Mary Alone

For those deep thinkers out there.
Post Reply
User avatar
Irish-Dane
I'm a pro at tobacco canning
I'm a pro at tobacco canning
Posts: 33109
Joined: Wed Jan 17, 2007 6:00 pm
Location: The beautiful mountains of Western North Carolina
Contact:

Re: Mary Alone

Post by Irish-Dane » Thu Apr 05, 2018 10:00 am

Gabriel wrote:
Mon Apr 02, 2018 3:46 pm
Ah, Del in the Theology Forum. It has been way too long since I've eavesdropped on one of those discussions. Good times. No sarcasm, I'm enjoying this one.
Agreed. When this thread started I hoped it wouldn't die out quickly but bring about good discussion. Mind you, that discussion I am not qualified or quantified to engage in, but I do enjoy reading it all.
It's not available because if you try it you will die. Your face will melt off and your children will weep over your exploded body. --Colton

User avatar
Del
Sneaky Snusser
Sneaky Snusser
Posts: 43986
Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2008 6:00 pm
Location: Madison, WI
Contact:

Re: Mary Alone

Post by Del » Thu Apr 05, 2018 10:02 am

tuttle wrote:
Thu Apr 05, 2018 9:00 am
I may be vastly oversimplifying things here, but I think the contention isn't that Mary, in faith, said "Yes", but that Protestants would say that Mary's "Yes" is submissive while Catholics would say that Mary's "Yes" is permissive.
I'll leave it to Wosbald to make this complicated.

I'll just say, "Yes."

Mary's obedient "yes" is as important as Abraham's obedience.
- God told Abraham to sacrifice Isaac. Abraham set himself to obeying this difficult and horrible command.... And after he passed the test, Abraham was rewarded with being the Father of the People who would receive the Savior of the world.
Gen 22:15ff wrote: A second time the angel of the Lord called to Abraham from heaven 16 and said: “I swear by my very self—oracle of the Lord—that because you acted as you did in not withholding from me your son, your only one, 17 I will bless you and make your descendants as countless as the stars of the sky and the sands of the seashore; your descendants will take possession of the gates of their enemies, 18 and in your descendants all the nations of the earth will find blessing, because you obeyed my command.”
- Just as Abraham could have refused to obey the Lord, so also Mary could have refused to receive Christ for the world.

We need a savior because Eve said "No" to God. (And because each of us often says "No.")

We have a Savior because:
- Abraham said "Yes" to God.
- Mary said "Yes" to God.
- and Jesus said "Yes" to God.
G.K. Chesterton — 'It is terrible to contemplate how few politicians are hanged.'

User avatar
tuttle
Tomnoddy Attercop
Tomnoddy Attercop
Posts: 16187
Joined: Tue Dec 02, 2008 6:00 pm
Location: Middle-west
Contact:

Re: Mary Alone

Post by tuttle » Thu Apr 05, 2018 10:30 am

wosbald wrote:
Thu Apr 05, 2018 9:13 am
+JMJ+
tuttle wrote:
Thu Apr 05, 2018 9:00 am
wosbald wrote:
Thu Apr 05, 2018 8:35 am
Joshoowah wrote:
Mon Apr 02, 2018 11:21 pm
Del touches on something within Classical Christianity that I believe, or at least think, has long been forgotten in the Protestant tradition, that is, Mary representing Eve and Jesus Adam in the "new creation." Just as both genders were part of Creation's fall, both are part of its redemption. It's nothing new, really, as Augustine, Ignatius, and Athanasius all touch on these themes. Now, I'm not fully in tune with the Catholic Church's teaching on Mary, but I am tracking and in general agreement with the premise of it. Mary is an integral part of the Incarnation that cannot be forgotten or swept over, if we're to have a holistic biblical theology. Genesis-to-Revelation, it's all a creation narrative, harkening back to that original failure.
I really think that you hit the nail squarely on the head back on the first page, and I've wondering if anyone would develop it.
back on page 1, Joshoowah wrote:
Mon Apr 02, 2018 2:20 am
[…]

… I point this out to say that even with a direct revelation from God there can be doubt and questioning. It is what makes the action of "faith" so unique as well as difficult.
Faith seen as "being faithful". As "action" (greek: ergon, ἔργον).

Wiktionary: ἔργον. Defined as "1. deed, doing, action" or as "2. labor, work, task".

Strong's: G2041 - ἔργον. KJV Translation Count — Total: 176x
The KJV translates Strong's G2041 in the following manner: work (152x), deed (22x), doing (1x), labour (1x).

There's a whole lot implied here vis-à-vis Mary, if faith is seen as "action", and how this relates to her "Yes" and whether (or not, as Jester protested) we needed it. It would seem to immediately imply that there is human work involved precisely in the Incarnation itself. That the Incarnation, itself, is humanly-participatory work/action.
I may be vastly oversimplifying things here, but I think the contention isn't that Mary, in faith, said "Yes", but that Protestants would say that Mary's "Yes" is submissive while Catholics would say that Mary's "Yes" is permissive.
What we're really talking about though, is whether faith, as Josh suggested, is a "being faithful". Whether faith is an action. A work.

And if being faithful is a work, then where is the work in "submission"? And if there is no work, then would that make the Protestant Mary faithless?
I don't think anyone disagrees with the idea that 'being faithful' is an action. Call it a work if you want. The Scriptures confirm that faith apart from works is dead.

My argument that Mary's "yes" was submissive is that it was more like a servant accepting and submitting to the commands of an authority over her. The angel did not come with a request: "Will you allow the Holy Spirit to come upon you in order that you will conceive in your womb and bear a son?", But he came with a proclamation: "You will conceive in your womb and bear a son."

