Posted on 12/31/2007 11:46:28 AM PST by NYer
Please look up the Nestorian Heresy which the Church condemned in 431Ad at Ephesus. The Nestorians believed as you do that Christ had two natures in one person. Christians have always believed that Christ had two persons with one nature.
You THINK you know what I believe. Tell me, if you play chess with someone else, do you move their pieces for them? Sure, you might have an educated guess which piece and where you opponent may move, but you can be wrong.
The scriptures say ‘Son of God’ not ‘God the Son’. There is a reason: Diety cannot die.
As far as what your ‘church’ condemns, I consider it to have been in doctrinal error, in several ways, long before 431 AD.
Good night, Happy New Year, and Lord Bless.
This was a wonderful post. You always manage to do it right. I regret not getting to it sooner today.
You must have great sons.
God bless.
See post #84
She could have said no, but didn’t. Of all of mankind SHE said yes. She participated in God’s gift in a way you and I never will. To that we owe her our gratitude. I don’t think it’s too much to say that this was HER gift to mankind. She nourished Him in her womb, she nourished Him in his life raising the child of God. He was born of her.
Don’t be so quick to belittle that in Mary. God chose to have her participate.......you insult God as well to do so.
Mary's "yes" was not a precondition for God to do what he did through her - as if God was waiting expectantly for a favor from the only one able to give it. Blasphemy!
No, the angel's message was a mandate: "You will be with child and give birth to a son, and you are to give him the name Jesus." There was no asking permission here, and Mary, being the godly, humble girl that she was, accepted this as the will of the Lord.
Nowhere in Scripture does Christ identify himself as the Son of Mary; neither does Scripture identify Mary as the Mother of God. Christ, rather, calls himself, "Son of Man" and "Son of God." "He will be great and will be called the Son of the Most High." Luke 1:32
Oops, you got your terms switched around. Christ is one Person with two natures.
Dang - you are correct sorry it was late. :)
Gabriel wasn't God's bagman and this wasn't a direct order for her to submit - leave that to people who call God "Allah".
Gabriel was simply prophesying what was to come. Mary's free will was not impeded in any way whatsoever, otherwise, you're characterizing the Holy Spirit as some kind of non-corporeal rapist. Do you really want to imply that?
"Be it done unto me according to thy word" is a voice of permission not submission.
Nowhere in Scripture does Christ identify himself as the Son of Mary; neither does Scripture identify Mary as the Mother of God. Christ, rather, calls himself, "Son of Man" and "Son of God." "He will be great and will be called the Son of the Most High." Luke 1:32
He doesn't declare Himself the second member of the Godhead, either. In fact, He was vague enough about the nature of His membership in the Trinity that it took several centuries to define both the Trinity and the hypostatic union. Since the hypostatic union defines that Jesus' two natures are INSEPERABLE, then it is impossible to say that Mary is not the Mother of God. If you deny this, you deny Jesus' divinity, end of story.
Additionally, if Mary's motherhood is of no consequence, can you explain why God bothered to be "born" at all? God created Adam out of dust. He could certainly create His own body in the same way or simply appear as an adult and begin His ministry right away. If the Lord wanted us to ignore Mary's motherhood, being born through her is an absolutely useless exercise on the part of God.
What Mary gave birth to died...
Jesus is one Person with two natures, human and divine.
Mary gave birth to the person Jesus Christ.
Jesus is God.
Mary is the Mother of God.
QED.
The KJV says: “..which are the prayers of saints.”
Both versions say ‘of’, not ‘to’.
The prayers are not to them, but are prayers by them.
The saints in heaven are presenting the prayers of the saints on earth to God. How did the saints in heaven come upon these prayers?
The saints are those sanctified, born of the Holy Ghost. Paul wrote to several of the churches he helped establish, addressing them: “to the saints at...”.
Yes, and the saints in heaven are presenting the prayers of these saints to God.
As Scripture indicates, those in heaven are aware of the prayers of those on earth. This can be seen, for example, in Revelation 5:8, where John depicts the saints in heaven offering our prayers to God under the form of "golden bowls full of incense, which are the prayers of the saints." But if the saints in heaven are offering our prayers to God, then they must be aware of our prayers. They are aware of our petitions and present them to God by interceding for us.But along comes ‘tradition’ of the RCC, to make superheros of certain people.Some might try to argue that in this passage the prayers being offered were not addressed to the saints in heaven, but directly to God. Yet this argument would only strengthen the fact that those in heaven can hear our prayers, for then the saints would be aware of our prayers even when they are not directed to them!
In any event, it is clear from Revelation 5:8 that the saints in heaven do actively intercede for us. We are explicitly told by John that the incense they offer to God are the prayers of the saints. Prayers are not physical things and cannot be physically offered to God. Thus the saints in heaven are offering our prayers to God mentally. In other words, they are interceding.
Since the earliest times, the Church has publicly proclaimed some saints as saints. It is certainly within the competence of Christ's Church, what the Bible calls "the pillar and foundation of truth," to do so.
And the Church had been doing so for 1500 years, long before Luther arrived on the scene with his assorted un-biblical, ahistorical, and unprecedented doctrines.
Thanks. We have enough real doctrinal differences. There's no need to create artificial ones.
But it raises the question of how much importance do we give to a translation. The KJB is a great piece of literature, but it was dependent on its sources, and , of course, on the word choices of its translators. So it reads as you say, just as Jerome said "gratia plenus." Inevitably one's theology influences the words we use.
