Mariology

[Placemat]

n/t

 

[Placemat]

Where in the Scriptures does it give this kind of view point or philosophy?

That the NT is Holy inspired/God-breathed is shown by how Jesus and the Apostles quoted from the books of the O.T. and referred to it as scripture....and of course in 2 Timothy 3 it clearly states that all scripture (OT) is inspired/God-breathed...and following through....in 2 Peter 3 - Peter holds Paul's letters as equal to the 'scriptures' (O.T.) and to be considered as such, they must also be Holy inspired/God-breathed. As to being the most accurate and reliable source for determining what the Apostles taught and preached during early Christianity, I think that by being Holy inspired/God-breathed - speaks for itself.

(I assume you are talking about Sola Scriptura even though you did not specifically mention that term)

See bolded above.

And by the way I don't care what the Catholic church teaches as far as this thread goes.

I'm sorry, forgive me for my presumption - I thought when you were posting those John 19 Verses earlier in the thread,(about John taking over the care of Mary,) that one of the Marian practices that you and your church followed was the same as the Catholic church's on Mary be your (all Christians)'Mother' also.

Inadvertently I believe in something similar about the scriptures but for completely different reasons.

I do not believe that "belief in Mary" is necessary for Salvation. Mary however in many ways is a role model for believers etc.

Sorry, I find your underlined part rather vague and hard to assign it to anything.....but I do agree with Mary being an incredible human being, truly blessed and I do love her.

lol apparently it does! I said that rhetorically in reference to you and what you seem to be assuming and nit picking.

lololol...then you must have been really surprised when I responded! ....and my post still stands.

 

[Pavel Mosko]

That the NT is Holy inspired/God-breathed is shown by how Jesus and the Apostles quoted from the books of the O.T. and referred to it as scripture....and of course in 2 Timothy 3 it clearly states that all scripture (OT) is inspired/God-breathed...and following through....in 2 Peter 3 - Peter holds Paul's letters as equal to the 'scriptures' (O.T.) and to be considered as such, they must also be Holy inspired/God-breathed.

Ugh. Every Christian believes that! (ok they're are some really liberal so called "Christians" who don't believe that, but hopefully you get my point).


This is the best way to describe what I'm talking about.:

I am guessing based on your avatar that you are woman. If not adjust the gender accordingly....


Imagine that you are the daughter of a famous national hero. Unfortunately I hardly know anything about Canadian heroes, but as luck would have it, I did watch the AMC series Turn, Washington's spies where the big villain in that show actually is a kind of Founding Father for Canada.

villain in turn washington spies - Google Search


So we will use him, or anyone else you think is better.

Now imagine this......

You as the daughter of this historical figure, run across a historian that has a completely different view or opinion of your father than you do. This person has the opinion because he has read all your father's letters that have been published by historians, and in addition to that, he read the books that Simcoe authored. (OK for analogy sake I'm taking liberties, Simcoe likely didn't author any books). And besides that he has read all the stuff of background people of the time had said about him, except for you... And you in this scenario was the only person to actually really know your father personally, eating dinner with him, being raised by him etc., logging in thousands of hours talking to your father throughout the years until he passed away.... while the other sources cited by the historian/ nemesis only knew your father casually as associates, acquaintances etc.



Now wouldn't you as the daughter of Simcoe (or whoever), be mad if this historian ignored your point of view, and even arrogantly believed and insisted that he knew your father better and his view was superior to yours and even tried to correct you concerning who your father really was like etc.

e.g. he can recite by memory some of your father's famous speeches and saying etc. even better than what you can recall sometimes ;since, he has spent years studying and memorizing the written word of your father, as well as those of some of his associates.

 

[Placemat]

Ugh. Every Christian believes that! (ok they're are some really liberal so called "Christians" who don't believe that, but hopefully you get my point).


This is the best way to describe what I'm talking about.:
associates.

Pavel - You asked me a question that I answered as succinctly and as honestly as I possibly could.

