Back in late-2013, I had a brief exchange with a Latter-day Saint who was struggling with Roman Catholic apologetic works, especially on the topic of how biblical and ancient the Mass was (he had previously been RCC). Part of my email response is available here (under “2014 update”) where I discussed common eisegetical mistakes Robert Sungenis and other leading RCC apologists on the Mass engage in. Sad to say, he would later revert to Roman Catholicism as evidenced by this post and others.
A few months ago, I left a message on this page, but it is still awaiting moderation. I am here reproducing what I wrote in the hope it will help anyone struggling with Roman Catholic claims to see what the true issues are, and the insurmountable problems Roman claims to authority truly are; I would also recommend another blog post I did, "Tim Staples, Mormonism, and Questions for Catholics”:
Hi J, long time no chat. Hope you are doing well.
Out of curiosity, how do you justify your acceptance of Rome’s Marian Dogmas, such as the Bodily Assumption and Immaculate Conception, especially in light of the fact that such beliefs were unknown in the early Church, and, ergo, were not “apostolic traditions.” For instance, early writers such as Irenaeus of Lyons in Against Heresies (3.16.7 [same book in Against Heresies where he made the Mary/Eve parallel]) in his comments on John 2:4 argued that Mary was guilty of personal sin, as did John Chrysostom in his Homilies on the Gospel of St. John, XXI; as for the assumption, see Stephen Shoemaker’s book, Ancient Traditions of the Virgin Mary’s Dormition and Assumption (Oxford University Press, 2003) documenting the origins and development of this belief. or just read Ludwig Ott’s discussion on the development of the IC in his *Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma*
I am aware that Luke 1:28 is often touted as “proof” of such a belief from the New Testament, but a careful study of *kecharitomene* shows it does not have any indication of Mary being free from the stain of original sin and/or personal sin (see http://scripturalmormonism.blogspot.com/2014/08/luke-128-and-evidence-for-immaculate.html)
Keep in mind, according to Rome, these and many other beliefs, are defined dogmas that one must, under pain of anathema, accept as definitional of the Gospel of Jesus Christ.
I do honestly hope and pray you will reconsider your adherence to Rome’s false gospel.
You have my email address, so if you ever want to discuss these issues in any more depth, always feel free to drop me a line.
