Ash Wednesday

A place to discuss Catholic topics and issues

Moderator: Moderators

User avatar
ThatGirlAgain
Prodigy
Posts: 2961
Joined: Wed Jul 27, 2011 1:09 pm
Location: New York City
Been thanked: 1 time

Ash Wednesday

Post #1

Post by ThatGirlAgain »

I have seen very few dirty faces in the street today. (Midtown Manhattan) The past couple of years there were more around here. :confused2: Maybe the new Archbishop (Cardinal now!) is enforcing the "got to go to Mass to get ashes" rule. (I would not know.)

Any practicing Catholics out there? Did you get your ashes today? Does your Church require you to attend Mass to get them?
Dogmatism and skepticism are both, in a sense, absolute philosophies; one is certain of knowing, the other of not knowing. What philosophy should dissipate is certainty, whether of knowledge or ignorance.
- Bertrand Russell

User avatar
LiamOS
Site Supporter
Posts: 3645
Joined: Sat Mar 20, 2010 4:52 pm
Location: Ireland

Post #2

Post by LiamOS »

I noticed quite a few people with ash in university today, much more than I expected. There may have been a facility in the chapel on campus. Interestingly however, there were none I saw in the physics building or in the school of mathematics.

User avatar
ThatGirlAgain
Prodigy
Posts: 2961
Joined: Wed Jul 27, 2011 1:09 pm
Location: New York City
Been thanked: 1 time

Post #3

Post by ThatGirlAgain »

AkiThePirate wrote:I noticed quite a few people with ash in university today, much more than I expected. There may have been a facility in the chapel on campus. Interestingly however, there were none I saw in the physics building or in the school of mathematics.
I was Honors Science and Honors Math in Catholic high school. But then I was already only pretending to be a Catholic. :P
Dogmatism and skepticism are both, in a sense, absolute philosophies; one is certain of knowing, the other of not knowing. What philosophy should dissipate is certainty, whether of knowledge or ignorance.
- Bertrand Russell

User avatar
Burninglight
Guru
Posts: 1202
Joined: Tue Mar 20, 2012 12:40 am

Ring around the rosary...

Post #4

Post by Burninglight »

Ring around the rosary...ashes ashes all fall down. this is what ash Wed reminds me of. I went to Catholic school; in fact, I was born and raised Catholic, but there came a time after reading the Bible that I could no longer identify with them. My family is Catholic and they cannot understand why I left. Ash Wednesday has to do with repentance and a sorrow for sin involving fasting from meat and whatever else one want to give up for lent.

It is good to fast, but it doesn't have to be during lent. The Bible actually says a doctrine of demons is when we are told to abstain from meat and not to marry. Priest are told they cannot marry and are occasionally told to fast from meat. I believe if priest were allowed to marry there would be a lot less pedophilia and homosexuality in the church rectories.

Praying the rosary and ash Wed have no significance for me, and I cannot see it being Scriptual. Jesus said call no man on earth father, and I use to call Priest "Father" pfft. Jesus said don't pray repetitious prayers the rosary comes to mind especially praying to a woman (Mary) who was just blessed among woman. She was no God. Where did anyone in the early church ever pray to the saints or Mary?

jedicri
Scholar
Posts: 350
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2011 8:40 pm
Been thanked: 1 time

Re: Ring around the rosary...

Post #5

Post by jedicri »

Burninglight wrote:Praying the rosary and ash Wed have no significance for me, and I cannot see it being Scriptual.
Where in the Bible does it teach that everything must be Scriptural?
Jesus said call no man on earth father, and I use to call Priest "Father" pfft.
To understand why the charge does not work, one must first understand the use of the word "father" in reference to our earthly fathers. No one would deny a little girl the opportunity to tell someone that she loves her father. Common sense tells us that Jesus wasn’t forbidding this type of use of the word "father."

In fact, to forbid it would rob the address "Father" of its meaning when applied to God, for there would no longer be any earthly counterpart for the analogy of divine Fatherhood. The concept of God’s role as Father would be meaningless if we obliterated the concept of earthly fatherhood.

But in the Bible the concept of fatherhood is not restricted to just our earthly fathers and God. It is used to refer to people other than biological or legal fathers, and is used as a sign of respect to those with whom we have a special relationship.

