Protestants, who have been around awhile, question about the Virgin Mary

[rinnie]

kellerk;9482726:

Hi kellerk -happy july 4th to you all fellow bloggers.Of course you are right .I understand where the IC accentuates that indeed Jesus was divine also, if one feels that is how God could only indwell Mary. Again, this is stemming from the early church debate as to just how was Jesus both divine and human and the declaration that Mary was the theotokus-“God bearer”. We all agree that Mary was this .Don’t believe you need IC for this and am sure it was not part of the equation during the Theotokus declaration (but yes ,she was pure,) Adding IC makes Mary not “amongst” women but above women, not because she incarnated the Lord but because she herself was “immaculate” . In that regard she is “apart” from the rest of humanity. The idea behind Theotokus was that God became as one of us, but really only in perfection, unlike any of us if you believe in IC .I am sorry, I would seem to have less of a connection with a perfect human than with a flawed one .That I /we are close to a perfect Christ is different in that he did become sin and died on the cross for that frailty. Hope you follow my thought, even in disagreement

Huh

 

[rinnie]

Ummmmm, Catholics here are the ones who say scripture is not enough to garner IC,you need father writings and tradition. Really ,it’s not me saying scripture is not enough .You twist my words Wrong again. given now at least 4 refernces/sources for my comments .You smokescreen my points very well though. Thank-you

Pretty sure Martyr did not say Mary had no original sin .Have not read all Iraneus ,not sure He did either (no original sin)

It seems i did respond and you “dismiss out of hand” my answer.

God bless.

david I asked you before, let me ask you again.

If the Blessed Mother was not saved from Original sin, and had original sin where is the teaching anywhere that states Jesus was born of a human mother who was not Immaculate?

Why would the scripture say that she was Blessed among women? Why does it not say she was not Blessed among women then?

Was does Immaculate mean to you? With sin?

Immaculate in the dictionary means free from moral blemish, Pure, kept clean. So how could she be pure, spotless if she was born with the stain of Original Sin on her?

She could not be called pure, immaculate, pure without stain if she had the stain of Original sin. How do you explain that?

You stated yourself she was Pure. How do you explain that?

 

[rinnie]

Ummmmm, Catholics here are the ones who say scripture is not enough to garner IC,you need father writings and tradition. Really ,it’s not me saying scripture is not enough .You twist my words Wrong again. given now at least 4 refernces/sources for my comments .You smokescreen my points very well though. Thank-you

Pretty sure Martyr did not say Mary had no original sin .Have not read all Iraneus ,not sure He did either (no original sin)

It seems i did respond and you “dismiss out of hand” my answer.

God bless.

Yes david catholics here do say scripture is not enough. We got that from the Catholic Bible. It says the Church is the Pilar of ALL truth, not the bible.

The bible says to stick to the teachings of the Church that are either WRITTEN or by WORD OF MOUTH. Word of mouth is Oral teachings david, or S.S.

Now david, where do you get the teachings that you are told to obey given to you by word of mouth? Since no Church has them but the CC?

 

[BrunoMaria]

So…taking into account the mindset of St. Joseph…we catholics see v24-25…as the point when St. Joseph, after the angel rouses him, finally takes it seriously, what his duty is going to be…to take care of Mary and the child Jesus…not to have sex with Mary

 

[JustaServant]

david I asked you before, let me ask you again.

If the Blessed Mother was not saved from Original sin, and had original sin where is the teaching anywhere that states Jesus was born of a human mother who was not Immaculate?

Why would the scripture say that she was Blessed among women? Why does it not say she was not Blessed among women then?

Was does Immaculate mean to you? With sin?

Immaculate in the dictionary means free from moral blemish, Pure, kept clean. So how could she be pure, spotless if she was born with the stain of Original Sin on her?

She could not be called pure, immaculate, pure without stain if she had the stain of Original sin. How do you explain that?

You stated yourself she was Pure. How do you explain that?

It looks like David is suspended, and judging from the deleted posts coupled with the mods general warning, it looks like David was “borrowing brains” in this thread. A simple cut and paste and Google search reveals he need a little help for his position. Using someone else’s words is not terribly honest.

 

[kellerk]

tqualey;9467829:

Don’t see how I am dictating by stating the obvious fact that Greek is the inspired Word here.

Earlier in this thread, I believe you stated you did not believe that the “entire” Greek was the inspired Word! It seems you choose to agree with whoever disagrees with the Church. The disenters in this case were not “good catholics” though, they are the ones of the Jewish faith that also deny the divinity of Christ, they are the ones that rejected the parts of the Hebrew Text that did not agree with their views.

All interpretations given here are personal I hope.That is i hope you have been personally illumined as to the truth of the matter. Whether we think it is brother or cousins scripture is referring to is based on this “personal” llumination.And if you think it must be done by a church officer or council,God still must illumine these individuals.It is quite personal .
No, that is the debate, if these doctrines “evolved” or are assumed from the beginning.

