Arguement of the topic Mary
-
yes it is doctrinally very importantOriginally posted by shade343:Is it important whether Mary is Jesu mother?
-
mary is definitely jesus' mum. she gave birth to him, through the power of the holy spirit.
but the argument here, is whether mary's role gives her authority as a divine being, to be worshipped like one. or even that she has the authority to intervene in any situation, just like God.
all i know is this. only God is the supreme being, and Jesus is man's mediator. there is no more need for any other mediator
by the way mc, your quote on luke 1:15 is out of context. u noticed it right? -
WHoopie!Originally posted by dumbdumb!:mary is definitely jesus' mum. she gave birth to him, through the power of the holy spirit.
but the argument here, is whether mary's role gives her authority as a divine being, to be worshipped like one. or even that she has the authority to intervene in any situation, just like God.
all i know is this. only God is the supreme being, and Jesus is man's mediator. there is no more need for any other mediator
by the way mc, your quote on luke 1:15 is out of context. u noticed it right?
Didn't noticed till you pointed out. That verse suppose to be JTB's context.
Apologies. 
Cheers -
No Christian church considers Mary divine as far as I am aware. The Roman Catholic Church does not consider her divine either, although she is highly venerated.Originally posted by dumbdumb!:but the argument here, is whether mary's role gives her authority as a divine being, to be worshipped like one. or even that she has the authority to intervene in any situation, just like God.
As a Protestant, I do not agree with the RCC's stand on a few doctrines, such as the Immaculate Conception of Mary (1854) and the Assumption of Mary (1950), for example. I do not find the Scriptural basis convincing at all.
As for her role in intervention, Catholics believe she can pray for us in the way you can ask your friend or pastor to pray for you. Catholics do not see death as a final event that prevents you from asking someone to intercede for you. Thus they believe they can ask long departed saints to pray for them.
There is a relatively recent movement to consider Mary as playing a crucial role in redemption along with Jesus. That move to make Mary a co-Redemptrix is supported by various people including Mother Teresa but the previous Pope had resisted that move. If the RCC make Mary Co-Redemptrix that will indeed be a major doctrinal departure from the rest of Christiandom and will raise questions of her divinity.
But at the moment, no....Mary is not divine, even as seen through Catholic eyes. -
The problem is that the moderator/s denies even the earthly status of Mary. Any quotation presented is being denounced as from the Catholic Bible.
Time and again, I have pointed out that the issue is NOT about the divinity of Mary, but the relationship between Jesus and Mary.
It is extremely disconcerting to have a forum proclaiming to be Christian in it's core, yet unable to even substantiate a simple request to validate their claims.
So sad, the state of this "Christian" in this church, sadder still, the state of these youths.
-
the earthly state of mary is that she's jesus' mum.
whats wrong with that? zzzz... don't tell me God don't use mary, use a cow to give birth to jesus meh...
that's the whole beauty of the christmas story, Jesus, came to this world, lived a blameless life, and died so that we can have the rewards of a blameless life, as he bore the curse of our sins. its the divine exchange.
God used mary to bear Jesus into this world. so she's his mum. that doesn't degrades Jesus' status as God. Jesus, God becoming man. He's still God. -
As I posted in the other thread, I think it is possible to argue thatOriginally posted by Chin Eng:The problem is that the moderator/s denies even the earthly status of Mary. Any quotation presented is being denounced as from the Catholic Bible.
Time and again, I have pointed out that the issue is NOT about the divinity of Mary, but the relationship between Jesus and Mary.
It is extremely disconcerting to have a forum proclaiming to be Christian in it's core, yet unable to even substantiate a simple request to validate their claims.
So sad, the state of this "Christian" in this church, sadder still, the state of these youths.
Mary does not fully fulfill the criteria of an earthly mother in that she might not have contributed her DNA to Jesus. She is merely a vessel ('bearer') for the unborn Christ. And as I said, I cannot disprove it nor confirm that view because the Scriptures is silent on that and unless we have some bits of Jesus' blood or tissues to test, we will never know.
Interested to know if that is what the thread starter means...
As for his/her assertion that Mary was a perpetual virgin, that goes against the Bible's description of James who chaired the Jerusalem council as the brother of Jesus (Acts 15). Both the Roman Catholic church and Protestant churches agree with the view that Mary and Joseph went on to have other children. -
The technicalities of what a mother should be is not the point of discussion. My point of argument is merely from the scriptural angle whereby the gospels, plus a couple of other verses, state clearly the Mary is the mother of Jesus. The moment we get beyond that, than we will be stepping into the realm of the unknowns - then there is no answer.Originally posted by oxford mushroom:As I posted in the other thread, I think it is possible to argue that
Mary does not fully fulfill the criteria of an earthly mother in that she might not have contributed her DNA to Jesus. She is merely a vessel ('bearer') for the unborn Christ. And as I said, I cannot disprove it nor confirm that view because the Scriptures is silent on that and unless we have some bits of Jesus' blood or tissues to test, we will never know.
But to humour you - why Mary? for that matter why woman? For the reason, only a woman can bear a human child? Then your point about DNA may not hold too much water afterall, seeing that the foetus will require the various conditions found solely in the human embryo (my medical terms are a bit rusty). Like you said, scripture is silent over this, but scripture is NOT silent about Mary's relationship with Jesus, one of mother and son.
I am too, but the newly promoted moderator is also very silent on this. All the mods can offer are just emotive postulating, ranging from just a mere "I don't believe" or "read the Bible" to an outright deletion of of threads. Doesn't this show a complete lack of knowledge of scripture plus the inability to answer any questions. It also shows a complete lack of maturity for these moderators to take on this role.Originally posted by oxford mushroom:Interested to know if that is what the thread starter means...
Unfortunately the moderator/s have the view that the mere mention of Mary equates to being Catholic. I also find it strange that the opinions of the moderator/s have no scriptural backing, are at best weird, at worst heretic.Originally posted by oxford mushroom:As for his/her assertion that Mary was a perpetual virgin, that goes against the Bible's description of James who chaired the Jerusalem council as the brother of Jesus (Acts 15). Both the Roman Catholic church and Protestant churches agree with the view that Mary and Joseph went on to have other children.
Lesson to the moderators, have a good read at oxford mushroom's writing. His is a good way to present an opposing view, something that neither of you are capable of. -
Jesus is fully Human, fully God. if u deny the human birth of Christ..therefore the motherhood of Mary..then u r a heretic in every sense.
-
Step Fannie Sun is not Mary
