The Left's War On Christians
See other The Left's War On Christians Articles
Title: Praying repetitive words using Rosary beads is forbidden
Source:
[None]
URL Source: http://www.bible.ca/cath-overview-false-teaching.htm
Published: Sep 16, 2017
Author: .bible.ca
Post Date: 2017-09-16 01:09:18 by A K A Stone
Keywords: None
Views: 10721
Comments: 67
FACT: Catholics pray repetitive words with Rosary Beads that were first invented in 1090 AD, by "Peter the Hermit" and made popular by St. Dominic in 1208 AD. Catholics believe that Mary appeared to St. Dominic in 1208 AD, at the church of Prouille and revealed the Rosary Beads to him. From this time, Catholics prayed 15 sets of 10 consecutive "hail Marys" in a row (150 times), in the Rosary. However, in 2003 AD, Pope John Paul added a new set of Mysteries, so now it is 20 sets of 10 "Hail Marys", (200 times in the Rosary, in total.) Catholics will vainly appeal to Psalm 136 that alternates the same phrase 26 times with 26 different blessings God gives us. It is not 26 in a row as with the rosary! This is also a song, not a prayer. Revelation 4:8 has "angels singing" not "men praying". Matthew 6:7 o YES NO o "And when you are praying, do not use meaningless repetition as the Gentiles do, for they suppose that they will be heard for their many words. Matthew 6:7 
Historical note: Roman Catholics borrowed the idea of praying with beads from the pagan religions who were already using them hundreds of years before: In 456 AD, Hindus are thought to have introduced the concept of praying with beads to the world. The earliest reference to a rosary (boberkhas) is in their "Jain Canon" (456 AD) These boberkhas had various numbers of beads 6,9,12,18,36 (any sub-multiple of 108) Islam (610 AD) uses a rosary of 99 beads, one for each of the names of God. Buddhists have 108 prayer beads on the string. The Rosary is of pagan origin and no Christian prior to 1000 AD used beads to pray. Question #1: Did Jesus forbid repetitive prayer using Rosary Beads? Answer:
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 48.
#41. To: A K A Stone, Liberator, Vicomte13 (#0)
I understand this thread is most likely a bait to get Catholics dander up. So I will break with that type of approach and quote some Catholic scholars on why they don't view what they do as pagan but culturally appropriated practices. The rosary is only one such appropriated practice which even giants such as Cardinal Newman: We are told in various ways by Eusebius [Note 16], that Constantine, in order to recommend the new religion to the heathen, transferred into it the outward ornaments to which they had been accustomed in their own. It is not necessary to go into a subject which the diligence of Protestant writers has made familiar to most of us. The use of temples, and these dedicated to particular saints, and ornamented on occasions with branches of trees; incense, lamps, and candles; votive offerings on recovery from illness; holy water; asylums; holydays and seasons, use of calendars, processions, blessings on the fields; sacerdotal vestments, the tonsure, the ring in marriage, turning to the East, images at a later date, perhaps the ecclesiastical chant, and the Kyrie Eleison [Note 17], are all of pagan origin, and sanctified by their adoption into the Church. {374} Greeks dedicate images to devils, and call them gods; but we to True God Incarnate, and to God's servants and friends, who drive away the troops of devils." [Note 18] Again, "As the holy Fathers overthrew the temples and shrines of the devils, and raised in their places shrines in the {377} names of Saints and we worship them, so also they overthrew the images of the devils, and in their stead raised images of Christ, and God's Mother, and the Saints. And under the Old Covenant, Israel neither raised temples in the name of men, nor was memory of man made a festival; for, as yet, man's nature was under a curse, and death was condemnation, and therefore was lamented, and a corpse was reckoned unclean and he who touched it; but now that the Godhead has been combined with our nature, as some life-giving and saving medicine, our nature has been glorified and is trans-elemented into incorruption. Wherefore the death of Saints is made a feast, and temples are raised to them, and Images are painted ... (John Henry Newman [made a cardinal by Pope Leo III in 1879]; Application of the Third Note of a True Development—Assimilative Power, Chapter 8; http://www.newmanreader.org/works/development/chapter8.html) That's how the Catholics view the pagan appropriated feasts, prayers and practices. They don't deny it but see it (at least Newman did) as a doctrinal development. We can disagree with this of course, but we should understand the background before we cast stones.
It is bait to learn. Here is my goal. Vic and other Catholics believe their view is correct and I and a few others agree. My problem with Vic and other Catholics is honesty. They say they believe in the a God of the Bible. If that is true than why do they have so many institutional traditions that aremcontrary to what now taught in the Bible. I'm not claiming to be the most knowledgeable or the most moral, I'm just interested in knowing why people who claim to believe in God don't believe in the words in his book. Vic cannot come on this thread and defend this practice. It is indefensible. Vic says there are errors in the Bible. IF someone believes that then why believe any of it. Vic seems to believe in evolution. How can someone believe both. I want to know how they think. It seems to me they have to lie to themselves.
I CAN come onto the thread and defend all of it. I have CHOSEN not to - just following Jesus' advice. Now I will answer very simply. Where you Protestants err is in believing that God's revelations ended in the First Century and are all contained in the text of the Bible. That is not true. God has continued to reveal new things through the Saints by way of the Church. The rosary was one of those things. Eating blood sausage was another. The Sunday worship was another. There are many. When your belief system is confined to a book whose oldest writing is from the First Century, you miss everything that God has said since. And like a First Century Jew, you deny that God CAN talk outside of your familiar book. The First Century Jews were dead wrong, and so are you. God sent Mary to reveal the rosary as a tool for Christian meditation. The rosary is, thus, revealed by God, and is not, therefore, part of the "vain babblings" of which Jesus spoke. You cannot wrap your mind around the idea that God continues to talk to his Church, and continues to reveal things, and sends Mary and Saints and angels as emissaries. But he does. Obviously, because none of this is in your book - because the last page of your book was written before the end of the First Century, you can't go look any of these things up. And because you have made up the tradition that everything must be in the book, you then blaspheme was God has revealed - just exactly like the Jews did regarding Jesus and the Church. Same thing, different day. You are not "teaching" me anything that I did not already know. But in return, you are unteachable, and I have stopped trying.
So in other words some things in the Bible are lies such as Paul's writings. And other things were added into the Bible like prayer beads and your bump on your head?
There are no replies to Comment # 48. End Trace Mode for Comment # 48.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#43. To: redleghunter (#41)
#44. To: A K A Stone (#43)
#48. To: Vicomte13 (#44)
(Edited)
Replies to Comment # 48.
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]