I'm 'old school' - the best way to describe something is by being direct and to the point - you lost me at "now imagine this".

 

[Pavel Mosko]

Pavel - You asked me a question that I answered as succinctly and as honestly as I possibly could.

I'm 'old school' - the best way to describe something is by being direct and to the point - you lost me at "now imagine this".

You are confident of your position of Mary based on "Reading the Bible". But how are you certain that your assumptions are correct?
Here is an illustration to make a point I've had my share of schooling from secular university schooling including going to both university and graduate school in psychology as well as some Protestant "Bible School" and Seminary.


Before I did a Bible school, which was a correspondence one I spent some time listening to some preachers that are called "Word of Faith", which has it's own board here below. This movement is technically Charismatic but a bit more controversial from your average Charismatic hence a different board from them.

Word of Faith


Anyway, here is story back in the very early 90s I use to listen to a preacher who is looked at as the Founder of this movement, Ken Hagin. And during his sermons he talked about the Bible school he founded, "Rhema Bible Training Center". He was quite proud of his school and tended to plug it in his books, sermons etc. One of his big points was about how seminaries are structured. He noticed that most seminaries spend a lot of time teaching you stuff that most people don't actually use after they graduate. (And that, I actually agree with). He however was very proud of his school, because it purely focused on things "Full Gospel" aka Charismatic / "Spirit Filled" preachers actually do: so their was a lot of Bible classes, along with much more "hands on" preaching and teaching classes as far as giving sermons and topical Bible studies goes, but besides that they had classes where people prayed for people to receive healing and other kinds of classes dealing with healing, "the Baptism of the Holy Spirit" and various other supernatural spiritual gifts.

But moving along.....


A few years after hearing all this stuff. I actually did go part time into traditional Seminary. And I took some of those tough classes that people seldom use, especially Biblical Greek and Hebrew. But I occasionally learned some important things (Which I credit to the Holy Spirit) that made it sort of valuable. My language professor one day mentioned scribal remarks. That there are parenthetical remarks that were made years later after the fact. These remarks were once on fringes to explain something like a footnote but footnotes were not invented yet. But there was a time when the scribes did this sort of thing, but this differed from the main scribal tradition of simply copying everything as is.

Anyway you can spot these remarks once you are aware of them. Some Bibles are nice enough to put them in parentheses. But even if they don't you can notice them if the narration voice changes from 1st to 3rd person.

NUMBERS 12:3
KJ21
(Now the man Moses was very meek, above all the men who were upon the face of the earth.)


But moving along....

When I was in my younger years I did not know what to make of the above comment... (nobody talked about scribal remarks) But after the fact, it was a watershed moment because it demonstrated the importance of actually having the right actual concrete facts about something historical, even when it comes to the Bible.


I say this because I have heard sermons preached by people who believe themselves to be "prophets" and believe themselves to receive supernatural insight into the scriptures and the mysteries of the Faith. One of these people, Rick Joyner, gave a long rambling sermon. I think about "The Spirit of Truth". And one of his points, it had to do with something like submitting to God or something like that. Now he quoted the above passage, but since he followed the utilitarian philosophy of Ken Hagin, as well as his own "Do things by the Spirit" approach did not bother doing any kind of back round research. And he happened to mention, the verse about Moses being humble, and well he basically assumed Moses prophesied or had a revelation of himself and recorded it in the text, and that his doing so was actually a "mark of humility". That actually was the a major point of his sermon, which I personally find scary. Because people are affected by the power of suggestion, and that probably goes quadrupedy for charismatics who believe themselves to have an inside tract with God. Not to mention this sort of thing can lead to goofy things. For centuries people made statutes of Moses with horns growing from his head, because when Jerome translated the Bible into Latin he misidentified the word for glory in Hebrew, which looks similar to horn.

Anyway, How is this not you on this subject?

