Marian Dogmas and the Bible

[PatienceAndLove]

The Virgin Mary is our hope and aspiration, she is the image of a redeemed humanity, free from sin, assumed in bodily glory and united to Christ.

Sorry, she isn’t mine. Jesus Christ is my hope and aspiration. Jesus was the only one free from sin. St. Thomas Aquinas stated just that. As far as the Assumption goes, there is not Biblical support for it and I just can’t buy something that expensive without an owner’s manual. God’s Love and Peace be with you.

How can you not hope and aspire to be like Mary? She was the first Christian. She placed her entire life into the hands of God, and in turn, into her Son. She trusted that God would protect her.
That is what is meant by Mary is our hope and our aspiration.

 

[Jordan_Francis]

How can you not hope and aspire to be like Mary? She was the first Christian. She placed her entire life into the hands of God, and in turn, into her Son. She trusted that God would protect her.
That is what is meant by Mary is our hope and our aspiration.

Exactly! When we say the Virgin Mary is our hope, this is not in the stead of Christ, she is our hope precisely because of Christ! Her life, at every stage, reveals Christ’s work and glory to the glory of God the Father and for the sake of all sinners.

 

[byoby]

Some people say that catholics ‘worship’ her, but we would NEVER EVER do that!We only pray to her and ask her to pray for us

 

[Jordan_Francis]

To say that Mary was sinless is a contradiction to Romans 3:9-10

9What shall we conclude then? Are we any better**? Not at all! We have already made the charge that Jews and Gentiles alike are all under sin.**

It is not a contradiction when looked at properly. This verse appears in a context to a community and is aimed at erasing pointless divions between people. When Paul says such things as “all are alike under sin” and “all have sinned and have fallen short of the glory of God” he is speaking of Original Sin (another Catholic term). The point of this verse is to show that humanity is characterized by a fallen nature and that, on their own, no person is capable of approaching God’s glory. Likewise, none of us makes a claim about every person on earth in terms of their individuality, as if we have met them all. Instead, we make claims about human nature in general such as “it is in human nature to love” or it is “in human nature to want sex”.

Mary did not glorify herself, rather she was graced by God. The doctrine of Mary’s sinlessness only linguistically contradicts this verse, not in any essentialy way. **It does not contradict the fact that this verse intends to convey- mainly the essential helplessness of the human condition. **

For example, Psalm 14:3 says:

All have turned aside,
they have together become corrupt;
there is no one who does good,
not even one.

Are we now to think that literally everyone is corrupt and good never happens? No, Christians infer a kind of hyperbole here. This is taken to be a statement about the human condition, that is clearly how Paul interprets it and expands on it as “all have sinned”. **Mary’s sinlessness does not violate what the text is saying about the human condition. **

Also, I find it interesting that many Protestant’s use this verse “that all have fallen short of God’s glory” in conjunction with other verses to show the need for Christian belief and the neccesity of hell. **They say that sin is incompatible with God’s presence **and therefore even the smallest sin condemns one to hell.

If sin is so incompatible with God’s presence, as is argued about the nature of God, then how does God dwell physically in a sinful woman?*

 

[De_Maria]

LOL; you will wait a long time from some people on that one. Not all of us dote on the cliches of apologetics; but when it comes to Marian dogmas being Tradition, (according to Catholics); it has already been stated that the Catholic dogmas on Mary “are not found explicitly in the Bible.” This was my original statement that brought about this topic.

Is Sola Scriptura explicitly in the Bible? Where?

This discussion cannot take place without discussing the relationship of what Catholics call “Tradition and Magisterium” to Scripture."

Tradition and Scripture are the Word of God. Magisterium is the interpreter of the Word of God and therefore the servant of the Word of God because the interpretation of the Church ensures the message of the Word of God is not adulterated or polluted.

Most Catholics are going by falsehoods about what Sola Scriptura actually means;

You mean that other Protestants have defined Sola Scriptura falsely? Because that is where we get the definition.

