How does Marian devotion save?

[Pitcharan]

Why is it strange?23 Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God with us."Notice it’s a virgin that shall be with child and it’s a virgin that brings forth a son. She’s a virgin at conception and still a virgin at the time of birth.I don’t stress it. The Scriptures do. And to confirm this we read that Joseph kept her a virgin until she gave birth to a son (Matt. 1:25).

But what’s strange is that men have made her a perpetual virgin - not the Scriptures. The Scriptures limit her virginity to the birth of the Christ Child. Then she and Joseph enter into a normal marital relationship and God blesses them with several other children - according to the Scriptures.

PR, what purpose would it serve for her to remain a virgin perpetually?

Dear brothers ans sisters in Christ who are raising so many questions about the perpetual virginity and other venerations of Mother Mary, though I am no great devotee of Mary or any other saint, I can say the following with conviction:

• Mary’s own prophecy “All nations will call me blessed” has already come true.
• For my friends from the west who may not know the exact meaning of “nation”, it could mean nationality or religion (Quam in urdu). Mary has a huge following among Hindus and Muslims in India.
• During the early days of christianity when Rome (Italy) was intoxicated with its “godess of lust - Diana”, Virgin Mary was the brand ambassador of the church who saved that land and its peoples.
• The church is led by the HS and in its wisdom promotes many devotions which have proved more effective than many evangleists.

 

[moondweller]

As with all Marian doctrines, they affirm and enlighten our understanding of Christ and his divinity.

The Scriptures themselves testify to His divinity. To brand Mary a perpetual virgin states nothing concerning the divinity of Christ. Can you think of any practical purpose for keeping her a virgin perpetually?

 

[moondweller]

Dear brothers ans sisters in Christ who are raising so many questions about the perpetual virginity and other venerations of Mother Mary, though I am no great devotee of Mary or any other saint, I can say the following with conviction:

• Mary’s own prophecy “All nations will call me blessed” has already come true.
  *** For my friends from the west who may not know the exact meaning of “nation”, it could mean nationality or religion (Quam in urdu). Mary has a huge following among Hindus and Muslims in India**.
• During the early days of christianity when Rome (Italy) was intoxicated with its “godess of lust - Diana”, Virgin Mary was the brand ambassador of the church who saved that land and its peoples.
• The church is led by the HS and in its wisdom promotes many devotions which have proved more effective than many evangleists.

Mary is called “blessed” because among all the Jewish women she was the one chosen to give birth to the long awaited Jewish Messiah. The One who would, according the the Jewish prophetic Scriptures, take upon Himself her own iniquities and those of the whole world (Is. 55; Jn. 1:29; 2 Cor. 5:21; 1 Pet. 2:24). If Mary has a huge following among the Hindus and Muslims its not for the purpose for which she was “blessed.” Those religions do not believe that the Child she bore is the Savior of the world through His sacrificial death and subsequent bodily resurrection. Those whom you say are followers of Mary are in spiritual darkness being in unbelief. How is it that Mary has and keeps a huge following of unbelievers? How different that is from Christ who requires that those who follow Him believe in Him - believe in His Person and sacrificial work on their behalf. And by believing in Him they receive eternal life (Jn. 3:14-18; 5:24; 1 Jn. 5:10-13). How is it that so many who follow Mary remain in utter darkness?

 

[Pitcharan]

. … How is it that so many who follow Mary remain in utter darkness?

That is your judgemental view and I cannot comment.

I cannot say for sure that no believer in christendom is in darkness.

The gospels tell us that even the first people to know God, viz., the Israelites, that too their most elect (scribes, priests and pharisees) who read the scriptures daily, were actually in the dark and hence unable to recognize the Messiah when He came.

These very people even saw what Jesus was doing but continued in their unbelief.

You are also seeing what Mary is doing all over the world, but refusing to believe.

 

[panevino]

The Scriptures themselves testify to His divinity. To brand Mary a perpetual virgin states nothing concerning the divinity of Christ. Can you think of any practical purpose for keeping her a virgin perpetually?

Honour to God the Father

 

[antonabe]

Wjhat is not mentioned in this thread is that if Mary was found pregnant without a Husband in that era she would have been subjected to ridicule and even stoning and that is why Joseph played a vital role and became a Husband to Mary and a foster father to Jesus I reiterate that Mary was consecrated to God and bore the son of God and remained a Virgin.

 

[PRmerger]

The Scriptures themselves testify to His divinity.

Amen!

To brand Mary a perpetual virgin states nothing concerning the divinity of Christ

Again, it testifies to the divinity of Christ and sublime calling that Mary had. She didn’t just carry a holy teacher, a good leader, a man who was close to God. Her womb was set apart for one purpose only: to bear the Light of the World.