And Mary, recognizing her place in the scheme of this grand story, calls herself the servant of the Lord and humbly accepts this pronouncement. "Let it be done to me according to your word" was not a permissive statement, but a humble recognition of her submission. That's no little thing. She could have been outraged or saddened or could have tried to justify this angelic visit as some strange nightmare. She could have tried to avoid the outcome of her calling like Jonah, and perhaps God would have used his creation to shock her into belief. But that's all conjecture because the reality is that Mary humbly accepted her calling with great faith.
"The Evangelium has not abrogated legends; it has hallowed them" -JRR Tolkien

"Better to die cheerfully with the aid of a little tobacco, than to live disagreeably and remorseful without." -CS Lewis

User avatar
wosbald
Lonergan Fan Club President
Lonergan Fan Club President
Posts: 23511
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2008 6:00 pm
Location: Cleveland, Ohio
Contact:

Re: Mary Alone

Post by wosbald » Thu Apr 05, 2018 11:11 am

+JMJ+
tuttle wrote:
Thu Apr 05, 2018 10:30 am
wosbald wrote:
Thu Apr 05, 2018 9:13 am
tuttle wrote:
Thu Apr 05, 2018 9:00 am
wosbald wrote:
Thu Apr 05, 2018 8:35 am
Joshoowah wrote:
Mon Apr 02, 2018 11:21 pm
Del touches on something within Classical Christianity that I believe, or at least think, has long been forgotten in the Protestant tradition, that is, Mary representing Eve and Jesus Adam in the "new creation." Just as both genders were part of Creation's fall, both are part of its redemption. It's nothing new, really, as Augustine, Ignatius, and Athanasius all touch on these themes. Now, I'm not fully in tune with the Catholic Church's teaching on Mary, but I am tracking and in general agreement with the premise of it. Mary is an integral part of the Incarnation that cannot be forgotten or swept over, if we're to have a holistic biblical theology. Genesis-to-Revelation, it's all a creation narrative, harkening back to that original failure.
I really think that you hit the nail squarely on the head back on the first page, and I've wondering if anyone would develop it.
back on page 1, Joshoowah wrote:
Mon Apr 02, 2018 2:20 am
[…]

… I point this out to say that even with a direct revelation from God there can be doubt and questioning. It is what makes the action of "faith" so unique as well as difficult.
Faith seen as "being faithful". As "action" (greek: ergon, ἔργον).

Wiktionary: ἔργον. Defined as "1. deed, doing, action" or as "2. labor, work, task".

Strong's: G2041 - ἔργον. KJV Translation Count — Total: 176x
The KJV translates Strong's G2041 in the following manner: work (152x), deed (22x), doing (1x), labour (1x).

There's a whole lot implied here vis-à-vis Mary, if faith is seen as "action", and how this relates to her "Yes" and whether (or not, as Jester protested) we needed it. It would seem to immediately imply that there is human work involved precisely in the Incarnation itself. That the Incarnation, itself, is humanly-participatory work/action.
I may be vastly oversimplifying things here, but I think the contention isn't that Mary, in faith, said "Yes", but that Protestants would say that Mary's "Yes" is submissive while Catholics would say that Mary's "Yes" is permissive.
What we're really talking about though, is whether faith, as Josh suggested, is a "being faithful". Whether faith is an action. A work.

And if being faithful is a work, then where is the work in "submission"? And if there is no work, then would that make the Protestant Mary faithless?
[…]

… The angel did not come with a request: "Will you allow the Holy Spirit to come upon you in order that you will conceive in your womb and bear a son?", But he came with a proclamation: "You will conceive in your womb and bear a son."

[…]
To me this sounds like the angel essentially saying, "Look, this is gonna happen one way or the other, so you might as well relax and try to enjoy it."

If so, then "the holy rape of the soul", indeed.

ImageImage

"[T]he emergency of irregular migration has to be met with justice, solidarity and mercy. Forms of collective expulsion, which do not allow for the suitable treatment of individual cases, are unacceptable."
— Pope Francis, Morocco

User avatar
Jester
Brother of Tuttle
Brother of Tuttle
Posts: 2695
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2016 1:10 pm
Location: Pleasant Hill, MO

Re: Mary Alone

Post by Jester » Thu Apr 05, 2018 11:24 am

wosbald wrote:
Thu Apr 05, 2018 11:11 am
+JMJ+
tuttle wrote:
Thu Apr 05, 2018 10:30 am
wosbald wrote:
Thu Apr 05, 2018 9:13 am
tuttle wrote:
Thu Apr 05, 2018 9:00 am
wosbald wrote:
Thu Apr 05, 2018 8:35 am
Joshoowah wrote:
Mon Apr 02, 2018 11:21 pm
Del touches on something within Classical Christianity that I believe, or at least think, has long been forgotten in the Protestant tradition, that is, Mary representing Eve and Jesus Adam in the "new creation." Just as both genders were part of Creation's fall, both are part of its redemption. It's nothing new, really, as Augustine, Ignatius, and Athanasius all touch on these themes. Now, I'm not fully in tune with the Catholic Church's teaching on Mary, but I am tracking and in general agreement with the premise of it. Mary is an integral part of the Incarnation that cannot be forgotten or swept over, if we're to have a holistic biblical theology. Genesis-to-Revelation, it's all a creation narrative, harkening back to that original failure.
I really think that you hit the nail squarely on the head back on the first page, and I've wondering if anyone would develop it.
back on page 1, Joshoowah wrote:
Mon Apr 02, 2018 2:20 am
[…]

… I point this out to say that even with a direct revelation from God there can be doubt and questioning. It is what makes the action of "faith" so unique as well as difficult.
Faith seen as "being faithful". As "action" (greek: ergon, ἔργον).

Wiktionary: ἔργον. Defined as "1. deed, doing, action" or as "2. labor, work, task".

