1. Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

The Assumption of Mary

Discussion in 'Other Christian Denominations' started by BRIANH, Jul 29, 2008.

  1. Marcia

    Marcia Active Member

    Joined:
    May 12, 2004
    Messages:
    11,139
    Likes Received:
    1
    This was not uncommon in that time - widowed women had to depend on relatives to take care of them or they would be beggars. Jesus telling John to regard Mary as his mother was to entrust Mary to John's care. He was speaking to John - Jesus did not tell us nor does God say anywhere that Mary is the mother of all believers!
     
  2. Agnus_Dei

    Agnus_Dei New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2006
    Messages:
    1,399
    Likes Received:
    0
    Hi Marcia, since you know a little about the culture and custom of that time period and since we're already discussing Mary, let me ask you this.

    Was Mary "ever-virgin"? You just made a good case for it. Why would Jesus give care of His mother to St. John, instead of another son, which was the Jewish custom?

    In XC
    -
     
  3. Marcia

    Marcia Active Member

    Joined:
    May 12, 2004
    Messages:
    11,139
    Likes Received:
    1
    I think Jesus had half-brothers - James was one. I do not believe in the perpetual virginity of Mary.

    There is no reason for her to be perpetually virgin - to think this matters is to assume that sex is a sin between a husband and wife, but it clearly isn't. Why should she be perpetually virgin?

    I don't know why Jesus gave care of his mother to John but here are some guesses:
    1. The brothers were not there at the moment
    2. We know Jesus loved John and felt John would be the right one to care for Mary
    3. Jesus chose John for some other reason
    4. The brothers could not care for Mary; perhaps they were already caring for the widowed mothers of their wives

    I think the fact Jesus did this is in no way evidence for the perpetual virginity of Mary!
     
  4. mrtumnus

    mrtumnus New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2007
    Messages:
    400
    Likes Received:
    0
    I am reading your posts. I am just trying to follow the logic that because Mary followed the Jewish law and offered the required sacrifice prescribed by law for childbirth this proves she sinned. That's beyond stretching the intent of the text. It simply proves that she kept the law, and nothing beyond that. Had she not kept the law as required -- that would have been a sin.

    Quite similar to Jesus being baptized by John in order to fulfill all righteousness -- even though John's baptism was for repentance and forgiveness of sins. Presenting himself to John to be baptized did not mean he needed to repent or be forgiven. It meant he was honoring the ritual and its purpose.
     
  5. BRIANH

    BRIANH Member

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2006
    Messages:
    126
    Likes Received:
    0
    People use this argument often because as Marcia has pointed out there are reasons. There are a couple of things I will ask you Angus if you do not mind based upon YOUR perspective.

    Why did Jesus not give the care of his mother to his step brothers and her stepsons? They were close enough to travel together after all.

    and if that is not the tradition you believe..

    Why did Jesus not give the care of his mother to her own nephews. After all the brothers mentioned are really cousins..
     
  6. mrtumnus

    mrtumnus New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2007
    Messages:
    400
    Likes Received:
    0
    You're absolutely correct -- Jesus was bound to follow the commandment to honor his mother. This is why any attempts to present that he "distanced himself" and "ignored her" and even sometimes publicly dis-honored her (I'm not saying by you) are ridiculous. All of those things would be contrary to honoring his mother, which he fulfulled completely to perfection as he did all the commandments.

    Yet, he could have simply requested John to take care of Mary. Telling him to "Behold your mother" is telling John to see Mary as his own mother.



    I believe there is implicit Scriptural evidence for this. For the purpose of a discussion like this however, I simply will point out that from a "Bible-alone" perspective I would contend the most one could say is the Bible doesn't explicitly speak to whether or not Mary sinned.

    Mary needed a Redeemer because she was a human woman entering a fallen world, and her salvation was merited by Christ on the cross. Catholic theology has never quesitoned that. The belief is that her salvation was applied uniquely to her due to the unique role she was to play in the salvation story. Saving someone before they inevitably fall is the same as saving someone after they fall.




