Mary Alone

For those deep thinkers out there.

Moderator: tuttle

Post Reply
User avatar
Del
Hacked by Kellyanne Conway
Hacked by Kellyanne Conway
Posts: 36694
Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2008 6:00 pm
Location: Madison, WI
Contact:

Re: Mary Alone

Post by Del » Sat Apr 07, 2018 6:08 pm

Jocose wrote:
Sat Apr 07, 2018 9:46 am
Why are protts so worried about giving honor to Mary?!
Because they know, in their hearts (where God has written this) that this is what God wants us to do.
"Utter frogshit from start to finish." - Onyx

"I shall not wear a crown of gold where my Master wore a crown of thorns." - Godfrey de Bouillon

User avatar
tuttle
Theology Room Mod
Theology Room Mod
Posts: 12533
Joined: Tue Dec 02, 2008 6:00 pm
Location: Middle-west
Contact:

Re: Mary Alone

Post by tuttle » Sat Apr 07, 2018 6:34 pm

Del wrote:
Sat Apr 07, 2018 6:08 pm
Jocose wrote:
Sat Apr 07, 2018 9:46 am
Why are protts so worried about giving honor to Mary?!
Because they know, in their hearts (where God has written this) that this is what God wants us to do.
Just to be fair, I don't think Protestants are worried about giving honor to Mary, nor do I think we do not give her honor. We don't honor her in the same way the R.C. and E.O. do. (That's not to say that there aren't some Protestants who are unnecessarily fearful of "leaning Romeward" and therefore go overboard in downplaying her) Frankly, I've never encountered any Protestants who do not honor Mary. We believe our honor of Mary is consistent with the Scriptures inso far as admiring her great faith and her role as the Mother of Jesus. Even Christ himself drew attention away from Mary as blessed for any reason beyond her faith (Luke 11:27-28).
"Better to die cheerfully with the aid of a little tobacco, than to live disagreeably and remorseful without." -CS Lewis

User avatar
gaining_age
What's-his-name - President: Devo Fan Club Intl
What's-his-name - President: Devo Fan Club Intl
Posts: 15397
Joined: Tue Mar 16, 2010 6:00 pm
Location: sun soaked Arizona

Re: Mary Alone

Post by gaining_age » Sat Apr 07, 2018 6:39 pm

Del wrote:
Sat Apr 07, 2018 6:08 pm
Jocose wrote:
Sat Apr 07, 2018 9:46 am
Why are protts so worried about giving honor to Mary?!
Because they know, in their hearts (where God has written this) that this is what God wants us to do.
Because, perhaps, all glory honor and power belong to the Triune God and Protestants see Christ as a sinless sacrifice and the Only one to qualify-- thus by exalting Mary into sinless for conception (Immaculate Conception definition as I recently was corrected in my thinking-- which I had thought that it meant the conception of the sinless Christ child previously).

Mary is much favored and I don't believe most Protestants would protest that-- we have it declared in the scriptures. Giving her more honor and even elevation into the role of salvation (or early salvation) then that fuzzies the sinful state of man perspective that Christ was the only righteous man (person). I'm not hitting all the nuances but trying a stab at a broad stroke of the problem.

And I for one did not applaud Del in the title of the thread but saw it as about near Trolling as one may have on CPS.
I was working to stay out of the thread as it seemed rather incendiary from the get go but I figure with a new Mod I'd come into the waters a little.

G.
Out of control odd rare old man (or possibly an hobbyist). -- Label by The Big R.
The 6s of 1st John:
2:6 Whoever claims to live in him must walk as Jesus walked
3:6 No one who lives in him keeps on sinning

User avatar
Joshoowah
Hermeneutic of suspicion
Hermeneutic of suspicion
Posts: 4663
Joined: Wed May 25, 2011 6:00 pm
Location: Nairobi, Kenya; formerly Wilmore, KY; Formerly Athens, AL
Contact:

Re: Mary Alone

Post by Joshoowah » Sun Apr 08, 2018 3:03 am

wosbald wrote:
Sat Apr 07, 2018 2:54 pm

Joshoowah wrote:
Sat Apr 07, 2018 1:12 pm
wosbald wrote:
Thu Apr 05, 2018 11:39 am
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.
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
What is it exactly that you would like me to weigh in on? I'd be happy to elaborate, as I feel I am quite comfortable discussing these sorts of topics.
Though I can't strictly speak for them, some of your Protestant compatriots appear to have a problem with your seeming characterization of faith as being an action. A "being faithful".

