J
Joe_5859
Guest
:tiphat: We’re here to help.Thanks for the link. I have it bookmarked. I will take a look at Duns Scotus as well. Good stuff! :bounce:
:tiphat: We’re here to help.Thanks for the link. I have it bookmarked. I will take a look at Duns Scotus as well. Good stuff! :bounce:
=Salvatore123;7939851]Actually, even St. Thomas Aquinas could not articulate the manner in which Mary was preserved from original sin, and yet still needed Christ as a redeemer based on the fact that she had absolutely no divinity in her - she was fully human.
My understanding such as it is;Duns Scotus formulated the “best” description yet of what happened, and I believe it is accepted by most theologians today. As I mentioned above, the dogma of the Immaculate Conception must be believed under pain of heresy for denial. The manner in which it operated, however, has never been reduced to dogma.
No, the redemption of all believers is also a “WAS.”My understanding such as it is;
Mary’s Redeemption is a “WAS” and all the rest of us a “WILL BE” [maybe?]
Her Redemption did come through Christ; but in a unique and special way as required by the circumstances. It came before her conception and birth; and was made with the possibility that she COULD HAVE [freewill, intellect and mind] violated it; BUT Never did
God Bless,
Pat
I agree with WCH but with one condition. As a Catholic, I believed Christ redeemed all of mankind on the cross, which is past tense. But as a Catholic I ALSO believe that in the mass, the grace of Christ’s sacrifice is received by believers still today.My understanding such as it is;
Mary’s Redeemption is a “WAS” and all the rest of us a “WILL BE” [maybe?]
Her Redemption did come through Christ; but in a unique and special way as required by the circumstances. It came before her conception and birth; and was made with the possibility that she COULD HAVE [freewill, intellect and mind] violated it; BUT Never did
God Bless,
Pat
Most protestants are aware of that.Show these to a protestant . . . but be sure to have “heart paddles” at the ready should heart attach ensue . . .
So much for only Catholics believing Mary to be the Mother of God and immaculately conceived:
Martin Luther:
“She is rightly called not only the mother of the man, but also the Mother of God … It is certain that Mary is the Mother of the real and true God.”
“It is an article of faith that Mary is Mother of the Lord and still a Virgin.”
“It is a sweet and pious belief that the infusion of Mary’s soul was effected without original sin; so that in the very infusion of her soul she was also purified from original sin and adorned with God’s gifts, receiving a pure soul infused by God; thus from the first moment she began to live she was free from all sin”
“The veneration of Mary is inscribed in the very depths of the human heart.”
“Is Christ only to be adored? Or is the holy Mother of God rather not to be honored? This is the woman who crushed the Serpent’s head. Hear us. For your Son denies you nothing.”
“Christ, …was the only Son of Mary, and the Virgin Mary bore no children besides Him… “brothers” really means “cousins” here, for Holy Writ and the Jews always call cousins brothers.”
“He, Christ, our Savior, was the real and natural fruit of Mary’s virginal womb… .This was without the cooperation of a man, and she remained a virgin after that.”
“God did not derive his divinity from Mary; but it does not follow that it is therefore wrong to say that God was born of Mary, that God is Mary’s Son, and that Mary is God’s mother…She is the true mother of God and bearer of God…Mary suckled God, rocked God to sleep, prepared broth and soup for God, etc. For God and man are one person, one Christ, one Son, one Jesus. not two Christs. . .just as your son is not two sons…even though he has two natures, body and soul, the body from you, the soul from God alone.”
“She is full of grace, proclaimed to be entirely without sin—something exceedingly great. For God’s grace fills her with everything good and makes her devoid of all evil.”
“[She is the] highest woman and the noblest gem in Christianity after Christ. …She is nobility, wisdom, and holiness personified. We can never honor her enough. Still honor and praise must be given to her in such a way as to injure neither Christ nor the Scriptures.”
“No woman is like you. You are more than Eve or Sarah, blessed above all nobility, wisdom, and sanctity.”
“One should honor Mary as she herself wished and as she expressed it in the Magnificat. She praised God for his deeds. How then can we praise her? The true honor of Mary is the honor of God, the praise of God’s grace… .Mary is nothing for the sake of herself, but for the sake of Christ…Mary does not wish that we come to her, but through her to God.”
