Posted on 12/22/2014 7:34:14 PM PST by Salvation
God isn’t asking us anything more than to make Him our own source and guide, to be taken at face value as Savior. It is ungodly when people shoot religion full of nonsense like oh, your lipstick is going to send you to a fiery eternity. This inevitably turns out to point at preachers that worship themselves more than the Lord.
It is Mark17 that made the above statement, not me. But thanks for taking this up.
Well you're not very well read then.
Well, perhaps. Since you're well read, perhaps you could show Mark17 and myself where in the Bible the passage is that describes Mary, the woman from whom Jesus was borb, as the new Eve. Then we can be well read, too.
Thank you.
A sovereign preferment of one, above self and others.
That tells everything about it except what is actually useful to know. It’s like calling grace “the unmerited favor of God.” 100% accurate and 100% useless.
Weird isn't it. It isn't there of course. I was a catholic till I was 21, and I don't remember if I ever heard anyone describe Mary as the new Eve. I may have, I just don't remember for sure, and I used to watch Bishop Sheen on TV all the time. At that time, the preaching of the cross was foolishness to me, but now that I can discern the cross, I would like to hear Sheen again, in light of what I know now. That would be interesting, yes?
Metmom, do you ever remember hearing this when you were a catholic?
Oh? Perhaps you could show us all a little of it, so we would know?
Yes, it would.
BTW folks, I saw on another thread, one thing mentioned, among many, was this so called stigmata, where people allegedly get the bleeding. I know in the Philippines, and maybe other places too, they choose guys to get nailed on a cross every year. I know what I think, but your opinions?
Jn 2:1-11 AV
Please note that the purpose of this passage is to give Jesus glory from the first of his public ministry until the last. It is not a passage given over to glorifying His birth mother, in which she plays a close, but minor, role.
(Also take note that it is well proven that when oinos/wine is used, it may be either what is known as juice to us, or it may be alcoholic beverage)(The sense of what "wine" means in the Bible, OT or NT, is context-dependent.)
=========
1 And the third day there was a marriage in Cana of Galilee; and the mother of Jesus was there:
This event happened the third day after arriving in Galilee, directly after His baptism by John in the south at Bethabara. Nathanael was from Cana and was present at Jesus' baptism. Did he perhaps invite the group to the event at Cana? It's a possibility.
2 And both Jesus was called, and his disciples, to the marriage.
The use of "called" might be better translated here as "invited," as well as His disciples, since it was not a commanded performance, not an imperative call.
3 And when they wanted wine, the mother of Jesus saith unto him, They have no wine.
This is has been taken--contextually and grammatically wrongly--to mean that at the wedding banquet, they had consumed all the wine so far provided, and have "run out of wine." That is not what the verse says.
The phrase υστερησαντος οινου (from hustereo, verb, aorist tense, active voice, participle mode, 3rd person, singular) is properly rendered, ". . . it was lacking wine" (where 'it' refers to the wedding).
Jesus' mother turned to face him and said,"οινον ουκ εχουσιν" (from the verb ἔχω = to have, present tense, active voice, indicative mode, 3rd person plural). "They continually have no wine" (during the process of holding the marriage and its feasting, so far); or better yet, "They are not having wine" with inference "at this banquet." What this is not saying is "They ran out of wine."
Mary did not say, "They have no more wine." "No more" is not anywhere written into this little scenario. What is there is that they have no wine, none at all.
4 Jesus saith unto her, Woman, what have I to do with thee? mine hour is not yet come."
Or, perhaps, "What has this to do with thee and me? You haven't gotten us here just to provide the drinks, have you?" But actually, He and the disciples are invited guests, and it is usual to bring a present for the bride and groom. What can they do to show graciousness?
This might have been the marriage of family relatives or friends, since His mother had been there (imperfect tense) for some time, as one may infer from the grammar. If He is likely to want to give a wedding present, she may be hinting both that the celebrating families are too poor to provide wine, so they are not having it at the wedding. Or on the other hand, that they are very aware of the admonition of Habakkuk 2:15, and have no intention to provide an occasion of drunkenness for guests, therefore are not serving alcoholic beverages at their holy ceremony and celebration.
5 His mother saith unto the servants, Whatsoever he saith unto you, do it (struck out, as it was added by the translators for clarity only).
Mary is only telling them that if He takes initiative to do something that needs the help of the servants, they should be ready to do as He orders as if he were representing the caterer or the family.
6 And there were set there six waterpots of stone, after the manner of the purifying of the Jews, containing two or three firkins apiece.
Note that there are six vessels, and a firkin is about 10 gallons. Estimate that each vessel has 25 firkins (6 vessels x 25 ga each, or about 150 gal). That would be about 600 quarts, enough for the whole wedding feast for everyone? If that were alcoholic, that would be a lot of temptation for drunkenness even if they were not yet drunken. But if it were pure, sweet, fresh, cool blood of the cluster, any amount wold be an appropriate gift.
7 Jesus saith unto them, Fill the waterpots with water. And they filled them up to the brim.
The waterpots here are ritual vessels, not hust ordinary jugs. They are handcarved from stone, not just clay, so they are very expensive, and kept holy and passed from generation to generation. Since wine has leaven in it, fermented wine with yeast would never be put in these vessels. That would defile them. I reckon that Jesus simply would not put filthy stuff in them. No sense in just making sweet, tasty wine like Welch's does, eh?
