Are Marian dogmas wildly un biblical?

[Good_Fella]

JL: Again scripture disagree with you. Who then is reigning as our king in the line of David? How can we be translated into HIS kingdom if there is no kingdom? [Col1:13 Who hath delivered us from the power of darkness, and **HATH TRANSLATED US INTO THE KINGDOM OF HIS DEAR SON

: 14 In whom we have redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins:]

Rm15:9 And that the Gentiles might glorify God for his mercy; as it is written, For this cause I will confess to thee among the Gentiles, and sing unto thy name. 10 And again he saith, REJOICE, ye GENTILES, WITH HIS PEOPLE. 11 And again, Praise the Lord, all ye Gentiles; and laud him, all ye people. 12 And again, ESAIAS SAITH, There shall be A ROOT OF JESSE, and he that SHALL RISE TO REIGN OVER THE GENTILES; in him shall the Gentiles trust.

Eph5:5 For this ye know, that no whoremonger, nor unclean person, nor covetous man, who is an idolater, hath any inheritance IN THE KINGDOM OF CHRIST AND OF GOD.] There is only ONE KINGDOM, the Davidic Kingdom and Christ the Son of David is it’s king forever. There is no such thing as two kingdoms one Heavenly and one Earthly. That’s a tradition of men, made a doctrine of God, to nullify the Word of God.

Hb1:8 But unto THE SON he saith, THY THRONE, O GOD, is for ever and ever: a sceptre of righteousness is the sceptre of thy kingdom.

[1Cor15:22 For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive. 23 But every man in his own order: Christ the firstfruits; afterward they that are Christ’s AT HIS COMING. 24 **THEN COMETH THE END, WHEN HE SHALL HAVE DELIVERED UP THE KINGDOM TO GOD, EVEN THE FATHER; when he shall have put down all rule and all authority and power. 25 FOR HE MUST REIGN, TILL HE HATH PUT ALL ENEMIES UNDER HIS FEET. 26 The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death.] You need to stop reading those RAPTURE, traditions of men books and start reading the actual Word of God.] It seems your contradict scripture alot.

JL: Yes just as Mary was told, [Lk 1:31 And, behold, THOU SHALT CONCEIVE in thy womb, AND BRING FORTH A SON, and shalt call his name JESUS. 32 He shall be great, and shall be CALLED the SON OF THE HIGHEST: and THE LORD GOD SHALL GIVE UNTO HIM **THE THRONE OF HIS FATHER DAVID: 33 HE WILL REIGN OVER THE HOUSE OF JACOB FOR EVER, his kingdom will have no end.]

Thanks for this fine endeavour. :thankyou:

People who try to discredit Mary in the economy of salvation often end up discrediting her divine Son.

PAX :heaven:

 

[jlhargus]

Thanks for this fine endeavour. :thankyou:

People who try to discredit Mary in the economy of salvation often end up discrediting her divine Son.

PAX :heaven:

JL: thanks I appreciate and agree with your remarks GF.

 

[benidict]

chirp…chirp…chirp…chirp…

 

[benidict]

Thanks for this fine endeavour. :thankyou:

People who try to discredit Mary in the economy of salvation often end up discrediting her divine Son.

PAX :heaven:

your not joking GF. it seems people who do this, come awful close to denying the Trinity every time its atttempted. if they dont actually go all the way and do it. sad really. i think the only safe way to go, is to follow what the Church teaches. its the only view that holds the Trinity together, and makes sense. i think that the two are so intricately entwined, its impossible to deny one, and hold on to the other. either what the Church teaches about Mary is true, in which case the Trinity is True, or we are wrong about both. peace

 

[Good_Fella]

your not joking GF. it seems people who do this, come awful close to denying the Trinity every time its atttempted. if they dont actually go all the way and do it. sad really. i think the only safe way to go, is to follow what the Church teaches. its the only view that holds the Trinity together, and makes sense. i think that the two are so intricately entwined, its impossible to deny one, and hold on to the other. either what the Church teaches about Mary is true, in which case the Trinity is True, or we are wrong about both. peace

Those non-Catholic Christians who deny Mary is the Mother of God but believe Jesus is the Person of the divine Word made flesh are demonstrating how they arbitrarily pick and choose whatever they personally want to believe in according to how they interpret the scriptures. But the truth is, if one denies Mary her divine maternity, then in all honesty he should deny Christ’s divinity. The heretics of the early Church rejected the orthodox tradition of the Theotokos strictly because they believed Jesus was only a man or a divine phantasm who merely appeared human but wasn’t actually born of the Virgin Mary in the flesh. Her body served as a channel between heaven and earth. Either heretical extreme rejects the traditional belief in the Incarnation and disfigures our orthodox understanding of the Trinity. If Jesus hadn’t been* “made of a woman”* (Gal 4:4) by the power of the Holy Spirit (Lk 1:35), he couldn’t have referred to himself as the Son of Man and thereby called God his heavenly Father.

