercession for us.

He makes intercession for us. Notice again, no Mary only Christ. If Jesus is so awesome at saving us, He would need no help, and He doesn’t.

(Eph 3:11) According to the eternal purpose which he purposed in Christ Jesus our Lord: (Eph 3:12) In whom we have boldness and access with confidence by the faith of him. Confidence and faith in Him, not them. Christ and only Christ has the purpose of salvation of man, not Mary. Mary’s purpose was to bring the flesh of the Savior to the world. Anything beyond was between her and God, meaning it is not our business, this making it impossible for her to be a co-redeemer, or worshipped in any other way.

But yet Catholicism continues to claim the Virgin as being someone integral to the operations of Heaven.

The former Pope, John Paul II, likely the most beloved pope in recent history, actually claimed he lived for Mary. The proof of this is the fact that he had Latin words basically meaning “Mary I’m all yours” embroidered down the side of his robes.

There are those that claim it was not stitched on his robes, but we can say for sure that it was his personal motto, with an article in the 2002 edition of the L.A. Times newspaper pointing this personal motto out.

He was said to believe that Mary saved him from the assassin’s bullet when he was shot in 1981. Bible time! (Pro 29:25) The fear of man bringeth a snare: but whoso putteth his trust in the LORD shall be safe. The Lord will keep you safe, not Mary. (Psa 50:15) And call upon me in the day of trouble: I will deliver thee, and thou shalt glorify me.

JP II, as he’s labeled, had a large ‘M’ in his Coat of Arms, indicating his devotion to Mary. This is not glory to God, but instead glory to a human, a woman, Mary. In fact, as Catholics know, there is a feast day, kind of a holiday for Mary. This is common with all saints not that that is any better though.

(Rom 15:11) And again, Praise the Lord, all ye Gentiles; and laud him, all ye people. I don’t think there has ever been a Jewish pope, but even if there has, they would be told to glorify God as well, in the ‘all ye people’ part. The Catholic Church glorifies Mary, not the Lord. Even the last pope had a ‘M’ instead of a ‘J’ (or ‘Y’ for purists) on his Coat of Arms.

I have a ton of pictures here showing people, including popes, kissing the feet of Mary statues and paintings in deference. (Act 10:34) Then Peter opened his mouth, and said, Of a truth I perceive that God is no respecter of persons. We are all equal in God’s eyes. Jesus is God, (John 1:1, 10:30,) so He was the only flesh that walked the Earth that might have been favored. But He gave His life to bear the punishment for sin.

Mary, in this situation, is the same as you or me.

While not official doctrine, many Catholics believe that Jesus cannot refuse any request put to Him by Mary. This is just insane. Jesus is God. Mary is a woman. I think Jesus is a bit higher ranked, and therefore is not bound to Mary’s words.

If this is true, someone, anyone, pray (or ‘ask’) Mary for immediate and lasting world peace. Doubt I’ll see that happen. How about time travel? What about the ability to fly? And no, it’s not too ‘out there’ either. If Mary will intercede and Jesus cannot refuse, then the Flying Nun should be real!

No, God can resist, not that Mary is even mediating, since that is Jesus’ job. God’s will is what rules in Heaven, not Mary’s.

In fact, Mary diverted people to Jesus directly! (Joh 2:5) His mother saith unto the servants, Whatsoever he saith unto you, do it. This was the water to wine miracle, the beginning of Jesus’ miracle works. She did not relay the orders from Jesus to the servants and back again, she pointed to Him directly.

Some might say this verse is just mundane information that the servants were told to do something, but that is not the case I believe. This happens during a time when Jesus was doing something that would lead to people developing a belief in Him.

Now let’s talk about the infamous ‘Queen of Heaven’ situation. This is absolutely unbelievable that they give Mary this title!

Why so you ask? Because of this: (Jer 44:17) But we will certainly do whatsoever thing goeth forth out of our own mouth, to burn incense unto the queen of heaven, and to pour out drink offerings unto her, as we have done, we, and our fathers, our kings, and our princes, in the cities of Judah, and in the streets of Jerusalem: for then had we plenty of victuals, and were well, and saw no evil. (Jer 44:18) But since we left off to burn incense to the queen of heaven, and to pour out drink offerings unto her, we have wanted all things, and have been consumed by the sword and by the famine. (Jer 44:19) And when we burned incense to the queen of heaven, and poured out drink offerings unto her, did we make her cakes to worship her, and pour out drink offerings unto her, without our men?

