Protestants and Mary

[Dokimas]

I’ll answer that even though what I said to you obviously didn’t getting through. You have little to no respect for her. You look at her as a normal human; stained with sin…almost as though people are given the opportunity to give birth to the King of the Universe everyday! You overlook everything having to do with her. That’s where we can start. Any disagreement thus far?

God Bless!

Seems to me that God has high regard for sinners. He shows His high regard by sending His Son to shed His Blood in payment for our sins. Being a sinner isn’t a put-down. It’s reality. A reality changed only by the Blood of the Lamb, not by church doctrine.​

As I’ve said before, I think Mary is a wonderful person of faith and quite an example for us to follow. I wish I would do a better job of living like she did. I have such high regard for her that I hope I never put her in a place of ‘reverence’ that’s not hers. Jesus said there is only one good and that is God. Paul, quoting the OT, said all have sinned and all are unrighteous. Jesus in the only one good and the only one sinless. Poor Mary is placed by the RCC in a positions that’s not hers.​

I’d like to share some verses and thoughts I gathered from studying the life of Mary from the Bible which makes her a wonderful role model for all Christians. I’ll start with these few right now. When I have a little more time I’ll share more.

☐ Who was Mary? A woman …

-Luke 1:47- full of joy; not based on her happenstance (much more than being happy);
she knew she was a sinner

-Luke 1:42-45- blessed and favored

-Luke 1:38- obeyed God by placing herself in God’s Hands

-Luke 1:50- she had right fear of God; She understood the timelessness of God and His mercy
and that He doesn’t change

 

[Dokimas]

Not all Protestants are the same, but an utter disregard for the Blessed Virgin is something modern Protestants embrace, as opposed to the Reformers who had great Marian devotion

What bothered the early reformers more that almost anything? It had to do with what faith is; how God (not the church) delt with sin and that the church charged money for the payment for sins (negating the only price needed for sin - the Blood of the Lamb).​

 

[CWBetts]

What bothered the early reformers more that almost anything? It had to do with what faith is; how God (not the church) delt with sin and that the church charged money for the payment for sins (negating the only price needed for sin - the Blood of the Lamb).​

What you are referring to, the sale of indulgences, was an abuse, but not as widespread as you seem to indicate. It was primarily a problem in Germany, and largely from a single community of Dominicans. This is what set off Martin Luther. And I will concede that the sale of indulgences was a problem that needed fixed. But here is the problem. How did Protestantism go from raising issues over this abuse to rejecting things their founders accepted? I am not going to discuss indulgences any further. But if the Reformers venerated the Blessed Mother, then why do modern Protestants not venerate her? Even the concept of Sola Scriptura as defined by Luther is different than the Sola Scriptura that comes out of non-denominational and evangelical churches today. Luther did not reject the Early Fathers, in fact he depended in St. Jerome. Luther venerated the Blessed Mother. I would make the claim that with few exceptions, modern Protestantism has very little to do with Reformed Theology, and instead become a twisted, man-made perversion of Christianity.

 

[Dokimas]

What you are referring to, the sale of indulgences, was an abuse, but not as widespread as you seem to indicate. It was primarily a problem in Germany, and largely from a single community of Dominicans. This is what set off Martin Luther. And I will concede that the sale of indulgences was a problem that needed fixed. But here is the problem. How did Protestantism go from raising issues over this abuse to rejecting things their founders accepted? I am not going to discuss indulgences any further. But if the Reformers venerated the Blessed Mother, then why do modern Protestants not venerate her? Even the concept of Sola Scriptura as defined by Luther is different than the Sola Scriptura that comes out of non-denominational and evangelical churches today. Luther did not reject the Early Fathers, in fact he depended in St. Jerome. Luther venerated the Blessed Mother. I would make the claim that with few exceptions, modern Protestantism has very little to do with Reformed Theology, and instead become a twisted, man-made perversion of Christianity.

The Bible doesn’t not exalt Mary like you and the RCC do. I get my understanding (as faulty as it may be) from my study of the Bible, not from what some reads into the Bible and from extra Biblical revelations.

