If you do Not believe that Blessed Mary is the Mother of God, than who do you believe Jesus Christ is?

[Cinette]

Do you have something to contribute to the discussion besides these kind of remarks?

*These comments are a reaction to some very un-scriptural statements one encounters on the thread. It is an expression of my frustration.

*

 

[rev_kevin]

*How about:

Luke 1:45And blessed is she who believed that there would be a fulfillment of what was spoken to her by the Lord." (Elizabeth) - Lord? which Lord?

to which Mary answered:

Luke 1:46 And Mary said, “My soul magnifies the Lord 47 and my spirit rejoices in God my Saviour, 48 for he has looked with favour on the lowliness of his servant, Surely, from now on all generations will call me blessed”

1. Are you SURE Elizabeth did not know which Lord??
2. And Mary when she referred to the Lord in response was she also confused??
   *

Oh good I see you can bring some discussion into this.

Now as you put it to me a few posts ago. Context, context context.

Now in 45. Do you think that they believe the unborn baby would do what he said?
Now the Lord here means God himself. Context my friend context.
46. Her soul magnifies the Lord. Just like your soul magifies the Lord (I hope). Lord here meaning God himself. Context my friend.
47. In God my savior. Here Jesus was not born yet so the only savior they had was God himself. Here once again talking about God himself not Jesus.
48. God looked on her with favior. God himself looked on her with favior.
None of these mean they knew Jesus was God.

 

[benedictus2]

Yes you are correct I don’t think she knew it was God himself.

Well I have asked this of Dokimas, if she did not know the Child was God, what do you think she meant by referring to the baby as Lord?

Yes they did but did they also know Jesus was God himself?

Are you saying that the Apostles did not know that Jesus was God? They may not have a fully defined Trinitarian doctrine but they certainly knew Jesus was God.

Yes which Lord don’t always mean God as I have pointed out earler.

Which is fine, but the question again goes back to what did Elizabeth mean then by the term Lord?

Yes the HS is the spirit of truth but Elizabeth is human and can interpert things incorrect,

Are you serious? You think that having been “filled” with the Holy Spirit the Holy Spirit is incapable of overcoming Elizabeth’s ignorance?

If that is so, then how can you accept the Bible to be inerrant if you feel that way?
I mean if the Holy Spirit is incapable of overcoming Elizabeth possible propensity for misinterpreting His guidance, then we have no hope of ever trusting the Bible. After all, the apostles who wrote the Bible could have “misinterpreted” the guidance of the Holy Spirit as well.

ya know like us non-Catholics do all the time.

Big difference Rev Kevin. The Bible that is supposed to be inerrant did not say that you non-Catholics were filled with the Holy Spirit.

 

[rev_kevin]

Heh.

Or Lord of the Dance.

http://www.northernlife.ca/images/LifestyleImages/michael_flatley.jpg

(I know you’re in Africa, Cinette, so if you don’t get the reference PM me and I’ll fill you in!)

LOL LOL LOL thats a good one. up

 

[benedictus2]

Heh.

Or Lord of the Dance.

http://www.northernlife.ca/images/LifestyleImages/michael_flatley.jpg

(I know you’re in Africa, Cinette, so if you don’t get the reference PM me and I’ll fill you in!)

Actually I like that term for God - Lord of the Dance.

Our life in the Spirit is a dance and He must always be the Lord, the one who leads.

Unfortunately, we often want to be the Lord of this dance which is why everything goes terribly wrong every now and again. Adam and Eve all over again.

 

[benedictus2]

*How about:

Luke 1:45And blessed is she who believed that there would be a fulfillment of what was spoken to her by the Lord." (Elizabeth) - Lord? which Lord?

to which Mary answered:

Luke 1:46 And Mary said, “My soul magnifies the Lord 47 and my spirit rejoices in God my Saviour, 48 for he has looked with favour on the lowliness of his servant, Surely, from now on all generations will call me blessed”

1. Are you SURE Elizabeth did not know which Lord??
2. And Mary when she referred to the Lord in response was she also confused??
   *

Hey Cinnette, Great point! Great post!:clapping::clapping::clapping:

 

[benedictus2]

Oh I see its ALL MY FAULT now that someone has nothing to say except…well nothing.
Well blame it in the Baptist. Why not. We get blamed for everything else, why not this.

We’ll we sort of do a round robin. Baptist today, but maybe will pin it on the Lutheran tomorrow, then maybe the Presbyterian the next and when we’ve gone through the list then we put all the names in a hat and pull one out when it is necessary to blame someone again.

But I personally think we should just stick to the atheists and the new-agers. They really have a lot to answer for.

 

[rev_kevin]

Well I have asked this of Dokimas, if she did not know the Child was God, what do you think she meant by referring to the baby as Lord?

