|
|
|
|
|
Users viewing this topic:
none
|
|
Login  | |
|
RE: The Perpetual Discussion on the Sinless Mary - 5/19/2005 9:51:40 AM
|
|
|
a-lily
Posts: 60
Joined: 5/15/2005
Status: offline
|
This is good enough for me:
Luke 11:27-28
As Jesus was saying these things, a woman in the crowd called out, "Blessed is the mother who gave you birth and nursed you."
He replied, "Blessed rather are those who hear the word of God and obey it."
_____________________________
"I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished." -Jesus Matthew 5 : 18
|
|
|
|
|
RE: The Perpetual Discussion on the Sinless Mary - 5/19/2005 10:21:24 AM
|
|
|
GoodME
Posts: 120
Joined: 4/12/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: a-lily
This is good enough for me:
Luke 11:27-28
As Jesus was saying these things, a woman in the crowd called out, "Blessed is the mother who gave you birth and nursed you."
He replied, "Blessed rather are those who hear the word of God and obey it."
Like...His mother (obeying the Word of God by agreeing to bear His son)???
Nice little word play here - don't you think??
In other words - don't honor Mary for her bearing the Son of God - honor her for her example of obedience to the call of God (to bear the Son of God).
|
|
|
|
|
RE: The Perpetual Discussion on the Sinless Mary - 5/19/2005 11:37:03 AM
|
|
|
Ormly
Posts: 24
Joined: 4/28/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: GoodME
quote:
ORIGINAL: a-lily
This is good enough for me:
Luke 11:27-28
As Jesus was saying these things, a woman in the crowd called out, "Blessed is the mother who gave you birth and nursed you."
He replied, "Blessed rather are those who hear the word of God and obey it."
Like...His mother (obeying the Word of God by agreeing to bear His son)???
Nice little word play here - don't you think??
In other words - don't honor Mary for her bearing the Son of God - honor her for her example of obedience to the call of God (to bear the Son of God).
quote:
He replied, "Blessed rather are those who hear the word of God and obey it."
He replied, "Blessed rather are those who hear the word of God and obey it."
...whatever it maybe and to whomoever it is given to.
Mary's extra-veneration is man-made and unBiblical. In other words it can't be supported by scripture. Now, that isn't taking away from her that which she never attributed to herself; she was perfectly content with being called by Jesus: "woman". ..And she was indeed a blessed woman, to be sure.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: The Perpetual Discussion on the Sinless Mary - 5/19/2005 11:44:48 AM
|
|
|
GoodME
Posts: 120
Joined: 4/12/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Ormly
Like...His mother (obeying the Word of God by agreeing to bear His son)???
Nice little word play here - don't you think??
In other words - don't honor Mary for her bearing the Son of God - honor her for her example of obedience to the call of God (to bear the Son of God).
quote:
He replied, "Blessed rather are those who hear the word of God and obey it."
He replied, "Blessed rather are those who hear the word of God and obey it."
...whatever it maybe and to whomoever it is given to.
Mary's extra-veneration is man-made and unBiblical. In other words it can't be supported by scripture. Now, that isn't taking away from her that which she never attributed to herself; she was perfectly content with being called by Jesus: "woman". ..And she was indeed a blessed woman, to be sure.
You haven't demonstrated this - you have just implied it. I am suggesting that within the context that Jesus is speaking, He is proclaiming to honor obedience, not "contact with Jesus" or anything else. We honor the Apostles because Jesus asked them to "go and spread the Good News" and they did - they obeyed.
If we honor the Apostles just because they saw Jesus, then we are groupies, not the Faithful.
Mary is an example of obedience and charity. You have not refuted this with fact - you have only stated that it is not so.
Fine then. On what basis does your claim rest? This is just your opinion - why should I agree (noting that I don't)?
|
|
|
|
|
RE: The Perpetual Discussion on the Sinless Mary - 5/19/2005 12:27:40 PM
|
|
|
jrah06
Posts: 32
Joined: 4/18/2005
Status: offline
|
Hi, onelordofall.
Since when do pagan ideas upset objective Divine Truth? Pagans believe a lot of crazy things, friend. What are Christians to do about it? I'd be willing to bet pagans believe a lot of discombobulated, pagan things about our Lord Jesus Christ, as well. What do you
propose we do about their heresy?
If you are not uncomfortable with so many people devoting themselves to her and not to Christ - if you aren't uncomfortable with pagan websites where there is blatant idolatry and witchcraft AND an inclusion of Mary as a goddess - I don't know what to tell you.
As for heresy: there is always a standard: the Bible.
Once again, you make the mistake of thinking Catholic devotion to Mary can somehow be separated from devotion to Her Son. Devotion to Mary is all about Christ, jrah. St. Elizabeth honored her as "Mother of my Lord" in honor of the Son of God in her womb, and even St. John the Baptist leapt for joy in utero at her presence. There really is biblical precedent for Catholic devotion to Mary. Apparently, some folks don't notice the particular Scripture verses which put a burr in their saddle? Like GoodMe said, we do not make this stuff up out of thin air. The Catholic Church has 2,000+ years under Her belt combatting heresy. It would not be a bad thing to research the Councils.
John the Baptist: he leapt for joy because of Mary? And yet as an adult his ministry was devoted to "the Lamb of God, Who takes away the sin of the world."
Biblical precedent for Catholic devotion to Mary? I would like to see that. There are not even 20 apparitions of Mary's name in the Bible.
Oh, I'm familiar with the Councils, but let's not get into that here.
