Mary most blessed? Sorry another Mary thread.

[thessalonian]

I asked this after a denial of it in a thread and noone responded so it needs proper attention.
Someone said Mary was not most blessed among women, she was just one of the blessed. Is this a true and proper interprutoin of Luke's infancy naritive where it says

Luke 1
42: and she exclaimed with a loud cry, "Blessed are you among women, and blessed is the fruit of your womb!

Let's get real here. Children are a blessing. Is this not correct from scripture?

Psalm 127
5. How blessed is the man whose quiver is full of them;
They will not be ashamed
When they speak with their enemies in the gate.

Now do you suppose that a dozen finite children would be the blessing of the infinite Lord of the universe? I am not denying the blessings of each and every child but would holding a sinful child in need of salvation be an equal blessing to holding the salvatoin of all mankind in your arms. Feeding him, clothing him, caring for him. (the beatitudes of which Mary even had to endure imprisonment and crusifixtion of her son), etc. etc. a blessing that is even blaspemous to compare to any other child. Mary was infinitely blessed to have the Christ Child in her home. Agreed?

Someone called Pius XII a fool for the dogma of the assumption which I am sure he thought was unbiblical. How much more should we be incensed by such nonsense.

Replies welcome.

God bless

 

[Gary]

Someone called Pius XII a fool for the dogma of the assumption which I am sure he thought was unbiblical. How much more should we be incensed by such nonsense.

I agree. The assumption is nonsense. It is also unbiblical. Just another man-made RCC dogma.

.

 

[Orthodox Christian]

We see in the gospel that when Jesus was crucified, not only did the Temple curtain tear, but there was a great earthquake, and the bodies of many great saints were resurrected. They went into Jerusalem after Jesus rose from the dead, and showed themselves to the people.

Now just where exactly did they go? Did they go lay down and die again? I think we know better. It is quite safe to assume that their bodies were taken up into heaven.

Now after this, a great many things happened, some of which are written in scripture, but many more happened after the last of the NT was written. Eusebius records the martyrdom of Polycarp, and Foxes book of martyrs repeats Eusebius' account. Many holy men and women were martyred, including 10 of the 12 Apostles. We receive the accounnts of their faith and glory with gladness.

The Assumption of Mary is not dogmatic in the Orthodox tradition, but the account of her death comes down to us much as do the accounts of the other Saints and their falling asleep in the Lord.

I note with some sadness that any story related to Mary is rejected by the Protesters because they have an axe to grind with Rome. They do not scornfully dismiss the other extra-biblical accounts of Saints and martyrdom- even if they remain skeptical (appropriate) they do not scorn (inappropriate).

I note these things with sadness because I know that the Protesters are not well. They do not base their perspectives about Mary on careful study and consideration- they base their perspectives on 'NOT ROME!' This is a soul-sickness, the seething of an estranged and wayward wife.

An objective response to Mary's Assumption, her continuedd virginity after the birth of Christ, and so forth would be studied skepticism, in the manner that most Protestant scholars treat the accounts of the martyrdoms of the Apostles.

But the Protesters scream and protest that Mary is nothing more than a birthgiver, a relatively unimportant sidenote in the gospel story. In reaction to Rome, they have become as unbelievers. They hear unsubstantiated accounts of miracles among their own in our times and rejoice, yet they seeth at the accounts of Mary which were verified by eyewitnesses.

Do you Protesters not see your lack of objectivity? Do you not see your double-standard? You act as rebellious teenagers, rejecting everything those 'old fools' believe.

 

[thessalonian]

Someone called Pius XII a fool for the dogma of the assumption which I am sure he thought was unbiblical. How much more should we be incensed by such nonsense.

I agree. The assumption is nonsense. It is also unbiblical. Just another man-made RCC dogma.

.

I'll not address the assumption issue as it was just a side comment.
I see you are not going to address what this thread is about. Is it unbiblical to say that Mary is MOST blessed of all women?

 

[thessalonian]

But the Protesters scream and protest that Mary is nothing more than a birthgiver, a relatively unimportant sidenote in the gospel story. In reaction to Rome, they have become as unbelievers. They hear unsubstantiated accounts of miracles among their own in our times and rejoice, yet they seeth at the accounts of Mary which were verified by eyewitnesses.

Do you Protesters not see your lack of objectivity? Do you not see your double-standard? You act as rebellious teenagers, rejecting everything those 'old fools' believe.

Well spoken. You hit the nail right on the head. And how many other truths do they reject because of an axe to grind rather than objective reason.

 

[notapseudonym]

If I remeber correctly, Luke was written in Greek.

In the English language we have a comparitaves and supleratives:
I am fast, you are faster, he is the fastest

In greek they do not have these so to say that some one was blest:
she is blest, she is belst in...., she is blest among......
That is to say Joan is blest, Agnus is blest in music, and Isabel is blest among all of you.

When Elizabeth said "Blessed are you among women" she was saying you are the most blest of all women. Notice how Elizabeth did not say among all men. If she would have said that it would have been putting Mary before Christ, since God humbled Himself to the form of a human.

