Was Mary Predestined?

[Guyonthestreet]

Yes. I do, however need to explain what that means, or you are going to accuse me of all kinds of things. Jesus Christ is sufficient. He did not need Mary to participate in the suffering, but he chose to allow her to participate. Here is an analogy (A can’t take credit for it, it comes from Rosalind Moss): Imagine a mother is at home with her young daughter. It is nap time for the daughter, and she sets the toddler down for a nap. Then mom decides to bake a cake for her husband. Well, as she is getting the ingredients out, the daughter hears and comes out of the bedroom. Seeing that mom is getting ready to make something, she asks, “Can I help, Mommy?” Of course the mother allows her daughter to help. Mom measured things out and the daughter will put them in the bowl, the daughter will hold on to the spoon as Mom mixes. The daughter licks the bowl. After dinner, they are eating cake and the father comments on how good it is. The daughter says “I helped make it, Daddy!” He replies “You did?” And he finishes the cake. Some questions: Was the mother alone sufficient in making the cake? Yes she was. Did the daughter help? Yes she did. Did it add something to the cake for the father? Yes it did. The same is true with Mary. She was not needed, because Christ is sufficient, but since he allowed her to participate in the suffering it adds a richness, a depth, to our faith that would not be there if she was not involved.

I get lost with all this poetic justification for Mary’s position.

In what way was Mary specifically allowed to share in the suffering of Christ, that would be any different to any mother seeing her son suffering?

She couldnt NOT participate in His suffering.

But in what way, specifically, does this add anything to the work of Christ on the Cross.

On a human level, her heart must have been rent apart, seeing her son suffer like that - but I cant see how that fact is somehow imbued with some sort of salvic power that compliments what Christ went through.

But I accept my understanding is far from perfect - thats why Im asking questions.

 

[Guyonthestreet]

Mary suffered an intercedes for us

Agreed.

 

[choy]

It’s very difficult for me to explore Mary as the new Eve because Jesus is considered the second Adam. Since Jesus is tne 2nd person of the godhead, it does not seem right to compare a creature (Mary) with the creator (Jesus) in regards to the theological importance between the first Adam and second Adam. When you study Romans chapter 5 in regards to the first Adam and second Adam, Mary is never mentioned. Is there anything in Scripture which would point Mary as being the new Eve?

it is not a comparison but a contrast. Eve brought sin into the world by saying YES to temptation. Mary brought salvation into the world by saying YES to God’s plan.

while not directly mentioned, it is believed that it is Mary who is described in Rev 12 as the woman clothed with the sun. because in verse 5 it is said that:

The woman was delivered of a boy, the son who was to rule all the nations with an iron sceptre, and the child was taken straight up to God and to his throne

the description of the woman fits Mary. and in this chapter describes Mary’s conflict with the dragon/serpent (a dragon is a type of serpent) with which is the prophesy given to Eve, that she will crush the serpent’s head and it will strike her heel.

 

[Guyonthestreet]

with which is the prophesy given to Eve, that she will crush the serpent’s head and it will strike her heel.

Isnt there a dispute over the translation of this part? That the pronoun used could have been ‘‘he’’ not ‘‘she’’.?

 

[2nd_Adam]

it is not a comparison but a contrast. Eve brought sin into the world by saying YES to temptation. Mary brought salvation into the world by saying YES to God’s plan.

while not directly mentioned, it is believed that it is Mary who is described in Rev 12 as the woman clothed with the sun. because in verse 5 it is said that:

The woman was delivered of a boy, the son who was to rule all the nations with an iron sceptre, and the child was taken straight up to God and to his throne

the description of the woman fits Mary. and in this chapter describes Mary’s conflict with the dragon/serpent (a dragon is a type of serpent) with which is the prophesy given to Eve, that she will crush the serpent’s head and it will strike her heel.

