Mariolatry?

[Grip Docility]

Every Christian is under obligation to live a life of good conscience educated by the teaching of Christ. For this reason, you are not asked to go against conscience.

Referring to the first post in this thread where you state the following:

One may question why it would be deemed inappropriate to refer to the Blessed Mary as the Queen of Heaven, especially in light of what the Apostle John describes in the Apocalypse:

Then God's temple in heaven was opened, and the ark of his covenant was seen within his temple; and there were flashes of lightning, rumblings, peals of thunder, an earthquake, and heavy hail. A great portent appeared in heaven: a woman clothed with the sun, with the moon under her feet, and on her head a crown of twelve stars. She was pregnant and was crying out in birth pangs, in the agony of giving birth. (Revelation 11:19-12:2 NRSV)​

Catholic Christians believe this woman, adorned with a crown of twelve stars, clothed with the sun, and with the moon under her feet, to be the mother of our Savior, Jesus Christ. This depiction, with its regal attire and crown, befits a queen. Therefore, what other title might Christians bestow upon her but Queen of Heaven, the mother of the King of Kings, Jesus our Lord? As His mother, she holds the position of Queen Mother of the King of Kings.

Praying to Blessed Mary, in fact, means to ask her to intercede on one's behalf, as 'pray' simply means to request. Similarly, requesting saints to intercede is not an act of worship, just as asking a fellow congregant in one's church to pray for you does not equate to worshipping them.

When Mary told the wine steward at the wedding in Cana, "Do as he says," was it for him to disregard her words? Christians heed Mary's words because they are considered good and true.

John 2:3 When the wine was gone, Jesus’ mother said to Him, “They have no more wine.”

4 “Woman, why do you involve me?” Jesus replied. “My hour has not yet come.”

5 His mother said to the servants, “Do whatever he tells you.”

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

Falling away from faith is not the same as becoming un-born and no longer being a child of God. Once a child of God, a born again believer can never cease being a child of God. They may become a disobedient faithless child, but still they are a child.​

The topic you've addressed is a subject of debate among Protestant denominations and, I believe, falls outside the purview of this discussion.

 

[Jipsah]

Mary gave birth to a man-God--not to God.

Sorry, that's heresy. Here;s what the Athanasian Creed says on the subject:
It is necessary for eternal salvation that one also faithfully believe that our Lord Jesus Christ became flesh. For this is the true faith that we believe and confess: That our Lord Jesus Christ, God’s Son, is both God and man.He is God, begotten before all worlds from the being of the Father, and he is man, born in the world from the being of his mother — existing fully as God, and fully as man with a rational soul and a human body; equal to the Father in divinity, subordinate to the Father in humanity.
Although he is God and man, he is not divided, but is one Christ.
He is united because God has taken humanity into himself; he does not transform deity into humanity.
He is completely one in the unity of his person, without confusing his natures.
For as the rational soul and body are one person, so the one Christ is God and man.

She did not do it of her own works since she was a virgin. She could not produce a sinless man-God. But she was used as the vehicle for his birth.

Nah, that's heresy again. If our Lord is fully human, then He is Mary's son. If the BVM was just an incubating device, then Christ is God, and not a man. But every orthodox confession has it that our Lord is wholly God and wholly man, with no division.

That means Mary was blessed to be used of God, but in no way was necessary to produce God Himself. Comprendes?

Tu no intiendes, mi compa. You're trying to make out Lord into a hybrid being who's partly human and partly God, but that's not what Christians confess. As the Creed says:

And in this Trinity, no one is before or after, greater or less than the other; but all three persons are in themselves, coeternal and coequal; and so we must worship the Trinity in unity and the one God in three persons.

Wecan't pick our Lord apart because it offends us that God has a mother, or because the concept that God can possibly have a mother at all is beyond our grasp. We don't have to understand it, we just have to believe it.

God the Father is God, the Holy Spirit is God, and our Lord Christ is God. No part gods, demigods, hybrid gods, or restricted gods. God, the only one there is.

Jesus Christ, God Incarnate, is God. "All things were made by Him, and without Him was not anything made that was made. ", right?

 

[Jipsah]

-
​

Jesus and The Father are in each other, meaning they are part of what makes up the whole of God,

I just rent my garment a little bit.

