Priest of Medjugorje Visons of Mary Defrocked

[Marcia]

It leaves the door open for "hey -- I just saw another one of those non-normative events, only instead of Samuel - it was my deceased uncle".

Or "it was Mary".

There is no Bible "doctrine" on how many "non-normative exceptions" can exist.

True, but to take a non-normative position has no credibility except with the gullible or those who want to believe it.

True - which is why I was very interested to see how you were going to close the door on Marian apparations. You seem to be left with 'well if they are occuring - they are non-normative like the case of Samuel".

Certainly that is an interesting solution.

I think there is other criteria with Mary, however.

First of all, there are supposed repeated apparitions of Mary whereas with Samuel you have one appearance, and same with Moses and Elijah.

Additionally, both of these were recorded in the Bible whereas nothing about Mary appearing after death, or stating that she would appear in the future is recorded. So we can take God's word that Samuel appeared and Moses and Elijah appeared; but there is no authority of God's word for the Mary appearances. I think this leaves a big hole for the Mary appearances. God's word is not behind them.

Narrative is confirmation that the event in question "did occur" and also eliminates the objection "according to the bible that can not occur". For example - Christ passed through the crowd that tried to stone him. That is "the narrative" - and that is "non normative" because in most cases when a crowd tried to stone someone (like Stephenen or like Paul) they simply grabbed them and stoned them.

So while Christ's example is "non normative" it still does not allow us to argue "no one else can claim that God enabled them to simply pass through the mob without harm because it is non-normative". In fact the Bible affirms that such a thing can happen - though it is certainly "non-normative" as you say.

It affirms that it happened with Christ, not that it can happen with anyone. It is certainly exceptional since I think this is only spoken of as far as Jesus is concerned.

Here again, we have it recorded in God's word. So if John Smith down the street tells me he "passed through a crowd" trying to kill him as Jesus did, I might believe him or not, but he does not have God's word behind him.

I would argue that in the case of the "really translated" Elijah and the really raised-and-assumed into heaven Moses, standing and speaking with Christ in Matt 17 "in living color" that that too is "non-Normative". So also is the case of an Angel speaking to Zachariah about the birth of John the baptizer - a "non-normative" event.

But if someone claims that an angel came and spoke to them, or that they saw Elijah -- I would be very skeptical, but I would not declare that "The Bible forbids it" or that the Bible states "that can not happen".

At best I can say "it happend in the Bible but it was non-normative".

Which falls far short of "it can not have happened to you" and totally misses 'The bible says that can not happen".

I don't argue with people's experiences, such as saying an angel appeared to them or they saw Elijah.

I do think angels, both fallen ones and good ones, can show up today, though I think it's rare. However, to say they saw a dead person is another category for me. That's the case where I would say "I'm sorry, but I don't believe it was a dead person."

In too many instances of this, it is in the context of occult activities, so the evidence is that it is demonic (such as going to a medium and then "hearing" or "seeing" the dead person then or later).

Here's the bottom line for me for all of this: Anyone with a claim to a non-normative event that seems contrary to scripture or has no basis in scripture has the burden on him or her to give evidence. If they can't, then we are not at fault for disbelieving it.

 

[Thinkingstuff]

Just an interesting point someone brought up to me. Whats the difference between speaking to the dead which is condemned in Exodus and Jesus speaking with Moses on the Mt. of Transfiguration?

 

[Agnus_Dei]

Nor is there any record that she ever died. If we agree to go strictly by the Bible, we have to admit that we just can't know. The last reference to Mary in the Bible is in Acts 1 when she was probably about 45 years old. After that we know she lived with John until she died. We don't know for sure where they lived, when or how she died or whether she died. The Bible is similarly silent at to how all the apostles but James met their deaths. Tradition, however, points strongly toward the dormition and assumption of Mary. And why would it be strange for our Lord to take His mother to Heaven early? We know it happened to Elijah and Enoch, and as you say, most probably to Moses.

Hi Zenas, Just a few comments...As an Orthodox Christian we began The Dormition of Mary Fast this past Saturday. It has been Traditionally held throughout the Church that Mary died a physical death while under the care of St. John and had a burial. Those Apostles that weren't present for the burial returned to her tomb to discover the tomb empty and concluded that her divine Son had raised and translated His mother to life with Him in the Kingdom.

Traditionally this is what the Church believes to have happened to Mary's body, but I don't think it's to the point of dogma, hence the reason we only celebrate her Dormition.