 

[lil_flower_luv]

Seems to me that God has high regard for sinners. He shows His high regard by sending His Son to shed His Blood in payment for our sins. Being a sinner isn’t a put-down. It’s reality. A reality changed only by the Blood of the Lamb, not by church doctrine.

Through God’s grace, Mary remained free from every personal sin her whole life long. That’s it, I’m sorry. Yes, of course He holds us sinners in high regard, so much, that He gave His only Son to be the New Adam. But also in giving us the New Eve, Mary. “Death through Eve, life through Mary.” ~St. Irenaeus

As I’ve said before, I think Mary is a wonderful person of faith and quite an example for us to follow. I wish I would do a better job of living like she did. I have such high regard for her that I hope I never put her in a place of ‘reverence’ that’s not hers. Jesus said there is only one good and that is God. Paul, quoting the OT, said all have sinned and all are unrighteous. Jesus in the only one good and the only one sinless. Poor Mary is placed by the RCC in a positions that’s not hers.

Yes, Paul was correct. The thing with Mary was, she was granted a singular privilege before her birth. “Before I formed you, I knew you.” Know that verse? God knew exactly who Mary would be, like all of us. He formed her to be His mother, and all that came with that. She truly stands out.

I’d like to share some verses and thoughts I gathered from studying the life of Mary from the Bible which makes her a wonderful role model for all Christians. I’ll start with these few right now. When I have a little more time I’ll share more.

☐ Who was Mary? A woman …

-Luke 1:47- full of joy; not based on her happenstance (much more than being happy);
she knew she was a sinner

-Luke 1:42-45- blessed and favored

-Luke 1:38- obeyed God by placing herself in God’s Hands

-Luke 1:50- she had right fear of God; She understood the timelessness of God and His mercy and that He doesn’t change

Very good. Thanks for digging that up!

 

[elvisman]

As I’ve said before, I think Mary is a wonderful person of faith and quite an example for us to follow. I wish I would do a better job of living like she did. I have such high regard for her that I hope I never put her in a place of ‘reverence’ that’s not hers. Jesus said there is only one good and that is God. Paul, quoting the OT, said all have sinned and all are unrighteous. Jesus in the only one good and the only one sinless. Poor Mary is placed by the RCC in a positions that’s not hers.

Sorry, Dokimas – that just doesn’t cut it.
In Romans 3:10, 23, the idea that Paul was speaking literally about everybody is sometimes pointed to by those who “twist the scriptures to their own destruction” (2 Pet. 3:16).
**Paul says: “There is no one righteous, not even one; For there is no distinction; allhave sinned and are deprived of the glory of God.” **
Oh, REALLY? How about babies or little ones who haven’t yet reached the age of reason? What about those who are mentally challenged and probably don’t have a complete use of their intellect or their will? What about Jesus? In this passage, St. Paul is actually quoting Psalm 14, where it says, "The fool (the evil) says in his heart, ‘There is no God. They are corrupt…there is none that does good.’” Later in the very same Psalm, we read that “God is present in the company of the “righteous.”
St. Paul was using inclusive language, and so was the writer of the Psalm. This would be similar to somebody saying that “everybody in town came to the parade”. Paul is writing about the whole of mankind in these verses and not individuals.

☐ Who was Mary? A woman …

Mary is not just A woman - she is THE Woman (Gen. 3:15, Rev. 12:1-6)

Luke 1:47- full of joy; not based on her happenstance (much more than being happy); she knew she was a sinner

You’re trying to place a meaning that just isn’t in this passage. This passage doesn’t say that Mary was a sinner – it says that God was her Savior – and he IS.
**The difference between Mary and us is that God saved her ****before **she was able to fall into sin, whereas, we are saved out of sin.

Kecharitomenewhich is the Greek word that Luke used (Luke 1:28)***,***is the absolute perfect passive participle that indicates a completed action with permanent result. She is full of grace and has no room for fault. So, Kecharitomene translates, "completely, perfectly, enduringly endowed with grace."

