Are Marian dogmas wildly un biblical?

  • Thread starter Thread starter benidict
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
It is especially ironic when a person engages in condemnation of others for “not believing” Jesus’s words based on the premise that Koine Greek has precise words for cousin when neither of the languages Jesus commonly spoke in (Hebrew and Aramaic) have such a term. Koine Greek scriptures that quote Jesus do so through translation. Where Jesus speaks he does so in a language that only has terms for near kin (especially those living in the same community) and distant kin (those not near to the household). The emphatic insistence that all Jesus’s brethren mentioned must be born after him upon Mary does not mesh with what we know historically about many of those called “brother of Christ,” including James.

The Bible never explicitly names or implies any of those brethren to be related to Mary by blood in any way, and Jesus’s actions with the Disciple John imply just the opposite.

But sure, I guess we could just eschew cultural and historical facts about the whole thing and prefer our own personally inferred meanings from a literal English reading of the King James. I mean, that’s about as American as Apple Pie when you get right down to it. 😉
It was stated that being devoted to Mary makes one close to Jesus. That’s senseless. If you want to get close to someone you don’t devote yourself to someone else.
That might’ve passed for a rational argument if not subject to basic scrutiny. Take, for example, the circumstances of separation from the object of one’s devotion. By scripture, man’s ruined nature creates separation between him and our perfect, ineffable Triune God. Conceptually, the limited nature of our earthly lives renders God certain knowledge of God unobtainable (such as revelations Paul could not share in 2nd Corinthians). A man saved by the ultimate sacrifice of his brother on a battlefield devotes himself to his brother by devoting himself to the widow and orphans his brother has left behind.

To truly understand Jesus is to love all that he loved. That includes his mother, blessed among women, who knew him more closely and longer than any mortal being. This also includes the poor, the widowed, and the vulnerable child. If you would be true and faithful to your Lord then you must love all he loves and shun all that he shuns.

Devotion to others can certainly bring you deeper in devotion to Christ Jesus. Meanwhile, haphazard rejections of that which he loved (his mother, his church, his apostles and their successors) surely risks driving you away from Christ.
Where did Jesus ever teach His Apostles (or anyone) personal devotion to His mother?
Through the Holy Spirit and the angels God makes manifest the importance of Mary in our scripture. Of course, if you read Scripture with complete ignorance of the Jewish culture of the time or the role of the New Testament as it pertains to the fulfillment of the prophecies of the Old Testament you’ll overlook a ton of relevant pieces. The most painfully obvious:

Elizabeth’s inspired prophecy “And whence is this to me, the Mother of my Lord should come to me?”

The Herald of God, Gabriel says, “Hail, thou that art highly favored, the Lord is with thee: blessed art thou among women”

The living God is noted to assent to Mary’s request at the Wedding Feast and makes special accommodation with her in his final moments of life of the cross, making her Mother of his most beloved disciple. Who could hope to model a better relationship with Jesus than that of Mary, his mother, or John his beloved disciple? It doesn’t make sense to look to Jesus as your model of how to have a relationship with Jesus, after all.

Of course, then there are the religiously authoritative teachings of the successors of the apostles themselves. If you reject their authority and tradition you don’t have a Bible since the compilation of Sacred Scripture was done under the same magisterium.

To walk with Mary is to follow Jesus from the Incarnation to the Ascension and beyond.
  • Marty Lund
 
It was stated that being devoted to Mary makes one close to Jesus. That’s senseless.
Nonsense in you FALLIBLE view of course, or do you have any infallible source that says “being devoted to Mary is nonsense”?
If you want to get close to someone you don’t devote yourself to someone else.You missed the point.
We get close to God, but unlike you, we do not do that to the exclusion of the one He declared “blessed”.
If you devote yourself to Christ you’ll get close to God - since He is God.
Yes!!!
But you can’t get close to Jesus by devoting yourself to Mary.
Says who?
Mary’s not part of the Godhead.
Nobody said she IS.
AGAIN, if you want to get close to someone you don’t devote yourself to someone else. Totally nonsensical.
Yes, it would be nonsensical if you try to get close to someone by devoting yourself to his opponent, but Mary is not Jesus’ opponent; she says to you “do whatever He tells you”.
Which Apostle ever taught the church personal devotion to Mary? Where did Jesus ever teach His Apostles (or anyone) personal devotion to His mother?
By the way, do you know what devotion means? Does the Bible tell us to “honor your father and your mother”? Is Jesus’s mother worth honoring? Did Jesus tell His beloved disciple “there is your mother”? Do you think the beloved disciple went right ahead and dishonored Mary? Are you a beloved disciple of Jesus? … then show your mother the honor she deserves. it takes nothing from Jesus.