It's been some years since I studied any RCC theology, but if I'm not mistaken the RCC believes Mary never died a physical death as Pope Pius XII in 1950 deliberately left open the question of whether Mary died before her Assumption, which is a break from what the early Fathers collectively taught.

In XC
-

 

[Marcia]

Just an interesting point someone brought up to me. Whats the difference between speaking to the dead which is condemned in Exodus and Jesus speaking with Moses on the Mt. of Transfiguration?

I don't see how the 2 are comparable.

Speaking to the dead - me trying to contact a dead person.

Jesus, God the Son, who is able to speak to anyone, appearing in a glorified state with Moses and Elijah to 3 disciples for a specific purpose. Moses was visibly there, in some sort of fashion, and Jesus was speaking to him.

That is not the same as people trying to contact people who have died.

Anyone who would try to use Jesus speaking with Moses (and I"m not saying you are doing this) as endorsement for speaking to the dead is seriously out of tune with God's word.


1 Chron. 10:13

So Saul died for his trespass which he committed against the LORD, because of the word of the LORD which he did not keep; and also because he asked counsel of a medium, making inquiry of it,

 

[BobRyan]

Quote:
Originally Posted by BobRyan
It leaves the door open for "hey -- I just saw another one of those non-normative events, only instead of Samuel - it was my deceased uncle".

Or "it was Mary".

There is no Bible "doctrine" on how many "non-normative exceptions" can exist.

True, but to take a non-normative position has no credibility except with the gullible or those who want to believe it.

1. You are determining the "number" of non-normative events by "opinion" in your response above - not scripture.

2. I can see how that model might have been used by Thomas when the disciples reported the non-normative resurrection of Christ.

3. I can "imagine" how the disciples might have responded to Peter, James and John telling them about the "non-normative visit" of Elijah and Moses in Matt 17.

We have not one case in all of scripture where a "non-normative miracle" is greeted by a Disciple with the observation "well that is non-normative so I would need to be gullible to believe it".

But as you seem willing to frame the point - it is opinion - not Bible that is the basis for that form of conclusion.

Interesting.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

Quote:
True - which is why I was very interested to see how you were going to close the door on Marian apparations. You seem to be left with 'well if they are occuring - they are non-normative like the case of Samuel".

Certainly that is an interesting solution.

I think there is other criteria with Mary, however.

First of all, there are supposed repeated apparitions of Mary whereas with Samuel you have one appearance, and same with Moses and Elijah.

If "Non-normative events" can not be repeated - then Christ could have only healed one person, could only have cast out one demon, could only have raised one person from the dead, could only have forgiven one sin as God.

However - as we know - there is no such rule about "non-normative only once" in all of scripture -- so it is either conjecture or preference or custom or ??? that leads you there.

Additionally, both of these were recorded in the Bible whereas nothing about Mary appearing after death, or stating that she would appear in the future is recorded. So we can take God's word that Samuel appeared and Moses and Elijah appeared; but there is no authority of God's word for the Mary appearances. I think this leaves a big hole for the Mary appearances. God's word is not behind them.

The fact that no Bible writer mentions such a non-normative historic event such as Mary being raised to life and then assumed into heaven before the disciples had died - (and thus before the Bible writers were gone) does argue against the event ever having occurred at all.

I am not convinced that the Bible is arguing that Samuel appeared to Saul or that the servant of Satan really had power to bring up the saints. I do not see any point in scripture where God said he turned over the power to bring up the righteous dead - to the servants of Satan. All He said on that matter was that the servants of satan deserved death for practicing such a deception - and in Isaiah 8:19-20 God argues against consulting the dead on behalf of the living.

For those who believe Samuel was in heaven at that point - it would be to argue that God gave the servants of Satan power over the dead saints in heaven or in "paradise". No such teaching is found in scripture - but it is found among those who align themselves with the occult.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

Quote:
I would argue that in the case of the "really translated" Elijah and the really raised-and-assumed into heaven Moses, standing and speaking with Christ in Matt 17 "in living color" that that too is "non-Normative". So also is the case of an Angel speaking to Zachariah about the birth of John the baptizer - a "non-normative" event.

But if someone claims that an angel came and spoke to them, or that they saw Elijah -- I would be very skeptical, but I would not declare that "The Bible forbids it" or that the Bible states "that can not happen".

At best I can say "it happend in the Bible but it was non-normative".

Which falls far short of "it can not have happened to you" and totally misses 'The bible says that can not happen".

