Catholics don't pray to ma-

It's real you nigger
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kuntillet_Ajrud

But what does it mean?

It means that god isn't real

It means that YHWH has a massive cock

No one is treating her as a god.

From an anthropological perspective they definitely are

yeah I mean she's just a divine figure in heaven free from sin who can answer prayers and use magic to grant wishes

Why do Christians get so hung up on not having minor gods? God himself, in his commandments, only demands that you worship him first and foremost. I think that leaves room to revere the Virgin Mary.

>anthropological
Kys

>God himself, in his commandments, only demands that you worship him first and foremost
It's not just the christians, the Jews have been hung up on this ever since King Josiah

If it looks like a duck, sounds like a duck, and walks like a duck...

>can't use different critical frameworks

After you, my dude

quack

>More pagan Catholics finally seeing their own sad sorry state.

>more protestants proud that they pray exclusively to the cowman bbc aka yhwh

It means that Arabs were pagans. Still are.

It's in Arabic.

Can she hear a billion prayers directed to her at once?

Then she has godlike powers.

Protestants died out 500 years ago. They were Catholics.

You posted the Arabic nonsense?

That has nothing to do with God.

>The inscriptions are mostly in early Hebrew with some in Phoenician script.

Try again sweety

The title "YHWH of Samaria" is used to describe the God of Samaria (in the northern Kingdom of Israel) and that Kingdom was known to openly accept idolatry.

Do you read what you cite to? No?

Do you know the Jews hated the Samaritans? No?

Sweetie?

what the actual fuck are you talking about you retarded cow worshipper?

>b-but thats the other yhwh not the real one in the sky right now!

Catholic church. Martin Luther. Protesting. 500 years ago.

They're all dead now.

Calling someone a "protestant" now is saying you believe men live over 500 years.

My God spoke cows into existence; I'm not a Hindu.

Correct. The Samaritans had no covenant with YHWH, and worshiped YHWH not in the temple in Jerusalem but on their own mountain, their own way.

There's a story of this with Jesus speaking to the Samaritan woman at the well.

Samaritans were half breed Jews and the Jews hated them.

>protestants don't exist
>god does exist

Wew @ this cognitive dissonance

have you never heard of the Lutheran church?

Cool mental gymnastics, my idolatrous dude

Judaism is false

Protestants existed 500 years ago.

God is eternal.

I have like zero cognitive dissonance.

The one where the members are called "Lutherans"?

Yes, I've heard of it.

Have you heard the sad attempt by popery to attempt to be the Christian hub for the world, and failing hard?

lol

If you don't want answers, don't ask questions.

>The Samaritans had no covenant with YHWH, and worshiped YHWH not in the temple in Jerusalem but on their own mountain, their own way
pretty sure Elijah didn't sacrifice in the temple either, but on Mount Carmel. nor did Solomon when he sacrificed on the high place right after he became king. this was before the temple was built, but the ark of the covenant was on the spot of the future temple and still should have served as the designated place for sacrifices.

So dumb. So arrogant. Dumb and arrogant.

2 Kings 17:29 However every nation continued to make gods of its own, and put them in the shrines on the high places which the Samaritans had made, every nation in the cities where they dwelt.

John 4
The woman said to Him, “Sir, I perceive that You are a prophet. Our fathers worshiped on this mountain, and you Jews say that in Jerusalem is the place where one ought to worship.”

Do you truly believe Judaism and Christanity didn't change over the course of 3000 years? The Bible has significant Phoenician, Egyptian, Babylonian, and Hellenic elements.

If it ain't g*d dang bible troof i dun wana hear a g*d dang thang bout it boi

yes yes, ignore the contradictions I've pointed out. Perhaps if you were actually somewhat well-read in the bible you would have been able to point to the poorly writte justification of Solomon's sacrifice on the high place which is in 1st Chronicles. how about one more contradiction for you: Samuel, the priest, in an Ephraimite, not a levite

And Jesus is the High Priest after the Order of Melchizedek, not the Levites.

Were not the Levites still in Abraham's nutsack when he tithed to Melchizedek?

No, you think your DNA will get you a place in heaven. You fool. If God wanted descendants of Abraham only, he would have made them out of rocks.

I'm just a sentimental atheist defending Catholics actually, desu

yet again you miss the entire point: only Levites were to serve as priests under the Law. Melchizedek wasn't under this covenant since he lived long before it. if you dispute this you should read Numbers.

Behead those who insult our Goddess, the Blessed Virgin, Holy Theotokos, Mother of God, and Queen of Heaven.

Whatever power Mary has, God has given to her. Mary isn't a goddess, she's a servant, like all the saints and the angels. The pagans believe each god has innate power, Catholics don't believe that for the servants of God. All power ultimately flows from the Lord.

But it's not an object of worship / religious icon, it's a fucking mockery. It's pretty much on par with pic related.

Nobody ever said Catholics don't pray to Mary. Mary being the sinless mother of God who holds a position of special advocacy with her divine son is biblical.

But user, prayer is not the same as worship. Every Catholic with a basic grasp of the faith understands that God alone is to be worshipped.

>atheists invent pseudo-history in their mind in a desperate attempt to discredit the Bible

nice try, but nobody falls for your shitty bait

>sinless mother of God
>biblical

nice

>special advocacy
>biblical

lol

source

What is this image?