Now, its only fair that if you think we are using false definitions of Sola Scriptura that you should define it for us. Please do. And while you are at it, point to the verse in Scripture from where you get the definition.

therefore, I would like to hear from Catholics, just how the Bible differs in it’s statements on Mary, as opposed to their tradition, and magisterium.

Uh, you must be mixed up. The Church teaches that Scripture and Tradition DO NOT differ in any doctrine. They are both the Word of God. The Word of God does not contradict Itself.

. Since Marian Doctrines are not found “explicitly” in The Holy Bible; then there are differences which should be looked at.

I don’t know where you’re getting that info. To not be found “explicitly” in Scripture is not to differ from Scripture. It means that it is “implied” in Scripture.

Lets get some definitions straight. To say that a doctrine is not explicitly defined in Scripture, means that you won’t find the official definition word for word in Scripture. Therefore, you won’t find that Scripture says, “The Holy Trinity means One God in three Divine Persons.”

To be explicit in Scripture means that you will find the words “in the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit” explicitly in Scripture. These words imply the doctrine of the Holy Trinity.

Therefore, the words, Mother of my Lord and Mother of Jesus are found explicitly in Scripture. And they imply the doctrine of Mary the Mother of God because Jesus is God and Mary is His mother.

In addition, you must realize that the New Testament is the product of the living Tradition of the Church. The Bible was put together by the Church. Not the other way around. And if the New Testament sprang from the Chruch’s Tradition therefore it is impossible for Tradition and Scripture to differ.

CONT’D

 

[byoby]

How can you not hope and aspire to be like Mary? She was the first Christian. She placed her entire life into the hands of God, and in turn, into her Son. She trusted that God would protect her.
That is what is meant by Mary is our hope and our aspiration.

I think Scripture teaches that Abraham was the first Christian. Abrahams FAITH was credited to him as Rightousness.

If you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to the promise.
Galations 3:29

 

[De_Maria]

CONT’D

For eg., “Sola Scriptura” would not claim to be the only source of information about Mary; but, it does make the claim to final authority;

!. Where? Please provide the verse.
2. That would make it a misnomer, wouldn’t it. Since Sola means “only” or “sole” and not “final”. And if you say it is the Sole final authority, well that would still be a misnomer because again, “sola” only means “sole” it doesn’t mean “sole final”.

for it is The Holy Bible upon which all other sources of divine Revelation must be in harmony with.

All doctrine must be in harmony with the Word of God in Tradition and Scripture. Doctrine is a product of interpretation. And Sola Scriptura is a doctrine based on false interpretation of Scripture.

It is easy to prove that the Scriptures aren’t the final authority because Scripture Itself says that the Church is the final authority (Matt 18:17).

This is really what Sola Scriptura says.

Really? Where? Please provide the verse.

If that is not true;

It isn’t.

then how can Catholics make the claim that “tradition” and “magisterium” are “Biblical?”

The same way that we know that the New Testament conforms to Tradition and the teaching of the Magisterium.

Can you name one “Marian doctrine” that is not found "explicitly in the Bible

Personally, I think they’re all explicitly in the Bible. But I don’t need them to be explicitly in the Bible in order to believe them. Do you understand?

Why do you need them to be explicitly in the Bible in order to believe them? You believe Sola Scriptura and Sola Scriptura is not even implied in the Bible. In fact, Sola Scriptura contradicts the Bible.

, and that would officially be called “Tradition” by the Catholic Church?

Even Scripture is called Tradition by the Catholic Church. Our entire Faith, Christianity is Tradition. We pass it down from generation to generation. Or did you make up your faith in Jesus Christ yourself?

The reason I am asking Catholics to please do this is because I don’t want to get caught in some cliche’ apologetics mumbo-jumbo; I actually do want to know what is truth.

Then you are in the right place. The Catholic Church teaches the Truth.

Since Catholics here have stated that not all Marian doctrines are found explicitly in the Bible; I am asking them to tell me which ones, which two or three of them would fit this description? That way; it won’t come from me; and I will feel better able to discuss it here.