And I will make him my firstborn, high above the kings of the earth.
Psalm 89, 27

Let me tell of the decree: The Lord said to me, "You are My son, I have fathered you this day."*
Psalm 2, 7 [Jewish Tanakh Version]*

Pax Christu :heaven:

 

[GreggAlvarez]

In all honesty though, why is it that our arguments fail? Our POSITION is true and that is why we believe it. They are logical, reasonable, rational, irrefutable and sometimes simple… Oh yeah… And biblical too But why do they SEEM irrefutable?

Objection:

1. “All have sinned.”
2. “All” means everybody.
3. “All” is literal

Response:

1. “All have sinned.”
2. Jesus did not sin.
3. “All” could not be literal.

Objection:

1. All have sinned
2. Jesus was excluded because He knew no sin.
3. All is literal.

Response:

1. All have sinned.
2. Jesus was not excluded in that specific verse.
3. All cannot be literal because He did not sin.

Objection:

1. All have sinned.
2. Jesus knew no sin so He was excluded and is the ONLY Person excluded.
3. All is literal.

Response:

1. All have sinned
2. “For the grace of God has appeared, saving all…” Titus 2:11.
3. We suspect that not all people will be saved.
4. “All” must not be literal but only an exaggeration.

Objection:

1. “Saving all”
2. “All” clearly just means the people that were saved.
3. “All” is literal.

You see where I am going with this… This is just one of countless examples. We ALWAYS go around in circles. I know my responses are right but how can I fix my arguments to make them more convincing? Why does the objector think they are not adding unwarranted words and assumptions to the premises and/or conclusions? Do you think it is directly related to a weakness in my argument? Why do the banal objections SEEM right? I do think they SEEM right without much thought.

I see all your arguments and I think, “Yup, he cannot say ANYTHING to object that.” Little do I know… So, I am just wondering what the problem is in our arguments. Maybe we leave too much room for faulty assumptions and accusations? I have been accused of thinking Jesus sinned while defending the Immaculate Conception. I am at a loss in understanding how that was assumed but the point is that somehow, someway there was room for that ridiculous accusation. I was also accused of thinking Scriptures are FALLIBLE while defending the infallibility of the Church. How? I have no clue. Can these assumptions be avoided?

Perhaps, this is for another thread but as far as I can tell, Catholics are the only ones left here. Maybe we all can use your intelligences and my peabrain to figure out airtight defenses for Marian dogma? Or you can just call me an idiot, ignore me and continue your discussion without me? Or we can start a group and do this? We could be the ones who are objecting our own arguments.

If you made it this far to my post, I am sorry you had to go through that.

 

[GaryTaylor]

your not joking GF. it seems people who do this, come awful close to denying the Trinity every time its atttempted. if they dont actually go all the way and do it. sad really. i think the only safe way to go, is to follow what the Church teaches. its the only view that holds the Trinity together, and makes sense. i think that the two are so intricately entwined, its impossible to deny one, and hold on to the other. either what the Church teaches about Mary is true, in which case the Trinity is True, or we are wrong about both. peace

I suspect thats the underlying purpose anyway. A systematic denial of any point which leads to all points. Till we reach the Cross, Christ, and God himself thus the Trinity and Holy Spirit.

Pretty much has been the senerio for past year or so. I believe its from one of two, either the totally ignorant or pure evil. And we would certainly be foolish to believe evil doesn’t exist right here on this board. And from the Temptation of Christ we see satan is a master with Scripture also. Combine this with the reality that this era is very important with the Blessed Mother /Holy Spirit, and the contempt becomes very clear.

