Mary was a good person and had a sinful nature like all of us.

[NotUrAvgGuy]

Oh yeah, she was worried. What mother wouldn't be? The statement wasn't "she knew where he was going," nor was it "she gave him permission." The statement was "She allowed it to happen." Now did she not allow it to happen? No. Did she allow it to happen? Yes.

Did she need to? She just needed to allow him to go about his Father's business and did she? Yes.

Mary did not allow Jesus to stay behind. She didn't even know he had stayed behind. How could she allow something she was ignorant of? She accepted Jesus' explanation when they found him, and there is no record of his being punished, but that is not the same as implying she knew what he was doing and allowed it. She "allowed it" after the fact.

 

[Valletta]

All of the apprations of Mary contain non-biblical teaching. These are demonic. This is not Mary appearing.

There are millions of events not in the Bible. For example, many people with near death experience report seeing a light. Reports of seeing angels have been made. That does not mean those events are all demonic. I highly doubt you have examined the testimony of all of those who have reported apparitions. Please respect the beliefs of others. Imagine if all Christians called the beliefs of other Christians demonic.

 

[NotUrAvgGuy]

There are millions of events not in the Bible. For example, many people with near death experience report seeing a light. Reports of seeing angels have been made. That does not mean those events are all demonic. I highly doubt you have examined the testimony of all of those who have reported apparitions. Please respect the beliefs of others. Imagine if all Christians called the beliefs of other Christians demonic.

I have studied all the notable apparations of Mary and believe them all to be demonic. That is not a personal attack. Believe in them if you want to but I believe them to be demonic.

 

[JoeT]

Mark 3:
20 And He *came home, and the crowd *gathered again, to such an extent that they could not even eat a meal. 21 And when His own people heard about this, they came out to take custody of Him; for they were saying, “He has lost His senses.” 22 The scribes who came down from Jerusalem were saying, “He is possessed by Beelzebul,” and “He casts out the demons by the ruler of the demons.” NASB

31 Then His mother and His brothers *came, and while standing outside they sent word to Him, calling for Him. 32 And a crowd was sitting around Him, and they *said to Him, “Behold, Your mother and Your brothers are outside looking for You.” 33 Answering them, He *said, “Who are My mother and My brothers?” 34 And looking around at those who were sitting around Him, He *said, “Here are My mother and My brothers! 35 For whoever does the will of God, this is My brother, and sister, and mother.” NASB

======================================

Mark 3:
20 Then Jesus entered a house, and again a crowd gathered, so that he and his disciples were not even able to eat. 21 When his family heard about this, they went to take charge of him, for they said, “He is out of his mind.” NIV
22 And the teachers of the law who came down from Jerusalem said, “He is possessed by Beelzebul! By the prince of demons he is driving out demons.”

31 Then Jesus’ mother and brothers arrived. Standing outside, they sent someone in to call him. 32 A crowd was sitting around him, and they told him, “Your mother and brothers are outside looking for you.” 33 “Who are my mother and my brothers?” he asked. 34 Then he looked at those seated in a circle around him and said, “Here are my mother and my brothers! 35 Whoever does God’s will is my brother and sister and mother.”

To hold the view that Christ was insane suggests that you believe God was not in control of the events. How do you figure that works?


JoeT

 

[Valletta]

I have studied all the notable apparations of Mary and believe them all to be demonic. That is not a personal attack. Believe in them if you want to but I believe them to be demonic.

I disagree with you but I don't call your beliefs demonic.

 

[NotUrAvgGuy]

I disagree with you but I don't call your beliefs demonic.

I am not going to lie to be respectful. I didn't say your beliefs are demonic. I said the apparations were.

 

[Valletta]

I have studied all the notable apparations of Mary and believe them all to be demonic. That is not a personal attack. Believe in them if you want to but I believe them to be demonic.

I have studied the Bible, and have found it is not Satan who heals the sick:

Matthew 11:4-6 And Jesus answered them, “Go and tell John what you hear and see: the blind receive their sight and the lame walk, lepers are cleansed and the deaf hear, and the dead are raised up, and the poor have good news preached to them. And blessed is he who takes no offense at me.” RSVCE

 

[JulieB67]

Now did she not allow it to happen? No. Did she allow it to happen? Yes.

That statement doesn't even make sense. You act as if she had power one way or the other for him staying behind. You stated-

Mary not only gave birth to Christ but she raised him to know who he was and what his mission was. That is why she allowd him to spend 3 days teachin at Temple in his adolecence.