placido
 
Hi brother Calvin 95,
Now that i have dealt with most of your statements and questions, allow me to ask clarification as to what you mean by “God-Man”: do you mean Jesus is 50 percent God and 50 percent man, or that Jesus is 100 percent God and 100 percent man? And did Jesus, at any stage, cease to be God?
I am asking just to avoid misunderstanding what you really believe.

placido
 
Calvin, Moondweller…

What kind of Christian churches do you belong to?

Why did Jesus not pass out Bibles to the Apostles…It would be so easy to have a Bible in hand from the very beginning??

Why didn’t Jesus pass out the book of the Bible and get the confusion from the get go??

You attach to book form, we focus on relationship to the living Word of God in relationship. We have the Word of God and the Eucharist—the Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity fed us at our liturgy…
 
Calvin,

To be truthful, I have the impression you came on here to vent and take out your anger on our beliefs. I asked what Christian church you belong to, because you have been indoctrinated to a certain image of what you think we are.

The Scriptures always warn us about false teachers. God is the author of Scripture…but He is using human words, and working through limited human intellect. Yet nevertheless, faith is passed down – not through books – but through the faith in the hearts of believers.

It would be good to take an objective, academic course on the history of the early church – one without bias…so I would recommend going to another resource other than the one you are attending right at present.
 
Yes, it would be nonsensical if you try to get close to someone by devoting yourself to his opponent, but Mary is not Jesus’ opponent; she says to you “do whatever He tells you”.
So you’re saying that those waiters at the wedding devoted themselves to Mary and by doing so they got closer to Jesus. What kind of interpretation is that? I’ll tell you, a totally nonsensical one.
By the way, do you know what devotion means? Does the Bible tell us to “honor your father and your mother”? Is Jesus’s mother worth honoring? Did Jesus tell His beloved disciple “there is your mother”? Do you think the beloved disciple went right ahead and dishonored Mary? Are you a beloved disciple of Jesus? … then show your mother the honor she deserves. it takes nothing from Jesus.
The CONTEXT of that passage is John being assigned by Jesus to take Mary into his care, not for Mary to take John into her care. In that passage Mary is the weaker, not John. He takes her into his house, she doesn’t take him into hers.

Nowhere is Mary ever exalted to the positions (either by Jesus or His Apostles) that men down through the centuries has ascribed to her. True Christianity is not a mother/son religion. It’s a Christ centered faith.

Mary’s not my mother. I certainly call her “blessed” having been chosen among all Jewish women to give birth to the long expected Jewish Messiah. But I am not called to “honor” her, pray to her for intercession, exalt her as Queen of heaven, or assign mystical events and divine attributes to her. One honors a person by remaining true to who he/she truly is. Not making them out to be someone they are not - even if those things are good. That is not honoring the person. You want to honor her? Then don’t go beyond what is written. So to answer the question: “Are Marian dogmas widely unbiblical?” Yes.
 
So you’re saying that those waiters at the wedding devoted themselves to Mary and by doing so they got closer to Jesus. What kind of interpretation is that? I’ll tell you, a totally nonsensical one.The CONTEXT of that passage is John being assigned by Jesus to take Mary into his care, not for Mary to take John into her care. In that passage Mary is the weaker, not John. He takes her into his house, she doesn’t take him into hers.

Nowhere is Mary ever exalted to the positions (either by Jesus or His Apostles) that men down through the centuries has ascribed to her. True Christianity is not a mother/son religion. It’s a Christ centered faith.

Mary’s not my mother. I certainly call her “blessed” having been chosen among all Jewish women to give birth to the long expected Jewish Messiah. But I am not called to “honor” her, pray to her for intercession, exalt her as Queen of heaven, or assign mystical events and divine attributes to her. One honors a person by remaining true to who he/she truly is. Not making them out to be someone they are not - even if those things are good. That is not honoring the person. You want to honor her? Then don’t go beyond what is written. So to answer the question: “Are Marian dogmas widely unbiblical?” Yes.
And, as it has been explained to you over and over again, your understanding of the doctrine of the Communion of Saints is seriously lacking.

