Apologetics help, please! Mary's "Omnipotence'

[myfavoritmartin]

John in Revelation was given the gift of seeing and hearing all creatures on heaven, on earth and under the earth simultaneously praising God. Was this omniscience or omnipresence on John’s part? No. It is not an inherent quality of John’s as it is with God. Was it God temporarily gifting him with superhuman capabilities? Yes. So he does with Mary and the saints.

It was a prophetic vision, he was still alive. Nice parallel sheeesh!

 

[myfavoritmartin]

Although I haven’t read every post in this thread, I think I have read enough.

It will never cease to amaze me how vehement Catholics are when it comes to justifying heresy.

You take scripture out of context to prove your preconceived notions… and you take your own church fathers out of context to prove their orthodoxy.

Sometimes fallible humans write or say things that are wrong, and the ECF’s are no exception. And if it has happened once, it is possible that it has happened many, many, many times.

John

www.gideonsword.net
www.swordforums.net

Could not agree more.

 

[6glargento]

Although I haven’t read every post in this thread, I think I have read enough.

It will never cease to amaze me how vehement Catholics are when it comes to justifying heresy.

You take scripture out of context to prove your preconceived notions… and you take your own church fathers out of context to prove their orthodoxy.

Sometimes fallible humans write or say things that are wrong, and the ECF’s are no exception. And if it has happened once, it is possible that it has happened many, many, many times.

John

www.gideonsword.net
www.swordforums.net

the only heresy is protestant doctrine and how they take scripture and ECF out of context to suppor their doctrines

 

[6glargento]

Perpetual virginity → Woman in Rev 12 is not Mary.

Therefore arguments for heavenly queenship of Mary invoking Rev 12 are unsound.

remember that revelation is a apocalyptic book and has much symbolism, the “birth pains” may not be literal birth pains

Gal 4:19 - Paul also describes his pain as birth pangs in forming the disciples in Christ. Birth pangs describe formation in Christ.

Rom. 8:22 - also, Paul says the whole creation has been groaning in travail before the coming of Christ. We are all undergoing birth pangs because we are being reborn into Jesus Christ.

Jer. 13:21 - Jeremiah describes the birth pangs of Israel, like a woman in travail. Birth pangs are usually used metaphorically in the Scriptures.

Hos. 13:12-13 - Ephraim is also described as travailing in childbirth for his sins. Again, birth pangs are used metaphorically.

Micah 4:9-10 - Micah also describes Jerusalem as being seized by birth pangs like a woman in travail.

Isaiah 66:7 - for example, we see Isaiah prophesying that before she (Mary) was in labor she gave birth; before her pain came upon her she was delivered of a son (Jesus). This is a Marian prophecy of the virgin birth of Jesus Christ.

 

[cygnusdei]

remember that revelation is a apocalyptic book and has much symbolism, the “birth pains” may not be literal birth pains

Gal 4:19 - Paul also describes his pain as birth pangs in forming the disciples in Christ. Birth pangs describe formation in Christ.

Rom. 8:22 - also, Paul says the whole creation has been groaning in travail before the coming of Christ. We are all undergoing birth pangs because we are being reborn into Jesus Christ.

Jer. 13:21 - Jeremiah describes the birth pangs of Israel, like a woman in travail. Birth pangs are usually used metaphorically in the Scriptures.

Hos. 13:12-13 - Ephraim is also described as travailing in childbirth for his sins. Again, birth pangs are used metaphorically.

Micah 4:9-10 - Micah also describes Jerusalem as being seized by birth pangs like a woman in travail.

Isaiah 66:7 - for example, we see Isaiah prophesying that before she (Mary) was in labor she gave birth; before her pain came upon her she was delivered of a son (Jesus). This is a Marian prophecy of the virgin birth of Jesus Christ.

Exactly. But are you ready to accept that the pain is figurative but the woman is literal?

 

[6glargento]

Exactly. But are you ready to accept that the pain is figurative but the woman is literal?

sure. as you see in the scripture that i cited, REAL people talked about experiancing birth pains that were not literal birth pains but rather suffering that goes along with following God. Mary experianced suffering when she watched her son be crucified, remember that simeon told her that a sword would peirce her heart. I don’t think that this idea holds water.

 

[San_Patricio]

Yikes! That’s a hard saying for this Catholic.

I believe God may “obey” as in grant Mary’s request… but He doesn’t have to. He is God. Mary isn’t.