God Bless, GT

 

[benidict]

Hail Mary, the
Lord is with thee.
Blessed art thou among women,
and blessed is the fruit of thy womb
Jesus.
Holy Mary mother of God. Pray for us
sinners now and at the hour of our deaths.
Amen

 

[Mark01]

If you made it this far to my post, I am sorry you had to go through that.

Great post, I can actually feel your frustration. I often feel this way when I try discussing theology/doctrine with my wife.

In order to debate someone logically one must have an opponant who is willing to use logic.

 

[benidict]

In all honesty though, why is it that our arguments fail? Our POSITION is true and that is why we believe it. They are logical, reasonable, rational, irrefutable and sometimes simple… Oh yeah… And biblical too But why do they SEEM irrefutable?

Objection:

1. “All have sinned.”
2. “All” means everybody.
3. “All” is literal

Response:

1. “All have sinned.”
2. Jesus did not sin.
3. “All” could not be literal.

Objection:

1. All have sinned
2. Jesus was excluded because He knew no sin.
3. All is literal.

Response:

1. All have sinned.
2. Jesus was not excluded in that specific verse.
3. All cannot be literal because He did not sin.

Objection:

1. All have sinned.
2. Jesus knew no sin so He was excluded and is the ONLY Person excluded.
3. All is literal.

Response:

1. All have sinned
2. “For the grace of God has appeared, saving all…” Titus 2:11.
3. We suspect that not all people will be saved.
4. “All” must not be literal but only an exaggeration.

Objection:

1. “Saving all”
2. “All” clearly just means the people that were saved.
3. “All” is literal.

You see where I am going with this… This is just one of countless examples. We ALWAYS go around in circles. I know my responses are right but how can I fix my arguments to make them more convincing? Why does the objector think they are not adding unwarranted words and assumptions to the premises and/or conclusions? Do you think it is directly related to a weakness in my argument? Why do the banal objections SEEM right? I do think they SEEM right without much thought.

I see all your arguments and I think, “Yup, he cannot say ANYTHING to object that.” Little do I know… So, I am just wondering what the problem is in our arguments. Maybe we leave too much room for faulty assumptions and accusations? I have been accused of thinking Jesus sinned while defending the Immaculate Conception. I am at a loss in understanding how that was assumed but the point is that somehow, someway there was room for that ridiculous accusation. I was also accused of thinking Scriptures are FALLIBLE while defending the infallibility of the Church. How? I have no clue. Can these assumptions be avoided?

Perhaps, this is for another thread but as far as I can tell, Catholics are the only ones left here. Maybe we all can use your intelligences and my peabrain to figure out airtight defenses for Marian dogma? Or you can just call me an idiot, ignore me and continue your discussion without me? Or we can start a group and do this? We could be the ones who are objecting our own arguments.

If you made it this far to my post, I am sorry you had to go through that.

or maybe my brother, it takes the Holy Spirit to remove the scales from our eyes. i used to be just a hateful of the Marian dogmas as anyone. until the Lord revealed some things to me…this may be what it takes. its not for the people we are debating anyway. it is for those that will view and never post. perhaps the Lord is using us to open others eyes. when i started this thread, i had no idea, that over 8000 people would view it. many have not posted. but we have no idea at all, as to how many world wide, we have opened to a whole new view of our Queen. its really worth it. how many people will we meet in the world to come that will join us, because the Creator gave us this tool, to not only convince the outsiders, but to open the eyes of those within his Church already that have questions. Peace and prayers for you. and keep up the good fight. i wont quit against the terrorist in Iraq. and we both wont quit when it comes to defending the blessed mother against fundamentalist in the idealogical realm. Peace

 

[Mikeoffaith]

I don’t think that is a question of being up to date because the local bishop, the Commission on Medjugorje as well as the Yugoslavian Bishops’ Conference declared that “Mary is not appearing at Medjogurje” as early as 1980s … but people simply ignore all this.

placido

Is this a problem that people ignore this and believe that she is appearing?