For example, Joseph tells his brothers of a special fatherly relationship God had given him with the king of Egypt: "So it was not you who sent me here, but God; and he has made me a father to Pharaoh, and lord of all his house and ruler over all the land of Egypt" (Gen. 45:8).

Job indicates he played a fatherly role with the less fortunate: "I was a father to the poor, and I searched out the cause of him whom I did not know" (Job 29:16). And God himself declares that he will give a fatherly role to Eliakim, the steward of the house of David: "In that day I will call my servant Eliakim, the son of Hilkiah . . . and I will clothe him with [a] robe, and will bind [a] girdle on him, and will commit . . . authority to his hand; and he shall be a father to the inhabitants of Jerusalem and to the house of Judah" (Is. 22:20–21).

This type of fatherhood not only applies to those who are wise counselors (like Joseph) or benefactors (like Job) or both (like Eliakim), it also applies to those who have a fatherly spiritual relationship with one. For example, Elisha cries, "My father, my father!" to Elijah as the latter is carried up to heaven in a whirlwind (2 Kgs. 2:12). Later, Elisha himself is called a father by the king of Israel (2 Kgs. 6:21).

Some Fundamentalists argue that this usage changed with the New Testament—that while it may have been permissible to call certain men "father" in the Old Testament, since the time of Christ, it’s no longer allowed. This argument fails for several reasons.

First, as we’ve seen, the imperative "call no man father" does not apply to one’s biological father. It also doesn’t exclude calling one’s ancestors "father," as is shown in Acts 7:2, where Stephen refers to "our father Abraham," or in Romans 9:10, where Paul speaks of "our father Isaac."

Second, there are numerous examples in the New Testament of the term "father" being used as a form of address and reference, even for men who are not biologically related to the speaker. There are, in fact, so many uses of "father" in the New Testament, that the Fundamentalist interpretation of Matthew 23 (and the objection to Catholics calling priests "father") must be wrong, as we shall see.

Third, a careful examination of the context of Matthew 23 shows that Jesus didn’t intend for his words here to be understood literally. The whole passage reads, "But you are not to be called ‘rabbi,’ for you have one teacher, and you are all brethren. And call no man your father on earth, for you have one Father, who is in heaven. Neither be called ‘masters,’ for you have one master, the Christ" (Matt. 23:8–10).

The first problem is that although Jesus seems to prohibit the use of the term "teacher," in Matthew 28:19–20, Christ himself appointed certain men to be teachers in his Church: "Go therefore and make disciples of all nations . . . teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you." Paul speaks of his commission as a teacher: "For this I was appointed a preacher and apostle . . . a teacher of the Gentiles in faith and truth" (1 Tim. 2:7); "For this gospel I was appointed a preacher and apostle and teacher" (2 Tim. 1:11). He also reminds us that the Church has an office of teacher: "God has appointed in the church first apostles, second prophets, third teachers" (1 Cor. 12:28); and "his gifts were that some should be apostles, some prophets, some evangelists, some pastors and teachers" (Eph. 4:11). There is no doubt that Paul was not violating Christ’s teaching in Matthew 23 by referring so often to others as "teachers."

Fundamentalists themselves slip up on this point by calling all sorts of people "doctor," for example, medical doctors, as well as professors and scientists who have Ph.D. degrees (i.e., doctorates). What they fail to realize is that "doctor" is simply the Latin word for "teacher." Even "Mister" and "Mistress" ("Mrs.") are forms of the word "master," also mentioned by Jesus. So if his words in Matthew 23 were meant to be taken literally, Fundamentalists would be just as guilty for using the word "teacher" and "doctor" and "mister" as Catholics for saying "father." But clearly, that would be a misunderstanding of Christ’s words.

Jesus criticized Jewish leaders who love "the place of honor at feasts and the best seats in the synagogues, and salutations in the market places, and being called ‘rabbi’ by men" (Matt. 23:6–7). His admonition here is a response to the Pharisees’ proud hearts and their g.asping after marks of status and prestige.

He was using hyperbole (exaggeration to make a point) to show the scribes and Pharisees how sinful and proud they were for not looking humbly to God as the source of all authority and fatherhood and teaching, and instead setting themselves up as the ultimate authorities, father figures, and teachers.