Think of it a glass full to the brim of water. There is no room for anything else because it is full. That is how Kecharitomene is translated in this verse.

-Luke 1:42-45- blessed and favored

-Luke 1:38- obeyed God by placing herself in God’s Hands
No** argument here. In fact, I’ll add this:**
**Non-Catholics misunderstand Luke 11:27-28, which says that a “woman in the crowd raised her voice and said to him [Jesus], ‘Blessed is the womb that carried you and the breasts at which you nursed.’ But he said, *’**Blessed rather are those who hear the word of God ***and keep it!” This *wasn’t *an insult against his mother. It was a commendation because Mary’s example is the fact that she heard the word of God and kept it by doing His will. **

-Luke 1:50- she had right fear of God; She understood the timelessness of God and His mercy and that He doesn’t change

Mary absolutely feared God. She was a faithful, obedient Jewish girl that would have done everything that was required by the Law. This would include all of the dietary laws with their restrictions and observance of the Passover – just as Jesus did. It’s ridiculous to think that she would have done otherwise.

 

[elvisman]

What bothered the early reformers more that almost anything? It had to do with what faith is; how God (not the church) delt with sin and that the church charged money for the payment for sins (negating the only price needed for sin - the Blood of the Lamb).​

This is not only inaccurate - it’s a bald-face lie.
The Church didn’t sell indulgences - individual men did and they were not sent out by the Church to do so. They did it on their own.

This is yet another lie perpetuated by those who don’t know their history - ecclesiastical or secular. If you truly believe this - produce one document from the Church during these times that commanded, assigned or otherwise condoned the selling of indulgences.

 

[elvisman]

Let’s debate it then Elvisman. How is it that us Protestants (all of one like and kind in your book) have no regard nor respect for the Blessed Mother of our Lord? Can you start there?

First of all - I don’t lump all Protestants into one basket. Some, like the Lutherans and Anglicans hold Mary in higher regard than most.

Secondly - if you want to debate an issue regarding Mary - please be more specific.

Lastly - the reason many Evangelicals and Fundamentalists reject Marian doctrines is because of divorce. T****he ecclesiastical divorce that is Protestantism will not allow for God making exceptions because - if this is the case - then the Catholic Church might be right about many other things.
And that is unthinkable to the anti-Catholic.

 

[Dokimas]

Lastly - the reason many Evangelicals and Fundamentalists reject Marian doctrines is because of divorce. T**he ecclesiastical divorce that is Protestantism will not **allow for God making exceptions because - if this is the case - then the Catholic Church might be right about many other things.
And that is unthinkable to the anti-Catholic.

I would classify myself as an evangelical; you’d probably say I’m a fundamentalist; my rejection of your doctrines of Mary has NOTHING to do with divorce. BTW, doesn’t the RCC make exceptons (annulment) for a price?​

NO ONE is right about anything because they’re correct about other things. We are correct if we line up with God’s Word, not with Protestant or Catholic teachings.​

 

[Dokimas]

This is not only inaccurate - it’s a bald-face lie.
The Church didn’t sell indulgences - individual men did and they were not sent out by the Church to do so. They did it on their own.

This is yet another lie perpetuated by those who don’t know their history - ecclesiastical or secular. If you truly believe this - produce one document from the Church during these times that commanded, assigned or otherwise condoned the selling of indulgences.

CWBetts has a different take than you and if she-he is correct, then what I said was not a bold-faced lie.​

Does the RCC charge it parishioners a price for saying a special Mass for loved ones who have died? What happened to the words of Jesus when He said, ‘Freely you have received, freely give.’

 

[CWBetts]

CWBetts has a different take than you and if she-he is correct, then what I said was not a bold-faced lie.​

Does the RCC charge it parishioners a price for saying a special Mass for loved ones who have died? What happened to the words of Jesus when He said, ‘Freely you have received, freely give.’

