The Marian Idolatry

Marian devotion is idolatry. Mary was a sinner like the rest of us who found salvation in Christ Jesus (Luke 1:47). Mary is not the “Queen of Heaven”. Mary is not a “co-mediator” (1 Tim. 2:5; Heb. 9:15; 8:6; 12:24). Mary is not a “co-redeemer” (Eph. 1:7). Mary was not a perpetual virgin (Matt 1:25; 13:55-56; 12:46; Mark 3:31-34; Luke 8:19-21; John 2:12; Acts 1:14).

The first ever mention of Mary's supposed "perpetual virginity" was in the 4th century by Jerome. The idea of Mary being without sin can likewise be traced back to the 4th century. However, certain 4th century theologians like John Chrysostom, Basil, Cyril of Alexandria, and Hilary of Poitiers denied the sinlessness of Mary and believed she had imperfections. In the 3rd century, Origen and Tertullian also denied any such sinlessness. The first four centuries are completely silent about Mary's supposed "assumption" (and an assumption it is), but in the latter part of the fourth century Epiphanius of Salamis wrote this:

"The holy virgin may have died and been buried … or she may have been put to death—as the scripture says, “And a sword shall pierce through her soul” … or she may have remained alive, for God is not incapable of doing whatever he wills. No one knows her end."

In A.D. 431, when the Council of Ephesus was held, it caused an unhealthy interest in the mother of Jesus. From this point on, Catholics began to idolize Mary and create fantastical fairy tales surrounding her. In the 5th century, dozens of writings began to emerge that claimed Mary had never died. The worship of Mary had begun, giving her traits of Jesus and making her co-equal with Jesus. Augustine had given his blessing upon all these heretical teachings.

Catholics try to play fast and loose with the term "saved" with regard to Mary because quite obviously they do not understand salvation. They think that Mary was "saved" from being able to sin. Their arguments make for a great fairy tale, but there is zero truth behind it. Catholics argue that in order for Mary to give birth to the Saviour, she needed to be without sin. So if Mary had to be without sin in order to birth Jesus, then so too did her mother need to be without sin in order to birth Mary; and her mother had to be without sin in order to birth her; and so on and so forth all the way back to Eve. Catholics really need to learn how logic works instead of blindly believing complete and utter nonsense.

Catholics need to learn to read Scripture (and early Christian history) instead of blindly following false religious tradition that opposes it.

The Lord's Supper and Baptism are NOT "Sacraments"!

The Lord's Supper, also referred to as Communion (a unity of the Body and the Head, as well as between member and member), and baptism are NOT "sacraments"! Once we educate ourselves on where this terminology came from and just exactly what it entailed, we should no longer use it.

"It will be recalled that in the days of Decius every householder had been instructed to fill out a formulary reading as follows: "I, N.N., have always sacrificed to the gods, and now in your presence I have, in keeping with the directive, sacrificed . . . and have tasted of the sacrificial victim; and I request that you, a public servant, certify the same." This formulary was intended to do two things. On the one hand it was part of a frantic effort to infuse new life into the dying religion of ancient Rome; on the other hand it was a device whereby each individual Christian could be located and taken in hand.
It would be most gratifying if we could know more about the evolution of the rite which is here described, the item about "tasting the sacrificial victim." That it was a feature of the practices associated with the cult of the so-called "mystery religions" is quite apparent. In these mystery religions (the only religious forms that had any vitality in those final days of pagan Rome), one partook of deity by ingesting a morsel of a sacrificial victim. By such ingesting, something of the élan of the god was said to be infused into the devotee, in a transaction known as a mysterion — the word that has given us the expression "mystery religion." This word mysterion was by the Latins rendered sacramentum — the direct antecedent of our word "sacrament."
...
It did not require a great deal of ingenuity for the fashioners of "Christian sacralism" to realize that with a few adroit alterations the Agape [meal] could be put in the place of the sacramentum and then serve the function which Decius had in mind, namely, the function of providing the monolithic society. A few alterations, a gather here and a tuck there, and the love-feast was all ready, ready to perform the function in the new sacralism which the pagan sacramentum had performed in the old.
The first thing that had to be done was to appropriate the pagan word sacramentum (recall that it occurs nowhere in the Scriptures) and to let it replace the word Agape of the authentic tradition. This was a clever stroke; every Roman citizen knew what a sacramentum was, and what it was supposed to do and achieve; he needed only to hear the word to know the theology, that of "tasting the sacrificial victim," a transaction signifying the participants' solidarity with the society of which he was a part.
A second thing that had to be done was to move the table out and the altar in. This would automatically make of the officiating minister a sacrificateur, a sacrificer, a priest; and this would as automatically change the viands, the bread and the wine that had stood on the table of the Agape, into the flesh and the blood of "the sacrificial victim."
A third thing that needed to be done was to eliminate as much as possible the "Take, eat" of the original ritual. This "Take, eat" was far too reminiscent of the voluntaryism that was so much a part of the authentic Christian vision; it portrayed too manifestly that in regard to the good things of the Christian faith there is always the take it or leave it. The determinative act of taking had to be eliminated and in its place had to come an act of imparting. ...
With these changes the love-feast was suitable to the role in the new sacralism which the pagan sacramentum had played in the old sacralism.
It is not at all surprising that all trough medieval times and into Reformation times, and beyond them, Corpus Christianum was thought of as a thing held together by "sacrament." [It was the Anabaptists' assault upon the sacraments as binders of society that made them so odious in the sight of the Reformers.]
—Leonard Verduin, The Reformers and Their Stepchildren, pp. 136-142.

As you can clearly see, ever-pagan Emperor Constantine flipped the Congregation of the Lord upon her head when he helped Christianity absorb pagan rituals and practices, which eventually evolved into the Catholic Church. The description above is very obviously the practice of Catholicism, and every Catholic who genuinely loves the Lord Jesus will recognize this fact and repudiate it. Otherwise, they are participating in pagan rituals associated with mystery religions in the worship of false gods. Slapping the face of Christianity on top of it does not change what it is in reality. Every Catholic who participates in such practice is practicing pagan mystery religion acts.

The fact that Protestant Reformers, including Fundamentalists and Evangelicals, maintained the terminology "sacraments" demonstrates perfectly how unwise they were and how little they knew of ecclesiastical history (the first three centuries) and Scripture (especially with regard to the cross as the dividing line of human history and context). That does not mean they were not godly or spiritual or had anything good to say, but it is to acknowledge that they embraced, believed, taught, and reproduced their many grave errors.

For any Christian to refer to the Lord's Supper and baptism as "sacraments" is heresy, and any Christian who practices the "sacraments" as described above is guilty of idolatry by participation in mystery religions to false gods. To my Catholic brothers and sisters who genuinely love the Lord Jesus, STOP participating in this godless anti-Christ ceremony and start holding communion in your own homes with other genuine believers. You do NOT require a "priest" or "pastor" in order to administer either of these as ALL Christians—men, women, and children—are priests under the New Covenant.

By calling the Lord’s Supper and baptism “sacraments,” you are associating them with demonic pagan practices!