“It is the consolation and the superabundant goodness of God, that man is able to exult in such a treasure. Mary is his true Mother, Christ is his brother. God is his father.”
“Mary is the Mother of Jesus and the Mother of all of us even though it was Christ alone who reposed on her knees…If he is ours, we ought to be in his situation; there where he is, we ought also to be and all that he has ought to be ours, and his mother is also our mother.”
Ulrich Zwingli:
“I firmly believe that Mary, according to the words of the gospel as a pure Virgin brought forth for us the Son of God and in childbirth and after childbirth forever remained a pure, intact Virgin.”
“I esteem immensely the Mother of God, the ever chaste, immaculate Virgin Mary.”
“Christ … was born of a most undefiled Virgin.”
“The more the honor and love of Christ increases among men, so much the esteem and honor given to Mary should grow.”
John Calvin:
“To this day we cannot enjoy the blessing brought to us in Christ without thinking at the same time of that which God gave as adornment and honour to Mary, in willing her to be the mother of his only-begotten Son.”
“Helvidius has shown himself too ignorant, in saying that Mary had several sons, because mention is made in some passages of the brothers of Christ.”
You shouldn’t laugh at Mary.Previous poster said:
“Those men were all Catholics, and Mary was of no concern to them in the Reformation.”
That’s funny . . .
Yes, redemption was accomplished once and for all 2000 years ago, and it continues today, and it continues in the future.I agree with WCH but with one condition. As a Catholic, I believed Christ redeemed all of mankind on the cross, which is past tense. But as a Catholic I ALSO believe that in the mass, the grace of Christ’s sacrifice is received by believers still today.
That’s so “first century.”As I like to proffer: I am already saved (Rom. 8:24, Eph. 2:5-8), but I’m also being saved (1 Cor. 1:8, 2 Cor. 2:15, Phil. 2:12), and I have the hope that I will be saved (Rom. 5:9-10, 1 Cor. 3:12-15).
What Bible verses state that salvation deals with the “more important questions”?Those men were all Catholics, and Mary was of no concern to them in the Reformation, but the more important questions concerning salvation were.
Not sure what this means. But, yes, it’s true that the Catholic view on salvation was proclaimed in the first century, as well as the 4th and 16th and now up to the present day.That’s so “first century.”![]()
nwrt.What Bible verses state that salvation deals with the “more important questions”?
Is this a “more important question”: Is there only One God? Or is this a lesser question? How do you know? Please cite Bible verses to support your ability to know if it’s a “more important” or a question of lesser importance.
Is this a “more important question”: was Jesus born of a virgin? Or is this a lesser question? How do you know? Please cite Bible verses to support your ability to know if it’s a “more important” or a question of lesser importance.
=WCH;7943349]No, the redemption of all believers is also a “WAS.”
So then everyone get’s to heaven? No judgment based on how one freely chooses to live one’s life?In Ephesians 1:6 you’ll find the only other use of the word charitoo which is used of Mary in Lk 1:28, and of all believers in Eph 1:6 in the Greek “aorist,” or “PAST TENSE.”
SITD.nwrt.
You’re in denial.WCH:
You said (to me): "You shouldn’t laugh at Mary. By the way, will you cite all of the reforms concerning Mary that the Reformers demanded of the RC?
Anyone with an elementary school education would not interpret what I said as “laughing at Mary”, and you know that. I was laughing at your comment that the three protestant revolters were “really Catholics”. Now THAT’s funny . . .
The question wasn’t, "do you need to cite anything concerning the Reformers demands for reform concerning Marian doctrine," but a simple request that you do so in order that I might prove that part of my point.As far as “citing reforms” regarding Mary - I don’t need to cite anything.
Indeed.It is really that simple.
PR’s question is most certainly worth replying to, WCH. It is another conundrum faced by Sola Scripturists. You are here stymied by yet another false doctrine that was invented during the reformation. The premise of SS is that everything that is necessary to salvation is found in the Scirptures. You could answer PR’s question, but you would have to use extrabiblical sources to do so, which would then prove that SS is false.nwrt.
Then by all means, guanophore, reply to her post.PR’s question is most certainly worth replying to, WCH.