Can you imagine the womb which bore God Incarnate, the Word Made Flesh, which contained that which the world could not contain, carrying any another mortal, sinful flesh?

Can you imagine the Ark of the Covenant, which carried the Sacred Ten Words, also carrying around ordinary pebbles found in the desert?

Can you think of any practical purpose for keeping her a virgin perpetually

Can you think of any PRACTICAL reason for Joseph not to have relations with Mary while pregnant?

Isn’t that a weird kind of marriage you’re proposing between Joseph and Mary? *He couldn’t enjoy marital relations with her while she was pregnant? * Why? For what practical purpose? So he could shout it out to the neighbors, “Hey, she’s still a virgin!”

 

[moondweller]

That is your judgemental view and I cannot comment.

I cannot say for sure that no believer in christendom is in darkness.

There’s much darkness in Christendom. But no true believer remains in darkness. No true believer personally rejects Jesus Christ, and is therefore “not judged” (Jn. 3:18), but “has passed out of death into life” (Jn. 5:24).

It is not my “judgmental view” that Muslims and Hindus, whom you say are huge followers of Mary, are unbelievers and remain in spiritual darkness. The doctrinal position of their respective religion testifies to this. Neither of those religions embrace Jesus Christ as Savior. Neither believe in Him as the One sent into this world by the Father, “not to judge the world but to save it through Him” (Jn. 3:17).

So it is a strange thing indeed that in so much spiritual darkness there’s found a huge devotion to Mary.

The gospels tell us that even the first people to know God, viz., the Israelites, that too their most elect (scribes, priests and pharisees) who read the scriptures daily, were actually in the dark and hence unable to recognize the Messiah when He came.

These very people even saw what Jesus was doing but continued in their unbelief.

Though many rejected Christ in unbelief, nevertheless, salvation comes from the Jews (Jn. 4:22). And the first believers were all Jewish. But there is not found in unbelieving Judaism a following of Mary as you say occurs in unbelieving Islam and pagan Hinduism.

You are also seeing what Mary is doing all over the world, but refusing to believe.

YOU SAY she is gathering a following to herself among those whose religions reject the truth concerning her Son. So, based on this blatant example, one must conclude concerning the question posed on this thread (“How does Marian devotion save?):” it doesn’t. Jesus said, “I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father but through Me” (Jn. 14:6). And Peter himself testified publicly concerning Christ:Acts 4:12 "And there is salvation in no one else; for there is no other name under heaven that has been given among men by which we must be saved."It is based on this Divinely revealed truth that among Muslims and Hindus devoted to Mary there is no salvation.

 

[Pitcharan]

There’s much darkness in Christendom. But no true believer remains in darkness. No true believer personally rejects Jesus Christ, and is therefore “not judged” (Jn. 3:18), but “has passed out of death into life” (Jn. 5:24).

It is not my “judgmental view” that Muslims and Hindus, whom you say are huge followers of Mary, are unbelievers and remain in spiritual darkness. The doctrinal position of their respective religion testifies to this. Neither of those religions embrace Jesus Christ as Savior. Neither believe in Him as the One sent into this world by the Father, “not to judge the world but to save it through Him” (Jn. 3:17).

So it is a strange thing indeed that in so much spiritual darkness there’s found a huge devotion to Mary.Though many rejected Christ in unbelief, nevertheless, salvation comes from the Jews (Jn. 4:22). And the first believers were all Jewish. But there is not found in unbelieving Judaism a following of Mary as you say occurs in unbelieving Islam and pagan Hinduism.YOU SAY she is gathering a following to herself among those whose religions reject the truth concerning her Son. So, based on this blatant example, one must conclude concerning the question posed on this thread (“How does Marian devotion save?):” it doesn’t. Jesus said, “I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father but through Me” (Jn. 14:6). And Peter himself testified publicly concerning Christ:Acts 4:12 "And there is salvation in no one else; for there is no other name under heaven that has been given among men by which we must be saved."It is based on this Divinely revealed truth that among Muslims and Hindus devoted to Mary there is no salvation.

Hi Moondweller,
truth cannot be distorted by using strong language, misquoting the Bible and being rabidly judgemental. Now coming to the question posed on the thread, what bigger proof do you want:

• Look at the rate at which the flock is growing in southern part of India.
• Marian devotion is the single largest contributor.
• Alluring techniques of non-catholics has only caused riots, deaths and communal unrest.

I am proud to say that my grandparents (paternal and maternal) came to know Jesus thro the Marian route and gladly embraced christianity.

