Mary Sightings in History

[The Biblicist]

Biblicist, I make the same suggestion to you as I made to Ann, and for the same reason.

For what it's worth, Mary conceived the Son of God. Or are you suggesting that the father of Jesus was a Roman soldier? That theory is making the rounds again now.

No! The scriptues are quite clear that Mary knew no man sexually and what was conceived in her was of the Holy Ghost.

 

[Yeshua1]

Okay, after reading the rest of the thread, I need to make something crystal clear: I deny and do not believe any of the Mariolatry of the RCC; it is simply superstition and paganism with absolutely no basis in scripture whatsoever.

But I also deny Nestorianism -- separating the two natures of Jesus -- which the Baptists on here are defending. One can deny Nestorianism without buying into all the RCC false teachings about Mary. One can even use the term "Mother of God" without buying into those teachings. The only thing that the term means is that since Jesus was both fully deity and fully human, Mary bore His humanity and deity -- NOT conceived His deity, but BORE it!!! If you deny that, you deny the full deity of Jesus. Some of you seem unable to grasp that.

And just to think: some have called me a heretic -- what a hoot!

Jesus HAS 2 seperate and disctinct natures, within ONE Body!

Fully nature of Diety, God, other sinless humanity, both in him, no co mingling/mixing, the humanity started in mary, Divine always was!

 

[Yeshua1]

I beg your pardon. What you call the "gospel of Rome" is the only true gospel. All the others are cheap imitations of the gospel. All the others distort the truth of scripture and totally ignore those they cannot distort.

the Gospel according to Rome denies the atoning work of Christ, denies him as sole mediator, denies that we can do NOTHING BUT receive that finished work and person of christ by faith ONE, and adds sacramental grace and other vain traditions of men!

IF paul was physically here on earth today, he would accuse RCC of teaching 'another/false Gospel!"

 

[The Biblicist]

I beg your pardon. What you call the "gospel of Rome" is the only true gospel. All the others are cheap imitations of the gospel. All the others distort the truth of scripture and totally ignore those they cannot distort.

If you really believe that then you certainly have no proper understanding of the book of Romans or the gospel of Jesus Christ at all! No one can be saved IF the RCC gospel is the ONLY basis of their faith!

Unfortunately we are on a "debate" forum where the very nature of it is to defend what one believes rather than objectively investigate and seek truth.

I would like to privately discuss this with you in an objective manner where truth is sought rather than one's theology defended. I think if you would approach the Bible in an objective manner you could not possibly defend the RCC gospel at all.

 

[pilgrimspen]

All so called 'Mary' apparitions are all false... Jim Tetlow's books might help you.
And its not really Mary.. its something disguising itself as Mary and Jesus.
Well who else is the great deceiver but the devil...
you say the messages is good... well behind it is a big lie... just compare the messages with the bible its so way way different...

I say get out of there... take it from a former RCC...

 

[WestminsterMan]

the Gospel according to Rome denies the atoning work of Christ, denies him as sole mediator, denies that we can do NOTHING BUT receive that finished work and person of christ by faith ONE, and adds sacramental grace and other vain traditions of men!

IF paul was physically here on earth today, he would accuse RCC of teaching 'another/false Gospel!"

You have no idea what Paul would say if he were here on earth today. You simply have an opinion of what he would say. Don't you guys ever tire of Catholic bashing?

WM

 

[WestminsterMan]

All so called 'Mary' apparitions are all false... Jim Tetlow's books might help you.
And its not really Mary.. its something disguising itself as Mary and Jesus.
Well who else is the great deceiver but the devil...
you say the messages is good... well behind it is a big lie... just compare the messages with the bible its so way way different...

I say get out of there... take it from a former RCC...

I wouldn't go so far as to say all of them are false. Some appear to have a scriptural message. However, there are those that the Church will not recognize because there isn't enough supporting evidence or the message is anti-biblical.

WM

 

[WestminsterMan]

Yep, the ancient heresy is back, at least on the Baptist Board.

It never left...

WM

 

[WestminsterMan]

A few questions:

If Mary was the mother of God and the Holy Spirit is God, was Mary also the mother of the Holy Spirit? snip...

