How do Catholics explain 1 Timothy 2:5 and Hebrews 7:26?

[steve_b]

Gnosticism, Arianism, Manicheism, Docetism, Nestorianism, etc.

All of those guys claimed their teachings were apostolic, too.

You called Mary’s assumption a heresy. Please give your source for this.

 

[Arglaze]

So in Jesus’s case “Lord” does not refer to the fact that He is God?

God Bless,
Michael

It was actually refering to the fact that he was The Messiah. That’s the whole point of the Gospels. The Messiah that the Jews rejected.

 

[Arglaze]

“As if” is your understanding, not ours. We know when we say Mary is Mother of God that Jesus is God and Mary is not. We know that God is infinite and Mary is finite. You are assuming a definition we do not adhere to and have explained to correct. You are insisting this is what we are saying and pushing your understanding on us. This is not how we believe and I resent you twisting our beliefs. If you cannot accept Mary as Mother of God because you do not have the belief as Mary Mother of God, then I pray you to ask God how you can understand this.

We cannot and will not say Mother of the Lord because JWs, Mormons, Buddhists, & Muslims can call Mary the Mother of Lord Jesus, but, they do not define Jesus as God.

So you’d rather use a man made term “Mary the Mother of God” as opposed to use what the scriptures say “Mary the Mother of the Lord”

 

[sola_scriptura]

Scripture tells us that in his youth, Jesus was obedient to his parents. At Cana, Mary tells the servants to “do whatever he tells you.” A few minutes later, there is wine in the jars.

You’re right to say Jesus humbled Himself & did have to obey His parents as a young child – however, the wedding at Cana was not an example of this. Rather, we see Jesus referring to His mother as “woman” (what does this have to do with us). Woman is a Jewish idiom typically used to refer to a subordinate female (or it can be a form of rebuke). It is here where Mary’s “temporal” role as queen mother is identified (in the tradition of the mothers of Solomon & David).

However, following this a disengagement occurs between the temporal and spiritual family of Christ (see Mark 3:31-35 and its parallel verses).

Jesus born in a sinful body? That would make Jesus “less” than Adam. This is too complex for the time I have now.

Jesus was born into flesh yes – and His flesh was no different than any flesh. Jesus reversed the work of Adam that resulted in our fall. For instance – Jesus became flesh – the same fallen flesh as is inherent in mankind. However, within and without of His flesh existed His divinity. Jesus obeyed where Adam failed – because of His divinity. Adam was molded in the image of God yet he sinned and became man (in our current fallen state). Jesus was born as man – in our current fallen state (of flesh that suffers death) and was perfectly obedient – returning back to the image of God (since He of course was God) – restoring humanity and abolishing the enmity between God and man (as a propitiation for our sins).

Adam received the sin from Eve and repeated it. Jesus received the flesh of fallen man from Mary and overcame it. This is the proper way to view the protoevangelium of Genesis 3:15.

“Authority over God?” Do WE have “authority over God” when we pray and he responds?

Uhhh … I’m not following you here?

 

[adstrinity]

So you’d rather use a man made term “Mary the Mother of God” as opposed to use what the scriptures say “Mary the Mother of the Lord”

Where is the quote, “Mary the Mother of the Lord,” in the scriptures?

 

[Arglaze]

Jesus born in a sinful body? That would make Jesus “less” than Adam. This is too complex for the time I have now.

I’ll honor your request to not discuss the sinful body part, but I’ll just say. No, the statement doesn’t make Jesus less than Adam, it just states that anyone born after Adam inherits the tendency to decay and die. Jesus did not have a body different to anyone else’s. His body was sinful flesh.

“For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh: That the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.” Romans 8:3-4

Though Jesus knew no sin.

If you reply to this, I will only answer privately, just so we can stay on topic.

 

[sola_scriptura]

I’ll honor your request to not discuss the sinful body part, but I’ll just say. No, the statement doesn’t make Jesus less than Adam, it just states that anyone born after Adam inherits the tendency to decay and die. Jesus did not have a body different to anyone else’s. His body was sinful flesh.

“For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh: That the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.” Romans 8:3-4

Though Jesus knew no sin.

If you reply to this, I will only answer privately, just so we can stay on topic.

 

[Arglaze]

Where is the quote, “Mary the Mother of the Lord,” in the scriptures?

It’s only mentioned in the Scriptures once, and actually I didn’t find it, someone just taught that to me a couple of posts ago, for which I’m grateful.

Here’s the text.
And they showed it to me on Luke 1:43 - “And whence is this to me, that the mother of my Lord should come to me?”

 

[sola_scriptura]

Here’s the usual reference as far as I can tell:

These all with one mind were continually devoting themselves to prayer, along with the women, and Mary the mother of Jesus, and with His brothers (Acts 1:18 NASB).

 

[CentralFLJames]

Sinful bodies can die, and that’s what Jesus got from Mary, a sinful body, just like everyone else.