>archeology causes me cognitive dissonance

Pagan idols and edgy atheists pretending those idols are the God of the Bible.

Got some scholarly sources on that?

>"Hail, Mary, full of Grace." -Archangel Gabriel
"Full of Grace" implies a lack of sin.

>Christ = God, Mary = Christ's Mother

>Asking for, and being granted a miracle from Christ before the time at which He is to reveal himself
>Not preferential advocacy

>"Full of Grace" implies a lack of sin.
lol what? even Catholics state that the gift of Grace is UNMERITED

No man or woman was without sin. To say would imply they had no need for Jesus to bridge the gap between Man and God.

That's not what I mean. The Greek term used here in the original text is basically synonymous with sinless. She was made that way with her immaculate conception (conceived without original sin) in order to be a suitable bearer of Christ. At least I think that's the reasoning, doctrinal sources would confirm.

Catholics often say they don't pray to Mary, they will say they pray with her or through her. The prayer OP posted looks to me like praying to her.

The Buddha is silent on God.

Those Catholics are misinformed, we do pay to saints. The distinction is that prayer itself is not a form of worship, it simply means to ask or petition.
I think the biggest thing that non Catholics have a problem with is the idea that God would grant saints the power to carry out His will though miracles, which, I should add, may not be how it is understood in the church. Don't take my word for this, you'd have to find the church's official doctrine on the matter.

Lmao how can God be a human? That's actually retarded. You can't reconcile the divine and the temporal.

>le perennialist meme

Because the question of god is irrelevant to a true understanding of reality

>has thousands statues and paintings venerating her
>catholics pray in front of these images
>catholics directly address Mary in their prayers
>catholics style Mary as "Mother of God"
>catholics believe Mary can cause divine intercession
>catholics carry talismans for the sole purpose of reciting special prayers asking Mary for divine intercession

Look, I know theologically you're only asking Mary to pray FOR you, but the practices themselves are almost indistinguishable from prayer and worship.

Mormons actually took that to its logical conclusion and are monolatrist (worshipping one God) rather than monotheist. They believe in Jesus as a separate divine being, that humans can become "like God", and that there's a Heavenly Mother as well as a Heavenly Father. Makes about as much sense as Catholicism, lol.

>popery

5/7 bait made me kek

Your level of thinking is that of ancient Irish peasants.

>it's biblical
>doctrine affirms that this one vague line confirms that Mary was a holy figure.

Acts 6:
"Now Stephen, a man full of God’s grace and power, performed great wonders and signs among the people."

I guess Stephen is divine too. Pack it up lads.

Doesn't make it wrong. They hadn't been spooked yet.

But isn't that just fetishism?
Animism has existed for much longer than the concept of god.

Uhh, afraid that's a lie, m8
The fact that's bullshit probably has something to do with the fact no one believed this for centuries

Prayer is an act of worship

No one denies Catholics "pray" to Mary.
If you want to go full prod and say prayer = worship, go for it, but at least be able to understand that the distinction can be drawn between the two.

>almost indistinguishable
But since they ARE different, nothing is wrong except the inability of Protestants to understand.

>hurr let us write books in our language so we can understand the faith
>fails to understand theological terms in own language

>this book is infallible
>therefore our interpretations will be infallible, unlike yours, because reasons
Protestantism was a mistake.

It is not, look up the archaic meaning of the word "pray" It literally mean to ask earnestly

In the original Greek text Stephen is not described in the same manner as the Blessed Virgin.
πλήρης χάριτος is used to describe him.
kecharitōmenē is used to describe her.
Also, I never said that Mary is divine, only God is divine.

nobody thinks mary is a goddess except Muhammad you fucking retard.

>>therefore our interpretations will be infallible
The only ones who believe there is such a thing as an infallible interpretation are Roman Catholics
Prayer always refers to worship. Prayer and pray are different words. It's also telling that you absolutely have to use the archaic meaning to defend it, but in explaining it you must use the modern definition.

This. Only Stephen and Jesus in the bible are "full of grace".

Mary is "favored" and "blessed", never "full of grace".

That's just a papist lie. A lie generated in like 1854.

Stop believing lies.

Romans 3:23 says all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God, not all but Mary.

Saint Gabriel says Mary is full of grace in certain ancient manuscripts.

Not now he isn't. He's weeping, and wailing, and gnashing his teeth in torment.

First off, Gabriel is not a saint. He's an angel.

Secondly, no, no they do not.

Thirdly, Mary would be appalled at people trying to talk to her after she died. Just appalled.

Angels are Saints. Yes they do. And no she wouldn't.

>First off, Gabriel is not a saint. He's an angel.
You've never heard of "Saint Micheal the Archangel" before?

This just displays your utter ignorance at anything relating to Christianity.

Be content with Catholicism or Islam, can't really tell which you belong to, and take your consequences as a man.

I've heard all sorts of absolute rubbish emanating from the Vatican. Including that they get to vote on who is a saint and who is not.

Go ahead and show me in the bible where either Gabriel or Michael is referred to as a saint.

Mary has never heard from you.

Mary will never hear from you.

You will never meet Mary.

Unless you repent, and are saved.

Orthodox call the Angel Micheal a Saint as well. Only Protashits don't I guess.