Against Mary - "Totus tuus, Mary"

[cpayne]

There is so much here that it woudl take some time to read. Why don’t you give me in 2-3 sentences why you believe the assumption is biblical?

Basically because the idea of the Christian tradition is biblical, and the Assumption is part of the tradition. It also has biblical precedent, Enoch and Elijah as examples.

 

[zemi]

There is so much here that it woudl take some time to read. Why don’t you give me in 2-3 sentences why you believe the assumption is biblical?

No, read it all, please (one article at a time). I’m in no hurry. Come tomorrow, in a week or in a month. Then come up with your questions, ok?

We’ve been debating the Assumption before. I’d like you to read these articles now. If you could…

 

[zemi]

No, read it all, please (one article at a time). I’m in no hurry. Come tomorrow, in a week or in a month. Then come up with your questions, ok?

We’ve been debating the Assumption before. I’d like you to read these articles now. If you could…

I mean, come up with your question after reading at least one whole article You don’t have to read it all at once

 

[zemi]

I’ll get to your responses later but I’d like to ask you this:

1. The Church council under the guidance of Holy Spirit came up with the biblical canon (397)
2. The Church council under the guidance of Holy Spirit came up with the teaching of Mary being Theotokos. (431)
3. On what grounds then do you accept 1.) BUT not 2.) ?

---

2nd question:

So let’s say we have the canon since 397. Do you honestly think that 44 years after the Theotokos doctrine comes up BUT IS ENTIRELY devoid of Scripture support?! (if the answer is yes, I must ask you to go and read the Church Fathers…). Do you deny that the Council of Ephesus was not led by the same Holy Spirit as 44 years before?!

 

[justasking4]

zemi;2557030]I did not say you said it was derogatory either.

God gave her the grace no human ever received before her… More than anyone before her… I think that from that follows that she was the most perfect disciple that ever lived → she was the most holiest person ever (after Jesus).

The grace God gave Mary was to bear the human Jesus. There is nothing in the text that leads to any conclusion that she was without sin. Secondlly, if the catholic view was correct i.e. sinless or kept from sin, then we should expect to see it in other parts of the NT. Again we do not.

Well, take only the Cana feast

1. Jesus does what he does on Mary’s insisting
2. Mary is mentioned first among the disciples. Peter is among the Apostles always mentioned first. Judas Iscariot is invariably mentioned last.

Having a certain rank on a list really doesn’t mean anything in this regards. Jesus also listen to Jarius to heal his daughter. What does this say about Jarius? Should we pray to him also?

But how? It is not enough to say that. Where do you have that rule in the Scripture that says in what you should imitate Jesus?

There are a number of places. One is where Jesus commands us to take up our cross and follow him. Other passages would be Matthew 10:38-39. Or Matt 11:28-30.
I Corinthians 11:1; 2 Corinthians 5:15; I Peter 2:21; I john 2:6 to name a few.

 

[justasking4]

zemi;2557339]I’ll get to your responses later but I’d like to ask you this:

1. The Church council under the guidance of Holy Spirit came up with the biblical canon (397)

1. The Church council under the guidance of Holy Spirit came up with the teaching of Mary being Theotokos. (431)

1. On what grounds then do you accept 1.) BUT not 2.) ?

I have no problem accepting the conclusion of both.​

2nd question:

So let’s say we have the canon since 397. Do you honestly think that 44 years after the Theotokos doctrine comes up BUT IS ENTIRELY devoid of Scripture support?! (if the answer is yes, I must ask you to go and read the Church Fathers…). Do you deny that the Council of Ephesus was not led by the same Holy Spirit as 44 years before?

i don’ deny that Mary was the mother and the means for Jesus to come into the world. That is very clear from the scriptures. What is not supported by the catholic doctrines is what follows from this for her. The catholic has exalted her so high as to make her some kind of goddess. Thats the issue. It goes far beyond what our Lord or His apostles ever said about her. That’s why this should be rejected on these grounds alone. Since these doctrines cannot be supported by the scriptures then you are left with the ideas of men.

Question: how do you know when a particular individual is being “guided by the Holy Spirit”? What is your criteria that leads you to know when it is happening?

 

[justasking4]

I mean, come up with your question after reading at least one whole article You don’t have to read it all at once

Alright. How then should it be discussed in a forumm like this?

 

[justasking4]

Basically because the idea of the Christian tradition is biblical, and the Assumption is part of the tradition. It also has biblical precedent, Enoch and Elijah as examples.

I’m aware of these 2 examples being used. However it does not prove it happened for her though. Just because something happened in one part of scripture doesn’t mean it happened to someone else.
You need some eyewitness accounts from the 1st century to support her assumption.

 

[terri_fortner]

Type in Google --praying to angels and you find a list of sites. Many in the New Age movement claim this.

I’m not saying that. What i’m saying is that if its not grounded in the Scriptures its not biblical nor apostolic. Next we need to see who is making these claims about Mary for instance and why should this mere man be believed? This is the problem with a lot of the support in regards to catholic doctrines and practices. When you venture outside the inspired-inerrant Scriptures you leave yourself open to all kinds of speculations of men.

A. My point was that if they are not Christina believers then their prayers are not going to God, where as as a Christian I pray to God. Just because I ask an angel or a saint or Mary specifically to pray with me, or to pray for me, is no different then someone saying that they feel their grandma’s watching over them. Or asking someone to pray for someone’s soul who just passed way. Talking to God can never be wrong, and I am hurt to even think that there are people out there who think that if oyu do not do it this way or that you are doing it wrong.

B. But the scriptures did not come together until after the events you question occurred.

 

[zemi]

Alright. How then should it be discussed in a forumm like this?