What did God think? There’s a hint in there, but let’s just go straight up with this verse: (Jer 7:20) Therefore thus saith the Lord GOD; Behold, mine anger and my fury shall be poured out upon this place, upon man, and upon beast, and upon the trees of the field, and upon the fruit of the ground; and it shall burn, and shall not be quenched. (Jeremiah 7 also speaks of the ‘queen of heaven’)

So we see that God is provoked to anger and throws down a fairly severe punishment for the children of Israel having anything to do with the ‘queen of heaven’. So why would the Catholic Church believe it was okay for them? Judah was whipped pretty bad for it, but it’s okay for the Catholic Church? No, its not.

We see that the ‘queen of heaven’ was something not of God. The queen was actually from a pagan religion, with many people associating the queen with the wife of Baal. I think we covered this goddess in Zeit-Lies!, which is episodes 22 through 24.

The early Catholic Church adopted the rituals and other elements of pagan religions as the Church spread. Evidence of this is Christmas and Easter, both pagan holidays first brought into Christian practice by the Catholic Church.

So it seems to be apparent that Mary’s position as the ‘queen’ was picked up when the Church came across Baal worshippers, or possibly from Astarte the goddess of the Assyrians. She is sometimes equated with Juno/Venus though this seems to be more tenuous.

Another example that shows the exaltation of Mary over Jesus is the many paintings produced both historically and even in modern times. Many paintings feature Jesus in a helpless position. Mary is often shown to be holding the baby Jesus, with halos over her head. This shows Mary as the caring mother, which I’m sure she was, but also shows Jesus as an infant, not able to do anything.

This means Mary is the power in the painting. This is a reflection of the artists’ opinion, which in turn was inspired by the teachings of the Catholic Church. While painters are not always theologians nor are they privy to information outside of what was known in their time, but they do speak on what theologians might be saying in their time through their work.

Another thing that bothers me, while not directly connected to Mary, is a hair relevant to this particular line, and that is the general portrayal of Christ. Either He is an infant on His mother’s lap, or He’s dead on the cross. While there are surely portrayals of Jesus painted with Him alive, it is much more common to see Mary as an adult, and Jesus as a baby or dead.

I love to buy my wife some form of a cross for Christmas, and yes, I do remember episode 18, no one’s perfect. Well, when I go out looking for a figurine or jewelry or whatever, when I find a place that has a lot of crucifixes with Jesus on them, I also find a lot of items with Mary on them as well.

My area is becoming pretty predominantly Catholic, so when you stop at places where things are handmade (as I usually prefer) you find a lot of these kinds of items.

My problem with that is this: Jesus isn’t up there anymore. My Lord has risen and ascended to Heaven, defeating sin and death on the way. Through Him, in Heaven, I have my salvation, where I know I will go to be with Him.

Why is the Lord portrayed as dead and powerless? My cross is empty since the Lord only stopped there long enough to be a sacrifice for humanity’s sin. After that, He went to prepare us a place where one day He will receive us to Himself.

Then, in one painting I have seen a picture of, Mary is placed on equal footing as Jesus in Heaven. The painting is in Italy, Parma I believe, and features the Trinity. Only this Trinity is not the same as you’ve seen before.

In this Trinity, God the Father is at the top, Jesus is to one side, the right, with God’s hand on His head. Then the left side is occupied by Mary, with God’s other hand on her head, and her and Jesus reaching to each other!

This may be just the opinion of the painter, but it is blasphemy. Mary is not in the Trinity, nor does she hold a spot in Heaven as an equal or superior to Christ.

Then we have the apparitions and other appearances.

There was a stain or something under an overpass when I was a teen that was supposedly shaped like the Virgin Mary in a nearby town. We had people from as far away as Canada and Central America coming to pay homage to this spot. Is this not putting a stain before God? They were all thinking more about currying favor with Mary than Jesus, it would seem. (Joh 14:6) Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.

The human mind will automatically make order out of chaos. Need proof? Put three dots in different spots on a piece of paper and then look at it. If you are honest about it, you will see a triangle. That is because the mind takes the random spots and organizes them into a shape.

A good example of optical illusions and how the mind can interpret things differently than they actually are is episode 274 of the podcast Best Of YouTube. You could find it on YouTube obviously, but I don’t know the keywords that would give you the same video I’ve seen.

The episode basically just shows things like the impossible box, the bending rod illusion, and the moving still picture. These things just go to prove that the mind can be ‘tricked’ into seeing something that is not actually intended to appear.

This is why people see shapes in clouds and in the stars. Your mind arranges the stars into the Big Dipper constellation, though before you knew where it was, they may appeared as a different shape to you.

Where one person might see Mary, another might see their deceased grandmother, or their daughter, or something completely different, like an animal or object. Point is, the mind is often what makes something appear in a random thing like a stain or chip or cloud, and it is not meant as a sign from above.

In the vein of signs, I’m also wary of these reports of miracles surrounding statues of Mary. I have heard of the statues of Mary weeping, of statues falling over, and other occurrences. These occurrences do not give glory to God, but instead the people are in awe over Mary, at least they are in all the articles I’ve read on these happenings. The people are always praising Mary and claiming it is a sign from her from Heaven.

