Are You More Blessed Than the Virgin Mary?

Desiring God ^ | 12/15/2010 | Jonathan Parnell

[RnMomof7]

In the sermon descriptively entitled, “That Hearing and Keeping the Word of God Renders a Person More Blessed Than Any Other Privilege That Ever God Bestowed on Any of the Children of Men,” Jonathan Edwards writes: The hearing and keeping the word of God brings the happiness of a spiritual union and communion with God. ‘Tis a greater blessedness to have spiritual communion with God and to have a saving intercourse with him by the instances of his Spirit and by the exercise of true devotion than it is to converse with God externally, to see the visible representation and manifestations of his presence and glory, and to hear his voice with the bodily ears as Moses did. For in this spiritual intercourse the soul is nigh unto and hath more a particular portion than in any external intercourse. ‘Tis more blessed to be spiritually related to Jesus Christ—to be his disciples, his brethren and the members—than to stand in the nearest temporal relation, than to be his brother or his mother. Come, Thou Long Expected Jesus, ed. Nancy Guthrie, 57.

[bkaycee]

Poor Mary

Yes, hopefully, God has sheilded her from all the falsehood done in her name.

[RnMomof7]

The disciples didn’t drink blood at the Passover meal. Jesus didn’t drink His own blood at the Passover meal. We don’t drink blood at communion.

Jesus confirms that the wine did not become His blood here

Mat 26:28 For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins.
Mat 26:29 But I say unto you, I will not drink henceforth of this fruit of the vine, until that day when I drink it new with you in my Father's kingdom.

[RnMomof7]

They do not know scripture, so they do not recognize it..

[RnMomof7]

Either way, does that answer your question "..is the spiritual less REAL than the physical

No that does not answer my question to you ... Is the physical presence of Christ more real and beneficial than the spiritual ...

[RnMomof7]

Everytime I see this thread bumped I stop and think... no I am not as blessed as the woman who gave birth to my LORD and SAVIOR! AND... everytime I have to see this bumped through this most holy season of CELEBRATION of the birth of my LORD, which was facilitated by the blessed virgin mother MARY... it is so offensive and saddening to have to encounter this headline.... again and again and again... akin to flogging.

Sorry you feel that way..I think it might be because of a misreading... the word is not BLESS ED like special or worthy of veneration..but blessed in that we are blessed by God as much as Mary was, because we have the infallible word of God to comfort and bless us .

Merry Christmas

[bkaycee]

To believe that God chose a sinful woman to bear his Son is quite a stretch. Catholic or Protestant it is disrespectful in the least and at best.. something you could never know nor prove.

Where have I heard that sentiment before? Oh, I know.

Luke 15:2 Both the Pharisees and the scribes began to grumble, saying, "This man receives sinners and eats with them."

[RnMomof7]

so, are you going back on your statement that the Ark = type of Christ?

Is there a reading problem here?? NO the ark is a type of Christ..BUT BY YOUR DOCTRINE Mary is..so according to catholic belief all of is that have Christ richly dwelling in us are as much an ark as mary

[Cronos]

In fact caww, good point -- this is the second post by RNMomof7 on Mary. I wonder why such non-Catholics are so obsessed?

As you, caww, said Yes, I think so too as is evidenced in the posts. Interesting that during this time of year where we celebrate Christ's birth...the fact the discussions are NOT about Him, rather Mary ..was she or not a virgin...was she or not sinless, etc. etc. etc. It's all about her

Actually -- you should notice that this thread was posted by RnMo7 -- who left the Church and is pretty rabidly against it -- perhaps your groups should realise that during this time of year where we celebrate Christ's birth. Why do you guys instead seem to just talk about anything BUT Christ? Weird....

[bkaycee]

God forbids the drinking of blood. It was reiterated in the NT, one of the very few OT regulations to be done so.

Exactly! Acts 15:20 but that we write to them that they abstain from things contaminated by idols and from fornication and from what is strangled and from blood.