Christ used hyperbole often, for example when he declared, "If your right eye causes you to sin, pluck it out and throw it away; it is better that you lose one of your members than that your whole body be thrown into hell" (Matt. 5:29, cf. 18:9; Mark 9:47). Christ certainly did not intend this to be applied literally, for otherwise all Christians would be blind amputees! (cf. 1 John 1:8; 1 Tim. 1:15). We are all subject to "the lust of the flesh and the lust of the eyes and the pride of life" (1 John 2:16).

Since Jesus is demonstrably using hyperbole when he says not to call anyone our father—else we would not be able to refer to our earthly fathers as such—we must read his words carefully and with sensitivity to the presence of hyperbole if we wish to understand what he is saying.

Jesus is not forbidding us to call men "fathers" who actually are such—either literally or spiritually. (See below on the apostolic example of spiritual fatherhood.) To refer to such people as fathers is only to acknowledge the truth, and Jesus is not against that. He is warning people against inaccurately attributing fatherhood—or a particular kind or degree of fatherhood—to those who do not have it.

As the apostolic example shows, some individuals genuinely do have a spiritual fatherhood, meaning that they can be referred to as spiritual fathers. What must not be done is to confuse their form of spiritual paternity with that of God. Ultimately, God is our supreme protector, provider, and instructor. Correspondingly, it is wrong to view any individual other than God as having these roles.

Throughout the world, some people have been tempted to look upon religious leaders who are mere mortals as if they were an individual’s supreme source of spiritual instruction, nourishment, and protection. The tendency to turn mere men into "gurus" is worldwide.

This was also a temptation in the Jewish world of Jesus’ day, when famous rabbinical leaders, especially those who founded important schools, such as Hillel and Shammai, were highly exalted by their disciples. It is this elevation of an individual man—the formation of a "cult of personality" around him—of which Jesus is speaking when he warns against attributing to someone an undue role as master, father, or teacher.

He is not forbidding the perfunctory use of honorifics nor forbidding us to recognize that the person does have a role as a spiritual father and teacher. The example of his own apostles shows us that.

The New Testament is filled with examples of and references to spiritual father-son and father-child relationships. Many people are not aware just how common these are, so it is worth quoting some of them here.

Paul regularly referred to Timothy as his child: "Therefore I sent to you Timothy, my beloved and faithful child in the Lord, to remind you of my ways in Christ" (1 Cor. 4:17); "To Timothy, my true child in the faith: grace, mercy, and peace from God the Father and Christ Jesus our Lord" (1 Tim. 1:2); "To Timothy, my beloved child: Grace, mercy, and peace from God the Father and Christ Jesus our Lord" (2 Tim. 1:2).

He also referred to Timothy as his son: "This charge I commit to you, Timothy, my son, in accordance with the prophetic utterances which pointed to you, that inspired by them you may wage the good warfare" (1 Tim 1:18); "You then, my son, be strong in the grace that is in Christ Jesus" (2 Tim. 2:1); "But Timothy’s worth you know, how as a son with a father he has served with me in the gospel" (Phil. 2:22).

Paul also referred to other of his converts in this way: "To Titus, my true child in a common faith: grace and peace from God the Father and Christ Jesus our Savior" (Titus 1:4); "I appeal to you for my child, Onesimus, whose father I have become in my imprisonment" (Philem. 10). None of these men were Paul’s literal, biological sons. Rather, Paul is emphasizing his spiritual fatherhood with them.

Perhaps the most pointed New Testament reference to the theology of the spiritual fatherhood of priests is Paul’s statement, "I do not write this to make you ashamed, but to admonish you as my beloved children. For though you have countless guides in Christ, you do not have many fathers. For I became your father in Christ Jesus through the gospel" (1 Cor. 4:14–15).

Peter followed the same custom, referring to Mark as his son: "She who is at Babylon, who is likewise chosen, sends you greetings; and so does my son Mark" (1 Pet. 5:13). The apostles sometimes referred to entire churches under their care as their children. Paul writes, "Here for the third time I am ready to come to you. And I will not be a burden, for I seek not what is yours but you; for children ought not to lay up for their parents, but parents for their children" (2 Cor. 12:14); and, "My little children, with whom I am again in travail until Christ be formed in you!" (Gal. 4:19).

John said, "My little children, I am writing this to you so that you may not sin; but if any one does sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous" (1 John 2:1); "No greater joy can I have than this, to hear that my children follow the truth" (3 John 4). In fact, John also addresses men in his congregations as "fathers" (1 John 2:13–14).