 

[Gary]

The Assumption of Mary is not dogmatic in the Orthodox tradition, but the account of her death comes down to us much as do the accounts of the other Saints and their falling asleep in the Lord.

Yes... good old man-made RCC dogma. 5-6 centuries later!

Roman Catholic authorities admit that “The idea of the bodily assumption of Mary is first expressed in certain transitus-narratives of the fifth and sixth centuries.â€Â

.

 

[thessalonian]

The Assumption of Mary is not dogmatic in the Orthodox tradition, but the account of her death comes down to us much as do the accounts of the other Saints and their falling asleep in the Lord.

Yes... good old man-made RCC dogma. 5-6 centuries later!

Roman Catholic authorities admit that “The idea of the bodily assumption of Mary is first expressed in certain transitus-narratives of the fifth and sixth centuries.â€Â

.

First fully expressed. But there were evidences of it as a doctrine long before that with Athansius and Hippolatus and others. We've discussed this.

Gary, can you deal with the topic of the thread or are you simply going to dance around side issues. Doesn't it bother you that children are a blessings and Jesus the infinite God would be an infinite blessing, yet many Protestants deny this FACT of scripture that Mary was more blessed than all women and quite apparently all but one man, Christ himself. Surely you can acknowledge this Biblical concept or is it more important to you to keep hammering away at Catholicism? Is that your Gospel? The Gospel of anti-catholicism.

 

[Gary]

Luke 1:42 ... and she exclaimed with a loud cry, "Blessed are you among women, and blessed is the fruit of your womb!

The texts say nothing about veneration or prayers to Mary; they simply call Mary “blessed†of God, which she truly was. Contrary to Roman Catholic practice, however, Mary was not blessed above all women but simply was the most blessed among all women.

There is not a single instance in the New Testament where veneration was given to Mary.

When the magi came to the manger to visit Jesus “they prostrated themselves and did him homage,†not Mary (Matthew 2:11).

Let us consider what Paul must have thought. He mentions Jesus thousand of times in his writings.... and Mary once (I think) and then not even by her name!

John probably outlived Mary and does not even mention Mary in his 1,2,3 John. Jude forgets to mention her. The author of Hebrews does not mention her; she is even left off the honor role of the faithful in Hebrews 11. James forgets to mention her. So does Peter.

Like the magi, I will continue to give Jesus homage!

.

 

[Orthodox Christian]

The word used in that verse is proskeneo, Gary, the same one used by Jesus Christ when He said this to THE HUMAN BEINGS at Philadelphia:

Behold, I will make them of the synagogue of Satan, which say they are Jews, and are not, but do lie; behold, I will make them to come and worship before thy feet, and to know that I have loved thee.

Revelation 3:9 KJV

Now Gary, the Lord said that he would make those who had troubled the Philadelphians give veneration to them.

Do you think that Mary would be less worthy of prokeneo than the Philadelphians? Your reply, sir?





"He who overcomes, I will make him a pillar in the temple of My God"

 

[Gary]

Mary of the Bible

Mary was the virgin mother of Jesus. God chose her. She is indeed blessed and can and should be called "blessed" by all Bible-believing, born-again Christians.

But many of the other titles given to her by the RCC are not in the Bible.

Have you ever wondered why there is not more about Mary in the Bible?

The reason is that the Bible is about someone else.... the only mediator and savior, our Lord Jesus Christ.

Jesus said: “You diligently study the Scriptures because you think that by them you possess eternal life. These are the Scriptures that testify about me...†(John 5:39).

OC, you can bow down to Mary. I will continue to bow down to Jesus.

Maranatha!

 

[thessalonian]

Luke 1:42 ... and she exclaimed with a loud cry, "Blessed are you among women, and blessed is the fruit of your womb!

The texts say nothing about veneration or prayers to Mary; they simply call Mary “blessed†of God, which she truly was. Contrary to Roman Catholic practice, however, Mary was not blessed above all women but simply was the most blessed among all women.



.

Gary, my question is not about veneration, prayers, etc. etc.. My question is about whether Mary was blessed more than other women and I think we can safely include above all men. It seems that you agree that Bible Berean was wrong and that Mary was not in fact just another blessed woman with a child but THEE MOST BLESSED OF ALL WOME and I think we can safely include all men except Christ. So it would seem for the first time that we agree and are in the same corner against Bible Berean. You might want to let him know he is wrong in this matter.

Why you have to derail the thread in to a diatribe about Catholic theology on veneration is beyond me.

Tell me though, did God exalt Mary? How exalted was she? . Who was the most exalted among men (besides Christ) and women?

Let's put the definition of the word exalt in her so we know what the word means exactly.

Exalt
To raise in rank, character, or status; elevate: exalted the shepherd to the rank of grand vizier.
To glorify, praise, or honor.

Perhaps we should first ask does God exalt men? Use the Bible Gary. I'll let ya.

 

[Gary]

Don't misquote me. I was very specific. Like the bible, I said: "Contrary to Roman Catholic practice, however, Mary was not blessed above all women but simply was the most blessed among all women."

