Questions on Mary from Protestant 101

[pedja]

He said ‘blessed are those who hear the word of God and keep it’ and that those who do so are his true mother and brothers.

Now are you seriously suggesting that there’s anybody you could name apart from Christ himself who heard and kept God’s word better than Mary? She who alone of all the Apostles and disciples *never *stuffed up, never put a foot wrong, never disbelieved, denied or betrayed like Peter and Judas, nor persecuted his followers like Paul.

He most certainly IS accrediting her with special status with this statement. To do otherwise would be breaking the commandment to honour his mother, and thus sinning. Impossible for Jesus.

He just points out that her special status is not based on biology alone. He is re-affirming WHY she’s the greatest of all God’s creatures, and thus closest to his heart. And thus worthiest to be called His mother, as she truly is in every sense

God`s commandment is “Honor your father and your mother”. In that context Jesus honored his mother AND father equally. Otherwise Jesus would be breaking the commandment He himself established.

 

[LilyM]

God`s commandment is “Honor your father and your mother”. In that context Jesus honored his mother AND father equally. Otherwise Jesus would be breaking the commandment He himself established.

So he gave Mary as much honour as he gave God the Father? Even we don’t suggest that any creature deserves the same honour as almighty God

But he certainly honoured her above all other creatures, and rightly so. And if we are truly his brothers and ‘co-heirs’, then we must honour her as our own mother like John did.

Even more, if we are truly Jesus’ disciples we are to love her as Jesus did. And he commanded us to ‘love one another as = to the same degree, in the same manner] I have loved you’.

He loved Mary specially, no doubt about it, so should we then.

 

[pedja]

He said ‘blessed are those who hear the word of God and keep it’ and that those who do so are his true mother and brothers.

Now are you seriously suggesting that there’s anybody you could name apart from Christ himself who heard and kept God’s word better than Mary? She who unlike all the Apostles and disciples *never *stuffed up, never put a foot wrong, never disbelieved, denied or betrayed like Peter and Judas, nor ran away from the Cross, nor persecuted his followers like Paul.

You have no way of knowing this. You want to believe that it was so. And even if she kept God`s word correctly and never doubted Him, she was certainly not the only one.

He most certainly IS accrediting her with special status with this statement. To do otherwise would be breaking the commandment to honour his mother, and thus sinning. Impossible for Jesus.

He just points out that her special status is not based on biology alone. He is re-affirming WHY she’s the greatest of all God’s creatures, and thus closest to his heart. And thus worthiest to be called His mother, as she truly is in every sense

And ‘woman’ was actually a term of great respect, in no way dismissive or putting her down at all. He was a grown man, in those days they never called their mothers ‘mother’ in public. And it’s only his public sayings and doings that are recorded.

So if **everybody **called their mother woman (in public), how is that proof that He is attributing anything special to her again?

 

[LilyM]

You have no way of knowing this. You want to believe that it was so. And even if she kept God`s word correctly and never doubted Him, she was certainly not the only one.

Who else did then? Who? Even John the Baptist didn’t want to baptise Jesus when Jesus requested it, which was a doubt and a failure in keeping God’s word correctly, and John was called by Jesus the greatest of men!

So if **everybody **called their mother woman (in public), how is that proof that He is attributing anything special to her again?

No, nothing special in it - just countering the idea, which you seemed to be implying, that there was anything derogatory or dismissive in the fact that he isn’t recorded as calling her mother.

But bear in mind that with almost his last breath on the cross he is concerned with her welfare above all. Not Mary Magdalene’s, not any of his other friends or relations, not even John’s, since John already had a mother of his own and didn’t need a second one, but Mary’s. How is this not singling her out and indicating his love of her above all others?

 

[pedja]

Who else did then? Who? Even John the Baptist didn’t want to baptise Jesus when Jesus requested it, which was a doubt and a failure in keeping God’s word correctly, and John was called by Jesus the greatest of men!

No, nothing special in it - just countering the idea, which you seemed to be implying, that there was anything derogatory or dismissive in the fact that he isn’t recorded as calling her mother.

