Do you have questions about Catholic beliefs & Practices

[patmiron]

I found this very informative on the Greek highly favored it is a little more complicated than I thought . What is the Greek of Luke 1:28’s “full of grace”?
I don’t want to quote and take it out of context.

1st I shared earlier that both the Latin Vulgate which predated the KJB by a 1,000 years or so AND the Catholic Douay Bible which predates it by about 50 years stae with clarity:
“Full of Grace”

Originally Posted by benhur View Post
Hi pat,

Well yes.You do not need forgiveness for something you did not do. Understand. Of course there is grace both in forgiveness in sin, and grace in being kept from sin. In the end , all in Christ are presented blameless, as if we had never sinned, like Catholic Mary.

Again, the degree of sin is mute. You can be perfect like Mary, or like the thief on the cross. Both will be presented blameless: the OT saints thru faith in the future Calvary and ever present Savior, and the NT saints thru the past Calvary and ever present Lord.

… edited for space

Thank you for stating the ‘fitting’ part though.Not everybody seems to know or understand that when dialoguing with others.

Blessings

A further discussion of the highlighted portion of your post.

Sin can never be a mute point. WHY?

Because in all of creations BILLIONS of stars, planets and galaxies, only ONE; only earth can be proven to be able to support the life forms found on it.

On Planet earth with its hundreds of millions of “living things”; again Only One; only man can freely choose to love or to hate; only man is “rational” and only man is created in the very image of our God; **[Gen 1:26-27] who John 4: 23-24 **tells us is a 'SPIRIT"
Question: HOW then can mortal man emulate a 'SPIRIT God?"

In order for man to do the above requires the following God-like attributes

A mind [not meaning our brain]

A Intellect [not meaning one’s “I. Q.”]

& a freewill

EACH of these attributes Like God’s [but not to the same degree] are immortal and spiritual realities. If you doubt this try to quantify your FREEWILL; which only the very foolish deny that it even exist. What is its size, weight, color and shape? Can’t be done; YET they exist in w every man.

Why then do you suppose God gives to every man these POWERFUL spiritual gits; which like God are immortal and can’t dies or be killed? Gifts BTW which are permanently attached to man’s eternal-SOUL.

It is the very reason that God gives His Angels the same gifts, so that they too can freely choose to know; to love [or hate [as Satan choose to do] God.

Man’s not only ability BUT propensity to sin is THEE GOD-TEST! It is man;s state to continuallhy HAVE to choose between right & wrong: the Good & the Evil

Ecclesiasticus 15:18
"Before man is life and death, good and evil, that which he shall choose shall be given him":

The Protestant theory of imputed righteousness is at best ungodly in that it denies GOD"Sovereign- RIGHT to TEST and re-test right up until death; the man he placed on earth TO PROVE and reprove hos faithfulness to God.

FURTHER it also deprives humanity of their inherit RIGHT to make use of the VERY Godly gifts granted to them for this very purpose.

It is critically important to recognize [REQUIRES God’s grace and the GIFTS of the HS to be able to actually do so: in other words to actually HAVE True FAITH [Eph 4:1-7] that Jesus choose to establish His One God; with just One set of Faith beliefs and now onw chosen people that He Jesus calls “MY CHURCH” [singular] Mt 16:18

It is an impossibility that GOD [All Good things perfected] COULD, WOULD OR DID wait for the reformation [1400+ YEARS later] to make known HIS one set of faith beliefs. Unless YOU can disprove that even GOD can have only ONE set of faith beliefs on LONG defined issue; you cannot MY friend; Justify your position

God Bless you friend!

PJM

 

[patmiron]

Hi a,

Here is pretty good rebuttal though a bit tougher in tone than yours. But it does give a pretty good comprehensive view of Mary doctrine from our point of view.

reformedapologeticsministries.com/2014/03/the-bible-does-not-teach-marys.html

Blessings

THANKS BUT since-:when do TWO WRONGS make One right?