We’ve all heard your opinions, and might I add, fallible opinions, over and over again. Just once we would like to hear you say that they are just your own fallible opinions.

Do you have the humility to make that admission?
 
You would fare much better to focus on the Word of God and not of men.
Thank you very much. We will do that. Therefore, we can dismiss your fallible interpretations of Scriptures, since, as is evident, you are a mere mortal who is subject to erroreous conclusions.
 
Originally Posted by placido View Post
Jumping to apostolic succession from Matthew 16:19? That is news to many of us who have never met a Catholic using Matthew 16:19 to defend Apostolic Succession. Or, may be (just may be) Calvin 95 does not even know what Catholics mean by Apostolic Succession.
Here is the Gospel According to Calvin 95, Chapter One Verse One: “In the beginning was the Bible, and the Bible was with God, and the Bible was God.”
Yes, according to Calvin 95, the Word of John 1:1 is the Bible
ad hominem = nothing to really say. It does show the heart and breaks the 2nd commandment, then by default the first. So have at it. I count it as all joy according the the Scripture.
Not an ad hominem attack. If it is, than your reply is as well.
 
I already explained that sufficiently from a biblical point of view, which you disagree with. You avoided the question, “how can God be born and be eternal?” Because the answer is so evident that you must side-step it and use a profusion of words to walk around the obvious. God has no Mother, if He did He would be a CREATURE; Jesus the God-man was born in the likeness of human flesh because this is the “tool” or “means” which He chose to reveal Himself into our little time-space box rather than in the holy of holies. You obviously are unable to comprehend the two natures and the relationship and importantance this has for man. I suggest you read and study your Bible on this topic before you continue on wit this discussion, which is really not a discussion.
Your’s, as well as Moondweller’s, Incarnational theolgy is seriously lacking.

I pose a simple little quiz to you which I gave to Moondweller some time ago. A quiz which, by the way, he failed miserably.

All I ask you to do is to choose either “A” or “B”. Got it? Either “A” or “B”

A: Jesus is a human person.

OR

B: Jesus is not a human a person.

Simple enough - “A” OR “B”.
 
Go read John 1:1, then come back with this nonsense. You all are just arguing with the Word of God and believe you are arguing with me. Didn’t Jesus say it would be that way?
The argument is your interpretation.
 
I already explained that sufficiently from a biblical point of view, which you disagree with. You avoided the question, “how can God be born and be eternal?” Because the answer is so evident that you must side-step it and use a profusion of words to walk around the obvious. God has no Mother, if He did He would be a CREATURE; Jesus the God-man was born in the likeness of human flesh because this is the “tool” or “means” which He chose to reveal Himself into our little time-space box rather than in the holy of holies. You obviously are unable to comprehend the two natures and the relationship and importantance this has for man. I suggest you read and study your Bible on this topic before you continue on wit this discussion, which is really not a discussion.
Calvin,

This is how you spell nestorianism (you might want to look up the word).
 
It was stated that being devoted to Mary makes one close to Jesus. That’s senseless. If you want to get close to someone you don’t devote yourself to someone else.You missed the point. If you devote yourself to Christ you’ll get close to God - since He is God. But you can’t get close to Jesus by devoting yourself to Mary. Mary’s not part of the Godhead.

AGAIN, if you want to get close to someone you don’t devote yourself to someone else. Totally nonsensical. Which Apostle ever taught the church personal devotion to Mary? Where did Jesus ever teach His Apostles (or anyone) personal devotion to His mother?
Yes, but Christ is not only God - He is also perfect Man. Christ mediates salvation to us through His Humanity, when Paul said salvation is “through the Man, Jesus Christ.” Salvation is always mediated in us through Christ, through the scriptures, through the Church, through the Sacraments etc. We as Christians are all called to mediate Christ to the world. We are living Sacraments of Christ’s Divine-Human Presence and Salvation in the world.

To get close to Christ one can and should indeed get close to those who bear Jesus in their hearts and lives. The martyrs, apostles, prophets etc. all point not just to God, but to the God-Man. The Virgin Mary is the one who gave God His Body and Blood. In the Gospel of Luke, the Archangel praises HER first and then the “Fruit of your womb.” God came to us through Mary - is it so far-fetched to think that Mary and the saints are there pushing us toward God and Christ via the Communion of the Saints?

