I was expecting this passage... and again I understand the objection.
The Apostle Paul also says in the same Epistle that "all Israel will be saved" (11:26). Does this mean that there will be an apocatastasis? Will all Israel in fact be saved?
In another Epistle to the Corinthian Church, the Apostle Paul tells them that they "were enriched in everything by Him in all utterance and all knowledge". (1 Corinthians 1:5). Does this mean that everything the Corinthian Church knew and said was inspired by God? Then why does the same Apostle rebuke the Church in Corinth in the same Epistle for being "still carnal. For where there are envy, strife, and divisions among you, are you not carnal and behaving like mere men?" (1 Corinthian 3:3)?
Elsewhere, we read: "And they both [Zechariah and Elizabeth] were 'righteous' in the sight of God, walking blamelessly in 'all' the commandments and requirements of the Lord" (Luke 1:6).
In the sight of God, who cannot look upon any sin, they both were 'righteous'...
So, yes we do read: "As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one"
But is this literally true? Didn't God say Noah was Righteous? (Genesis 7:1) Was God wrong?
So we see a foreshadow (i.e. a type) of Mary in Hannah. Does this mean that Hannah is Mary's equal? We also find a foreshadow of our Lord Jesus in King David. Does this mean that David is an equal to Jesus Christ? I would argue that to use the foreshadows of Mary and Jesus against them is reckless and does grave harm to our Faith but perhaps you feel it is more important to sew doubt concerning Mary even at the expense of Jesus Himself?
I have never spoken of Mary's sinfulness or sinlessness so it is unclear to me why you argue this point. It is a Consensual Teaching that Mary's righteousness was imputed by Grace through Faith even in the Earliest Church Teaching. We cannot turn to the most extreme positions (Immaculate Conception) and speak of consensus. When we speak of the Consensual Teachings of the Church we are looking at 'all' the teachings and seeking the canon (i.e. measure). I am not speaking about the Canon of the Scriptures but the 'true' canon or measure which enlightens us to a fruitful encounter with the Scriptures. Some call this Holy Orthodoxy... Others call it Holy Tradition.
We should open a new topic title simply 'heresy' because I encounter it 'a lot' here and yet question if the 'inmates have taken over the Asylum' in this regards. No historical study of the consensual teachings would agree with you in your assertion I'm not sure if you and others honestly understand this.
And yet we believe that the Holy Spirit dwells in every Believers... And yet we believe that we are participates in the 'Body of Christ'... Sons of God... not only Sons... but Heirs. Heirs of what?
Perhaps you misunderstand the Teaching of Theosis (i.e. Deification). It is simply the recognition that we, as lovers of Christ, all naturally wish, and are commanded to be perfect. The Lord commands: 'Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect' (Matt. 5:48). And the Apostle Paul admonishes: "In malice be ye children, but in understanding be men' (I Cor. 14:20). Eslewhere he says: "Stand perfect and complete in all the will of God' (Cor. 4:12); and again: 'Let us go on unto perfection' (Heb. 6:1). The same commandment is also found in the Old Testament. Thus God says to Israel in Deuteronomy: 'Thou shalt be perfect with the Lord thy God' (Deut. 18:13). And David advised his son Solomon: 'And thou, Solomon my son, know thou the God of thy father, and serve him with a perfect heart and with a willing mind' (1 Chron. 28:9). After all this we cannot fail to see that God demands from Christians the fullness of perfection, that is, that we should be perfect in all virtues.
If God asks this of us then surely God also provides a means to achieve it... and the only means that know to achieve perfection is with and in Christ who is our brother, the first of many.
Yes, we can see in Mary a type for every Christian. It would only be our humility and recognition of our distance from God's Holiness which would cause us to pause in comparing ourselves to Her but I see your point and I agree.
It is more Scriptural than you know.
There is only 'one Church' and 'one Body of Christ' though there be 'many parts' there are still 'all one'.
[qoute]God works through local churches which he has ordained in this day and age, just as in the Old Testament, he ordained the Temple to be the symbolic dwelling place of God.[/quote]
Symbolic? Do you also believe the Ark was 'symbolic'?
And yet we are not polytheists. We just claim that every believer is 'the' temple of God (except Mary). :laugh:
Neither is 'Trinity'... yet we claim it as Doctrine.
Elisabeth spoke to Mary: "And how have I deserved that this honor should be granted to me, that the mother of my Lord should come to me" (Luke 1:43)?