 

[Placemat]

You are confident of your position of Mary based on "Reading the Bible". But how are you certain that your assumptions are correct?

Well, first of all, it is your assumption that all I have based my 'position of Mary' on has been derived from "Reading the Bible". Secondly, in answer to your question, I have no "assumptions" about Mary, as by His grace He has assured me that what has been written in scripture by the prophets and by the Apostles pertaining to her is true. Nothing more, nothing less. Any confidence I have rests solely in Him.

 

[Placemat]

.

Anyway, How is this not you on this subject?



View attachment 301148

Well, I wear glasses for one thing and I never let my beard get that long.

(.... and poor Jerome...oops!)

As for the 'subject' matter....discernment comes into it, again by His grace.

 

[fide]

I do not believe that "belief in Mary" is necessary for Salvation.

Please accept first of all that I am not accusing you of "minimalism", but rather that one sentence (granted, out of context) casts a spotlight on this fault among many Christians: minimalism. Which I'd define in the context of contemporary Christianity as "What's the least I need to do to get saved"? That sort of self-seeking in a disciple of Jesus is itself contradictory. Jesus Himself did not "seek Himself", but rather the will of His Father who sent Him. His Life was (is) one of Self-donation, and the Cross shows certainly not self-protection or preservation - although salvation of the human soul is definitely protected and preserved, precisely in self-donation with Jesus in - through - upon one's own cross.

All that is to say that Christology also ought not be the final "heading" of a Christian's studies and discipleship. Yes, Mariology can be a subset of Christology - but Christ is not the end in Himself of the glorious Truth and Life into which we are called! Christ is the incarnation of the Son, within the Holy Trinity. Trinity is the central mystery of the Christian Life, and not Theology nor Christology nor Pneumatology nor Mariology are final except in the mystery of Trinity. A faithful disciple of Jesus is called into the fullness of Truth, which He was sent to begin to reveal. As He promised, another Counselor - the Holy Spirit - would come after Him, and so the Self-revelation of God would continue....

 

[Pavel Mosko]

Please accept first of all that I am not accusing you of "minimalism", but rather that one sentence (granted, out of context) casts a spotlight on this fault among many Christians: minimalism.

I get that and strangely minimalism and other isms have been something I have spoken of concerning Protestants many times before.

As far as myself goes, I would stand by my minimalist statement based on the New Testament lexical word for truth, Alethia, which describes truth as far as being precise concerning facts and details. Based on all the other stuff I wrote in the thread about Mary as far as theology goes, it should be obvious that I consider Mary important as far as General theology, doctrine, Church history etc. goes. And would generally stand by the statement because it clarifies Protestants interpretations etc. that pretty much are a strawman of the belief of Catholics and Orthodox.

 

[fide]

As far as myself goes, I would stand by my minimalist statement based on the New Testament lexical word for truth, Alethia, which describes truth as far as being precise concerning facts and details. Based on all the other stuff I wrote in the thread about Mary as far as theology goes, it should be obvious that I consider Mary important as far as General theology, doctrine, Church history etc. goes. And would generally stand by the statement because it clarifies Protestants interpretations etc. that pretty much are a strawman of the belief of Catholics and Orthodox.

The minimalism that concerns me so deeply, is that kind that masks love of this world, with a "minimal" love for God - "enough" love for God to avoid hell, but not so much as to make me lose the benefits of carnal earthly pleasures. His Commandment is not minimalistic: "all".