Well, since I believe they’re all explicit in the Bible, I guess I’m the wrong Catholic to ask.

Sincerely,

De Maria.

 

[BrewMax]

How can you not hope and aspire to be like Mary? She was the first Christian. She placed her entire life into the hands of God, and in turn, into her Son. She trusted that God would protect her.
That is what is meant by Mary is our hope and our aspiration.

Our focus should be upon Jesus Christ, not Mary. Mary can’t do anything for you that you cannot do for yourself. If you believe that she can then you are elevating her to a supernatural state which is Biblically wrong. Jesus is The Way, not Mary and not anyone else.

 

[BrewMax]

are you that afraid you might be wrong?? i’ve read the book a few times and learned much. i also was forced to investigate for myself and i still have problems with many of the Marian Dogmas. i’m not suggesting having such an open mind that your brain falls out, but this is a man who was once in your camp and changed. don’t you think it’s worth it to find out why, and if you are still convinced you are right you will have a lot more ammo when debating this issue.

please…

 

[De_Maria]

Our focus should be upon Jesus Christ

It is. We believe in the imitation of Jesus.

, not Mary.

Since Jesus selected His Mother from all eternity to love, honor, glorify and obey, in accordance with His Father’s Commandments, I would say that Jesus, Himself would disagree with you.

Mary can’t do anything for you that you cannot do for yourself.

Only if you discount the teaching of Scripture which says that God listens to those He especially loves. For instance Job, God wouldn’t listen to Job’s friends, He listened to Job. And Moses, God wouldn’t listen to Miriam or Aaron as much as He would to Moses. Or Abraham, God listened to Abraham when Abraham asked mercy on Sodom and Gomorrah.

So, unless you’ve given birth to the Messiah lately, I think Mother Mary has one up on you as far as her influence on the Almighty.

If you believe that she can then you are elevating her to a supernatural state which is Biblically wrong.

Prove it. Show me from Scripture that we should disregard Jesus’ mother.

Jesus is The Way, not Mary and not anyone else.

Yeah, but Jesus selected Mary to be His Mother and appointed her to be our Mother and guide and protector as well.

John 19
27 After that, he saith to the disciple: Behold thy mother. And from that hour, the disciple took her to his own.

Apocalypse 12
17 And the dragon was angry against the woman: and went to make war with the rest of her seed, who keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ.

Sincerely,

De Maria

 

[bengal_fan]

please…

i’m just trying to share with you how educated people learn. if you want to continue to just read what you already believe, go for it. you won’t grow though, as a Christian or a human being. you will continue to hear from the scriptures what your tickling ear teachers are saying (unable to discern for yourself) and be quite shocked if and when you stand face to face with God (imo).

 

[PatienceAndLove]

Our focus should be upon Jesus Christ, not Mary. Mary can’t do anything for you that you cannot do for yourself. If you believe that she can then you are elevating her to a supernatural state which is Biblically wrong. Jesus is The Way, not Mary and not anyone else.

Our focus is on Our Lord. And I realize that Mary cannot save me, and the Church does not tell us to elevate her as such.

However, in modeling myself after her- in all her humbleness, her Love for Our Lord and God, her obedience, her trust, etc… I can hope and aspire to become a better Christian.

 

[justasking4]

Jordan Francis;2783727]*
9What shall we conclude then? Are we any better**? Not at all! We have already made the charge that Jews and Gentiles alike are all under sin.***

It is not a contradiction when looked at properly. This verse appears in a context to a community and is aimed at erasing pointless divions between people.
Where do you get “This verse appears in a context to a community and is aimed at erasing pointless divions between people” in this chapter?

When Paul says such things as “all are alike under sin” and “all have sinned and have fallen short of the glory of God” he is speaking of Original Sin (another Catholic term). The point of this verse is to show that humanity is characterized by a fallen nature and that, on their own, no person is capable of approaching God’s glory.

This would also apply to Mary. There is not one verse in the Scriptures that says Mary was not fallen or characterized by a fallen nature.