Again, she had no idea he had stayed behind and she had no idea what he was talking about when he answered on why he did stay behind. So no, she did not "allow" it to happen. She had no power one way or the other or understanding at that point in time of what he was talking about.

 

[NotUrAvgGuy]

I have studied the Bible, and have found it is not Satan who heals the sick:

Matthew 11:4-6 And Jesus answered them, “Go and tell John what you hear and see: the blind receive their sight and the lame walk, lepers are cleansed and the deaf hear, and the dead are raised up, and the poor have good news preached to them. And blessed is he who takes no offense at me.” RSVCE

We know Satan can inflict injury and disease as evidenced in what he did to Job. He might be able to heal disease he causes but I agree he cannot heal other diseases. Not all diseases require miracles to heal. Sometimes medical science can heal and demons and Satan know our bodies better than we do and can empower doctors to use their knowledge. Not all apparent miracles are miracles. They may evade explanation but it doesn't mean they were miracles.

The issue I have with the apparitions are the messages and their unbiblical content. I don't believe God would bless such false doctrine with real acts of healing.

 

[rturner76]

Mary did not allow Jesus to stay behind.

Perhaps it is semantics that we disagree on. I believe that possibly you interpret "allowed" to mean "gave permission."
I see allowed more as "allowed it to happen." Whether she gave him permission to go or not, she let him do what he did. Rather intentionally or by mistake, she allowed it to happen by not going with him or sending Joseph with him. Had she done that, she would have known where he was and what she is doing.

She accepted Jesus' explanation when they found him, and there is no record of his being punished, but that is not the same as implying she knew what he was doing and allowed it. She "allowed it" after the fact.

Of course, she accepted it. She knew what his mission was. Perhaps she was surprised that he started so early in life but she knew that he knew what he was there to do. I never implied that she knew what she was doing but allowing him to go off alone allowed him to do what he did. When she heard why it was allowed she blessed it.

It's all a part of why Mary was such a good mother to Jesus. She knew her feelings but she also knew his authority on Earth and the incarnation of Almighty God so she didn't question his motives. It's one of the things that makes Mary so special.

 

[rturner76]

That statement doesn't even make sense. You act as if she had power one way or the other for him staying behind. You stated-

Yeah, I mistyped my statement. I meant today did she make it happen or allow it to happen? Allowing something to happen is not synonymous to "gave permission.

Again, she had no idea he had stayed behind and she had no idea what he was talking about when he answered on why he did stay behind. So no, she did not "allow" it to happen. She had no power one way or the other or understanding at that point in time of what he was talking about.

By not checking if he was there before she left, she allowed it to happen. A lay example (though pretty silly) is, if someone takes their dog for a walk in the heart of the city with no leash and they get hit by a canr or bite someone, they allowed it to happen by not using a leash. They didn't plan for it or wish for it, they simply by not paying attention, allowed it to happen. They didn't make it happen. That is the context in which I am using the word "allowed."

 

[Valletta]

We know Satan can inflict injury and disease as evidenced in what he did to Job. He might be able to heal disease he causes but I agree he cannot heal other diseases. Not all diseases require miracles to heal. Sometimes medical science can heal and demons and Satan know our bodies better than we do and can empower doctors to use their knowledge. Not all apparent miracles are miracles. They may evade explanation but it doesn't mean they were miracles.

The issue I have with the apparitions are the messages and their unbiblical content. I don't believe God would bless such false doctrine with real acts of healing.

It's just doctrine that disagrees with your personal interpretation of the Bible. There are many many interpretations of the Bible by very holy and sincere people, perhaps you got a few things wrong. Here is an example of what I consider a miracle:
“The enormously distended and very hard abdomen began to flatten and within 30 minutes it had completely disappeared. No discharge whatsoever was observed from the body.”

This Lourdes Miracle Led to the Conversion of Alexis Carrel

Discover the miracle from Lourdes that brought about the conversion of Nobel Prize-winning physician Dr. Alexis Carrel.

www.magiscenter.com

Another is the miracle of the sun at Fatima, witnesses by tens of thousands of people.

 

[NotUrAvgGuy]

Perhaps it is semantics that we disagree on. I believe that possibly you interpret "allowed" to mean "gave permission."
I see allowed more as "allowed it to happen." Whether she gave him permission to go or not, she let him do what he did. Rather intentionally or by mistake, she allowed it to happen by not going with him or sending Joseph with him. Had she done that, she would have known where he was and what she is doing.