By referring to these people as their spiritual sons and spiritual children, Peter, Paul, and John imply their own roles as spiritual fathers. Since the Bible frequently speaks of this spiritual fatherhood, we Catholics acknowledge it and follow the custom of the apostles by calling priests "father." Failure to acknowledge this is a failure to recognize and honor a great gift God has bestowed on the Church: the spiritual fatherhood of the priesthood.

Catholics know that as members of a parish, they have been committed to a priest’s spiritual care, thus they have great filial affection for priests and call them "father." Priests, in turn, follow the apostles’ biblical example by referring to members of their flock as "my son" or "my child" (cf. Gal. 4:19; 1 Tim. 1:18; 2 Tim. 2:1; Philem. 10; 1 Pet. 5:13; 1 John 2:1; 3 John 4).

All of these passages were written under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, and they express the infallibly recorded truth that Christ’s ministers do have a role as spiritual fathers. Jesus is not against acknowledging that. It is he who gave these men their role as spiritual fathers, and it is his Holy Spirit who recorded this role for us in the pages of Scripture. To acknowledge spiritual fatherhood is to acknowledge the truth, and no amount of anti-Catholic grumbling will change that fact.
Jesus said don't pray repetitious prayers
No He did not. Jesus repeated the same prayer in Gethsamene Mt 26:39, 42, 44.
the rosary comes to mind
The above response rebuts this point.
especially praying to a woman (Mary) who was just blessed among woman. She was no God.
Mary was not just blessed, but was full of grace and is Mother of God.
Where did anyone in the early church ever pray to the saints or Mary?
All early Christians. The most problematic line in the Hail Mary prayer for non-Catholics is usually the last: "pray for us sinners now and at the hour of our death." Many non-Catholics think such a request denies the teaching of 1 Timothy 2:5: "For there is one God, and there is one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus." But in the preceding four verses (1 Tim. 2:1-4), Paul instructs Christians to pray for each other, meaning it cannot interfere with Christ’s mediatorship: "I urge that prayers, supplications, petitions, and thanksgivings be made for everyone. . . . This is good, and pleasing to God our Savior."

We know this exhortation to pray for others applies to the saints in heaven who, as Revelation 5:8 reveals, intercede for us by offering our prayers to God: "The twenty-four elders fell down before the Lamb, each holding a harp, and with golden bowls full of incense, which are the prayers of the saints.

User avatar
Burninglight
Guru
Posts: 1202
Joined: Tue Mar 20, 2012 12:40 am

What is Scriptural

Post #6

Post by Burninglight »

Show me where the Bible says I can't come against or disagree with something that is not Scriptural as not being from God. The Bible teaches not to call any man on earth father doesn't mean you can't call your dad father or the founders of America founding fathers. It means it in a deeper sense. for instance, it is to teach us not to be a respecter of persons.

God is no respecter of persons. A Catholic priest has no more an ability to intercede to God for an individual as I or any other Christian. The Pope is no greater than any other Christian, and if he teaches he is, then he has become an anti Christ. Anti christ means someone who stands in the place of Christ. The Bible teaches us that every Biblical Christian is a saint. The Bible doesn't teach us that Mary is the mother of God or that we should pray to her or for the dead or to saints. So in boldness and with conviction I can and do rebuke such as nonsense as unscriptural. I can come against every imagination that exalts itself against the knowledge of God, because I understand that Catholics and Muslims are not my enemies.

As stated in Scripture, my battle is not against flesh and blood but against principalities and spiritual wickedness in high places. I used to be Catholic and I know the problems and the man made justifications to support the unscriptural aspects of it. I still go to Catholic church with my parents when I visit and usually the priest does the mass sharing some Biblical Scriptures and I have no problem with that. But I have a problem with those who try to convince us that Mary is the mother of God.

Even Jesus put people in their place regarding this issue. For instance, those who heard Jesus' awesome teachings said blessed is the woman who gave you suck. Jesus said, "More blessed are those who hear the word of God and do it." Another time people brought Jesus mother to His attention and Jesus responded, Who is my mother...? but they that do the will of God." So if you are going to call Mary the mother of God because she gave birth to Yeshua, then you better call all women who do God's will the mother of God. Even said, Jesus to his mother "What have I to do with thee women... don't you know I need to be about my father's business" Don't make a goddess our of Mary; don't pray to her is what I hear Jesus saying to my heart.