Mk 12:29 Jesus answered, "The first is, 'Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God, the Lord is one;
Mk 12:30 and you shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind, and with all your strength.'​

And also, for those who have been offered so much - grace, truth, love, mercy, divine revelation,....:

Lk 12:42 And the Lord said, "Who then is the faithful and wise steward, whom his master will set over his household, to give them their portion of food at the proper time?
Lk 12:43 Blessed is that servant whom his master when he comes will find so doing.
Lk 12:44 Truly, I say to you, he will set him over all his possessions.
Lk 12:45 But if that servant says to himself, 'My master is delayed in coming,' and begins to beat the menservants and the maidservants, and to eat and drink and get drunk,
Lk 12:46 the master of that servant will come on a day when he does not expect him and at an hour he does not know, and will punish him, and put him with the unfaithful.
Lk 12:47 And that servant who knew his master's will, but did not make ready or act according to his will, shall receive a severe beating.
Lk 12:48 But he who did not know, and did what deserved a beating, shall receive a light beating. Every one to whom much is given, of him will much be required; and of him to whom men commit much they will demand the more.​

I pray the Lord to open the eyes of the faithful, to look forward with supernatural faith, and hope, and holy charity, and be witnesses of all that they have seen and heard from Him. All.

 

[Albion]

It's not a "strawman" to think that it's going too far to pray to Mary and say that she will perform certain miracles or make sure that the petitioner will not die without a last chance to repent or the like. It is going too far to think that she was taken bodily into heaven or gave birth to Christ in some fashion that preserved her virginity in a physical sense, or, worse, that she is the co-redeemer of mankind. It is going too far to believe that God cannot refuse any petition she takes to him.

Yet all of that is commonplace in certain circles.

That said, honoring and revering her memory, acknowledging that she is the Mother of God (properly understood), and commemorating her with certain holidays, etc. is a different matter...and it's not as though every "Protestant" is outraged at this.

 

[fide]

or, worse, that she is the co-redeemer of mankind.

It is sad that many (all?) protestants consider the "worse" travesty to be what you have written here - that she or any human being could be in some sense a "co-redeemer" of mankind. It seems so obvious to me, that all disciples are called into the redemptive work of Christ, Son of God and son of man. All are called into the perfect love of God - called not only to being loved by God as beloved children of His, but also into loving as He loves, with the self-giving love with which He loves. That is, into the Self-gift of Christ on the Cross with our own crosses which we must take up, if we would follow Him.

Col 1:24 Now I rejoice in my sufferings for your sake, and in my flesh I complete what is lacking in Christ's afflictions for the sake of his body, that is, the church,...​

Lk 9:22 "The Son of man must suffer many things, and be rejected by the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be killed, and on the third day be raised."
Lk 9:23 And he said to all, "If any man would come after me, let him deny himself and take up his cross daily and follow me.
Lk 9:24 For whoever would save his life will lose it; and whoever loses his life for my sake, he will save it.​

And this passage also, very simple, but it holds much meaning for all with ears to hear:

1Pe 4:7 The end of all things is at hand; therefore keep sane and sober for your prayers.
1Pe 4:8 Above all hold unfailing your love for one another, since love covers a multitude of sins.​

And this as well:

1Co 12:25 that there may be no discord in the body, but that the members may have the same care for one another.
1Co 12:26 If one member suffers, all suffer together; if one member is honored, all rejoice together.
1Co 12:27 Now you are the body of Christ and individually members of it.
​

Holy Scripture is infinitely, immeasurably deep and rich with meaning. We must listen with ears of supernatural faith to begin to hear what it means to be in Him.

 

[Pavel Mosko]

It's not a "strawman" to think that it's going too far to pray to Mary and say that she will perform certain miracles or make sure that the petitioner will not die without a last chance to repent or the like. It is going too far to think that she was taken bodily into heaven or gave birth to Christ in some fashion that preserved her virginity in a physical sense, or, worse, that she is the co-redeemer of mankind. It is going too far to believe that God cannot refuse any petition she takes to him.

Yet all of that is commonplace in certain circles.

That said, honoring and revering her memory, acknowledging that she is the Mother of God (properly understood), and commemorating her with certain holidays, etc. is a different matter...and it's not as though every "Protestant" is outraged at this.