 

[crazzeto]

Hi Moondweller,
truth cannot be distorted by using strong language, misquoting the Bible and being rabidly judgemental. Now coming to the question posed on the thread, what bigger proof do you want:

• Look at the rate at which the flock is growing in southern part of India.
• Marian devotion is the single largest contributor.
• Alluring techniques of non-catholics has only caused riots, deaths and communal unrest.

I am proud to say that my grandparents (paternal and maternal) came to know Jesus thro the Marian route and gladly embraced christianity.

This is what Mary does, she leads you directly to God by pointing the way to Jesus… Simple enough, it’s too bad many Protestant groups are stuck in an either / or mentality with regard to Mary and the Communion of Saints.

 

[Tomster]

Well, the Catholic stance on this thread is that there must be “official” interpreters of the Scriptures. So I’m asking for the “official” commentary by these “official” interpreters. You have no other source by which to judge whether or not my interpretation of your list of verses is correct. Unless you’re claiming to actually be one of those “official” (infallible) interpreters. Are you? If not, then provide for me the “official” “Book of Interpretation.” And I must assume this "official" book is quite ancient, else your church would have been in Scriptural darkness for many years. And if there is no such book, then what does that say?

I will provide you with the words of St. Paul, regarding the Eucharist. Please refer to 1 Corinthians 11:23:29.

The doctrine of the real presence in the Eucharist is greatly corrobororated by St. Paul’s text. In conjunction with the texts from St. John’s Gospel, chapter six, we may add this: St. Paul declares that “whosoever shall eat the bread or drink the cup unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and the blood of the Lord.” Now, these words can mean nothing else than that any indignity offered to the Eucharist is the same as though offered to the body of Christ which men saw upon earth. A crime against the Eucharist is against the life and Person of Jesus Christ. This is not to say that an unworthy communion is equivalent to the crime of Judas, but that both are in the same species of crime: they are both a crime against the life and Person of Jesus Christ. The very purpose of St. Paul’s argument is to convince the Corinthians that their unworthy treatment is not exercised upon a mere symbol. For this purpose he relies not on his own authority: he goes back to the words of Jesus which he received not from men, but from the Lord. By the power of these he proves to his hearers that the Eucharist is the real body and blood of Christ; and then he draws the conclusion that their sin is not against a symbol, but against the very body and blood of Christ.

If a man maltreated an image or statue of a king, would any sane man charge him with a crime against the life of the king? And therefore, if the Eucharist were a mere symbol, St. Paul’s argument would be absurd.

Sorry, Moondweller, your fallible intepretations regarding the Eucharist are false.

 

[Tomster]

And you’ll be the judge as to the “correctness.” **LOL **

Hey, here’s a good idea, write for me your interpretation of each verse in the Book of Hebrews. And then after that, the Book of Romans. And then after that…Are you delusional? You really think I’m going to spend time on a long list like that? LOL Especially in light of your comment below: And you think I would take your list seriously? Honestly? :whacky:

An idea? You have an idea?

I have an idea. Interpret the list, RIGHT NOW!

A person, such as yourself, should have no problem interpreting that list infallibly since you have previously proclaimed yourself to be illumined by the Holy Spirit.

The only delusion I have witnessed on this thread is your own self-delusion thinking you can interpret all of the Scriptures infallibly and expecting us to believe any of it.

 

[Tomster]

Are they forthcoming or haven’t you found a suitable extra-biblical reference yet?

Moondweller,

Still searching are you?

 

[Tomster]

So those who stayed ate His flesh and drank His blood?

Absolutely!

 

[moondweller]

Amen!

Again, it testifies to the divinity of Christ and sublime calling that Mary had. She didn’t just carry a holy teacher, a good leader, a man who was close to God. Her womb was set apart for one purpose only: to bear the Light of the World.

Can you imagine the womb which bore God Incarnate, the Word Made Flesh, which contained that which the world could not contain, carrying any another mortal, sinful flesh?

Can you imagine the Ark of the Covenant, which carried the Sacred Ten Words, also carrying around ordinary pebbles found in the desert?

This is the core of your reasoning. It’s human reasoning not Divine revelation. Divine revelation does not say Mary’s womb was “set apart,” i.e., eternally sanctified (hagiazō ). Mary was chosen to bear the Christ Child, but nothing is said of her womb being forever “set apart.” It’s not the womb that was holy, but the Person she bore.

Isn’t that a weird kind of marriage you’re proposing between Joseph and Mary?

