Who really cares what the ECF's had to say?

[Anglian]

Greetings. Why is the Catholic denomination still trying to put forth more Mary dogmas?

..

Dear LLOJ

Katherine is an Orthodox Christian, so no point asking her - or me. We don't belong to an organised Church.

Peace,

Anglian

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

Dear LLOJ

Katherine is an Orthodox Christian, so no point asking her - or me. We don't belong to an organised Church.

Peace,

Anglian

Ooops. My bad. I didn't notice that

 

[Anglian]

Dear LLOJ,

I'm sure that your question is being answered in the Mariology thread, which is perhaps the best place for it. This one has enough red herrings to stock a delicatessen, and sufficient straw men to field a baseball match already

On the OP, I do think we have established that we should all care, whether we read them directly or not, for we read their influence even in the canon we receive.

I guess, however, that with GA closed, we were bound to end up somewhere else with our own version of Bob Dylans's never ending road-show

Peace,

Anglian

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

Dear LLOJ,

I'm sure that your question is being answered in the Mariology thread, which is perhaps the best place for it. This one has enough red herrings to stock a delicatessen, and sufficient straw men to field a baseball match already

On the OP, I do think we have established that we should all care, whether we read them directly or not, for we read their influence even in the canon we receive.

I guess, however, that with GA closed, we were bound to end up somewhere else with our own version of Bob Dylans's never ending road-show

Peace,

Anglian

They re-opened it yesterday

http://christianforums.com/showthread.php?t=7267438&page=2

 

[Anglian]

Dear LLOJ,

Thanks for the heads up on that

Perhaps those themes unconnected with the main thrust of the OP can be taken across there for the usual dusting off?

Peace,

Anglian

 

[beamishboy]

Not to mention that if Jesus had repudiated His mother, He would not have been sinless since He would have broken the commandment to honor His parents (and Mary was in every way His mother--she was not just a tube He passed through). I would also argue that He didn't repudiate His mother since He loved and was concerned enough with her wellbeing after His death that He made sure she was taken care of (assigning her to the Apostle John's care).

As he broke the commandment on the Sabbath? As he broke Mosaic law to stone adulterous women?

Besides, what he did was not a violation of the fifth commandment. He, as God, has the right to send Mary to hell if she didn't repent of her sins and accept Jesus. Are you saying that Jesus has no power to condemn Mary if she should, of her own free will, choose not to believe in Him and reject Him as Saviour? Your mistake is a very human mistake. You forget Jesus is God and Mary but a poor sinner forgiven by Jesus and cleansed by Him.

 

[Anglian]

Dear Beamishboy,

As he broke the commandment on the Sabbath? As he broke Mosaic law to stone adulterous women?

Your misreadings seem endless. Christ did not break the law, He corrected the Pharisaical literal misreading of it; neither did He stone anyone, least of all the woman taken in adultery in the Johannine addition. He came to fulfil the law, not to abolish it. Nowhere does He claim the right to violate His own commandments.

You forget Jesus is God and Mary but a poor sinner forgiven by Jesus and cleansed by Him.

No one here is forgetting any such thing. The Spirit, speaking through St. Elizabeth said St. Mary would be called 'blessed'; she is, because we call her so; your refusal to obey the plain word of Scripture is at odds with claims you make elsewhere about plain reading. The eisegesis in which you indulge is clear evidence, were any required, of the wisdom of exegesis within the Holy Tradition of the Church.

Peace,

Anglian
Peace,

Anglian

 

[beamishboy]

Dear Beamishboy,
[/size]
Your misreadings seem endless. Christ did not break the law, He corrected the Pharisaical literal misreading of it; neither did He stone anyone, least of all the woman taken in adultery in the Johannine addition. He came to fulfil the law, not to abolish it. Nowhere does He claim the right to violate His own commandments.


No one here is forgetting any such thing. The Spirit, speaking through St. Elizabeth said St. Mary would be called 'blessed'; she is, because we call her so; your refusal to obey the plain word of Scripture is at odds with claims you make elsewhere about plain reading. The eisegesis in which you indulge is clear evidence, were any required, of the wisdom of exegesis within the Holy Tradition of the Church.

