 |
Wondergirl,
We really don't know how much time Mary spent with Jesus.
We doubt even know what happened to Joseph or when.
All that is speculation.
But we do know that Mary did spend some time with Jesus and was with Him at times.
Peace and kindness,
Fred
The issue with common sense is that it also says that a person can not die and come back from the dead,
Common sense tells you that you can not walk on water, heal the sick by touching them and more.
So when dealing with the power of God common sense is not what you need, but faith , faith of a innocent child who does not "know" better, but one that can accept that God does things his way, not the way man wants him to
Yes, I agree. The NT reports some of these times. I don't believe Mary was fully aware of who Jesus was. She had been told things and knew of the prophecies, but all the permutations, the enormity of who Jesus was and what He had ahead of Him had to overwhelm and even confuse her.Quote:
Originally Posted by arcura
I doubt ( really I really feel) that no one really knew fully who Jesus was till after he came back.
They were still confusing the earthly king and their current political problems with that of heaven and the world to come.
We see that all of the followers ( that did not run away) were in hiding after Jesus Death, they were in fact still hiding 3 days latter ( when Jesus returned) they were behind "locked" doors.
And although Thomas gets the blame, I bet that all of the followers had doubts but Thomas actually spoke out. You don't real that Peter yelled Jesus and ran to him, they were all amazed, in fear and did not believe it was really him.
We are all born into this sin nature. My babies sure didn't sin. But as they grew they surely did because they had a sin nature. There are babies born daily... they have not sinned.Quote:
Originally Posted by JoeT777
God is no respecter of persons... Mary needed a savior too.
It took a few minutes to figure out where this question came from. We hadn't talked on this thread whether Jesus was followed by Mary during his ministry. I did find on another thread where I asked just how we could know that Mary did or didn't follow Christ around Palestine. We don't know, and will likely never know, whether she did or didn't. I contend that it was likely that she did, at least at a distance, and it's even more likely in the last few month of His ministry than at the start. The reason being is that we see her at Calvary and at most of the gatherings with the Apostles; presumably with John.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wondergirl
It's true; it's a man's world. And it was even more of a man's world in Christ's time. Women would be assigned roles much like the older girls in the household of the 1950's. (Notice I didn't say 'of today'). They were expected to mind, keep house, cook, and work in the fields, etc. I'm afraid that most women today couldn't muster up to the rigors of daily life. (In the same breath let me say that the differences are, in most ways, an improvement.) All of which is to say that society in year 1 was much different than today.
I do contend that it is more likely that Mary lived an ascetic life, or at least started living a life of chastity. But, here too, we have little evidence. Asceticism isn't a New Testament invention of Catholic monks. Various Jewish communities practiced different degrees of asceticism, as do the Religious of today's Church. Some Jews and some Christians would exercise body, mind and spiritual along with fasts for the purpose of strengthening virtue. The practice dates as far back as the Prophets. The Essenes or Healers were the most notable in Christ's time. Some came from the Jewish sect of Pharisees; a good analogy might be to say they were the Puritans of the Old Testament Law. There are those who believe Paul might have lived an ascetic life because he described himself as a 'Pharisee, the son Pharisees.' Life in these communities sometimes included both men and women. It was a unique lifestyle marked by poverty, chastity, labor, solitude, and prayer. Many believe that Mary may have lived in one of these communities and had set out to live a life of Holy chastity. That being the case, she wouldn't have been bound by the Jewish ordinance to marry and have children. There are a few hints in scripture such as, 'Joseph was a just man' was no simple tribute made by his divine visitor. It implied that Joseph had lived a Holy life, a righteous life, “an ordinary sort of man on whom God relied to do great things,” (St. Josemaria Escriva). “Saint Joseph was a just man, a tireless worker, the upright guardian of those entrusted to his care. May he always guard, protect and enlighten families.” Pope John Paul II.
Evidence exists in early Christian writings of an early tradition which included the concept of an Immaculate Mary. While we can't rely on all these writing like we can the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John they tell of the nature of early Christian worship and society. Some are pseudepigraphic in nature, one such writing is The Gospel of James sometimes, called Protoevangelium of James. The problem is that while this work can be dated to 150 A.D. the authorship is questionable. The Gospel of James claims to have been written by James, presumably James the Just, however most scholars are of the opinion that it is pseudography. What's important to us here is that the Gospel of James provides us a look into early Church Tradition of Mary's perpetual virginity and a veneration of Mary and at least proposes at least one idea of why Mary chose an ascetic life. And too,it shows that the Immaculate Conception wasn't a recent construct.