God Bless PJM

 

[patmiron]

This is a reply to posts 370 & 375:
375 first: Adrift thank you for a precise answer (with explanation). How can His departing be His coming?
Now 370: Patrick thanks for your reply. Just one problem,I am not sure but it sounds like you are agreeing with me but putting the vision 1000 years further into the future.

No:blush:

Just TRYING to answer your other post. It took place before the Death and Resurrection of Christ:thumbsup:

God Bless PJM aka patmiron

 

[benhur]

Benhur quote - "Well yes.You do not need forgiveness for something you did not do. Understand. Of course there is grace both in forgiveness in sin, and grace in being kept from sin. In the end , all in Christ are presented blameless, as if we had never sinned, like Catholic Mary.

**Again, the degree of sin is mute. **You can be perfect like Mary, or like the thief on the cross. Both will be presented blameless: the OT saints thru faith in the future Calvary and ever present Savior, and the NT saints thru the past Calvary and ever present Lord.
Blessings" end of Ben Hur quote

A further discussion of the highlighted portion of your post.

Sin can never be a mute point. WHY?

Because in all of creations BILLIONS of stars, planets and galaxies, only ONE; only earth can be proven to be able to support the life forms found on it.

On Planet earth with its hundreds of millions of “living things”; again Only One; only man can freely choose to love or to hate; only man is “rational” and only man is created in the very image of our God; **[Gen 1:26-27] who John 4: 23-24 **tells us is a 'SPIRIT"
Question: HOW then can mortal man emulate a 'SPIRIT God?"

In order for man to do the above requires the following God-like attributes

A mind [not meaning our brain]

A Intellect [not meaning one’s “I. Q.”]

& a freewill

EACH of these attributes Like God’s [but not to the same degree] are immortal and spiritual realities. If you doubt this try to quantify your FREEWILL; which only the very foolish deny that it even exist. What is its size, weight, color and shape? Can’t be done; YET they exist in w every man.

Why then do you suppose God gives to every man these POWERFUL spiritual gits; which like God are immortal and can’t dies or be killed? Gifts BTW which are permanently attached to man’s eternal-SOUL.

It is the very reason that God gives His Angels the same gifts, so that they too can freely choose to know; to love [or hate [as Satan choose to do] God.

Man’s not only ability BUT propensity to sin is THEE GOD-TEST! It is man;s state to continuallhy HAVE to choose between right & wrong: the Good & the Evil

Ecclesiasticus 15:18
"Before man is life and death, good and evil, that which he shall choose shall be given him":

The Protestant theory of imputed righteousness is at best ungodly in that it denies GOD"Sovereign- RIGHT to TEST and re-test right up until death; the man he placed on earth TO PROVE and reprove hos faithfulness to God.

FURTHER it also deprives humanity of their inherit RIGHT to make use of the VERY Godly gifts granted to them for this very purpose.

It is critically important to recognize [REQUIRES God’s grace and the GIFTS of the HS to be able to actually do so: in other words to actually HAVE True FAITH [Eph 4:1-7] that Jesus choose to establish His One God; with just One set of Faith beliefs and now onw chosen people that He Jesus calls “MY CHURCH” [singular] Mt 16:18

It is an impossibility that GOD [All Good things perfected] COULD, WOULD OR DID wait for the reformation [1400+ YEARS later] to make known HIS one set of faith beliefs. Unless YOU can disprove that even GOD can have only ONE set of faith beliefs on LONG defined issue; you cannot MY friend; Justify your position

God Bless you friend!

PJM

Hi Pat,

Look, this seems like a lot to read and missing the point. Tell me, will a saint be presented ‘spotless’ before the Lord ? We know Mary is/was, but is she more spotless ? We all sin, some more than others. Does that change how spotless we will be before the Lord ? All I said is that the degree, the degree of sin is mute in the regard of being presented spotless. I do not think I am at odds with CC teaching on this. Our rewards will be different, but please tell me if I am wrong in asserting that we will be all "spotless’’ and that equally, on that great day. I would really like to hear how you think the thief will not be presented as blameless as Mary though both are in heaven now. Are Mary’s garments a Pure White and the thief’s a Linen Off White ? Please tell me where are sins are remembered in heaven ? If they are not remembered, how will we tell who sinned more, or less, or not at all ? Does it matter, up there ?

