Honoring Mary as Protestants

To: TurkeyLurkey

Mary was human. She was the mother of a human, the Lord Jesus Christ, Who was also the begotten Son of God. That does not make Mary the mother of God.

The human Jesus IS the divine Jesus. If he is God, and Mary is his mother, how does that not make her the mother of God?

that the mother of my Lord (adonai, the sovereign, Master or Lord)should come to me?

Again, is not "my Lord" the same as Jesus? Who is God? How does this support your position that Mary is not the mother of God?

The Latin phrase is "Et unde hoc mihi, ut veniat mater Domini mei ad me?". Domini is used often in the Bible, and translates into my Lord, or "God" in just about every situation it's used.

81 posted on 09/08/2020 10:57:34 AM PDT by Svartalfiar

With God all things are possible.

True, but that doesn't offer proof for one way or the other. Trying to say that for the purpose of proving your point of human comprehension doesn't mean God did or did not fully separate the human Jesus from his divinity. Sure he could have, but did he?

It's a tangential non sequitor, there's no way to refute it but it doesn't do anything for either side of the argument. We could likewise argue over whether or not I watered the grass this morning. Well, it's raining right now. Sure, the grass is getting watered, but that doesn't say anything about whether or not someone watered it this morning.

82 posted on 09/08/2020 11:04:45 AM PDT by Svartalfiar

83 posted on 09/08/2020 1:13:05 PM PDT by TurkeyLurkey

You wrote, "The human Jesus IS the divine Jesus."

The part you have messed up in your syllogism is that The Divine Son existed from before even time was created and it was through the divine Son that all that was created was made. That was even before the name 'Immanuel', God with us/ Jeshua / Jesus was conceived in Mary's uterus.

BTW, conceived in her body refers to the already alive embryonic form of Jesus implanting in the uterine lining of Mary's body, so she cannot even be credited with contributing any DNA/Chromosomes to the embryonic age Jesus!

It is absolutely impossible for Mary the Mother of Jesus to have contributed ANYTHING to the divinity of Jesus as The Son from before time began. It is also impossible to show from scripture that Mary contributed any mitochondria to the cells in the gestating body of the male, Jesus. The Word of God (Who is ALSO The Son of God portion of the triune God) does tell us that the physical embryonic body of Jesus was put in Mary's uterus by GOD..

Now why would the Catholic religion want to confuse the issue of the Mother of Jesus calling her the mother of God? ... Think empowerment scheme and idolatry and satan's desire to diminish the status of The Son of God Who existed before even satan or Mary the Mother of Jesus.

84 posted on 09/08/2020 1:56:18 PM PDT by MHGinTN (A dispensation perspective is a powerful tool for discernment)

there is not any truth which could cut through to your dead soul.
Just don’t take that mark planned for you.
................................................
Well if my soul is dead, as apparently has been revealed to you by the Lord Himself, does it really matter if I take or don’t that mark that’s planned for me?

85 posted on 09/08/2020 2:45:34 PM PDT by fortes fortuna juvat

God left us the Holy Spirit to lead us
...................................
God didn’t leave us the Holy Ghost because the Holy Ghost IS God. And the very fact that the Holy Ghost plays an integral role in our salvation is itself proof that Luther’s sola scriptura notion is obviously false!

86 posted on 09/08/2020 2:56:39 PM PDT by fortes fortuna juvat

why not go with what John calls her twice in John 2? I.e., the mother of Jesus.
..............................................
Nothing wrong with using the phrase mother of Jesus so long as its use is not intended to deny the Deity of the Christ. And of course the phrase in no way changes the fact that Mary was His mother!

87 posted on 09/08/2020 3:12:00 PM PDT by fortes fortuna juvat

To: fortes fortuna juvat

God didn’t leave us the Holy Ghost

John 15:26 26 But when the Comforter is come, whom I will send unto you from the Father, even the Spirit of truth, which proceedeth from the Father, he shall testify of Me.
Now, who to believe? fortes fortuna juvat or God.

88 posted on 09/08/2020 3:19:29 PM PDT by BipolarBob (The cost of abortion is a human sacrifice.)