The idea of Mary as "co-redemptrix" is not official Catholic doctrine, and it appears to me you may be unfamiliar with the underlying Catholic theology which, if properly understood, may not bristle your non-Catholic hairs on the back of your neck so much.
I will answer the idea of Mary as "co-redemptrix" in later post.
Aren't we all "co-redeemers" in Christ?
We are REDEEMED by Christ. Who says we're co-redeemers?
Are we all not part of His Body
That means Mary is a co-redemptrix?
Do we all mediate for each other by prayer [which we are commanded to do in Scripture] or are our intercessory prayers meaningless to our Father?
We're told by Scripture to pray, and that has no relevance to Mary being sinless or co-redemptrix.
Scripture also says that Christ is the ONLY mediator, but non-Catholics pray for each other all the time while they throw the "one mediator" prooftext about when they want to discredit the intercession of the Saints in heaven.
You're misinterpreting this. We pray as INTERCESSORS and NEVER as mediators. Christ's mediator-role as per the Bible means HE ALONE can bridge the gap between sinful humanity and God the Father, Who is holy.
The question you must answer for yourself is if you believe your prayer is efficacious for the Body of Christ. If you don't think it is, I can't understand why you do it. If you believe your love of God benefits others in the Body of Christ, even if it is only through prayer, [as opposed to sacrifice], than your actions may also be seen a co-redemptive, as long as they are united in Christ. FYI, sacrifice is a much higher form of worship in Catholic Christian theology than prayer only. The prophecy of Simeon in the temple is Scriptural validation that a "sword" pierced Mary's heart, too. When do you think that prophecy was fulfilled?
Whatever pain Mary felt (and no disrespect here, as a mother her suffering was indubitably colossal) it was NOTHING next to the pain God the Father felt by "making Him Who knew no sin to BE SIN" (II Corinthians). JESUS is the focus, not Mary. Actions co-redemptive? All we can do is be good witnesses and show the Fruit of the Spirit. It's never our credit; it's always thanks to God alone. We are but channels through which the Lord touches others with His love. Catholicism makes Mary way more than a mere channel of God's work.
How "redemptive" is actual suffering for love of Christ, jrah? Is it harder to stand at the foot of your Son's Cross and feel His pain as a mother; or is it harder to pray?
Suffering for Jesus is something the Bible says we will face - Jesus said it Himself (final verses of John 16) and Apostle Paul ("Yes, all those who desire to live godly in Christ Jesus will suffer persecution". NO REFERENCE TO MARY.). And it has NOTHING to do with the redemption of our souls, a miracle created and performed by GOD ONLY.
I'm pretty sure other Catholics here have addressed this concern. If it needs to be said again, we believe Mary is sinless by God's Grace, whereas our Lord Jesus Christ is sinless by Nature.
There is no Scriptural backing for her being sinless by God's grace.
We all have a role in salvation history, whether it be for ourselves or others. We are all intercessors for the Body of Christ. We all use our gifts, talents, and resources to heal wounds, divisions, and promote unity in His Body, don't we? If not, we should. That is what the Scriptures call us to do. IMHO, the whole disconnect between devout Catholics and modern-day non-Catholic Christians is the redefinition of the "Body of Christ" at the "reformation." Never before were Christians so individualistic.
You're misunderstanding "role." Our roles as SAVED people are to fulfill the Great Commission. Jesus' role was uniquely HIS: HE ALONE redeems. Not me, not you, and not Mary.
I snipped the rest of your post for brevity. It appears to me your friend understands her faith at a deeper level than her words allow her to express. Just an observation based on what you've shared about her here. Perhaps it's time for you to research Catholicism on your own and leave your friend out of these discussions?
Believe you me I have researched it plenty. As for her, yes I can leave her out, but: given that she said she doesn't know whether she is saved because she "hasn't loved people enough" (her own words) whereas our salvation is through Christ by God's grace through our faith - I think she doesn't even KNOW exactly WHAT the Gospel really is.
Just a thought. No offense intended by my response. I pray you don't take any.
None taken.
Peace of Christ,
Likewise!
_____________________________
I am barely beginning to learn what following Christ really means - and each lesson is humbling. I'm glad, and fortunate, that God is more loving and patient than me.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: The Perpetual Discussion on the Sinless Mary - 5/19/2005 12:45:38 PM
|
|
|
Ormly
Posts: 24
Joined: 4/28/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: GoodME
quote:
ORIGINAL: Ormly
Like...His mother (obeying the Word of God by agreeing to bear His son)???
Nice little word play here - don't you think??
In other words - don't honor Mary for her bearing the Son of God - honor her for her example of obedience to the call of God (to bear the Son of God).
quote:
He replied, "Blessed rather are those who hear the word of God and obey it."
He replied, "Blessed rather are those who hear the word of God and obey it."
...whatever it maybe and to whomoever it is given to.
Mary's extra-veneration is man-made and unBiblical. In other words it can't be supported by scripture. Now, that isn't taking away from her that which she never attributed to herself; she was perfectly content with being called by Jesus: "woman". ..And she was indeed a blessed woman, to be sure.
quote:
You haven't demonstrated this - you have just implied it. I am suggesting that within the context that Jesus is speaking, He is proclaiming to honor obedience, not "contact with Jesus" or anything else.
Honor obedience?? He demands it!
quote:
We honor the Apostles because Jesus asked them to "go and spread the Good News" and they did - they obeyed.
What honor do they deserve for their obedience? What honor does anyone deserve for their obedience? Gratitude? By all all means, but honor? No one deserves that aside from Christ Himself.
quote:
Fine then. On what basis does your claim rest? This is just your opinion - why should I agree (noting that I don't)?