Let me know what do you want to talk about (after some reading i gave you ) and we can make a new thread. Is that ok?

 

[zemi]

I have no problem accepting the conclusion of both.​

i don’ deny that Mary was the mother and the means for Jesus to come into the world. That is very clear from the scriptures. What is not supported by the catholic doctrines is what follows from this for her. The catholic has exalted her so high as to make her some kind of goddess. Thats the issue. It goes far beyond what our Lord or His apostles ever said about her. That’s why this should be rejected on these grounds alone. Since these doctrines cannot be supported by the scriptures then you are left with the ideas of men.

Question: how do you know when a particular individual is being “guided by the Holy Spirit”? What is your criteria that leads you to know when it is happening?

At that time it was not clear for Nestorius that Mary was Theotokos, only that she was Christotokos.

How can we know that?
Jesus promised HS to his One Church he founded to protect her from error.

As for the individuals like the person you meet daily, I don’t dare to say. We are to primarily try to be holy ourselves, then it surely gets contagious. (Lk 2,23-24 → Jesus doesn’t answer, just tells them “Strive to enter in”, just my insight )

 

[reluctant_saint]

The grace God gave Mary was to bear the human Jesus.

I was going to write a long response to this statement, but then I realized that a long response wasn’t necessary. I have only one thing to say.

My Christian convictions convince me that when Jesus died on the cross, that it was in fact the second person of the Holy Trinity, the Word of God himself, dying on the cross. It wasn’t just a man. It was the God-Man.

I assume you believe, like me, that it was indeed that God-Man who died on the cross. So let me ask you a question.

If human beings can kill the God-Man, like they did, then what’s so hard to believe about a human being giving birth to the God-Man?

Jesus is all or nothing. If he’s God, then he was always God, even in the womb of Mary.

 

[heisenburg]

The grace God gave Mary was to bear the human Jesus.

To you in Christ

Question. Do you believe that Jesus did not have a Human Nature until he was born of Mary?

In Christ

 

[justasking4]

I was going to write a long response to this statement, but then I realized that a long response wasn’t necessary. I have only one thing to say.

My Christian convictions convince me that when Jesus died on the cross, that it was in fact the second person of the Holy Trinity, the Word of God himself, dying on the cross. It wasn’t just a man. It was the God-Man.

I assume you believe, like me, that it was indeed that God-Man who died on the cross. So let me ask you a question.

If human beings can kill the God-Man, like they did, then what’s so hard to believe about a human being giving birth to the God-Man?

Jesus is all or nothing. If he’s God, then he was always God, even in the womb of Mary.

i do believe that the human body of Jesus was created in the body of Mary and He had a natural birth like everyone else who is human.

 

[justasking4]

terri_fortner;2557689]A. My point was that if they are not Christina believers then their prayers are not going to God,

What if they said otherwise? What if they claimed they are praying to God this way?

where as as a Christian I pray to God. Just because I ask an angel or a saint or Mary specifically to pray with me, or to pray for me, is no different then someone saying that they feel their grandma’s watching over them. Or asking someone to pray for someone’s soul who just passed way.

What you don’t know and cannot know if a saint, angel or mary can hear you. You may believe it but that does not make it true. The Scriptures do not teach this. What this is based on is the opinion of men and not God.

Talking to God can never be wrong, and I am hurt to even think that there are people out there who think that if oyu do not do it this way or that you are doing it wrong.

Then don’t read the scriptures. It is clear there is a right way and a wrong way to pray.

B. But the scriptures did not come together until after the events you question occurred.

Again this counts against the catholic view.

 

[justasking4]

zemi;2557740]At that time it was not clear for Nestorius that Mary was Theotokos, only that she was Christotokos.

How can we know that?
Jesus promised HS to his One Church he founded to protect her from error.

Would you happen to have the specific and clear passage that says this?

As for the individuals like the person you meet daily, I don’t dare to say. We are to primarily try to be holy ourselves, then it surely gets contagious. (Lk 2,23-24 → Jesus doesn’t answer, just tells them “Strive to enter in”, just my insight )

 

[reluctant_saint]

i do believe that the human body of Jesus was created in the body of Mary and He had a natural birth like everyone else who is human.

So then you believe that the Romans only killed the human body of Jesus?

 

[justasking4]

I wonder if justasking4 has read my posts. I wonder if anybody has read my posts. Maybe they’re a little too long. But then again, isn’t the truth usually the hardest thing to explain?

Justasking4, if you want a biblical explanation of Catholic Marian beliefs, read my posts. The Bible has more to say about Mary than you think.

Can you summarize in 2-3 sentences what you wrote? Give me your best arguments and lets go from there.

 

[reluctant_saint]

Can you summarize in 2-3 sentences what you wrote? Give me your best arguments and lets go from there.

I’m afraid that’s quite impossible. The Bible exegesis involved with my argument is a little too in depth the summarize in two or three sentences. I can repost them if you like.

 

[justasking4]

zemi;2552087]I know that very well.

My question however remains. If the Church with cooperation of the Holy Spirit did some thinking and came up with the canon, YET it “cannot do the thinking for us” as “in Christ we are called to think” then I suppose you did not accept what the Church taught and that you came to the exact same canon as the Church by your thinking “in Christ”.

Not sure i follow you here. Your church has some correct doctrines but not all. No Christian should ever just let their church do all the thinking. They should be held accountable for teaching the truth in light of the scriptures. To do that, you must first know the scriptures. Sadly most catholics i know do not.

I hope you see your position is hopelessly self-refuting unless you cherry-pick where you can do the thinking “in Christ” and what things you accept because the Church “did the thinking”.

We are commanded in scripture to critically examine everything. We are to be thinking Christians and not to just accept what your leaders say. That is the road to destruction and increasing false teachings.