Ah but that is the strawman because the Catholic or Orthodox person soliciting the prayer of a saint like that is not usually asking them to perform miracles etc. :

1) but rather for their prayers much like a protestant might ask for the prayers of their pastor, an evangelist etc. In this case it really is a kind of application of the passage of James where he quotes or paraphrases a passage in the Ecclesiasticus about "the fervent effectual prayer of a righteous man". James 5:16



2) This also fits in with the ancient concepts of liturgy, as well as what we know takes place in heaven etc. via scriptures describing the worship of heaven. Basically metaphysically speaking their really is One worship service going on, that one in heaven, and we are participating in that here on earth.

Psalm 141:2,Revelation 5:8,Revelation 8:3-4



Besides that their also are other issues of things like being accused of necromancy etc. But I would suggest that people who like to make those kinds of charges do not really understand the spirituality of the New Testament and that they are actually being "unbiblcial" because:

1) There are many passages that speak of the Church / Ecclesia as one Body.

2) Jesus a number of times makes statement that diminish the importance of death, e.g. referring to it as "sleep" on at least two occasions etc.

3) There are other passages that suggest that the role of victorious saints is intercession, most notably in the book of Revelation.

Anyway my counter is that Protestants might pay lip service to various passages of "One Church", death is largely defeated but at other times they are actually defacto doing or suggesting the opposite! Basically they act as if there is a huge divide between the living and the dead, and they act like their are two Churches (one of the living and one for the dead).



Anyway as a side note I will say I think various people in the past have misunderstood the nature of the saints etc. Which is to say, that sometimes Protestants have been right about some of their fears and misgivings etc. But I also much more believe that Protestants largely don't get the big picture of the context of the Bible, the Church etc. paradigm wise. They are often looking at the Church from the eyes of Enlightenment philosophy etc. and don't really get the ontological metaphysical nature of the Church as a theotropic entity etc.

 

[Albion]

Ah but that is the strawman because the Catholic or Orthodox person soliciting the prayer of a saint like that is not usually asking them to perform miracles etc.

Well, we could debate what "usually" means in this case, but all of it exists and prayers to the Virgin include what I referred to, and more than that. So for whom it applies, that's the issue.

1) but rather for their prayers much like a protestant might ask for the prayers of their pastor, an evangelist etc.

My friend, I've heard all the excuses before. Every time that some practice is criticized, the defenders come back and say that it's a misunderstanding, or an exaggeration, or something of that sort. But it's not. So that was my contribution to this thread--pointing out that a certain level of honor regarding the Virgin is not wrong, but that going beyond that does happen often and it's definitely supported by the churches.

In this case it really is a kind of application of the passage of James where he quotes or paraphrases a passage in the Ecclesiasticus about "the fervent effectual prayer of a righteous man". James 5:16

Sorry, no. What I was addressing is not at all what you are attempting to reduce it to by citing a verse like this one that refers to prayer itself, but I will of course be happy to read and respond to anything that reacts to the kinds of beliefs and devotions that I did point to in that post.

 

[Pavel Mosko]

It is sad that many (all?) protestants consider the "worse" travesty to be what you have written here - that she or any human being could be in some sense a "co-redeemer" of mankind. I

This is kind of where I think Catholics end up doing more harm than good to their cause. Because the co-redempterix stuff is kind of an embellishment on earlier Nicene and Apostolic fathers stuff. I can appreciate it as a statement of Mary having a direct hand in our salvation by cooperating with God to lend her body to the Incarnation process that made things possible. But most Protestants do not really have any kind of serious foundation in Nicene type theology to be able to appreciate that kind of thing. (I mean outside of rote learning and some brief discussion from a Confirmation class etc. or maybe even less than that no discussion of the Creeds)


Anyway about all you can do on this stuff is try to challenge the paradigm and the claims that are presented, and maybe if you do a good job they are a little more open minded in the future. But the old saying about leading horses to water applies here, furthermore I think anything else going beyond what I mention here is more or less going to usually antagonize them to double down on their position.