There is a requested donation, but you don’t get turned down. You cannot be denied sacraments for inability to pay. And on that matter, don’t Protestant ministers charge for things like weddings and funerals. Until those things are free, you have nothing to say.

 

[CWBetts]

I would classify myself as an evangelical; you’d probably say I’m a fundamentalist; my rejection of your doctrines of Mary has NOTHING to do with divorce. BTW, doesn’t the RCC make exceptons (annulment) for a price?​

NO ONE is right about anything because they’re correct about other things. We are correct if we line up with God’s Word, not with Protestant or Catholic teachings.​

God’s Word is not exclusively written. If the Faith is based exclusively on the Bible, then what did the early Christians do before the Bible was compiled

 

[Dokimas]

Sorry, Dokimas – that just doesn’t cut it.
In Romans 3:10, 23, the idea that Paul was speaking literally about everybody is sometimes pointed to by those who “twist the scriptures to their own destruction” (2 Pet. 3:16).
Paul says: “There is no one righteous, not even one; For there is no distinction; allhave sinned and are deprived of the glory of God.”
St. Paul was using inclusive language, and so was the writer of the Psalm. This would be similar to somebody saying that “everybody in town came to the parade”. Paul is writing about the whole of mankind in these verses and not individuals.

How about the verses around Romans 3:10?

8 And why not say, “Let us do evil that good may come”? ––as we are slanderously reported and as some affirm that we say. Their condemnation is just.
9 What then? Are we better than they? Not at all. For we have previously charged both Jews and Greeks that they are all under sin.
10 As it is written: “There is none righteous, no, not one;
11 There is none who understands; There is none who seeks after God.
12 They have all turned aside; They have together become unprofitable; There is none who does good, no, not one.”
13 “Their throat is an open tomb; With their tongues they have practiced deceit”; “The poison of asps is under their lips”;
14 “Whose mouth is full of cursing and bitterness.”

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dokimas
Luke 1:47- full of joy; not based on her happenstance (much more than being happy); she knew she was a sinner

You’re trying to place a meaning that just isn’t in this passage. This passage doesn’t say that Mary was a sinner – it says that God was her Savior – and he IS.
The difference between Mary and us is that God saved her before she was able to fall into sin, whereas, we are saved out of sin.

Kecharitomenewhich is the Greek word that Luke used (Luke 1:28),is the absolute perfect passive participle that indicates a completed action with permanent result. She is full of grace and has no room for fault. So, Kecharitomene translates, “completely, perfectly, enduringly endowed with grace.”

Are you referring to the Greek word ‘charitoo’ translated in the KJV? In Luke 1:28 it is in the Present Active Imperative. The same word is used in the following verse about Paul and those he was referring to. Also notice it was a work done by God: Eph 1:6 to the praise of the glory of His grace, by which He has made <5487> us accepted <5487> in the Beloved. The numbers are from Strong’s number system. The Holy Spirit had your Greek word to be used for Mary and all true blievers in the Messiah Jesus.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dokimas
-Luke 1:42-45- blessed and favored

Non-Catholics misunderstand Luke 11:27-28, which says that a “woman in the crowd raised her voice and said to him [Jesus], ‘Blessed is the womb that carried you and the breasts at which you nursed.’ But he said, 'Blessed rather are those who hear the word of God and keep it!” This wasn’t an insult against his mother. It was a commendation because Mary’s example is the fact that she heard the word of God and kept it by doing His will.

Or Catholics misunderstand that we (I for one) don’t think for a milli-second that Jeus was disrespecting Mary. He was putting her role in perspective; maybe because He knew there would be those you would elevate her to a place that she doesn’t want and that is not hers.

Mary absolutely feared God. She was a faithful, obedient Jewish girl that would have done everything that was required by the Law. This would include all of the dietary laws with their restrictions and observance of the Passover – just as Jesus did. It’s ridiculous to think that she would have done otherwise.

Jesus didn’t follow the letter of the Sabbath. But, what does ‘it’s ridiculous to think that she would have done other wise’ have to do with my comments or the OP?