Mary was a sinner like every other man of God through history and Jesus was the only sinless person who lived. Mary had to come to Him for forgiveness just as everyone else! She was just most blessed among woman' she was not a goddess or the Queen of God's throne! Those that say that are engaged in idolatry!

Finally, Muslims love to debate Catholic Christians, because it really makes them feel justified in saying Christianity is heavily mix with paganism, and it makes it difficult for Biblical Christians to distinguish themselves from Catholics in a Muslim's eye. I saw a debate between a Catholic priest and a Muslim; the Cahtolic lost the debate. I have noticed that most Christians that convert to Islam are either Catholics or nonimal Christians that don't know Yeshua that only know about Him.

jedicri
Scholar
Posts: 350
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2011 8:40 pm
Been thanked: 1 time

Re: What is Scriptural

Post #7

Post by jedicri »

Burninglight wrote:Show me where the Bible says I can't come against or disagree with something that is not Scriptural as not being from God.
Strawman. You initially argued the basis for Scriptural support for something you did not agree with. The argument is not whether you cannot disagree with something that is not Scriptural --- that is irrelevant and not to the subject matter you initally brought up.
The Bible teaches not to call any man on earth father doesn't mean you can't call your dad father or the founders of America founding fathers. It means it in a deeper sense. for instance, it is to teach us not to be a respecter of persons.
I already addressed what Jesus meant by these words of His above. It rebuts your dismissive comment "Jesus said call no man on earth father, and I use to call Priest 'Father' pfft."
God is no respecter of persons. A Catholic priest has no more an ability to intercede to God for an individual as I or any other Christian.
Incorrect. The Bible tells the story of Abraham who intercedes for the city of Sodom and Gomorrha, Genesis 18:22-33.

It's interesting you dismiss 1 Tim. 2:1-4 which totally refutes your position; St. Paul instructs Christians to pray for each other, meaning it cannot interfere with Christ’s mediatorship: "I urge that prayers, supplications, petitions, and thanksgivings be made for everyone. . . . This is good, and pleasing to God our Savior."

The Pope is no greater than any other Christian, and if he teaches he is, then he has become an anti Christ. Anti christ means someone who stands in the place of Christ.
To be more concise, 1 John 2:22 tells us that anyone who opposes the Father is an antichrist. 1 John 4:3 says, "Every spirit that does not acknowledge Jesus does not belong to God. This is the spirit of the antichrist that, as you have heard, is to come, but in fact is already in the world."
The Bible teaches us that every Biblical Christian is a saint. The Bible doesn't teach us that Mary is the mother of God or that we should pray to her or for the dead or to saints. So in boldness and with conviction I can and do rebuke such as nonsense as unscriptural.


Understood correctly, the title Mother of God (Greek: Theotokos, "God-bearer") does not mean that Mary is the source of Christ’s divine nature, nor does it mean Mary is the Mother of the Father or the Holy Spirit. It means Mary is Mother of the person of Jesus, who is God:
The One whom [Mary] conceived as man by the Holy Spirit, who truly became her Son according to the flesh, was none other than the Father’s eternal Son, the second person of the Holy Trinity. Hence the Church confesses that Mary is truly "Mother of God." (CCC 495)

If Jesus is God and Mary is Jesus' mother, than Mary is the Mother of God. Period. This does not mean Mary is the mother of Jesus' divinity. Not at all. Mary is the mother of the PERSON, Jesus Christ, who is God. We don't limit Mary's motherhood to Jesus' human nature. Do you call your mother the mother of your human nature only? No. Even though your mother did not give you your soul, she is still the mother of YOU, as a PERSON. Similarly, even though Mary did not give Jesus His soul or divinity, she still is His mother. This does not elevate Mary to a goddess anymore than it elevates your mother to a goddess, who participated in giving you an immortal soul.

Mary is the Mother of the Divine Person, Jesus Christ, who is God. Don't confuse the human and divine natures, but also don't reduce Mary's motherhood to Jesus' nature alone, and not His personhood.

Already addressed praying to Mary and to saints.