8 And he saith unto them, Draw out now, and bear unto the governor of the feast. And they bare it.
Made as if freshly pressed, and without the process that normally would cause filth to be in the created juice; however, on the other hand, Jesus could have created alcoholic wine without the usual filth.
9 When the ruler of the .feast had tasted the water that was made wine, and knew not whence it was: (but the servants which drew the water knew;) the governor of the feast called the bridegroom,
Assuming that the bridegroom had finally broken out the festival wine, the caterer/master of ceremonies called out for the bridegroom (with his voice) to compliment him on his prudent strategy, of saving the wine to be served later in the feast, and using pure water at first from the waterpots --
10 And saith unto him, Every man at the beginning doth set forth good wine; and when men have well drunk, then that which is worse: but thou hast kept the good wine until now.
"You have not had wine from the start of the feast, like everyone usually begins the feast. Instead of giving me wine to serve from the beginning, you wisely have saved the wine and not served any until now! That's a pretty wise strategy to extend the use of the little you have!" (Note that this verse does not say that anybody in this feast had drunk any wine. It just describes the usual practice of how a feast is commonly scheduled. Saying that anyone in this feast was previously drinking wine is simply a misinterpretation and not even a legitimate exegetical inference. It would be reading into the text by eisegesis something that is simply not there.)
11 This beginning of miracles did Jesus in Cana of Galilee, and manifested forth his glory; and his disciples believed on him.
Building a doctrine of salvation--that is, of believing on Him--on assuming Jesus was serving gallons and gallons of alcoholic beverage to revelers that were already three sheets to the wind, to prove His Divinity, is a very unsafe way to claim any kind of theological repute for the interpreter who essentially claims this as genuine inspired Bible truth.
Even then, it would be very questionable to think that The God who hates the influence of even a little recreationally taken alcohol on the spiritual life of a true believer, would agree with His Son being just a purveyor of a mind-bending drug to attract followers.
The meek and righteous scholar will not do so, but place the greatest emphasis on the sanctified nature of the first of many affirming miracles that He, the great Teacher and Master performed in His earthly ministry.
When seen this way, Jesus now appears as a compassionate and beneficial Friend, with Solomonic ingenuity of helping make this a truly memorable and spiritual adventure not only for the celebrants, but also for the disciples He has called to minister with Himself, and to be told to us.
And this is how we, the readers and studiers of the Bible, ought to take the vignette. Using a misinterpretation of this to justify the acceptability of social drinking is a great dishonor to The Christ and his recorder, John the Apostle.
LOL, yes, I would say it is a bit outside the realm of normalcy, would’t you?
Yes ... if you have the courage ... go read John 13-17 and find the Lord's Table mentioned. You will see the author is wrong for yourself.
What you do with that knowledge is up to you.
Do you recall the concept that Jesus fulfilled what was foretold in the Old Testament? It's more complicated then just here's a Bible verse and that proves everything. Exegesis. There are many words and concepts that are not regularly taught to kids. When you were confirmed you were thought to responsible enough to continue learning your faith.
We don't start kids off learning Calculus. It's a process. It takes a life time and I am sorry that apparently your teachers did not instill in you a love for the Church that nurtured you for 21 years. Well they tried to nurture you. I am not being sarcastic. I am very sorry that we failed you.
Google it. More information then I could post. I doubt you really want to know. It’s just a game with “My Bible and Me” Christians. So no, I will not show you in the Bible.
And I was looking forward to this SO much!
I think you are telling me that you can't really find Mary as the new Eve in the Bible?
Awwwww, shucks -- I've been waitibg all night for this . . .
Been there, done that.
Romanism seems to be failing a lot of its unwilling inductees these days. Let me comfort you with some gentle words from the Savior:
"Come unto me, all ye that labor and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest. Take my yoke upon you, and learn of (απο) me, for I am meek and lowly in heart: and you shall find rest unto your souls. For my yoke is easy, and my burden is light."
This is a call unto discipleship, which so many who have left Romanism, heard and followed the gospel of salvation through faith alone, have taken up the yoke of eternal discipleship, and have become greatly and joyously lightened of the impossible burden of earning one's way to Heaven.
I have been lucky not to be trapped on I-90, but I have witnessed the carnage.
Yes, of course I remember that. What I could not figure out, was how it applied to me as an individual. I had no doubt that Old and New Testament saints were in Heaven with Jesus, because I thought somewhere along the line, they led a good enough life to work their way there. Now, me on the other hand, I was not quite so confident in my ability to lead the life I thought would get me to Heaven. I recall one day, I was about 12, laying down on the couch, trying to figure out how long eternity would be. I figured it would be longer than I wanted it to be, and not feeling too good about my performance, it scared me to death. I couldn't hardly function for days, for fear. I thought I had only about a 50% chance of going to Heaven. Not the odds I hoped for. So, after every t was crossed and every i was dotted, all I wanted to know, was what is the plan of salvation? After all, if one does not make it to Heaven, then nothing else matters. I was 21 when the preaching of the cross was no longer foolishness to me. Others may have different variations of experience, but that was my experience. So, as I said, the only thing I really care about, is what is the plan of salvation? Nothing else matters.
It is very edifying to me that you came to this at 12. Have you ever had an inkling that maybe God is calling you to a vocation? Just a thought.. (I am being Serious).
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.