-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Could someone explain?
- Thread starter Trust in the Lord
- Start date
John Gilmore
New Member
This is nonsense! There are not two Christs with one ruling over the other. You have invented a Christ of two persons that is not the Christ of the bible.
Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ. For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the godhead bodily. Col. 2:8,9
[ October 12, 2003, 05:00 PM: Message edited by: John Gilmore ]
Dear friend, have you yet removed the prophet Isaiah?
May God Bless you to see the truth of what I have written is founded upon his word and not that of any pretension of man, my own included.
I believe you will find Isaiah proclaimed this truth in what we call his chapter 9.
Bro. Dallas
May God Bless you to see the truth of what I have written is founded upon his word and not that of any pretension of man, my own included.
I believe you will find Isaiah proclaimed this truth in what we call his chapter 9.
Bro. Dallas
BobRyan
Well-Known Member
Christ was the Son of God - BEFORE He was the Son of Man.
Christ did not "become" the Son of God - thanks to Mary - but the Son of Man.
At His birth - the NEW ontology for Christ was NOT His being God - but man.
This is why we do not call Joseph "The Instructor of God" or "God's instructor".
In Christ,
Bob
Christ did not "become" the Son of God - thanks to Mary - but the Son of Man.
At His birth - the NEW ontology for Christ was NOT His being God - but man.
This is why we do not call Joseph "The Instructor of God" or "God's instructor".
In Christ,
Bob
faithcontender
New Member
Now you admit that Mary needed and received it. But you deny that she was a sinner. How can she need it if she had no sin.If you admit that she received it then you must admit that she was a sinner. Otherwise you have another definition of what salvation is.
Please take note of the meaning of salvation from webster dictionary:
1 a : deliverance from the power and effects of SIN
When you say she received it means she was delivered from the power and effects of sin.
You are the one contradicting yourself. You said Mary had no sin because of her preservative redemption. Mary had no sin yet she was redeemed?
If she was redeemed then she was a sinner.
Otherwise you have new definition what redemption is.
Take note of the meaning of redemption from the catholic encyclopedia:
It is the restoration of man from the bondage of sin to the liberty of the children of God through the satisfactions and merits of Christ.
The mere fact that she received redemption means that she received restoration from the bondage of sin to the liberty of being a child of God through the satisfactions and merits of Christ.
tragic_pizza
New Member
So should I take silence as an admission that none of you can produce any Biblical evidence for Marian theology (the way to Jesus is through Mary) or praying to the dead/asking the dead to pray for you?
One wouldn't expect surrender so easily.
One wouldn't expect surrender so easily.
GraceSaves
New Member
If I fall into a big hole full and injur myself, but you pull me out and take me to a hospital, you have saved my life.
If I'm about to fall into a big hole, but at the last second, you grab my arm and prevent me from falling, you saved my life.
The first is us. The second is Mary. Both were saved from sin, and both by the merits of Jesus Christ.
If I'm about to fall into a big hole, but at the last second, you grab my arm and prevent me from falling, you saved my life.
The first is us. The second is Mary. Both were saved from sin, and both by the merits of Jesus Christ.
Carson Weber
<img src="http://www.boerne.com/temp/bb_pic2.jpg">
Hi faithcontender,
How can she need it if she had no sin.
Because her lack of sin is precisely an answer to her need. God's answer to this need is a part of his eternal foreknowledge, and so he prefigured her Immaculate Conception through the Protoevangelion in Genesis 3:15 and the decor of the Ark of the Covenant.
Webster defines salvation as deliverance from the power and effects of sin. Mary was certainly delivered from the power and effects of sin - in a way more perfect than you or I, for she was truly delivered - in the most perfect way - from the power and effects of sin!
You said Mary had no sin because of her preservative redemption. Mary had no sin yet she was redeemed? If she was redeemed then she was a sinner.
That Mary's soul was preserved from Original Sin at the moment of ocnception does not mean that Mary had no need of the redemption of Jesus; rather, Mary owed more to the redemption of Jesus than anyone else. In fact, Mary received from her Son a higher form of redemption. All other human beings are redeemed (through the subjective redemption, that is, the application of the redemption) after they have received a fallen nature. Mary, on the contrary, was redeemed by the grace of Jesus at conception, the grace which prevented Mary from ever receiving a fallen nature. Hence, the grace of Jesus redeemed Mary at conception before her nature was affected by sin. And so, we rightly say that Mary owed more to Christ than anyone else. Through the graces of Jesus at Calvary, Mary never received a fallen nature but was sanctified and thereby redeemed from the first instance of her existence.
