Lets Obey Mary

Tam,

Listen to the mp3 I provided a link to above. Jesus didn't rebuke Mary.

 

On the occasion of Jesus' first miracle the Lord does not use the word, 'mother' which is the Greek word, {maytare} but the word, 'woman' which is the Greek word, {goonay}. The reason is that our Lord though very respectful to his mother, knowingly sets Himself apart from her being. It is God in the flesh Who commands the filling of the waterpots. It is the Son of God Who says, 'Draw out now and bear unto the governor of the feast.' Verse eleven of John chapter two indicates the purpose of the miracle; it was so that Jesus could manifest His great glory and Divine power. It was at this event that the disciples believed on Him. Mary is merely part of the entourage on the occasion of the wedding.

In Matthew 12:46-50 Jesus distances Himself from the mother of our Lord when He indicates that all the older women were His mothers, and the younger unmarried women were His sisters, and the men who loved Jesus were called His brothers.

I looked up this latter passage, in Matthew, and this is what Dr. Homer A. Kent, Jr., Th.D. Professor of New Testament and Greek had to say about this passage. He is professor at Grace Theological Seminary, Winona Lake, Indiana.

'The spiritual relationship between Christ and believers is closer than the closest of blood ties. This saying offered no disrespect to Mary, nor to his brothers, for at a later time we find them sharing this spiritual relation (Acts 1:14). Yet neither is there any suggestion that the mother of Jesus had special access to His Presence.'

This above paragraph is taken from "The Wycliffe Bible Commentary" Moody Press, p. 951. Editors: Charles F. Pfeiffer & Everett F. Harrison. Dr. Pfeiffer Th.M., Ph.D. is Professor of Old Testament, Gordon Divinity School, Beverly Farms, Massachusetts. Dr. Harrison, Th.D., Ph.D., Professor of New Testament at Fuller Theological Seminary, Pasadena, California.

The elevation of Mary in some religious thinking is not documented in any of the books of the Bible. Nevertheless, we are eternally grateful to Mary for giving to us God's only begotten Son Jesus Christ. Was He not the one who transformed the water into wine?

 

Actually - She is not doing any translation at all. She is relying on someone else to do it - rather than having to depend on biased one-sided one-view groups (Like the JW NWT done by ONE group only - or the Catholic version that does "the same").

But as for our view of the Mother of Jesus - a sinner from among humanity that was truly blessed as the mother of the Messiah - well - she is not "all powerful" and we need not "Worship at her altars" just because agree to call her "blessed".

Christ alone paid the price that we owe for our sins. Mary did not pay for a single sin - not of hers and not of ours. Her sins and our sins were paid by "Christ alone".

In Christ,

Bob

 

Bob, do you have a source for any religion that explicitly claims to "Worship at her altars", or is this just another strawman?

 

As it turns out... I have a source for everything I post - and never is it of the form "My church says that your church is wrong".

(I recall you complaining about my always "having sources" and "knowing too much" about what other groups believed... you know - "reading too much".)

I take it you are now back on the track of "reading is a good thing". So you "agree" that a source is needed for the quote I gave. Even better if that source is in fact an authortative RC source - eh? That is a big step forward for you Harley. I applaud your taking that approach.

Think about it. Sources are "Great".

In Christ,

Bob

 

I encourage everyone to begin to read John's Gospel in light of the Genesis creation narrative, which is the backdrop behind John's narrative. John presents the salvation wrought by Jesus Christ as a New Creation. In the Genesis narrative, after Creation, we encounter a marriage. John, by presenting the Wedding Marriage at Cana, is showing that Jesus, the Bridegroom, is bringing about the long awaited marriage with his Bride (of whom Mary, the New Eve [i.e. "Woman"], is exemplar) that the prophets have proclaimed (e.g. Hosea) in times past. This intimate covenant formed between God and man, through the Incarnation, is the beginning of the New Creation, whereby man is born from above - reborn if you will - and recreated in Jesus Christ through baptism. This is why the narrative moves into Jesus' discourse with the Samaritan woman at the well, wherein Jesus is the man she is with who is not her husband. God is calling the ten lost northern tribes to himself (e.g., again, Hosea) - this is what the Samaritans are - in the person and work of Jesus. The Gospel eventually moves to incorporating the Gentiles, which was long prophesied through Ezekiel, Jeremiah, Isaiah, etc. (See where Phillip brings Jesus' attention to the Greeks).

 

Could you please post the source for the religion that explicitly claims to "Worship at her altars?" I would be interested to see it.

Adventists acknowledge that many of their beliefs about scripture cannot actually be found there (see thread on Adventist Glasses), and they're reading their interpretation into the source documents. So, if you could, please post an explicit source and not something that requires us to read your interpretation into it.

Thank you.

 

Carson Weber and Catholic Convert:

We can go round and round with this forever but I, speaking as someone who grew up in the system you are now ensnared in and was YANKED OUT with full force by none other than Christ Himself (thank You Lord!) we are trying to help you because we love you and want to see you saved!