But bear in mind that with almost his last breath on the cross he is concerned with her welfare above all. Not Mary Magdalene’s, not any of his other friends or relations, not even John’s, since John already had a mother of his own and didn’t need a second one, but Mary’s. How is this not singling her out and indicating his love of her above all others?

I wasnt implying the idea of anything dismissive etc. He didn`t call her anything special though, He simply called her woman. Jesus was not only her son but also her heavenly Father.

I think this is why He is treating her like anybody else, in saying that He actually has no mother, brother or sister but that everybody who is lives according to His will is his mother and brother!

On the cross He is talking to her not as her son but as her God! Maybe Mary was the most emotional one and Jesus saw that she would need somebody to take care of her, which is why He appointed John to do that. And of course there is nothing wrong about it, it is what you would expect Jesus to do. And of course it is possible that He loved her more because she was his mother on this earth but as God it is impossible for him to love more or less, he loves equally.!

 

[Protestant101]

Luke 1:41 IS the account of Mary’s visit - as I said, it is UPON hearing Mary’s greeting that Elizabeth is said to be filled with the Holy Spirit. There is no hint at all that PRIOR to hearing Mary’s greeting Elizabeth was filled with the Holy pirit - or indeed touched by that particular personage in the slightest. It happened at the time Mary greeted her - ‘when my ears heard your greeting’ as Elizabeth says.

What scriptural or other basis do you have for this other gibberish you’re saying about ‘overflowing’ or being fuller than full of the Holy Spirit??? That’s a completely nonsensical and unscriptural idea.

Well, to me, the mystery of Bethlehem is incomprehensible; and yet, it is a positive fact. That a body (Mary) should be formed for the Son of God by the over-shadowing of the Holy Spirit; and that the Holy Spirit should dwell in Christ of Bethlehem, is such a miracle of divine power! And this same Spirit will even now come and dwell in the bodies of sinful men and women is the supreme “mystery” of God’s grace; we are “the temple of the Holy Ghost.” (1 Cor.6:19-20).

Elizabeth would be no exception, as she gave birth to a baby “in her old age.” She conceived her child 6 months before Mary.

A once and for all filling of the Spirit is not taught in the Bible. We must note the various purposes for which people were filled with the Spirit in Apostolic times:

A) For witness – (Acts 2:4)
B) For answering objections – (Acts 4:8)
C) For speaking boldly God’s Word – (Acts 4:31)
D) For serving tables – (Acts 6:2-3)
E) For suffering persecution and martyrdom – (Acts 7:55)
F) For exposing evil – (Acts 13:9-10)
G) For praising or giving thanks – (Eph.5:18-20)

The last item I have listed is certainly applicable for both Mary and Elizabeth. Their wonderful testimony to one another is all the proof I need of their infilling of the Holy Spirit.

It is true that when a person is truly “filled” with the Spirit, that they do not just get filled once, and then that’s it. Jesus said:

**Joh 7:38 **He that believeth on me, as the scripture hath said, out of his belly shall flow rivers of living water.
**Joh 7:39 **(But this spake he of the Spirit, which they that believe on him should receive: for the Holy Ghost was not yet given; because that Jesus was not yet glorified.)

The Holy Spirit is signified in Scripture by “living water” and by “rivers of living water.” Every river must have an outlet, or it ceases to be a river. The inflow depends upon the outflow. The Bible in reflecting upon redeemed people today, shows that a Christian is a channel through which the Holy Spirit may reach other lives; either that, or a person simply becomes a great dam, blocking the work of God’s Spirit.

By His reference to the flow of “rivers of living water;” Jesus “spake of the Spirit” which they that believe on Him should receive. I am glad that Jesus made this so plain. I am glad that Mary & Elizabeth both accepted this infilling of the Spirit in their pilgrim journey, along with all the other faithful of the ages.

 

[LilyM]

And of course there is nothing wrong about it, it is what you would expect Jesus to do. And of course it is possible that He loved her more because she was his mother on this earth but as God it is impossible for him to love more or less, he loves equally.!

He loves everyone greatly to be sure. But if he loved everyone exactly the same he would have treated everyone the same. He didn’t.