Are you saying that the Apostles did not know that Jesus was God? They may not have a fully defined Trinitarian doctrine but they certainly knew Jesus was God.
Which is fine, but the question again goes back to what did Elizabeth mean then by the term Lord?
Are you serious? You think that having been “filled” with the Holy Spirit the Holy Spirit is incapable of overcoming Elizabeth’s ignorance?

If that is so, then how can you accept the Bible to be inerrant if you feel that way?
I mean if the Holy Spirit is incapable of overcoming Elizabeth possible propensity for misinterpreting His guidance, then we have no hope of ever trusting the Bible. After all, the apostles who wrote the Bible could have “misinterpreted” the guidance of the Holy Spirit as well.
Big difference Rev Kevin. The Bible that is supposed to be inerrant did not say that you non-Catholics were filled with the Holy Spirit.

Well Elizabeth was not Catholic and according to your last statement here if your not Catholic your not filled with the HS but Elizabeth a non-Catholic was filled with the HS.???

Where does it say that the disciples knew Jesus was God?

What Elizabeth meant has been discussed over and over here.

Well I’m not saying Elizabeth is ignorant. What I’m saying is she is human with human thoughts and understanding. The HS can direct you in the right direction or thought but being human we often don’t know what or why, we just do it.

The HS guidance is misinterperted all the time by many people. Elizabeth is no different.

 

[rev_kevin]

We’ll we sort of do a round robin. Baptist today, but maybe will pin it on the Lutheran tomorrow, then maybe the Presbyterian the next and when we’ve gone through the list then we put all the names in a hat and pull one out when it is necessary to blame someone again.

But I personally think we should just stick to the atheists and the new-agers. They really have a lot to answer for.

Good one Can I do some picking out of the hat. plllllleeeeeessssseee.
You last statement here is sooooo correct.

 

[benedictus2]

Oh good I see you can bring some discussion into this.

Now as you put it to me a few posts ago. Context, context context.

Now in 45. Do you think that they believe the unborn baby would do what he said?

But, you’re forgetting that the issue here is whether Lord meant God.

So what Cinette is trying to point out here is, the Lord in verse 45, who is this “Lord” ?

Now the Lord here means God himself. Context my friend context.

Yes, context, context. The Lord here meant God himself. So what made you think that 2 verses before they were not knowingly referring to God Himself?

They may not know how it can be that God who is in heaven is all of a sudden in Mary’s womb, but it does not mean that being filled with the Spirit they had no idea that it was God indeed.

There are many things we “know” inside us but when pressed to explain we are lost for words.

1. Her soul magnifies the Lord. Just like your soul magifies the Lord (I hope). Lord here meaning God himself. Context my friend.

The question is again, how do you know that the Mary knew the Lord here is God but Elizabeth meant something else when she said Lord?

1. In God my savior. Here Jesus was not born yet so the only savior they had was God himself. Here once again talking about God himself not Jesus.

Yes, but how do you know that Elizabheth did not know that God has in a mysterious way become incarnate in her womb?

If you get a chance try to get a copy of the testimony of Fr Donald Calloway. He was an atheist who knew nothing about God and yet in a span of 3 hours, God infused Him with so much knowledge about Jesus and His Church that He converted just like that. Without reading the Bible, He came to know Jesus, the Eucharist, Trinity, Motherhood of God the Apostles, etc. etc.

If God could do that to a corrupt atheist like Donald Calloway was, do you think He is incapable of revealing this to Elizabeth ?

1. God looked on her with favior. God himself looked on her with favior.
   None of these mean they knew Jesus was God.

And none of this says that they do not know that Jesus was not God either.

The question remains, what do you think Elizabeth meant by the word Lord based on all this?

 

[benedictus2]

Well Elizabeth was not Catholic and according to your last statement here if your not Catholic your not filled with the HS but Elizabeth a non-Catholic was filled with the HS.???

Actually I did not say that if you are not Catholic you are not filled with the Holy Spirit. What I said that you non-denominationals do not have it written in the inerrant Bible that you are filled with the Holy Spirit. Any claims you might make to being filled with the Holy Spirit is not backed up by the inerrant Bible.

Where does it say that the disciples knew Jesus was God?

Where do you think we got the idea that Jesus is God if not from the Apostles?

What Elizabeth meant has been discussed over and over here.

If so then tell me what she meant by the word Lord according to you. And please do not evade this in the same manner as Dokimas. He has danced around it 5 times now I think and never ever answered.

Well I’m not saying Elizabeth is ignorant. What I’m saying is she is human with human thoughts and understanding.

And what I am saying is, since she is supposed to have been filled by the Holy Spirit, is the Holy Spirit incapable of surmounting that limited human understanding? How come we can claim to know that Jesus is God and yet say that this woman who has been filled with the Holy Spirit cannot possibly know this.

The HS can direct you in the right direction or thought but being human we often don’t know what or why, we just do it.

But if you have been directed in a “thought” then you obviously “know” this “thought”.