You will ever be in my Prayers!

 

Nice Spin Carson.

#1. In the Genesis "account" - Creation week is 7 days - not 6.

#2. In the Gensis "account" - Adam has no "mother".

#3. In John's Gospel "account" of the Messiah (Christ) - Jesus is not "married to his mother".

#4. In "your version" Adam is married to his mother.

I find that "odd".

But far more devastating for Catholicism - is the fact that John starts out telling us of the connection between "THE WORD" and "THE FLESH" of Christ saying "THE WORD became FLESH".

It is the expansion of that SAME opening theme that we see in John 6 - where the FLESH is in fact a symbol for the WORD

But then - Adam marrying his mother - or Jesus and his mother Marry -- married as Adam and Eve ... seem to be ideas that though missing from the text - "occur" in Catholicism rather than the cleare point of John 1 showing the WORD that becomes FLESH - and then the John 6 connection again showing the FLESH as a symbol for the WORD.

Go figure.

In Christ,

Bob

[ February 13, 2004, 05:55 PM: Message edited by: BobRyan ]

 

Harley said

You "seem to have genuine interest" in "the source" Harley. But that does not go with your past behavior does it? Paying close attention to the "details"?

AS for the quote -- Notice that while praying to the dead - The RCC also claims to worship God. This is also true of their worship at Mary's Altars. The idea is that they enhance their worhsip of God - while at Mary's altars.

So they are worshipping God (in their view) at Mary's altars. Praying to Mary, singing her praises and offering their devoptions to her - becomes to them - a form of worship to God Himself. I think they hope that God will be so pleased by their prayers to Mary (His mother according to them) that even though they build altars to Mary and venerate her, praise her and delcare her to be "sinnless" like Christ - He might view that as a kind of honor shown to Him as well.

In Christ,

Bob

 

Indeed we could go round and round forever, however, I will limit myself to say thing regarding your "testimony".

God does not "yank" people out of His Church. That is the job of another spirit, one who is maleviolent towards the truth.

I spent 13 yeras in Fundamentalism and 12 years in Calvinism. I have a first hand look at their doctrines, teachings, and general foolishness which is passed off as "good Bible preaching, brutha!!!"

Some of it is orthodox (to which they should thank the Catholic Church for both determining that truth and keeping it) but a whole lot of it is foolishness of the worst sort such as godly people don't ___________________ [fill in whatever your personal pet peeve is] , the "rapture" is happening tommorrow at 8:47 AM, Jesus damns little children to hell if they are not of "the elect", the "name it and claim it 'gospel" (also known as "blab it and grab it"), the so called "Toronto Blessing" (a spectacle of ridiculousness), 10 year old, 12 year old, 14 year old preachers, women preachers, sodomite preachers (none here would allow this I will say) etc. etc. etc.

Man made religion and full of nonsense!!

And you LEFT Christ's Church for this man made non Catholic well of chaos??

Shame on ya!!

I'll try to remember to pray that God will bring ya back to yer senses.

Brother Ed

 

Actually it does. But providing explicit sources backing up your outlandish assertions definitely matches your past (and present behavior)

Your details are the same as always: talk around the issue; post a page or so of almost relevant quotes (this time you didn't even bother with that); twist, twist, twist; smile triumphantly as if you actually believe you fooled anyone other than yourself.

And your quote from the catechism saying that RCCs actually DO worship Mary is .... oh yeah! The same place as all your "proof" about non-Adventists: in your imagination!

 

It would appear that all this applies to Mary.

IN Christ,

Bob

 

In the quote above it is states as "NOT" being from the Pope. In fact it is a good example of what was NOT said by that RC source.

And of course - our RC betheren will instantly recognize that all the references in that quote - to God and King and Father and King of Kings - should be "deleted" and Mary should be put in the place of God in every reference to God in that quote - to make it an "authentic" RC source quote of the Pope.

I had hoped to get "corrected" on that point.

In Christ,

Bob

 

Hi Mike,

I apologize for those who failed to show you the love of Jesus and who failed to teach you how Jesus is personally encountered, how the burning love of his Sacred Heart is encountered in every Eucharist as he comes to us to renew the intimate covenant we share with God through his divine flesh.

 

Tam,

John 4 is a carefully crafted theological narrative wherein John presents Jesus as Yahweh betrothing himself to those who have been unfaithful (i.e., the 10 Northern Tribes), thus experiencing the covenant curse of exile. I don't have the time to present an exegesis here; I suggest looking at some contemporary commentaries (e.g. the Ignatius Catholic Study Bible).

 

I just knew someone would ask to see the quote of Pope Pius in its "pure" marian form -- (because as we all know - there is a lot interest and respect among our RC bretheren for what the Popes say)...

Enjoy!

And.... "your welcome".

In Christ,

Bob