Claim? What claim is that? That extra-veneration of Mary is unBiblical? I stand by that and the Bible supports it.
quote:
Mary is an example of obedience and charity. You have not refuted this with fact - you have only stated that it is not so.
Why do I need to refute what I didn't imply? I've stated nothing you imply that I have by my remarks. I said she was blessed, to be sure. Why do you suppose I would say such a thing if she wasn't BECAUSE of her character? Why would God have chosen her if not because of her character? Do think she was the only one available for God to use?
quote:
If we honor the Apostles just because they saw Jesus, then we are groupies, not the Faithful .
I don't honor them at all. They died. Honor is for the living.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: The Perpetual Discussion on the Sinless Mary - 5/19/2005 12:54:07 PM
|
|
|
jrah06
Posts: 32
Joined: 4/18/2005
Status: offline
|
Onelordofall,
Here is the post I promised. I will tackle both Mary's alleged sinlessness and status as co-redemptrix. Bolded, italicized, and upper-case fonts within the excerpts are mine for emphasis.
WAS MARY SINLESS?
The Catechism of the Catholic Church:
(491) Through the centuries the Church has become ever more aware that Mary, full of grace" through God, was redeemed from the moment of her conception. That is what the dogma of the Immaculate Conception confesses, as Pope Pius IX proclaimed in 1854.
The most Blessed Virgin Mary was, from the first moment of her conception, by a singular grace and privilege of almighty God and by virtue of the merits of Jesus Christ, Savior of the human race, preserved IMMUNE from all stain of original sin. (Page 138)
The Word of God:
Luke 1:46-47
"And Mary said: 'my soul magnifies the Lord, and my spirit has rejoiced in God my Savior."
Romans 3:10-12
"As it is written, There is NONE righteous, no, NOT ONE: There is NONE that understandeth, there is NONE that seeketh after God. They are ALL gone out of the way, they are together become unprofitable; there is NONE that doeth good, no, NOT ONE."
Romans 3:23
"For ALL have sinned, and come short of the glory of God"
It's crystal clear. There is absolutely no Scriptural proof of Mary being sinless.
The Catechism of the Catholic Church:
(494) At the announcement that she would give birth to "the Son of the Most High" without knowing man, by the power of the Holy Spirit, Mary responded with the obedience of faith, certain that "with God nothing will be impossible": "Behold, I am the handmaid of the Lord; let it be done to me according to your word." Thus, giving her consent to God's word, Mary becomes the mother of Jesus, Espousing the divine will for salvation wholeheartedly, without a SINGLE SIN to restrain her, she gave herself entirely to the person and to the work of her Son; she did so in order to save the mystery of redemption with him and dependent on him, by God's grace:
As St. Irenaeus says, "Being obedient she became the cause of salvation for herself and for the whole human race." Hence not a few of the early Fathers gladly assert ..: "The knot of Eve's disobedience was untied by Mary's obedience: what the virgin Eve bound through her disbelief, Mary loosened by her faith. Comparing her with Eve, they call Mary "the Mother of the living" and frequently claim: "Death through Eve, life through Mary." (Pg 138)
The Word of God:
Acts 4:12
"Neither is there salvation IN ANY OTHER: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved."
John 14:6
"Jesus saith unto him, 'I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, BUT BY ME.'"
1 John 5:11-12
"And this is the record, that God hath given to us eternal life, and this life is in his Son. He that hath the Son hath life; and he that hath not the Son of God hath not life."
IS MARY A CO-REDEMPTRIX - DID SHE HAVE OR RECEIVE POWER TO SAVE?
The Catechism of the Catholic Church:
(969) "This motherhood of Mary in the order of grace continues uninterruptedly from the consent which she loyally gave at the Annunciation and which she sustained without wavering beneath the cross, until the eternal fulfillment of all the elect. Taken up to heaven she did not lay aside this SAVING OFFICE but by her manifold intercession continues to bring us gifts of eternal salvation. . . . Therefore the Blessed Virgin is invoked in the Church under the titles of Advocate, Helper, Benefactress, and Mediatrix." (Page 275)
The Word of God:
1 John 2:1
"My little children, these things write I unto you, that ye sin not. And if any man sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous"
Acts 4:12
"Neither is there salvation IN ANY OTHER: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved."
John 14:6
"Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: NO MAN cometh unto the Father, BUT BY ME."
In peace,
Jrah06
_____________________________
I am barely beginning to learn what following Christ really means - and each lesson is humbling. I'm glad, and fortunate, that God is more loving and patient than me.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: The Perpetual Discussion on the Sinless Mary - 5/19/2005 11:04:57 PM
|
|
|
onelordofall
Posts: 262
Joined: 4/11/2005
Status: offline
|
Hello again jrah06,
Please do not take my unresponsiveness as an indication that I am uninterested in continuing our discussion here. It may be a few days before I can get back.
But, in the mean time, please do not think that Catholics are unaware of Rom. 3:23 and other perceived prooftexts tossed about by non-Catholic Christians in order to discredit Catholic dogma concerning Mary. To be perfectly honest, we've heard them all before and they do not accomplish the result intended. If one applies Rom. 3:23 to all humanity, it must include Christ Himself, unless one wants to once again deny that Christ is fully Man; i.e., the Son of Man, as well as the Son of God. That particular heresy was dealt with centuries ago. I do not believe you are implying that you believe Christ was not fully human, therefore, you must think through Rom. 3:23 and find a better interpretation of it before you use it to condemn the Mother of the Lord as an active sinner.