Where did Jesus give us His mother, you ask? The Fathers and saints saw in His words at the Cross “Behold your mother!” as being not only addressed to John but also to His followers.

Just as Mary nurtured the Body of Christ when He was on earth 2000 years ago, so too does she today nurture the Body of Christ which is His Church, of which He is the Head. The Christian Church has always invoked the Martyrs for help (you can see this in the invocations on the tombs of the martyrs in the catacombs). In Christ, we can have relationships with those who have gone on to be with Him in heaven. They are alive in Christ and insofar as we are spiritually alive in Christ - we are one in Him, pray for one another and as Christ was, we are nurtured by the intercession of His Mother as well. The Church, under the Holy Spirit, Who was promised to the Church by Christ to be with us always, has developed such veneration, and this can be found in each and every ancient, Apostolic Church throughout the world from the time of the Apostles (even such sects as the Arians who had their own saints, a number of whom are now in the Catholic and Orthodox calendars due to their longstanding veneration).

Also, we should always be careful how we use Scripture which is ultimately a … Church book. It was written by members of Christ’s Church, for members of Christ’s Church.

We cannot fully understand it in the way the Holy Spirit (rather than by our own weak, darkened minds as a result of sin) apart from the way the Church has interpreted it - indeed wrote it. The idea that the Scriptures are the only source of Revelation that points to the fullness of the Christian Faith given us by Christ through the Holy Spirit is something that the Scriptures themselves never counsel.

Most Holy Virgin Mary and all the Saints, pray to the Lord Jesus for us!

Alex
 
I already explained that sufficiently from a biblical point of view, which you disagree with. You avoided the question, “how can God be born and be eternal?” Because the answer is so evident that you must side-step it and use a profusion of words to walk around the obvious. God has no Mother, if He did He would be a CREATURE; Jesus the God-man was born in the likeness of human flesh because this is the “tool” or “means” which He chose to reveal Himself into our little time-space box rather than in the holy of holies. You obviously are unable to comprehend the two natures and the relationship and importantance this has for man. I suggest you read and study your Bible on this topic before you continue on wit this discussion, which is really not a discussion.
It is interesting, Calvin, that the phrase “Mother of God” continues to frighten most Protestants since that very title was decided upon by Christ’s Church some 1200 years before Luther and Calvin arrived on the scene. Undoubtably one of the foremost objections to the title “Mother of God” springs from the lack of conviction about the divinity of Christ Himself. It is obvious that your thinking in this matter is very much akin to Nestorianism.

Other Protestant difficulties stem from rejection or at least a misunderstanding of the nature and role of Tradition (except when a Protestant wishes to give his own private, fallible oral tradition in matters of faith and morals as Bible truth) and the developement of dogma in the Church.

To a Fundamentalist, Scripture is the sole rule of faith. Interpretation of the same can and does vary from Fundamentalist to Fundamentalist. The reason for the varying interpretations between individual Protestant/Fundamentalists is the scourge of all of Protestantism, namely, the Protestant dogma of private judgment.

What I have just stated is pill, so to speak, probably much to large for you to swallow. But the truth is the truth and the truth must be stated.
 
Being devoted to Mary makes you devoted to Mary, not Jesus. Unless you’re making her part of the Godhead.
Moondweller,
I take acception to this. How do you know if Kathleen’s devotion to the Blessed Virgin causes her to not use that devotion to guide her to Christ? I have found Kathleen to be, by her words here, nothing less than a woman of faith in our Savior.

I am devoted to my wife, but “my hope is built on nothing less than Jesus’ blood and righteousness.”

Jon
 
Moondweller,
I take acception to this. How do you know if Kathleen’s devotion to the Blessed Virgin causes her to not use that devotion to guide her to Christ? I have found Kathleen to be, by her words here, nothing less than a woman of faith in our Savior.

I am devoted to my wife, but “my hope is built on nothing less than Jesus’ blood and righteousness.”

Jon
Indeed. And the Catholic view is that by one’s devotion to one’s spouse, one grows closer to Christ, and by one’s devotion to Christ, one grows closer to one’s spouse. :gopray:

And! It follows…

(The Catholic Church is nothing if not consistent!)

By one’s devotion to Mary one grows closer to Christ, and by one’s devotion to Christ one grows closer to Mary. 👍
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top