No, only that it was probably a coined or rare word word that applies only to this one woman in the unique situation. Jews who attack this scene keep trying to make Mary into just the mother of a prophet, whenever they don’t just make the whole thing a hellenistic contrivance. But don’t we Christians all agree that whole that certainly fits the case of John and Elizabeth . here Luke is telling us this is something above and beyond that, and certainly very different from the case of Heracles and his mother. Here we have the departure point between the Old and New Covenant. The spirit of prophesy continues, but takes a radically new form. Of course, I don’t think the Jews think of John as a Prophet, sice that age is supposed to be over, and rabbinical Judaism is, I think, so focused on the “Law” they they no longer listen for the Spirit.
**How did the saints in heaven come upon these prayers?**
Those in heaven you are referring to as saints are called elders. Now, maybe you can prove that they aren’t OT saints (prophets maybe), although I’m sure not going to say either way.
Are you saying that God knew nothing of these prayers until the elders got a hold of them? Surely not.
2 Kings 20:5 God speaking: “..I have heard thy prayer, I have seen thy tears..”. No middleman accredited for those incoming prayers there.
The many prayers (psalms) of David are directed straight to God.
The Lord told Cornelius that his prayers and alms had come up before him. No middlemen mentioned.
I think it’s great that we can ask someone still here on earth to pray to God for us, because that is multiplying faith toward God. I just don’t ask those that are dead.
Of those that have passed on, which ones are awake?
Paul tells the CHURCH not to fret about those that ‘sleep in Jesus’, and that ‘the dead in Christ shall rise first’.
So, why even pray TO someone other than Almighty God, who only is omnipresent, omniscient, and omnipotent. His glory he will not share with another.
Mary was used to help produce the fleshly sacrifice with a soul, God saw to it that it was sinless, and provided the Spirit which was not given by measure unto him. In other words, he was given unlimited Spirit of God (”the Father in me, he doeth the works”). Mary’s body did not create the Spirit.
Mary was blessed to be chosen for the task, but later you will find her in the upper room waiting for the outpouring of the Holy Ghost. She HAD to receive it, just like the others present. “Ye must be born again”.
**And the Church had been doing so for 1500 years, long before Luther arrived on the scene with his assorted un-biblical, ahistorical, and unprecedented doctrines.**
A brief anti-proddie rant?
Just like anyone hungering and thirsting for righteousness, I believe that God sent a witness to Luther, showing him the truth. Unfortunately, he only accepted some of it.
God wants people born again his way, but some want their ‘riches’ (religious pride and position) and God too.
“She could have said no, but didn’t. Of all of mankind SHE said yes. She participated in God’s gift in a way you and I never will. To that we owe her our gratitude. I don’t think it’s too much to say that this was HER gift to mankind. She nourished Him in her womb, she nourished Him in his life raising the child of God. He was born of her.
Don’t be so quick to belittle that in Mary. God chose to have her participate.......you insult God as well to do so.”
With respect. I am not belittling Mary. Mary is a magnificiant example of true faith, of dedicated love for God, of someone who willing served her Savior. She was blessed in the most glorious way and she is someone who I respect greatly. After all, she was told by Gabriel that the Lord favored her highly and had chosen her to bear His Son! My point is that Christ, the Savior, is the gift from God alone. Even the Magnificat shows Mary’s appreciation for what God has done with and thru her.
Mary’s Song
46And Mary said:
“My soul glorifies the Lord
47and my spirit rejoices in God my Savior,
48for he has been mindful
of the humble state of his servant.
From now on all generations will call me blessed,
49for the Mighty One has done great things for me—
holy is his name.
50His mercy extends to those who fear him,
from generation to generation.
51He has performed mighty deeds with his arm;
he has scattered those who are proud in their inmost thoughts.
52He has brought down rulers from their thrones
but has lifted up the humble.
53He has filled the hungry with good things
but has sent the rich away empty.
54He has helped his servant Israel,
remembering to be merciful
55to Abraham and his descendants forever,
even as he said to our fathers.”
I am NOT saying that Mary was simply the vessel that bore Christ. No, rather it is clear she is a chosen servant of God who he honored among all other women ever by delivering on His promise of Salvation by having the Third Person of the Holy Trinity conceive the Second in Mary, using her lineage to David as the completion of His Promise.
But, and this is big, the gift of Christ is God’s gift. Mary certainly participated in a way that you adn I can’t...of course, she was the one who did all you noted. In that sense I understand what you mean and what a gift she gave to raise Christ well, in God’s desired fashion. The gift I refer to is the deliverance of the promise of the Messiah. That is God’s doing pure and simple. It is not taking Mary’s importance away but rather glorifying God for doing what you, me and even Mary we could not do without God making it so and bringing the impossible to a glorious reality.
I hope I have clarified what I originally meant in my previous post.
Blessings to you thru Christ Jesus, our Savior.
PM
Neither was God at the mercy his servant's decision. Your misrepresentation of God and the facts as Scripturally stated speaks volumns - despite your weak attempt to equate a Biblical view of God with that of Islam. God's work is not at the mercy of those who He wishes to work his will. He is sovereign, and will have his way, willingness or not.
Do you not even remember that Moses was completely unwilling to fulfill the command of God to be the instrument of deliverance to Israel? "Send someone else, not me!" And yet God was firm, but gentle, and assured Moses that his power was with him. Peter was told by the Lord that he would be lead where he did not want to go (to crucifixion.) And yet God did mighty works through these men despite their reluctance because it was solely through His power that these works were done.
The difference being the response. Moses resisted God to the point where the Lord almost killed him; Peter denied the Lord and ran away. Unlike these men, so representative of Israel in their reluctance , she responded with her whole heart almost immediately. The pure heart of a young girl responded in a way that puts all the heroes to shame.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.