Baptists and Mary

[MariaG]

They both still have equal authority over the children.

So do you not think Jesus, who although one person had two natures, would honor His mother, recognizing her authority over him while never giving up His divine authority over her? And that Mary is equally aware of this dichotomy and would not abuse this unique relationship?

 

[ahimsaman72]

MariaG:

So do you not think Jesus, who although one person had two natures, would honor His mother, recognizing her authority over him while never giving up His divine authority over her? And that Mary is equally aware of this dichotomy and would not abuse this unique relationship?

I don’t see the coorelation of Jesus’s divine authority and any authority from Mary. She was His mother. She had maternal authority over her son. Joseph was His father and had paternal authority over Him. For all intents and purposes, Joseph was His father on earth. I see no reason to take their relationship any further than what I have described here.

If Mary had authority you would see the Bible say, “I baptize you in the name of the Father, the Mother Mary, the Son and the Holy Spirit.” You and I both realize that isn’t true. She has no authority over Her Son, the Saviour. Once grown, the Lord honored her as the Mosaic law commands. He also honored His father. He was perfect, wasn’t he? Therefore, he lived under their roof, abided by their rules until manhood. He then respected and loved them as He would be expected as an adult child of his earthly parents.

 

[Thomas2]

Um, I’m not sure what Baptists are supposed to believe about Mary cause I managed to get kicked out of a Baptist church before I could read and write! Sunday school that is…to much arguing with the Sunday school teacher. Um, is that a bad habit?

Peace and all good,

Thomas2

 

[mayra_hart]

Mary’s Queenship

by Fr. William G. Most

The beginning of the concept that Mary is a Queen is found in the annunciation narrative. For the angel tells her that her Son will be King over the house of Jacob forever. So she, His Mother, would be a Queen.“He, the Son of God, reflects on His heavenly Mother the glory, the majesty and the dominion of His kingship, for, having been associated to the King of Martyrs in the unspeakable work of human Redemption as Mother and cooperator, she remains forever associated to Him, with a practically unlimited power, in the distribution of the graces which flow from the Redemption. Jesus is King throughout all eternity by nature and by right of conquest: through Him, with Him, and subordinate to Him, Mary is Queen by grace, by divine relationship, by right of conquest, and by singular choice [of the Father]. And her kingdom is as vast as that of her Son and God, since nothing is excluded from her dominion.”

We notice that there are two titles for the kingship of Christ: divine nature, and “right of conquest”, i.e., the Redemption. She is Queen “through Him, with Him, and subordinate to Him.” The qualifications are obvious, and need no explanation. Her Queenship is basically a sharing in the royalty of her Son. We do not think of two powers, one infinite, the other finite. No, she and her Son are inseparable, and operate as a unit.

 

[mayra_hart]

Of the four titles Pius XII gave for her Queenship, we notice that two are closely parallel to those of Jesus:

(1) He is king by nature, as God; she is Queen by “divine relationship” that is, by being the Mother of God. In fact her relation to her Son is greater than that of ordinary Mothers of Kings. For she is the Mother of Him who is King by very nature, from all eternity, and the relationship is exclusive, for He had no human father. Still further, the ordinary queen-mother gives birth to a child who later will become king. The son of Mary is, as we said, eternally king, by His very nature. (2) He is king by right of conquest. She too is Queen by right of conquest. We already saw that this title for Him means that He redeemed us from the captivity of satan. She shared in the struggle and victory. Since the Pope expressed her dependence on Him in a threefold way–something we would have known anyway–then it is clear that he did not have in mind any other restriction which he did not express. So, maintaining this subordination, “by right of conquest” means the same for her as it does for Him.

The other two titles: (3) She is Queen by grace. She is full of grace, the highest in the category of grace besides her Son. (4) She is Queen by singular choice of the Father. A mere human can become King or Queen by choice of the people. How much greater a title is the choice of the Father Himself!