 

[Jipsah]

The Son became flesh, The Father or The Spirit did not become flash. So Mary gave birth to The Son.​

Sounds a lot like you're envisioning 3 separate Gods there, which is obviously heretical, or that in fact the Blessed Virgin created the Son, which is simple nonsense.

 

[Jipsah]

-

​

The Son became flesh, The Father or The Spirit did not become flash. So Mary gave birth to The Son.

You're stumbling back towards 3 Gods again.

 

[Jipsah]

-

​

There is one God that exist as a Triune Being

And not three Gods. The Father is God. The Son is God. The Holy Spirit is God. But not three Gods, only One God. Right?

 

[Jipsah]

-
​

So why was Jesus the only member of The Trinity to be able to open and read the scroll, or to look at it.

I'm kinda scared to hear your explanation.

 

[d taylor]

I just rent my garment a little bit.

-

​

Keep renting, because if you have not noticed by now. There is nothing about The Bible we agree on.

 

[jas3]

-

​

Keep renting, because if you have not noticed by now. There is nothing about The Bible we agree on.

Jesus is God, not "part of" God.

 

[d taylor]

Jesus is God, not "part of" God.

-

​

Never said Jesus was not God, but Jesus is not The Father or the Holy Spirit

 

[RandyPNW]

Jesus never sinned. Nor have babies or Mary or those with severe mental disabilities sinned.

Paul contradicts your statements....
Rom 3.23 for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God.

Thus obviously you are misinterpreting Romans by trying to say it means any of the aforementioned must have sinned. Likewise your conclusion that because Mary needed a savior means she sinned is false.

You apparently don't take the Scriptures seriously. There is no debate therefore.

 

[jas3]

Never said Jesus was not God, but Jesus is not The Father or the Holy Spirit

You said that Jesus was "part of what makes up the whole of God," which is incompatible with Him being "true God of true God."

 

[Valletta]

Paul contradicts your statements....
Rom 3.23 for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God.

You apparently don't take the Scriptures seriously. There is no debate therefore.

Jesus never sinned.

2 Cor 5: 21 For our sake he made him to be sin[a] who knew no sin, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God.
Revised Standard Version Catholic Edition

 

[Jipsah]

-

​

Keep renting, because if you have not noticed by now. There is nothing about The Bible we agree on.

Rending. Yeah, I tend to spend most of my time in the New Testament.

 

[Jipsah]

-

​

Never said Jesus was not God, but Jesus is not The Father or the Holy Spirit

Jesus is God. The Father is God. The Holy Spirit is God. They are one and inseparable.

 

[RandyPNW]

Luke 1:43 And why is this granted me, that the mother of my Lord should come to me? RSVCE

As has been pointed out to you, "my Lord" is a reference to God. Elizabeth did not say "mother of Jesus," she said "mother of my Lord."
Study the Old Testament. This is a reference to God. You have objection to the Word of God, of which God is the ultimate author, your beef is really with God instead of the Catholics on this thread. Try not to get hung up on titles, that is not the message of the Bible.

I think the term "Lord" is synonymous with master. Jesus was a form of Deity, no doubt.

Was Mary then Mother of God? Of course not. God does not have a mother. However, in the form of man God did have a mother, who had nothing whatsoever to do with producing a divine child. She just "had him."

The emphasis here was not on Mary, but on the Lord, who Mary carried. In Mary coming, she brought the Lord with her. You are turning this around to be about Mary, rather than about the Lord she carried.

 

[RandyPNW]

You prove my point yet again my friend!!

I will waste no time on "air."

 

[RandyPNW]

Every Christian is under obligation to live a life of good conscience educated by the teaching of Christ. For this reason, you are not asked to go against conscience.

Referring to the first post in this thread where you state the following:

One may question why it would be deemed inappropriate to refer to the Blessed Mary as the Queen of Heaven, especially in light of what the Apostle John describes in the Apocalypse:

Then God's temple in heaven was opened, and the ark of his covenant was seen within his temple; and there were flashes of lightning, rumblings, peals of thunder, an earthquake, and heavy hail. A great portent appeared in heaven: a woman clothed with the sun, with the moon under her feet, and on her head a crown of twelve stars. She was pregnant and was crying out in birth pangs, in the agony of giving birth. (Revelation 11:19-12:2 NRSV)​

Catholic Christians believe this woman, adorned with a crown of twelve stars, clothed with the sun, and with the moon under her feet, to be the mother of our Savior, Jesus Christ. This depiction, with its regal attire and crown, befits a queen. Therefore, what other title might Christians bestow upon her but Queen of Heaven, the mother of the King of Kings, Jesus our Lord? As His mother, she holds the position of Queen Mother of the King of Kings.