I look forward to further discussion when time allows.
Peace of Christ,
Michael
|
|
|
|
|
RE: The Perpetual Discussion on the Sinless Mary - 5/19/2005 11:13:35 PM
|
|
|
onelordofall
Posts: 262
Joined: 4/11/2005
Status: offline
|
One more thing, jrah06,
It is unfair of you to insinuate that I am "not uncomfortable" over pagans and their perverse views of Christ, His Church, and His Mother.
To set the record straight, I am "uncomfortable" about it. I merely asked you what you propose Christians are supposed to DO about it.
Please rephrase or refrain from addressing my views about "pagans," which you are completely unaware of, at this point in the discussion. Thank you.
Peace of Christ,
Michael...signing off
|
|
|
|
|
RE: The Perpetual Discussion on the Sinless Mary - 5/20/2005 6:01:49 AM
|
|
|
Ormly
Posts: 24
Joined: 4/28/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: onelordofall
Hello again jrah06,
Please do not take my unresponsiveness as an indication that I am uninterested in continuing our discussion here. It may be a few days before I can get back.
But, in the mean time, please do not think that Catholics are unaware of Rom. 3:23 and other perceived prooftexts tossed about by non-Catholic Christians in order to discredit Catholic dogma concerning Mary. To be perfectly honest, we've heard them all before and they do not accomplish the result intended. If one applies Rom. 3:23 to all humanity, it must include Christ Himself, unless one wants to once again deny that Christ is fully Man; i.e., the Son of Man, as well as the Son of God.
BUT IT CAN'T INCLUDE JESUS IF WAS HE WAS BORN SINLESS AS EVEN YOU BELIEVE HE WAS!
Where is your thinking in this?? How can the Christ within Him be born IN sin???!! Holiness cannot abide in sin!!
|
|
|
|
|
RE: The Perpetual Discussion on the Sinless Mary - 5/20/2005 6:39:33 AM
|
|
|
sdaw
Posts: 877
Joined: 4/11/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Ormly
quote:
ORIGINAL: onelordofall
Hello again jrah06,
Please do not take my unresponsiveness as an indication that I am uninterested in continuing our discussion here. It may be a few days before I can get back.
But, in the mean time, please do not think that Catholics are unaware of Rom. 3:23 and other perceived prooftexts tossed about by non-Catholic Christians in order to discredit Catholic dogma concerning Mary. To be perfectly honest, we've heard them all before and they do not accomplish the result intended. If one applies Rom. 3:23 to all humanity, it must include Christ Himself, unless one wants to once again deny that Christ is fully Man; i.e., the Son of Man, as well as the Son of God.
BUT IT CAN'T INCLUDE JESUS IF WAS HE WAS BORN SINLESS AS EVEN YOU BELIEVE HE WAS!
Where is your thinking in this?? How can the Christ within Him be born IN sin???!! Holiness cannot abide in sin!!
Dear Ormly,
This is the thinking. If "all" means "all", then the verse must include Christ. If it does not include Christ, "all" does not mean "all".
If that is the case, then the verse cannot be used as evidence against the Immaculate Conception and the sinlessness of Mary.
On the Feast of St. Bernardine of Sienna
Blessed be God in His Angels and in His Saints!
|
|
|
|
|
RE: The Perpetual Discussion on the Sinless Mary - 5/20/2005 12:10:14 PM
|
|
|
Ormly
Posts: 24
Joined: 4/28/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: sdaw
quote:
ORIGINAL: Ormly
quote:
ORIGINAL: onelordofall
Hello again jrah06,
Please do not take my unresponsiveness as an indication that I am uninterested in continuing our discussion here. It may be a few days before I can get back.
But, in the mean time, please do not think that Catholics are unaware of Rom. 3:23 and other perceived prooftexts tossed about by non-Catholic Christians in order to discredit Catholic dogma concerning Mary. To be perfectly honest, we've heard them all before and they do not accomplish the result intended. If one applies Rom. 3:23 to all humanity, it must include Christ Himself, unless one wants to once again deny that Christ is fully Man; i.e., the Son of Man, as well as the Son of God.
BUT IT CAN'T INCLUDE JESUS IF WAS HE WAS BORN SINLESS AS EVEN YOU BELIEVE HE WAS!
Where is your thinking in this?? How can the Christ within Him be born IN sin???!! Holiness cannot abide in sin!!
Dear Ormly,
This is the thinking. If "all" means "all", then the verse must include Christ. If it does not include Christ, "all" does not mean "all".
If that is the case, then the verse cannot be used as evidence against the Immaculate Conception and the sinlessness of Mary.
On the Feast of St. Bernardine of Sienna
Blessed be God in His Angels and in His Saints!
Need it be spelled out that "All" contextually means "all of fallen humanity; Adams race; sinful man"? Was Jesus any of that? To what exteme will dogma go to support/protect wrong doctrine? Mary was born in sin unless you can prove from scripture, she wasn't. She was just a chosen vessel, that's all. Examine your belief because her veneration was introduced quite sometime after the Apostolic age and by the RCC.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: The Perpetual Discussion on the Sinless Mary - 5/20/2005 12:17:52 PM
|
|
|
sdaw
Posts: 877
Joined: 4/11/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Ormly
quote:
ORIGINAL: sdaw
quote:
ORIGINAL: Ormly
quote:
ORIGINAL: onelordofall
Hello again jrah06,
Please do not take my unresponsiveness as an indication that I am uninterested in continuing our discussion here. It may be a few days before I can get back.