As for praying for the dead, Scripture teaches that "It is therefore a holy and wholesome thought to pray for the dead, that they may be loosed from sins" 2 Machabees 12:46.
But I have a problem with those who try to convince us that Mary is the mother of God.

Even Jesus put people in their place regarding this issue. For instance, those who heard Jesus' awesome teachings said blessed is the woman who gave you suck. Jesus said, "More blessed are those who hear the word of God and do it." Another time people brought Jesus mother to His attention and Jesus responded, Who is my mother...? but they that do the will of God." So if you are going to call Mary the mother of God because she gave birth to Yeshua, then you better call all women who do God's will the mother of God. Even said, Jesus to his mother "What have I to do with thee women... don't you know I need to be about my father's business" Don't make a goddess our of Mary; don't pray to her is what I hear Jesus saying to my heart.
Those are misunderstandings you have about Jesus "rebuking" Mary.

Matt. 12:48; Mark 3:33; Luke 8:21 - when Jesus asks, "Who are my mother, and sisters and brothers?," some Protestants argue that Jesus is rebuking Mary in order to denigrate her. To the contrary, when Jesus' comments are read in light of Luke 8:5-15 and the parable of the sower which Jesus taught right before His question, Jesus is actually implying that Mary has already received the word as the sower of good ground and is bearing fruit. Jesus is teaching that others must, like Mary, also receive the word and obey it.

Matt. 12:48; Mark 3:33; Luke 8:21 - Jesus' question about "who are my mother, and sisters and brothers" was also made in reference to Psalm 69:8-9. Jesus the Prophet was answering the psalmist's prophecy that those closest to Him would betray Him at His passion. Jesus is emphasizing the spiritual family's importance over the biological family, and the importance of being faithful to Him. While many were unfaithful to Jesus, Mary remained faithful to Him, even to the point of standing at the foot of the Cross.

Matt. 12:48; Mark 3:33; Luke 8:21 - finally, to argue that Jesus rebuked Mary is to argue that Jesus violated the Torah, here, the 4th commandment. This argument is blasphemous because it essentially says that God committed sin by dishonoring His Mother.

Luke 11:28 - when Jesus says, "Blessed rather are those who hear the word of God and keep it," some Protestants also call this a rebuke of Mary. Again, to the contrary, Jesus is exalting Mary by emphasizing her obedience to God's word as being more critical than her biological role of mother. This affirms Luke 1:48.

Luke 11:28 - also, the Greek word for "rather" is "menounge." Menounge really means "Yes, but in addition," or "Further." Thus, Jesus is saying, yes my mother is blessed indeed, but further blessed are those who hear the word of God and keep it. Jesus is encouraging others to follow Mary's example in order to build up His kingdom.

Luke 11:27-28 - finally, Jesus is the one being complimented, not Mary. Therefore, Jesus is refocusing the attention from Him to others who obey the word of God. If He is refocusing the attention away from Him to others, His comment cannot be a rebuke of Mary His mother.

John 2:4 - this is another example that Protestants use to diminish Mary's significance. Jesus' question to Mary, "what have you to do with me?" does no such thing. To the contrary, Jesus' question illustrates the importance of Mary's role in the kingdom. Jesus' question is in reality an invitation to His mother to intercede on behalf of all believers and begin His ministry, and His Mother understands this. Mary thus immediately intercedes, Jesus obeys her, and performs the miracle which commenced His ministry of redemption.

Luke 8:28 - the demons tell Jesus the same thing, "what have you to do with us." The demons are not rebuking Jesus, for God would not allow it. Instead, the demons are acknowledging the power of Jesus by their question to Him.

John 2:4; 19:26 - when Jesus uses the title "woman" (gnyai), it is a title of dignity and respect. It is the equivalent of Lady or Madam. Jesus honored His Mother as God requires us to do.
Mary was a sinner like every other man of God through history and Jesus was the only sinless person who lived. Mary had to come to Him for forgiveness just as everyone else!
On the contrary, Mary is unique since she is the Mother of God:

Gen. 3:15 - we see from the very beginning that God gives Mary a unique role in salvation history. God says "I will put enmity between you and the woman, between your seed and her seed." This refers to Jesus (the "emnity") and Mary (the "woman"). The phrase "her seed" (spermatos) is not seen elsewhere in Scripture.

Gen 3:15 / Rev. 12:1 - the Scriptures begin and end with the woman battling satan. This points to the power of the woman with the seed and teaches us that Jesus and Mary are the new Adam and the new Eve.