Strong's: G2041 - ἔργον. KJV Translation Count — Total: 176x
The KJV translates Strong's G2041 in the following manner: work (152x), deed (22x), doing (1x), labour (1x).

There's a whole lot implied here vis-à-vis Mary, if faith is seen as "action", and how this relates to her "Yes" and whether (or not, as Jester protested) we needed it. It would seem to immediately imply that there is human work involved precisely in the Incarnation itself. That the Incarnation, itself, is humanly-participatory work/action.
I may be vastly oversimplifying things here, but I think the contention isn't that Mary, in faith, said "Yes", but that Protestants would say that Mary's "Yes" is submissive while Catholics would say that Mary's "Yes" is permissive.
What we're really talking about though, is whether faith, as Josh suggested, is a "being faithful". Whether faith is an action. A work.

And if being faithful is a work, then where is the work in "submission"? And if there is no work, then would that make the Protestant Mary faithless?
[…]

… The angel did not come with a request: "Will you allow the Holy Spirit to come upon you in order that you will conceive in your womb and bear a son?", But he came with a proclamation: "You will conceive in your womb and bear a son."

[…]
To me this sounds like the angel essentially saying, "Look, this is gonna happen one way or the other, so you might as well relax and try to enjoy it."

If so, then "the holy rape of the soul", indeed.
I would be a lot more cautious in my words if I were you. You are indeed calling the God of all creation a rapist.
FIGHT LAUGH FEAST

“Liberal Christianity” may be more appealing to the masses than “conservative Christianity,” -TNLawPiper

I am become meme,
Destroyer of shorts -Elon

User avatar
coco
Uniquely Duggish
Uniquely Duggish
Posts: 32499
Joined: Sun Feb 01, 2009 6:00 pm
Location: Sweet Home Alabama
Contact:

Re: Mary Alone

Post by coco » Thu Apr 05, 2018 11:27 am

Jester wrote:
Thu Apr 05, 2018 11:24 am
wosbald wrote:
Thu Apr 05, 2018 11:11 am
+JMJ+
tuttle wrote:
Thu Apr 05, 2018 10:30 am
wosbald wrote:
Thu Apr 05, 2018 9:13 am
tuttle wrote:
Thu Apr 05, 2018 9:00 am
wosbald wrote:
Thu Apr 05, 2018 8:35 am
Joshoowah wrote:
Mon Apr 02, 2018 11:21 pm
Del touches on something within Classical Christianity that I believe, or at least think, has long been forgotten in the Protestant tradition, that is, Mary representing Eve and Jesus Adam in the "new creation." Just as both genders were part of Creation's fall, both are part of its redemption. It's nothing new, really, as Augustine, Ignatius, and Athanasius all touch on these themes. Now, I'm not fully in tune with the Catholic Church's teaching on Mary, but I am tracking and in general agreement with the premise of it. Mary is an integral part of the Incarnation that cannot be forgotten or swept over, if we're to have a holistic biblical theology. Genesis-to-Revelation, it's all a creation narrative, harkening back to that original failure.
I really think that you hit the nail squarely on the head back on the first page, and I've wondering if anyone would develop it.
back on page 1, Joshoowah wrote:
Mon Apr 02, 2018 2:20 am
[…]

… I point this out to say that even with a direct revelation from God there can be doubt and questioning. It is what makes the action of "faith" so unique as well as difficult.
Faith seen as "being faithful". As "action" (greek: ergon, ἔργον).

Wiktionary: ἔργον. Defined as "1. deed, doing, action" or as "2. labor, work, task".

Strong's: G2041 - ἔργον. KJV Translation Count — Total: 176x
The KJV translates Strong's G2041 in the following manner: work (152x), deed (22x), doing (1x), labour (1x).

There's a whole lot implied here vis-à-vis Mary, if faith is seen as "action", and how this relates to her "Yes" and whether (or not, as Jester protested) we needed it. It would seem to immediately imply that there is human work involved precisely in the Incarnation itself. That the Incarnation, itself, is humanly-participatory work/action.
I may be vastly oversimplifying things here, but I think the contention isn't that Mary, in faith, said "Yes", but that Protestants would say that Mary's "Yes" is submissive while Catholics would say that Mary's "Yes" is permissive.
What we're really talking about though, is whether faith, as Josh suggested, is a "being faithful". Whether faith is an action. A work.

And if being faithful is a work, then where is the work in "submission"? And if there is no work, then would that make the Protestant Mary faithless?
[…]

… The angel did not come with a request: "Will you allow the Holy Spirit to come upon you in order that you will conceive in your womb and bear a son?", But he came with a proclamation: "You will conceive in your womb and bear a son."

[…]
To me this sounds like the angel essentially saying, "Look, this is gonna happen one way or the other, so you might as well relax and try to enjoy it."

If so, then "the holy rape of the soul", indeed.
I would be a lot more cautious in my words if I were you. You are indeed calling the God of all creation a rapist.
Rather than dealing with the conception, the Protestants would do well to go back and have a closer look at what Wos said about the nature of faith.
There are many terrible attributes of the lowly cob. Not the least of them is that it makes you look like a doof.

User avatar
infidel
kthxbai
kthxbai
Posts: 6483
Joined: Mon Dec 28, 2009 6:00 pm

Re: Mary Alone

Post by infidel » Thu Apr 05, 2018 11:36 am

Jester wrote:
Thu Apr 05, 2018 11:24 am
wosbald wrote:
Thu Apr 05, 2018 11:11 am
+JMJ+
tuttle wrote:
Thu Apr 05, 2018 10:30 am

… The angel did not come with a request: "Will you allow the Holy Spirit to come upon you in order that you will conceive in your womb and bear a son?", But he came with a proclamation: "You will conceive in your womb and bear a son."