I don't argue with people's experiences, such as saying an angel appeared to them or they saw Elijah.

I do think angels, both fallen ones and good ones, can show up today, though I think it's rare. However, to say they saw a dead person is another category for me. That's the case where I would say "I'm sorry, but I don't believe it was a dead person."

In too many instances of this, it is in the context of occult activities, so the evidence is that it is demonic (such as going to a medium and then "hearing" or "seeing" the dead person then or later).

I agree - the dead appearing is occultic. It is unique to the world of Satan and his followers.

The Bible flatly condemns it. Israel was commanded to exterminate those who practiced it. It point goes far beyond "it is non-normative" in my view.

Here's the bottom line for me for all of this: Anyone with a claim to a non-normative event that seems contrary to scripture or has no basis in scripture has the burden on him or her to give evidence. If they can't, then we are not at fault for disbelieving it.

I would go even farther and state that - anyone claiming to do what the Bible condemns - is practicing sin, and they are themselves being deceived.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

Hi Zenas, Just a few comments...As an Orthodox Christian we began The Dormition of Mary Fast this past Saturday. It has been Traditionally held throughout the Church that Mary died a physical death while under the care of St. John and had a burial. Those Apostles that weren't present for the burial returned to her tomb to discover the tomb empty and concluded that her divine Son had raised and translated His mother to life with Him in the Kingdom.

Traditionally this is what the Church believes to have happened to Mary's body, but I don't think it's to the point of dogma, hence the reason we only celebrate her Dormition.

It's been some years since I studied any RCC theology, but if I'm not mistaken the RCC believes Mary never died a physical death as Pope Pius XII in 1950 deliberately left open the question of whether Mary died before her Assumption, which is a break from what the early Fathers collectively taught.

In XC
-

Hmm -- that reminds me...

The Transitus Mariæ
The Account of St. John the Theologian
of the Dormition of the Holy Mother of God
AS THE ALL-HOLY glorious Mother of God and ever-virgin Mary, as was her wont, was going to the holy tomb of our Lord to burn incense, and bending her holy knees, she was importunate that Christ our God who had been born of her should return to her.

And I John say to her: Jesus Christ our Lord and our God is coming, and thou seest Him, as He promised to thee. And the holy mother of God answered and said to me: The Jews have sworn that after I have died they will burn my body. And I answered and said to her: Thy holy and precious body will by no means see corruption.
….
And I answered and said: Yes, I heard. And the Holy Spirit said to me: This voice which thou didst hear denotes that the appearance of thy brethren the apostles is at hand, and of the holy powers that they are coming hither to-day. And at this I John prayed.
[b]And the Holy Spirit said to the apostles: Let all of you together, having come by the clouds from the ends of the world, be assembled to holy Bethlehem by a
whirlwind, on account of the mother of our Lord Jesus Christ;[/B]

Peter from Rome, Paul from Tiberia, Thomas from Hither India, James from Jerusalem. Andrew, Peter's brother, and Philip, Luke, and Simon the Cananaean, and Thaddaeus who had fallen asleep, were raised by the Holy Spirit out of their tombs; to whom the Holy Spirit said: Do not think that it is now the resurrection; but on this account you have risen out of your tombs, that you may go to give greeting to the honour and wonder-working of the mother of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, because the day of her departure is at hand, of her going up into the heavens.

And Mark likewise coming round, was present from Alexandria; he also with the rest, as has been said before, from each country. [b]And Peter being lifted up by a cloud, stood between heaven and earth, the Holy Spirit keeping him steady.[/b] And at the same time, the rest of the apostles also, having been [b]snatched up in clouds, were found along with Peter. And thus by the Holy Spirit, as has been said, they all came together. [/B]
http://www.comparative-religion.com/christianity/apocrypha/new-testament-apocrypha/6/3.php

Note: For more information on this letter and other apocryphal works,
see http://www.knight.org/advent/cathen/01601a.htm
http://landru.i-link-2.net/shnyves/assumption_of_mary.htm

 

[BobRyan]

Apparently the dark ages was a wonderful time for just "making stuff up"

 

[BobRyan]

Just an interesting point someone brought up to me. Whats the difference between speaking to the dead which is condemned in Exodus and Jesus speaking with Moses on the Mt. of Transfiguration?

Jude 7 quotes the book "The Assumption of Moses" as being valid. In that case Moses was not dead in Matt 17 when Jesus was speaking to him.

So it is not a case of speaking to the dead or praying to the dead. It is a case of speaking to someone that was bodily resurrected and then taken to heaven.