But, in the mean time, please do not think that Catholics are unaware of Rom. 3:23 and other perceived prooftexts tossed about by non-Catholic Christians in order to discredit Catholic dogma concerning Mary. To be perfectly honest, we've heard them all before and they do not accomplish the result intended. If one applies Rom. 3:23 to all humanity, it must include Christ Himself, unless one wants to once again deny that Christ is fully Man; i.e., the Son of Man, as well as the Son of God.
BUT IT CAN'T INCLUDE JESUS IF WAS HE WAS BORN SINLESS AS EVEN YOU BELIEVE HE WAS!
Where is your thinking in this?? How can the Christ within Him be born IN sin???!! Holiness cannot abide in sin!!
Dear Ormly,
This is the thinking. If "all" means "all", then the verse must include Christ. If it does not include Christ, "all" does not mean "all".
If that is the case, then the verse cannot be used as evidence against the Immaculate Conception and the sinlessness of Mary.
On the Feast of St. Bernardine of Sienna
Blessed be God in His Angels and in His Saints!
Need it be spelled out that "All" contextually means "all of fallen humanity; Adams race; sinful man"? Was Jesus any of that? To what exteme will dogma go to support/protect wrong doctrine? Mary was born in sin unless you can prove from scripture, she wasn't. She was just a chosen vessel, that's all. Examine your belief because her veneration was introduced quite sometime after the Apostolic age and by the RCC.
Dear Ormly
An interesting question. If Christ is not of Adam's race, how can He be our Redeemer?
On the Feast of St. Bernadine of Sienna
Blessed be God in His Angels and in His Saints!
|
|
|
|
|
RE: The Perpetual Discussion on the Sinless Mary - 5/20/2005 12:50:42 PM
|
|
|
Ormly
Posts: 24
Joined: 4/28/2005
Status: offline
|
Because His Father is sinless. It is the Father's lineage that counts. Ergo, He was born from above.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: The Perpetual Discussion on the Sinless Mary - 5/20/2005 12:56:01 PM
|
|
|
Rom828
Posts: 25
Joined: 5/4/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: S.Benedict
We must therefore confess simply that the Blessed Virgin committed no actual sin, neither mortal nor venial; so that what is written (Cant 4:7) is fulfilled: "Thou art all fair, O my love, and there is not a spot in thee," etc.
In context Solomon is praising his bride for her beauty. "Spot"{less} is a reference to her outward beauty. The same wording is used to describe an OT sacrifice needing to be "spotless" (i.e. no physical blemishes). In the case of Chris it is used to apply to His sinlessness but in the context of Song of Solomons chapter 4 it is clearly a reference to her physical beauty and it would be horrible hermeneutics to apply it to her spirital state.
Bob
|
|
|
|
|
RE: The Perpetual Discussion on the Sinless Mary - 5/20/2005 1:10:03 PM
|
|
|
Rom828
Posts: 25
Joined: 5/4/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: jrah06
The Catechism of the Catholic Church:
(494) At the announcement that she would give birth to "the Son of the Most High" without knowing man, by the power of the Holy Spirit, Mary responded with the obedience of faith, certain that "with God nothing will be impossible": "Behold, I am the handmaid of the Lord; let it be done to me according to your word." Thus, giving her consent to God's word, Mary becomes the mother of Jesus, Espousing the divine will for salvation wholeheartedly, without a SINGLE SIN to restrain her, she gave herself entirely to the person and to the work of her Son; she did so in order to save the mystery of redemption with him and dependent on him, by God's grace:
Let's remember that God is sovereign. It was not necessary for Mary to be without sin to insure she would obey God. Was there any doubt that Saul would obey the heavenly vision on the road to Damascus even though he was a sinful man? No! Not from God's perspective. How is it that any of us sinners repsond to the Gospel? It's because God's grace gifts us faith. We cannot say no. Mary obeyed not because she was sinless but because God's grace led her to obey.
quote:
IS MARY A CO-REDEMPTRIX - DID SHE HAVE OR RECEIVE POWER TO SAVE?
The Catechism of the Catholic Church:
(969) "This motherhood of Mary in the order of grace continues uninterruptedly from the consent which she loyally gave at the Annunciation and which she sustained without wavering beneath the cross, until the eternal fulfillment of all the elect. Taken up to heaven she did not lay aside this SAVING OFFICE but by her manifold intercession continues to bring us gifts of eternal salvation. . . . Therefore the Blessed Virgin is invoked in the Church under the titles of Advocate, Helper, Benefactress, and Mediatrix." (Page 275)
Let's also be clear that although God chose to use Mary He could have used any other woman. To absribe a "saving office" to Mary, to call her a "co-mediatrix", etc. is to take glory away from God who alone deserves the glory! There is only one mediator given in Scripture and that is Christ. Mary is never recorded as a mediatrix. She is not our "Advocate", "Benefactrass" or "Mediatrix". To suggest so is really blasphemy as those are titles (in their masculine form - except for Benefactor) for the Holy Spirit or Christ! For a human to share those titles is blasphemy.
Mary was a wonderful godly woman who is a example to all of us. She was blessed by God's grace but she was still a human, still a sinner, was born and died like the rest of us, and went on to have children without that in any way degrading who she was in giving birth to Jesus.
Our salvation was not dependent on Mary. It was dependent on Christ alone. Just as God could have made the rocks to sing praises so He could have chosen another woman. Just as the cruxificion was not left to chance neither was Mary's obedience. It was all of God to His sole glory!
