Does anyone else have a problem with "Maryology"?

[Joero]

The Catholic Church has apostolic authority and the charism of infallibilty in her Teaching Office. I’m surprised that you can believe everything you wish to fallibly and erroneously interpret for yourself. I leave you to loll in your errors.

Pax vobiscum
Good Fella

Yes, you are right. There are people on earth, though they know deep in their hearts as they scanned to read the bible that there was a woman from whom the savior came to exist in physical form and don’t even bothered why this savior chose this woman to be His mother. Most of them love the savior but hate the woman who gave birth to a savior and hate the RCC for making dogmas favoring this woman, never knowing that the body and blood of the savior, which undeniably from the woman, were used for the atonement for their sins. What an ungrateful return !

 

[justasking4]

NotWorthy;2487666]OK, in the hopes of bringing this subject back to the fore:

In Revelation, it shows the saints offering up our prayers to God.
Mary is a Saint.

Hence, Mary is one of those that offers up our prayers to God.

Where in Revelations does it specific show anyone here on earth praying specifically to a saint in heaven? All it says that the “living creatures and elders holding bowls of incense which are the prayers of the saints”. This is not about anyone praying specifically to any created being.

In 1 Kings (and throughout the rest of Kings and some of Chronicles) we see the mother of the King of Israel is the Queen. Her role, among others, is to act as intercessor for the people.
Mary, as Queen of the New Israel, is our intercessor.

Hence, Mary offers up our prayers to God as intercessor.

Think what you are saying here. The apostles were certainly aware of this and yet never make such a claim for her in the NT. In fact if i’m not mistaken this connection was not even made for centuries.

 

[justasking4]

Joero;2488613]This is about the assumption of the Blessed Virgin Mary:
In Gen. 3:15 - it says " I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed. He shall crush thy head, and thou shalt crush his heel ".

The woman in this particular passage could never be referred to Eve because she had fallen to the serpent’s temptation. Impliedly speaking, the woman refers to the Blessed Virgin Mary who gave birth to the savior of all mankind, Jesus Christ. There is a forever enmity between the Blessed Virgin Mary and satan. Jesus Christ, though triumphant in His fight against satan, would suffer an enjury.

From the word of John’s gospel (John 1:1 and John 1:14) the Word who was God made flesh and dwelt amongst us - which refers to Jesus Christ. In Wisdom 1:4 it says " Wisdom will never dwell in anyone who is deceitful or a slave of sin" - Jesus christ is the Power and Wisdom of God (1 Corinthians 1: 24). In these passages, one would wonder why did the 2nd person of the Holy Trinity took His body and blood from the womb of the Blessed Virgin Mary when everyone has sinned (Rom. 5: 12). But what is unclean cannot produce something clean ( Sirach 34: 4). If the Blessed Virgin Mary had been tainted from the sin Adam and Eve committed, the body and blood from which Jesus Christ took to atone for the sins of mankind would have been not worthy for atonement. Ergo, the Blessed Virgin Mary, by the will of God for the redemption of all mankind, was protected from all the stain of sins.

How do you what you write here is true? The NT never makes such claims for Mary.
Where in Scripture does is say–" Ergo, the Blessed Virgin Mary, by the will of God for the redemption of all mankind, was protected from all the stain of sins."?

From all of these passages, would it then be wrong for the RCC to declare the Assumption of the Blessed Virgin Mary, body and soul, into heaven?

Yes.The reason is that there is no evidence for it in Scripture nor history. In fact its not really mentioned for several centuries. No church should ever teach as doctrine if there are no grounds for it in Scripture.

 

[justasking4]

Yes, you are right. There are people on earth, though they know deep in their hearts as they scanned to read the bible that there was a woman from whom the savior came to exist in physical form and don’t even bothered why this savior chose this woman to be His mother. Most of them love the savior but hate the woman who gave birth to a savior and hate the RCC for making dogmas favoring this woman, never knowing that the body and blood of the savior, which undeniably from the woman, were used for the atonement for their sins. What an ungrateful return !

This is not about love or hatred for Mary but about the truth. There are no facts to support the idea that Mary was assumed or without sin.