**
I don’t know why the length of the debate makes a difference. The fact that it evolved over time means there was much thought and debate among many “personally illuminated” individuals, that were not going to make a rash judgement on something of such importance. That should give you more confidence in the result rather than less. This is not just a result of one or two individual interpretations and neither are the ones given here on this thread**.

 

[tqualey]

Hi, Rinnie,

The excellent post you have provided will NEVER BE ENOUGH because it flys in the face of Sola Scriptura and personal interpretation. This basic Protestant error is responsible for all of the chaos and splintering we find in the religious teachings of Protestantism today.

These Protestants have even portested their own founders - Luther and Calvin both had devotions to the Blessed Virgin Mary. Luther was quite clear in speaking out agains those who claimed Mary had other children. But what is being witnessed is on-going splintering because self and the knowledge one claims is placed at the center of this misguided belief - instead of the Chruch - the bulwark of the Truth.

God bless

david, where did anyone say scripture was ever clear about the I.C. That is why we have Tradition that goes along with S.S. to lead us to to the truth.

The bible ittself tells us the CHURCH is the pilar of all truth, not the bible. Also it tells us to stick to the teachings of the Early Fathers of the CHurch. That is what we do.

I have showed you proof that the I.C. was believed and taught by the Apostle John who lived with the Blessed Mother after the death of Jesus. Why is that not enough?

 

[tqualey]

Hi, JustaServant,

I missed that one.

Considering that all we were getting were multiple statements that simply said, “I’m right and you are wrong - and I do not have to respond when challenged”, I’m sure he is happier at another forum. Maybe a Protestant one where he can get all the agreement he seeks without an argument!

God bless

It looks like David is suspended, and judging from the deleted posts coupled with the mods general warning, it looks like David was “borrowing brains” in this thread. A simple cut and paste and Google search reveals he need a little help for his position. Using someone else’s words is not terribly honest.

 

[kellerk]

kellerk;9482726:

Hope you follow my thought, even in disagreement

Hello again!! I can certainly tell you it has not been an easy task, following your thoughts but, I’m managing. I will comment on this post first, then make a general comment regarding several of the recent post which I have been contemplating a response to.

-“God bearer”. We all agree that Mary was this .Don’t believe you need IC for this. Adding IC makes Mary not “amongst” women but above women, not because she incarnated the Lord but because she herself was “immaculate” . In that regard she is “apart” from the rest of humanity.

So, what you are saying is…the fact that Mary was a virgin is enough to set her apart from the rest of humanity. The IC makes her “above” all women when she should only be considered “apart”, and apart only because she had a virgin birth. Am I getting this right? Assuming this is what you mean, ok, that could make sense IF that is the only question you have. But, this assumption leaves many questions unanswered. Some that come to mind are…
(Why did she have to be a virgin? Wouldn’t being the mother of God be enough to set her apart? Why did He choose Mary and not some other virgin? If He wanted to take on sin, why didn’t He go ahead and take on the “original sin” of His mother while He was at it? Why did He have to be “perfect” anyway? Why did He need a woman at all? Why didn’t He just come down here and skip all this other stuff and make it real easy for us to understand?)
The real question here is, how did Jesus choose to come into the world? I think the IC does not “add” anything rather it “explains” everything. **

The idea behind Theotokus was that God became as one of us, but really only in perfection, unlike any of us if you believe in IC.

**

Not necessarily “unlike any of us” if you consider how we were meant to be created. No, we are not perfect but, is this how we were originally meant to be when created? The idea is that Jesus became one of us, in perfection, like we were “supposed” to be. Like a New Adam, right? Mary was put above all women by Jesus’ own merit for the purpose of coming into the world “perfect” as was meant from the beginning.

I am sorry, I would seem to have less of a connection with a perfect human than with a flawed one . That I /we are close to a perfect Christ is different in that he did become sin and died on the cross for that frailty.

**I was with you until this last statement, not sure I should even go there with you. What are you saying??? You would prefer to view Jesus as a “flawed” human so you can connect with Him better? Surely, I have misunderstood. I think I’ll just leave this one alone except to point out that maybe….instead of humanity the word we should be using is humility. Moving on…
This last statement I have been contemplating for several days. I will try to keep this short.

It seems your goal has been to prove that not everyone within the church agreed with the IC and the PV of Mary. OK…My question is, what does that prove? The fact that some disagreed does not make it false. The fact that the debate took a long time just proves this was not just a rash decision made by a few powerful guys but, that all differing opinions were considered, thoughfully deliberated and was brought to a consensus which should give you more confidence in the result, not less. The fact that the ones that disagreed were “good catholics” as you like to put it, doesn’t really prove anything either. Question: Did any of these “good catholics” split from the church as a result of these differences? The answer to that should prove something to YOU. The one guy that did ultimately split from the church doesn’t even hold the same views as you. So what do you have? 1) Scripture is vague on the subject. 2) A few guys within the church did not totally agree. 3) The debate took a long time. And 4) Your personal interpretations.