Bob
|
|
|
|
|
RE: The Perpetual Discussion on the Sinless Mary - 5/20/2005 1:39:23 PM
|
|
|
Ormly
Posts: 24
Joined: 4/28/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: jrah06
The Catechism of the Catholic Church:
(494) At the announcement that she would give birth to "the Son of the Most High" without knowing man, by the power of the Holy Spirit, Mary responded with the obedience of faith, certain that "with God nothing will be impossible": "Behold, I am the handmaid of the Lord; let it be done to me according to your word." Thus, giving her consent to God's word, Mary becomes the mother of Jesus, Espousing the divine will for salvation wholeheartedly, without a SINGLE SIN to restrain her, she gave herself entirely to the person and to the work of her Son; she did so in order to save the mystery of redemption with him and dependent on him, by God's grace:
quote:
Let's remember that God is sovereign. It was not necessary for Mary to be without sin to insure she would obey God.
The sovereignty of God is not the issue nor did she need to be without sin to obey. She just did and God foreknew she would, period.
quote:
Was there any doubt that Saul would obey the heavenly vision on the road to Damascus even though he was a sinful man? No!
But why? Could it be he feared for his life? Also be reminded that he was blinded! Do you equate that with Mary's experience with the Gabriel?
quote:
Not from God's perspective. How is it that any of us sinners repsond to the Gospel?
We are made to see our need for Christ for our spiritual healing, just like Paul was.
quote:
It's because God's grace gifts us faith.
God gifts us grace, not faith. He reveals Himself, by His grace, that we have faith to believe.
quote:
We cannot say no.
Yes, we can. Why do believe we can't?
quote:
Mary obeyed not because she was sinless but because God's grace led her to obey.
But Mary wasn't sinless. Now where do we go with this? For her to be sinless her parents would have had to be sinless. Were her parents also sinless?
< Message edited by Ormly -- 5/20/2005 1:48:34 PM >
|
|
|
|
|
RE: The Perpetual Discussion on the Sinless Mary - 5/20/2005 2:53:24 PM
|
|
|
Rom828
Posts: 25
Joined: 5/4/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
Ormly: The sovereignty of God is not the issue nor did she need to be without sin to obey. She just did and God foreknew she would, period.
Unfortunately in order to respond to this we would have to sidetrack into a discussion of foreknowledge vs. foreordination. God foreknows because He foreordains. He foreordained Mary to obey and thus He foreknew it. He didn't "look down the coridors of time to see what choice she would make (having no control over that choice) and then 'foreknew' that choice". He decreed it before time began.
quote:
Bob: Was there any doubt that Saul would obey the heavenly vision on the road to Damascus even though he was a sinful man? No!
quote:
Ormly: But why? Could it be he feared for his life? Also be reminded that he was blinded! Do you equate that with Mary's experience with the Gabriel?
My point was that in both cases the outcome was certain as it had been foreordained. The circumstances were different to be sure.
quote:
Bob: Not from God's perspective. How is it that any of us sinners repsond to the Gospel?
quote:
Ormly: We are made to see our need for Christ for our spiritual healing, just like Paul was.
We are born spiritually dead. Dead men can't be made to see. God must first regenerate/resurrect us spiritually. He gives us a new nature that WILL believe. It is a certainty. Just as our old nature was incapable of believing our new nature in incapable of not believing.
Ephesians 2:1 "And you He made alive, who were dead in trespasses and sins..."
quote:
Bob: It's because God's grace gifts us faith.
quote:
Ormly: God gifts us grace, not faith. He reveals Himself, by His grace, that we have faith to believe.
quote:
Bob: We cannot say no.
quote:
Ormly: Yes, we can. Why do believe we can't?
Ephesians 2:8 "For by grace you have been saved through faith, and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God, not of works, lest anyone should boast."
The gift referred to here is "faith". Grace was why we received the gift and how we received it. The gift is being constrasted with works. If we had exercised faith on our own we would have been adding something to God's grace. The faith we have is itself a gift. Thus we having nothing to boast about. We cannot say "Well God gave me grace, but I still did the right thing and believed." It is all of God to His eternal glory!
Acts 13:48 "Now when the Gentiles heard this, they were glad and glorified the word of the Lord. And as many as had been appointed to eternal life believed." (emphasis added)
Note only those who were appointed believed and none who were appointed did not believe.
quote:
Bob: Mary obeyed not because she was sinless but because God's grace led her to obey.
quote:
Ormly: But Mary wasn't sinless. Now where do we go with this? For her to be sinless her parents would have had to be sinless. Were her parents also sinless?
I'm not sure what you're saying here. Mary was born with original sin just like the rest of us. She also sinned during her lifetime just like the rest of us.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: The Perpetual Discussion on the Sinless Mary - 5/20/2005 3:53:02 PM
|
|
|
Ormly
Posts: 24
Joined: 4/28/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Rom828
quote:
Ormly: The sovereignty of God is not the issue nor did she need to be without sin to obey. She just did and God foreknew she would, period.
quote:
Unfortunately in order to respond to this we would have to sidetrack into a discussion of foreknowledge vs. foreordination. God foreknows because He foreordains .