 

[Joero]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Joero
Yes, you are right. There are people on earth, though they know deep in their hearts as they scanned to read the bible that there was a woman from whom the savior came to exist in physical form and don’t even bothered why this savior chose this woman to be His mother. Most of them love the savior but hate the woman who gave birth to a savior and hate the RCC for making dogmas favoring this woman, never knowing that the body and blood of the savior, which undeniably from the woman, were used for the atonement for their sins. What an ungrateful return !

This is not about love or hatred for Mary but about the truth. There are no facts to support the idea that Mary was assumed or without sin.

My post # 158 addressed to you, implies necessary question to be answered, which I didn’t ask but now I should ! Who then, the woman in Gen. 3: 15, is referred to ?

 

[NotWorthy]

Where in Revelations does it specific show anyone here on earth praying specifically to a saint in heaven? All it says that the “living creatures and elders holding bowls of incense which are the prayers of the saints”. This is not about anyone praying specifically to any created being.

Good point! But we do see a cloud of witnesses in Hebrews, isn’t it? What are these guys witnessing? Those of us here. We are all a part of the Body of Christ, so we should be praying for one another, eh?

Think what you are saying here. The apostles were certainly aware of this and yet never make such a claim for her in the NT. In fact if i’m not mistaken this connection was not even made for centuries.

But, justy, doesn’t Paul tell us that “ALL Scripture is profitable”?

So it took centuries, eh? Yeah, probably because it took the Church some 400 years or so to figure out definatively that Jesus was True Man and True God, hence he truly is the King of Kings. Take a look at Chalcedon and all that Athanasius had to go through with the Arians. That’s truly the basis for this teaching. “Mother of God”, “Queen of Heaven”, and all that.

 

[NotWorthy]

How do you what you write here is true? The NT never makes such claims for Mary.
Where in Scripture does is say–" Ergo, the Blessed Virgin Mary, by the will of God for the redemption of all mankind, was protected from all the stain of sins."?

Yes.The reason is that there is no evidence for it in Scripture nor history. In fact its not really mentioned for several centuries. No church should ever teach as doctrine if there are no grounds for it in Scripture.

Justasking, you make this last statement, in order to refute all the Scripture that jaero has presented? I’m going to ignore your Scriptures by calling it non-scriptural?

 

[Good_Fella]

How do you what you write here is true? The NT never makes such claims for Mary.
Where in Scripture does is say–" Ergo, the Blessed Virgin Mary, by the will of God for the redemption of all mankind, was protected from all the stain of sins."?

It says so here: Genesis 3:15 (Jesus comes between Mary and Satan and his offspring, original sin.); Luke 1:28 (“Hail, full of grace.”); Luke 1:39 / 2Sam 6:2 ( Luke compares Mary with the Ark of the Old Covenant to underscore Mary’s immaculate and undefiled state of being.) Revelation 12:1. (Mary’s crown of glory in Heaven.)

Yes.The reason is that there is no evidence for it in Scripture nor history. In fact its not really mentioned for several centuries. No church should ever teach as doctrine if there are no grounds for it in Scripture.

Did you say “several centuries”? Look again!

They blessed her (Mary), saying:"O God of our fathers, bless this child, and give her an everlasting name to be named in all generations. And all the people said, “So be it, so be it. Amen.” And he brought her to the chief priests; and they blessed her, saying: “O God most high, look upon this child, and bless her with the utmost blessing, which shall be forever.”

‘Protoevangelium of John’, 6:2 (150 A.D.)

“And indeed it was a virgin, about to marry once for all after her delivery, who gave birth to Christ, in order that each title of sanctity might be fulfilled in each parentage, by means of a mother who was BOTH VIRGIN AND WIFE of one husband.”

Tertullian, ‘On Monogamy’, 8 ( 213 A.D.)

“He was the ark formed of incorruptible wood. For by this is signified that his tabernacle (Mary) was exempt from putridity and corruption.”

Hyppolytus, ‘Orations Inillud, Dominus Pacit me’ (ante 235 A.D.)

“Thou alone and thy Mother are in all things fair, there is no flaw in thee and no stain in thy Mother.”

Ephraem, ‘Nisibene Hymns’, 27:8 ( 370 A.D.)

“Mary, a Virgin not only undefiled but a Virgin whom grace has made inviolate, free of every stain of sin.”

Ambrose, Sermon 22:30 ( 388 A.D.)