Likewise, none of us makes a claim about every person on earth in terms of their individuality, as if we have met them all. Instead, we make claims about human nature in general such as “it is in human nature to love” or it is “in human nature to want sex”.
I still don’t see how your explaniation shows that Mary was not a sinner?

The Scriptures most certainly do make claims about humanity without mentioning their individuality. Not only in Romans 3:9-10 but 5:10 and 18. This applies to all human beings ever born of a man and a woman.

Mary did not glorify herself, rather she was graced by God. The doctrine of Mary’s sinlessness only linguistically contradicts this verse, not in any essentialy way. **It does not contradict the fact that this verse intends to convey- mainly the essential helplessness of the human condition. **

For example, Psalm 14:3 says:

Are we now to think that literally everyone is corrupt and good never happens? No, Christians infer a kind of hyperbole here. This is taken to be a statement about the human condition, that is clearly how Paul interprets it and expands on it as “all have sinned”. **Mary’s sinlessness does not violate what the text is saying about the human condition. **

Of course it viloates it. Even she acknowledged her Savior in Luke 1:47.

Also, I find it interesting that many Protestant’s use this verse “that all have fallen short of God’s glory” in conjunction with other verses to show the need for Christian belief and the neccesity of hell. **They say that sin is incompatible with God’s presence **

and therefore even the smallest sin condemns one to hell.
This is true since the divine standard is absolute perfection at all times.

If sin is so incompatible with God’s presence, as is argued about the nature of God, then how does God dwell physically in a sinful woman?

I don’t see the problem with this. Look at Philippians 2:5-8 which tells us that Jesus “emptied” Himself which made it possible for God to dwell among men without destroying them.

 

[jsphbeale]

Ark of the (new) Covenant
The Old Testament Ark of the Covenant was a true icon of the sacred. Because it contained the presence of God symbolized by three types of the coming Messiah-the manna, the ten commandments, and Aarons rod-it had to be pure and untouched by sinful man (see 2 Sam. 6:1-9 and Ex.25:10ff; Num.4:15).
In the New Testament, the new Ark is not an inanimate object, but a person: the Blessed Mother. How much more pure would the new Ark be when we consider the old Ark was a mere “shadow” in relation to it (see Heb.10:1)? This image of Mary as the Ark of the Covenant is an indicator that Mary would fittingly be free from all contagion of sin to be a worthy vessel to bear God in her womb. And most importantly, just as the Old Covenant Ark was pristine from the moment it was constructed with explicit divine instruction in Exodus 25, so would Mary be pure from the moment of her conception. God, in a sense, prepared His own dwelling place in both the Old and New Testaments.

1. The Ark of the Covenant contained three “types” of Jesus inside:manna, Aaron’s rod, and the ten commandments. In Hebrew, commandment (dabar) can be translated “word”. Compare: Mary carried the fulfillment of all these types in her body. Jesus is the “true [manna] from heaven” (John 6:32), the true “high Priest” (Heb.3:1), and “the word made flesh” (John 1:14).
2. The glory cloud (Hebrew Anan) was representative of the Holy Spirit, and it “overshadowed” the Ark when Moses consecrated it in Ex. 40:32-33. The Greek word for “overshadow” found in the Septuagint is a form of episkiaseri. Compare: “The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you; therefore the child to be born will be called holy, the Son of God”. Luke 1:35). The Greek word for overshadow is episkiaseri.
3. David “leapt and danced” before the Ark when it was being carried into Jerusalem in procession in 2 Sam. 6:14-16. Compare: As soon as Elizabeth heard the sound of Mary’s salutation, John the Baptist “leaped for joy” in her womb (cf. Luke 1:41-44).
4. After a manifistation of the power of God working through the Ark, David exclaims,“How can the Ark of the Lord come unto me?” Compare: After the revelation to Elizabeth about the true calling of Mary, who was carring God in her womb, Elizabeth exclaims" Why is this granted me, that the mother of my Lord should come to me?" (Luke 1:43)
5. The Ark of the Lord “remained in the house of Obededom…three months” in Sam. 6:11. Compare: “Mary remained with [Elizabeth] for about three months” (Luke 1:56)

This is part of an article by Tim Staples. I could not find a thread to link to and wish all could read the whole article-there is much more.