 

[fide]

I think anything else going beyond what I mention here is more or less going to usually antagonize them to double down on their position.

It may appear that I am, but actually I am not trying to convince anyone of anything. Saving Faith does not come from "convincing". What can be called "natural faith" does come by rational conclusion (and/or by being raised to believe in one thing or another, by parents or a dominant culture) - but not saving faith, which is supernatural in origin (that is, a gift in supernatural grace, from God). I realize that many people do not understand or recognize any such distinction; for many, "faith is faith". Period. But that is wrong, and is a serious error to try to live with. Paul is very clear about this crucially important distinction:

Eph 2:8 For by grace you have been saved through faith; and this is not your own doing, it is the gift of God—
Eph 2:9 not because of works, lest any man should boast.​

Saving faith is the only faith that matters, and it is not received through a rational (or an irrational) human work of reasoning to some conclusion. It is purely a gift, gratuitously given, and typically heard in the Word of God as truly "of God":

Rom 10:17 So faith comes from what is heard, and what is heard comes by the preaching of Christ.​

So, the Truth must be heard! And it must be asserted - proclaimed - in Faith! Then, the word is potent. And if the ears are listening, and the hearing heart is fertile, there will be the miracle of believing, and thus growing in the intention of God.

 

[Pavel Mosko]

It may appear that I am, but actually I am not trying to convince anyone of anything. Saving Faith does not come from "convincing". What can be called "natural faith" does come by rational conclusion (and/or by being raised to believe in one thing or another, by parents or a dominant culture) - but not saving faith, which is supernatural in origin (that is, a gift in supernatural grace, from God). I realize that many people do not understand or recognize any such distinction; for many, "faith is faith". Period. But that is wrong, and is a serious error to try to live with. Paul is very clear about this crucially important distinction:

Interesting to hear a Catholic talk like that, I guess I tend to think of all the "saving Faith" lingo as the province of Protestants while I guess it is good to be reminded that it is part of the greater Western Christian tradition.

 

[Placemat]

The minimalism that concerns me so deeply, is that kind that masks love of this world, with a "minimal" love for God - "enough" love for God to avoid hell, but not so much as to make me lose the benefits of carnal earthly pleasures. His Commandment is not minimalistic: "all".

Mk 12:29 Jesus answered, "The first is, 'Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God, the Lord is one;
Mk 12:30 and you shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind, and with all your strength.'​

And also, for those who have been offered so much - grace, truth, love, mercy, divine revelation,....:

Lk 12:42 And the Lord said, "Who then is the faithful and wise steward, whom his master will set over his household, to give them their portion of food at the proper time?
Lk 12:43 Blessed is that servant whom his master when he comes will find so doing.
Lk 12:44 Truly, I say to you, he will set him over all his possessions.
Lk 12:45 But if that servant says to himself, 'My master is delayed in coming,' and begins to beat the menservants and the maidservants, and to eat and drink and get drunk,
Lk 12:46 the master of that servant will come on a day when he does not expect him and at an hour he does not know, and will punish him, and put him with the unfaithful.
Lk 12:47 And that servant who knew his master's will, but did not make ready or act according to his will, shall receive a severe beating.
Lk 12:48 But he who did not know, and did what deserved a beating, shall receive a light beating. Every one to whom much is given, of him will much be required; and of him to whom men commit much they will demand the more.​

I pray the Lord to open the eyes of the faithful, to look forward with supernatural faith, and hope, and holy charity, and be witnesses of all that they have seen and heard from Him. All.

Beautiful prayer sentiments Fide, for all Christians.

 

[Landon Caeli]

Why does it exist and for what purpose?

I've never heard of it before... Interesting concept.

 

[Placemat]

​

Holy Scripture is infinitely, immeasurably deep and rich with meaning. We must listen with ears of supernatural faith to begin to hear what it means to be in Him.

Good advice for all Christians to adhere too with regards to scripture; prayerfully led by the Holy Spirit, assured by His promises.