I’ve never read anything that cited Mary as omnipotent, but lemme give a shot at an answer. Because of Mary’s perfect obedience to God she would never do or ask anything that was not in conformity with His will, therefore anything she asks would be granted. De facto omnipotence. How’d I do?

 

[cygnusdei]

sure. as you see in the scripture that i cited, REAL people talked about experiancing birth pains that were not literal birth pains but rather suffering that goes along with following God. Mary experianced suffering when she watched her son be crucified, remember that simeon told her that a sword would peirce her heart. I don’t think that this idea holds water.

Revelations 12:2
And she being with child cried, travailing in birth, and pained to be delivered.

So the woman is literal, the pain is figurative, but the child is literal? You give leap of faith a whole new meaning.

 

[San_Patricio]

To Todd Easton & Red Bandito:

Calling Mary the “Ark of His convenant” is a Catholic interpretation but not found in any Apostolic teachings in the N.T. You guys still have to deal with the FACT that the woman in Rev. 12 is never seen in heaven. She does not follow her Son into heaven when He is caught up to God and to His throne. INSTEAD it is stated (symbolically) that two wings of the great eagle are given to her in order that she might fly into the wilderness. That’s not heaven, guys! Nope, no heavenly throne for her. The fact that she wears a crown does not mean she is a literal queen. But having a crown means she does rule. In the future Millennial Kingdom, when the Messiah, to whom she gave birth, returns to rule the nations with a rod of iron (Rev. 12:5; cf. Rev. 19:15), according to many, many O.T. prophecies regarding His Kingdom rule, national Israel will enjoy an exalted, prominate position amongst all the nations on earth at that time (example: Is. 60; Jer. 3:15-18; 23:5-8; 33:15-26; Zech. 8:22-23; 14:8-9, 16). Why? Because Israel’s Messiah/King will be ruling this earth from Jerusalem for 1000 years.

The ark of the old covenant contained the word of God written on stone. The ark of the new covenant contained the Word made Flesh, Jesus. What contained Jesus? Mary. Mary is the ark of the new covenant. If it says the ark went to Heaven, then Mary’s in Heaven. It ain’t rocket science.

Oh yeah, Red, thanks for all the quotes from Luther, but don’t forget Luther was a Roman Catholic. Protestantism eventually dropped the Marian doctrines because of their lack of Biblical (Apostolic) support, it had nothing to do with Luther. Luther dropped Rome’s doctrine of justification by faith plus works because it, too, had no Biblical (Apostolic) support.

Luther altered the Bible in an attempt to achieve scriptural support for salvation by faith alone. The Church had it right then and still does today, and unless you want to call Jesus a liar, will have it right until the end of time.
So you deny the Church’s authority, and you deny Luther’s authority… So it’s just every man for himself with his own personal interpretation of the Bible? Where does it say that in the Bible? Where in scripture does it say “I will send my Spirit to Bene so that he may infallibly interpret the Bible?”
I must have missed that page…!

 

[San_Patricio]

Let me know where my reasoning breaks down:
(1) Mary retained virginal integrity (dogma)
(2) Therefore Mary did not have birth pains
(3) The woman in Rev 12:2 had birth pains
(4) Therefore she couldn’t be Mary

Your breakdown occurs in (2). You equate childbirth with loss of virginity. Virginity refers to sexual activity. Mary could have given birth in a normal human way and still retained her virginity.

 

[cygnusdei]

Your breakdown occurs in (2). You equate childbirth with loss of virginity. Virginity refers to sexual activity. Mary could have given birth in a normal human way and still retained her virginity.

According to the catechism (see #77), the perpetual virginity dogma refers to the event of Christ’s birth.

 

[San_Patricio]

I guess I am still waiting to see how any of this relates to the OP which concerned Mary’s omnipotence. The subject of her perpetual virginity is already discussed in an ongoing thread. But here, no one has mentioned her omnipotence except the thread title. Are we off topic or did the OP’s title mislead?

You mean omnipotence isn’t a synonym for perpetual virginity?

Y’all got WAY off topic.

 

[6glargento]

Revelations 12:2
And she being with child cried, travailing in birth, and pained to be delivered.

So the woman is literal, the pain is figurative, but the child is literal? You give leap of faith a whole new meaning.

in galatians 4:19 paul is a literal person but he talks about figurative birth pain

so why can’t mary be a literal person with birth pain

 

[San_Patricio]

According to the catechism (see #77), the perpetual virginity dogma refers to the event of Christ’s birth.

CCC 77 “In order that the full and living Gospel might always be preserved in the Church the apostles left bishops as their successors. They gave them ‘their own position of teaching authority.’” Indeed, “the apostolic preaching, which is expressed in a special way in the inspired books, was to be preserved in a continuous line of succession until the end of time.”