Thanks for the response, it was very good. Since God knew Mary’s response before Mary, salvation did not rest in Mary’s cooperation with God. God uses individuals to fulfill what He has ordained before the foundations of the world including Judas, Peter, and Mary. Without Judas, we have no glorious gospel. Peter wanted to do things contrary to the glorious cross, but God prevented Him from changing the predetermined plan of the cross. So, in this discussion, Mary and Judas played similar singnificant roles to fullifill the glorious gospel of God. Yet, they both could not change the plan of God, nor can any man or woman. It could be said the same for Adam and Eve. We know God is not the author of evil, nor did He cause Adam and Eve to fall… because God cannot be tempted by evil. It is impossilbe for God to sin, or do the wrong thing. However, without the fall of mankind, we would not know the love of God being demonstrated to us through the cross of Christ… which is so glorious!

Have you personally received Mary as your co-redeemer? If so, in what way has Mary redeemed you in regards to the Christian doctrine of redemption and the atonement?

 

[choy]

Thanks for the response, it was very good. Since God knew Mary’s response before Mary, salvation did not rest in Mary’s cooperation with God. God uses individuals to fulfill what He has ordained before the foundations of the world including Judas, Peter, and Mary. Without Judas, we have no glorious gospel. Peter wanted to do things contrary to the glorious cross, but God prevented Him from changing the predetermined plan of the cross. So, in this discussion, Mary and Judas played similar singnificant roles to fullifill the glorious gospel of God. Yet, they both could not change the plan of God, nor can any man or woman. It could be said the same for Adam and Eve. We know God is not the author of evil, nor did He cause Adam and Eve to fall… because God cannot be tempted by evil. It is impossilbe for God to sin, or do the wrong thing. However, without the fall of mankind, we would not know the love of God being demonstrated to us through the cross of Christ… which is so glorious!

Have you personally received Mary as your co-redeemer? If so, in what way has Mary redeemed you in regards to the Christian doctrine of redemption and the atonement?

its hard to argue after the fact. we can never know if Mary could have said ‘no’ because she said ‘yes’. its like saying, did God pre-determine that i am to marry my wife? all we know right now is she said ‘yes’. we can argue about her saying ‘no’ but what proof could we had that she could have said ‘no’? therefore you can say me and my wife were pre-determined to get married by God.

i believe Mary could have said no. and if she did then God would have a backup plan. in fact, we may not know, maybe Mary was not the first choice to bear the Messiah. someone in the past said ‘no’ and nothing was written of them. maybe yes, maybe no. its near impossible to prove anything other than what has already transpired.

of course God did choose someone who He knows in all likelihood say ‘yes’. but that doesn’t mean Mary couldn’t have said ‘no’. salvation is not possible without the cooperation of man. and Mary’s cooperation made this possible

 

[2nd_Adam]

its hard to argue after the fact. we can never know if Mary could have said ‘no’ because she said ‘yes’. its like saying, did God pre-determine that i am to marry my wife? all we know right now is she said ‘yes’. we can argue about her saying ‘no’ but what proof could we had that she could have said ‘no’? therefore you can say me and my wife were pre-determined to get married by God.

i believe Mary could have said no. and if she did then God would have a backup plan. in fact, we may not know, maybe Mary was not the first choice to bear the Messiah. someone in the past said ‘no’ and nothing was written of them. maybe yes, maybe no. its near impossible to prove anything other than what has already transpired.

of course God did choose someone who He knows in all likelihood say ‘yes’. but that doesn’t mean Mary couldn’t have said ‘no’. salvation is not possible without the cooperation of man. and Mary’s cooperation made this possible

It’s the same with Judas and his role of salvation. I don’t want to make Mary an issue for unity or separation. However, I do have concerns of Catholic teaching on Mary in regards to redemption. The main question that seems to be central would have to be the role of Mary as co-redeemer. I know it is not Catholic dogma, but there is such a mixed belief with Catholics with Mary being a co-redeemer with Christ. Do you personally see Mary as your co-redeemer in any way in regards to the doctrine of redemption and atonement? Mary had a very significant role in fulfilling God’s plan of redemption. However, when you think about it, the death of Christ is actually spoken more of in Scripture than the birth of Christ. Therefore, we can say Judas played in a more significant role in Christ and Him crucified for sinners than the role of Mary. Christ was sent into this sin cursed world by God the Father to die. The death of Christ is the death of deaths.