A very different scenario.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[Thinkingstuff]

Jude 7 quotes the book "The Assumption of Moses" as being valid. In that case Moses was not dead in Matt 17 when Jesus was speaking to him.

So it is not a case of speaking to the dead or praying to the dead. It is a case of speaking to someone that was bodily resurrected and then taken to heaven.

A very different scenario.

in Christ,

Bob

When you say valid. What do you mean? And we all know Moses died it says so in Duet. So Moses had died. I've read the assumption of Moses and I'm not sure you would consider it Valid. And Note Aren't we all alive in Christ even after we die?

 

[targus]

Does it not appear a bit "odd" that the huge interest the RCC has in Mary...

No more odd than the obsession that the SDA has with Ellen White.

 

[Agnus_Dei]

Apparently the dark ages was a wonderful time for just "making stuff up"

unlike the Western Churches, the Orthodox Church tends to avoid defining precise terms regarding Mary's death and assumption, which is why we Orthodox only celebrate/remember her death (Dormition) with a feast.

The events surrounding Mary's death has always been referred to as legends...some say she died in Jerusalem, or Ephesus or in Antioch...some say she died and was assumed immediately, or she never died and was assumed, some legends have her being assumed 3 days after her death...all are apocryphal, but none have any historical validity.

In regard to Mary's death, St. John of Damascus wrote in the 8th century:

St. Juvenal, Bishop of Jerusalem, at the Council of Chalcedon (451), made known to the Emperor Marcian and Pulcheria, who wished to possess the body of the Mother of God, that Mary died in the presence of all the Apostles, but that her tomb, when opened, upon the request of St. Thomas, was found empty; wherefrom the Apostles concluded that the body was taken up to heaven. (Fount of Wisdom. I, 96)​

So from St. John of Damascus, we know all the Apostles minus St. Thomas was present when Mary died...how the Apostles arrived to witness Mary's death is really irreverent and is not dogmatized or treated as any historical fact in the Orthodox Church....but it is a pretty cool legend and who's to say God couldn't have done something as cool as transporting the Apostles on clouds to Mary's death bed?

BTW Bob, try not to stress out over this...its not worth it.

In XC
-

 

[BobRyan]

Originally Posted by BobRyan
Jude 7 quotes the book "The Assumption of Moses" as being valid. In that case Moses was not dead in Matt 17 when Jesus was speaking to him.

So it is not a case of speaking to the dead or praying to the dead. It is a case of speaking to someone that was bodily resurrected and then taken to heaven.

A very different scenario.

When you say valid. What do you mean?
And we all know Moses died it says so in Duet. So Moses had died.

1. I mean that Jude affirms the facts found in the book "The assumption of Moses" by quoting them as fact.

2. The assumption is not a reference to "translated like Elijah" it is a reference to "died, resurrected and then taken to heaven".

I've read the assumption of Moses and I'm not sure you would consider it Valid. And Note Aren't we all alive in Christ even after we die?

Hint - you could not have read all of it.

Christ states in Matt 22 "God is not the God of the dead" as a "proof" that there MUST be a resurrection.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

Does it not appear a bit "odd" that the huge interest the RCC has in Mary would not have been reflected at all by NT authors such that she could be translated directly to heaven as you see with Enoch and Elijah - in your examples above -- and yet NO NT author would even consider it worthy of "mention"????

The bible writers "mention" the angels visits to her - they mention the "comments of Christ" to her at His death and they even "mention" her coming to Christ with all his brothers insisting that He needed to rest a while - but yet they make no mention at all that she was translated?? Not possible!

That requires too much "faith" in what they were willing to ignore.

The RCC itself - although willing to literally idolize Mary and engage in outright Mary-olotry is not willing to go to such an extreme as to deny that Mary ever died. In their doctrines on the "assumption of Mary" they teach that Mary had god-like qualities (Co-redemptrix and sinless like Christ etc) such that the same Acts 2 statement about God not allowing the sinless Christ to "undergo decay" should also be applied to the "sinless Mary" and so they claim she was raised from the dead and then bodily assumed into heaven as was Christ (and Moses).


But they base their entire argument on the Bible-denying point "Mary sinless like Christ" - I can not go to that extreme either.

No more odd than the obsession that the SDA has with Ellen White.

I find your logic in trying to connect those two points to be "illusive" just then.