Peace,

Anglian
Peace,

Anglian

Your missing my point seems endless. You folks who are used to venerating Mary have totally misunderstood her and her relationship with Jesus. You take any slight by Jesus on his mother as a breach of the fifth commandment but that is clearly not so.

Should Jesus send Mary to hell if she exercises her free will not to believe in Him? Of course he should and would.

Don't forget that Mary is a poor human sinner in need of grace from Christ. Does Jesus chastise Mary? You bet he does. The Bible tells us that those whom God loves, he also chastises. I daresay God loves Mary and he chastises her. Have you ever considered that Jesus' treatment of her during his early ministry was a chastisement of her for not understanding His ministry? You behave like you're on hot coals every time I show from the Bible that Jesus showed his irritation towards Mary. Maybe not irritation but he was clearly dissatisfied with her.

Please remind yourselves every morning when you wake up that Mary was very much human and if she hadn't repented of her sins and received grace from Jesus, she would be a condemned soul. Remind yourselves that where she erred, Mary was chastised by Jesus because the Bible tells us God chastises those he loves. After you've done that regularly, you'll get used to the idea that Jesus is God and Mary had to go on her knees begging Jesus for mercy and grace. Basically, I just want you guys to get used to the idea that Jesus is God and Mary a poor repentant sinner.

 

[MamaZ]

Dear MamaZ,

You must take your interpretation up with St. Luke, who records the words spoken by St. Elizabeth when the Holy Spirit had entered into her.

It is not part of our Tradition to contradict the direct words of the Holy Spirit, or to claim, by implication, that one part of Holy Scripture contradicts another.

The Holy Spirit said St. Mary would be called 'blessed' and was right, of course, because we called her 'blessed'; of course, if you are right and we should not call her 'blessed', the Holy Spirit would have spoken in error, for no one would have called her 'blessed'. The Holy Spirit or you and the Beamishboy, which is most likely to err?

Peace,

Anglian

Well being that this was a conversation between two women who had the wonderful experience of being born again I can understand these two women discussing this. But what this is not, is a teaching that all Should call her blessed. For all that have had that wonderful experience of being born again are blessed.

 

[MamaZ]

Not to mention that if Jesus had repudiated His mother, He would not have been sinless since He would have broken the commandment to honor His parents (and Mary was in every way His mother--she was not just a tube He passed through). I would also argue that He didn't repudiate His mother since He loved and was concerned enough with her wellbeing after His death that He made sure she was taken care of (assigning her to the Apostle John's care).

What does this have to do with all being blessed? What does this also have to do with Jesus saying that all who hear and do are my mother brother and sister? For Jesus Kindgom is not of this world and according to the flesh. It is a Spirital kingdom born from the Spirit of God.

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

Originally Posted by beamishboy
As he broke the commandment on the Sabbath? As he broke Mosaic law to stone adulterous women?

Your misreadings seem endless. Christ did not break the law, He corrected the Pharisaical literal misreading of it; neither did He stone anyone, least of all the woman taken in adultery in the Johannine addition. He came to fulfil the law, not to abolish it. Nowhere does He claim the right to violate His own commandments.

Greetings Anglian. Now that ya mention John 8, I had a view of what JESUS may have written in the dirt and it may be from that event in Daniel 5. I have a thread on it if thou art interested

http://christianforums.com/t4724863&page=4
John 8 and Jesus writing in the Dirt

John 8:6 This yet they said trying Him, that They may be having to be accusing of Him. The yet Jesus down-stooping, to the finger Wrote into the ground,
7 As yet they persisted asking Him. He up-bends and said toward them "The sinless-one of ye first the stone on her let be casting!
8 And again down-stooping He Wrote into the ground,

 

[Philothei]

You can insult the beamishboy but the beamishboy shrugs off all insults.

It is because Beamishboy is a great theogian ?!..

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

It is because Beamishboy is a great theogian ?!..

