I would like to discuss the theology on Mary

  • Thread starter Thread starter Hungry4God
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
But coming back to the original thread I saw someone mentioned Luke 1:28 saying Mary was “full of grace”. In that sense the person said Mary was perfect. What I found interesting is that most Bibles does not say that even the NIV which is most commonly used by Catholics doesn’t use those words this is what the NIV says -
Luke 1:28 "The angel went to her and said, “Greetings, you who are highly favored! The Lord is with you.”

But for arguments sake let’s just say Mary was full of grace. The phrase, “full of grace,” does not necessitate sinlessness by virtue of its use. Through my studies of the Bible I found this interesting that the NIV doesn’t say Mary was full of grace but says Stephen was at Acts 6:8 - 8 “Now Stephen, a man full of God’s grace and power, performed great wonders and signs among the people.”
To say that “full of grace” means that Mary was sinless would then mean that Stephen was sinless too… Would any of you agree?
 
Excessively long cut and pastes from other websites, as well as giving the impression they are YOUR words by not quoting or linking, is a violation of the Forum Rules and Banned Topics.
CONTENT RULES

  1. *]Do not paste articles from web sites into a post. If you wish to reference an article on the web, link to its web address, instead.

  1. and
    22, Lengthy excerpts
    of articles or publications that exceed standards for “reasonable use” (generally no more than three paragraphs) or might otherwise be construed to infringe copyright.
 
The evidence is clear that all the Sacred Scriptures, as progressively added to the Bible canon, were consistently recognized by God’s servants, including Jesus and his apostles, as inspired. By “inspiration” is meant, not a mere heightening of the intellect and emotions to a higher degree of accomplishment or sensitivity (as is often said of secular artists or poets), but the production of writings that are inerrant and that have the same authority as if written by God himself. For this reason the prophets who contributed to the writing of the Hebrew Scriptures ceaselessly credited their messages to God, with the pronouncement, “This is what God has said,” here’s a few scriptures to check (Isa 37:33; Jer 2:2; Na 1:12) Even Jesus and his apostles confidently quoted the Hebrew Scriptures as God’s own word spoken through the assigned writers, hence as certain of fulfillment and as the final authority in any controversy. (Mt 4:4-10; 19:3-6; Lu 24:44-48; Joh 13:18; Ac 13:33-35; 1Co 15:3, 4; 1Pe 1:16; 2:6-9) They contained “the sacred pronouncements of God.” (Ro 3:1, 2; Heb 5:12)
Showing his full faith in the inerrancy of the Sacred Writings, Jesus said that “the Scripture cannot be nullified” (Joh 10:34, 35) and that “sooner would heaven and earth pass away than for one smallest letter or one particle of a letter to pass away from the Law by any means and not all things take place.” (Mt 5:18) He told the Sadducees that they were in error regarding the resurrection because “you know neither the Scriptures nor the power of God.” (Mt 22:29-32; Mr 12:24) He was willing to submit to arrest and death itself because of knowing that this was in fulfillment of the written Word of God, the Sacred Scriptures.—Mt 26:54; Mr 14:27, 49.
These statements, of course, apply to the pre-Christian Hebrew Scriptures. That the Christian Greek Scriptures were likewise presented and accepted as inspired is also clear please read these verses (1Co 14:37; Ga 1:8, 11, 12; 1Th 2:13), also the apostle Peter in one statement including Paul’s letters with the rest of the Scriptures. (2Pe 3:15, 16) Thus the entire body of the Scriptures comprise the unified and harmonious written Word of God.—Eph 6:17

God’s own purpose in preparing the Sacred Scriptures and the inspired declaration that “the saying of God endures forever” give assurance that God has preserved the internal integrity of the Scriptures through the centuries.—1Pe 1:25. Absolute inerrancy is therefore to be attributed to the written Word of God. With good reason, then, John urged Christians to “test the inspired expressions to see whether they originate with God.” (1Jo 4:1-3; compare Re 22:6.)
We can see how harmonious the Bible is in that it does not contradict itself in anyway even though it was written over a period of 1600 years from 44 different men living in different periods of time. No other book can do that. All glory should go to God for its under his authority that his will takes place an things goes the way he wants it to. Not a church
You quoted my questions, but didn’t answer either of them. There were many gospels people beleived were sacred scripture that didn’t make it into the Bible along with a number of epistles. At some point an authority had to step in and make the determination (with guidance from the holy Spirit f course). What authority was that?