That’s why John was singled out as ‘the disciple Jesus loved’ (clearly because he was somehow favoured over the others), and that’s why he singled out Mary for John to take care of as opposed to any of the others. Does it sound to you like Mary Magdalene was not also heartbroken or in need of John’s help? How about Peter? You think he wasn’t crying and grieving just as bitterly too? What about Judas who was so distraught he committed suicide? “Hey John, while you’re at it, watch out for Judas, he doesn’t feel too good about what he’s done” - no? Why not?

Clearly Jesus loved and cared for his mother Mary more than all of these.

 

[LilyM]

We must note the various purposes for which people were filled with the Spirit in Apostolic times:

A) For witness – (Acts 2:4)
B) For answering objections – (Acts 4:8)
C) For speaking boldly God’s Word – (Acts 4:31)
D) For serving tables – (Acts 6:2-3)
E) For suffering persecution and martyrdom – (Acts 7:55)
F) For exposing evil – (Acts 13:9-10)
G) For praising or giving thanks – (Eph.5:18-20)

The last item I have listed is certainly applicable for both Mary and Elizabeth. Their wonderful testimony to one another is all the proof I need of their infilling of the Holy Spirit.

But NOT - I repeat - NOT simply for removing barrenness! Not Sarah, nor Rachel, nor Samson’s nor Samuel’s mothers are described as being touched by the Holy Spirit when their barrenness was removed from them.

The POINT at which the Holy Spirit is FIRST described as touching Elizabeth IS at the point of Mary’s greeting to her. THAT is the point at which Elizabeth gives her testimony. Not one second before.

 

[Maria1212]

I see most of the Catholic teachings on Mary as stemming from pagan concepts, and Apocryphal legends, which have grown to be called “Tradition,” by the Catholic Church. Vine.”

Hi Protestant 101,

If I may clarify, there are no Catholic teachings that contradict the Bible. However, unlike Adentists, Catholics do not consider the oral teachings of the Apostles to be pagan.

One stumbling block to understanding the Catholic viewpoint is limiting ones thinking to "either/or" categories, as you are doing by restricting Gods world to Sola Scrpitura. Most Christians, with the exception of Adventists, believe in the Trinity, the canon of the Bible, and the death of the last Apostle closing the deposit of faith, even though they are not found explicitly in the Bible. (As you know, Adventists initially rejected belief in the Trinity but later reversed their opinion. Moreover, Adventists believe the teachings of Ellen White, which rejects the deposit of faith closing with the death of the last Apostle).

Catholics accept both the Bible and Tradition. However, all Catholic beliefs about Mary are found in the Bible, but some are more fully developed in conjunction with Sacred Tradition… Moreover, the Bible never places Mary in opposition to Jesus, and neither does the Catholic Church.

Many persons and events in the Old Testamant, prefigured or foreshadowed (anticipated) and symbolized persons and events in the New Testament. That being said, Catholics read the Bible in a literal sense. Scripture, typological, moral, and analogical are all based on the literal.

I know Adventists find Catholic teaching on Mary incorrect because you personally do not see it spelled out explicitly in Scripture. But when you one reads the Bible using the above method, Mary`s special role is clearly revealed in the Old Testament, as in the New Testament.

I am not trying to change your mind, but rather show you where our beliefs come from. This is not possible for me to explain if you do not understand the way Catholics read the Bible. We read it as a whole and see the Old Testament fulfilled in the New Testament.

Sincerely,

Maria1212

 

[Maria1212]

You could as well argue that Jesus did not pay any special attention to Mary at all.

Before He died, He did not even call Mary mother but woman`. Again Jesus is doing absolutely nothing to show that Mary shold hold any superior or special position.

Dear Pedja,

I strongly disagree. Jesus spoke only seven times from the Cross. He was doing more than just making domestic arrangements for his Mom. Moreover, God honored Mary above all other creatures by making her the mother of His Son.