For an analogy, at conception, we fall into the muck of sin and are thereafter pulled out of it. In Mary's case, just as she was about to fall into this muck of sin - at her conception - God prevented this immersion of Mary in sin (hence, preservative redemption), thus saving her more perfectly than the rest of humanity. That is what makes her personal salvation so powerful, unique, and exemplary.
How can she need it if she had no sin.
Because her lack of sin is precisely an answer to her need. God's answer to this need is a part of his eternal foreknowledge, and so he prefigured her Immaculate Conception through the Protoevangelion in Genesis 3:15 and the decor of the Ark of the Covenant.
Webster defines salvation as deliverance from the power and effects of sin. Mary was certainly delivered from the power and effects of sin - in a way more perfect than you or I, for she was truly delivered - in the most perfect way - from the power and effects of sin!
You said Mary had no sin because of her preservative redemption. Mary had no sin yet she was redeemed? If she was redeemed then she was a sinner.
That Mary's soul was preserved from Original Sin at the moment of ocnception does not mean that Mary had no need of the redemption of Jesus; rather, Mary owed more to the redemption of Jesus than anyone else. In fact, Mary received from her Son a higher form of redemption. All other human beings are redeemed (through the subjective redemption, that is, the application of the redemption) after they have received a fallen nature. Mary, on the contrary, was redeemed by the grace of Jesus at conception, the grace which prevented Mary from ever receiving a fallen nature. Hence, the grace of Jesus redeemed Mary at conception before her nature was affected by sin. And so, we rightly say that Mary owed more to Christ than anyone else. Through the graces of Jesus at Calvary, Mary never received a fallen nature but was sanctified and thereby redeemed from the first instance of her existence.
For an analogy, at conception, we fall into the muck of sin and are thereafter pulled out of it. In Mary's case, just as she was about to fall into this muck of sin - at her conception - God prevented this immersion of Mary in sin (hence, preservative redemption), thus saving her more perfectly than the rest of humanity. That is what makes her personal salvation so powerful, unique, and exemplary.
faithcontender
New Member
Hi GraceSaves and Carson,
Now you are talking about special salvation and redemption. Where can you find in the scriptures, this kind of salvation and redemption you are talking about?
Now you are talking about special salvation and redemption. Where can you find in the scriptures, this kind of salvation and redemption you are talking about?
tragic_pizza
New Member
Saying that the Ark is a type of Mary is, frankly, heretical. Even a passing glance at Scripture clearly shows the Ark as a type of Christ.
Honestly.
Honestly.
Carson Weber
<img src="http://www.boerne.com/temp/bb_pic2.jpg">
Hi Tragic,
The ark of the covenant held three items: (1) manna, (2) Aaron's staff, and (3) the Decalogue.
This is fulfilled in Jesus Christ who is the Bread of Life, our High Priest, and the Incarnate Word of God. The items in the ark are not to be confused with the enclosing structure (the ark itself), which houses the items.
St. Luke, in his Gospel, through literary allusion to the Old Testament, presents Mary as the Ark of the Covenant.
The ark of the covenant held three items: (1) manna, (2) Aaron's staff, and (3) the Decalogue.
This is fulfilled in Jesus Christ who is the Bread of Life, our High Priest, and the Incarnate Word of God. The items in the ark are not to be confused with the enclosing structure (the ark itself), which houses the items.
St. Luke, in his Gospel, through literary allusion to the Old Testament, presents Mary as the Ark of the Covenant.
I understand what Catholics say about this, and even *why* they say it. However, I'm tripping a bit on the word "redeem". What you describe isn't really redemption, at least how I understand it. You mentioned Webster's in your post: Webster's defines "redeem" as "To purchase back; to regain possession of by payment of a stipulated price; to repurchase." (emphasis added) Etymologically, the word means to red- (again) -emere (to take, buy): in other words, to take/buy *again*. In the Catholic view of Mary, she was never *out* of God's "possession", she was never owned by sin/death, thus she was not bought *back*. Preventing something from leaving is one thing, restoring something after you've lost ownership is another.
Maybe I'm too picky.
Ray Berrian
New Member
Carson Weber said, 'St. Luke, in his Gospel, through literary allusion to the Old Testament,
presents Mary as the Ark of the Covenant.'
Ray is saying, 'The Ark of the Covenant was the dwelling place of Almighty God under the Old Covenant. The High Priest went into the Most Holy Place or the Holy of holies not to meet with Mary, though we should respect her, but with Christ who is our mercy-seat. Christ ' . . . by His own blood entered once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption for us.' Notice a complete redemption was won for us at the Cross not an intermitten spiritual life. He gives eternal life to His people. [I John 5:11]
I may be wrong, but I don't believe you will find Mary's name or doctrines mentioned even once in the Book of Hebrews, which deals with the holiness of God, the Ark, the High Priest and the Temple. In other words, those who cleave to Mariolatry have a 'seducing spirit' [I Timothy 4:1c] an erring spirit that is not from God Himself.
presents Mary as the Ark of the Covenant.'