John 2:4, 19:26 - Jesus calls Mary "woman" as she is called in Gen. 3:15. Just as Eve was the mother of the old creation, Mary is the mother of the new creation. This woman's seed will crush the serpent's skull.

Isaiah 7:14; Matt. 1:23 - a virgin (the Greek word used is "parthenos") will bear a Son named Emmanuel, which means "God is with us." John 1:14 - God in flesh dwelt among us. Mary is the Virgin Mother of God.

Matt. 2:11 - Luke emphasizes Jesus is with Mary His Mother, and the magi fall down before both of them, worshiping Jesus.

Luke 1:35 - the child will be called holy, the Son of God. Mary is the Mother of the Son of God, or the Mother of God (the "Theotokos").

Luke 1:28 - "Hail Mary, full of grace, the Lord is with you." These are the words spoken by God and delivered to us by the angel Gabriel (who is a messenger of God). Thus, when Catholics recite this verse while praying the Rosary, they are uttering the words of God.

Luke 1:28 - also, the phrase "full of grace" is translated from the Greek word "kecharitomene." This is a unique title given to Mary, and suggests a perfection of grace from a past event. Mary is not just "highly favored." She has been perfected in grace by God. "Full of grace" is only used to describe one other person - Jesus Christ in John 1:14.

Luke 1:38 - Mary's fiat is "let it be done to me according to thy word." Mary is the perfect model of faith in God, and is worthy of our veneration.

Luke 1:42 - "Blessed are you among women, and blessed is the fruit of your womb, Jesus." The phrase "blessed are you among women" really means "you are most blessed of all women." A circumlocution is used because there is no superlative in the Greek language. Note also that Elizabeth praises Mary first, and then Jesus. This is hyperdulia (but not latria which is worship owed to God alone). We too can go through Mary to praise Jesus. Finally, Catholics repeat these divinely inspired words of Elizabeth in the Rosary.

Luke 1:43 - Elizabeth's use of "Mother of my Lord" (in Hebrew, Elizabeth used "Adonai" which means Lord God) is the equivalent of "Holy Mary, Mother of God" which Catholics pray in the Rosary. The formula is simple: Jesus is a divine person, and this person is God. Mary is Jesus' Mother, so Mary is the mother of God (Mary is not just the Mother of Jesus' human nature - mothers are mothers of persons, not natures).

Luke 1:44 - Mary's voice causes John the Baptist to leap for joy in Elizabeth's womb. Luke is teaching us that Mary is our powerful intercessor.

Luke 1:46 - Mary claims that her soul magnifies the Lord. This is a bold statement from a young Jewish girl from Nazareth. Her statement is a strong testimony to her uniqueness. Mary, as our Mother and intercessor, also magnifies our prayers.

Luke 1:48 - Mary prophesies that all generations shall call her blessed, as Catholics do in the "Hail Mary" prayer. What Protestant churches have existed in all generations (none), and how many of them call Mary blessed with special prayers and devotions?

Gal. 4:4 - God sent His Son, born of a woman, to redeem us. Mary is the woman with the redeemer. By calling Mary co-redemptrix, we are simply calling Mary "the woman with the redeemer." This is because "co" is from the Latin word "cum" which means "with." Therefore, "co-redemptrix" means "woman with the redeemer." Mary had a unique but subordinate role to Jesus in salvation.

Eph. 1:1; Phil. 1:1; Col. 1:2 - the word "saints" (in Hebrew "qaddiysh") means "holy" ones. So Mary is called Holy, the greatest Saint of all.

Luke 2:35 - Simeon prophesies that a sword would also pierce Mary's soul. Mary thus plays a very important role in our redemption. While Jesus' suffering was all that we needed for redemption, God desired Mary to participate on a subordinate level in her Son's suffering, just as he allows us to participate through our own sufferings.

Luke 2:19,51 - Mary kept in mind all these things as she pondered them in her heart. Catholics remember this by devoting themselves to Mary's Immaculate Heart and all the treasures and wisdom and knowledge contained therein.
she was not a goddess or the Queen of God's throne! Those that say that are engaged in idolatry!
That is you who is saying that; Catholicism does not teach this. Care to show your proof to what you claim?

