Needed, (by some), Additions to the Good News of Christ.

[ebia]

"Man has added many things and ordinances to the gospel of Jesus Christ.
Why, when Christ is all sufficient to salvation from sin and to life in God??"

Indeed.  I'm still waiting for you to explain these additions:

1. Sola Scriptura
2. Biblical inerrancy in matters not concerning faith
3. The idea that God only speaks through the bible, and never through his followers or the Church

[sincereheart]

Clearly not.
I ask again, which bit of:
Mary gave birth to Jesus.
Therefore Mary is the mother of Jesus.
Jesus is God
Therefore Mary is the mother of God.
do you have a problem with?


The "Therefore Mary is the mother of God" part.  

but Mary's role - carrying, giving birth to, and nuturing Christ - is on a different order of magnitude.

Why? If Christ didn't think so, why would man? It seems to attempt to humanize God and deify Mary.

Appearences can be deceptive.  Lots of things appear strange or wrong if you don't understand them.

Which is why I'm asking....

[ebia]

The "Therefore Mary is the mother of God" part.  

How can that not follow from the previous two lines?

but Mary's role - carrying, giving birth to, and nuturing Christ - is on a different order of magnitude.

Why? If Christ didn't think so,

Why do you say this?

It seems to attempt to humanize God and deify Mary.

How does it humanize God?   Jesus was fully God and fully man, and that's as humanizing as it needs to get.
Its not intended to deify Mary, but to recognising that she was called to do, and willingly did, something above and beyond what any other mortal has ever done.

Appearences can be deceptive.  Lots of things appear strange or wrong if you don't understand them.

Which is why I'm asking....

Fair enough.  When so many people are accusing, then others get defensive about it.  Fair questions are good - accusations are not.

[sincereheart]

How can that not follow from the previous two lines?

I follow the reasoning - it's logical by man's standards. But I don't see how that makes it right. If God was here before man, how could He possibly have a mother?  

but Mary's role - carrying, giving birth to, and nuturing Christ - is on a different order of magnitude.

Why? If Christ didn't think so, ...

Why do you say this?

Matthew 12:46 While Jesus was still talking to the crowd, his mother and brothers stood outside, wanting to speak to him. 47 Someone told him, "Your mother and brothers are standing outside, wanting to speak to you."
48 He replied to him, "Who is my mother, and who are my brothers?" 49 Pointing to his disciples, he said, "Here are my mother and my brothers. 50 For whoever does the will of my Father in heaven is my brother and sister and mother."
 
Mark 3:31 Then Jesus' mother and brothers arrived. Standing outside, they sent someone in to call him. 32 A crowd was sitting around him, and they told him, "Your mother and brothers are outside looking for you."
33 "Who are my mother and my brothers?" he asked.
34 Then he looked at those seated in a circle around him and said, "Here are my mother and my brothers! 35 Whoever does God's will is my brother and sister and mother."

Luke 8:19 Now Jesus' mother and brothers came to see him, but they were not able to get near him because of the crowd. 20 Someone told him, "Your mother and brothers are standing outside, wanting to see you."
21 He replied, "My mother and brothers are those who hear God's word and put it into practice."

Luke 11:27 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."

How does it humanize God?
By giving Him a mother....

Jesus was fully God and fully man, and that's as humanizing as it needs to get.
I agree!

[ebia]

How can that not follow from the previous two lines?

I follow the reasoning - it's logical by man's standards. But I don't see how that makes it right. If God was here before man, how could He possibly have a mother?  

Because He was born on earth in approximately 1 BC.  Who say's a mother has to exist before her children?

Matthew 12:46 While Jesus was still talking to the crowd, his mother and brothers stood outside, wanting to speak to him. 47 Someone told him, "Your mother and brothers are standing outside, wanting to speak to you."
48 He replied to him, "Who is my mother, and who are my brothers?" 49 Pointing to his disciples, he said, "Here are my mother and my brothers. 50 For whoever does the will of my Father in heaven is my brother and sister and mother."

The point he is trying to get across here, is that we are His family.  Not that His mother isn't special.
 

Mark 3:31 Then Jesus' mother and brothers arrived. Standing outside, they sent someone in to call him. 32 A crowd was sitting around him, and they told him, "Your mother and brothers are outside looking for you."
33 "Who are my mother and my brothers?" he asked.
34 Then he looked at those seated in a circle around him and said, "Here are my mother and my brothers! 35 Whoever does God's will is my brother and sister and mother."

as above.

Luke 8:19 Now Jesus' mother and brothers came to see him, but they were not able to get near him because of the crowd. 20 Someone told him, "Your mother and brothers are standing outside, wanting to see you."
21 He replied, "My mother and brothers are those who hear God's word and put it into practice."

as above

Luke 11:27 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."

Which she did.  Big time.

How does it humanize God?
By giving Him a mother....

Ok, I'll rephrase it.  How does having a mother humanize Him anymore than being born as a helpless infant in a dirty stable, growing up in wretched world, being betrayed by his best mates, and dying the most excrutiatingly painful and humiliating death imaginable?