Ray is saying, 'The Ark of the Covenant was the dwelling place of Almighty God under the Old Covenant. The High Priest went into the Most Holy Place or the Holy of holies not to meet with Mary, though we should respect her, but with Christ who is our mercy-seat. Christ ' . . . by His own blood entered once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption for us.' Notice a complete redemption was won for us at the Cross not an intermitten spiritual life. He gives eternal life to His people. [I John 5:11]
I may be wrong, but I don't believe you will find Mary's name or doctrines mentioned even once in the Book of Hebrews, which deals with the holiness of God, the Ark, the High Priest and the Temple. In other words, those who cleave to Mariolatry have a 'seducing spirit' [I Timothy 4:1c] an erring spirit that is not from God Himself.
Carson Weber
<img src="http://www.boerne.com/temp/bb_pic2.jpg">
Brian,
Good post!
Mary is a member of the human race, which is subject to sin, and Jesus Christ redeemed humanity, which was subject to Satan due to Adam's sin. The effect of this is what we call "Original Sin" (i.e., the privation of the life of God in the soul), and the application of Christ's objective redemption is what we receive. Mary, who was inevitably (apart from this sinfular grace) to receive the effects of Adam's sin, was redeemed at the moment of her conception, and it really happened - instantaneously. She was subject to Satan in the sense that she was destined - apart from this singular grace - to receive the effects of being deprived of grace. This is why her redemption is "preservative".
Another cool study is to see exactly "why" Mary was preserved from sin. Essentially, this singular grace is one of vocation. Her vocation to assist in Salvation History as the Theotokos is the raison d'etre for her Immaculate Conception. But, that is a whole other topic in and of itself.
Good post!
Mary is a member of the human race, which is subject to sin, and Jesus Christ redeemed humanity, which was subject to Satan due to Adam's sin. The effect of this is what we call "Original Sin" (i.e., the privation of the life of God in the soul), and the application of Christ's objective redemption is what we receive. Mary, who was inevitably (apart from this sinfular grace) to receive the effects of Adam's sin, was redeemed at the moment of her conception, and it really happened - instantaneously. She was subject to Satan in the sense that she was destined - apart from this singular grace - to receive the effects of being deprived of grace. This is why her redemption is "preservative".
Another cool study is to see exactly "why" Mary was preserved from sin. Essentially, this singular grace is one of vocation. Her vocation to assist in Salvation History as the Theotokos is the raison d'etre for her Immaculate Conception. But, that is a whole other topic in and of itself.
tragic_pizza
New Member
Horsefeathers and balderdash. Tiddlywinks, even.
The Ark ("enclosing structure" indeed), when sealed, was invested with the Presence of God. No one was allowed to come into physical contact with the Ark, and unless I misinterpret the Scripture, when the priests carried it before the people in the wilderness it was covered from view by the coverings of the tabernacle. Certainly when it was in the permanent Temple, it was shrouded in utter darkness in the Most Holy Place, and the one time a year when a priest went in, the room was clouded in incense smoke.
The Ark is such an obvious type of Christ that it boggles the mind to interpret it any other way.
But I gotta tell you, if someone told me that the Ark was a type of Mary, I'd overdo my devotion to her as well.
But go ahead, for the sake of clarity, and produce those verses in St. Luke which support your rather interesting interpretation. It'll be the first time in this thread that someone has produced a Scripture I've requested.
Carson Weber
<img src="http://www.boerne.com/temp/bb_pic2.jpg">
Hi tragic,
I encourage you to refrain from emotative language such as "Horsefeathers and balderdash. Tiddlywinks, even." Let's have a reasoned discussion based on facts, not emotion. Cool?
No one was allowed to come into physical contact with the Ark
Which is all the more reason it is a foretype of Mary's Immaculate Conception, the all holy Mother of God.
But go ahead, for the sake of clarity, and produce those verses in St. Luke which support your rather interesting interpretation.
First, do you allow for the possibility that the New Testament authors taught through literary allusion? All literary allusion is implicit. This implicit-ness of theological narrative does not make the implications any less true or affirmed by the author than explicit statements. When I show you this allusion, you have to have an open ear and a softened heart with the ability to listen. From your words, I can already sense that you are approaching the situation with a hardened attitude, ready to rebut and reject anything shown you. Is this true?