However, I dunno if they want to make an issue of it. I sure don't.
Well, faith, like love, is more of an action than a passive belief (emotion, in the case of love). I do not think many folks would debate me on that, as I do believe there to be ample evidence biblically for this conclusion. I would not necessarily characterize them as "works" in the fullest sense of that word, but I suppose it can be interpreted in that fashion. I've long believed the Protestant evangelical movement over the past two hundred years or so has either neglected or forgotten these things, albeit with good intentions. The intention, of course, has been to bring as many as possible into the fold - into the body of Christ; however, it has created a gospel that is seemingly more palatable, easier to swallow, but lacks the nourishment necessary to truly mature. Dietrich Bonhoeffer would characterize it as "cheap grace."
Off Topic
I realize I am using general and broad characterizations here in regards to the evangelical movement, so I want to take a moment to say that this is not the case in every evangelical church worldwide; however, I have found it to be the norm in my own experience of teaching 250 students over the past 4 years and their understanding of the gospel (all who originate from a variety geographical areas such as Korea, Kenya, South Africa, Sweden, U.S.A., Australia, U.K., Ireland, Canada, China, and Japan). I do consider myself an evangelical in the truest sense of the word, but the good intentions of the revivalists have lead us down a road we need to repent (i.e. "about face") of and return to the gospel of Jesus. This is neither the place nor time to discuss these things, and if there is interest another thread should be started.
In order to fully understand this, at least in my opinion, is to study the words used in Scripture and how those words would have been understood. Faith is a multi-faceted term within the Hebrew mindset, just as love is multi-faceted, that is, our modern definitions of these terms do not capture the true, biblical meaning. A similar word that comes to mind is that of "remembrance." I believe in order to truly grow in our understanding of what Jesus, the apostles, Paul, and all early Christians said in regards to "remembrance," we need to look to how that word was used when they were speaking about it. The Old Testament witness is a great place in this particular case, where remembrance is more active in nature than passive (i.e. a recollection of events; cf. Ps. 77 for one example).

So, in this particular case, Mary's faith was an action, an active acceptance of the blessing the LORD wished to bestow upon her. The New Creation needed a male and female to be part of its inauguration, just as male and female contributed to the fragmentation of the Old. Is Mary our savior? By no means, but she does play a role that is important and should not be neglected.

God approaches us by grace, prevenient grace as John Wesley would say, and it is by that grace we are able to participate in his grand story.
"For to me, to live is Christ and to die is gain. If I am to go on living in the body, this will mean fruitful labor for me. Yet what shall I choose?" Philippians 1:21-22

ImageImage

User avatar
Del
Hacked by Kellyanne Conway
Hacked by Kellyanne Conway
Posts: 36694
Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2008 6:00 pm
Location: Madison, WI
Contact:

Re: Mary Alone

Post by Del » Sun Apr 08, 2018 7:20 am

tuttle wrote:
Sat Apr 07, 2018 6:34 pm
Del wrote:
Sat Apr 07, 2018 6:08 pm
Jocose wrote:
Sat Apr 07, 2018 9:46 am
Why are protts so worried about giving honor to Mary?!
Because they know, in their hearts (where God has written this) that this is what God wants us to do.
Just to be fair, I don't think Protestants are worried about giving honor to Mary, nor do I think we do not give her honor. We don't honor her in the same way the R.C. and E.O. do. (That's not to say that there aren't some Protestants who are unnecessarily fearful of "leaning Romeward" and therefore go overboard in downplaying her) Frankly, I've never encountered any Protestants who do not honor Mary. We believe our honor of Mary is consistent with the Scriptures inso far as admiring her great faith and her role as the Mother of Jesus. Even Christ himself drew attention away from Mary as blessed for any reason beyond her faith (Luke 11:27-28).
YES!

And so.... the reason why Jesus and the Church that He established esteem Mary so much is indeed due to her extraordinary faith, obedience, and humility.

There is a very simple reason why we love and honor Mary so much: The earliest Christians did so, as the Apostles taught them to. Luke's account reminds and guides us as to why we honor Mary.
Luke 11 wrote:27 As Jesus was saying these things, a woman in the crowd called out, “Blessed is the mother who gave you birth and nursed you.”