Personally, I think, if you weren’t careful, you could talk yourself right out of believing there even is a God at all. If I showed you a bunch of historical records and writings of men that disagreed there was a God, would that make it so?**

 

[tqualey]

Hi, Kellerk,

Great post!

Check Post #604 for an update…

God bless

david ruiz;9483514:

Hello again!! I can certainly tell you it has not been an easy task, following your thoughts but, I’m managing. I will comment on this post first, then make a general comment regarding several of the recent post which I have been contemplating a response to.

**So, what you are saying is…the fact that Mary was a virgin is enough to set her apart from the rest of humanity. The IC makes her “above” all women when she should only be considered “apart”, and apart only because she had a virgin birth. Am I getting this right? Assuming this is what you mean, ok, that could make sense IF that is the only question you have. But, this assumption leaves many questions unanswered. Some that come to mind are…
(Why did she have to be a virgin? Wouldn’t being the mother of God be enough to set her apart? Why did He choose Mary and not some other virgin? If He wanted to take on sin, why didn’t He go ahead and take on the “original sin” of His mother while He was at it? Why did He have to be “perfect” anyway? Why did He need a woman at all? Why didn’t He just come down here and skip all this other stuff and make it real easy for us to understand?)
The real question here is, how did Jesus choose to come into the world? I think the IC does not “add” anything rather it “explains” everything. **

Not necessarily “unlike any of us” if you consider how we were meant to be created. No, we are not perfect but, is this how we were originally meant to be when created? The idea is that Jesus became one of us, in perfection, like we were “supposed” to be. Like a New Adam, right? Mary was put above all women by Jesus’ own merit for the purpose of coming into the world “perfect” as was meant from the beginning.****

**I was with you until this last statement, not sure I should even go there with you. What are you saying??? You would prefer to view Jesus as a “flawed” human so you can connect with Him better? Surely, I have misunderstood. I think I’ll just leave this one alone except to point out that maybe….instead of humanity the word we should be using is humility. Moving on…
This last statement I have been contemplating for several days. I will try to keep this short.

It seems your goal has been to prove that not everyone within the church agreed with the IC and the PV of Mary. OK…My question is, what does that prove? The fact that some disagreed does not make it false. The fact that the debate took a long time just proves this was not just a rash decision made by a few powerful guys but, that all differing opinions were considered, thoughfully deliberated and was brought to a consensus which should give you more confidence in the result, not less. The fact that the ones that disagreed were “good catholics” as you like to put it, doesn’t really prove anything either. Question: Did any of these “good catholics” split from the church as a result of these differences? The answer to that should prove something to YOU. The one guy that did ultimately split from the church doesn’t even hold the same views as you. So what do you have? 1) Scripture is vague on the subject. 2) A few guys within the church did not totally agree. 3) The debate took a long time. And 4) Your personal interpretations.

Personally, I think, if you weren’t careful, you could talk yourself right out of believing there even is a God at all. If I showed you a bunch of historical records and writings of men that disagreed there was a God, would that make it so?**

 

[kellerk]

tq- yeah, I just caught that…too bad huh, I had been working on that for a few days.

 

[tqualey]

Hi Kellerk,

Hey, the time was well spent - we can all learn new things about our Faith and the people that helped pass it forward to us!

Save what you did (like maybe in Word document) so you can call it back up when this matter re-surfaces … as it surely will.

God bless

tq- yeah, I just caught that…too bad huh, I had been working on that for a few days.

 

[brumano]

Thank-you, good response. Is your question that the Word upholds Church teaching or that the Word tells of a Truthful Church ? As you probably know we have differences in the definition of Church ,and in just what manner He keeps His promise to guide us.As you state ,our purpose is to love him ,and I would add to have a relationship with Him. He can tell us about His Word ,His Body ,His teachers, pastors ,bishops, His doings of yesterday ,today and tomorrow ,etc.etc…Perhaps you mean scriptural backing for these disputed doctrines, for which I acknowledge them , but they have their counterparts which also must be acknowledged/weighed.

That’s right, well part right as I said and so the true church which has Christ’s own authority to teach down through the ages must also do the weighing and the discerning, as to what the scriptures mean, and what are the truly right moral rules to uphold, again as absolutes not just as ongoing issues.
You refuse the Doctrine of the Immaculate Conception of Mary, you must therefore have an opposing doctrine of Mary of your own, it is your own because it is not given from the scriptures, A scriptural doctrine has to have positivity in the scriptures; Mary Ever Virgin is absolute scripturally, the weight of the scriptures being so massive as well as Christologic, that an opposing doctrine is crushed into nothingness, it does not matter in the least how confidently anyone may think personally of a null doctrine; truth is absolute and eternal.