Sincerely,

Maria1212

 

[Maria1212]

Hi,

I just learned about some great resources on another thread. In particular:

pjpiisoe.org/Resources_Pamphlets.html#Anchor_Mariology

pjpiisoe.org/pamphlets/199MarysRoleInOurSalvation.pdf

Sincerely,

Maria1212

 

[pedja]

He loves everyone greatly to be sure. But if he loved everyone exactly the same he would have treated everyone the same. He didn’t.

That’s why John was singled out as ‘the disciple Jesus loved’ (clearly because he was somehow favoured over the others), and that’s why he singled out Mary for John to take care of as opposed to any of the others. Does it sound to you like Mary Magdalene was not also heartbroken or in need of John’s help? How about Peter? You think he wasn’t crying and grieving just as bitterly too? What about Judas who was so distraught he committed suicide? “Hey John, while you’re at it, watch out for Judas, he doesn’t feel too good about what he’s done” - no? Why not?

Clearly Jesus loved and cared for his mother Mary more than all of these.

Again, this is only your personal opinion, which I still quite don’t understand. You said “if God loved everyone the same he would have treated everyone the same”. How can you determine what God would have or would not have done if…etc? There is no Biblical justification that God loves some people more and some less!

I can understand that you, or generally spoken WE, treat people that way. That is normal to us because we don’t know any better or maybe because we simply cannot love everybody equally. How could you love somebody you don’t even know more than let’s say your own child? But it is different with God since we are ALL his creation.

According to your logic we should then also be praying to Enoch because he was SO GOOD that God even took him away to heaven (which He didn’t do with Mary).

 

[pedja]

Dear Pedja,

I strongly disagree. Jesus spoke only seven times from the Cross. He was doing more than just making domestic arrangements for his Mom. Moreover, God honored Mary above all other creatures by making her the mother of His Son.

Sincerely,

Maria1212

He gave John the honour of baptizing Him. He gave the prophets the honour to proclaim His will. He gave Moses the honour of leading His people out of slavery…

 

[josephdavid]

Enoch because he was SO GOOD that God even took him away to heaven (which He didn’t do with Mary).

Can you show that Mary was not taken to Heaven? Why would He not take Mary to Heaven?

It is true God loves all of us equally and totally but with that said He obviously has a special purpose for Mary. Remember we all believe that God knows of the future long before the future is present. So he knew that Mary would be the Mother of His Child.

But the tradition of Mary assumption into Heaven does not need to proven in Scriptures, because we have Sacred Tradition. Remember what is taught in John 21:25 and before that remember what Christ said to John as He was dying on the Cross in John 19:26-27.

Earlier in this thread some one mentioned that St. Ignatius wrote about Mary being the Mother of God. Is he wrong? Afterall he was a disciple of St. John who was the Apostle of Christ. Further more St. Ignatius live in Antioch whom also both Peter and Paul had planted the faith there. Did John who was filled by the Holy Spirit through Jesus Christ, teach Ignatius incorrectly?

 

[CherryBomb]

One stumbling block to understanding the Catholic viewpoint is limiting ones thinking to "either/or" categories, as you are doing by restricting Gods world to Sola Scrpitura.
Catholics accept both the Bible and Tradition.

I agree with this. I find this is definitely a big issue in trying to explain Catholic beliefs to non-Catholic friends and family! Scripture and Tradition are both vitally important.

 

[pedja]

I agree with this. I find this is definitely a big issue in trying to explain Catholic beliefs to non-Catholic friends and family! Scripture and Tradition are both vitally important.

Scripture yes. Tradition? Whos tradition? Weren`t Jews keeping the tradition as well and exactly because of that Jesus was telling them off?

 

[josephdavid]

I agree with this. I find this is definitely a big issue in trying to explain Catholic beliefs to non-Catholic friends and family! Scripture and Tradition are both vitally important.

Oh good I am not the only one. My father’s side of the family is all Born Again Baptists and used to frequently question Catholism. Fortunately my Grandmother was the only one who would ask questions to understand not to judge.

Actually it was her giving me my first Bible that lead me there. I started to read it in college and it just led me to the Catholic faith. She was puzzled by that up to her death last month but she accepted it none the less.