[…]
To me this sounds like the angel essentially saying, "Look, this is gonna happen one way or the other, so you might as well relax and try to enjoy it."

If so, then "the holy rape of the soul", indeed.
I would be a lot more cautious in my words if I were you. You are indeed calling the God of all creation a rapist.
If you read carefully you'll notice that he didn't call God a rapist, but pointed out that's essentially what tuttle said.
Inadvertently emboldening the cause of naïve Evolutionism since 2016.

"Who the hell ponders placentas? Dude, you're a freak of nature." - DepartedLight

"One man's saint is another man's infidel." - hugodrax

"Total. Freaking. Win." - Skip

User avatar
wosbald
Lonergan Fan Club President
Lonergan Fan Club President
Posts: 23511
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2008 6:00 pm
Location: Cleveland, Ohio
Contact:

Re: Mary Alone

Post by wosbald » Thu Apr 05, 2018 11:39 am

+JMJ+
Jester wrote:
Thu Apr 05, 2018 11:24 am
wosbald wrote:
Thu Apr 05, 2018 11:11 am
tuttle wrote:
Thu Apr 05, 2018 10:30 am
wosbald wrote:
Thu Apr 05, 2018 9:13 am
tuttle wrote:
Thu Apr 05, 2018 9:00 am
wosbald wrote:
Thu Apr 05, 2018 8:35 am
Joshoowah wrote:
Mon Apr 02, 2018 11:21 pm
Del touches on something within Classical Christianity that I believe, or at least think, has long been forgotten in the Protestant tradition, that is, Mary representing Eve and Jesus Adam in the "new creation." Just as both genders were part of Creation's fall, both are part of its redemption. It's nothing new, really, as Augustine, Ignatius, and Athanasius all touch on these themes. Now, I'm not fully in tune with the Catholic Church's teaching on Mary, but I am tracking and in general agreement with the premise of it. Mary is an integral part of the Incarnation that cannot be forgotten or swept over, if we're to have a holistic biblical theology. Genesis-to-Revelation, it's all a creation narrative, harkening back to that original failure.
I really think that you hit the nail squarely on the head back on the first page, and I've wondering if anyone would develop it.
back on page 1, Joshoowah wrote:
Mon Apr 02, 2018 2:20 am
[…]

… I point this out to say that even with a direct revelation from God there can be doubt and questioning. It is what makes the action of "faith" so unique as well as difficult.
Faith seen as "being faithful". As "action" (greek: ergon, ἔργον).

Wiktionary: ἔργον. Defined as "1. deed, doing, action" or as "2. labor, work, task".

Strong's: G2041 - ἔργον. KJV Translation Count — Total: 176x
The KJV translates Strong's G2041 in the following manner: work (152x), deed (22x), doing (1x), labour (1x).

There's a whole lot implied here vis-à-vis Mary, if faith is seen as "action", and how this relates to her "Yes" and whether (or not, as Jester protested) we needed it. It would seem to immediately imply that there is human work involved precisely in the Incarnation itself. That the Incarnation, itself, is humanly-participatory work/action.
I may be vastly oversimplifying things here, but I think the contention isn't that Mary, in faith, said "Yes", but that Protestants would say that Mary's "Yes" is submissive while Catholics would say that Mary's "Yes" is permissive.
What we're really talking about though, is whether faith, as Josh suggested, is a "being faithful". Whether faith is an action. A work.

And if being faithful is a work, then where is the work in "submission"? And if there is no work, then would that make the Protestant Mary faithless?
[…]

… The angel did not come with a request: "Will you allow the Holy Spirit to come upon you in order that you will conceive in your womb and bear a son?", But he came with a proclamation: "You will conceive in your womb and bear a son."

[…]
To me this sounds like the angel essentially saying, "Look, this is gonna happen one way or the other, so you might as well relax and try to enjoy it."

If so, then "the holy rape of the soul", indeed.
I would be a lot more cautious in my words if I were you. You are indeed calling the God of all creation a rapist.
So, I'm right?

Okay. Thanx for the confirmation.

I guess we're done here. Image

——————————————————————————————————
coco wrote:
Thu Apr 05, 2018 11:27 am
Rather than dealing with the conception, the Protestants would do well to go back and have a closer look at what Wos said about the nature of faith.
But remember, it's, firstly, what Josh said (or seemed to say). What we really need is for him to come back and weigh-in.

As for now … Image

ImageImage

"[T]he emergency of irregular migration has to be met with justice, solidarity and mercy. Forms of collective expulsion, which do not allow for the suitable treatment of individual cases, are unacceptable."
— Pope Francis, Morocco

User avatar
Jester
Brother of Tuttle
Brother of Tuttle
Posts: 2695
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2016 1:10 pm
Location: Pleasant Hill, MO

Re: Mary Alone

Post by Jester » Thu Apr 05, 2018 11:43 am

wosbald wrote:
Thu Apr 05, 2018 11:39 am
+JMJ+
Jester wrote:
Thu Apr 05, 2018 11:24 am
wosbald wrote:
Thu Apr 05, 2018 11:11 am
tuttle wrote:
Thu Apr 05, 2018 10:30 am
wosbald wrote:
Thu Apr 05, 2018 9:13 am
tuttle wrote:
Thu Apr 05, 2018 9:00 am
wosbald wrote:
Thu Apr 05, 2018 8:35 am
Joshoowah wrote:
Mon Apr 02, 2018 11:21 pm
Del touches on something within Classical Christianity that I believe, or at least think, has long been forgotten in the Protestant tradition, that is, Mary representing Eve and Jesus Adam in the "new creation." Just as both genders were part of Creation's fall, both are part of its redemption. It's nothing new, really, as Augustine, Ignatius, and Athanasius all touch on these themes. Now, I'm not fully in tune with the Catholic Church's teaching on Mary, but I am tracking and in general agreement with the premise of it. Mary is an integral part of the Incarnation that cannot be forgotten or swept over, if we're to have a holistic biblical theology. Genesis-to-Revelation, it's all a creation narrative, harkening back to that original failure.
I really think that you hit the nail squarely on the head back on the first page, and I've wondering if anyone would develop it.
back on page 1, Joshoowah wrote:
Mon Apr 02, 2018 2:20 am
[…]

… I point this out to say that even with a direct revelation from God there can be doubt and questioning. It is what makes the action of "faith" so unique as well as difficult.
Faith seen as "being faithful". As "action" (greek: ergon, ἔργον).