28 He replied, “Blessed rather are those who hear the word of God and obey it.”
The woman in Luke 11was speaking of Christ's Kingship.... by praising His mother thus, she was saying "God Bless the Queen!" She was harkening back to the time that Bathsheba approached Solomon, who established the custom in Israel of having too many wives -- and the King's Mother as the Queen.
1 Kings 2:19 wrote:19 When Bathsheba went to King Solomon to speak to him for Adonijah, the king stood up to meet her, bowed down to her and sat down on his throne. He had a throne brought for the king’s mother, and she sat down at his right hand.

20 “I have one small request to make of you,” she said. “Do not refuse me.”

The king replied, “Make it, my mother; I will not refuse you.”
So we are not surprised when Jesus sends His Mother to us in apparitions, arrayed as a Queen of Heaven and Earth.
===================================

And as always, we believe as the earliest Christians did, that Jesus gave Mary to all of us to be our spiritual Mother as He was dying on the Cross. As we are reborn in Him and share His life, so we are also joined with her. This is such a divine gift! While not strictly necessary for our salvation, Jesus made our salvation even better by giving us His mother.
Last edited by Del on Sun Apr 08, 2018 7:26 am, edited 1 time in total.
"Utter frogshit from start to finish." - Onyx

"I shall not wear a crown of gold where my Master wore a crown of thorns." - Godfrey de Bouillon

User avatar
Del
Hacked by Kellyanne Conway
Hacked by Kellyanne Conway
Posts: 36694
Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2008 6:00 pm
Location: Madison, WI
Contact:

Re: Mary Alone

Post by Del » Sun Apr 08, 2018 7:24 am

gaining_age wrote:
Sat Apr 07, 2018 6:39 pm
And I for one did not applaud Del in the title of the thread but saw it as about near Trolling as one may have on CPS.
Sorry about that.

I didn't mean to offend anyone by the title. I hoped that it was clever as click-bait, and appropriate to the topic in the OP.
"Utter frogshit from start to finish." - Onyx

"I shall not wear a crown of gold where my Master wore a crown of thorns." - Godfrey de Bouillon

User avatar
Gabriel
Enraged by S'mores
Enraged by S'mores
Posts: 11394
Joined: Thu Jun 25, 2009 6:00 pm
Location: central IL

Re: Mary Alone

Post by Gabriel » Sun Apr 08, 2018 8:41 am

Del wrote:
Sun Apr 08, 2018 7:24 am
gaining_age wrote:
Sat Apr 07, 2018 6:39 pm
And I for one did not applaud Del in the title of the thread but saw it as about near Trolling as one may have on CPS.
Sorry about that.

I didn't mean to offend anyone by the title. I hoped that it was clever as click-bait, and appropriate to the topic in the OP.
I chuckled.
Sola Deo Gloria

User avatar
gaining_age
What's-his-name - President: Devo Fan Club Intl
What's-his-name - President: Devo Fan Club Intl
Posts: 15397
Joined: Tue Mar 16, 2010 6:00 pm
Location: sun soaked Arizona

Re: Mary Alone

Post by gaining_age » Sun Apr 08, 2018 8:42 am

Del wrote:
Sun Apr 08, 2018 7:24 am
gaining_age wrote:
Sat Apr 07, 2018 6:39 pm
And I for one did not applaud Del in the title of the thread but saw it as about near Trolling as one may have on CPS.
Sorry about that.
Thank you.
Out of control odd rare old man (or possibly an hobbyist). -- Label by The Big R.
The 6s of 1st John:
2:6 Whoever claims to live in him must walk as Jesus walked
3:6 No one who lives in him keeps on sinning

User avatar
UncleBob
CPS Theological Dogmatician
CPS Theological Dogmatician
Posts: 33704
Joined: Tue Aug 03, 2004 6:00 pm
Location: Lubbock, TX USA
Contact:

Re: Mary Alone

Post by UncleBob » Sun Apr 08, 2018 9:21 am

Joshoowah wrote:
Sun Apr 08, 2018 3:03 am
Well, faith, like love, is more of an action than a passive belief (emotion, in the case of love). I do not think many folks would debate me on that, as I do believe there to be ample evidence biblically for this conclusion. I would not necessarily characterize them as "works" in the fullest sense of that word, but I suppose it can be interpreted in that fashion.
Faith is tied to obedience rather than just "works" or belief. If one obeys, works will follow (Hebrews 11). If one obeys, belief is moot. Jonah complains to God that he knew Nineveh would repent if he went a preached--he just didn't want them to do so.
"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