Of course, she accepted it. She knew what his mission was. Perhaps she was surprised that he started so early in life but she knew that he knew what he was there to do. I never implied that she knew what she was doing but allowing him to go off alone allowed him to do what he did. When she heard why it was allowed she blessed it.

It's all a part of why Mary was such a good mother to Jesus. She knew her feelings but she also knew his authority on Earth and the incarnation of Almighty God so she didn't question his motives. It's one of the things that makes Mary so special.

What always amazes me in these discussions, is how Joseph always gets left out. What about what he allowed? Why aren't you praising him for being so special? I don't recall who it was on this forum, but they suggested Mary had to be sinless as Jesus would have needed a sinless mother to rightly understand and guide him. Oh, but it was ok for his father to be a sinner?

Young boys look up to their fathers like young girls do to their mothers. Both parents are incredibly important but Jesus was known as the "carpenter's son." We know he himself did some carpentry. We don't know when Joseph died. Sometime between Jesus being 12 and 30. He was around for Jesus' formative years and maybe even into adulthood. Why wasn't it equally important for him to be sinless? If God can make Mary sinless would it have been so hard to do it for Joseph as well? I am sure Joseph is a Catholic saint yet growing up Catholic I never heard of anyone praying to Joseph. My church was named St. Basils. Why not St. Josephs? I think Joseph really gets the short straw in the Catholic church. It is as though he had no bearing on the kind of man Jesus was. That all came from Mary. Joseph would have been expected to be the spiritual head of the family, not Mary.

If you think that makes Mary so special how about saying it makes Joseph so special too.

 

[Valletta]

What always amazes me in these discussions, is how Joseph always gets left out. What about what he allowed? Why aren't you praising him for being so special? I don't recall who it was on this forum, but they suggested Mary had to be sinless as Jesus would have needed a sinless mother to rightly understand and guide him. Oh, but it was ok for his father to be a sinner?

Young boys look up to their fathers like young girls do to their mothers. Both parents are incredibly important but Jesus was known as the "carpenter's son." We know he himself did some carpentry. We don't know when Joseph died. Sometime between Jesus being 12 and 30. He was around for Jesus' formative years and maybe even into adulthood. Why wasn't it equally important for him to be sinless? If God can make Mary sinless would it have been so hard to do it for Joseph as well? I am sure Joseph is a Catholic saint yet growing up Catholic I never heard of anyone praying to Joseph. My church was named St. Basils. Why not St. Josephs? I think Joseph really gets the short straw in the Catholic church. It is as though he had no bearing on the kind of man Jesus was. That all came from Mary. Joseph would have been expected to be the spiritual head of the family, not Mary.

If you think that makes Mary so special how about saying it makes Joseph so special too.

Joseph is a well known saint who receives plenty of prayer requests for intercession. But Mary, the "woman," can be found time and time again in the Bible at important moments in salvation history, beginning in Genesis 3:15. No matter what the translation, whether the actual head crusher is Jesus or Mary (the Koine Greek does not specify gender, I think the reference is to Jesus) she is there.

 

[NotUrAvgGuy]

It's just doctrine that disagrees with your personal interpretation of the Bible. There are many many interpretations of the Bible by very holy and sincere people, perhaps you got a few things wrong. Here is an example of what I consider a miracle:
“The enormously distended and very hard abdomen began to flatten and within 30 minutes it had completely disappeared. No discharge whatsoever was observed from the body.”

This Lourdes Miracle Led to the Conversion of Alexis Carrel

Discover the miracle from Lourdes that brought about the conversion of Nobel Prize-winning physician Dr. Alexis Carrel.

www.magiscenter.com

Another is the miracle of the sun at Fatima, witnesses by tens of thousands of people.

Jesus never made a public spectacle or his miracles. He always had a specific reason for healing someone in the accounts we have. No one went back and got healed from some water he used or someplace he healed someone (like the thousands of claimed healings from the waters of Lourdes).

Mostly, the apparitions of Mary have brought attention to Mary and, secondarily, to the Catholic church. A true Christian gives all the glory to God and does not instruct people to pray to them (like Mary did in instructing people to pray the rosary which includes prayers to herself). I thought only God could dispense heavenly grace, but Mary (supposedly) claims to be able to:

Our Lady would appear at one point with beams of light coming forth from gems on the ring which she wore on her finger. However, some of the gem did not glow. The message Our Lady gave to St. Catherine was this:

“These rays symbolize the graces I shed upon those who ask for them. The gems from which rays do not fall are the graces for which souls forget to ask.”