Nevertheless, all of the above is speculation, but, more likely than your suggestion that she was a homebody or a concubine. Whatever gave you that idea anyway; how do you know Martha and Mary were 'homebodies'? I do have a great deal of trouble with even thinking that “Mary M. was Jesus' mistress or wife.” Don't tell me, after hounding me for 'Scriptural proof,' time and time again, that you put more credence in Dan Brown than a 2,000 year old Christian tradition of an Immaculate Mary?
JoeT
I stopped reading when I came to this. Her adopted patriarch??
Classy I think that is the most profound refuting of the argument that Mary had to be free of original sin to be the mother of Jesus. It is so obvious and yet none of us has said it. The RCC dogma in fact means that Mary didn't need a saviour and all need a saviour. If Mary was free from original sin then Mary wasn't human, and therefore Jesus wasn't human and his sacrifice could not have accomplished our redemption.Quote:
Originally Posted by classyT
I actually agree with you... no one had a clue and their actions more than their words speak volumes. When the Lord asked the disciples who did they say he is... Peter spoke right up and announced He was the Christ the son of the living God. The Lord said flesh and blood hadn't revealed that to Peter but the Holy Spirit had. We can conclude they didn't know by their actions. Mary was no different. She KNEW how he was conceived but she hadn't a clue of what he was going to do and who he REALLY WAS. Not until after the resurrection... and EVEN then they didn't understand everything.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fr_Chuck
JoeT, John was her patriarch?? Do you know what that means?
I explained somewhere what a patriarch was. It's a 'father' like figure in charge of the family.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wondergirl
JoeT
And she got one. Catholics believe that when Mary was conceived she received sanctifying grace at that very instant in time her soul was infused. Thus, she was exempted from the stain of original sin. In essence she received the same sanctifying graces one receives at Baptism, the removal and the effects of original sin except for the temporal punishment of death given Adam. You might say she received her sanctifying graces in advance of her Holy life. CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA: Immaculate ConceptionQuote:
Originally Posted by classyT
JoeT
I fully agree with Fr_Chuck and Joe.
I know that some others were like me years ago who had trouble with some beliefs about Mary.
But when I finally came to realize the Church is and was indeed the pilar and foundation of the truth and the early fathers indicated the immaculate conception, I came to accept it.
I now see no reason to change that belief.
Peace and kindness,
Fred
"Woman, behold thy son."Quote:
Originally Posted by JoeT777
John was to replace Jesus as Mary's son -- a foster son, as it were.
Nevertheless, he took care of her – relationships work 2 waysQuote:
Originally Posted by Wondergirl
So, call me 'Uncle Backwards'.
We don't know to what extent, if any. Joseph may still have been alive too.Quote:
Originally Posted by JoeT777
Joe,
Will Do.
LOL
Fred
Wondergirl,
That is true.
Unfortunately we know very little about Saint Joseph.
We do believe that he was an excellent care giver to Jesus and Mary while he was alive because God chose him to be such.
Peace and kindness,
Fred
My understanding, Joe, is that without the sacrifice of Jesus Christ it is not possible to receive the sancification that baptism confers. Certainly those baptised by John were not sanctified in this manner, and what you are saying is, in effect, Mary would have been unable to exercise her free will and refuse to carry the Christ child because her path had already been determined for her. So if Mary were set aside, and had not free will, she is something other than human and therefore Jesus was not human, 100% man. Jesus is the only sinless being ever born because his father the Holy Spirit did not carry the sin of Adam.Quote:
Originally Posted by JoeT777
It can be seen why it took the Pope speaking infalliably to proclaim this doctrine, there is such great difficulty with it.
paraclete,
In case you did not know, "With God all things are possible"!!