How is it that He would foreordain what He doesn't foreknow? You have it backwards. [Rom.8.29]
quote:
He foreordained Mary to obey and thus He foreknew it. He didn't "look down the coridors of time to see what choice she would make (having no control over that choice) and then 'foreknew' that choice". He decreed it before time began.
quote:
No. Never did God do such a thing. He always chose the ones He foreknew for whatever He had in mind.
quote:
Bob: Was there any doubt that Saul would obey the heavenly vision on the road to Damascus even though he was a sinful man? No!
quote:
Ormly: But why? Could it be he feared for his life? Also be reminded that he was blinded! Do you equate that with Mary's experience with the Gabriel?
quote:
My point was that in both cases the outcome was certain as it had been foreordained. The circumstances were different to be sure.
Again, you have it backwards.
quote:
Bob: Not from God's perspective. How is it that any of us sinners repsond to the Gospel?
quote:
Ormly: We are made to see our need for Christ for our spiritual healing, just like Paul was.
Luke 8:48 (NASB-U)
And He said to her, "Daughter, your faith has made you well; go in peace."
Whose faith made her well?
quote:
We are born spiritually dead. Dead men can't be made to see. God must first regenerate/resurrect us spiritually. He gives us a new nature that WILL believe. It is a certainty. Just as our old nature was incapable of believing our new nature in incapable of not believing.
That's Calvin speak. In the sense you take it it is to say that one needs to be saved before one can be saved. That doesn't make any sense.
quote:
Ephesians 2:1 "And you He made alive, who were dead in trespasses and sins..."
Paul is NOT speaking of salvation when writing that but of a restoration of ones freedom in relationship to the Father before Adam trangressed. That's something that is supposed to happen AFTER one realizes the life of Christ within him; one who has a heart after God.
quote:
Bob: It's because God's grace gifts us faith.
quote:
Ormly: God gifts us grace, not faith. He reveals Himself, by His grace, that we have faith to believe.
quote:
Bob: We cannot say no.
quote:
Ormly: Yes, we can. Why do believe we can't?
quote:
Ephesians 2:8 "For by grace you have been saved through faith, and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God, not of works, lest anyone should boast."
Yes.... For by what are you saved? For by grace you are saved, THE GIFT OF GOD--- through faith.. Read it again for undertanding this time. Then re-read my previous statement.
quote:
The gift referred to here is "faith". Grace was why we received the gift and how we received it. The gift is being constrasted with works. If we had exercised faith on our own we would have been adding something to God's grace. The faith we have is itself a gift. Thus we having nothing to boast about. We cannot say "Well God gave me grace, but I still did the right thing and believed." It is all of God to His eternal glory!
Ditto my last comment. He "gifts" everyone grace. Everyone "basks" in God's grace.
quote:
Acts 13:48 "Now when the Gentiles heard this, they were glad and glorified the word of the Lord. And as many as had been appointed to eternal life believed." (emphasis added)
Note only those who were appointed believed and none who were appointed did not believe.
That scripture says that those who would be saved believed. That's the context. appointed=ordained. Foreknowledge--foreordained--appointed. In that order.
Romans 8:29 (NASB-U)
For those whom He foreknew, He also predestined to become conformed to the image of His Son, so that He would be the firstborn among many brethren;
You must follow Rom. 8.28 with vs 29 in order to undertand vs 28
quote:
Bob: Mary obeyed not because she was sinless but because God's grace led her to obey.
quote:
Ormly: But Mary wasn't sinless. Now where do we go with this? For her to be sinless her parents would have had to be sinless. Were her parents also sinless?
I'm not sure what you're saying here. Mary was born with original sin just like the rest of us. She also sinned during her lifetime just like the rest of us.
Yes? Isn't that what I wrote? So we are in agreement on that point.
< Message edited by Ormly -- 5/20/2005 3:59:30 PM >
|
|
|
|
|
RE: The Perpetual Discussion on the Sinless Mary - 5/20/2005 4:25:04 PM
|
|
|
Rom828
Posts: 25
Joined: 5/4/2005
Status: offline
|
Continued quoting is getting too tricky!
Foreknowledge, as you use it, implies a passive foresight by God apart from His foreordaining their actions.
"Foreknow" in Rom 8:29; 11:2 (cf. 1 Peter 1:2, 20) indicates not only advance recognition, but also an advance choice by God. It does not express the idea of a spectator's passive anticipation of what will happen spontaneously.
Jesus said, "No one can come to Me unless it has been granted to him by My Father" (Jn 6:65, cf. 6:44; 10:25-28). Why would God need to "grant" it to them if He already passively saw that they were going to believe? The "grant" comes first then belief. That is foreordination. It is active. It is an action without which the future belief will not take place.
Although the Scriptures use the term "foreknew" or "foreknowledge", that is for our benefit as time and space creatures. God lives in the "eternal now". He is outside time and space. The future, the present, and the past are all "now" to Him. There is no such thing as "looking into the future" for God. God would not be God if He had to make His plans based on passive foreknowledge. He would still be limited by our "future" choices. He could "have the benefit of always being right" because He could foresee our choices but He would not be in total control which is part of being GOD.
Although all human acts are free in the sense of an immediate, self-determination, they are nonetheless the outworking of God's eternal purpose and foreordination. We are not free beings in the sense of having autonomous will. Our will is always subject to and under the control of God's will. Anything less and God would not be sovereign.
Such beliefs, though you may disagree with them, are founded on Scripture not on the opinion of John Calvin or any other man (except Jesus of course!).
As to the woman's faith making her well, where did her faith come from? It was a gift from God.
Even Adam had free will in the limited sense. Man has never been free in terms of being autonomous creatures. The difference is that Adam's nature was not spiritually dead. We, born dead, cannot know of our spiritual need until the Holy Spirit breathes life into us. A life God has foreordained. Once alive our eyes are opened and then we respond in faith though that faith is itself a gift.