 

[pedja]

Can you show that Mary was not taken to Heaven? Why would He not take Mary to Heaven?

It is true God loves all of us equally and totally but with that said He obviously has a special purpose for Mary. Remember we all believe that God knows of the future long before the future is present. So he knew that Mary would be the Mother of His Child.

But the tradition of Mary assumption into Heaven does not need to proven in Scriptures, because we have Sacred Tradition. Remember what is taught in John 21:25 and before that remember what Christ said to John as He was dying on the Cross in John 19:26-27.

Earlier in this thread some one mentioned that St. Ignatius wrote about Mary being the Mother of God. Is he wrong? Afterall he was a disciple of St. John who was the Apostle of Christ. Further more St. Ignatius live in Antioch whom also both Peter and Paul had planted the faith there. Did John who was filled by the Holy Spirit through Jesus Christ, teach Ignatius incorrectly?

So what are we doing now, both speculating if Mary was taken to heaven? Well it does say for Enoch and Elijah that they were taken to heaven, why then make an exception and not tell us if she went to heaven as well?

You say He had a special purpose for Mary. Of course He had, but he also had many other very special purposes for many other special people throughout the history! The Bible is FULL of such examples of God`s specially chosen people! Yet we still dont pray to none of them.

You say the tradition doesnt need to be proven by the Bible. Well then my tradition doesnt need to be proven by the Bible either. Your tradiotion is human, mine as well. We can easily end up talking about human traditions, you can claim they are based in the Bible, I can do the exact same thing. And all I can say is that your tradition (Mary holding a special place) is not proven by the scripture.

John didnt teach Ignatius incorrectly but you dont know if Ignatius might not have expressed things the way he understood it. Then I could also say Matthew, Mark, John and Luke disagree and contradict many times on certain things- did Jesus teach them wrong?!

 

[josephdavid]

**1)**You say the tradition doesnt need to be proven by the Bible.

**2)**Then I could also say Matthew, Mark, John and Luke disagree and contradict many times on certain things- did Jesus teach them wrong?!

1. Tradition is mentioned and expected to be followed claimed in the New Testement. Said by Jesus, by Peter and by Paul especially.
2. Before or after they were filled with the Holy Spirit and Jesus willed them to teach all nations and make disciples? If the then the Holy Spirit professes through the 12 disciples is the Holy Spirit incorrect? Did not Jesus say that Satan will not prevail over the His Church? Also do not forget Jesus did command that “What ever you shall bind here on Earth shall be bound in Heaven”

So I am not sure how you would believe in the end the Holy Apostles were wrong?

More over the confusion of “praying” to Mary. Catholics do not pray to Mary in the same sense of praying to God. Not at all. In fact we ask her to pray for us, much in same fashion I would ask you to pray for me.

Again I believe perhaps Protestants should study the CCC to see clearly that Catholics are not to worship Mary nor hold her at same level as God the Father, God the Son or God the Holy Spirit.

 

[pedja]

1. Tradition is mentioned and expected to be followed claimed in the New Testement. Said by Jesus, by Peter and by Paul especially.
2. Before or after they were filled with the Holy Spirit and Jesus willed them to teach all nations and make disciples? If the then the Holy Spirit professes through the 12 disciples is the Holy Spirit incorrect? Did not Jesus say that Satan will not prevail over the His Church? Also do not forget Jesus did command that “What ever you shall bind here on Earth shall be bound in Heaven”

So I am not sure how you would believe in the end the Holy Apostles were wrong?

More over the confusion of “praying” to Mary. Catholics do not pray to Mary in the same sense of praying to God. Not at all. In fact we ask her to pray for us, much in same fashion I would ask you to pray for me.

Again I believe perhaps Protestants should study the CCC to see clearly that Catholics are not to worship Mary nor hold her at same level as God the Father, God the Son or God the Holy Spirit.

Ok, that is not a problem for me, but again, you asking Mary to pray for you is not backed up by scripture at all. And then I just wonder why are you doing it? Neither can we know if she`s dead or alive nor is it required to pray to God **through **her. If she died then why are you praying to someone who is dead?