Peace abd kindness,
Fred
Yup. That's how God was able to have a sinful woman give birth to His perfect Son.Quote:
Originally Posted by arcura
Fred, Joe,Quote:
Originally Posted by arcura
So TRUE! With God ALL things ARE possible. But we can't just make stuff up to fit our beliefs. If something as big as Mary never sinned, or suddenly became UNABLE to sin was in the Bible then I would accept it. But it isn't there... I believe we are told NOT to add to it. Making Mary more than she was... is not fair to her. I believe if she were here today, she'd be appalled.( oh YES I DID just say that.. ) She was a woman, born into sin through no fault of her own just like you and me. According to the Bible she found favor in God's eyes and became pregnant with God himself by the power of the Holy Spirit. Why add more than what the Bible records about her? Her role is AWESOME and miracle enough.
I still believe that Mary was completely sin free when Jesus was born. I see it as necessary.
Otherwise it is like trying to drink clean water from a dirty class.
The water become tainted.
Jesus was NOT tainted.
Fred
Your church can have a sinless Mary come from a sinful Anne, but not a sinless Jesus come from a sinful Mary?Quote:
Originally Posted by arcura
Wondergirl,
Please at least try to understand why the Catholics and others believe that Mary was sinless.
It is all based on Holy Scripture as has been posted here.
I am not trying to get you to chnge your mind, just to understand.
We Christians need to get along and not fight one another.
We are at war with the world.
Peace and kindness, Fred.
I love you to pieces, Fred, and am not fighting with you. Please answer my question. I am trying to understand.Quote:
Originally Posted by arcura
Quote:
Originally Posted by arcura
Sorry Fred, I must have missed the post where you posted the actual scripture where it states that Mary was conceived and born of a virgin. So could you please repost it for us?
But just in case you don't have one, could you also please explain all these virgin births going back 20 or 30 generations leading up to Mary being totally sinless.
Well to quote the Bible and something you recently posted... With GOD ALL things are possible. ;) He was fully God, fully man and the Bible never records that Mary was sinless... only the Lord Jesus. I will shut up now because I'm saying the same thing over and over... I reckon you know where I stand and why. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by arcura
Wondergirl,
As I mentioned, it is a matter of deductive reasoning that Mary had to be sinless to give birth to a pure Jesus.
He was full of grace and most blessed of all women from God and therefore without sin via an emaculate conception from her mother.
Luke 1:28 And the angel being come in, said unto her: Hail, full of grace, the Lord is with thee: blessed art thou among women.
Luke 1:42 And she cried out with a loud voice, and said: Blessed art thou among women, and blessed is the fruit of thy womb.
Luke 1:45 And blessed art thou that hast believed, because those things shall be accomplished that were spoken to thee by the Lord.
Oeace and kindness,
Fred
Sorry Fred but God does not follow man's logic because nothing about the way in which we are redeemed is logical from man's perspective and there is no reason given by God why he should have followed your deductive reasoning in relation to the birth of Jesus. 2+2 does not equal fiveQuote:
Originally Posted by arcura
paraclete,
I USE the Holy Bible for that and God DOES allow me to think.
Thank You,
Fred
Yes, Fred. I got that part. Now, answer my question: Why wasn't Anne sinless too?Quote:
Originally Posted by arcura
Wondergirl,
There was no need for Ann to be sinless because God made her conception of Mary to be immaculate.
I thought that you understood that.
Peace and kindness,
Fred
Therefore, there was no need for Mary to be sinless because God made the conception of Jesus to be immaculate.Quote:
Originally Posted by arcura
Wondergirl,
That is one way to look at it but I do not.
I think Jesus needed to come from a pure vessel.
It's like drinking pure water from a clean glass.
I hope that you can understand my thinking on that.
Peace and kindness,
Fred
Look at what you wrote. I know what you mean, but without a virgin Mary when explaining, what you will always end up with is... "God made Jesus"; or something just like that. If Jesus is God, HOW CAN HE BE MADE? God is not created, therefore God cannot make God.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wondergirl
JoeT
JoeT7,
Excellent point well made.
Peace and kindness,
Fred
Yes, Joe, look VERY CAREFULLY at what I wrote. I said very clearly, "God made the CONCEPTION of Jesus to be sinless."Quote:
Originally Posted by JoeT777
Thus, a sinless Mary needed to come from a pure vessel.Quote:
Originally Posted by arcura
Then He's not begotten, but made, whether it's through conception or very carefully through conception.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wondergirl
JoeT
| All times are GMT -7. The time now is 08:12 PM. |