User avatar
Joshoowah
Hermeneutic of suspicion
Hermeneutic of suspicion
Posts: 4663
Joined: Wed May 25, 2011 6:00 pm
Location: Nairobi, Kenya; formerly Wilmore, KY; Formerly Athens, AL
Contact:

Re: Mary Alone

Post by Joshoowah » Sun Apr 08, 2018 9:56 am

Double post.
Last edited by Joshoowah on Sun Apr 08, 2018 9:56 am, edited 1 time in total.
"For to me, to live is Christ and to die is gain. If I am to go on living in the body, this will mean fruitful labor for me. Yet what shall I choose?" Philippians 1:21-22

ImageImage

User avatar
Joshoowah
Hermeneutic of suspicion
Hermeneutic of suspicion
Posts: 4663
Joined: Wed May 25, 2011 6:00 pm
Location: Nairobi, Kenya; formerly Wilmore, KY; Formerly Athens, AL
Contact:

Re: Mary Alone

Post by Joshoowah » Sun Apr 08, 2018 9:57 am

UncleBob wrote:
Joshoowah wrote:
Sun Apr 08, 2018 3:03 am
Well, faith, like love, is more of an action than a passive belief (emotion, in the case of love). I do not think many folks would debate me on that, as I do believe there to be ample evidence biblically for this conclusion. I would not necessarily characterize them as "works" in the fullest sense of that word, but I suppose it can be interpreted in that fashion.
Faith is tied to obedience rather than just "works" or belief. If one obeys, works will follow (Hebrews 11). If one obeys, belief is moot. Jonah complains to God that he knew Nineveh would repent if he went a preached--he just didn't want them to do so.
Oh, I concur, good man, but obedience is an active, participatory thing, no? But to reiterate, I do believe obedience is integral, and that true obedience leads to transformation (i.e. good works).
"For to me, to live is Christ and to die is gain. If I am to go on living in the body, this will mean fruitful labor for me. Yet what shall I choose?" Philippians 1:21-22

ImageImage

User avatar
Del
Hacked by Kellyanne Conway
Hacked by Kellyanne Conway
Posts: 36694
Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2008 6:00 pm
Location: Madison, WI
Contact:

Re: Mary Alone

Post by Del » Sun Apr 08, 2018 7:24 pm

Joshoowah wrote:
Sun Apr 08, 2018 9:57 am
UncleBob wrote:
Joshoowah wrote:
Sun Apr 08, 2018 3:03 am
Well, faith, like love, is more of an action than a passive belief (emotion, in the case of love). I do not think many folks would debate me on that, as I do believe there to be ample evidence biblically for this conclusion. I would not necessarily characterize them as "works" in the fullest sense of that word, but I suppose it can be interpreted in that fashion.
Faith is tied to obedience rather than just "works" or belief. If one obeys, works will follow (Hebrews 11). If one obeys, belief is moot. Jonah complains to God that he knew Nineveh would repent if he went a preached--he just didn't want them to do so.
Oh, I concur, good man, but obedience is an active, participatory thing, no? But to reiterate, I do believe obedience is integral, and that true obedience leads to transformation (i.e. good works).
Of course.

This should never have become a question or problem.

"Does God want me to do this? Yes? Okay then.... I'm working on it."

I saw a reflection once on the "Judgment of the Nations" parable ("the Sheep and the Goats"). Preacher/writer said something like, "You can't work your way into heaven. But you can certainly 'not work' your way into Hell."

For most Christians, this does not present any sort of difficulty.
"Utter frogshit from start to finish." - Onyx

"I shall not wear a crown of gold where my Master wore a crown of thorns." - Godfrey de Bouillon

User avatar
FredS
Really, really likes watching kids fish.
Really, really likes watching kids fish.
Posts: 20486
Joined: Sat Feb 21, 2009 6:00 pm
Location: NOCO (Northern Colorado)

Re: Mary Alone

Post by FredS » Sun Apr 08, 2018 8:33 pm

Del wrote:
Sun Apr 08, 2018 7:24 pm
I saw a reflection once on the "Judgment of the Nations" parable ("the Sheep and the Goats"). Preacher/writer said something like, "You can't work your way into heaven. But you can certainly 'not work' your way into Hell."