Finally we have Mary appearing to people as an apparition, or similar to a ghost. This has happened four times in a major way recognized by the Church I believe, those being Fatima Portugal, Guadalupe Mexico, Lourdes France, and Czestochowa (Jasna Gora) Poland. There likely have been a great number of apparitions claimed by laymen that haven’t been taken seriously.

There are no ghosts people, plain and simple. (Heb 9:27) And as it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment. But, you say, Mary is already up in Heaven. (2Co 5:8) We are confident, I say, and willing rather to be absent from the body, and to be present with the Lord. Why in the world would someone in Heaven want to leave the presence of the Lord to come to Earth? I don’t think they would.

Also, this is also relevant to the lack of authority of Mary as we’ve already talked about. She is not in power in Heaven, thereby would not have the option to return to Earth unless willed by God. And that is not willed by God.

In fact, seeing and interacting with an apparition is expressly forbidden by God. (Deu 18:10) There shall not be found among you any one that maketh his son or his daughter to pass through the fire, or that useth divination, or an observer of times, or an enchanter, or a witch, (Deu 18:11) Or a charmer, or a consulter with familiar spirits, or a wizard, or a necromancer.

What is a necromancer? They are those that talk to the dead. Someone that leads a séance is a necromancer. Mary is not alive, so to interact with her apparition is necromancy. In fact, because the Bible does not mention her assumption, she pretty much surely died as we all do, so that makes it even less likely that it is her in the apparition. The apparition is likely a demon posing as Mary.

If so, this makes it even more dangerous to interact with it. I do believe, and feel free to correct me on this, that one of the messages of Fatima was the consecration of Russia to Mary which would result in many conversions to Catholicism. I believe this is a promise of Fatima.

Consecrated to Mary? This is not who anything should be consecrated to. (Heb 10:20) By a new and living way, which he hath consecrated for us, through the veil, that is to say, his flesh. The ‘he’ in this verse is Jesus. The word ‘consecrate’ is mentioned 13 other times in the Bible, none of them with a mention of Mary.

Now some might say it is from tradition, an oral record passed down from the very beginnings of the Church. There is no way to prove this of course. Oral traditions have a habit of not leaving a written trail, strangely enough.

Every played that game ‘telephone’ when you were in school? It starts with one word or phrase and is passed through several different people and when it ends, it is likely nowhere near the original phrase. “A little snail” becomes “Hey Billy smells” or something like that. Oral traditions have a tendency to have things removed or added as people have their own personal preferences.

And there is no way to prove this did not happen.

(Pro 16:25) There is a way that seemeth right unto a man, but the end thereof are the ways of death. So these oral traditions, many that are in conflict with the Bible seems right, but aren’t.

I believe this is a verse that some might think to defend the traditions: (2Th 2:15) Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle.

Now see, this verse actually backs up the Bible. The Thessalonians were given teachings orally, but also in written form. Therefore, the two would not contradict each other. So any teaching that is not in harmony with the Bible is not correct.

I think I understand one reason why Mary has taken such an important role in the Church. That is because she is the ‘perfect’ woman as in a woman to look up to. The priesthood is celibate and single, this makes looking up to Mary the closest thing to a spouse they can get. Mary is a woman they can love without the temptation of sex, and without having to hide their devotion.

Women can look up to Mary as a symbol of female power. Mary would then be the original independent woman, almost an early feminist. Instead of being in a subservient role, she is powerful. She is the mother of God, she is the one that asks, or nearly commands the Messiah to take care of the requests made of her.

This kind of ‘girl power’ is very appealing but it counters the traditional role assigned by the Bible. (Eph 5:22) Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord.

I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again: men are commanded to honor their wives as well in Ephesians 5:25, Colossians 3:19, and 1^st Peter 3:7. There are no tyrants allowed.

As we’ve seen here, Mary is not an intercessor for man, nor is she a mediator, or a c0-redeemer. She was a woman that I believe wholeheartedly was saved and is in Heaven with God, but she was not the mother of God.

She was not a perpetual virgin, but instead the wife of a husband after the birth of Jesus. She was not taken to Heaven before death, for this is not mentioned in the Bible. She is not a ghost that appears before people or makes images in mundane objects, nor is she knocking over statues or making them cry.

I think Mary may be very upset in Heaven as she sees traditions of men followed that are against the word of God.

I pray that if you come to the Lord Jesus (1Ti 2:5) For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus.

We’ll leave it at that. Email me, and until next time, God bless.

This entry was posted on Tuesday, May 20th, 2008 at 2:21 pm and is filed under Transcriptions | . You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.