 

[brumano]

Jospeh knew Mary after she gave birth to our Lord and Savior because the bible says so.

 

[Ubenedictus]

what statements would you like referenced ? Rebuttal or differing views did not wait till 16th century . A brother above gave a nice link to St Jerome and Helvidius ,discussing this same issue ,back in 4-5th century .

not really, they werent ‘discussion’, Jerome was accusing helvidius of heresy, misinterpretation of scripture and unfaithfulness to God’s words.
Ubenedictus

 

[dsully]

Somebody recommended to me, Hail Holy Queen by Scott Hahn. I will still probably read the book, but I was also able to find these podcasts on one of Hahn’s sites. They are conversations with Mike Aquilina about Mary.

salvationhistory.com/audio-resources

You will find the Mary podcasts on the second row of shows.

All in all I am starting to like Scott Hahn a lot more. He has a lot of the qualities that I like best about Protestant pastors (love of the word of God, ability to grasp and communicate the big ideas of Scripture, passion for preaching Christ) but obviously he brings out Catholic teachings from the Bible.

Dan

 

[Ubenedictus]

Ubenedictus;9480955:

Regenerated and born again are the same thing. Jesus told Nicodemus that a leader of Israel should know of “new birth”, being born in the spirit. This was told to Nicodemus as if it was in the past and present . and future. .OT saints WERE regenerated. They were justified ,righteous ,by FAITH in God’s provision/covering ,not animal sacrifice.Come on you are quoting from Hebrews , it is there.They look forward to Calvary as we look backwards for justification.

they looked forward to calvary, that doesnt mean they were born again. Nicodemus could only have known about being born again(Jesus thought he should know) by reading the prophesy of the prophets. They couldnt be born again.
Ubenedictus

 

[Ubenedictus]

Again disagree Theotukus has nothing to do with disputed Marian doctrines. What you think is gained by a perfect womb in terms of His divinity, you lose in terms of his humanity (a womb unlike any other human)…That a virgin Mary bore Emanual was not dependent on IC or ever-virgin or Assumption, hence you have Theotokus with either doctrine

i didnt say, the theotokus is dependet on the IC, i said all other marian doctrines flow from the theotokus, it seems you are reading from bottom to top. Have you read the proclamation of the IC? If you have, you would notice that the pope identifies that she is the IC because God prepared her to give birth to Jesus, the early fathers usually bases their belief in d virginity of mary on ezk44. They say because God has passed thru that ‘gate’, that gate will remain closed. So again d pepertual virginity flows from the theotokus.
Ubenedictus

 

[Ubenedictus]

“Then Pope St. Pius V, in 1567 (DS 1973) condemned the error of Baius who said Our Lady was subject to original sin.” Baius was a Catholic theologian,never lost his teaching post.

yeah he couldnt lose his teaching post because nobody had proclaim the dogma, pope puis was simply keeping the tradition. Read about the earliest schism those guys werent in schism even though they held a wrong doctrine untill true doctrine was proclaimed and the wrong one condemned. Any church father could tell them than their doctrine was wrong yet till true doctrine was define they were ok. The same happen to baius.

 

[tqualey]

Hi, Ubenedictus,

One of the things I have found to be profoundly sad about the majority of Protestant argumentation is that even if the words clearly identify Catholic Doctrine (Real Presence, Sacrament of Penance, etc) there is still an argument because the Words must pass through each individual filter of private interpretation.

Another sad aspect is that Protestant have deliberately chosen to have this chaos becaue no one can authoratively interpret Scripture with the guarantee of no error - as Christ promised to His Church. There is no escape from the Protestant because no other authority besides Scripture (Sola Scriptura) is falsely recognized.

Now, a simply trip through Scripture revelas that Scripture makes no claim it is the Only Authority - or even less logically - that Scripture interprets intself. These are truly the traditions of men who have for almost 500 years continue to splinter further away from the the Truth. But the trip can not end with Scripture becase, in reality, in never really began there - it was the Catholic Church that gave us the Canon of Scripture and it is this same Church that has the unique Authority given by Christ, to clearly interpret what was said and what is meant. We are very blessed to be in the Catholic Church.

By the way, take a look at Post #604 for an update.

God bless

i didnt say, the theotokus is dependet on the IC, i said all other marian doctrines flow from the theotokus, it seems you are reading from bottom to top. Have you read the proclamation of the IC? If you have, you would notice that the pope identifies that she is the IC because God prepared her to give birth to Jesus, the early fathers usually bases their belief in d virginity of mary on ezk44. They say because God has passed thru that ‘gate’, that gate will remain closed. So again d pepertual virginity flows from the theotokus.
Ubenedictus