Pius XII added that “nothing is excluded from her dominion.” As Mediatrix of all graces, who shared in earning all graces, she is, as Benedict XV said, “Suppliant omnipotence”: she, united with her Son, can obtain by her intercession anything that the all-powerful God can do by His own inherent power. i hope this will be of help for our baptist brothers

 

[hlgomez]

Pio, so to answer my question - you are saying that Jesus was obedient to her in every way - that He obeyed her and honored her “perfectly” and that we are to also obey her and honor her “perfectly”. Am I understanding you correctly? I’m not being arrogant. I’m simply asking the question. Am I exhibiting humility in my posts or am I acting arrogantly?

What does Scripture say? Does it say in the commandments “Honor you father and your mother”? Did Jesus did what was commanded to “honor your father and mother” in a “perfect way” than we do when He was here on earth? Also, what is the opposite of obedience? If Jesus didn’t obey her mother, what is it? If Jesus was told by Mama Mary to carry the firewood for cooking, will He not obey His mother? If Jesus was told to study the Scriptures everyday by her Mother, will He not do it?

Further, when I say “perfect way” it means he did it 100% right at all times. Not like us who sometimes disobeys and dishonors our mother and father.

So my answer to your question is “YES” Jesus did it perfectly.

Pio

 

[dessy]

Hi talking about Mary being sinless is God’s doing,

*God had a purpose for all that and is also to fulfill the scripture.

*Lets get something clear if Mary is with sin that means christ the son too will Inherit the same sin.

Mary has being in the Mind of God ever b4 creation,take a look at the issue of Adam & Eve God made a statement when put a course on the serpent " I will put enemity between u and the Woman, between ur offspring and Her offspring…"

*Even in ISAIAH where God fortold the coming of Christ through Mary He said “the Gate I will pass through no man will ever pass through it” Isaiah 56. Mary is the Gate, that is to let us know that God have being Preserving Mary for that purpose.

*Mary was Betroded to Joseph her Spouse but then God allowed Her to Concieve by the power of the Holy Spirit Cos God does not want Christ to have any spot of sin.

To be sincere they are all DIVINE Work By GOD.

LORD HAVE MERCY ON US
Through Christ Our Lord

 

[mayra_hart]

Martin Luther’s Devotion to Mary

Luther indeed was quite devoted to Our Lady, and retained most of the traditional Marian doctrines which were held then and now by the Catholic Church. This is often not well-documented in Protestant biographies of Luther and histories of the 16th century, yet it is undeniably true. It seems to be a natural human tendency for latter-day followers to project back onto the founder of a movement their own prevailing viewpoints. Since Lutheranism today does not possess a very robust Mariology, it is usually assumed that Luther himself had similar opinions. We shall see, upon consulting the primary sources (i.e., Luther’s own writings), that the historical facts are very different. We shall consider, in turn, Luther’s position on the various aspects of Marian doctrine.

God says . . . : “Mary’s Son is My only Son.” Thus Mary is the Mother of God.

(Ibid.)

God did not derive his divinity from Mary; but it does not follow that it is therefore wrong to say that God was born of Mary, that God is Mary’s Son, and that Mary is God’s mother . . . She is the true mother of God and bearer of God . . . Mary suckled God, rocked God to sleep, prepared broth and soup for God, etc. For God and man are one person, one Christ, one Son, one Jesus, not two Christs . . . just as your son is not two sons . . . even though he has two natures, body and soul, the body from you, the soul from God alone.

 

[mayra_hart]

Probably the most astonishing Marian belief of Luther is his acceptance of Mary’s Immaculate Conception, which wasn’t even definitively proclaimed as dogma by the Catholic Church until 1854. Concerning this question there is some dispute, over the technical aspects of medieval theories of conception and the soul, and whether or not Luther later changed his mind. Even some eminent Lutheran scholars, however, such as Arthur Carl Piepkorn (1907-73) of Concordia Seminary in St. Louis, maintain his unswerving acceptance of the doctrine. Luther’s words follow:

It is a sweet and pious belief that the infusion of Mary’s soul was effected without original sin; so that in the very infusion of her soul she was also purified from original sin and adorned with God’s gifts, receiving a pure soul infused by God; thus from the first moment she began to live she was free from all sin.

 

[spurgeon]

kramerbaby:

Why do Baptists believe that mary was not sinless?