It’s not weird at all that Joseph should refrain from sexual relations with Mary during her pregnancy with Jesus. As pointed out to you earlier, the prophecy foretold that she was to be a virgin at conception and a virgin at the time of birth. I am not proposing, nor do the Scriptures, that Joseph was prohibited from *ever *having a normal marriage relationship with his wife. Funny how you think Joseph refraining from “knowing” Mary while pregnant with the Christ Child is grossly weird, but his being prohibited from ever having a normal marital relationship with his wife is not. Strange reasoning, indeed. But I understand that your reasoning must conform to your Mariology, even though Scripture reveals differently.

 

[Tomster]

This is the core of your reasoning. It’s human reasoning not Divine revelation. Divine revelation does not say Mary’s womb was “set apart,” i.e., eternally sanctified (hagiazō ). Mary was chosen to bear the Christ Child, but nothing is said of her womb being forever “set apart.” It’s not the womb that was holy, but the Person she bore.It’s not weird at all that Joseph should refrain from sexual relations with Mary during her pregnancy with Jesus. As pointed out to you earlier, the prophecy foretold that she was to be a virgin at conception and a virgin at the time of birth. I am not proposing, nor do the Scriptures, that Joseph was prohibited from *ever *having a normal marriage relationship with his wife. Funny how you think Joseph refraining from “knowing” Mary while pregnant with the Christ Child is grossly weird, but his being prohibited from ever having a normal marital relationship with his wife is not. Strange reasoning, indeed. But I understand that your reasoning must conform to your Mariology, even though Scripture reveals differently.

Now that I have refuted your interpretations once again, what or to whom does your reasoning conform?

 

[moondweller]

I am proud to say that my grandparents (paternal and maternal) came to know Jesus thro the Marian route and gladly embraced christianity.

Glad to hear it. But have they embraced “Christianity” or “Christ?” Embracing “Christianity” is to embrace the religion. But personally believing in the Person of Christ and the redemptive, sacrificial work He accomplished, once for all, on their behalf embraces salvation.

This is what Mary does, she leads you directly to God by pointing the way to Jesus…

I have not read of any huge conversion to belief in Christ for salvation among those Muslims and Hindus whom you say are followers of Mary. When did the gospel message that Christ commissioned to His Apostles change from belief in Him to belief in a perpetual, exalted virgin? I have yet to read in the Scriptures where it’s taught that the way to belief in the Son (for salvation) is through devotion to the mother.

 

[Tomster]

This is the core of your reasoning. It’s human reasoning not Divine revelation. Divine revelation does not say Mary’s womb was “set apart,” i.e., eternally sanctified (hagiazō ). Mary was chosen to bear the Christ Child, but nothing is said of her womb being forever “set apart.” It’s not the womb that was holy, but the Person she bore.It’s not weird at all that Joseph should refrain from sexual relations with Mary during her pregnancy with Jesus. As pointed out to you earlier, the prophecy foretold that she was to be a virgin at conception and a virgin at the time of birth. I am not proposing, nor do the Scriptures, that Joseph was prohibited from *ever *having a normal marriage relationship with his wife. Funny how you think Joseph refraining from “knowing” Mary while pregnant with the Christ Child is grossly weird, but his being prohibited from ever having a normal marital relationship with his wife is not. Strange reasoning, indeed. But I understand that your reasoning must conform to your Mariology, even though Scripture reveals differently.

In regards to the Eucharist, you object to the impossibility of the literal sense which forces you to accept the figurative sense. We Catholics recognize that to understand these words in the literal sense necessitates a great miracle, but we deny that the literal sense is impossible. In fact we recognize a great affinity between this miracle and the Incarnation. Ah, the Incarnation, a theological topic which you are totally in the dark over as I have proven to you elsewhere.

“The Word was made flesh,” “This is my body,” - they are kindred mysteries. The acceptance of one invites to the acceptance of the other. In dealing with them, man can not believe without the influence of heaven. Reason alone never yet led a man safely through the land of mystery, through which every pilgrim must pass. Reason can work with faith, but reason cannot suceed alone.

 

[Tomster]

More nonsense stemming from prejudice? Agreed!. But, added to that, there is a mix of ignorance and much fear. Post #552 is a classic example.

 

[PRmerger]

Funny how you think Joseph refraining from “knowing” Mary while pregnant with the Christ Child is grossly weird, but his being prohibited from ever having a normal marital relationship with his wife is not.

That’s YOUR paradigm. If it was weird for Joseph not to have relations with Mary for their entire marriage–as you claim–then why wouldn’t it be weird to abstain while she’s pregnant.

Does your pastor teach that it’s sinful to have relations during pregnancy because that’s what the Bible states–Joseph had no relations with Mary during her pregnancy?