I encourage you to refrain from emotative language such as "Horsefeathers and balderdash. Tiddlywinks, even." Let's have a reasoned discussion based on facts, not emotion. Cool?
No one was allowed to come into physical contact with the Ark
Which is all the more reason it is a foretype of Mary's Immaculate Conception, the all holy Mother of God.
But go ahead, for the sake of clarity, and produce those verses in St. Luke which support your rather interesting interpretation.
First, do you allow for the possibility that the New Testament authors taught through literary allusion? All literary allusion is implicit. This implicit-ness of theological narrative does not make the implications any less true or affirmed by the author than explicit statements. When I show you this allusion, you have to have an open ear and a softened heart with the ability to listen. From your words, I can already sense that you are approaching the situation with a hardened attitude, ready to rebut and reject anything shown you. Is this true?
GraceSaves
New Member
My thoughts exactly. By virtue of this admission by tragic_pizza, he should be able to see why it was that God chose to free Mary from original sin so that the Lord God, Jesus Christ, would be kept in the holiest of vessels, just like God's presence was in the holiest of vessels, the Ark of the Covenant.
thessalonian
New Member
"I may be wrong, but I don't believe you will find Mary's name or doctrines mentioned even once in the Book of Hebrews, which deals with the holiness of God, the Ark, the High Priest and the Temple. In other words, those who cleave to Mariolatry have a 'seducing spirit' [I Timothy 4:1c] an erring spirit that is not from God Himself. "
So Hebrews trumps Luke? Perhaps you could deal with what the heck Luke was thinking then. There is no conflict in one sense between the type of Jesus being the AOC and Mary being the AOC. Yet the things inside the Ark were a type of Christ (the holy bread, Aaron's staff and the tablets upon which the 10 commandments were written).
Hebrews 9:3
Behind the second veil there was a tabernacle which is called the Holy of Holies,
having a golden altar of incense and the ark of the covenant covered on all sides with gold, in which was a golden jar holding the manna, and Aaron's rod which budded, and the tables of the covenant;
So do you deny that Mary contained Jesus within her womb just as the symbols of Christ were contained within the AOC. See, we can find Mary in Hebrews after all.
I have had some non-catholics say "we are all to become the AOC". To which I say AMEN. We are all to grow in the image and likeness of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. When we enter the heavenly kindom our souls must be completed in the image and likeness as Adam and Eve were in the garden. ("nothing unclean shall enter". Mary was already in that image and likeness. Your spirit of denial can continue to ignore these things but they are true.
Before we get to Hebrews tell us what Luke was thinking when he parrelled 2 Sam 6 with his first chapter and the visition of Mary to Elizabeth. Do I need to quote the obvious parrellels for you.
Blessings
[ October 13, 2003, 11:29 AM: Message edited by: thessalonian ]
So Hebrews trumps Luke? Perhaps you could deal with what the heck Luke was thinking then. There is no conflict in one sense between the type of Jesus being the AOC and Mary being the AOC. Yet the things inside the Ark were a type of Christ (the holy bread, Aaron's staff and the tablets upon which the 10 commandments were written).
Hebrews 9:3
Behind the second veil there was a tabernacle which is called the Holy of Holies,
having a golden altar of incense and the ark of the covenant covered on all sides with gold, in which was a golden jar holding the manna, and Aaron's rod which budded, and the tables of the covenant;
So do you deny that Mary contained Jesus within her womb just as the symbols of Christ were contained within the AOC. See, we can find Mary in Hebrews after all.
I have had some non-catholics say "we are all to become the AOC". To which I say AMEN. We are all to grow in the image and likeness of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. When we enter the heavenly kindom our souls must be completed in the image and likeness as Adam and Eve were in the garden. ("nothing unclean shall enter". Mary was already in that image and likeness. Your spirit of denial can continue to ignore these things but they are true.
Before we get to Hebrews tell us what Luke was thinking when he parrelled 2 Sam 6 with his first chapter and the visition of Mary to Elizabeth. Do I need to quote the obvious parrellels for you.
Blessings
[ October 13, 2003, 11:29 AM: Message edited by: thessalonian ]
John Gilmore
New Member
Here is an anthem of praise to the blessed Virgin which, I believe, conforms to the teachings of the Orthodox, Catholic, and Reformation churches:
Hail, Mary, mother of God, full of grace received of the Holy Spirit, blessed are you are among women and blessed is the fruit of your womb, Jesus, who has freed us from sin, death, and hell by His holy, innocent, and bitter sufferings on the cross.
Hail, Mary, mother of God, full of grace received of the Holy Spirit, blessed are you are among women and blessed is the fruit of your womb, Jesus, who has freed us from sin, death, and hell by His holy, innocent, and bitter sufferings on the cross.