Yes, I understand that this is your interpretation of Rev 12. I, however, cannot accept that this is Mary. It is true that this woman apparently represents, metaphorically, the "mother" of Christ. But that doesn't mean it refers to an individual. It can also refer to either Eve or Israel, both of whom indirectly gave birth to Christ.

Mary did not have a crown of 12 stars. She did not give birth to either the 12 tribes or Israel or to the 12 apostles of Christ. This "Woman" is not Mary! Even if you wish to interpret it as such, the Scriptures themselves do not identify her as that, even though it would've been simple to do so.

So you assign such an elevated place of authority to a single woman due to a vague prophecy, the interpretation of which is debatable. Would God really make such an exalted claim on such sketchy grounds? I don't think so.

Not only so, but our example, the Apostle Paul, who gave us much of the NT Scriptures, claimed he was "nothing." Should we then count Mary as superior to the entire Church?

2 Cor 12.11 I am not in the least inferior to the “super-apostles,” even though I am nothing.

Praying to Blessed Mary, in fact, means to ask her to intercede on one's behalf, as 'pray' simply means to request. Similarly, requesting saints to intercede is not an act of worship, just as asking a fellow congregant in one's church to pray for you does not equate to worshipping them.

I know what "prayer" is--we should not be praying to, or asking Mary, for anything. Our go-between with God is Jesus himself. He is the one we pray through--not Mary, and not the saints. Certainly not any angel!

When Mary told the wine steward at the wedding in Cana, "Do as he says," was it for him to disregard her words? Christians heed Mary's words because they are considered good and true.

That's true of any good Christian. We heed the words of wise Christians who would properly advise us.

 

[RandyPNW]

Sorry, that's heresy. Here;s what the Athanasian Creed says on the subject:
It is necessary for eternal salvation that one also faithfully believe that our Lord Jesus Christ became flesh. For this is the true faith that we believe and confess: That our Lord Jesus Christ, God’s Son, is both God and man.He is God, begotten before all worlds from the being of the Father, and he is man, born in the world from the being of his mother — existing fully as God, and fully as man with a rational soul and a human body; equal to the Father in divinity, subordinate to the Father in humanity.
Although he is God and man, he is not divided, but is one Christ.
He is united because God has taken humanity into himself; he does not transform deity into humanity.
He is completely one in the unity of his person, without confusing his natures.
For as the rational soul and body are one person, so the one Christ is God and man.

Nobody is denying that Jesus' mother gave birth to a divine child! What I deny is that God the Father has a "mother!" It is heresy to say that God has a Mother and is not a self-existent entity.

In saying Jesus had a mother is not the same thing as saying God the Father has a Mother!! You heretic!

Nah, that's heresy again. If our Lord is fully human, then He is Mary's son. If the BVM was just an incubating device, then Christ is God, and not a man. But every orthodox confession has it that our Lord is wholly God and wholly man, with no division.

This isn't about the Deity of Christ. It isn't about Christology. It is rather about the doctrine of God. And that holds that God is eternally self-existent, and the source of all else. He did not have a Mother since He had no beginning.

Tu no intiendes, mi compa. You're trying to make out Lord into a hybrid being who's partly human and partly God, but that's not what Christians confess. As the Creed says:

And in this Trinity, no one is before or after, greater or less than the other; but all three persons are in themselves, coeternal and coequal; and so we must worship the Trinity in unity and the one God in three persons.

I understand Trinitarian theology, and we are not arguing Christology. I've never said Jesus is partly God and partly Man. God did not simply inhabit Man, whether as a spirit or as a mind, nor as the Word of God.

Jesus is entirely the product of God's Word representing the full Deity of God. I've neve said anything else.

My opinion is: tu no comprendes! God as an omnipotent, infinite Being had no mother to give Him birth. But as the Son of God it is said that the God-Man had a mother, namely Mary. I can go with this.