| This thread has been locked, it will not receive new replies. |
|
Locked on 10/13/2013 3:40:25 PM PDT by Religion Moderator, reason:
Poster’s request |
Posted on 10/12/2013 9:34:46 AM PDT by NKP_Vet
The most common objection I get to Mary as Mother of God, especially from Fundamentalists, but not limited to them, is, “The words ‘Mother of God’ are nowhere to be found in the Bible. Therefore, I will not accept it as true.”
This line of reasoning fails in dramatic fashion when carried to its logical conclusion when we consider the central mystery of the Christian Faith, the Trinity, is not found in Scripture verbatim as well. And we could go on. The Incarnation would fall by the wayside. Essential terms we use to do theology, like homoousios (Gr.—same nature, Jesus has the “same nature” as his Father), hypostatic union, the circumincessions of the persons of the Blessed Trinity, etc. All gone! The canon of Scripture, the nature of the sacrament of Holy Matrimony, and so much more we believe as Christians would be out the door because none of these things are made explicit in Scripture.
And this is not to mention “justification by faith alone.” Can anyone agree there is just a bit of irony in the fact that the same fellow who tells me he will not accept Mary as “Mother of God” because those words “are not found in the Bible,” will accept justification by faith alone when the only time those words are found in the Bible the words “not by” are right in front of them (cf. James 2:24)?
(Excerpt) Read more at catholic.com ...
Nobody’s “correcting” the Holy Spirit. That’s crazy talk.
Excellent find. Please link.
Hey is that Sam Kinnison on the box cover:)
“You spread hate when you accuse us of being divorcees, ...”
You appear to confuse facts with emotion.
“...een (sic) though the vast majority of Catholics don’t follow Catholic teaching anyway on contraception, divorce, or whatever.”
No one ever claimed that to be Catholic was to be sinless.
” Most Catholics lose it before they’re 18.”
An assertion based on what facts?
That “find” also includes many things he ignores. Keep reading. It is cafeteria time, pick-n-choose religion!
For the Secrets of the Rosary and the Papal quotes? The links are there, usually after the text. For the Papal quotes, for the one or two that don’t have a link, google the title and it’ll take you to someplace on the Vatican website.
Here's where we disagree, then. I think that all of those phrases which I listed (and common both to Protestant and Catholic believers) are true and describe a truth found in the Bible; and likewise "Mother of God." It would only be thought non-Biblical if it were taken in a heretical sense, as I explained here (#77).
(Please do click the link, because there I list and discard a number of heretical senses--- which would be rejected both by you and by me.)
In the intended sense, "Mother of God" affirms that Jesus Christ is an indivisible Person, a Person who assumed a human nature, and was born of the Virgin.
If you think that the Bible teaches that Jesus was not a Person, but rather a --- oh, I don't know --- a double, a Siamese twin, a kind of android entity but not really human, a simulacrum, an illusion --- then, we've got a problem. But if Jesus Christ is a Person, then the person who gave him birth is His mother.
The doctrine does not "add" any dignity to Mary -- not at all, that's not its purpose --- beyond what was given her by God, namely motherhood. The purpose of the doctrine is to protect our Biblical understanding of Christ as a Person and not an illusion, vision, puppet, conjoined twin, a poor guy with a Dissociative Identity Disorder, or anything lesser than a Divine Person who took up a human nature.
In short, the doctrine is "about" Christ, not Mary.
It’s statements like those from Catholics that show just how carnal they are. One really needs little else to understand that it’s the RCC they worship and hold as their savior. No Spirit filled believer would ever give man the credit for something that God did. They forget that God also used Judas, Balaam’s donkey, Caesar, Herod and many more who have ended their earthly life unlikely headed for eternity in heaven.
No, because it’s not because of the Catholic church that we heard about Jesus.
For the most part, it’s because of the Jews who wrote the NT that we heard of Him, eith the possible exception of Luke.
*eucharist* isn’t found in Scripture either.
Neither is *immaculate conception*, *magisterium*, *sacred tradition*, *purgatory*, *transubstantiation*, *sacrament*, *host*, *papacy*, *assumption*, or a whole host of other Catholic terminology that you claim is supported by Scripture.
I agree with you here. I don't get how your statement contradicts mine.
All human holiness is because of a relationship of trust in God our Savior. It is identical in the sense that it is of the same kind: a dependent, derivative holiness which comes only as the gift of grace, and which is like the moon, in relation to the sun: a pale reflection, not the burning Source.
On the other hand, some people are holier than others. I think my husband is holier than I. I have no doubt my mother was holier than I. Mary was holier, too, because she was so intimately close to Christ, united because of her humility, her faith, her hearing the Word and keeping It--- the Word made flesh in her womb.
"All generations will call me blessed." That's true of Mary, not of me!
I don't know.
Why do they create some fantasy and call it *sacred tradition* and elevate it above Scripture?
Or the divorce. Often the reason.
Prove it. Prove it's often the reason.
Statement 1: “All human holiness is because of a relationship of trust in God our Savior. It is identical in the sense that it is of the same kind: a dependent, derivative holiness which comes only as the gift of grace... a pale reflection, not the burning Source.
Statement 2: On the other hand, some people are holier than others... because she was so intimately close to Christ, united because of her humility, her faith, her hearing the Word and keeping It
If righteousness (or “holiness” as you call it) is the gift of God, it does not follow that there are some who are more righteous than others because of their “humility, faith, hearing and keeping the Word.” You are proposing the “because” based on her own personal merits. Since, if righteous comes from God, then humility, faith, hearing and keeping the Word also comes from God. If they do not come from God as the “source,” then it is the personal holiness of the individual that made them holier than the other, and not because God was deficient in giving righteousness to individuals. In other words, you contradict yourself.
Furthermore, the scripture does not teach that Mary was more righteous than anyone else because of her closeness to Jesus.
“And it came to pass, as he spake these things, a certain woman of the company lifted up her voice, and said unto him, Blessed is the womb that bare thee, and the paps which thou hast sucked. But he said, Yea rather, blessed are they that hear the word of God, and keep it.” (Luk 11:27-28)
If it is, “rather, blessed are they that hear the word of God, and keep it,” then it follows that anyone who obeys God in their vocation are as blessed as Mary. Though, of course, to be “blessed” does not mean “is more righteous than.”
Hey, with that in mind, you never got back to me where the Holy Spirit has told us to search other than scripture to see if what someone teaches is true. I’ll look forward to your source.
“Prove it. Prove it’s often the reason.”
Sure, go ahead.
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.