To: fortes fortuna juvat

Yes, there is a BIG difference. All descendants from Adam are born with a dead spirit. Jeshua explained this to Nicodemus in John 3, and He explained what one must do to come alive in spirit using the simple example of the brass snake.

When the Body of Christ is removed in the Departure and the lawless one is revealed, then the command to take the Mark happens, the Holy Spirit will be anticipating saving the spirit of ANY WHO WILL call upon The Lord Christ to save them as they refuse the Mark.

The Revelation of John has these thus saved arriving in Heaven as attendees for the Wedding. These are not the 'One True Church of ALL born agains' taken to Himself When Jesus gathers us into the air to meet Him in new bodies, but they are whisked away to Heaven by calling upon Jesus to save their spirit. Too many of them will have been relieved of their head on earth so they are in spirit in Heaven.

It makes so much difference when one calls upon the Lord to be born again. The Bride of Christ does that without the proof event of the Departure. A number so great John could not count them all are born again and whisked to Heaven after they are murdered for not worshipping the Beast. The Revelation of John reveals it all, when he, John, is raised to Heaven in spirit to be instructed of what is and what is to come thereafter.

89 posted on 09/08/2020 3:52:45 PM PDT by MHGinTN (A dispensation perspective is a powerful tool for discernment)

To: fortes fortuna juvat

Read 1 John 3:9 ... GOD DOES LEAVE US The Holy Spirit when we are Born Again, His seed of eternal life ABIDES in our born again spirit, to be united to a new body at the Gathering to Him as He revealed in John 14 to hid closest friends.

90 posted on 09/08/2020 3:54:59 PM PDT by MHGinTN (A dispensation perspective is a powerful tool for discernment)

To: Leaning Right; dartuser; ifinnegan; CondoleezzaProtege; jimfr; eens; Sparticus; ...

Mother of G-d” - I don’t understand why there should be any controversy with that phrase. Anyone who has read the Gospels knows exactly what the word “mother” means there. If the Catholics would like to focus a bit more on Mary than most, then why not? And if some other group would like to focus a bit more on John the Baptist than most, again why not? It’s not like either group is putting someone ahead of Christ.

Because Catholics have effectively put Mary above what God says of her, and many have effectively put her ahead of Christ. 1 Corinthians 3:21 states, “Therefore let no man glory in men. “ and 1 Corinthians 4:6 states that ye might learn in us not to think *of men* above that which is written.” Although this is in the context of sectarianism due to Corinthians elevating particular leaders above that which is written in Scripture, the principle applies to elevating Mary above that which is written.

Many Catholic Marian attributions even much parallel even that of Christ:

For in the the Catholic quest to almost deify Mary, it is taught by Catholics*,

As the the Son of God has a unique unique relationship with the Persons of the Trinity, so also Mary is said to have a unique relationship with all three Persons of the Trinity;
As Christ is the express image of God, and highly exalted above all under the Father, having the primary position among all creation, so Mary is declared to be the greatest saint of all, and the first of all creatures, and as having a certain affinity with the Father, with a pre-eminent resemblance which she bears to the Father;
As Christ was called the Son of God, indicating ontological oneness, so Mary is called the Mother of God (which naturally infers the same, and is not the language of Scripture, which even clarifies Israel birthed Christ "according to the flesh, God blessed for ever": Rm. 9:4,5);
As the the Son of God supernaturally, spiritually makes believing souls into children of God, Mary is said to be the mother of Christians in "supernatural and spiritual generation."
As Christ was sinless, so Mary was;
As the Lord remained a virgin, so also Mary;
As the Lord was bodily ascended into Heaven, so Mary also was;
As the Holy Spirit directs believers to be "Looking unto Jesus the author and finisher of our faith," (Hebrews 12:2) in whom believes are accounted a holy nation, (1 Pt. 2:9) so Catholicism teaches that believers are to "turn their eyes to Mary" in whom "the Church is already the 'all-holy." (CCC 829)
As the Father made Christ Lord over all things, so Mary is said to be enthroned above all creation (all other believers have to wait for their crowns) and exalted by the Lord as Queen over all things;
As Christ is given all power in heaven and in earth, so Mary is “surpassing in power all the angels and saints in Heaven.”
As Christ is given all power on Heaven and on earth, so Mary is said to have (showing some restraint) “almost unlimited power;” and showing less restraint, to be "omnipotent" (by grace);
As God the Father made His Divine Son functionally the Lord over the universe, so Mary states, "I command what I will, and introduce whom I will."
As no man comes to the Father but through the Son, so it is taught that no one can come to the Son except through Mary in Heaven;
As no one can obtain mercy, be saved/redeemed or be delivered and know the Father but through the Son, so the same is said of Mary;
As those whom God has chosen will come to Him, so it is said that if Mary wills our salvation, and then we are sure to obtain it.
As the emphasis is upon Christ as the Creator through whom God (the Father) made all things, including Mary, so it is emphasized that uniquely “to her, Jesus owes His Precious Blood,” shed for the salvation of mankind, (the logic behind which can lead back to Eve);
As Scripture declares that Christ suffered for our sins, so Mary is said to have done so also, even all the consequences of sin;
As Christ redeemed mankind (as many as truly believe) with the Father and the Spirit, so it is said of Mary that "we might rightly say she redeemed the human race together with Christ."
As Christ saves us from the condemnation and death resulting from the fault of Adam, so it is taught that man was condemned through the fault of Eve, the root of death, but that we are saved through the merits of Mary; who was the source of life for everyone.
As all things come from the Father through the Son, so Mary is made to be the dispenser of all grace; that "through her are obtained every hope, every grace, and all salvation."
As believers have confidence through Christ, so Mary is extolled as being the foundation of all the believer's confidence.
As the Lord wills all souls to be saved through Christ, so it is said that it is God's will that we obtain everything through Mary.
And as the Lord called souls to come to Him to be given life and salvation, so (in misappropriation of the words of Scripture) it is said of Mary, “He that shall find me shall find life, and shall have salvation from the Lord;” “that through her are obtained every hope, every grace, and all salvation. For this is His will, that we obtain everything through Mary.”
As Christ is the King of the saints and over all kings, (Rv. 15:3; 17:14; 19:16) so Mary is made Queen of Heaven and the greatest saint, and that “Next to God, she deserves the highest praise;”
As Christ ever liveth to make intercession for the saints, so is Mary said to be in constant intercession;
as only to God is ascribed the power and privilege of hearing prayer from all flesh, so also is Mary extolled as doing so;
as believers only address God/Christ in prayer to Heaven, including in prostration before Him, so also do Catholics pray to Mary;
as believers only pray to God to have mercy on sinners, so Catholics beseech Mary to do so.
As Catholics (adding error to error) believe Christ gave His "real" flesh and blood to be eaten, so it is emphasized that Mary gave Him this, being fashioned out of Mary's pure blood and even being “kneaded with the admixture of her virginal milk,” so that she can say, "Come and eat my bread, drink the wine I have prepared" (Prov. 9:5);
And as Christ is given many titles of honor, so Mary also is, except that she is honored by Catholics with more titles than they give to the Lord Himself!

Mary was a holy, virtuous instrument of God, but of whom Scripture says relatively little, while holy fear ought to restrain ascribing positions, honor, glory and powers to a mortal that God has not revealed as given to them, and or are only revealed as being possessed by God Himself. But like as the Israelites made an instrument of God an object of worship, (Num. 21:8,9; 2Kg. 18:4) Catholics have magnified Mary far beyond what is written and warranted and even allowed, based on what is in Scripture.

In addition, although (technically) Mary is not to be worshiped in the same sense that God is worshiped, yet the distinctions between devotion to Mary and the worship of God are quite fine, and much due to the psychological appeal of a heavenly mother (especially among those for whom Scripture is not supreme), then the historical practice of Catholics has been to exalt Mary above that which is written. As the Catholic Encyclopedia states, "By the sixteenth century, as evidenced by the spiritual struggles of the Reformers, the image of Mary had largely eclipsed the centrality of Jesus Christ in the life of believers." (Robert C. Broderick, ed., The Catholic Encyclopedia, revised and updated; NY: Thomas Nelson Publishers, 1987, pp.32,33)