For most Christians, this does not present any sort of difficulty.
I like cake.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QJVC44zj6FI
"If we ever get to heaven boys, it aint because we aint done nothin' wrong" - Kris Kristofferson

"One of the things I love about CPS is the frank and enthusiastic dysfunction here. God help me, I do love it so." – OldWorldSwine

"I'd like to put a hook in that puppet and swing it through a bunch of salmon!" - durangopipe

User avatar
wosbald
Crux' Cleveland Correspondent
Crux' Cleveland Correspondent
Posts: 18710
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2008 6:00 pm
Location: Cleveland, Ohio
Contact:

Re: Mary Alone

Post by wosbald » Mon Apr 09, 2018 10:19 am

+JMJ+
tuttle wrote:
Sat Apr 07, 2018 6:01 pm
Hmmm...what if I threw a wrench into this by saying that Mary's 'yes' was ordained from the foundation of the world? …
And with that, we're back full-circle: Eternal Decrees.

And is way of framing the issue essentially different than "submission"?

Cuz I'm not seein' it. Unfreedom is unfreedom.




"In the end, My Immaculate Heart will triumph." - Our Lady of Fatima

User avatar
tuttle
Theology Room Mod
Theology Room Mod
Posts: 12533
Joined: Tue Dec 02, 2008 6:00 pm
Location: Middle-west
Contact:

Re: Mary Alone

Post by tuttle » Mon Apr 09, 2018 11:33 am

wosbald wrote:
Mon Apr 09, 2018 10:19 am
+JMJ+
tuttle wrote:
Sat Apr 07, 2018 6:01 pm
Hmmm...what if I threw a wrench into this by saying that Mary's 'yes' was ordained from the foundation of the world? …
And with that, we're back full-circle: Eternal Decrees.

And is way of framing the issue essentially different than "submission"?

Cuz I'm not seein' it. Unfreedom is unfreedom.
Is there something wrong with eternal decrees? That's God's cup of tea.

God decrees > Man responds in belief/unbelief > God works all things for His glory and the good of his people using both the faithful and sinful reactions of humanity > His word does not return void, but accomplishes that which He pleases.

Would it assuage you for me to say that, as opposed to specifically Mary, Mankind's 'yes' was ordained from the foundation of the world? My point is that if God decreed it and if Christ was slain before the foundation of the world, then truly, Mary's 'yes', as being integral to the plan for the Incarnation, was ordained.
"Better to die cheerfully with the aid of a little tobacco, than to live disagreeably and remorseful without." -CS Lewis

User avatar
Del
Hacked by Kellyanne Conway
Hacked by Kellyanne Conway
Posts: 36694
Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2008 6:00 pm
Location: Madison, WI
Contact:

Re: Mary Alone

Post by Del » Mon Apr 09, 2018 12:28 pm

tuttle wrote:
Mon Apr 09, 2018 11:33 am
wosbald wrote:
Mon Apr 09, 2018 10:19 am
+JMJ+
tuttle wrote:
Sat Apr 07, 2018 6:01 pm
Hmmm...what if I threw a wrench into this by saying that Mary's 'yes' was ordained from the foundation of the world? …
And with that, we're back full-circle: Eternal Decrees.

And is way of framing the issue essentially different than "submission"?

Cuz I'm not seein' it. Unfreedom is unfreedom.
Is there something wrong with eternal decrees? That's God's cup of tea.

God decrees > Man responds in belief/unbelief > God works all things for His glory and the good of his people using both the faithful and sinful reactions of humanity > His word does not return void, but accomplishes that which He pleases.

Would it assuage you for me to say that, as opposed to specifically Mary, Mankind's 'yes' was ordained from the foundation of the world? My point is that if God decreed it and if Christ was slain before the foundation of the world, then truly, Mary's 'yes', as being integral to the plan for the Incarnation, was ordained.
It was also ordained from the foundation of the world that Mary would become the Queen of Heaven and Earth... Queen of all Angels and Saints.

Christians have long speculated that this is why Satan rebelled. He hates the Incarnation. If God were to take on the nature of His creation, it should be an angelic nature.... not that lowly human nature. If a creature is to sit at God's right hand, it should be an Angel -- Lucifer himself, the greatest of angels! Not some earthly Woman!