Blessings

 

[benhur]

THANKS BUT since-:when do TWO WRONGS make One right?

God Bless PJM

It is never wrong to seek to understand where the "contender’ is coming from (by reading a contrary opinion/site), enabling a better pacification, if possible. That as per Didache, " do not schism but pacify those that contend’’.

Blessings

 

[benhur]

1st I shared earlier that both the Latin Vulgate which predated the KJB by a 1,000 years or so AND the Catholic Douay Bible which predates it by about 50 years stae with clarity:
“Full of Grace”

Originally Posted by benhur View Post
Hi pat,

Well yes.You do not need forgiveness for something you did not do. Understand. Of course there is grace both in forgiveness in sin, and grace in being kept from sin. In the end , all in Christ are presented blameless, as if we had never sinned, like Catholic Mary.

Again, the degree of sin is mute. You can be perfect like Mary, or like the thief on the cross. Both will be presented blameless: the OT saints thru faith in the future Calvary and ever present Savior, and the NT saints thru the past Calvary and ever present Lord.

… edited for space

Thank you for stating the ‘fitting’ part though.Not everybody seems to know or understand that when dialoguing with others.

Blessings

A further discussion of the highlighted portion of your post.

Sin can never be a mute point. WHY?

Because in all of creations BILLIONS of stars, planets and galaxies, only ONE; only earth can be proven to be able to support the life forms found on it.

On Planet earth with its hundreds of millions of “living things”; again Only One; only man can freely choose to love or to hate; only man is “rational” and only man is created in the very image of our God; **[Gen 1:26-27] who John 4: 23-24 **tells us is a 'SPIRIT"
Question: HOW then can mortal man emulate a 'SPIRIT God?"

In order for man to do the above requires the following God-like attributes

A mind [not meaning our brain]

A Intellect [not meaning one’s “I. Q.”]

& a freewill

EACH of these attributes Like God’s [but not to the same degree] are immortal and spiritual realities. If you doubt this try to quantify your FREEWILL; which only the very foolish deny that it even exist. What is its size, weight, color and shape? Can’t be done; YET they exist in w every man.

Why then do you suppose God gives to every man these POWERFUL spiritual gits; which like God are immortal and can’t dies or be killed? Gifts BTW which are permanently attached to man’s eternal-SOUL.

It is the very reason that God gives His Angels the same gifts, so that they too can freely choose to know; to love [or hate [as Satan choose to do] God.

Man’s not only ability BUT propensity to sin is THEE GOD-TEST! It is man;s state to continuallhy HAVE to choose between right & wrong: the Good & the Evil

Ecclesiasticus 15:18
"Before man is life and death, good and evil, that which he shall choose shall be given him":

The Protestant theory of imputed righteousness is at best ungodly in that it denies GOD"Sovereign- RIGHT to TEST and re-test right up until death; the man he placed on earth TO PROVE and reprove hos faithfulness to God.

FURTHER it also deprives humanity of their inherit RIGHT to make use of the VERY Godly gifts granted to them for this very purpose.

It is critically important to recognize [REQUIRES God’s grace and the GIFTS of the HS to be able to actually do so: in other words to actually HAVE True FAITH [Eph 4:1-7] that Jesus choose to establish His One God; with just One set of Faith beliefs and now onw chosen people that He Jesus calls “MY CHURCH” [singular] Mt 16:18

It is an impossibility that GOD [All Good things perfected] COULD, WOULD OR DID wait for the reformation [1400+ YEARS later] to make known HIS one set of faith beliefs. Unless YOU can disprove that even GOD can have only ONE set of faith beliefs on LONG defined issue; you cannot MY friend; Justify your position

God Bless you friend!

PJM

Hi P,
Not sure what reformers said about imputed righteousness. Not sure if they denied "testing’’, or a working out of faith, or use of gifts, or a life in Christ for “that which we were apprehended for” etc… Did not know they(reformers) negate the battle of the flesh vs the spirit within us, that Paul’s speaks about . So, not having read about the various aspects or teachings about how we are righteous, not sure that you are adding *your *version/understanding of their version(s) about it.