The practice of praying to departed saints and Mary was one that developed, helped by pagan influences, for Scripture provides no example of any believer praying to anyone in Heaven by the Lord, and reveals that doing otherwise was a practice of pagans, including to the “Queen of Heaven.” (Jer. 44:17,18,19,25). The Catholic Encyclopedia speculates that a further reinforcement of Marian devotion, “was derived from the cult of the angels, which, while pre-Christian in its origin, was heartily embraced by the faithful of the sub-Apostolic age. It seems to have been only as a sequel of some such development that men turned to implore the intercession of the Blessed Virgin. This at least is the common opinion among scholars, though it would perhaps be dangerous to speak too positively. Evidence regarding the popular practice of the early centuries is almost entirely lacking...,” (Catholic Encyclopedia > Devotion to the Blessed Virgin Mary) Yet, as expected, it imagines this practice came from the apostles and NT church, but which never exampled or instructed it, and instead showed that the believer has immediate access to God in the Divine Christ, (Heb. 10:19), who is the all sufficient and immediate intercessor between God (the Father) and man. (Heb. 2:17,18; 4:15,16) To the glory of God

And indeed 1 Timothy 2:5 states that “For *there is* one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus,” and by Him believers have “boldness to enter into the holiest by the blood of Jesus. (Hebrews 10:19) Otherwise we would die if we tried. (cf. Leviticus 16:2)

It should be kept in mind that my objection is not to Mary being honored as the holy chosen vessel to bring forth Christ, but to the excess ascriptions, appelations, exaltation, and adoration (and the manner of exegesis behind it), ascribed to the Catholic Mary, whether officially or by Catholics (with implicit sanction of authority). And which presumes that bowing down to a statute and attributing to the person it represent attributes and glory that are uniquely ascribed to God/Christ in Scripture, including the power to hear in Heaven incessant multitudinous mental prayers addressed to them from earth and respond to them, and imploring such for heavenly aid, would be understood and vindicated as merely being "hyperdulia," and not "latria" (which Rome states is the manner of adoration reserved for God).

As making that distinction itself is presumptuous, the Scriptures do not sanction religiously bowing down to any statue in supplication, nor supplies even one single prayer to anyone in Heaven but the Lord (crying "Abba, Father," Gal. 4:6; not "Mama, Mother"), nor in instructions on who to pray to ("our Father who art in Heaven," not "our Mother").

And there is simply not even one example of the presumably (by Catholics) common basic practice of believers praying to created beings in Heaven (PTCBIH) (http://peacebyjesus.net/ptds.html) among the over 200 prayers by believers in Scripture (http://peacebyjesus.net/BIBLE-PRAYERS.html), or instructions on who to address.

And as said, one would have a hard time in Bible times explaining kneeling before a statue and praising the entity it represented in the unseen world, beseeching such for Heavenly help, and making offerings to them, and giving glory and titles and ascribing supernatural attributes to such which are never given in Scripture to created beings (except to false gods), including having the uniquely Divine power glory to hear and respond to virtually infinite numbers of prayers individually addressed to them.

Which manner of "adulation" could constitute worship in Scripture (Words for worship in the NT (http://peacebyjesus.net/Words_used_for_worship.html)), yet Catholics imagine that by playing word games then they can avoid crossing the invisible line between mere "veneration" and worship.

The only prayers or offerings in Scripture to anyone else in Heaven (http://peacebyjesus.net/ptds.html) is by pagans, including to the only Queen of Heaven see therein, by souls who were as adamant as many Catholics in defending their blasphemous practice:

As for the word that thou hast spoken unto us in the name of the Lord, we will not hearken unto thee. But we will certainly do whatsoever thing goeth forth out of our own mouth, to burn incense unto the queen of heaven, and to pour out drink offerings unto her, as we have done, we, and our fathers, our kings, and our princes... (Jeremiah 44:16-17 (http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3739006/bible/jeremiah/44:16-17/))

91 posted on 09/09/2020 4:56:59 PM PDT by daniel1212 (Trust the risen Lord Jesus to save you as a damned and destitute sinner + be baptized + follow Him)

To: ifinnegan; CondoleezzaProtege; ConservativeMind; ealgeone; Mark17; fishtank; boatbums; Luircin; ...