What Cattechism are you reading?

 

[cygnusdei]

CCC 77 “In order that the full and living Gospel might always be preserved in the Church the apostles left bishops as their successors. They gave them ‘their own position of teaching authority.’” Indeed, “the apostolic preaching, which is expressed in a special way in the inspired books, was to be preserved in a continuous line of succession until the end of time.”

What Cattechism are you reading?

I meant post #77 of this thread.

 

[San_Patricio]

I meant post #77 of this thread.

Sorry, I misunderstood.

However, CCC 499 only says Christ’s birth “did not diminish (H)is mother’s virginal integrity but sanctified it.” No mention is made of the MANNER in which He was born.

None of which has to do with the title of this thread.
(I’m kinda partial to my answer in post #107)

 

[justasking4]

the only heresy is protestant doctrine and how they take scripture and ECF out of context to suppor their doctrines

Being a protestant i would agree that does happen at times. However i do have a couple of questions about this topic on Mary.

In the book, Glories of Mary by Alfonso Maria de’, Saint Liguori he makes a lot claims about Mary that i don’t see in scripture. For example he writes that …"it is the will of God that all graces come should come to us by the hands of Mary.

or "all graces are dispensed by Mary, and all who are saved are saved only by the means of this divine Mother.

Since Ligori is a saint and a doctor of the roman catholic church, and this book is endorsed by the roman catholic church, this must be part of the “fullness of the truth” that i hear so much about here am supposedly missing as a protestant.

My question is this: since the scripture never teaches such a thing like this about Mary, is this not a false teaching since it cannot be grounded in the scriptures?

If not taught in scripture, how would your church know this to be a fact about her?

 

[cygnusdei]

Mark 12:30 (emphasis mine)
And thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind, and with all thy strength: this is the first commandment.

Guys, God gives us heart, soul, mind, and strength - and all of these must go hand in hand in our faith in Him. I believe our God is a rational God, that’s why he gives us the gift of intelligence so we can appreciate His infinite wisdom.

My sunday school teacher once told me a story of a mentally ill person singing a sunday school song incessantly. He was praising God, but his mind wasn’t, because he was mentally ill. God wants you to use your mind. God created us according to his image, so our rational mind must have been patterned after His divine nature as well.

I think that’s it from me. I apologize to everyone if I strayed off topic. God bless.

 

[justasking4]

The ark of the old covenant contained the word of God written on stone. The ark of the new covenant contained the Word made Flesh, Jesus. What contained Jesus? Mary. Mary is the ark of the new covenant. If it says the ark went to Heaven, then Mary’s in Heaven. It ain’t rocket science.

Luther altered the Bible in an attempt to achieve scriptural support for salvation by faith alone. The Church had it right then and still does today, and unless you want to call Jesus a liar, will have it right until the end of time.
So you deny the Church’s authority, and you deny Luther’s authority… So it’s just every man for himself with his own personal interpretation of the Bible? Where does it say that in the Bible? Where in scripture does it say “I will send my Spirit to Bene so that he may infallibly interpret the Bible?”
I must have missed that page…!

Has the catholic church infallibly interpreted every verse in the Bible? If they have i would like to see this book.

When you read the Bible as a catholic how do you know you have the correct interpretation of a verse or passage?

 

[San_Patricio]

Being a protestant i would agree that does happen at times. However i do have a couple of questions about this topic on Mary.

In the book, Glories of Mary by Alfonso Maria de’, Saint Liguori he makes a lot claims about Mary that i don’t see in scripture. For example he writes that …"it is the will of God that all graces come should come to us by the hands of Mary.

or "all graces are dispensed by Mary, and all who are saved are saved only by the means of this divine Mother.

Since Ligori is a saint and a doctor of the roman catholic church, and this book is endorsed by the roman catholic church, this must be part of the “fullness of the truth” that i hear so much about here am supposedly missing as a protestant.

My question is this: since the scripture never teaches such a thing like this about Mary, is this not a false teaching since it cannot be grounded in the scriptures?

If not taught in scripture, how would your church know this to be a fact about her?

God chose that Christ would come to the world through Mary, and in the same way He continues to come to us through her. On the Cross He did give us to her and her to us.
The Church knows things not explicitly in Scripture becuse it is the Church that gave us Scripture. It can, however, be found IMPLICT in Scripture.
Jesus didn’t send the Holy Spirit to guide the Bible, He sent Him to guide the Church.