I think though we are getting side tracked from the question of Mary. This though is one of those watershed issues. If you believe man to be a free, autonomous creature then you will head down a very different path then if you see man as a limited, created being who is totally depraved and totally dependent upon God.
My only point originally is that Mary did not have to be without sin in order to believe Gabriel's message and obey. Our salvation was secure and not subject to Mary's choice as that choice was foreordgained by God.
Bob
|
|
|
|
|
RE: The Perpetual Discussion on the Sinless Mary - 5/20/2005 4:51:55 PM
|
|
|
Ormly
Posts: 24
Joined: 4/28/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
Although all human acts are free in the sense of an immediate, self-determination, they are nonetheless the outworking of God's eternal purpose and foreordination. We are not free beings in the sense of having autonomous will. Our will is always subject to and under the control of God's will. Anything less and God would not be sovereign.
You'll need scripture for that, Bob, that I don't believe you'll find. God never goes against our will. He can however, make us willing to be willing, that is unless we so stubbornly refuse and then He may give us over to a reprobate condition. If you don't believe it is that way then you'll have show from scripture where it isn't. God USES life [circumstances] and our will to bring us into compliance with His will. This should be readily seen as the way He performs with the new born individual, to bring him into maturity. But alas and alac, all too often it is never recognized and if the message on Sunday is always about getting saved and making heaven the goal, one will never know that is what the new birth is all about. i.e., sonship.
< Message edited by Ormly -- 5/20/2005 5:00:34 PM >
|
|
|
|
|
RE: The Perpetual Discussion on the Sinless Mary - 5/21/2005 3:53:48 AM
|
|
|
onelordofall
Posts: 262
Joined: 4/11/2005
Status: offline
|
Hello Mattumanu,
quote:
Except that Rome's history shows that she isn't willing to consider that she might be wrong. The church, it is said, cannot be wrong. Rome is not going to meet anyone "halfway" on these issues. It's all or nothing.
Exactly. We cannot compromise on Divine Truth. [I'm thinking this is off-topic, but just a quick response to the concerns you raised.]
Peace in Christ,
Michael
|
|
|
|
|
RE: The Perpetual Discussion on the Sinless Mary - 5/21/2005 3:59:32 AM
|
|
|
onelordofall
Posts: 262
Joined: 4/11/2005
Status: offline
|
Ormly,
I remain unconvinced by your prooftexts which you posted to prove the "sin nature" [or original sin, whichever you prefer] is passed on only by the father. I understand that your theological leanings lead you to interpret them that way, but they are just not proving your point, IMHO.
Thanks for the effort, though.
Peace in Christ,
Michael
|
|
|
|
|
RE: The Perpetual Discussion on the Sinless Mary - 5/21/2005 4:25:57 AM
|
|
|
onelordofall
Posts: 262
Joined: 4/11/2005
Status: offline
|
Getting back to the topic at hand, ROM828 wrote:
quote:
Let's also be clear that although God chose to use Mary He could have used any other woman.
Catholic Christians believe our Heavenly Father does not merely "use" anyone. We are adopted sons and daughters, co-heirs with Christ, just as Scripture affirms.
quote:
To absribe a "saving office" to Mary, to call her a "co-mediatrix", etc. is to take glory away from God who alone deserves the glory!
Catholic Christians are not unaware that all Grace comes from God. We also are aware of the fact that, in His Grace, He elevates our nature as a result of the Incarnation. Face it, the Son of God and "Man" [Mary] gave glory to God. In fact, He was the crowing Glory of God. And the abundant Grace of God allows His children to share in "the riches of glory in his inheritance among the holy ones" spoken of by St. Paul in Eph 1:18. Amazing Grace!
quote:
There is only one mediator given in Scripture and that is Christ.
Indeed. One Mediator for salvation Who shares all He is with His faithful, just as He and the Father are One. One Body of Christ...and then we all share in His One salvific mediation, just like His Mother.
Peace in Christ,
Michael
|
|
|
|
|
RE: The Perpetual Discussion on the Sinless Mary - 5/21/2005 8:08:51 AM
|
|
|
Ormly
Posts: 24
Joined: 4/28/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: onelordofall
Ormly,
I remain unconvinced by your prooftexts which you posted to prove the "sin nature" [or original sin, whichever you prefer] is passed on only by the father. I understand that your theological leanings lead you to interpret them that way, but they are just not proving your point, IMHO.
Thanks for the effort, though.
Peace in Christ,
Michael
Hi Michael!
What you say is too bad because you have no other reference than the Bible itself for what we are speaking of ergo, you are relying on RCC interpretation alone. How about considering my prooftext to be accurate because of the context of the rest of the Bible? In other words one must accept the context to believe the prooftext. Consider one other thing that is be escaping you: You being unconvinced is something you wrestle with in light of being unable to accept because of church dogma that you esteem higher than Biblical truth. That's a tough problem for anyone who fears the church. Your moniker speaks of one Lord of all, but is He is in your estimation or is it the church that is your "Lord"? Think about it.
Kindly,
Orm
< Message edited by Ormly -- 5/21/2005 8:15:07 AM >
|
|
|
|
 New Messages |
 No New Messages |
 Hot Topic w/ New Messages |
 Hot Topic w/o New Messages |
 Locked w/ New Messages |
 Locked w/o New Messages |
|
 Post New Thread
Reply to Message
Post New Poll
Submit Vote
Delete My Own Post
Delete My Own Thread
Rate Posts |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Tools
Printable Version