Unless you are claiming the extreme position that affirmation of the 1Cor 12 Gifts of the Spirit is to be equated with mariolotry. (Which I suppose may be your point -- one can always use clarity in such a nonsequitter as you have offerred)

in Christ,

Bob

 

[Marcia]

1. You are determining the "number" of non-normative events by "opinion" in your response above - not scripture.

2. I can see how that model might have been used by Thomas when the disciples reported the non-normative resurrection of Christ.

3. I can "imagine" how the disciples might have responded to Peter, James and John telling them about the "non-normative visit" of Elijah and Moses in Matt 17.

We have not one case in all of scripture where a "non-normative miracle" is greeted by a Disciple with the observation "well that is non-normative so I would need to be gullible to believe it".

But as you seem willing to frame the point - it is opinion - not Bible that is the basis for that form of conclusion.

Interesting.

in Christ,

Bob

I am speaking of extraordinary claims outside of the recorded events of the Bible. Anyone who makes such a claim needs to give evidence for it, especially if it duplicates something in the Bible (such as walking on water, going to heaven and coming back, etc).

 

[Marcia]

If "Non-normative events" can not be repeated - then Christ could have only healed one person, could only have cast out one demon, could only have raised one person from the dead, could only have forgiven one sin as God.

However - as we know - there is no such rule about "non-normative only once" in all of scripture -- so it is either conjecture or preference or custom or ??? that leads you there.



The fact that no Bible writer mentions such a non-normative historic event such as Mary being raised to life and then assumed into heaven before the disciples had died - (and thus before the Bible writers were gone) does argue against the event ever having occurred at all.

I am not convinced that the Bible is arguing that Samuel appeared to Saul or that the servant of Satan really had power to bring up the saints. I do not see any point in scripture where God said he turned over the power to bring up the righteous dead - to the servants of Satan. All He said on that matter was that the servants of satan deserved death for practicing such a deception - and in Isaiah 8:19-20 God argues against consulting the dead on behalf of the living.

For those who believe Samuel was in heaven at that point - it would be to argue that God gave the servants of Satan power over the dead saints in heaven or in "paradise". No such teaching is found in scripture - but it is found among those who align themselves with the occult.

in Christ,

Bob

I never said nor do I think the medium brought up Samuel because she cried out. There is a reason God tells us that; she was surprised. Samuel was not what she usually saw (iow, he was real whereas she was probably used to seeing nothing or something "ghostly" like a spirit/demon).

Another way we know this is Samuel: The Bible says it's Samuel, Samuel rebukes Saul for disobeying God, and Samuel correctly predicts Saul's death.

Saul wanted his prophet and God gave it to him - in spades!

 

[Marcia]

Jude 7 quotes the book "The Assumption of Moses" as being valid. In that case Moses was not dead in Matt 17 when Jesus was speaking to him.

So it is not a case of speaking to the dead or praying to the dead. It is a case of speaking to someone that was bodily resurrected and then taken to heaven.

A very different scenario.

in Christ,

Bob

The bodily assumption of Elijah and the fact that the burial place of Moses' body was not given is interesting in light of this passage (appearing with Jesus on the Mt of Transfiguration) and in light of Rev. 11 about the 2 witnesses:
"These have the power to shut up the sky, so that rain will not fall during the days of their prophesying; and they have power over the waters to turn them into blood, and to strike the earth with every plague, as often as they desire."

Shutting up the sky is a power given to Elijah and turning water into blood and bringing plague was a power given to Moses. I do not think the 2 witnesses in Rev. will actually be Elijah and Moses (though they could be) but they will be 2 people for whom Elijah and Moses were types.

Of course, Elijah and Moses represent the Law and the Prophets.

 

[Marcia]

[/i]

2. The assumption is not a reference to "translated like Elijah" it is a reference to "died, resurrected and then taken to heaven".

Bob, Jesus is the firstfruits of bodily resurrection -- he is the first One to have bodily resurrection; Moses was not bodily resurrected. I think it's possible he could have been taken to heaven as Elijah was but he was not bodily resurrected.

 

[Marcia]

When you say valid. What do you mean? And we all know Moses died it says so in Duet. So Moses had died. I've read the assumption of Moses and I'm not sure you would consider it Valid. And Note Aren't we all alive in Christ even after we die?

The mystery around Moses is that his burial place was not given or known; this was highly unusual in the OT for someone of that stature to not have this recorded. Jude records a dispute over the body of Moses between Satan and Michael the archangel.

I think possibly Moses died but was then bodily taken to heaven; Elijah was bodily taken to heaven while alive. But I have not thought too much about this.