Wiktionary: ἔργον. Defined as "1. deed, doing, action" or as "2. labor, work, task".

Strong's: G2041 - ἔργον. KJV Translation Count — Total: 176x
The KJV translates Strong's G2041 in the following manner: work (152x), deed (22x), doing (1x), labour (1x).

There's a whole lot implied here vis-à-vis Mary, if faith is seen as "action", and how this relates to her "Yes" and whether (or not, as Jester protested) we needed it. It would seem to immediately imply that there is human work involved precisely in the Incarnation itself. That the Incarnation, itself, is humanly-participatory work/action.
I may be vastly oversimplifying things here, but I think the contention isn't that Mary, in faith, said "Yes", but that Protestants would say that Mary's "Yes" is submissive while Catholics would say that Mary's "Yes" is permissive.
What we're really talking about though, is whether faith, as Josh suggested, is a "being faithful". Whether faith is an action. A work.

And if being faithful is a work, then where is the work in "submission"? And if there is no work, then would that make the Protestant Mary faithless?
[…]

… The angel did not come with a request: "Will you allow the Holy Spirit to come upon you in order that you will conceive in your womb and bear a son?", But he came with a proclamation: "You will conceive in your womb and bear a son."

[…]
To me this sounds like the angel essentially saying, "Look, this is gonna happen one way or the other, so you might as well relax and try to enjoy it."

If so, then "the holy rape of the soul", indeed.
I would be a lot more cautious in my words if I were you. You are indeed calling the God of all creation a rapist.
So, I'm right?

Okay. Thanx for the confirmation.

I guess we're done here. Image

If God were to take your life tonight would you call him a murderer? Does anyone here actually think there is something God can take from you that does not already belong to him?
FIGHT LAUGH FEAST

“Liberal Christianity” may be more appealing to the masses than “conservative Christianity,” -TNLawPiper

I am become meme,
Destroyer of shorts -Elon

User avatar
infidel
kthxbai
kthxbai
Posts: 6483
Joined: Mon Dec 28, 2009 6:00 pm

Re: Mary Alone

Post by infidel » Thu Apr 05, 2018 11:47 am

Jester wrote:
Thu Apr 05, 2018 11:43 am
wosbald wrote:
Thu Apr 05, 2018 11:39 am
+JMJ+
Jester wrote:
Thu Apr 05, 2018 11:24 am
wosbald wrote:
Thu Apr 05, 2018 11:11 am
tuttle wrote:
Thu Apr 05, 2018 10:30 am
wosbald wrote:
Thu Apr 05, 2018 9:13 am
tuttle wrote:
Thu Apr 05, 2018 9:00 am
wosbald wrote:
Thu Apr 05, 2018 8:35 am
Joshoowah wrote:
Mon Apr 02, 2018 11:21 pm
Del touches on something within Classical Christianity that I believe, or at least think, has long been forgotten in the Protestant tradition, that is, Mary representing Eve and Jesus Adam in the "new creation." Just as both genders were part of Creation's fall, both are part of its redemption. It's nothing new, really, as Augustine, Ignatius, and Athanasius all touch on these themes. Now, I'm not fully in tune with the Catholic Church's teaching on Mary, but I am tracking and in general agreement with the premise of it. Mary is an integral part of the Incarnation that cannot be forgotten or swept over, if we're to have a holistic biblical theology. Genesis-to-Revelation, it's all a creation narrative, harkening back to that original failure.
I really think that you hit the nail squarely on the head back on the first page, and I've wondering if anyone would develop it.
back on page 1, Joshoowah wrote:
Mon Apr 02, 2018 2:20 am
[…]

… I point this out to say that even with a direct revelation from God there can be doubt and questioning. It is what makes the action of "faith" so unique as well as difficult.
Faith seen as "being faithful". As "action" (greek: ergon, ἔργον).

Wiktionary: ἔργον. Defined as "1. deed, doing, action" or as "2. labor, work, task".

Strong's: G2041 - ἔργον. KJV Translation Count — Total: 176x
The KJV translates Strong's G2041 in the following manner: work (152x), deed (22x), doing (1x), labour (1x).

There's a whole lot implied here vis-à-vis Mary, if faith is seen as "action", and how this relates to her "Yes" and whether (or not, as Jester protested) we needed it. It would seem to immediately imply that there is human work involved precisely in the Incarnation itself. That the Incarnation, itself, is humanly-participatory work/action.
I may be vastly oversimplifying things here, but I think the contention isn't that Mary, in faith, said "Yes", but that Protestants would say that Mary's "Yes" is submissive while Catholics would say that Mary's "Yes" is permissive.
What we're really talking about though, is whether faith, as Josh suggested, is a "being faithful". Whether faith is an action. A work.

And if being faithful is a work, then where is the work in "submission"? And if there is no work, then would that make the Protestant Mary faithless?
[…]

… The angel did not come with a request: "Will you allow the Holy Spirit to come upon you in order that you will conceive in your womb and bear a son?", But he came with a proclamation: "You will conceive in your womb and bear a son."

[…]
To me this sounds like the angel essentially saying, "Look, this is gonna happen one way or the other, so you might as well relax and try to enjoy it."