The rest of your assumptions are just that.. assumptions, not worth looking at. Your conclusion is therefore not proven or valid.

Now why don't you admit that the Bible is about Jesus and not Mary?

Can you explain why the magi paid homage to Jesus and NOT to Mary?

As I said to OC, you can keep bowing down and praying to Mary. I will keep bowing down, going on my knees and praying to my Father in the name of my Saviour and Lord, Jesus Christ.

You can keep searching the Scriptures for so-called parallels about Mary.... I will keep searching the Scriptures for my Lord and Saviour, Jesus Christ.

Maranatha!

 

[thessalonian]

Don't misquote me. I was very specific. Like the bible, I said: "Contrary to Roman Catholic practice, however, Mary was not blessed above all women but simply was the most blessed among all women."

The rest of your assumptions are just that.. assumptions, not worth looking at. Your conclusion is therefore not proven or valid.

Now why don't you admit that the Bible is about Jesus and not Mary?

Can you explain why the magi paid homage to Jesus and NOT to Mary?

As I said to OC, you can keep bowing down and praying to Mary. I will keep bowing down, going on my knees and praying to my Father in the name of my Saviour and Lord, Jesus Christ.

You can keep searching the Scriptures for so-called parallels about Mary.... I will keep searching the Scriptures for my Lord and Saviour, Jesus Christ.

Maranatha!

What was it that just passed over my head. Duck! What God did for Mary and with her tells us about God. Not just Mary. Gary, I get the feeling you are just not capable of a serious debate with me. You always avoid my guestions and never answer them directly. Only indirectly when forced to. I've answered yours. This I suspect reflects poorly on you with the lurkers. But who am I to say.

Blessings.

 

[Gary]

I've answered yours (questions)

Nope. I am still waiting for the Bible chapter/verses to support the RCC dogmas of (1) The Perpetual Virginity of Mary (2) The Immaculate Conception (Mary born sinless) (3) The Sinlessness of Mary (Mary remaining sinless) (4) The Bodily Assumption of Mary (Mary bodily assumed into heaven) (5) The Mediatorship of Mary (Mary called/titled "Mediatrix" and "Co-redemptrix") (6) Praying to Mary
http://www.christianforums.net/viewtopi ... 517#202517

 

[Orthodox Christian]

Mary of the Bible

Mary was the virgin mother of Jesus. God chose her. She is indeed blessed and can and should be called "blessed" by all Bible-believing, born-again Christians.

But many of the other titles given to her by the RCC are not in the Bible.

Have you ever wondered why there is not more about Mary in the Bible?

The reason is that the Bible is about someone else.... the only mediator and savior, our Lord Jesus Christ.

Jesus said: “You diligently study the Scriptures because you think that by them you possess eternal life. These are the Scriptures that testify about me...†(John 5:39).

OC, you can bow down to Mary. I will continue to bow down to Jesus.

Maranatha!

I see you skulked away from my direct question again, gary, I take this as a concession to the correctness of my exegesis.

Now I will correct you on the matter of praxis:
You have set up yet another false dichotomy (thanks to Thessalonian for bringing this element into the debate).
: Bow down to Mary OR bow down to Christ.

Honor should be ubiquitous Gary, but the rebellious know little of this. I myself have much to learn, as I ought to more carefully honor Christ within you.

Regarding "bowing down to Christ:"
Gary, my bowing down to Christ is so far beyond my bowing down to Saints it isn't even worthy of mentioning in the same breath, were it not for the fact that my prostrating myself (latria) before Christ is teaching me to pay honor (proskeneo) before those who bear His image- even as marred as that image typically is.

Your unwillingness to honestly engage in debate to its logical end is unfortunate, Gary, for you miss the blessing found at the end of where your own thinking is leading.

Regards
James

 

[AwedbyGod]

It seems to me that the Sola Scriptura rank and file don't hold that position for honest reasons. I think they use it in order to prop up their own dogmatic thinking in a sort of bunker mentality. The sad part is that they seem unwilling or unable to see the obvious error in their own thinking. Perhaps it is encoded in their DNA. At any rate the disorder seems to be deeply ingraned and all but immune to logic, reason, and truth.


<queue reply about how: "I ain't need nothin but tha baible, son.">

:roll:

 

[thessalonian]

I've answered yours (questions)

Nope. I am still waiting for the Bible chapter/verses to support the RCC dogmas of (1) The Perpetual Virginity of Mary (2) The Immaculate Conception (Mary born sinless) (3) The Sinlessness of Mary (Mary remaining sinless) (4) The Bodily Assumption of Mary (Mary bodily assumed into heaven) (5) The Mediatorship of Mary (Mary called/titled "Mediatrix" and "Co-redemptrix") (6) Praying to Mary
http://www.christianforums.net/viewtopi ... 517#202517

Well when you remove the hands from over your ears when I start showing you parrellels that lead up to the scriptures that demonstrate these things, then I will finishing answering. By the way, as for praying to Mary I gave a rather long response to that to someone. I believe it was you. I'll have to check.