Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
We know that is how the natural works, but we don't know that is how the spiritual (of the Holy Spirit) works.
That's not what you said
The opposite of raising her up is putting her down. So now you are saying Jesus broke the 4th Commandment.
Good day,"Made under the law" refers to Jesus.
and you will notice, that at Cana, Jesus refers to her as Woman. At the moment Jesus begins His ministry (at the request of His Mother), she is Woman, the new Eve.
You're as good as taking snipets of things other as you are scripture and contriving odd ideas from them.
You're as good as taking snipets of things other as you are scripture and contriving odd ideas from them.
One could look at you 9n this case as being intentionally deceptive.
John 2:4
Jesus said unto her, Woman, what have I to do with you? my hour has not yet come.
All Commentaries on John 2:4Go To John 2
John Chrysostom
AD 407
To prove that He greatly respected His mother, hear Luke relate how He was subject to His parents Luke 2:51, and our own Evangelist declare how He had forethought for her at the very season of the Crucifixion. For where parents cause no impediment or hindrance in things belonging to God, it is our bounden duty to give way to them, and there is great danger in not doing so; but when they require anything unseasonably, and cause hindrance in any spiritual matter, it is unsafe to obey. And therefore He answered thus in this place, and again elsewhere, Who is My mother, and who are My brethren? Matthew 12:48, because they did not yet think rightly of Him; and she, because she had borne Him, claimed, according to the custom of other mothers, to direct Him in all things, when she ought to have reverenced and -->worshipped--> Him. This then was the reason why He answered as He did on that occasion. For consider what a thing it was, that when all the people high and low were standing round Him, when the multitude was intent on hearing Him, and His doctrine had begun to be set forth, she should come into the midst and take Him away from the work of exhortation, and converse with Him apart, and not even endure to come within, but draw Him outside merely to herself. This is why He said, Who is My mother and My brethren? Not to insult her who had borne Him, (away with the thought!) but to procure her the greatest benefit, and not to let her think meanly of Him. For if He cared for others, and used every means to implant in them a becoming opinion of Himself, much more would He do so in the case of His mother. And since it was probable that if these words had been addressed to her by her Son, she would not readily have chosen even then to be convinced, but would in all cases have claimed the superiority as being His mother, therefore He replied as He did to them who spoke to Him; otherwise He could not have led up her thoughts from His present lowliness to His future exaltation, had she expected that she should always be honored by Him as by a son, and not that He should come as her Master. 3. It was then from this motive that He said in this place, Woman, what have I to do with you? and also for another reason not less pressing. What was that? It was, that His miracles might not be suspected. The request ought to have come from those who needed, not from His mother. And why so? Because what is done at the request of one's friends, great though it be, often causes offense to the spectators; but when they make the request who have the need, the miracle is free from suspicion, the praise unmixed, the benefit great. So if some excellent physician should enter a house where there were many sick, and be spoken to by none of the patients or their relations, but be directed only by his own mother, he would be suspected and disliked by the sufferers, nor would any of the patients or their attendants deem him able to exhibit anything great or remarkable. And so this was a reason why He rebuked her on that occasion, saying, Woman, what have I to do with you? instructing her for the future not to do the like; because, though He was careful to honor His mother, yet He cared much more for the salvation of her soul, and for the doing good to the many, for which He took upon Him the flesh. These then were the words, not of one speaking rudely to his mother, but belonging to a wise dispensation, which brought her into a right frame of mind, and provided that the miracles should be attended with that honor which was meet. And setting other things aside, this very appearance which these words have of having been spoken chidingly, is amply enough to show that He held her in high honor, for by His displeasure He showed that He reverenced her greatly; in what manner, we will say in the next discourse. Think of this then, and when you hear a certain woman saying, Blessed is the womb that bare You, and the paps which You have sucked, and Him answering, rather blessed are they that do the will of my Father Luke 11:27, suppose that those other words also were said with the same intention. For the answer was not that of one rejecting his mother, but of One who would show that her having borne Him would have nothing availed her, had she not been very good and faithful. Now if, setting aside the excellence of her soul, it profited Mary nothing that the Christ was born of her, much less will it be able to avail us to have a father or a brother, or a child of virtuous and noble disposition, if we ourselves be far removed from his virtue. A brother, says David, does not redeem, shall man redeem? Psalm 49:7, Septuagint We must place our hopes of salvation in nothing else, but only in our own righteous deeds (done) after the grace of God. For if this by itself could have availed, it would have availed the Jews, (for Christ was their kinsman according to the flesh,) it would have availed the town in which He was born, it would have availed His brethren. But as long as His brethren cared not for themselves, the honor of their kindred availed them nothing, but they were condemned with the rest of the world, and then only were approved, when they shone by their own virtue; and the city fell, and was burnt, having gained nothing from this; and His kinsmen according to the flesh were slaughtered and perished very miserably, having gained nothing towards being saved from their relationship to Him, because they had not the defense of virtue. The Apostles, on the contrary, appeared greater than any, because they followed the true and excellent way of gaining relationship with Him, that by obedience. And from this we learn that we have always need of faith, and a life shining and bright, since this alone will have power to save us. For though His relations were for a long time everywhere held in honor, being called the Lord's kinsmen, yet now we do not even know their names, while the lives and names of the Apostles are everywhere celebrated. Let us then not be proud of nobleness of birth according to the flesh, but though we have ten thousand famous ancestors, let us use diligence ourselves to go beyond their excellences, knowing that we shall gain nothing from the diligence of others to help us in the judgment that is to come; nay, this will be the more grievous condemnation, that though born of righteous parents and having an example at home, we do not, even thus, imitate our teachers. And this I say now, because I see many heathens, when we lead them to the faith and exhort them to become Christians, flying to their kinsmen and ancestors and house, and saying, All my relations and friends and companions are faithful Christians. What is that to you, thou wretched and miserable? This very thing will be especially your ruin, that you did not respect the number of those around you, and run to the truth. Others again who are believers but live a careless life, when exhorted to virtue make the very same defense, and say, my father and my grandfather and my great-grandfather were very pious and good men. But this will assuredly most condemn you, that being descended from such men, you have acted unworthily of the root from whence you are sprung. For hear what the Prophet says to the Jews, Israel served for a wife, and for a wife he kept (sheep) Hosea 12:12; and again Christ, Your father Abraham rejoiced to see My day, and he saw it, and was glad. John 8:56 And everywhere they bring forward to them the righteous acts of their fathers, not only to praise them, but also to make the charge against their descendants more heavy. Knowing then this, let us use every means that we may be saved by our own works, lest having deceived ourselves by vain trusting on others, we learn that we have been deceived when the knowledge of it will profit us nothing. In the grave, says David, who shall give you thanks? Psalm 6:5 Let us then repent here, that we may obtain the everlasting goods, which may God grant we all do, through the grace and lovingkindness of our Lord Jesus Christ, with whom to the Father and the Holy Ghost be glory, for ever and ever. Amen.