The HS guidance is misinterperted all the time by many people. Elizabeth is no different.

But the question is how do you know that Elizabeth has misinterpreted the HS guidance. Is there anything in that verse that says she has?

 

[benedictus2]

Good one Can I do some picking out of the hat. plllllleeeeeessssseee.
You last statement here is sooooo correct.

You can most definitely pick one. But I think that will be a rigged choice because I think there will be only one name in your hat

 

[rev_kevin]

But, you’re forgetting that the issue here is whether Lord meant God.

So what Cinette is trying to point out here is, the Lord in verse 45, who is this “Lord” ?
Yes, context, context. The Lord here meant God himself. So what made you think that 2 verses before they were not knowingly referring to God Himself?

They may not know how it can be that God who is in heaven is all of a sudden in Mary’s womb, but it does not mean that being filled with the Spirit they had no idea that it was God indeed.

There are many things we “know” inside us but when pressed to explain we are lost for words.

The question is again, how do you know that the Mary knew the Lord here is God but Elizabeth meant something else when she said Lord?
Yes, but how do you know that Elizabheth did not know that God has in a mysterious way become incarnate in her womb?

If you get a chance try to get a copy of the testimony of Fr Donald Calloway. He was an atheist who knew nothing about God and yet in a span of 3 hours, God infused Him with so much knowledge about Jesus and His Church that He converted just like that. Without reading the Bible, He came to know Jesus, the Eucharist, Trinity, Motherhood of God the Apostles, etc. etc.

If God could do that to a corrupt atheist like Donald Calloway was, do you think He is incapable of revealing this to Elizabeth ?
And none of this says that they do not know that Jesus was not God either.

The question remains, what do you think Elizabeth meant by the word Lord based on all this?

Like I said in my other posts here. I believe that the word Lord spoken by Elizabeth meant God. but I don’t think Elizabeth knew that. I believe she knew he was a higher power sent by God but not God himself.

 

[rev_kevin]

You can most definitely pick one. But I think that will be a rigged choice because I think there will be only one name in your hat

You thinkest wrong. I have nothing against the Catholic faith. My choice would be… could rev kevin pick a religion other than Catholic, could this be beginning of a new trend, tune in next week, same CAF time, same CAF station.

 

[benedictus2]

Like I said in my other posts here. I believe that the word Lord spoken by Elizabeth meant God. but I don’t think Elizabeth knew that. I believe she knew he was a higher power sent by God but not God himself.

Now THAT is an answer. Thank you.

Considering that Elizabeth was a Jew, what sort of higher power do you think she had in mind?

 

[rev_kevin]

Now THAT is an answer. Thank you.

Considering that Elizabeth was a Jew, what sort of higher power do you think she had in mind?

The Son of God.

 

[benedictus2]

The Son of God.

Do you think for Elizabeth, the Son of God is also God, i.e. His nature is Divine?

 

[Cinette]

Oh good I see you can bring some discussion into this.

Now as you put it to me a few posts ago. Context, context context.

Now in 45. Do you think that they believe the unborn baby would do what he said?
Now the Lord here means God himself. Context my friend context.
46. Her soul magnifies the Lord. Just like your soul magifies the Lord (I hope). Lord here meaning God himself. Context my friend.
47. In God my savior. Here Jesus was not born yet so the only savior they had was God himself. Here once again talking about God himself not Jesus.
48. God looked on her with favior. God himself looked on her with favior.
None of these mean they knew Jesus was God.

*:whacky::whacky:There’s a hole in my bucket dear Kevin dear Kevin … there’s a hole in my bucket dear Kevin, a hole:shrug:

Elizabeth called Mary “the Mother of my Lord” and she did not know what she was saying although she was inspired by the Holy Spirit.

I’m sorry but according to the Rev Kevin the Holy Spirit is getting a little ahead of himself!

No - I have said all I have to say and I rest my case.

Cinette*

 

[rev_kevin]

*:whacky::whacky:There’s a hole in my bucket dear Kevin dear Kevin … there’s a hole in my bucket dear Kevin, a hole:shrug:

Elizabeth called Mary “the Mother of my Lord” and she did not know what she was saying although she was inspired by the Holy Spirit.

I’m sorry but according to the Rev Kevin the Holy Spirit is getting a little ahead of himself!

No - I have said all I have to say and I rest my case.

Cinette*

I’m just going to ignor your less then funny remarks and mark them down as childish.
Now getting back to the adult side of the converstation.

Where does it say she was inspired by the HS to say that?

 

[rev_kevin]

Do you think for Elizabeth, the Son of God is also God, i.e. His nature is Divine?

No I don’t think Elizabeth thought the Son of God is God. But I do think she thought the Son of God, Jesus the Messiah was Divine. Who wouldn’t after all he is the Son of God. See the words “Son of God” is saying that she believed that Jesus was God’s Son, not God himself.