If so, then "the holy rape of the soul", indeed.
I would be a lot more cautious in my words if I were you. You are indeed calling the God of all creation a rapist.
So, I'm right?

Okay. Thanx for the confirmation.

I guess we're done here. Image

If God were to take your life tonight would you call him a murderer? Does anyone here actually think there is something God can take from you that does not already belong to him?
Uh, I guess wos was right 8O
Inadvertently emboldening the cause of naïve Evolutionism since 2016.

"Who the hell ponders placentas? Dude, you're a freak of nature." - DepartedLight

"One man's saint is another man's infidel." - hugodrax

"Total. Freaking. Win." - Skip

User avatar
Jester
Brother of Tuttle
Brother of Tuttle
Posts: 2695
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2016 1:10 pm
Location: Pleasant Hill, MO

Re: Mary Alone

Post by Jester » Thu Apr 05, 2018 11:58 am

infidel wrote:
Thu Apr 05, 2018 11:47 am
Jester wrote:
Thu Apr 05, 2018 11:43 am
wosbald wrote:
Thu Apr 05, 2018 11:39 am
+JMJ+
Jester wrote:
Thu Apr 05, 2018 11:24 am
wosbald wrote:
Thu Apr 05, 2018 11:11 am
tuttle wrote:
Thu Apr 05, 2018 10:30 am
wosbald wrote:
Thu Apr 05, 2018 9:13 am
tuttle wrote:
Thu Apr 05, 2018 9:00 am
wosbald wrote:
Thu Apr 05, 2018 8:35 am


I really think that you hit the nail squarely on the head back on the first page, and I've wondering if anyone would develop it.


Faith seen as "being faithful". As "action" (greek: ergon, ἔργον).

Wiktionary: ἔργον. Defined as "1. deed, doing, action" or as "2. labor, work, task".

Strong's: G2041 - ἔργον. KJV Translation Count — Total: 176x
The KJV translates Strong's G2041 in the following manner: work (152x), deed (22x), doing (1x), labour (1x).

There's a whole lot implied here vis-à-vis Mary, if faith is seen as "action", and how this relates to her "Yes" and whether (or not, as Jester protested) we needed it. It would seem to immediately imply that there is human work involved precisely in the Incarnation itself. That the Incarnation, itself, is humanly-participatory work/action.
I may be vastly oversimplifying things here, but I think the contention isn't that Mary, in faith, said "Yes", but that Protestants would say that Mary's "Yes" is submissive while Catholics would say that Mary's "Yes" is permissive.
What we're really talking about though, is whether faith, as Josh suggested, is a "being faithful". Whether faith is an action. A work.

And if being faithful is a work, then where is the work in "submission"? And if there is no work, then would that make the Protestant Mary faithless?
[…]

… The angel did not come with a request: "Will you allow the Holy Spirit to come upon you in order that you will conceive in your womb and bear a son?", But he came with a proclamation: "You will conceive in your womb and bear a son."

[…]
To me this sounds like the angel essentially saying, "Look, this is gonna happen one way or the other, so you might as well relax and try to enjoy it."

If so, then "the holy rape of the soul", indeed.
I would be a lot more cautious in my words if I were you. You are indeed calling the God of all creation a rapist.
So, I'm right?

Okay. Thanx for the confirmation.

I guess we're done here. Image

If God were to take your life tonight would you call him a murderer? Does anyone here actually think there is something God can take from you that does not already belong to him?
Uh, I guess wos was right 8O
Obviously not. Effing perverts. What kind of encounter do you imagine with the virgin Mary?

Mary was not given a choice but she did accept what was going to happen.
FIGHT LAUGH FEAST

“Liberal Christianity” may be more appealing to the masses than “conservative Christianity,” -TNLawPiper

I am become meme,
Destroyer of shorts -Elon

User avatar
infidel
kthxbai
kthxbai
Posts: 6483
Joined: Mon Dec 28, 2009 6:00 pm

Re: Mary Alone

Post by infidel » Thu Apr 05, 2018 12:04 pm

Jester wrote:
Thu Apr 05, 2018 11:58 am
Obviously not. Effing perverts. What kind of encounter do you imagine with the virgin Mary?
Hey, wos and I ain't the one's saying Mary had no choice.

In before the lock :cheese:
Last edited by infidel on Thu Apr 05, 2018 12:06 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Inadvertently emboldening the cause of naïve Evolutionism since 2016.

"Who the hell ponders placentas? Dude, you're a freak of nature." - DepartedLight

"One man's saint is another man's infidel." - hugodrax

"Total. Freaking. Win." - Skip

User avatar
Del
Sneaky Snusser
Sneaky Snusser
Posts: 43986
Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2008 6:00 pm
Location: Madison, WI
Contact:

Re: Mary Alone

Post by Del » Thu Apr 05, 2018 12:06 pm

Jester wrote:
Thu Apr 05, 2018 11:24 am
wosbald wrote:
Thu Apr 05, 2018 11:11 am
+JMJ+
tuttle wrote:
Thu Apr 05, 2018 10:30 am
wosbald wrote:
Thu Apr 05, 2018 9:13 am
tuttle wrote:
Thu Apr 05, 2018 9:00 am
wosbald wrote:
Thu Apr 05, 2018 8:35 am
Joshoowah wrote:
Mon Apr 02, 2018 11:21 pm
Del touches on something within Classical Christianity that I believe, or at least think, has long been forgotten in the Protestant tradition, that is, Mary representing Eve and Jesus Adam in the "new creation." Just as both genders were part of Creation's fall, both are part of its redemption. It's nothing new, really, as Augustine, Ignatius, and Athanasius all touch on these themes. Now, I'm not fully in tune with the Catholic Church's teaching on Mary, but I am tracking and in general agreement with the premise of it. Mary is an integral part of the Incarnation that cannot be forgotten or swept over, if we're to have a holistic biblical theology. Genesis-to-Revelation, it's all a creation narrative, harkening back to that original failure.
I really think that you hit the nail squarely on the head back on the first page, and I've wondering if anyone would develop it.
back on page 1, Joshoowah wrote:
Mon Apr 02, 2018 2:20 am
[…]

… I point this out to say that even with a direct revelation from God there can be doubt and questioning. It is what makes the action of "faith" so unique as well as difficult.
Faith seen as "being faithful". As "action" (greek: ergon, ἔργον).