How important, then, it is to pray for the intercession of our Blessed Mother! After this, the image we see on the Miraculous Medal appeared, with Our Lady telling St. Catherine to have the medal struck as soon as possible. She promised:

“All who wear it will receive great graces; they should wear it around the neck. Graces will abound for persons who wear it with confidence.”

(5 Messages from Marian Apparitions and Their Meaning - Ascension Press Media)

Like the scapular, it is another thing to be worn that is supposed to bring us grace or preserve us from Purgatory (which does not exist). When did Jesus or the Apostles ever suggest anyone wear anything? I don't have time now to go through all the major Marian apparitions and there non-biblical messages. On more than one occasion "Mary" urged people to pray the rosary. We are commanded in Scripture to not give repetitious prayer. Prayer, by definition, is only to God. We cannot "pray" to anyone else. People kiss their rosaries like they are some kind of holy relic. It borders on idolatry. Prayer is an active conversation with God. It is not a mindless repetition of memorized prayers while you are supposed to be reflecting on some scene from Jesus' life. That is more like meditation but not prayer.

I don't consider these apparitions to be of Mary or from God. It is Satan trying to deceive and lead people to devote themselves more to Mary than to Jesus. I tried to talk to an older Catholic woman once about Jesus. She was all about Mary. She said she would talk to me about Jesus if I talked to her about Mary. Not that unusual. A lot of Catholics get downright defensive and emotional when it comes to Mary. It's like you are insulting their Mother yet you're not insulting Mary. You are simply pointing out who she really is as portrayed in the Bible not in all the manmade traditions that have grown up around her.

 

[NotUrAvgGuy]

Joseph is a well known saint who receives plenty of prayer requests for intercession. But Mary, the "woman," can be found time and time again in the Bible at important moments in salvation history, beginning in Genesis 3:15. No matter what the translation, whether the actual head crusher is Jesus or Mary (the Koine Greek does not specify gender, I think the reference is to Jesus) she is there.

Only Jesus could crush Satan and that was written in Hebrew, not Greek. I know of no one, outside of the Catholic church, who even questions if that was a reference to Jesus or Mary. Clearly it was Jesus.

 

[BobRyan]

I disagree with you but I don't call your beliefs demonic.

Paul refers to "doctrines of demons"
1 Tim 4:1 Now the Spirit expressly says that in latter times some will depart from the faith, giving heed to deceiving spirits and doctrines of demons,

Paul says that in departing from the pure teaching of the Gospel proclaimed in the first century - some adopt "doctrines of demons"

 

[BobRyan]

There are millions of events not in the Bible. For example, many people with near death experience report seeing a light. Reports of seeing angels have been made.

indeed - and of course Saul is told by the witch in 1 Sam 28 that she sees the dead prophet Samuel.

That does not mean those events are all demonic.

True But if we are talking about a doctrine that God has given NT saints and those saints actually believe it --- then it is to be found.

So then today people claim to believe in apparitions of Mary and other related ideas... so we expect them to talk about what they do believe.

That is why it is curious that no one in the first centuries mention some of these later innovations

 

[NotUrAvgGuy]

It's just doctrine that disagrees with your personal interpretation of the Bible. There are many many interpretations of the Bible by very holy and sincere people, perhaps you got a few things wrong. Here is an example of what I consider a miracle:
“The enormously distended and very hard abdomen began to flatten and within 30 minutes it had completely disappeared. No discharge whatsoever was observed from the body.”

This Lourdes Miracle Led to the Conversion of Alexis Carrel

Discover the miracle from Lourdes that brought about the conversion of Nobel Prize-winning physician Dr. Alexis Carrel.

www.magiscenter.com

Another is the miracle of the sun at Fatima, witnesses by tens of thousands of people.

Another thing that strikes me odd from the apparitions of Mary, is the difference in tone from "Mary". When Gabriel appears to Mary, and announces God's plan for her, Mary responds:

“I am the Lord’s servant,” Mary answered. “May your word to me be fulfilled.” (Luke 1:38)

Even after her cousin Elizabeth greets her and Mary makes her proclamation, she calls herself the "humble servant of the Lord."