“Let them search the scriptures. They will not find Mary’s death; they will not find whether she died or did not die; they will not find whether she was buried or was not buried…Scripture is absolutely silent on Mary’s earthly end because of the extraordinary nature of the prodigy, in order not to shock the minds of men…Neither do I maintain stoutly that she died.”

Epiphanius ( 377 A.D.)

“If anyone does not believe that Mary is the Mother of God, he is severed from the Godhead.”

Gregory of Nazianzus, ‘To Cledonius’, 101 ( 382 A.D.)

“Therefore, brothers, stand firm and hold fast to the traditions that you were taught, either by an oral statement or by a letter of ours.” 2 Thess 2:15]

“Obey your leaders and defer to them…” [Heb 13:17]

Pax vobiscum
Good Fella

 

[justasking4]

Good Fella;2494291]Did you say “several centuries”? Look again!

They blessed her (Mary), saying:"O God of our fathers, bless this child, and give her an everlasting name to be named in all generations. And all the people said, “So be it, so be it. Amen.” And he brought her to the chief priests; and they blessed her, saying: “O God most high, look upon this child, and bless her with the utmost blessing, which shall be forever.”

‘Protoevangelium of John’, 6:2 (150 A.D.)

“And indeed it was a virgin, about to marry once for all after her delivery, who gave birth to Christ, in order that each title of sanctity might be fulfilled in each parentage, by means of a mother who was BOTH VIRGIN AND WIFE of one husband.”

Tertullian, ‘On Monogamy’, 8 ( 213 A.D.)

Where does it say anything here about her being sinless?

“He was the ark formed of incorruptible wood. For by this is signified that his tabernacle (Mary) was exempt from putridity and corruption.”

Hyppolytus, ‘Orations Inillud, Dominus Pacit me’ (ante 235 A.D.)

“Thou alone and thy Mother are in all things fair, there is no flaw in thee and no stain in thy Mother.”

Ephraem, ‘Nisibene Hymns’, 27:8 ( 370 A.D.)

“Mary, a Virgin not only undefiled but a Virgin whom grace has made inviolate, free of every stain of sin.”

Ambrose, Sermon 22:30 ( 388 A.D.)

“Let them search the scriptures. They will not find Mary’s death; they will not find whether she died or did not die; they will not find whether she was buried or was not buried…Scripture is absolutely silent on Mary’s earthly end because of the extraordinary nature of the prodigy, in order not to shock the minds of men…Neither do I maintain stoutly that she died.”

Epiphanius ( 377 A.D.)

“If anyone does not believe that Mary is the Mother of God, he is severed from the Godhead.”

Gregory of Nazianzus, ‘To Cledonius’, 101 ( 382 A.D.)

Pax vobiscum
Good Fella

These are even later sayings. Now let me ask you. Who are these men who speak like this? Do you take what they say as apostles or as speaking as prophets?

“Therefore, brothers, stand firm and hold fast to the traditions that you were taught, either by an oral statement or by a letter of ours.” 2 Thess 2:15]

“Obey your leaders and defer to them…” [Heb 13:17]

The scriptures do teach this. However, this must be qualified by the truth. The Scriptures also speak of false teachers coming into the church itself and decieve many. We are also commanded to “examine” all things carefully. What this tells us is that we are not just to accept everything a leader says without examining what they teach in light of the truth.

 

[Joero]

How do you what you write here is true? The NT never makes such claims for Mary.
Where in Scripture does is say–" Ergo, the Blessed Virgin Mary, by the will of God for the redemption of all mankind, was protected from all the stain of sins."?

Yes.The reason is that there is no evidence for it in Scripture nor history. In fact its not really mentioned for several centuries. No church should ever teach as doctrine if there are no grounds for it in Scripture.

I am waiting for your reply of my post # 164 and while I’m waiting, would you please, as additional questions, take these and reply immediately:
Since you’ve been positively anchoring on your position that there are no grounds in the bible to support the Immaculate Conception and the Assumption of the Blessed Virgin Mary, even if the other posters and I have given you the logical presentations of passages from which these dogmas were based upon, which made me to presume that you are looking for the literal sense or the explicit sense from the bible, I am now seeking from your side the literal or the explicit sense from the bible your reasons that the Virgin Mary has sinned for which reasons we may agree or disagree your point of presentations. ( the literal or the explicit sense, please ! )

 

[justasking4]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Joero
Yes, you are right. There are people on earth, though they know deep in their hearts as they scanned to read the bible that there was a woman from whom the savior came to exist in physical form and don’t even bothered why this savior chose this woman to be His mother. Most of them love the savior but hate the woman who gave birth to a savior and hate the RCC for making dogmas favoring this woman, never knowing that the body and blood of the savior, which undeniably from the woman, were used for the atonement for their sins. What an ungrateful return !