    There was no need to hide her away during the ministry of Christ. At the time the NT was written she was no longer with Jesus and the other disciples. She was living with John in Ephesus, and very much "hidden away". Christianity was growing. Persecutions were increasing. This is one possible reason they downplayed the role of Mary in their writing -- to protect her from both the overly zealous faithful, the curiosity seekers, and the persecutors. Certainly as good as any other assumption.



    [/QUOTE]I can certainly appreciate your opinions regarding that, and I have no desire to convert you. My simple point is that the idea that these doctrines are contrary to Scripture is not supported. They certainly may be contrary to the way some interpret Scripture. Individual interpretations are a dime a dozen.
     
  7. mrtumnus

    mrtumnus New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2007
    Messages:
    400
    Likes Received:
    0
    I think your assertion that he was putting Mary in "her proper place" would be much more substantiated if he had actually refused her request. The fact that he did indeed change the water into wine at her request, even though the time of his ministry had not yet come, sort of brings your interpretation of the event into question, don't you think?

    I'm not sure where Scripture speaks of any half-brothers of Jesus? They may well have been half-brothers in the eyes of society (Joseph's children) or cousins. Since Scripture nowhere indicates Mary gave birth to other children, it could be a very logical choice for him to choose John.

    I do not see how stretching out his arms towards all who do his will is showing disrespect toward Mary?

    Your willingness to so easily claim that Jesus failed to honor his mother amazes me. Was Jesus not required to "Honor his father and mother"? Did he not fulfill all of the commandments to perfection?

    Have you considered the title of "woman" was therefore meant to actually honor her? Consider another piece of Scripture I am surprised you did not quote:

    As Jesus was saying these things, a woman in the crowd called out, "Blessed is the mother who gave you birth and nursed you." He replied, "Blessed rather are those who hear the word of God and obey it."

    Many see this as a 'diss' of Mary. Other than the obvious (Jesus would not publicly dis-honor his mother) -- consider that Scripture teaches us that Mary was indeed blessed. It teaches us that she did indeed hear the word of God and obeyed -- at great personal risk I might add. So what does Jesus really mean here?

    The word 'rather' is key. Most apply the definition -- "on the contrary". You have to get pretty far down on the list to get to that definition though. How about the primary -- "with better reason". Or this one -- "more correctly speaking".

    So have you considered that what Jesus is saying is not that Mary was not blessed by being his physical mother, but more importantly she (and any of us) are even more blessed when we hear the word of God and obey? Probably not.

    The term 'woman' could well be in recognition of the fact that the importance of Mary being willing to obey God gains her a status even moreso than that of being his physical mother, and that is which he recognizes. Interesting interpretation, isn't it?

    But I would categorically reject your view that Jesus did not honor his mother and fulfill that commandment as perfectly as he did all the rest.
     
  8. mrtumnus

    mrtumnus New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2007
    Messages:
    400
    Likes Received:
    0
    And it also says that Mary is the mother of all the church's members. Not a contradiction.
     
  9. Amy.G

    Amy.G New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2006
    Messages:
    13,103
    Likes Received:
    4
    I think the phrase "behold your mother" means to care for her as his own mother and take her into his family as a member, not a guest. If this is the way Jesus meant it, then John would have certain Jewish oblilgations to care for her.



    But the Bible does say that Mary was a sinner. First of all, she was born to 2 parents who were sinners. Second, the only person in all of history to be sinless was Jesus. Third, we have scripture.

    Luk 1:46 And Mary said:
    "My soul magnifies the Lord,
    Luk 1:47 And my spirit has rejoiced in God my Savior.

    Jesus is the Savior to sinners.
    Mar 2:17 When Jesus heard [it], He said to them, "Those who are well have no need of a physician, but those who are sick. I did not come to call [the] righteous, but sinners, to repentance."*

    Rom 3:23 for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God,


    See how easy that is? You can use scripture to prove what is true. :)





    Mary was a human being who needed to be saved from her sins.