Jesus left behind no writings and commanded none of his apostles to write anything down. This means he left another mechanism for the transmission of faith, (a living teaching Church).

2Th 2:15 Paul openly talks about teachings not written down.
 
But coming back to the original thread I saw someone mentioned Luke 1:28 saying Mary was “full of grace”. In that sense the person said Mary was perfect. What I found interesting is that most Bibles does not say that even the NIV which is most commonly used by Catholics doesn’t use those words this is what the NIV says -
Luke 1:28 "The angel went to her and said, “Greetings, you who are highly favored! The Lord is with you.”

But for arguments sake let’s just say Mary was full of grace. The phrase, “full of grace,” does not necessitate sinlessness by virtue of its use. Through my studies of the Bible I found this interesting that the NIV doesn’t say Mary was full of grace but says Stephen was at Acts 6:8 - 8 “Now Stephen, a man full of God’s grace and power, performed great wonders and signs among the people.”
To say that “full of grace” means that Mary was sinless would then mean that Stephen was sinless too… Would any of you agree?
This seems to have been discussed quite well on another thread I found.
Here’s the link:

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=55634
 
WARNING

The original title of this thread is problematic, because it seems to speak of Our Lady as a “thing.”

Everyone is expected to speak about the Blessed Mother with the same reverence as the universal Church. Any use of language, terminology or inappropriate questions on the Virgin Mary WILL NOT BE TOLERATED.
 
It will always be hard for a JW and a Catholic to agree on certain matters even some protestants…
Catholics look to the Pope/magisterium and “tradition” as the final authority on what the Bible “really” teaches and view the Bible as secondary. Where as we view the Bible as final, absolute and only authority. From the first study with JWs a person is taught to examine the Bible and compare their personal beliefs. It’s very rare that you will hear a JW say any of our beliefs are a mystery, and will never find one having blind faith. Our beliefs are all explainable using the Bible.

One of the 1st century Christians who set a good example for us is Paul… Acts 17:2,3 “So according to Paul’s custom he went inside to them, and for three sabbaths he reasoned with them from the Scriptures, 3 explaining and proving by references…”
Likewise today it’s a custom for us to use scriptures to reason with people and why we always give scriptures as references.
Acts 17:11 also shows that those who heard what Paul said “carefully examining the Scriptures daily to see whether these things were so.”
That is also why we thoroughly study or carefully examine the scriptures to see if it is in the Bible and another reason why we are so well familiar with the Bible.

Personally I think you guys are wasting your time trying to prove doctrinal beliefs which is not biblical because Catholics follow tradition more than the Bible and others vice versa so on that basis it will be hard for either of you to accept or even to understand what the other is saying. In this case it would then be best to do what Matthew 10:14 says “Wherever anyone does not receive you or listen to your words, on going out of that house or that city, shake the dust off your feet.”
Sometimes it’s best to just ‘shake the dust off your feet’ and move on
 
This is why Jesus, in His wisdom, gave us not a book, but a Church. The Church, in turn, gave us not only the written Sacred Scriptures, but also a way to interpret them! We have a living Magisterium, through the authority granted to the Apostles, and carried on to this modern day by Apostolic Succession. The reason Protestants have so much trouble interpreting the Scriptures is because they have no infallible authority to guide them and they have lost the protection of the Holy Spirit giving to the Church to ensure correct teachings in faith and morals.
Amen.

Preach it.😃
I agree.

I have seen and experienced first hand the confusion when there are several possible interpretations of a single Bible verse. All the arguing with everybody thinking themselves infallible.

There may be arguing here in this forum but compared to the Evangelical forums this is nothing. The most egregious interpretation of a bible verse I have read in an Evangelical forum is a man defending why rape victims have to marry their rapist. It’s in the Bible so it must be okay.
 
It will always be hard for a JW and a Catholic to agree on certain matters even some protestants…
Catholics look to the Pope/magisterium and “tradition” as the final authority on what the Bible “really” teaches and view the Bible as secondary.
1 Cor 11:2 I commend you because you remember me in everything and maintain the traditions even as I have delivered them to you.

