Posted on 04/30/2010 8:03:48 AM PDT by Quix
.
|
7 “When you pray, don’t babble on and on as people of other religions do. They think their prayers are answered merely by repeating their words again and again. 8 Don’t be like them, for your Father knows exactly what you need even before you ask him! 9 Pray like this: Our Father in heaven, --New Living Translation 7And when you pray, do not heap up phrases (multiply words, repeating the same ones over and over) as the Gentiles do, for they think they will be heard for their much speaking. [I Kings 18:25-29.] 8Do not be like them, for your Father knows what you need before you ask Him. 9Pray, therefore, like this: 15But if you do not forgive others their trespasses [their [j]reckless and willful sins, [k]leaving them, letting them go, and [l]giving up resentment], neither will your Father forgive you your trespasses. --Amplified Pray with Simplicity 5"And when you come before God, don't turn that into a theatrical production either. All these people making a regular show out of their prayers, hoping for stardom! Do you think God sits in a box seat? 6"Here's what I want you to do: Find a quiet, secluded place so you won't be tempted to role-play before God. Just be there as simply and honestly as you can manage. The focus will shift from you to God, and you will begin to sense his grace. 7-13"The world is full of so-called prayer warriors who are prayer-ignorant. They're full of formulas and programs and advice, peddling techniques for getting what you want from God. Don't fall for that nonsense. This is your Father you are dealing with, and he knows better than you what you need. With a God like this loving you, you can pray very simply. Like this: 16-18"When you practice some appetite-denying discipline to better concentrate on God, don't make a production out of it. It might turn you into a small-time celebrity but it won't make you a saint. If you 'go into training' inwardly, act normal outwardly. Shampoo and comb your hair, brush your teeth, wash your face. God doesn't require attention-getting devices. He won't overlook what you are doing; he'll reward you well. |
Mark Kirby: O Mother of Good Counsel, I am all thine, Most Holy Mary, There is no part of my life that is not open to thee, I want to be completely transparent with thee, Praying in this way, I can be at rest, |
.
.
.
Our Lord was very clear when he said, “Upon this Rock I will build My Church.”
Protestants can go off on whatever absurd tangent they want to try to prove that Peter isn’t the Rock, but they CANNOT ESCAPE the reality that “My Church” refers to a SINGLE CHURCH.
Oh, it's the Joachim and Anna stuff, right?
I bought this book in the early '70's. It cost $7!!!!! YOU can scarcely get a good paperback for that kind of money these days.
But to get back to Irenaeus - in what sense is what he says "authoritative"? That is, to me this is not strictly speaking theology or systematic theology.
I guess I'm still not seeing what the problem is with that passage. It just seems evident and pleasant to me. It think this is important when viewed in the old way:
For in the same way the sin of the first created man (protoplasti) receives amendment by the correction of the First-begotten,Here's what I think he's saying: We can think of Jesus as the second Adam. The first Adam seals the deal on the Fall. The second Adam seals the deal on our redemption.
So
The first woman took the first human step in the Fall. The Fall was, um, perfected when Adam ate the apple. Up until he wussed out, we had a chance.
So an analogy is that the first human step in our redemption could be said to have been taken by Mary (in all the ways Irenaeus says) but of course it takes the second Adam to perfect it.
I feel unclear in my expression and fuzzy in my alleged mind. Sorry. But I still don't see what there is in this passage to be upset about.
“So an analogy is that the first human step in our redemption could be said to have been taken by Mary (in all the ways Irenaeus says) but of course it takes the second Adam to perfect it.”
No, not quite. But when you no longer “feel unclear in my expression and fuzzy in my alleged mind.” we'll have to talk again.
“So an analogy is that the first human step in our redemption could be said to have been taken by Mary (in all the ways Irenaeus says) but of course it takes the second Adam to perfect it.”
No, not quite.
Well, in what did I go astray?
WONDERFULLY EXCELLENT.
I don’t know how to encourage folks to reflect more on the original question.
I’m still stunned and at a loss.
Sadly, Dear Sister.
So if such ideas are found in Scripture, please inform me!
I do think AG's summary is good (though the link to my humble but brilliant post is broken.)
If you think I make these comments without looking up the meaning of what was written you are wrong.
The fact remains you changed your tag yesterday. Likewise it is true you were posting on a thread about (and supporting the idea of) "giving your all to Mary."
And "giving one's all to Mary" is indeed "contrary to Scripture."
I’ve been blessed by both.
Thanks for your ping.
Thanks.
I’ll crawl out of the grief at some point.
Very sad and troubling, to me, still.
the only reason the following words seem so difficult for some folks to understand . . . in thought, words and actions . . .
A-G:
is the very human
aversion to focusing all glory on God.
There's a problem with that, however.
I suspect that if folks want a different standard with different rewards accordingly,
they'll have to find a spare VERY DIFFERENT MULTIVERSE lying around somewhere.
I haven't noticed any in my neighborhood.
He need never lie. He never wants to.
That is a big difference from He cannot lie
And thus, as the human race fell into bondage to death by means of a virgin, so is it rescued by a virgin;This is where one starts to want the original (instead of this klunky translation).
BUT, as I read this, Mary's "rescue" is presented as, so to speak, proportionate to Eve's getting us in the soup. SO, again as I read it (past tense, I was just sort of reading along ...) Ireneaus was saying that Eve contributes to our condemnation -- starts the process by which we end up in the soup -- and Mary contributes to our redemption.
And that's the say in which Mary's "fiat" balances Eve's disobedience. I'm seeing it like this:
| Eve | Adam | Mary | Jesus |
|---|---|---|---|
| 'starts' fall by eating 'apple', offering to adam | Completes Fall by accepting 'apple' from Eve | 'starts' redemption by accepting vocation and 'bearing the fruit', to wit: Jesus | completes redemption by life, cross, etc. |
| listens to lucifer | ... | Listens to Gabriel | ... |
| takes fruit from tree | ... | bears fruit FOR tree (cross) | ... |
As to the "patroness" (advocate) thing, for us we all get to choose for whom we pray, and Mary by (through grace) getting it right seems suited to advocate for Eve. I don't know what theological proposition arises from this.
I know some folks here have said some of Irenaeus is spurious, and I must say this line of thought, tabulation, tidying things up strikes me as kind of late medieval-- that's just an impression.
Amen!
Thank you oh so very much for sharing your insights, dearest sister in Christ!
Amen!
Truly, to God be the glory, not man, never man.
Thank you oh so very much for sharing your insights, dearest sister in Christ!
I would say that to read the relevant verse from Hebrews as making an ethical and metaphysical statement about the nature of Will, the relationship between potency and act in God, etc is to ask too much of it.
Hebrews says, He cannot lie (It IS Hebrews, right? whatever...) I say Lying is not a thing about which "can" or "cannot" can strictly speaking be used. Better to say that someone who lies cannot tell the truth.
It's the whole evil as a privation of good line of thought.
Yet you say, "she dispensed Him". Very bizarre
There are many examples in Scripture
of Angels appearing to mortals—’great mortals of the faith.’
Typically the mortal would fall down at their feet only to be reprimanded along the lines of . . .
NO WAY—GET UP! I’m merely a servant of the Most High as well.
There’s a lesson there.
It is impossible for God to lie.
He cannot do it. He cannot do *whatever He wants*.
That is a false premise and no argument built on it is even worth discussing even if you could construct an allegedly logical argument from it. It’d be a waste of time.
http://scripturetext.com/hebrews/6-18.htm
lol, some Gatsbys are greater than others
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.