"In the unbloody sacrifice of the Mass, celebrated by priests, the same life-giving victim is offered up. ... He is sacrificed for us in the mystery of this sacred oblation.

http://www.papalencyclicals.net/Pius09/p9amant1.htm

"Nothing is greater or holier than the unbloody sacrifice of the Mass." -Pope Pius IX (the infallible), Amantissimi Redemptoris

Rom 3:25 God presented Christ as a sacrifice of atonement, through the shedding of his blood—to be received by faith.

Heb 9:22 In fact, the law requires that nearly everything be cleansed with blood, and without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness.

Clearly, the unbloody "sacrifice" is no sacrifice at all. It, admittidely, does not (cannot) perfect anyone.

Communion was never meant to be a continuation, immolation, one in the same sacrifice, but a memorial of thanksgiving for those who recieve it. "Do this in REMEMBORANCE of Me"

[Quix]

INDEED.

[Mad Dawg]

Wow, am I a lousy guy to ask this question of! After a decades long fast, I find Aquinas so congruent with my alleged manner of thinking ... I do think that there is a peril in scholastic thought: one can think that the explanations and distinctions are more important than they really are. I’ll be interested in what others say.

[bkaycee]

Mat 26:28 For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins.

Mat 26:29 But I say unto you, I will not drink henceforth of this fruit of the vine, until that day when I drink it new with you in my Father's kingdom.

Another interesting twist. Will Christ be drinking His own Blood in heaven with us?

Did they pharisees protest that the Christians were drinking blood? Why not?

[Mad Dawg]

..so according to catholic belief all of is that have Christ richly dwelling in us are as much an ark as mary

Well, sholem aleichem! The penny begins to drop! Of course "just as much" is a phrase that could bear some parsing. Only if one, in a gnostic-tending way, utterly despises the flesh would one claim absolute present equivalence between the way in which and the degree to which the Word abides in the redeemed and the way He abode in Mary. But in general it seems you are stumbling toward what we teach.

[bkaycee]

How laughable is that teaching. Deception breeds deception and it knows no bounds.

It would be laughable if it wasn't so sad and tragic.

[presently no screen name]

I agree. However, common sense should shake some eyes open - what that pope says/does about their Mary - realize infallibility is non existent but idol worship is. Since they won’t take God’s Word as Truth, their own sense should see the obvious. They believe it because they are told it without seeing any result of it. They don’t take God’s Word as Truth but no problem w/believing ‘infallibility ‘ for a pope - because they are told. How dumb can one be and still breathe.

[Dr. Eckleburg]

If the ark is Christ than none of us can or will ever be the ark

If on the other hand the ark IS MARY containing Christ ..THEN every SAVED man or woman is like the ark..containing Christ..

AMEN! Flawless logic and precise Scriptural understanding.

The problem my friend is with the Catholic position

As is so often the case.

[Cronos]

the ark is a type of Christ..

So you are saying that Christ is just a container? A container for God?

Why would your group believe that Jesus Christ is just a container for God? Doesn't your group realise that Jesus Christ is Lord, God?

[Cronos]

So, wait a minute don't you believe that the Holy Spirit can dwell within us?

[Cronos]

Did you understand that Lutherans do not believe in consubstantiation?

If you say "Lutherans do not believe in transubstantiation the physical stays the physical... I understand their teaching of con substaniation" when your understanding is at the very basics wrong (namely that they do not even believe in consubstantiation) I consider that similar to saying you "fully understand Catholicism".

Why does your post 619 presume to tell Lutherans what they believe in?

If a lutheran tells one what he believes in, it's better to say "oh, thank you" and learn rather than dispute further and tell him 'no, that's not what you believe in, let me tell you what you believe in".

[presently no screen name]

1. So (*question*)do you think that St. Thomas was not blessed?

You take one Scripture and try to make doctrine out of it.

What did Jesus say - WITHOUT YOU ADDING TO IT? He was addressing those who have not seen Him. If you can't understand that - as IT IT WRITTEN - I say it's caused by too much catechism and too much of man's way of doing things.

Do you think you can read that Scripture as IT IS WRITTEN and take from it what it is saying? You might benefit from that exercise. Is Jesus saying who isn't blessed or saying who is blessed? Why then are you asking me and making an assumption on something that isn't addressed? Don't add or take away anything from His Word.