Jesus had a sinful body just like everyone else!!!

Your credibility just went from about 30% to ZERO.
This is utter heresy and you are even outside the mainline Protestant camp here on this whopper.

The unity of the human being is inseparable from soul and body. The two are integral parts of the same human being just as the trinity is inseparable from its 3 persons. Yes, at death, the body is temporarily removed since the soul exists outside of time and space. But this is only temporary. Jesus was full God and full unsinful and unfallen man. Ergo Jesus’ body is NOT sinful. Divinity can not and will not attach itself to sin! The pascal mystery where Jesus is said “to become sin” is an expression that means Jesus took on the penalty of sin - but Jesus never became sin in his divine essence.

So, what is it with some of you “way out there” Protestants who insist that the body is evil ? We were created in God’s image for heaven’s sake. The Human Body is incomplete without the soul and the soul is incomplete without the body. The two together are what constitute a human being made in God’s image. Yes, there is original sin that corrupts the body - but that is forgiven during baptism and the reason why we still must die. But because our humanity is incomplete without the body is why the body is to be resurrected on the last day and repatriated with the soul to make the human being complete once again.

James

 

[adstrinity]

It’s only mentioned in the Scriptures once, and actually I didn’t find it, someone just taught that to me a couple of posts ago, for which I’m grateful.

Here’s the text.
And they showed it to me on Luke 1:43 - “And whence is this to me, that the mother of my Lord should come to me?”

St. Elizabeth calls her kinswoman, “mother of my Lord.” She doesn’t say, “Mother of the Lord.” She personalizes it. Why did she say this, one wonders.

 

[SenorSalsa]

Hebrew 4:15
15For we do not have a high priest who is unable to sympathize with our weaknesses, but we have one who has been tempted in every way, just as we are—yet was without sin

emphasis mine, as if the bible ever actually bolds things

 

[Arglaze]

Hebrew 4:15
15For we do not have a high priest who is unable to sympathize with our weaknesses, but we have one who has been tempted in every way, just as we are—yet was without sin

emphasis mine, as if the bible ever actually bolds things

Totally agree with that text. Jesus was in sinful flesh, but he knew no sin.

 

[sola_scriptura]

Jesus had a sinful body just like everyone else!!!

classical theology generally makes a distinction between “sinful” flesh and fallen flesh – so you do hold the majority view (among both Catholics & Protestants).

The traditional view among Protestants is that Mary was rendered sinless when she was “filled with grace” (at or before the annunciation). The RCC goes farther with their doctrine of the Immaculate Conception.

Jesus was full God and full unsinful and unfallen man. Ergo Jesus’ body is NOT sinful. Divinity can not and will not attach itself to sin! The pascal mystery where Jesus is said “to become sin” is an expression that means Jesus took on the penalty of sin - but Jesus never became sin in his divine essence.

There is a minority view out there, which views the temptation of Jesus (by Satan) and verses like Rom. 8:3-4 as indicating He was born into sinful flesh. However, a careful read of Rom. 8:3-4 tells us Jesus was born “in the image of sinful flesh” (which of course is different than being actually born into sinful flesh). Opponents of this idea would ask how could it be that Jesus was actually tempted and experienced temptation in a real sense if He was incapable of sin – which is a valid question.

So, what is it with some of you “way out there” Protestants who insist that the body is evil ? We were created in God’s image for heaven’s sake.

If you read past chapter two of Genesis you will find out the consequences of the fall. We are sinful & spiritually discerned – it’s all over scripture. We cannot please God outside of faith. Unless regenerated we are depraved.

The Human Body is incomplete without the soul and the soul is incomplete without the body. The two together are what constitute a human being made in God’s image. Yes, there is original sin that corrupts the body - but that is forgiven during baptism and the reason why we still must die. But because our humanity is incomplete without the body is why the body is to be resurrected on the last day and repatriated with the soul to make the human being complete once again.

James

The original sin is forgiven during baptism? So you’re saying guilt for Adam’s sin is imputed to all of mankind – or do we just inherit our sin nature due to the fall?

 

[CentralFLJames]

Totally agree with that text. Jesus was in sinful flesh, but he knew no sin.

You are either expressing yourself incompetently or are some variety of gnostic.

Jesus’ body was NOT sinful. Jesus took on only the universal penalty of original sin that are common to all humanity in his body. That is Jesus assented to take on in his body things like aging, fatigue, thirst, hunger, sadness etc. but NO sickness nor any physical deformity. In fact His body was profoundly beautiful and perfect in form. This penalty for sin that Jesus assented to take onto Himself was done only to join Himself to humanity and empathize with our common human condition as part of the atonement and reconciliation with God. But Jesus NEVER took on original sin in the sense of a “sin in the flesh” as you call it his “fleshy body”. This is heresy. Jesus was 100% divine and 100% human but without one iota of sin in soul or body.