Blessings

 

[eddie_too]

i believe the most reliable source for whether or not Mary was without sin is the teachings of those who knew and lived with her (not in her home but as chosen followers of her Son).

since they (the apostles (who knew her personally) and their successors) declared her without sin, i will go with them and decline speculating about how or why they are wrong.

 

[blanchardman]

No:blush:

Just TRYING to answer your other post. It took place before the Death and Resurrection of Christ:thumbsup:

God Bless PJM aka patmiron

I know the “transfiguration” took place before the death and resurrection. The question is what was this that the three saw.
Were Moses and Elijah seen in their “glorified bodies”?
What exactly is the fulfillment of Matt 16:28?

 

[adrift]

Hi a,

Here is pretty good rebuttal though a bit tougher in tone than yours. But it does give a pretty good comprehensive view of Mary doctrine from our point of view.

reformedapologeticsministries.com/2014/03/the-bible-does-not-teach-marys.html

Blessings

Yes much insight

I have not digested all of it yet. It takes time to look up all that is referenced. Of course I disagree with their interpretation. It is weak. Saying Mary sinned because she questioned God, is a feeble attempt to show Mary as sinful imho. It fails because it states that what they call evident isn’t. They quote to scriptures one warning against false prophets and the other from Romans that chastises those who would put themselves on the same level of God. What it fails to acknowledge is that there are place in scripture that questions God that is not presented as sin Habakkuk 1:2, Psalm 10:1-18 ,Psalm 74:1-23. However it fails on another point because it doesn’t recognize Mary is acting as a parent nor does it consider the rest of what it says 51 And he went down with them, and came to Nazareth; and he was subject unto them: and his mother kept all these sayings in her heart. It also calls into question if Mary knew that Jesus was God. There is much wrong in this rebuttal.

 

[adrift]

I know the “transfiguration” took place before the death and resurrection. The question is what was this that the three saw.
Were Moses and Elijah seen in their “glorified bodies”?
What exactly is the fulfillment of Matt 16:28?

Didn’t you see my answer?
The Ascension of Jesus into heaven

 

[adrift]

It is never wrong to seek to understand where the "contender’ is coming from (by reading a contrary opinion/site), enabling a better pacification, if possible. That as per Didache, " do not schism but pacify those that contend’’.

Blessings

 

[adrift]

1st I shared earlier that both the Latin Vulgate which predated the KJB by a 1,000 years or so AND the Catholic Douay Bible which predates it by about 50 years stae with clarity:
“Full of Grace”

I have no idea why you quoted my post. I hope you read the link. It would be helpful if you read the thread before you post anymore:shrug:

 

[blanchardman]

Didn’t you see my answer?
The Ascension of Jesus into heaven

The Ascension is Jesus going not coming.

 

[benhur]

i believe the most reliable source for whether or not Mary was without sin is the teachings of those who knew and lived with her (not in her home but as chosen followers of her Son).

since they (the apostles (who knew her personally) and their successors) declared her without sin, i will go with them and decline speculating about how or why they are wrong.

Hi eddie.,

Sounds nice, and it is what is espoused by pat also. It is a church thing so to speak. I mean I believe my stance is also apostolic. Where I lose you is “their successors”, not all of them, but many of them. After all “their successors’’ really goes up to and past 1854.
So to recap, I also follow the apostles, and some early and mid father successors, who were ''Catholic”.

Blessings

 

[benhur]

Yes much insight

I have not digested all of it yet. It takes time to look up all that is referenced. Of course I disagree with their interpretation. It is weak. Saying Mary sinned because she questioned God, is a feeble attempt to show Mary as sinful imho. It fails because it states that what they call evident isn’t. They quote to scriptures one warning against false prophets and the other from Romans that chastises those who would put themselves on the same level of God. What it fails to acknowledge is that there are place in scripture that questions God that is not presented as sin Habakkuk 1:2, Psalm 10:1-18 ,Psalm 74:1-23. However it fails on another point because it doesn’t recognize Mary is acting as a parent nor does it consider the rest of what it says 51 And he went down with them, and came to Nazareth; and he was subject unto them: and his mother kept all these sayings in her heart. It also calls into question if Mary knew that Jesus was God. There is much wrong in this rebuttal.