Why cut it off? Post it all.

Well, what RC would want this statement included?

The Protestant suspicion that to honour Mary is not to honour her as a creaturely object of God’s benevolence, but as a quasi-transcendent subject somehow alongside God, is certainly not unfounded, having a basis not merely in bastardised Catholic practice but also in Catholic dogmatics.

One would have a hard time in Bible times explaining kneeling before a statue and praising the entity it represented in the unseen world, beseeching such for Heavenly help, and making offerings to them, and giving glory and titles and ascribing supernatural attributes to such which are never given in Scripture to created beings (except to false gods), including having the uniquely Divine power glory to hear and respond to virtually infinite numbers of prayers individually addressed to them.

Moses, put down those rocks! I was only engaging in hyper dulia, not adoring her. Can't you tell the difference?

Which manner of "adulation" could constitute worship in Scripture , yet Catholics imagine that by playing word games then they can avoid crossing the invisible line between mere "veneration" and worship.

92 posted on 09/09/2020 4:57:50 PM PDT by daniel1212 (Trust the risen Lord Jesus to save you as a damned and destitute sinner + be baptized + follow Him)

To: Responsibility2nd

Mary was a sinner? But, but.... how could a sinful woman give birth to a sin free savior?

How could a sinful woman give birth to a sin free Mary? A Cath response is that with God all things are possible, which is true, for God's pure words also come thru holy but imperfect men, but the issue is that of lack of warrant for both Mary being preserved from sinning and from consummating her marriage, and being bodily assumed into Heaven and crowned as its queen, as well as being an object of prayer, etc. etc.

A manifest principle in Scripture is that whenever there is a notable exception to the norm among even far less important characters than Mary, then Scripture usually mentions it. From extreme age (Methuselah), to excess size, fingers (Goliath), strength (Samson), barrenness (Hannah), hearing a speaking donkey (Balaam), a celibate marriage (David and Abishag), prolonged celibacy (Anna), ascetic diet (John the Baptist), the supernatural transport of Phillip, the atypical singleness of Paul and Barnabas, and uncharacteristic duplicity of Peter, and the surpassing labor and suffering of Paul, birth by a virgin (Mary), to Christ being sinless, which is mentioned at least thrice.

However, absolutely zero is stated as concerns Mary being sinless, or for that matter a perpetual virgin, etc., while the evidence weighs on the side of her also being afflicted from the effects of a sinful nature and also having a consummated marriage.

93 posted on 09/09/2020 5:04:53 PM PDT by daniel1212 (Trust the risen Lord Jesus to save you as a damned and destitute sinner + be baptized + follow Him)

One would have a hard time in Bible times explaining kneeling before a statue and praising the entity it represented in the unseen world,

And there lies the problem. Standards of reference for truth being scripture or tradition/church.

Until RC uses the scripture for testing truth, it is like talking to a fencepost......................

They even rewrote the 10 commandments. Compare them sometime.

94 posted on 09/09/2020 5:05:13 PM PDT by PeterPrinciple (Thinking Caps are no longer being issued but there must be a warehouse full of them somewhere.)

To: fortes fortuna juvat

Let me think about it awhile before I abandon 20 centuries of Church doctrine and embrace yours instead!

Actually Catholic Marian devotion is one of the many distinctive Catholic teachings that are not manifest in the only wholly inspired substantive authoritative record of what the NT church believed (which is Scripture, in particular Acts through Revelation, which best shows how the NT church understood the gospels).

95 posted on 09/09/2020 5:06:09 PM PDT by daniel1212 (Trust the risen Lord Jesus to save you as a damned and destitute sinner + be baptized + follow Him)

To: Leaning Right

Mother of God says something different than mother of Jesus.

Mary is never referred to as mother of God in Scripture. It was always mother of Jesus.

If that’s how the Holy Spirit saw fit to identify her, I don’t see where men think they have the right to come along and think they can improve on the work of God.

For some reason Catholics don’t think calling Mary *mother of Jesus* as she is in Scripture is good enough.