    You are saying that the apostles downplayed Mary's role, while at the same time neglecting an important doctrine? And this doctrine of Mary was revealed sometime later by people other than the apostles?


    You have proven my point that you cannot find the Marian doctrine in all of scripture. You have believed what the RCC has taught you. You need to search the scriptures to see if these things are true.

    Act 17:11 These were more fair-minded than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness, and searched the Scriptures daily [to find out] whether these things were so.
     
  10. mrtumnus

    mrtumnus New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2007
    Messages:
    400
    Likes Received:
    0
    It certainly isn't explicit evidence, but then again, Scripture doesn't give any explicit evidence she had more children either.

    The belief in the perpetual virginity of Mary has nothing to do with believing that sex between a husband and wife is a sin. There are many things which factor into the belief, but not that one. But many people do make the assumption that Mary and Joseph were a young couple, in love, planning to have a family. That is simply an assumption as nowhere in Scripture indicates that. There were many reasons for marriage in the Jewish culture.

    But if they were planning to be married and have a family, why did Mary bring up the topic of her virginity when the angel told her that in the future she would have a child? I can understand her response of "how can this be, I am a virgin" if the angel had said "Oh, by the way, you are pregnant". I can't quite see it as making much sense when she was told she was going to have a son in the future. Why did she not just assume she and Joseph would be having a son?
     
  11. DHK

    DHK <b>Moderator</b>

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2000
    Messages:
    37,982
    Likes Received:
    137
    Matthew 13:55-56 Is not this the carpenter's son? is not his mother called Mary? and his brethren, James, and Joses, and Simon, and Judas?
    56 And his sisters, are they not all with us? Whence then hath this man all these things?

    His brothers: James, Joses, Simon, Judas. Those were their names. They were the children of Mary and Joseph, and therefore half-brothers. He had half-sisters as well mentioned in verse 56. Mary was not a perpetual virgin. She was a mother that had many children, after Christ was born.

    The reason that Jesus entrusted Mary to John, was spiritual. John was the beloved disciple. He was also a disciple of means, and had a house where he was financially able to take care of Mary. Remember that Mary and Joseph were a poor family.
    He did not entrust her to anyone of his brothers because they were not saved. Both Jude and James (authors of the respective books of Jude and James) could have taken care of her, but they were not saved until after the resurrection. Jesus would not entrust the care of Mary to someone who was antagonistic to Him and His ministry even if they were related to Him.

    Jude 1:1 Jude, the servant of Jesus Christ, and brother of James, to them that are sanctified by God the Father, and preserved in Jesus Christ, and called:

    Galatians 1:19 But other of the apostles saw I none, save James the Lord's brother.
     
  12. Doubting Thomas

    Doubting Thomas Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2003
    Messages:
    2,618
    Likes Received:
    7

    I'm not RC or EO, but I'll hazard a guess..

    Jesus committed His Mother, Mary, to John, His Beloved Disciple, instead of James or his other step-brothers because:
    (1) the latter were not blood relatives of Mary; AND
    (2) the latter were not believers in Christ at the time.

    Christ committed the care of His Mother, a faithful follower of her Son to the end, to John, who also faithfully stayed by Christ's side even at the Cross. I could say more, but that'll do for now...
     
  13. Doubting Thomas

    Doubting Thomas Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2003
    Messages:
    2,618
    Likes Received:
    7
    Ah...but where in the Scriptures does it actually say they were children of Mary?
     
  14. BRIANH

    BRIANH Member

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2006
    Messages:
    126
    Likes Received:
    0
    I dont get the first one. He did not give her to people she has known for..from this perspective 30 years because...they were not blood relatives? It sounds like you are saying he is protesting step children. Please clarify if you will. I am confused.
     
  15. Doubting Thomas

    Doubting Thomas Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2003
    Messages:
    2,618
    Likes Received:
    7
    It's "BOTH...AND".
     
  16. mrtumnus

    mrtumnus New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2007
    Messages:
    400
    Likes Received:
    0
    Which at a minimum gets back to someone in the NT having a relationship with Mary as their mother.