Ok. Thanks for reading. As far as Mary acting only as parent and maybe justifying some possible ‘negatives’, not sure if that is cop out. I mean I hear many apologists says Mary was ever virgin, partly from an oath to serve God undividedly, including raising Jesus for His mission. Otherwise it sounds like that she was like any other parent, which is odd if every other parent was ‘fallen’, with sin. I mean if one is full of grace I would think it is more than just being sinless, it should cover full of grace understanding as a parent and all.That is, why would she allow her ‘parenting’ call get in the way of ministry, for she wanted Him to come back home to ‘rest’? I mean Peter also had normal protection impulses (not sinful) also, and said Christ would not go to the cross. We all know who influenced Peter for that impulse. So while some things may not be sin, it may show one not to be “full of grace”. Graced yes, but not “full” .

If we determine that she is full of grace, then we must determine what that means as in no original sin and no actual sin, and anything else or just that?. But generally all good things (knowledge, wisdom, patience, discernment) are by grace also. So I think the article shows a few instances where Mary did not sin but was also not full of grace in the matter. Of course one could say that is not what 'full of grace" means, just as others say it does not mean no original or committed sins either.

To recap, some imply ‘full of grace’, and then go on further to imply what that means (no sin only). So I would say 'full of grace ’ is not explicit , and that even more less explicit that it is without sin, any kind.

Blessings

 

[benhur]

Hi eddie.,

Sounds nice, and it is what is espoused by pat also. It is a church thing so to speak. I mean I believe my stance is also apostolic. Where I lose you is “their successors”, not all of them, but many of them. After all “their successors’’ really goes up to and past 1854.
So to recap, I also follow the apostles, and some early and mid father successors, who were ''Catholic”, on this issue.

Blessings

 

[adrift]

The Ascension is Jesus going not coming.

You are using that word differently than I would. A king comes into his kingdom means he inherits it. It is this sense that I believe that come into means. Jesus Ascended that is He came into His kingdom.
I cannot see the Transfiguration as Jesus coming into anything:shrug:

 

[adrift]

Ok. Thanks for reading. As far as Mary acting only as parent and maybe justifying some possible ‘negatives’, not sure if that is cop out. I mean I hear many apologists says Mary was ever virgin, partly from an oath to serve God undividedly, including raising Jesus for His mission. Otherwise it sounds like that she was like any other parent, which is odd if every other parent was ‘fallen’, with sin. I mean if one is full of grace I would think it is more than just being sinless, it should cover full of grace understanding as a parent and all.That is, why would she allow her ‘parenting’ call get in the way of ministry, for she wanted Him to come back home to ‘rest’? I mean Peter also had normal protection impulses (not sinful) also, and said Christ would not go to the cross. We all know who influenced Peter for that impulse. So while some things may not be sin, it may show one not to be “full of grace”. Graced yes, but not “full” .

If we determine that she is full of grace, then we must determine what that means as in no original sin and no actual sin, and anything else or just that?. But generally all good things (knowledge, wisdom, patience, discernment) are by grace also. So I think the article shows a few instances where Mary did not sin but was also not full of grace in the matter. Of course one could say that is not what 'full of grace" means, just as others say it does not mean no original or committed sins either.

To recap, some imply ‘full of grace’, and then go on further to imply what that means (no sin only). So I would say 'full of grace ’ is not explicit , and that even more less explicit that it is without sin, any kind.

Blessings

There is little scripture as you well know that we can see Mary as being sinless. As you well know, I don’t rely on scripture alone. I do believe that there is some evidence but not enough for some. Mary and Joseph were no ordinary parents. What must it have like to rear Jesus? We have little information other than the temple. I am not understanding your comment -That is, why would she allow her ‘parenting’ call get in the way of ministry, for she wanted Him to come back home to ‘rest’- I am lost. I make the assumption you are referring to Mary wanting Jesus to rest:shrug: but I don’t understand where that comes from
Thank you for your posting the link. It was indeed rough and unnecessary to make some comments and conclusions. I am still working on it.