She is the spouse of the Holy Spirit. But more to the point here... neither you, nor I, nor anyone on Earth has a handle on the nature of the Trinity so that dog just won't hunt.

WM

 

[The Biblicist]

She is the spouse of the Holy Spirit. But more to the point here... neither you, nor I, nor anyone on Earth has a handle on the nature of the Trinity so that dog just won't hunt.

WM

Absurd! So Mary committed adultery when she married Joseph?!?

Mt 1:16 And Jacob begat Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ.

 

[mandym]

God has no Mother. The bride spoken of in scripture is the church. The complete sacrilegious disrespect shown to God by these absurd RCC doctrines is astounding and on the same level of stupidity as the Mormon idea that Jesus and Satan are brothers and Jesus is created. No difference.

 

[WestminsterMan]

Absurd! So Mary committed adultery when she married Joseph?!?

That would have been BEFORE they wedded. You really should consider a name change there The Biblicist... I mean since you couldn't recognize that most obvious and seminal part of the story AND since you apparently don't understand what constitutes adultery.

WM

 

[The Biblicist]

That would have been BEFORE they wedded. You really should consider a name change there The Biblicist... I mean since you couldn't recognize that most obvious and seminal part of the story AND since you apparently don't understand what constitutes adultery.

WM

Give me a break! Did the Holy Spirit die and release her from marriage (Rom. 5:1-5)? Marriage is to death do we part!

 

[WestminsterMan]

God has no Mother. The bride spoken of in scripture is the church. The complete sacrilegious disrespect shown to God by these absurd RCC doctrines is astounding and on the same level of stupidity as the Mormon idea that Jesus and Satan are brothers and Jesus is created. No difference.

Pure opinion unsupported by facts...

WM

 

[The Biblicist]

Pure opinion unsupported by facts...

WM

You are correctly evaluating your own position - pure speculative opinion that is clearly condemned by facts.

 

[WestminsterMan]

Give me a break! Did the Holy Spirit die and release her from marriage (Rom. 5:1-5)? Marriage is to death do we part!

Oh The Biblicist... you so funny. God placed a baby into Mary's womb via the Holy Spirit. I don't have a problem calling Mary the Spouse of the Holy Spirit. It's just a title created by the Early Church... much like using the phrase "hypo-static union" to address that which cannot be understood by the human mind, or the word "Trinity" for that matter. I would posit that the reason you have such stress in your life is due to trying to fathom the unfathomable. There - I just gave you a break.

WM

 

[WestminsterMan]

You are correctly evaluating your own position - pure speculative opinion that is clearly condemned by facts.

Hardly. Just look at the rant to which I was responding. I saw nothing but opinion in it. Eager to pick a fight are we?

WM

 

[BillySunday1935]

You are correctly evaluating your own position - pure speculative opinion that is clearly condemned by facts.

Biblicist.

I've been absent for a while, but you sure do sound familiar. Have you ever gone by the moniker "doctor Walter"? I can recognize that snarky attitude from a mile away.

Billy

 

[The Biblicist]

Oh The Biblicist... you so funny. God placed a baby into Mary's womb via the Holy Spirit. I don't have a problem calling Mary the Spouse of the Holy Spirit. It's just a title created by the Early Church... much like using the phrase "hypo-static union" to address that which cannot be understood by the human mind, or the word "Trinity" for that matter. I would posit that the reason you have such stress in your life is due to trying to fathom the unfathomable. There - I just gave you a break.

WM

The laws of Marriage are clearly spelled out in the Scriptures and you are suggesting that the Lord would violate the very principles that He has established by those laws.

The Lord does not violate His own principles even in metaphorical applications much less literal applications.

Mary was never married to the Holy Spirit and the Holy Spirit is no more her "spouse" than when the Holy Spirit conceives all children in all wombs in all mothers as PHYSICAL life and conception ALWAYS comes from God and there is no marriage between God the Holy Spirit and all mothers.

 

[pilgrimspen]

Westminster - why do you think that not all the messages are false?
And besides why would Mary show herself... The Mary in the apparition is
different from the Mary of the bible who is humble.
The Mary of the Apparition says build shrines in honor of her and to pray to her.
The Mary of the bible prayed with the apostles.
The bible... NT.. is the final message and no other message is needed..
This is the age of deception.