The beamishboy is second to none [well, mabye except me] in his correction of those that might lead the little flock astray.
I remember this thread where the beamyboy had to correct AV-VET concerning a "deck of cards" and a "pack of cards"

http://christianforums.com/showthread.php?t=7252245&page=36
My Bicycle Challenge

That's one thing I find irritating about Gramps. Usually, his posts are very short. He usually does not commit himself. He refuses to take me on - when I want to argue with him about the Flood. For all his bravado telling science to take a hike, he can't even argue with a 13 year old. His style is this - he will ask a question rather than take a person directly on an argument. I suspect he knows he hasn't a leg to stand on. Then, he'll insinuate something and when he is cornered and he realises he's wrong, he will challenge you - where exactly did he say it categorically? I find this less than honest. For all my disagreement with atheists, I do find at least that they are more honest. I suppose it's because they don't have to hide. They've got all the evidence on their side. It's we Christians who have no evidence but have to depend on faith who will have to sneak here and there without committing ourselves - particularly if we are fundamentalists - always afraid of being caught out on a limb.

But I belong to a new generation of Christians. Gramps' style of Christianity is outdated. The new generation does not hide. We admit we have no evidence and we believe on faith alone. We accept the obvious truth of evolution. We don't wear blinkers and we don't hide all the time. Hehe.

 

[Anglian]

Dear Beamishboy,

Your authority to speak on the nature of the relationship between Our Saviour and His mother would be precisely what?

Your missing my point seems endless. You folks who are used to venerating Mary have totally misunderstood her and her relationship with Jesus. You take any slight by Jesus on his mother as a breach of the fifth commandment but that is clearly not so.

It may be that living in a Western society you are ignorant of how great the respect shown to mothers in the Middle East by their sons. A public rebuke to a mother from her son would, indeed, be a breach of the commandment to honour thy father and they mother. Next time you are in Egypt, rebuke someone's mother in public - but don't blame me if you are lynched, it is you who seems to think sons rebuking their mothers is no serious matter.

Should Jesus send Mary to hell if she exercises her free will not to believe in Him? Of course he should and would.

No one has suggested otherwise; put the straw man back in your castle.

You behave like you're on hot coals every time I show from the Bible that Jesus showed his irritation towards Mary. Maybe not irritation but he was clearly dissatisfied with her.

So you keep telling us; you are not infallible and must support this argument. As I have pointed out, the social system in the Middle East now, let alone that in Jewish society in the 1st century AD would have made such behaviour a serious matter.

Please remind yourselves every morning when you wake up that Mary was very much human and if she hadn't repented of her sins and received grace from Jesus, she would be a condemned soul.

Second appearance of said straw man; no one here has argued that St. Mary was not human; your anti-Catholic stuff does not work with the Orthodox; find a new record, the one you are using is very scratched.

you'll get used to the idea that Jesus is God

I suspect I had spotted that about 40 years before you were a twinkle in your father's eye; but thanks for confirming you believe this much of what the Church teaches.

and Mary had to go on her knees begging Jesus for mercy and grace

.
Sorry, is this in the Gospel According to the Beamishboy? I can't find St. Mary on her knees begging Jesus in my NT. The examples of your eisegesis multiply in line with the straw man production rate - and speaking of which, here it comes for a third time:

Basically, I just want you guys to get used to the idea that Jesus is God and Mary a poor repentant sinner.

For the third time, no one here has argued anything to the contrary. I don't know whether you are inventing these arguments to have one, at least, that you can win, but they are not ones I have made.

I am sure there is an actual thesis somewhere in what you are saying, but you are, thus far, doing an excellent job of demonstrating how badly one goes wrong by relying on one's own unaided reading of Holy Scripture.

Peace,

Anglian

 

[Gwendolyn]

Beamish boy, you seem to believe some untrue things about beliefs concerning Mary. You accuse the apostolic churches of believing things they do not believe at all. Please don't make assumptions - you know what happens when you "assume"

Mary needed a Saviour. We all need a Saviour. No one said she didn't. Mary is human like we are human. Catholics and Orthodox look at her as a prime example of how to be a Christian - she raised Christ and obeyed the Lord in all things. That's a pretty hefty task, I'd say. It is because Mary chose to say "yes" when she had the full freedom to say "no" to God that she is respected. She humbly submitted herself to God's command, and became the mother of the Incarnate Christ. That is some serious dedication.