Most people who asume the Blessed Virgin to be a former sinner erroniously use the “all" in the verse which goes something like this: All have sined and have come short of the glory of God.” This is simply a mistken logic and you wont get ery far by arguing it out with a long logical argument.
Simply give an illustration such as.If someone says “we are all here” does this mean that the entire world is here? of course not.Why then does this all necessarily include the Blessed Virgin? And in any case at the time of writing this statement King Herod had slain many infants with the idea of including Jesus among them.
Were these infants included among those who had sinned?Are we begining to establish that not every last individual is among “all”?

 

[faithfulservant]

ahimsaman72:

I asserted that I was a Christian. You said “only partially”. Then you said, “You are a Christian”. Either I am a Christian and a disciple of Jesus Christ or I’m a pagan, Buddhist, Hindu or Muslim. Which is it?

i thought the rest of my post made that clear…you are a Christian that has not experienced the fullness of the faith that Jesus intended for all His followers…until you return to the Church that He authorized and instituted on earth, you can never realize that fullness…IOW, you have some serious “gaps” in your Christianity

 

[ahimsaman72]

faithfulservant:

i thought the rest of my post made that clear…you are a Christian that has not experienced the fullness of the faith that Jesus intended for all His followers…until you return to the Church that He authorized and instituted on earth, you can never realize that fullness…IOW, you have some serious “gaps” in your Christianity

Reminds me of some pentecostals who claim that if you don’t speak in tongues, that you somehow don’t have the fullness that God intends all believers to have.

I don’t understand these “gaps” in my Christianity. I’m sure you can elaborate.

 

[mayra_hart]

Full Of Grace

The teachings regarding Mary, the Mother of our Lord, are the most disturbing to Fundamentalist “Bible Christians.” Kimberly Hahn, a convert from Presbyterianism to Catholicism, said, before she became Catholic, that there were only three more things that kept her from converting: Mary, Mary, and Mary. 
As do most Protestants, GATR believes that those Marian doctrines are extrinsic to the Bible and rob the Lord of his glory and honor. Quite the opposite is true, however. The first three teachings on Mary we will examine are her being the Mother of God, the fact that she was conceived without sin and thus remained sinless throughout her entire life, and her

glorious Assumption.

The Mother of God

Protestants do not like to refer to Mary as the Mother of God. They believe it elevates Mary too much. They say Mary is only the Mother of Jesus. GATR notes:

The Bible…never calls Mary the Mother of God for a very simple reason:
God has no mother. As someone has rightly said, just as Christ’s human nature had
no father, so His divine nature had no mother.1]

Now, however nice this may sound, it is nonsense. By calling Mary the Mother of God, we make it clear that Jesus is fully divine, and so this actually elevates Jesus rather than Mary. The fact alone that God has chosen a woman to bear his only son, who is divine, already elevates Mary to a status that no human being could transgress by venerating her. After all, Jesus drew his humanity from Mary. Christ was a real son of Mary; he was her child!
Jesus Christ is God. Women who bear people are called mothers. If the person a woman bears is God, then, consequently, the woman is the Mother of God. It’s that simple. Now, GATR claims that Jesus’ divine nature had no mother. This is true, of course, but the Church does not teach otherwise. We say that Mary is the Mother of God; mothers are not mothers of natures, but of persons, and Jesus was a divine person who took on a human nature. Karl Keating explains it this way:

Was your mother the mother of your human nature? No, she was the mother of you.
It is a person who is conceived and born, not a nature [only]. What person was born of Mary?
A divine Person only–not a human person–but a divine Person who took on human nature.
The one born of Mary “shall be called the son of God” (Lk 1:35), and “God sent his son,
made of a woman” (Gal 4:4).2]

So if we do believe that Jesus is God, and that while on earth, he had a human and a divine nature in one person–namely, a divine person–, which fundamentalists do believe, then we must conclude that Mary is the Mother of God. There is no way out. Even Martin Luther used and defended the title “Mother of God.”3]

 

[faithfulservant]

ahimsaman72:

Reminds me of some pentecostals who claim that if you don’t speak in tongues, that you somehow don’t have the fullness that God intends all believers to have.

I don’t understand these “gaps” in my Christianity. I’m sure you can elaborate.

not knowing which “ecclesial community” you belong to puts me at a disadvantage…but how about this…Jesus instituted 7 sacraments for His Church… how many does your particular form of Christianity recognize ?