 

[De_Maria]

Where do you get "This verse appears in a context to a community

That is correct. St. Paul is addressing the Church.

and is aimed at erasing pointless divions between people" in this chapter?

Again, that is correct. St. Paul frequently voices concern over the fact that Jews and Gentiles have not realized that they are all members of God’s family:

Romans 1::16For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek.

Romans 3:29
Is he the God of the Jews only? is he not also of the Gentiles? Yes, of the Gentiles also: 30Seeing it is one God, which shall justify the circumcision by faith, and uncircumcision through faith.

1 Corinthians 12:13
For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit.

This would also apply to Mary. There is not one verse in the Scriptures that says Mary was not fallen or characterized by a fallen nature.

No, it wouldn’t. If you let Scripture interpret Scripture, you will see that Paul is not speaking about the righteous but about the unrighteous fools who do not believe in God:

Romans 3:10As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one:

Paul says AS IT IS WRITTEN, so we need to look where it is written to understand what Paul is talking about:

Psalm 53:1
The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God. Corrupt are they, and have done abominable iniquity: there is none that doeth good.

And again, if it were true that “there is none righteous”, St. Paul would contradict Scripture:

Genesis 7:1
And the LORD said unto Noah, Come thou and all thy house into the ark; for thee have I seen righteous before me in this generation.

Luke 1:6
And they were both righteous before God, walking in all the commandments and ordinances of the Lord blameless.

So, Paul does not mean that “there is none righteous” without exception. And we definitely can’t count Mary amongst the unrighteous since Scripture says:

Luke 1:28
And the angel came in unto her, and said, Hail, thou that art highly favoured, the Lord is with thee: blessed art thou among women.

The angel would hardly say that of the unrighteous.
CONT’D

 

[De_Maria]

CONT’D

The Scriptures most certainly do make claims about humanity without mentioning their individuality

Not in this case.

only in Romans 3:9-10

Discussed above.

but 5:10 and 18. This applies to all human beings ever born of a man and a woman.

No it doesn’t. Look at verse 14.

Romans 5:14
Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adam’s transgression, who is the figure of him that was to come.

You see how he admits that some “had not sinned”.

[Of course it viloates it. Even she acknowledged her Savior in Luke 1:47.
[/quote]

Sure. So do we acknowledge that Jesus is her Savior. But let me ask you, would you rather be saved from an accident by someone preventing you from stepping in front of a truck? Or would you rather be saved after the truck ran over you and the doctor came and stitched you back together?

The Heavenly Physician prevented His Mother being struck by sin only He can do it and it is wonderful in our sight. Ask yourself, if you could do that for those you love, wouldn’t you?

This is true since the divine standard is absolute perfection at all times.

Then only Mary and Jesus are saved since the rest of us fall into sin at one time or another.

I don’t see the problem with this. Look at Philippians 2:5-8 which tells us that Jesus “emptied” Himself which made it possible for God to dwell among men without destroying them.

In other words, you stand in contradiction to what you stated above. You believe that the divine standard is perfection yet you believe that God dwells with sinful man. That definitely needs explanation.

As for the Catholic position, we believe that God is absolutely transcendant and His Holy Spirit dwells in us and we live, move and have our being in Him without affecting Him in the least.

Sincerely,

De Maria

 

[PatienceAndLove]

I think Scripture teaches that Abraham was the first Christian. Abrahams FAITH was credited to him as Rightousness.

If you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to the promise.
Galations 3:29

How was Abraham a Christian? Wasn’t he a bit before Jesus’ time?

 

[justasking4]

That is correct. St. Paul is addressing the Church.