 

[GaryTaylor]

or maybe my brother, it takes the Holy Spirit to remove the scales from our eyes. i used to be just a hateful of the Marian dogmas as anyone. until the Lord revealed some things to me…this may be what it takes. its not for the people we are debating anyway. it is for those that will view and never post. perhaps the Lord is using us to open others eyes. when i started this thread, i had no idea, that over 8000 people would view it. many have not posted. but we have no idea at all, as to how many world wide, we have opened to a whole new view of our Queen. its really worth it. how many people will we meet in the world to come that will join us, because the Creator gave us this tool, to not only convince the outsiders, but to open the eyes of those within his Church already that have questions. Peace and prayers for you. and keep up the good fight. i wont quit against the terrorist in Iraq. and we both wont quit when it comes to defending the blessed mother against fundamentalist in the idealogical realm. Peace

And there it is, STANDING OVATION:thumbsup: I believe the Holy Spirit is waiting for someone to pick-up the Rosary.

 

[placido]

Is this a problem that people ignore this and believe that she is appearing?

Yes, ignoring our leaders is a problem: “Obey your leaders and defer to them, for they keep watch over you and will have to give an account, that they may fulfill their task with joy and not with sorrow …” (Hebrews 13:17).
Making individual believers the final arbiters would make the Church unnecessary.

placido

 

[Good_Fella]

Is this a problem that people ignore this and believe that she is appearing?

The Marian apparitions in Medjugore are still under investigation by the Church. In 1991, the Conference of Bishops in former Yugoslavia judged non constate de supernaturalitate (“supernaturality is not established”). They did not declare constat de non supernaturalitate (“it is established that there is nothing supernatural”). Nothing definitive will be established by the Church until after the alleged apparitions come to an end. It was the same case with the apparitions of Our Lady at Lourdes and Fatima. The Vatican’s Sacred Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith has already intervened (for the first time in the history of Marian apparitions) to make sure that the investigations continue either until after the claimed apparitions come to an end or they are proved false before then.

PAX :heaven:

 

[Good_Fella]

Yes, ignoring our leaders is a problem: “Obey your leaders and defer to them, for they keep watch over you and will have to give an account, that they may fulfill their task with joy and not with sorrow …” (Hebrews 13:17).
Making individual believers the final arbiters would make the Church unnecessary.

placido

It was an individual local bishop who, in the exercise of his temporal authority, ordered that St. Joan of Arc be burned at the stake.

PAX :heaven:

 

[placido]

It was an individual local bishop who, in the exercise of his temporal authority, ordered that St. Joan of Arc be burned at the stake.

PAX :heaven:

For the sake of our favorite apparitions, we should, according to you, discard Hebrews 13:17 and ignore our leaders.
Hmmm … funny to see the extend some fellows would go just to justify their defiance of church authority.
But take note: according the CATHOLIC CHURCH, the local ordinary has the final say about apparitions in his diocese … and the local bishop clearly said “Mary is not appearing at Medjugorje”.
You may not like it but …

placido

 

[Mikeoffaith]

Yes, ignoring our leaders is a problem: “Obey your leaders and defer to them, for they keep watch over you and will have to give an account, that they may fulfill their task with joy and not with sorrow …” (Hebrews 13:17).
Making individual believers the final arbiters would make the Church unnecessary.

placido

Then what is the Church’s response? How does it deal with this?

 

[placido]

The Marian apparitions in Medjugore are still under investigation by the Church. In 1991, the Conference of Bishops in former Yugoslavia judged non constate de supernaturalitate (“supernaturality is not established”). They did not declare constat de non supernaturalitate (“it is established that there is nothing supernatural”). Nothing definitive will be established by the Church until after the alleged apparitions come to an end. It was the same case with the apparitions of Our Lady at Lourdes and Fatima. The Vatican’s Sacred Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith has already intervened (for the first time in the history of Marian apparitions) to make sure that the investigations continue either until after the claimed apparitions come to an end or they are proved false before then.

PAX :heaven:

It seems you are (perhaps innocently) misrepresenting the reasons why the Vatican’s Sacred Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith has intervened. Please make sure of your facts.

placido

 

[placido]

It was an individual local bishop who, in the exercise of his temporal authority, ordered that St. Joan of Arc be burned at the stake.

PAX :heaven:

Please don’t forget to retract the statement that it was the “individual LOCAL BISHOP” who ordered that St. Joan of Arc be burned at the stake … just a reminder.

placido

 

[placido]

Then what is the Church’s response? How does it deal with this?

The Church’s response is – like it always has been – renewed exhortation to heed the Word of God; and the Word of God (both oral and written) says we have to obey our leaders and to be submissive to them … oh yes, that is contrary to the Lutheran alternative.

placido