[ollie]

"Man has added many things and ordinances to the gospel of Jesus Christ.
Why, when Christ is all sufficient to salvation from sin and to life in God??"

Indeed.  I'm still waiting for you to explain these additions:

1. Sola Scriptura
2. Biblical inerrancy in matters not concerning faith
3. The idea that God only speaks through the bible, and never through his followers or the Church

It is I who am asking why the additions. Perhaps you could answer, please, instead of doubling a question back on me about other additions? It is impossible to learn what makes man add to what God has given when the original question is treated in this manner.

The theme of the thread, in so many reworded words to help your understanding of the question, is why man has to add to God's will for man when He has given Christ who is all sufficient for the man of God.

[ebia]

& my point is, that for any set of "additions" that you choose to use as examples, at least one group of people are going to argue that they are not additions.

The real answer to your question is, of course, that, as fallen individuals, we'll manage to mess up anything we get our hands on, either intentionally, unintentionally, or both.

[Dyskolos]

but Mary's role - carrying, giving birth to, and nuturing Christ - is on a different order of magnitude.

Why? If Christ didn't think so, why would man? It seems to attempt to humanize God and deify Mary.

I don't see where you get the 'deify Mary' bit, but emphasizing Mary's role as the mother of Jesus was exactly what you say it was - an attempt to humanize Jesus. I don't think the importance of Mary's role as the mother of God, the proof that Jesus was human, can be overstated.

A lot of scholars think that the nativity narratives, found only in Matthew and Luke, are interpolations by proto-orthodox Christians (the branch of Christianity that eventually became the Catholic Church), who felt they were necessary to battle the popular Gnostic teaching that Jesus was fully divine, and only gave the appearance of being human.

[ollie]

*applauds*

 


And as an extra.... why is Mary considered a perpetual virgin if she was married and Jesus had siblings? And why is Mary considered sinless?  

Mary was considered eternally a virgin because no where in scripture does it say that she had children and the understanding of all the early Church Father's (those who had first hand accounts from the Apostles and others who knew Jesus and His mother) agree with this perpetual virginity.  

Verses used by some to show Christ had brothers and/or sisters can always be shown to be referring to cousins or other more distant relationships.  Besides it must be remembered that Joseph was much older than Mary and could easily have had children from a previous marriage so even if Jesus had true brothers and sisters they could have been half brother and so Mary still could have remained a virgin.  

The point is that the teaching that she remained a virgin  is not contrary to scripture and is supported by the writings of the earliest Christians.

Mary is considered sinless because Jesus/God cannot be in the presence of sin as is clear from Rev 21:27 where nothing unclean can enter heaven.  Therefore so that Mary could be an acceptable vessel to bear our Lord she was kept from sin and saved by Christ prior to her birth.   This teaching also is not contrary to scripture and is supported by the writings of the earliest Christians.

"This teaching also is not contrary to scripture and is supported by the writings of the earliest Christians."


Why are these early writings of the "earliest Christians" not in the Bible?
Is it because they were found to be uninspired of God's Holy Spirit and subject to error and inconsistencies, therefore not
compiled into the inspired writings known as the Bible?

[ollie]

& my point is, that for any set of "additions" that you choose to use as examples, at least one group of people are going to argue that they are not additions.

The real answer to your question is, of course, that, as fallen individuals, we'll manage to mess up anything we get our hands on, either intentionally, unintentionally, or both.

When one is in Christ one is no longer "fallen".

Thanks, it is an answer of sorts.

[ebia]

Why are these early writings of the "earliest Christians" not in the Bible?
Is it because they were found to be uninspired of God's Holy Spirit and subject to error and inconsistencies, therefore not
compiled into the inspired writings known as the Bible?

What's your test for inspired?

Some were rejected because they weren't of apostolic authorship, some because they were simply not good enough or didn't come from a sufficiently reliable source.  Many though, were rejected simply because they were not suitable for reading in Church, which is what the bible was originally intended to be - a book of scriptures suitable for reading in church.

Just because a book wasn't deemed suitable to be included in the bible, doesn't necessarly mean it's inaccurate.

[ebia]

When one is in Christ one is no longer "fallen".

Replace the word "fallen" with "falable" if it makes you happier.  You got the sense of what I was trying to say.

[michael_legna]

Ok, please forgive my ignorance in advance....


Mary is Jesus' mother, Jesus is truly God, Mary is God's mother.  That simple.

So wouldn't that put Mary with God during creation?

Why does her 'status' have to be elevated? Why couldn't she be just a woman who God used - along the lines of Moses, John, Paul, etc? A 'vessel', if you will... Why does she have to be considered 'more holy'? This (along with the pope stuff) really has me thrown! I realize that RCC'ers say it is not worshipping Mary - but to a non-RCC'er it definitely appears to be!

No that would not require Mary to be with God at creation.  She is Jesus' mather not His creator.  Mary has no role in creation.