My post # 158 addressed to you, implies necessary question to be answered, which I didn’t ask but now I should ! Who then, the woman in Gen. 3: 15, is referred to ?

Eve. Here is that verse. Look at the context–
13 Then the Lord God said to the woman, “What is this you have done?” And the woman said, “The serpent deceived me, and I ate.”

The woman here is Eve.

14 The Lord God said to the serpent,“Because you have done this,Cursed are you more than all cattle,And more than every beast of the field;On your belly you will go, and dust you will eat all the days of your life;

The Lord speaks to the serpent here.

15 And I will put enmity Between you and the woman,And between your seed and her seed;He shall bruise you on the head, and you shall bruise him on the heel.”
The Lord continues to speak and warn what is going to happen between the serpent and the woman (Eve) and her descedants.

 

[Good_Fella]

Where does it say anything here about her being sinless?

Look below. The above concerns Mary’s perpetual virginity.

These are even later sayings. Now let me ask you. Who are these men who speak like this? Do you take what they say as apostles or as speaking as prophets?

These men comprise the Apostolic Succession and teach with authority. What they write reflects the prevalent Christian beliefs of their time.

The scriptures do teach this. However, this must be qualified by the truth. The Scriptures also speak of false teachers coming into the church itself and decieve many. We are also commanded to “examine” all things carefully. What this tells us is that we are not just to accept everything a leader says without examining what they teach in light of the truth.

The truth? You don’t know the truth. You don’t even know what the Bible is.

Are you kidding, or just ignorant? The Church Fathers are not false teachers. Below is a list of false teachings and heretics:

Theodotus of Byzantium, Apollonaris, Arius, Donatists, Gnostics (today they include evangelical “Christians”), Macedonius, Marcion, Modalists, Monophysists, Monothelites, Montanists, Nestorious, Novatian, Pelagius, Priscillianism, Sabellius, Subordinationism, Valentius, Martin Bucer, John Calvin, Thomas Cranmer, Marie Dentier, Diego de Enzinas, William Farel, Nicolaus Gallus, Berthold Haller, Justus Jonas, John Knox, Martin Luther, Philip Melanchthon, Johannes Oecolampadius, Olaus Petri, Bernhard Rothmann, Joseph Smith, John Smythe, Hans Tausen, Pierre Viret, John Wesley, and Huldrych Zwingli. (There are twice as many more so-called Protestant reformers since the 16th century.)

So, which false teacher do you follow, if that heretic isn’t yourself?

Pax vobiscum
Good Fella

 

[Good_Fella]

Eve. Here is that verse. Look at the context–
13 Then the Lord God said to the woman, “What is this you have done?” And the woman said, “The serpent deceived me, and I ate.”

The woman here is Eve.

14 The Lord God said to the serpent,“Because you have done this,Cursed are you more than all cattle,And more than every beast of the field;On your belly you will go, and dust you will eat all the days of your life;

The Lord speaks to the serpent here.

15 And I will put enmity Between you and the woman,And between your seed and her seed;He shall bruise you on the head, and you shall bruise him on the heel.”
The Lord continues to speak and warn what is going to happen between the serpent and the woman (Eve) and her descedants.

Are you serious?

 

[justasking4]

Good Fella;2494809]These are even later sayings. Now let me ask you. Who are these men who speak like this? Do you take what they say as apostles or as speaking as prophets?

These men comprise the Apostolic Succession and teach with authority. What they write reflects the prevalent Christian beliefs of their time.

Are these men popes who speak for the entire church at the time?

The scriptures do teach this. However, this must be qualified by the truth. The Scriptures also speak of false teachers coming into the church itself and decieve many. We are also commanded to “examine” all things carefully. What this tells us is that we are not just to accept everything a leader says without examining what they teach in light of the truth.