2 Thess 2:15 So then, brethren, stand firm and hold to the traditions which you were taught by us, either by word of mouth or by letter.
 
WARNING

The original title of this thread is problematic, because it seems to speak of Our Lady as a “thing.”

Everyone is expected to speak about the Blessed Mother with the same reverence as the universal Church. Any use of language, terminology or inappropriate questions on the Virgin Mary WILL NOT BE TOLERATED.
Thank you. I did not catch this myself and I am glad that you pointed this out.

Our Lady, the Mother of God, is the woman. She is not “just” a mother. She is not “just” an uneducated girl. She is the girl whose fiat gave all women, all mothers dignity and joy.
 
WARNING

The original title of this thread is problematic, because it seems to speak of Our Lady as a “thing.”

Everyone is expected to speak about the Blessed Mother with the same reverence as the universal Church. Any use of language, terminology or inappropriate questions on the Virgin Mary WILL NOT BE TOLERATED.
AMEN!
 
But coming back to the original thread I saw someone mentioned Luke 1:28 saying Mary was “full of grace”. In that sense the person said Mary was perfect. What I found interesting is that most Bibles does not say that even the NIV which is most commonly used by Catholics doesn’t use those words this is what the NIV says -
Luke 1:28 "The angel went to her and said, “Greetings, you who are highly favored! The Lord is with you.”

But for arguments sake let’s just say Mary was full of grace. The phrase, “full of grace,” does not necessitate sinlessness by virtue of its use. Through my studies of the Bible I found this interesting that the NIV doesn’t say Mary was full of grace but says Stephen was at Acts 6:8 - 8 “Now Stephen, a man full of God’s grace and power, performed great wonders and signs among the people.”
To say that “full of grace” means that Mary was sinless would then mean that Stephen was sinless too… Would any of you agree?
I am a little late in answering seeing that the poster has been banned but I thought it was still important to correct a misunderstanding.
Stephen was not said to be full of grace although that is a common translation. The Greek word that is used “pistis” would more accurately translated full of faith as pistis has the meaning of conviction of the truth of anything.

Mary on the other hand is full of Charis which is translated in other scriptures as grace.
 
Considering God can do all things it wouldn’t surprise me in the least if jesus came from a sinners womb and yet has no sin, I mean God can turn make the universe merely by speaking. Also I wanted to ask about those two things about peter being the first pope and the fisrt church being Catholic, what evidence is there that Peter was a pope and what evidence is there that the fist church was the Catholic church?
I am a Catholic revert, who spent over a dozen years in the protestant church and I know the concerns you have because I thought them also, not knowing the Catholic faith at the time but one thing I had to ask myself and you might want to ask yourself is,“why does it bother you that Mary was sinless?” I found with myself and other protestants that there is a kind of pride issue. Wondering how could someone be sinless and I be a sinner.

Couple of other things I learned. You will never love Mary more than Jesus. Can you imagine how much he loved her. She was his mother. We can never love her as much as Jesus. Also if we are rewarded for our works here in this life when we enter heaven, how much would Mary be rewarded for her being the mother of our Savior and as a mom myself, I can’t even imagine the pain she went through.

Also, in Old Testament times, it was always the mother who sat next to the king, not the wife. I kings 2:19.

Check out the story of our Lady of Guadalupe. This was my first experience with the Blessed Mother, when coming to the knowledge of God’s truth.

You would fare better seeking out good Catholics books that will explain Catholic teaching better than maybe some of the answers here in the forum. Not that you won’t get good answers here but they can be kind of mixed, unclear answers and not everyone who answers may give you the truth out of their own lack of knowledge.

Couple of good books: Behold Your Mother - Time Staples
The Glories of Mary - Alphonsus Liguori
The Baltimore Catechism is also excellent just to understand Catholic teaching in general.

God bless. Glad you are here seeking. 🙂
 
WARNING

The original title of this thread is problematic, because it seems to speak of Our Lady as a “thing.”

Everyone is expected to speak about the Blessed Mother with the same reverence as the universal Church. Any use of language, terminology or inappropriate questions on the Virgin Mary WILL NOT BE TOLERATED.
Amen.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top