User avatar
Burninglight
Guru
Posts: 1202
Joined: Tue Mar 20, 2012 12:40 am

Mary mother of God?

Post #8

Post by Burninglight »

I could relate to you more if you said Mary is the mother of the son of man (Jesus); but don't say she is the mother of the son of God or of God. There is nothing Scriptural about that or praying to Mary. Many Catholics look to Mary more than Christ for their salvation, because they see her as a mother and someone who might be more abounding in mercy.

I speak from experience as I was once Catholic; I have heard it with my own ears that Mary was considered to the the Queen of Heaven by Catholics. I haven't heard her being a goddess, but IMO, that's what she is if she is really god's mother. Just because we believe in the deity of Christ that doesn't mean we can refer to her as "Mother of God" Muslims will have a hay day on that, and they make that kind of thinking look stupid. Believe me, I have seen them debate with Catholics and they lose against Muslim scholars all the time! Even the Pope wouldn't debate with Deedat! You quoted from Scriptures that's referring to the Church not Mary the Church is known as the bride of Christ. You are using inferences from verses to support your views. There is no explicit Scriptures to condone calling Mary mother of God! The Lord rebuke that in Jesus name!

Look I don't want to argue with you. If you believe in Jesus for the salvation of your soul and not in Mary, you do well. Mary cannot save your soul or redeem you in God's eyes. She had to come to Christ like the rest of us.

She didn't remain a virgin after the birth of Jesus Christ. Joseph knew her like a man knows a woman. Mary was bless among woman. Hail Mary was a salutation; she was full of God's grace. BTW, that is how we are saved: for by grace are you saved by faith; it is not of yourselves; it is a gift! Mary also received this gift otherwise she or we could boast. I never said Jesus rebuked Mary; you said that. You could be right!

The Magi most certainly was not bowing to worship Mary or Joseph who were present at our Lord's birth. It was Jesus only Yeshua the Lord of lords. He has no mother partner nor does God the father have a mother or wife partner. Jesus is the word of God made flesh.

Mary was just a carnal creation like all of us who was blessed among woman, but she is not to be prayed to like a goddess. Read the Scriptures carefully friend. You have as zeal, but not according to knowledge; "you err not knowing the Scriptures or the power thereof."

User avatar
Burninglight
Guru
Posts: 1202
Joined: Tue Mar 20, 2012 12:40 am

Blessed Mary

Post #9

Post by Burninglight »

I might like to add, since you quoted Luke 1:43, that you look a little further ahead for the proper context where Mary said, “My soul magnifies the Lord, and my spirit rejoices in God my Savior, for he has looked on the humble estate of his servant.
Notice that Mary is calling Jesus her savior and his servant. Mary would have to submit to Jesus' Lordship just like all kindred, nations and tongues. What was done to Mary was from God only. She was simply a chosen vessel.

She will always be called blessed for it, but never worshipped as if she were deity and conceived without sin. It is written: "For all have sinned and come short of the glory of God..." The only exception is Jesus (Yeshua). Sin and iniquity are passed down through the father's line never the mother's. Jesus Son of God was the only sinless person that ever existed since the world began for God is His father! This is the gospel meaning good news. Jesus saved Mary and us all that believe on His name: "For there is no other name given whereby we might be saved except for Jesus Christ"

I notice that you called Mary the virgin Mother of God. First of all I hope I made a good case that God has no mother; for God always was and always will be. Next Mary was the virgin mother of our Lord. She had children after Jesus was born. So get "is a virgin" present tense out of your discussion.


You are right Jesus didn't mention repetitous prayer, but he did say “And when you pray, do not heap up empty phrases as the Gentiles do, for they think that they will be heard for their many words. Do not be like them, for your Father knows what you need before you ask him. Then he taught them the Lord's prayer; however, when I used to pray "Holy Mary mother of God pray for our sinners now and at the hour of our death amen" This is an empty phrase that Jesus spoke of. I repented of it.
I hope & pray you come to the knowledge of truth friend!
PBUY

jedicri
Scholar
Posts: 350
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2011 8:40 pm
Been thanked: 1 time

Re: Mary mother of God?

Post #10

Post by jedicri »

Burninglight wrote:Look I don't want to argue with you.
Then you should not have posted what you did in the first place in "Catholicism"; what you posted is seen as heresy and as such will be challenged and refuted.

Post Reply