Again, that is correct. St. Paul frequently voices concern over the fact that Jews and Gentiles have not realized that they are all members of God’s family:

Romans 1::16For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek.

Romans 3:29
Is he the God of the Jews only? is he not also of the Gentiles? Yes, of the Gentiles also: 30Seeing it is one God, which shall justify the circumcision by faith, and uncircumcision through faith.

1 Corinthians 12:13
For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit.

No, it wouldn’t. If you let Scripture interpret Scripture, you will see that Paul is not speaking about the righteous but about the unrighteous fools who do not believe in God:

Romans 3:10As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one:

Paul says AS IT IS WRITTEN, so we need to look where it is written to understand what Paul is talking about:

Psalm 53:1
The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God. Corrupt are they, and have done abominable iniquity: there is none that doeth good.

And again, if it were true that “there is none righteous”, St. Paul would contradict Scripture:

Genesis 7:1
And the LORD said unto Noah, Come thou and all thy house into the ark; for thee have I seen righteous before me in this generation.

Luke 1:6
And they were both righteous before God, walking in all the commandments and ordinances of the Lord blameless.

So, Paul does not mean that “there is none righteous” without exception. And we definitely can’t count Mary amongst the unrighteous since Scripture says:

Luke 1:28
And the angel came in unto her, and said, Hail, thou that art highly favoured, the Lord is with thee: blessed art thou among women.

The angel would hardly say that of the unrighteous.
CONT’D

Are you saying that there are human beings who have never sinned?

 

[justasking4]

De Maria;2785592]CONT’D
Not in this case.

Discussed above.

No it doesn’t. Look at verse 14.

Romans 5:14
Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adam’s transgression, who is the figure of him that was to come.

You see how he admits that some “had not sinned”.

Not so. What Paul is saying that even though we were not there to sin as Adam did, we inherit the sin nature from him nonetheless.

[Of course it viloates it. Even she acknowledged her Savior in Luke 1:47.

Sure. So do we acknowledge that Jesus is her Savior. But let me ask you, would you rather be saved from an accident by someone preventing you from stepping in front of a truck? Or would you rather be saved after the truck ran over you and the doctor came and stitched you back together?

This idea of being “saved from sinning” has no basis in the scriptures.

The Heavenly Physician prevented His Mother being struck by sin only He can do it and it is wonderful in our sight. Ask yourself, if you could do that for those you love, wouldn’t you?

The issue is: did God do this and what is the evidence that He did. There is not one shred of evidence in the scriptures that He did this to Mary.
Even the catholic church at times believed she died. Death is the result of sin.

Then only Mary and Jesus are saved since the rest of us fall into sin at one time or another.

In other words, you stand in contradiction to what you stated above. You believe that the divine standard is perfection yet you believe that God dwells with sinful man. That definitely needs explanation.

How so? When Jesus came into the world He limited His divine attributes so that He could live among sinful men. That’s what Phil 2:5-8 is all about.

As for the Catholic position, we believe that God is absolutely transcendant and His Holy Spirit dwells in us and we live, move and have our being in Him without affecting Him in the least.

If God were “absolutely transcendant” how was it possible for Him to take on human flesh and live among men?

Sincerely,

De Maria

[/quote]

 

[BrewMax]

Our focus is on Our Lord. And I realize that Mary cannot save me, and the Church does not tell us to elevate her as such.

However, in modeling myself after her- in all her humbleness, her Love for Our Lord and God, her obedience, her trust, etc… I can hope and aspire to become a better Christian.

oh really? Everything about Mary parallels Jesus in the Catholic church.

1. She is proclaimed to be the mother of God.
2. She is claimed to be conceived without original sin.
3. She is claimed to be assumed into Heaven body and soul.
4. She is proclaimed queen of Heaven.
5. She is claimed to be mediatrix of all graces. This means that as Christ dispenses saving grace to mankind, Mary along with Jesus will have the final say as to who receives it.
6. Mary is proclaimed to be co-redemptrix of the universe.

It surely looks to me that you are elevating her to Godhood.