This is why Satan refused to serve after God's plan was revealed. This is why Satan attacked the human Woman with the first temptation. And this is why God prophesied in Genesis 3, that there would be a Woman who would be at perfect enmity with Satan.... a sinless Woman, who would serve God completely and without any selfish thought or pride.

It was all in God's plan! The beauty of God's Plan could not be marred by Satan or sin or the efforts of reformers to remove Mary's unique part in His Plan.
"Utter frogshit from start to finish." - Onyx

"I shall not wear a crown of gold where my Master wore a crown of thorns." - Godfrey de Bouillon

User avatar
tuttle
Theology Room Mod
Theology Room Mod
Posts: 12533
Joined: Tue Dec 02, 2008 6:00 pm
Location: Middle-west
Contact:

Re: Mary Alone

Post by tuttle » Mon Apr 09, 2018 1:10 pm

Del wrote:
Mon Apr 09, 2018 12:28 pm
tuttle wrote:
Mon Apr 09, 2018 11:33 am
wosbald wrote:
Mon Apr 09, 2018 10:19 am
+JMJ+
tuttle wrote:
Sat Apr 07, 2018 6:01 pm
Hmmm...what if I threw a wrench into this by saying that Mary's 'yes' was ordained from the foundation of the world? …
And with that, we're back full-circle: Eternal Decrees.

And is way of framing the issue essentially different than "submission"?

Cuz I'm not seein' it. Unfreedom is unfreedom.
Is there something wrong with eternal decrees? That's God's cup of tea.

God decrees > Man responds in belief/unbelief > God works all things for His glory and the good of his people using both the faithful and sinful reactions of humanity > His word does not return void, but accomplishes that which He pleases.

Would it assuage you for me to say that, as opposed to specifically Mary, Mankind's 'yes' was ordained from the foundation of the world? My point is that if God decreed it and if Christ was slain before the foundation of the world, then truly, Mary's 'yes', as being integral to the plan for the Incarnation, was ordained.
It was also ordained from the foundation of the world that Mary would become the Queen of Heaven and Earth... Queen of all Angels and Saints.

Christians have long speculated that this is why Satan rebelled. He hates the Incarnation. If God were to take on the nature of His creation, it should be an angelic nature.... not that lowly human nature. If a creature is to sit at God's right hand, it should be an Angel -- Lucifer himself, the greatest of angels! Not some earthly Woman!

This is why Satan refused to serve after God's plan was revealed. This is why Satan attacked the human Woman with the first temptation. And this is why God prophesied in Genesis 3, that there would be a Woman who would be at perfect enmity with Satan.... a sinless Woman, who would serve God completely and without any selfish thought or pride.

It was all in God's plan! The beauty of God's Plan could not be marred by Satan or sin or the efforts of reformers to remove Mary's unique part in His Plan.
The Reformers didn't remove Mary's unique part in God's Plan. But they did emphasize what the Scriptures had to say about her, and that surely led to a sheering away of certain doctrines that developed over the years to that point.

You can develop doctrine and theology about how Mary is the Queen of Heaven, but you can't say that the Reformers somehow removed something that was revealed in Scripture about Mary. You rightly categorized what Christians do when they ponder Satan's rebellion--they speculate. Nothing wrong with speculation or even forming a system of belief upon speculation if other established truths seem to corroborate it. In so far as that goes, I think Protestants would put the idea that "Mary is the Queen of Heaven" under the same kind of speculative category. As the Scriptures already do not make it an open-and-shut case, they don't find enough corroboration with the rest of Scriptures to feel fully comfortable with going ahead and developing a full blown doctrine of Mary on par with the Roman church.

That said, I think you'd be rather shocked (as in "impressed") at what many of the Reformers actually had to say about Mary, and what they believed about her status.
"Better to die cheerfully with the aid of a little tobacco, than to live disagreeably and remorseful without." -CS Lewis

User avatar
Del
Hacked by Kellyanne Conway
Hacked by Kellyanne Conway
Posts: 36694
Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2008 6:00 pm
Location: Madison, WI
Contact:

Re: Mary Alone

Post by Del » Mon Apr 09, 2018 1:37 pm

tuttle wrote:
Mon Apr 09, 2018 1:10 pm
Del wrote:
Mon Apr 09, 2018 12:28 pm
tuttle wrote:
Mon Apr 09, 2018 11:33 am
wosbald wrote:
Mon Apr 09, 2018 10:19 am
+JMJ+
tuttle wrote:
Sat Apr 07, 2018 6:01 pm
Hmmm...what if I threw a wrench into this by saying that Mary's 'yes' was ordained from the foundation of the world? …
And with that, we're back full-circle: Eternal Decrees.