    Do you believe that at some point Mary ceased to be the mother of Jesus?




    I must have missed the part where the Bible says that Mary is a sinner?

    Mary speaks in terms of God being her Savior. Not will be her Savior in the future. So when do you think God became her Savior?

    In terms of "all have sinned" -- there are quite a few places in Scripture where it's quite evident that the use of "all", or "none" or "no one" is not speaking about all individuals, but rather generically about mankind. Some individuals are quite logically exempt from the 'all'. What in your view qualifies this to be different?







    My thoughts are the apostles did not reveal everything they knew explicitly within Scripture.




    I never said I cannot find it. I think Scripture implicitly supports it. What I will consistently say is that one cannot "search the scriptures" and prove it is false.

    Interesting Scripture -- they were searching the OT to see if they could verify what Paul was telling them about Christ. The NT was not yet there to search. They combined what Scripture foretold and accepted the teaching of Paul that Jesus actually rose from the dead -- for this was nowhere contained in Scripture at the time.

    My mother will be the first to tell you that I never was one to just believe what people taught me. ;) I have diligently searched the Scriptures. I believe these things about Mary most of all because they are rooted in an understanding of the nature of God and bring glory to God most of all.
     
  17. mrtumnus

    mrtumnus New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2007
    Messages:
    400
    Likes Received:
    0
    So was he actually the carpenter's son? I think not. Could they have been sons of Joseph? Possibly. Society certainly would have seen them as the brothers of Jesus, just as they saw Joseph as his father as evidenced by your quote. Could they be cousins? Possibly. In other places Scripture refers to people as brothers and sisters when it's clear they aren't. "Brothers" was quite a generic term to the Jews who viewed extended family as family.

    For example, if you take it all to mean literal brothers and sisters, then Mary had a sister named Mary. Odd thing wouldn't it be for parents to have two daughters and name them both Mary? Incidently, the other Mary had sons names James and Joses as well, who would have been cousins of Jesus.

    Scripture nowhere says that Mary had other children after the birth of Christ. Period.


    How can you prove from Scripture that not one of these "brothers" were saved? Sounds like speculation to me.
     
  18. steaver

    steaver Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2004
    Messages:
    10,443
    Likes Received:
    182
    Faith:
    Non Baptist Christian
    Oh brother !

    I have been reading this thread and this is the most grossly fabricated doctrine I think I have ever witnessed being defended.

    I would wager, if I were a wagering man, that those who preach Mary was sinless and the Mother Queen of heaven could also prove Santa Clause and the Easter Bunney as real from God's Holy Word.

    Unbelieveable.:praying:
     
  19. Amy.G

    Amy.G New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2006
    Messages:
    13,103
    Likes Received:
    4
    That's good. Then search the scriptures and post all that they teach about the doctrine of Mary. But at this point all you have given me is the RCC teachings. What do the scriptures say?

    An example of this type of scripture search would be the doctrine of the Trinity. The word "Trinity" does not appear in scripture, yet I can give you verse after verse after verse where the doctrine is clearly revealed.

    That is what I am asking you to do regarding the doctrine of Mary. Find scriptures that reveal this doctrine that you so whole heartedly believe. If the doctrine is true, you will be able to prove it from scripture.
     
  20. mrtumnus

    mrtumnus New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2007
    Messages:
    400
    Likes Received:
    0
    I have searched. I am satisified that the doctrines do not contradict Scripture and that they speak to the nature and glory of God first and foremost. I understand there are those who automatically make an assumption that can't be -- if anybody really searches (as they have) it would be clear. I think we all come from pre-disposed beliefs it can be difficult to shake.

    Regarding the Trinity, ever read a rebuttal by a JW as to why the doctrine of the Trinity is not revealed in Scripture? Using the Bible alone, they will defend their belief as supported by Scripture without reservation. The clear definition of the nature of the Trinity and of Christ took the church centuries with many heresies along the way, all claiming Scripture as for their side.
     
Loading...