 

[Dokimas]

God’s Word is not exclusively written. If the Faith is based exclusively on the Bible, then what did the early Christians do before the Bible was compiled

They had the letters written and passed around. Before these letters they had the apostles, including Paul, who were with Jesus, who were taught by Jesus, whom Jesus gave the Holy Spirit to and who preached what they knew to be true; much of these truths were written down in the letteres I referred to.

 

[Dokimas]

There is a requested donation, but you don’t get turned down. You cannot be denied sacraments for inability to pay. And on that matter, don’t Protestant ministers charge for things like weddings and funerals. Until those things are free, you have nothing to say.

I can only speak for myself; I don’t charge.

 

[CWBetts]

How about the verses around Romans 3:10?

8 And why not say, “Let us do evil that good may come”? ––as we are slanderously reported and as some affirm that we say. Their condemnation is just.
9 What then? Are we better than they? Not at all. For we have previously charged both Jews and Greeks that they are all under sin.
10 As it is written: “There is none righteous, no, not one;
11 There is none who understands; There is none who seeks after God.
12 They have all turned aside; They have together become unprofitable; There is none who does good, no, not one.”
13 “Their throat is an open tomb; With their tongues they have practiced deceit”; “The poison of asps is under their lips”;
14 “Whose mouth is full of cursing and bitterness.”

This is Paul quoting the OT. If you go back to the original source(53rd Psalm), you would realize David is not talking about all people, but about the enemies of God’s people. It is about context.

 

[Dokimas]

There is a requested donation, but you don’t get turned down. You cannot be denied sacraments for inability to pay. And on that matter, don’t Protestant ministers charge for things like weddings and funerals. Until those things are free, you have nothing to say.

BTW, just because others do it does it make it correct? My parents never let us use that as an excuse for doing wrong or questionable.

 

[Dokimas]

This is Paul quoting the OT. If you go back to the original source(53rd Psalm), you would realize David is not talking about all people, but about the enemies of God’s people. It is about context.

Seems “Romans 3:9 What then? **Are we better than they? Not at all. **For we have previously charged both Jews and Greeks that they are all under sin,” disagrees with your assessment of what he was saying.​

Then there are these verses from Romans 3:

19 ¶ Now we know that whatever the law says, it says to those who are under the law, that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God.
20 Therefore by the deeds of the law no flesh will be justified in His sight, for by the law is the knowledge of sin.
21 But now the righteousness of God apart from the law is revealed, being witnessed by the Law and the Prophets,
22 even the righteousness of God, through faith in Jesus Christ, to all and on all who believe. For there is no difference;
23 for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God,
24 being justified freely by His grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus,
25 whom God set forth as a propitiation by His blood, through faith, to demonstrate His righteousness, because in His forbearance God had passed over the sins that were previously committed,
26 to demonstrate at the present time His righteousness, that He might be just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus.
27 Where is boasting then? It is excluded. By what law? Of works? No, but by the law of faith.
28 Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith apart from the deeds of the law.
29 Or is He the God of the Jews only? Is He not also the God of the Gentiles? Yes, of the Gentiles also,
30 since there is one God who will justify the circumcised by faith and the uncircumcised through faith.

 

[CWBetts]

None of this seems to indicate that Mary could not have been free from sin! Do you think that sin is so powerful, and God is so impotent, that He could not protect one person, the one He chose to bring salvation to the world, from sin? Is that what you are saying? Are you actually saying that the Devil is more powerful than God? God could not have done this? I must disagree.

 

[Dokimas]

Do you think that sin is so powerful, and God is so impotent, that He could not protect one person, the one He chose to bring salvation to the world, from sin? Is that what you are saying? Are you actually saying that the Devil is more powerful than God? God could not have done this? I must disagree.

Of course God could do what you said for Mary.​

Of course sin is not more powerful than God.​

Of course the devil is not more powerful than God.​

Those aren’t the questions; the question is whether God (Jesus) needs Mary to be free from sin? Jesus lives in redeemed sinners even as we ‘speak’.