You need to do some fundamental research on Christology and see all the heresies that The Catholic Church put down in this area before you start putting forth your new personal spin on old heresies that the Church pulverized centuries ago.

James

 

[sola_scriptura]

You are either expressing yourself incompetently or are some variety of gnostic.

Jesus’ body was NOT sinful. Jesus took on only the universal penalty of original sin that are common to all humanity in his body. That is Jesus assented to take on in his body things like aging, fatigue, thirst, hunger, sadness etc. but NO sickness nor any physical deformity. In fact His body was profoundly beautiful and perfect in form. This penalty for sin that Jesus assented to take onto Himself was done only to join Himself to humanity and empathize with our common human condition as part of the atonement and reconciliation with God. But Jesus NEVER took on original sin in the sense of a “sin in the flesh” as you call it his “fleshy body”. This is heresy. Jesus was 100% divine and 100% human but without one iota of sin in soul or body.

where do you get the profoundly beautiful part from? I’ve never read that one in scripture … sounds like a Greco-Roman ideal for a god rather than what we find in scripture? I’m certainly not saying Jesus was ugly – but “profoundly beautiful” is speculation at best?

 

[sola_scriptura]

Totally agree with that text. Jesus was in sinful flesh, but he knew no sin.

I agree Hebrews 4:15 is a compelling verse; however, you also have to consider:

For it was fitting for us to have such a high priest, holy, innocent, undefiled, separated from sinners and exalted above the heavens (Hebrews 7:26).

 

[CentralFLJames]

classical theology generally makes a distinction between “sinful” flesh and fallen flesh – so you do hold the majority view (among both Catholics & Protestants).

The traditional view among Protestants is that Mary was rendered sinless when she was “filled with grace” (at or before the annunciation). The RCC goes farther with their doctrine of the Immaculate Conception.

Indeed.

There is a minority view out there, which views the temptation of Jesus (by Satan) and verses like Rom. 8:3-4 as indicating He was born into sinful flesh. However, a careful read of Rom. 8:3-4 tells us Jesus was born “in the image of sinful flesh” (which of course is different than being actually born into sinful flesh). Opponents of this idea would ask how could it be that Jesus was actually tempted and experienced temptation in a real sense if He was incapable of sin – which is a valid question.

I concur that Jesus was born in the image of sinful flesh. Jesus elected in the 2nd person of His Divinity before taking on Human form to take on those things of universal consequence of original sin - aging, hunger, fatigue, pain, suffering - but no unique illnesses or body deformities. But being Divine Jesus exempted Himself from being intimately touched by original sin by taking a body and soul that were pure and untarnished by original sin.

If you read past chapter two of Genesis you will find out the consequences of the fall. We are sinful & spiritually discerned – it’s all over scripture. We cannot please God outside of faith. Unless regenerated we are depraved.

I agree with this. But beyond the consequence is the greater stain of real original sin that pervades the soul and leave an appetite of concupensence even after forgiven through baptism.

The original sin is forgiven during baptism? So you’re saying guilt for Adam’s sin is imputed to all of mankind – or do we just inherit our sin nature due to the fall?

Yes, original sin is forgiven during baptism. But I don’t want to get into the word semantics of how original sin it is transmitted or imputed. The way I conceptualize is that it is inherited since were all sub-types of Adam (and morally degrading ever more rapidly with each generation).

Baptism grafts us into a new sub-type of Jesus and Mary as new Adam and new Eve which type gives us a promise of a divine-human nature greater than Adams. For if Mary is blessed above all women that means Mary is greater than Eve. And if Jesus is the Son of Mary and God then those baptised and persevering in Christ are accepted by God as His divine Children through the new Divine Davidic lineage of Jesus. Pretty exciting stuff!

James

 

[CentralFLJames]

where do you get the profoundly beautiful part from? I’ve never read that one in scripture … sounds like a Greco-Roman ideal for a god rather than what we find in scripture? I’m certainly not saying Jesus was ugly – but “profoundly beautiful” is speculation at best?

This is in keeping with the imagery of Jesus’ noble Kingship and in his role as perfect unblemished pascal lamb.

Theologians now are unanimous in the view that Christ was noble in bearing and beautiful in form, such as a perfect man should be; for Christ was, by virtue of His incarnation, a perfect man (see Stentrup, “Christologia”, theses lx, lxi).

James

 

[HamtramckSteve]

Jesus was both God and man while here on earth. Mary was the mother of the “man” portion of Christ. She did not “mother” God since God is infinite (as is Jesus) and has no creator.

Does this make any sense to you?

You can not separate Jesus into his component parts. He is one, complete person.

RCC typology almost acts as if Mary played a role in the perfection of Jesus.

So, if something A “almost” acts “as if” something B, does something A really act that way?

In other words, if I almost act as if I crossed the road, did I really cross the road?