The truth? You don’t know the truth.

huh? How would you define truth?

You don’t even know what the Bible is.

Nonsense. i know very well what it ism composed of etc.

Are you kidding, or just ignorant? The Church Fathers are not false teachers.

Do you claim that all the fathers said and taught everyting that was true and believed by the catholic church?

Below is a list of false teachings and heretics:

Theodotus of Byzantium, Apollonaris, Arius, Donatists, Gnostics (today they include evangelical “Christians”), Macedonius, Marcion, Modalists, Monophysists, Monothelites, Montanists, Nestorious, Novatian, Pelagius, Priscillianism, Sabellius, Subordinationism, Valentius, Martin Bucer, John Calvin, Thomas Cranmer, Marie Dentier, Diego de Enzinas, William Farel, Nicolaus Gallus, Berthold Haller, Justus Jonas, John Knox, Martin Luther, Philip Melanchthon, Johannes Oecolampadius, Olaus Petri, Bernhard Rothmann, Joseph Smith, John Smythe, Hans Tausen, Pierre Viret, John Wesley, and Huldrych Zwingli. (There are twice as many more so-called Protestant reformers since the 16th century.)

Does you church offically consider luther a heretic? If so, can you point me to the source in your church where this is stated?

So, which false teacher do you follow, if that heretic isn’t yourself?

I work very hard to understand the scriptures and listen to men that teach it in context. However, this thread is not about my being a heretic but about the claims your church makes about Mary. So far it has failed a number of tests for being true.

Pax vobiscum
Good Fella

 

[justasking4]

Are you serious?

Who else is mentioned in these passages?

 

[Joero]

Eve. Here is that verse. Look at the context–
13 Then the Lord God said to the woman, “What is this you have done?” And the woman said, “The serpent deceived me, and I ate.”

The woman here is Eve.

14 The Lord God said to the serpent,“Because you have done this,Cursed are you more than all cattle,And more than every beast of the field;On your belly you will go, and dust you will eat all the days of your life;

The Lord speaks to the serpent here.

15 And I will put enmity Between you and the woman,And between your seed and her seed;He shall bruise you on the head, and you shall bruise him on the heel.”
The Lord continues to speak and warn what is going to happen between the serpent and the woman (Eve) and her descedants.

 

[LilyM]

Eve. Here is that verse. Look at the context–
13 Then the Lord God said to the woman, “What is this you have done?” And the woman said, “The serpent deceived me, and I ate.”

The woman here is Eve.

14 The Lord God said to the serpent,“Because you have done this,Cursed are you more than all cattle,And more than every beast of the field;On your belly you will go, and dust you will eat all the days of your life;

The Lord speaks to the serpent here.

15 And I will put enmity Between you and the woman,And between your seed and her seed;He shall bruise you on the head, and you shall bruise him on the heel.”
The Lord continues to speak and warn what is going to happen between the serpent and the woman (Eve) and her descedants.

Enmity between the Serpent and Eve - when she had just listened to him and eaten the apple? Some enmity that is. Give me more enemies like that and I won’t need any friends!

 

[love4mary]

It was God coming to me through Mary that I am no longer an atheist, but a practicing Catholic today. The doctrines concerning Mary were the easiest for me to understand and believe in my heart to be true.

I Love Mary and thank her every day for leading me to her Son, Jesus.

Problems with Maryology?,.,.Not this Girl…!!!

 

[Good_Fella]

Who else is mentioned in these passages?

Genesis 3:15 prophetically speaks of Jesus and Mary as opposed to Satan and original sin. Your interpretation makes no sense at all.

Pax vobiscum
Good Fella

 

[Joero]

Genesis 3:15 prophetically speaks of Jesus and Mary as opposed to Satan and original sin. Your interpretation makes no sense at all.

Pax vobiscum
Good Fella

You are right, may be he doesn’t know that majority of non-catholic scholars of theology are submissive to the catholic’s interpretation of Gen. 3: 15, only that they donnot want to ask for the intercession of the Blessed Virgin Mary, not like us catholics. What he wants us to prove is the literal sense from the bible about the immaculate conception and the assumption, which these dogmas were based upon the logical sense from the bible, not the literal sense. Oh come on Justasking4, are you kidding, from the way you presented your arguments, seems to me you are sort of a knowlegeable person and a bright one !