 

[ahimsaman72]

faithfulservant:

not knowing which “ecclesial community” you belong to puts me at a disadvantage…but how about this…Jesus instituted 7 sacraments for His Church… how many does your particular form of Christianity recognize ?

It really doesn’t matter which “ecclesial community” I belong to, as far as I am concerned. My belief is the true church of God is made up of all believers from all denominations. I am a Southern Baptist by birth and continue to attend a baptist church where I live. We don’t have “sacraments”. We recognize two ordinances, being baptism and Lord’s supper.

This really is going outside the scope of the thread topic - which I suggest we return to before the mods close it.

God bless…

 

[hlgomez]

It really doesn’t matter which “ecclesial community” I belong to, as far as I am concerned. My belief is the true church of God is made up of all believers from all denominations.

ahimsaman72,

I understand your belief, ahim, that the “true Church” of God is made up of all believers of Christ. That “truth,” which is Christ Himself, shall be found in this supposedly “true Church.” When this true Church possesses all truth, and nothing but the truth, then it is, indeed, the true Church. There is only one Church that possesses the truth, for there is only one Truth–Jesus Christ. It cannot posses in herself “half truths” and “pseudo truths” for She (the Church) is the Body of Christ and Christ belongs to God. She cannot preach doctrines that belongs to the devil, nor interprets doctrines opposing the truth, nor divide believers who long for truth with their whole hearts.

Pio

 

[ahimsaman72]

hlgomez:

ahimsaman72,

I understand your belief, ahim, that the “true Church” of God is made up of all believers of Christ. That “truth,” which is Christ Himself, shall be found in this supposedly “true Church.” When this true Church possesses all truth, and nothing but the truth, then it is, indeed, the true Church. There is only one Church that possesses the truth, for there is only one Truth–Jesus Christ. It cannot posses in herself “half truths” and “pseudo truths” for She (the Church) is the Body of Christ and Christ belongs to God. She cannot preach doctrines that belongs to the devil, nor interprets doctrines opposing the truth, nor divide believers who long for truth with their whole hearts.

Pio

Many claim to be the true church. Jehovah’s Witnesses, Mormons, Church of Christ, the Catholic Church, etc. They can’t all be true. So, what are we to surmise from this? Truth exists. Truth is absolute. Truth is not perceptible to all, though. I don’t believe there’s any way that we, in this body, can decipher the 100% absolute truth. If 100% truth was perceptible to all, then all would have the same belief.

On the contrary, churches do preach doctrines that belong to the devil and lead many astray. Question is, who are those churches? I would say those churches that fall outside of the Pauline gospel spelled out in I Cor. 15. I have searched and searched and prayed and prayed for the true church since I was a child. I’ve always been interested in my Christian faith and learning. Joseph Smith was the same. He saw the divisions in the churches and did not know who to believe. He prayed to God and he claims God told him not to join any, but that He would use Joseph to restore the true church. I sympathize with Joseph in that respect.

I am not a “Mormon” but I can appreciate their philosophy and beliefs. I can identify with Joseph Smith in many ways.

As I said to another poster, this kind of discussion is really going away from the topic and I advise us all to stick to the original thread topic.

Peace…

 

[hlgomez]

ahimsaman72,

Will the church embrace abortion?

Will the church embrace embryonic stem cell research?

Will the church embrace euthanasia?

Will the church embrace same sex union or “marriage”?

Will the church embrace cloning?

Will the church embrace relativism?

There are many more, but those I have written above are litmus tests for the truth in our modern times that the church will embrace.

Pio

 

[ahimsaman72]

hlgomez:

ahimsaman72,

Will the church embrace abortion?

Will the church embrace embryonic stem cell research?

Will the church embrace euthanasia?

Will the church embrace same sex union or “marriage”?

Will the church embrace cloning?

Will the church embrace relativism?

There are many more, but those I have written above are litmus tests for the truth in our modern times that the church will embrace.

Pio

The early church had no such litmus test.

 

[mercygate]

ahimsaman72:

The early church had no such litmus test.

Nor did it need one for *those *issues. The Church is a living authority which must meet the world as the world changes and challenges.