And is way of framing the issue essentially different than "submission"?

Cuz I'm not seein' it. Unfreedom is unfreedom.
Is there something wrong with eternal decrees? That's God's cup of tea.

God decrees > Man responds in belief/unbelief > God works all things for His glory and the good of his people using both the faithful and sinful reactions of humanity > His word does not return void, but accomplishes that which He pleases.

Would it assuage you for me to say that, as opposed to specifically Mary, Mankind's 'yes' was ordained from the foundation of the world? My point is that if God decreed it and if Christ was slain before the foundation of the world, then truly, Mary's 'yes', as being integral to the plan for the Incarnation, was ordained.
It was also ordained from the foundation of the world that Mary would become the Queen of Heaven and Earth... Queen of all Angels and Saints.

Christians have long speculated that this is why Satan rebelled. He hates the Incarnation. If God were to take on the nature of His creation, it should be an angelic nature.... not that lowly human nature. If a creature is to sit at God's right hand, it should be an Angel -- Lucifer himself, the greatest of angels! Not some earthly Woman!

This is why Satan refused to serve after God's plan was revealed. This is why Satan attacked the human Woman with the first temptation. And this is why God prophesied in Genesis 3, that there would be a Woman who would be at perfect enmity with Satan.... a sinless Woman, who would serve God completely and without any selfish thought or pride.

It was all in God's plan! The beauty of God's Plan could not be marred by Satan or sin or the efforts of reformers to remove Mary's unique part in His Plan.
The Reformers didn't remove Mary's unique part in God's Plan. But they did emphasize what the Scriptures had to say about her, and that surely led to a sheering away of certain doctrines that developed over the years to that point.

You can develop doctrine and theology about how Mary is the Queen of Heaven, but you can't say that the Reformers somehow removed something that was revealed in Scripture about Mary. You rightly categorized what Christians do when they ponder Satan's rebellion--they speculate. Nothing wrong with speculation or even forming a system of belief upon speculation if other established truths seem to corroborate it. In so far as that goes, I think Protestants would put the idea that "Mary is the Queen of Heaven" under the same kind of speculative category. As the Scriptures already do not make it an open-and-shut case, they don't find enough corroboration with the rest of Scriptures to feel fully comfortable with going ahead and developing a full blown doctrine of Mary on par with the Roman church.

That said, I think you'd be rather shocked (as in "impressed") at what many of the Reformers actually had to say about Mary, and what they believed about her status.
The Reformers removed the teaching of the Apostles -- that which every Christian must have before the Scripture are fully available and meaningful to us. The key heresy of the Reformation is that Scripture Alone is sufficient for a Christian.

I don't know where they got that idea. (Some slithering whisper of how we would all be more free if we discard most of what God gave us to know Him, I suppose.)

We know that Luther had a great devotion to Mary. Doesn't matter much, nowadays. The descendants of Mr. Calvin's tradition recoil from any mention of Mary.... like vampires from garlic. Why is that?

I figure that I am fine, as long as I don't love and honor Mary more than Jesus does.
"Utter frogshit from start to finish." - Onyx

"I shall not wear a crown of gold where my Master wore a crown of thorns." - Godfrey de Bouillon

User avatar
tuttle
Theology Room Mod
Theology Room Mod
Posts: 12533
Joined: Tue Dec 02, 2008 6:00 pm
Location: Middle-west
Contact:

Re: Mary Alone

Post by tuttle » Mon Apr 09, 2018 2:08 pm

Del wrote:
Mon Apr 09, 2018 1:37 pm
tuttle wrote:
Mon Apr 09, 2018 1:10 pm
Del wrote:
Mon Apr 09, 2018 12:28 pm
tuttle wrote:
Mon Apr 09, 2018 11:33 am
wosbald wrote:
Mon Apr 09, 2018 10:19 am
+JMJ+
tuttle wrote:
Sat Apr 07, 2018 6:01 pm
Hmmm...what if I threw a wrench into this by saying that Mary's 'yes' was ordained from the foundation of the world? …
And with that, we're back full-circle: Eternal Decrees.

And is way of framing the issue essentially different than "submission"?