96 posted on 09/09/2020 5:16:18 PM PDT by metmom (...fixing our eyes on Jesus, the Author and Perfecter of our faith.....)

To: Svartalfiar; TurkeyLurkey

The Latin phrase is "Et unde hoc mihi, ut veniat mater Domini mei ad me?". Domini is used often in the Bible, and translates into my Lord, or "God" in just about every situation it's used.

Technically it is the Latin equivalent of the Hebrew Adonai and the Greek Kyrios, and which is not the word for God, but can be used for both civil rulers and as denoting the functional title for God who is the Divine Master. Elizabeth did not expressly call Jesus her God, but while Mary functionally was the mother of Israel - "according to the flesh" - a distinction the Holy Spirit is careful to make in Rm. 9:5 when speaking of Christ coming out of Israel, yet as a uncritically used formal title it goes beyond the langiage of Scripture as does Co-redemptrix. Maybe you like the latter also.

*"Dominus, plural Domini, in ancient Rome, “master,” or “owner,” particularly of slaves. The name became the official title for the emperor, beginning with Diocletian, who reigned from ad 284 to 305; and thus he and his successors are often referred to as the dominate (dominatus), as contrasted with the earlier principate (principatus) of Augustus and his successors. Some earlier emperors, such as Caligula (reigned ad 37–41), however, also had used the title. By Trajan’s day it was the common form of address to the emperor. - https://www.britannica.com/topic/dominus

97 posted on 09/09/2020 5:22:42 PM PDT by daniel1212 (Trust the risen Lord Jesus to save you as a damned and destitute sinner + be baptized + follow Him)

To: PeterPrinciple

And there lies the problem. Standards of reference for truth being scripture or tradition/church. Until RC uses the scripture for testing truth, it is like talking to a fencepost...................... They even rewrote the 10 commandments. Compare them sometime.

Rather than writing being what God manifestly made His most-reliable means of authoritative preservation. (Exodus 17:14; 34:1,27; Deuteronomy 10:4; 17:18; 27:3,8; 31:24; Joshua 1:8; 2 Chronicles 34:15,18-19, 30-31; Psalm 19:7-11; 102:18; 119; Isaiah 30:8; Jeremiah 30:2; Matthew 4:5-7; 22:29; Luke 24:44,45; John 5:46,47; John 20:31; Acts 17:2,11; 18:28; Revelation 1:1; 20:12, 15;

And thus as abundantly evidenced , as written and established, Scripture became the transcendent supreme standard for obedience and testing and establishing truth claims as the wholly Divinely inspired and assured Word of God;

Thus the veracity of even apostolic oral preaching could be subject to testing by Scripture; (Acts 17:11)

Moreover, men such as the apostles could speak as wholly inspired of God and also provide new public revelation thereby (in conflation with what had been written), neither of popes and councils claim to do;

In Catholicism Scripture is effectively too often made a servant to be abused in being compelled to support teachings that they can only wish were taught in the only wholly God-inspired and faithful substantive record of what the NT church believed.

98 posted on 09/09/2020 5:30:04 PM PDT by daniel1212 (Trust the risen Lord Jesus to save you as a damned and destitute sinner + be baptized + follow Him)

The atonement is about Jesus, not Mary.

Whatever state Mary was in has nothing to do with Jesus atoning death on the cross.

There’s not one Scripture that can be found that hangs the validity of the atonement on Mary.

99 posted on 09/09/2020 5:30:31 PM PDT by metmom (...fixing our eyes on Jesus, the Author and Perfecter of our faith.....)

To: Svartalfiar; TurkeyLurkey

Edit: but while Mary functionally was the mother of ~~Israel~~ Jesus "according to the flesh" - a distinction the Holy Spirit is careful to make in Rm. 9:5 when speaking of Christ coming out of Israel - yet as a uncritically used formal title it goes beyond the language of Scripture, as does Co-redemptrix. Maybe you like the latter also.

100 posted on 09/09/2020 5:32:24 PM PDT by daniel1212 (Trust the risen Lord Jesus to save you as a damned and destitute sinner + be baptized + follow Him)

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794