 

[benhur]

There is little scripture as you well know that we can see Mary as being sinless. As you well know, I don’t rely on scripture alone. I do believe that there is some evidence but not enough for some. Mary and Joseph were no ordinary parents. What must it have like to rear Jesus? We have little information other than the temple. I am not understanding your comment -That is, why would she allow her ‘parenting’ call get in the way of ministry, for she wanted Him to come back home to ‘rest’- I am lost. I make the assumption you are referring to Mary wanting Jesus to rest:shrug: but I don’t understand where that comes from
Thank you for your posting the link. It was indeed rough and unnecessary to make some comments and conclusions. I am still working on it.

Hi a’

Thanks again for reply.

As far as scripture, I find it (all the references to Mary) fits the view I espouse. I see where the CC uses the full of grace scripture as implicit and the rest by Tradition.

So, I find Mary pondering things as implication that she is like us. When she left Jesus at the temple, again like us. Not sin, but not full of grace either. The big one is when His ‘brethren’ went to get Him and return Him home, for they thought He was ‘beside himself’. I think this took place at Capernum,early on. Mary was with them, the ‘brethren’. The disciples told Jesus "your mother is outside’’ and Jesus asked , "who is my mother?’. The point is it is implied Mary was with the brethren who wanted to bring Him home, when he had just begun His ministry, and was getting ‘mobbed’. Again, maybe not a sin, but certainly not “full of grace”.

Hope that clarifies. Again thanks for reading the ‘tough’ article.

Blessings

 

[adrift]

Hi a’

Thanks again for reply.

As far as scripture, I find it (all the references to Mary) fits the view I espouse. I see where the CC uses the full of grace scripture as implicit and the rest by Tradition.

So, I find Mary pondering things as implication that she is like us. When she left Jesus at the temple, again like us. Not sin, but not full of grace either. The big one is when His ‘brethren’ went to get Him and return Him home, for they thought He was ‘beside himself’. I think this took place at Capernum,early on. Mary was with them, the ‘brethren’. The disciples told Jesus "your mother is outside’’ and Jesus asked , "who is my mother?’. The point is it is implied Mary was with the brethren who wanted to bring Him home, when he had just begun His ministry, and was getting ‘mobbed’. Again, maybe not a sin, but certainly not “full of grace”.

Hope that clarifies. Again thanks for reading the ‘tough’ article.

Blessings

Jesus being lost in the temple is something I contemplate a lot. It has been speculated that this was the precursor to a bar mitzvah. This is my description as the bar mitzvah we know today did not exist at that time. However, the idea of the boy becoming a man did. It has been explained to me that men and women traveled separately with the children going with the mother. Going to Jerusalem Mary would have cared for Jesus going back the care would have been turned over to Joseph. Mary would have thought Joseph had Jesus since He was 12 Joseph might have thought that Mary Had Jesus as she would have going. This is why Jesus could remain in Jerusalem without them missing Him. I don’t connect this with grace at all.
Now the big one. I have a program where I can take a verse and see how it is rendered in different translations Mark 3:10 is translated by some as relative, family, or friends. The Greek is belonging to according to this program. Mary is family and she belongs to Jesus but I don’t think that this verse indicates her at all. It is only later verse 31 that she is mentioned accompanied with His brothers. It seems that scripture is talking about two different groups. Even if both groups were one and they were wanting to seize Jesus because they thought he was mad, it does not indicate what Mary believed. Women had little consequence and it doesn’t seem to me that a woman would be in the position to seize anyone. It doesn’t say why they wanted to speak to Jesus only that they were seeking Him but for what purpose it is not stated. When Jesus said that His mother and brothers are those who do His will would that not include Mary? Do you think she did not do His will? It seems to me the answer is yes. It seems to me that it was done full of grace.