Of course not. I'm stating rather than raise her up, he knew she was in the same standing as anyone else and we know he also nails down that when he states all are his mother and brethren that hear the will of God and do it. Common sense tells us he loved and honored her as his birth mother but not the extent that she should be raised in such a fashion that she is today. The early church never taught that. The CC branched off and started that. She's barely a footnote after the church is started in the NT and certainly Christ did not include her in his Revelation. To say she is the ark of the convenant is also made up tradition that has nothing to do with the Word of God. Revelation 12 is Mother Israel, not Mary.
The Catholic church calls that "immaculate conception" when they claim God's power does that for Mary's mother... as if God can do that with Mary's mother but can't do it with Mary herself. I fail to see the logic in that since God apparently did it for Mary without needing Mary's mother to have that happen.
As I said - the idea that God could not have Mary give birth to a pre-existing sinlesss being (God the Son in human flesh) via incarnation rather than procreation, without making that sinless being sinful in the process of incarnation makes no sense. When you consider that they then leap over to the idea of a sinful being giving natural child birth to a newly born sinless being via natural procreation, - and having that child be sinful from the start, they have negated every argument possible against a normal sinful nature , human mother such as Mary giving birth to a sinless being via incarnation of a previously existing sinless being God the Son, as Jesus the Christ.
I wish that were the case.
What commandment do you call the "4th commandment?"
True.Good day,
You have Very interesting personal take on the "woman"
John Chrysostom- sees it as a rebuke
For where parents cause no impediment or hindrance in things belonging to God, it is our bounden duty to give way to them, and there is great danger in not doing so; but when they require anything unseasonably, and cause hindrance in any spiritual matter, it is unsafe to obey. And therefore He answered thus in this place, and again elsewhere, 'Who is My mother, and who are My brethren?' (Matt. xii. 48), because they did not yet think rightly of Him; and she, because she had borne Him, claimed, according to the custom of other mothers, to direct Him in all things, when she ought to have reverenced and worshiped Him. This then was the reason why He answered as He did on that occassion....And so this was a reason why He rebuked her on that occasion, saying, 'Woman, what have I to do with thee?' [John 2:4] instructing her for the future not to do the like; because, though He was careful to honor His mother, yet He cared much for the salvation of her soul" - John Chrysostom (Homilies on the Gospel According to St. John, 21)
CHURCH FATHERS: Homily 21 on the Gospel of John (Chrysostom)
Featuring the Church Fathers, Catholic Encyclopedia, Summa Theologica and more.www.newadvent.org
In Him,
Bill
He called her woman. He did not raise her up period. I am not all over the place. Are you stating she wasn't under the law? So you are claiming although Jesus was, she wasn't? You are contradictioning your reasoning. She followed the law that was certain.
No one has to prove the gospel of Matthew is inspired text or not. You either believe it or you don't. Many athiests have read it and don't believe. So your point is moot.
On the contrary -- it has been shown repeatedly that we have the same proof today as the first century saints had when they fully accepted Matthew as inspired text without first waiting 300 years (Or as some imagine - 1500 years) to see if in fact some church council would come along johnny-come-lately and admit to the same fact that they knew in the first century.
Given that reasoning, why isn't "The Shepard of Hermas" considered inspired text?
On what reasoning? You realize that it's God that gives the increase right? Even the early churches could plant seeds that didn't go anywhere. The Holy Spirit is what leads us to truth. And the Word has a big part of that. I was "taught" many doctrines growing up. But once I read the Bible in it's entirety for the first time I could see the truth for myself that some of those doctrines were not true. That's why I left my church. And yes, that was a protestant church. And that's when I finally realized too just what the "true" church was and isn't.
The Catholic church calls that "immaculate conception" when they claim God's power does that for Mary's mother... as if God can do that with Mary's mother but can't do it with Mary herself. I fail to see the logic in that since God apparently did it for Mary without needing Mary's mother to have that happen.
As I said - the idea that God could not have Mary give birth to a pre-existing sinlesss being (God the Son in human flesh) via incarnation rather than procreation, without making that sinless being sinful in the process of incarnation makes no sense. When you consider that they then leap over to the idea of a sinful being giving natural child birth to a newly born sinless being via natural procreation, - and having that child be sinful from the start, they have negated every argument possible against a normal sinful nature , human mother such as Mary giving birth to a sinless being via incarnation of a previously existing sinless being God the Son, as Jesus the Christ.