Fast-forward to1859 in Wisconsin and how does Mary announce herself? "I am the queen of heaven."

How about in Gietrzwald in Poland: "I am the Blessed Virgin Mary of the Immaculate Conception."

At La Salette: "If my people will not submit…" (Why not "God's people"?)

How many titles has the Catholic Church given to Mary?

"Many, many, impossible to count them all! Even if we wanted to mention only what are the titles that the Church has given to Mary, only in the Rosary do we read these definitions:

• Saint Mary
• Holy Mother of God
• Queen of Heaven
• Queen conceived without original sin
• Gate of Heaven
• Morning Star
• The health of the sick
• Refuge of sinners
• Queen of Angels
• Queen of the Patriarchs
• Queen of the Apostles
• Queen of Martyrs
• Queen of all Saints
• Queen of the Most Holy Rosary
• Mother of the Church
• Mother of Divine Grace
• Mystic Rose
• Tower of David
• Ark of the Covenant
• Virgin Worthy of Honour
• Virgin Worthy of Praise
• Mighty Virgin
• Merciful Virgin
• Mirror of Perfection
• Seat of Wisdom
• Cause of our joy
• Tabernacle of Eternal Glory"

(https://www.holyart.com/blog/religi...how-many-are-all-the-names-dedicated-to-mary/)

That's almost more titles than God has! The title "Morning Star" is interesting as in Isaiah 14:12 it is used of Satan and in Revelation 22:16 it is used of Jesus. Why would the church add that title to her when it has already been used of Jesus? Is not God the "Seat of Wisdom"? Is not Jesus the "Refuge of sinners"? Jesus cried out in the Temple, "I am the way, the truth, and life. No one comes to the Father but through me." John 14:6. So how is Mary the "Gate of Heaven"? Please don't say it's because without Mary there would be no Jesus! Yes, Jesus needed a human mother but that hardly makes her the "Gate of Heaven." The gate to heaven, so to speak, is opened when one puts their faith in Jesus Christ as their Lord and Savior. You don't have to put your faith in Mary or call upon her name.

"Salvation is found in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given to mankind by which we must be saved." (Acts 4:12)

Yet Mary is the "Refuge of sinners" and the "Gate of Heaven"?

In Scripture, Mary took no other title than "humble servant of the Lord" much as Paul called himself the "Lord's bondservant." Godly people do not accept titles or proclaim them. I cannot see the real Mary appearing before men and proclaiming herself the "Queen of heaven" or the "Mother of Divine Grace." She would call herself a "humble servant of the Lord" and give all the glory to her Son. She would refuse adoration and titles. She would be saddened that people march through streets holding statues of her. She would urge us, as in the book of Hebrews, to "Fix your eyes upon Jesus the author and perfector of our faith." (Hebrews 12:2) She would not have us carry statues of her, pray to her, wear medals or scapulars, call her titles, and so on. She would tell us to look upon her son and quit focusing on her. Mary never drew attention to herself yet Roman Catholicism has put her on a pedestal. That's not the Mary I see in Scripture.

 

[BobRyan]

It's just doctrine that disagrees with your personal interpretation of the Bible.

In Mark 7:7-13 Jesus provides a prime example of slam-hammering tradition "sola scriptura" -- because the Bible matters even when people differ.

Of course anyone opposing Christ or the NT Apostles could always retort "well that is just your view of the Bible". But that would not change the fact that they were wrong in their position - even though it is true that each person as a particular POV.

What matters is what the Bible actually says on a given topic. That is why there is focus on taking "proofs" that some Catholic sources offer and compare them to what the Bible teaches.

There are many many interpretations of the Bible by very holy and sincere people, perhaps you got a few things wrong.

Indeed -- people differ on a great many topics. But obviously given any two conflicting views only one of them can be right (at most) and some cases none of them are right. We need to consider both sides carefully to see which one has the support of scripture as in the case of Christ in Mark 7 denouncing the tradition of the magisterium of His day.

Here is an example of what I consider a miracle:
“The enormously distended and very hard abdomen began to flatten and within 30 minutes

No doubt miracles happen as in the case of Moses before Pharaoh. In that case both Moses and the Egyptian magicians and sorcerers were
able to make it appear that their staffs turned into live snakes.

Another is the miracle of the sun at Fatima, witnesses by tens of thousands of people.

Agreed - that too appears to be a miracle. Was it from God?