 

[beamishboy]

Dear Beamishboy,

Your authority to speak on the nature of the relationship between Our Saviour and His mother would be precisely what?

I would need special authority to comment on the relationship between God the Father and God the Son. But between Jesus and his brothers or Jesus and His mother, my authority comes from the Gospels. Don't you see your problem? Again, you have elevated Mary way too high. Or... can I quote philotei to answer your question? Hehe:

It is because Beamishboy is a great theogian ?!..

It may be that living in a Western society you are ignorant of how great the respect shown to mothers in the Middle East by their sons. A public rebuke to a mother from her son would, indeed, be a breach of the commandment to honour thy father and they mother. Next time you are in Egypt, rebuke someone's mother in public - but don't blame me if you are lynched, it is you who seems to think sons rebuking their mothers is no serious matter.

Nope, your argument does not apply (not in the Middle East, not anywhere) where the Son is God and the mother a poor human sinner. You talk a lot about knowing that Jesus is God and Mary is human but the examples you give don't seem to show that you believe your talk.

I suspect I had spotted that about 40 years before you were a twinkle in your father's eye; but thanks for confirming you believe this much of what the Church teaches.

I don't deny you might be 40 years older. Although your age doesn't appear on your posts, you did mention once that you're a grandpa or something like that.

.

Sorry, is this in the Gospel According to the Beamishboy? I can't find St. Mary on her knees begging Jesus in my NT.

Why? Does the idea of a kneeling grovelling Mary before her God Jesus offend your sensitivities? Now, I hope you understand why I keep reminding people that Jesus is God and Mary a poor repentant sinner. Frequently, we humans tend to say one thing but behave in a totally different way. It's the fault of our species. One may say he knows Jesus is God and Mary but that doesn't mean a thing if his actions and subsequent words show a belief in Mary that is hugely elevated beyond the level of humanity. That is what's so dangerous about Mary veneration. Without realising it, veneration usually leads to deification without the person even realising it.

I am sure there is an actual thesis somewhere in what you are saying, but you are, thus far, doing an excellent job of demonstrating how badly one goes wrong by relying on one's own unaided reading of Holy Scripture.

No, the only difference is I'm not affected by a firm belief or practice that makes it impossible for me to see straight. If someone has a strong cherished belief, and Scriptures oppose that belief, there is a tendency for him and all his co-religionists to stretch Scriptures beyond all recognition as they interpret Scriptures away from its original meaning in order to accommodate that cherished but forbidden belief. To someone outside that religion, the interpretation is wildly wrong; it's obviously so but the chap and his co-religionists will always be blind to this.

I just hope you will consider what I've said. Please don't treat this as a debate and you must not lose to a younger chap. We should just look at scripture without making it say only what we want to hear.

 

[beamishboy]

The beamishboy is second to none [well, mabye except me] in his correction of those that might lead the little flock astray.
I remember this thread where the beamyboy had to correct AV-VET concerning a "deck of cards" and a "pack of cards"

http://christianforums.com/showthread.php?t=7252245&page=36
My Bicycle Challenge

The bit about "deck" of cards came from my ignorance of the peculiarities of American English. I just wanted to know why everyone was saying "deck". AV1611Vet was the one who asked me what the English word was. That part was OK and he still spoke to me normally.

He got mad with me when I corrected him because he said KJV was translated from manuscripts which were in Koine Greek but all other versions were translated from manuscripts which were in Classical Greek, the language of homosexuals!!! I told him he was talking rubbish - the manuscripts were all in Koine Greek and never Classical Greek and besides, I do Classical Greek in school and it's not the language of homosexuals. That offended him mortally and he's ignored beamishboy the valiant knight to this day. He got nicked by the beamishboy's blade, if I may use an allegory with some violence in it. Hehe.

That's why I have to tread carefully. Old folks don't like to be corrected by the beamishboy.

 

[Anglian]

Dear Beamishboy

I would need special authority to comment on the relationship between God the Father and God the Son. But between Jesus and his brothers or Jesus and His mother, my authority comes from the Gospels.

No, it comes from you misreading of them. Simply saying your reading is correct without providing reasons is why suspicions arise that you think you are infallible.