Cuz I'm not seein' it. Unfreedom is unfreedom.
Is there something wrong with eternal decrees? That's God's cup of tea.

God decrees > Man responds in belief/unbelief > God works all things for His glory and the good of his people using both the faithful and sinful reactions of humanity > His word does not return void, but accomplishes that which He pleases.

Would it assuage you for me to say that, as opposed to specifically Mary, Mankind's 'yes' was ordained from the foundation of the world? My point is that if God decreed it and if Christ was slain before the foundation of the world, then truly, Mary's 'yes', as being integral to the plan for the Incarnation, was ordained.
It was also ordained from the foundation of the world that Mary would become the Queen of Heaven and Earth... Queen of all Angels and Saints.

Christians have long speculated that this is why Satan rebelled. He hates the Incarnation. If God were to take on the nature of His creation, it should be an angelic nature.... not that lowly human nature. If a creature is to sit at God's right hand, it should be an Angel -- Lucifer himself, the greatest of angels! Not some earthly Woman!

This is why Satan refused to serve after God's plan was revealed. This is why Satan attacked the human Woman with the first temptation. And this is why God prophesied in Genesis 3, that there would be a Woman who would be at perfect enmity with Satan.... a sinless Woman, who would serve God completely and without any selfish thought or pride.

It was all in God's plan! The beauty of God's Plan could not be marred by Satan or sin or the efforts of reformers to remove Mary's unique part in His Plan.
The Reformers didn't remove Mary's unique part in God's Plan. But they did emphasize what the Scriptures had to say about her, and that surely led to a sheering away of certain doctrines that developed over the years to that point.

You can develop doctrine and theology about how Mary is the Queen of Heaven, but you can't say that the Reformers somehow removed something that was revealed in Scripture about Mary. You rightly categorized what Christians do when they ponder Satan's rebellion--they speculate. Nothing wrong with speculation or even forming a system of belief upon speculation if other established truths seem to corroborate it. In so far as that goes, I think Protestants would put the idea that "Mary is the Queen of Heaven" under the same kind of speculative category. As the Scriptures already do not make it an open-and-shut case, they don't find enough corroboration with the rest of Scriptures to feel fully comfortable with going ahead and developing a full blown doctrine of Mary on par with the Roman church.

That said, I think you'd be rather shocked (as in "impressed") at what many of the Reformers actually had to say about Mary, and what they believed about her status.
The Reformers removed the teaching of the Apostles -- that which every Christian must have before the Scripture are fully available and meaningful to us. The key heresy of the Reformation is that Scripture Alone is sufficient for a Christian.

I don't know where they got that idea. (Some slithering whisper of how we would all be more free if we discard most of what God gave us to know Him, I suppose.)
I started to tangle with this, but it was like every other word I was responding to was a tangle. I can only hope that one day you'll actually take the time to read the Reformers or barring that, at the very least read some well reasoned history (not slanted from the RC perspective) about what they did and why they did it, not in order to persuade you, but in order for you to not sound like a dingbat about them on CPS :lol:
Del wrote:We know that Luther had a great devotion to Mary. Doesn't matter much, nowadays. The descendants of Mr. Calvin's tradition recoil from any mention of Mary.... like vampires from garlic. Why is that?
I would qualify that. Calvinists don't recoil from any mention of Mary, they recoil from interpretations of Mary that aren't supported in the Scriptures. And I'll qualify that even more. Recoil is too strong of a word. Disagree is better. (Again, that's not to say people don't recoil...but I really don't think that's the normal reaction to the mention of Mary)
Del wrote:I figure that I am fine, as long as I don't love and honor Mary more than Jesus does.
Eternal, sacrificial, perfect love? That's a mighty high bar there, my friend. More power (figuratively speaking) to you if you can achieve it

May I advocate another path to honor Mary? Seek to love Jesus as much as she does.
"Better to die cheerfully with the aid of a little tobacco, than to live disagreeably and remorseful without." -CS Lewis

User avatar
DepartedLight
That boy's got a Thorazine deficiency.
Posts: 26672
Joined: Thu Nov 19, 2009 6:00 pm
Location: Tobacco Fairy HQ, North Carolina

Re: Mary Alone

Post by DepartedLight » Mon Apr 09, 2018 3:19 pm

Zombie Thread of the Decade Redux?

We've done this before.

A lot.

Post Reply