Wiktionary: ἔργον. Defined as "1. deed, doing, action" or as "2. labor, work, task".

Strong's: G2041 - ἔργον. KJV Translation Count — Total: 176x
The KJV translates Strong's G2041 in the following manner: work (152x), deed (22x), doing (1x), labour (1x).

There's a whole lot implied here vis-à-vis Mary, if faith is seen as "action", and how this relates to her "Yes" and whether (or not, as Jester protested) we needed it. It would seem to immediately imply that there is human work involved precisely in the Incarnation itself. That the Incarnation, itself, is humanly-participatory work/action.
I may be vastly oversimplifying things here, but I think the contention isn't that Mary, in faith, said "Yes", but that Protestants would say that Mary's "Yes" is submissive while Catholics would say that Mary's "Yes" is permissive.
What we're really talking about though, is whether faith, as Josh suggested, is a "being faithful". Whether faith is an action. A work.

And if being faithful is a work, then where is the work in "submission"? And if there is no work, then would that make the Protestant Mary faithless?
[…]

… The angel did not come with a request: "Will you allow the Holy Spirit to come upon you in order that you will conceive in your womb and bear a son?", But he came with a proclamation: "You will conceive in your womb and bear a son."

[…]
To me this sounds like the angel essentially saying, "Look, this is gonna happen one way or the other, so you might as well relax and try to enjoy it."

If so, then "the holy rape of the soul", indeed.
I would be a lot more cautious in my words if I were you. You are indeed calling the God of all creation a rapist.
Zechariah scoffed at the angel's message.... and he was struck dumb "until all had come to pass," speaking after Zechariah named the child "John."
So there is some merit in saying that they could only submit to God's will.

Also consider the defiance of Jonah in contrast with the obedience of Abraham.

Mary gave her full consent to God's plan, and now she is Queen of Heaven and Earth. (Mostly because her Son is the King, but still....)

Mary could have failed to believe, or even refused outright, and we do not know what the consequences might have been.

But Mary believed what the angel told her... and she asked a question, seeking to understand (how she, an avowed virgin, could conceive a child).... and with that answered, she gave her complete will and consent. Now she is the model of what a perfect Christian is.
G.K. Chesterton — 'It is terrible to contemplate how few politicians are hanged.'

User avatar
Skip
Everything in Moderatoration
Everything in Moderatoration
Posts: 24183
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 6:00 pm
Location: Slightly East of Pepik
Contact:

Re: Mary Alone

Post by Skip » Thu Apr 05, 2018 12:08 pm

infidel wrote:
Thu Apr 05, 2018 12:04 pm
Jester wrote:
Thu Apr 05, 2018 11:58 am
Obviously not. Effing perverts. What kind of encounter do you imagine with the virgin Mary?
Hey, wos and I ain't the one's saying Mary had no choice.

In before the lock :cheese:
Image

(And no, I'm not interested in punching the infidel...)
2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017 Winner of the CPS Award: "Most Likely to be Found Without Pants at Any Given Moment"

2017 Curmudgeon of the Year

"No man is peer to Skip, peasant." -A_Morley

User avatar
Jester
Brother of Tuttle
Brother of Tuttle
Posts: 2695
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2016 1:10 pm
Location: Pleasant Hill, MO

Re: Mary Alone

Post by Jester » Thu Apr 05, 2018 12:11 pm

infidel wrote:
Thu Apr 05, 2018 12:04 pm
Jester wrote:
Thu Apr 05, 2018 11:58 am
Obviously not. Effing perverts. What kind of encounter do you imagine with the virgin Mary?

Mary was not given a choice but she did accept what was going to happen.
Hey, wos and I ain't the one's saying Mary had no choice.

In before the lock :cheese:
I know you guys didn't say it. The angel did.
"And behold, you will conceive in your womb and bear a son, and you shall call his name Jesus." Luke 1:31
"She will bear a son, and you shall call his name Jesus, for he will save his people from their sins.” Matthew 1:21
and Isaiah said it way before Mary could consent.
"Therefore the Lord himself will give you a sign. Behold, the virgin shall conceive and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel." Isaiah 7:14
FIGHT LAUGH FEAST

“Liberal Christianity” may be more appealing to the masses than “conservative Christianity,” -TNLawPiper

I am become meme,
Destroyer of shorts -Elon

User avatar
Skip
Everything in Moderatoration
Everything in Moderatoration
Posts: 24183
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 6:00 pm
Location: Slightly East of Pepik
Contact:

Re: Mary Alone

Post by Skip » Thu Apr 05, 2018 12:18 pm

Crud. If this thread becomes a pissing contest on Mary and Calvinism, it's going first on the list for the Council of Hats' consideration tonight.
2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017 Winner of the CPS Award: "Most Likely to be Found Without Pants at Any Given Moment"

2017 Curmudgeon of the Year

"No man is peer to Skip, peasant." -A_Morley

User avatar
Jester
Brother of Tuttle
Brother of Tuttle
Posts: 2695
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2016 1:10 pm
Location: Pleasant Hill, MO