As I have stated before, I'm not an apologist, I understand your convictions in upholding the identity of this Baptist Forum. I know you've spent a great deal of time crafting a body of knowledge that would serve you in defending your Faith as your Tradition has taught you. I'm only pointing out that there is a body of knowledge that is older and more complete than being 'a Baptist' it's called being 'a Christian' and it holds to the Consensual Teachings of the Church of the Living God as it was from the beginning, is now and will ever be.
Be Well.
Jesus Repudiates Mariolatry Volume II
Discussion in 'Other Christian Denominations' started by D28guy, Dec 8, 2007.
Page 12 of 17
-
The Greek word for "perfect" is teleios. It means mature or complete. It in no way means sinless, and that is not what Christ was speaking about, for no man can be perfect as in sinless. Only God is sinless. The Lord was teaching us to be complete in Him. We are complete when we exercise or show forth the fruit of the Spirit. The Old English word "perfect" also means "complete."
-
Being 100% divine had nothing to do with Mary or Biology.
Biology is not a pathway to being God
What was Mary the "wiser than"?
What was Mary teaching "to add" when he was a small child?
What was Mary "correcting" when he was a small child?
What was Mary "protecting" when he was an infant?
...
"Corrector of God"
"Wiser than God"
"Protector of God"
... Odd how these all serve to exault the HUMAN parent to "QUEEN of the UNIVERSE" rather than exaulting Christ.
To the point that (predictably) we NOW see pictures and images of MARY the adult holding a "tiny Jesus" and we read about worship/prayers "at Mary's altars" -
Point and Match.
in Christ,
Bob -
Bob,
You said...
But of course. There is nothing new under the sun. The Goddess must be worshipped....
-
Matt Black Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
-
Matt Black Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
-
Matt Black Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
-
Matt Black Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
-
Matt,
DHK said...
We are going according to what is found in scriptures from the 1st century, and they have Gods annointing on them.
Mike. -
Matt Black Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
I said 'affirmed', not 'invented'. The truth is very much there in Scripture as I have demonstrated.
-
What is the link/reference for that? -
So here is the perfect opportunity to show how an appeal to "tradition" will fix the problem here - in THIS example of "difference of opinion".
hmmm funny how that is not a solution based on your own criteria "existence of difference proves the source for doctrine is insufficient"
in Christ,
Bob -
-
Seriously Bob, my statement responding to DHK “laying aside” Divinity says nothing of Mary being responsible for Christ’s Divinity.
Mary supplied the Flesh, hence the term “Incarnation”. Christ’s Divinity was clothed with humanity through the “Incarnation” via Mary.
Educate yourself...you'll be better off.
ICXC NIKA
- -
The issue is not HOW the purveyors of error convinced themselves to introduce non-Biblical doctrines and positions regarding the "mother of God" nor even how they foisted those errors onto the Christian world.
(you seem to argue that IF they had a good thought in their heads while doing it then the error can be overlooked) -
Quote:
Originally Posted by BobRyan
Being 100% divine had nothing to do with Mary or Biology.
Biology is not a pathway to being God
So the Bible NEVER (no not even once in all of scripture) refers to Mary as "MOTHER of GOD" or "WISER than GOD" or "PROTECTOR OF GOD" or "STRONGER than GOD" or "CORRECTOR of GOD" or "INSTRUCTOR of God".
This just isn't that hard to get.
in Christ,
Bob -
Matt Black Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
-
What saith the Scriptures?
"Now the birth of Jesus Christ was as follows: After His mother was betrothed to Joseph...." Matthew 1:18
Was Matthew wrong is saying Mary was the mother of Christ?
"And when they [the wise men] had come into the house, they saw the young Child with Mary His mother, and fell down and worshiped Him." Matthew 2:11
Again, it refers to the mother of the Child. Was Matthew wrong in saying Mary was His mother?
Or do you suppose the Child was other than Christ?
"But why is this granted to me, that the mother of my Lord should come to me?" (said Elizabeth to Mary) Luke 1:43
Was Elizabeth wrong is saying Mary was the mother of her Lord?
"And Joseph and His mother marveled at the things which were spoken of Him." Luke 2:33
Was Luke wrong in referring to Mary as His mother?
Or the "His" refer to someone other than Christ?
(Of course there are many more Scriptures stating that Mary was in fact the mother of Christ Jesus)
Do you now want to retract your statements that "Mary never was Christ's mother" and that "Christ had no mother"? -
Page 12 of 17