Why did God elevate Mary?  I don't know - I think it has something to do with her reply to the news that she was to bear Christ.  She basically said let Thy will be done.  As the second Eve she responded with an obedience that directly opposes the disobedience of the first eve.  That gives her a special place in the salvation plan.

As for appearances, remember appearances are not reality.  It may appear to me that something you do has one intent when you really have another, but I am in no position to judge your intent.

[michael_legna]

*applauds*

 


And as an extra.... why is Mary considered a perpetual virgin if she was married and Jesus had siblings? And why is Mary considered sinless?  

Mary was considered eternally a virgin because no where in scripture does it say that she had children and the understanding of all the early Church Father's (those who had first hand accounts from the Apostles and others who knew Jesus and His mother) agree with this perpetual virginity.  

Verses used by some to show Christ had brothers and/or sisters can always be shown to be referring to cousins or other more distant relationships.  Besides it must be remembered that Joseph was much older than Mary and could easily have had children from a previous marriage so even if Jesus had true brothers and sisters they could have been half brother and so Mary still could have remained a virgin.  

The point is that the teaching that she remained a virgin  is not contrary to scripture and is supported by the writings of the earliest Christians.

Mary is considered sinless because Jesus/God cannot be in the presence of sin as is clear from Rev 21:27 where nothing unclean can enter heaven.  Therefore so that Mary could be an acceptable vessel to bear our Lord she was kept from sin and saved by Christ prior to her birth.   This teaching also is not contrary to scripture and is supported by the writings of the earliest Christians.

Nonsense, all you have quoted is traditional teaching of the RCC.

Scripture does not substantiate your allegations, it is clear Joseph and Mary had sons and daughters.

There is not a shred of evidence Joseph had any children by any previous marriage.

Keep dreaming....

Mary, was not a perpetual virgin and neither was she immaculately concevied, nor taken bodily into heaven, it is all a concotion of someones imagination, taught as thou it is the Word of God.

She was a plain ole sinner in need of a Savior just like every run of the mill human, she was chosen by God to give birth to the Child Jesus, even she says she is a sinner;

Lk 1
41  And it came to pass, that, when Elisabeth heard the salutation of Mary, the babe leaped in her womb; and Elisabeth was filled with the Holy Ghost:
42  And she spake out with a loud voice, and said, Blessed art thou among women, and blessed is the fruit of thy womb.
43  And whence is this to me, that the mother of my Lord should come to me?
44  For, lo, as soon as the voice of thy salutation sounded in mine ears, the babe leaped in my womb for joy.
45  And blessed is she that believed: for there shall be a performance of those things which were told her from the Lord.
46  And Mary said, My soul doth magnify the Lord,
47  And my spirit hath rejoiced in God my Saviour.
48  For he hath regarded the low estate of his handmaiden: for, behold, from henceforth all generations shall call me blessed.
49  For he that is mighty hath done to me great things; and holy is his name.
50  And his mercy is on them that fear him from generation to generation.
51  He hath showed strength with his arm; he hath scattered the proud in the imagination of their hearts.
52  He hath put down the mighty from their seats, and exalted them of low degree.
53  He hath filled the hungry with good things; and the rich he hath sent empty away.
54  He hath holpen his servant Israel, in remembrance of his mercy;
55  As he spake to our fathers, to Abraham, and to his seed for ever.
56  And Mary abode with her about three months, and returned to her own house.


Petro

Petro do you ever read what I write.  I said Mary had Jesus as a savior.  The verse you quote cannot be interpreted even by you to say that the Catholic teaching says Mary doesn't claim Christ as a savior.  In fact Mary if anything it supports the idea that Mary was saved prior to her birth or at least prior to her pregnancy since she already recognizes Jesus as her savior before anyone else and before He actually dies on the cross in the sacrifice you put all your faith in to the exclusion of all the other teachings of scripture.

As for there being no evidence in scripture that she was a perpetual virgin.  I agree, but Catholics don't hold to the man made idea of sola scriptura.  I said and still contend that there is nothing in scripture contrary to the doctrine of perpetual virginity and rather than address that you drag out another strawman to attack.

[sincereheart]

Verses used by some to show Christ had brothers and/or sisters can always be shown to be referring to cousins or other more distant relationships.  Besides it must be remembered that Joseph was much older than Mary and could easily have had children from a previous marriage so even if Jesus had true brothers and sisters they could have been half brother and so Mary still could have remained a virgin.

Where do I find more on this? Being non-RCC, I would like Scripture on it. But if it isn't there, where do your early church fathers explain it? Sorry, 'it' being; Joseph's age, previous marriage, possibility of Mary's step-parenting, being married to Mary and not ummm.... consumating the marriage (so to speak).

Why did God elevate Mary?

Did God elevate Mary or did man?  

It may appear to me that something you do has one intent when you really have another, but I am in no position to judge your intent.

I realize appearances are simply what things appear to be. That being told, I can tell you what I don't understand and you can explain it - if you so choose.