Re: Mary Alone

Post by Jester » Thu Apr 05, 2018 12:20 pm

Skip wrote:
Thu Apr 05, 2018 12:18 pm
Crud. If this thread becomes a pissing contest on Mary and Calvinism, it's going first on the list for the Council of Hats' consideration tonight.
What was said about Calvinism?
FIGHT LAUGH FEAST

“Liberal Christianity” may be more appealing to the masses than “conservative Christianity,” -TNLawPiper

I am become meme,
Destroyer of shorts -Elon

User avatar
Skip
Everything in Moderatoration
Everything in Moderatoration
Posts: 24183
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 6:00 pm
Location: Slightly East of Pepik
Contact:

Re: Mary Alone

Post by Skip » Thu Apr 05, 2018 12:24 pm

Jester wrote:
Thu Apr 05, 2018 12:20 pm
Skip wrote:
Thu Apr 05, 2018 12:18 pm
Crud. If this thread becomes a pissing contest on Mary and Calvinism, it's going first on the list for the Council of Hats' consideration tonight.
What was said about Calvinism?
Nothing directly.

Yet...
2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017 Winner of the CPS Award: "Most Likely to be Found Without Pants at Any Given Moment"

2017 Curmudgeon of the Year

"No man is peer to Skip, peasant." -A_Morley

User avatar
coco
Uniquely Duggish
Uniquely Duggish
Posts: 32499
Joined: Sun Feb 01, 2009 6:00 pm
Location: Sweet Home Alabama
Contact:

Re: Mary Alone

Post by coco » Thu Apr 05, 2018 12:33 pm

wosbald wrote:
Thu Apr 05, 2018 11:39 am
+JMJ+
Jester wrote:
Thu Apr 05, 2018 11:24 am
wosbald wrote:
Thu Apr 05, 2018 11:11 am
tuttle wrote:
Thu Apr 05, 2018 10:30 am
wosbald wrote:
Thu Apr 05, 2018 9:13 am
tuttle wrote:
Thu Apr 05, 2018 9:00 am
wosbald wrote:
Thu Apr 05, 2018 8:35 am
Joshoowah wrote:
Mon Apr 02, 2018 11:21 pm
Del touches on something within Classical Christianity that I believe, or at least think, has long been forgotten in the Protestant tradition, that is, Mary representing Eve and Jesus Adam in the "new creation." Just as both genders were part of Creation's fall, both are part of its redemption. It's nothing new, really, as Augustine, Ignatius, and Athanasius all touch on these themes. Now, I'm not fully in tune with the Catholic Church's teaching on Mary, but I am tracking and in general agreement with the premise of it. Mary is an integral part of the Incarnation that cannot be forgotten or swept over, if we're to have a holistic biblical theology. Genesis-to-Revelation, it's all a creation narrative, harkening back to that original failure.
I really think that you hit the nail squarely on the head back on the first page, and I've wondering if anyone would develop it.
back on page 1, Joshoowah wrote:
Mon Apr 02, 2018 2:20 am
[…]

… I point this out to say that even with a direct revelation from God there can be doubt and questioning. It is what makes the action of "faith" so unique as well as difficult.
Faith seen as "being faithful". As "action" (greek: ergon, ἔργον).

Wiktionary: ἔργον. Defined as "1. deed, doing, action" or as "2. labor, work, task".

Strong's: G2041 - ἔργον. KJV Translation Count — Total: 176x
The KJV translates Strong's G2041 in the following manner: work (152x), deed (22x), doing (1x), labour (1x).

There's a whole lot implied here vis-à-vis Mary, if faith is seen as "action", and how this relates to her "Yes" and whether (or not, as Jester protested) we needed it. It would seem to immediately imply that there is human work involved precisely in the Incarnation itself. That the Incarnation, itself, is humanly-participatory work/action.
I may be vastly oversimplifying things here, but I think the contention isn't that Mary, in faith, said "Yes", but that Protestants would say that Mary's "Yes" is submissive while Catholics would say that Mary's "Yes" is permissive.
What we're really talking about though, is whether faith, as Josh suggested, is a "being faithful". Whether faith is an action. A work.

And if being faithful is a work, then where is the work in "submission"? And if there is no work, then would that make the Protestant Mary faithless?
[…]

… The angel did not come with a request: "Will you allow the Holy Spirit to come upon you in order that you will conceive in your womb and bear a son?", But he came with a proclamation: "You will conceive in your womb and bear a son."

[…]
To me this sounds like the angel essentially saying, "Look, this is gonna happen one way or the other, so you might as well relax and try to enjoy it."

If so, then "the holy rape of the soul", indeed.
I would be a lot more cautious in my words if I were you. You are indeed calling the God of all creation a rapist.
So, I'm right?

Okay. Thanx for the confirmation.

I guess we're done here. Image

——————————————————————————————————
coco wrote:
Thu Apr 05, 2018 11:27 am
Rather than dealing with the conception, the Protestants would do well to go back and have a closer look at what Wos said about the nature of faith.
But remember, it's, firstly, what Josh said (or seemed to say). What we really need is for him to come back and weigh-in.

As for now … Image
I didn't say so, but it is interesting that the Protestants haven't noticed, isn't it?
There are many terrible attributes of the lowly cob. Not the least of them is that it makes you look like a doof.

User avatar
UncleBob
CPS Theological Dogmatician
CPS Theological Dogmatician
Posts: 37311
Joined: Tue Aug 03, 2004 6:00 pm
Location: Lubbock, TX USA
Contact:

Re: Mary Alone

Post by UncleBob » Thu Apr 05, 2018 12:37 pm

Image
"One man's theology is another man's belly laugh." - Robert A. Heinlein

"Many of the points here, taken to their logical conclusions, don't hold up to logic; they're simply Godded-up ways of saying "I don't like that." - Skip

"Get your facts first, then you can distort them as you please." -Mark Twain

Post Reply