Don't you see your problem? Again, you have elevated Mary way too high. Or... can I quote philotei to answer your question? Hehe:

As in St. Luke, I call her 'blessed'; what's too high there?

Nope, your argument does not apply (not in the Middle East, not anywhere) where the Son is God and the mother a poor human sinner. You talk a lot about knowing that Jesus is God and Mary is human but the examples you give don't seem to show that you believe your talk.

I'm sure there is an argument embedded in your assertions, and when it is expanded, I shall respond to it.

Why? Does the idea of a kneeling grovelling Mary before her God Jesus offend your sensitivities?

I simply asked you for the citation from the Bible for this statement; you do not provide it, because you can't, and you seek to divert the discussion; this record is now very scratched indeed.

Now, I hope you understand why I keep reminding people that Jesus is God and Mary a poor repentant sinner

No, I have no idea, since I have been aware of it for ever such a long time - it is there in Holy Tradition. Your usual anti-Catholic stuff simply does not work with the Orthodox, but is clearly so embedded that you can't help it coming out.

. Frequently, we humans tend to say one thing but behave in a totally different way. It's the fault of our species.

It is called Original Sin.

That is what's so dangerous about Mary veneration. Without realising it, veneration usually leads to deification without the person even realising it.

So you say. The Orthodox have been venerating her for nearly two thousand years and don't deify her, which seems to undermine your argument as something general; it simply illustrates your obsession with anti-Catholicism, alas.

No, the only difference is I'm not affected by a firm belief or practice that makes it impossible for me to see straight.

Your own belief in your own infallibility does exactly that, as you have shown now many times.

If someone has a strong cherished belief, and Scriptures oppose that belief, there is a tendency for him and all his co-religionists to stretch Scriptures beyond all recognition as they interpret Scriptures away from its original meaning in order to accommodate that cherished but forbidden belief.

Vide your own refusal to accept the word of the Holy Spirit as spoken by St. Elizabeth.

[

We should just look at scripture without making it say only what we want to hear.

When you stop doing that, let us know.

Peace,

Anglian

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

So you say. The Orthodox have been venerating her for nearly two thousand years and don't deify her, which seems to undermine your argument as something general; it simply illustrates your obsession with anti-Catholicism, alas.

No less than being anti-mormon I bet
The only difference in my view is one uses a Catechism and the other uses the BoM. Woe is us!!!!

http://christianforums.com/showthread.php?t=7261510
Are Mormons Christians?

 

[Montalban]

You two can continue to scratch each other's back if that's what thrills you but you can't change the words of scriptures.

A woman in the crowd shouts to Jesus that "blessed is the woman who gave thee suckle" (as it appears in one version). If there had been Anglian and Montalban in the crowd then, the two of you would have readily assented to her declaration and recited your Hail Mary's devoutly. But what did Jesus do?

Oh no, my dearies, he did not agree with her. He employs a style he normally does when dealing with Pharisees in answer to their questions. Ie. he takes their words and apply them elsewhere. He did it here. He said, Rather, blessed are those who obey His Father.

He employs the same admirable technique when his mother and brothers had come to take him home. Elsewhere in the gospel, it was written that they even thought he had gone insane. How did he react when told His mother and brothers were waiting at the door? Did he rush to the door and tell his disciples to venerate his mother? If Anglian and montalban were there in our Lord's midst, I have no doubt they would have gone over to venerate her in person (not just an icon). Oh no, my dearies, again, our Lord, without even receiving his mother and brothers, asked, "who is my mother and who are my brothers?" Turning to his disciples (still no mention of him receiving his mother or opening the door to her), he says those who obey him are his mother and brothers and sisters. Notice, he didn't say they are LIKE his mother, etc. Those who obey him ARE his mother, brothers and sisters.

Sorry, folksies. You can't change those words in the Bible. They remain in the Bible for all times. You can insult the beamishboy but the beamishboy shrugs off all insults. Come on, the beamishboy is a valiant knight. He presents the words of the Gospel to you and if you don't accept them, he'll just shake the dust of his stirrups and gallop off into the sunset.

I'm not changing the words. You are. I've asked you is Mary blessed? Did she do anything 'special'? You ignore that. You invented the contradiction, not me.