Results 1 - 5 of 5
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | When did the catholic church go wrong? | Bible general Archive 1 | Emmaus | 26028 | ||
Mary, the New Eve "And the Lord God said to the serpent, ...I will put enmity between you and the woman and between her seed and your seed." Genesis 3:14-15 "A great sign appeared in the sky, a woman clothed with the sun...Then the dragon stood before the woman about to give birth, to devour her child when she gave birth. She gave birth to a son, a male child, destined to rule all the nations with an iron rod." Revelation 12:1,4-5 " And the dragon was angry with the woman and went off to make war against the rest of her offspring." Revelation 12:17 "For this purpose the Son of God was manifested, that he might destroy the works of the devil." 1 John 3:8 "Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign; Behold a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Emmanuel." Isaiah 7:14 "But when the fullness of time was come, God sent forth his Son, born of a woman, born under the law." Galatians 4:4 ________________________________________ It can be seen that the woman of Genesis 3:15 is Mary, the new Eve, for this mention of the "seed of the woman" in scripture is unique. All other mention of seed always refers to man's seed. But Jesus was born in the flesh of a woman, by the power of the Holy Spirit, not by the seed of a man. Mary is the New Eve, the mother of all the living in Christ Jesus according to the Spirit, just as Eve is "the mother of all the living," in Adam according to the flesh. Genesis 3: 20. Jesus is the New Adam. 1 Corinthians 15:45-49 __________________________________________ "Fear not Mary, for thou hast found favor with God...The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Most High shall overshadow thee: therefore the child which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God." Luke 1:30, 35 Here we begin to see that Mary’s dignity grows out of her relationship to Jesus and the Holy Trinity, as does the dignity of every child of God. She is the daughter of the Father, the mother of the Son and the spouse of the Holy Spirit. "Blessed are you who believed that what was spoken to you by the Lord would be fulfilled.... My soul proclaims the greatness of the Lord; my spirit rejoices in God my savior.... Behold from henceforth all generations will call me blessed." Luke 1:45, 46-48 By the same analogy it can be seen that though Eve opened the door to sin and death by her disobedience and "no" to God's command, it was by Adam’s dis- obedience and sin that death entered and enslaved all mankind. So Mary, by her obedience and "yes " to God, opened the door to grace and life for all mankind, which was secured by the obedience of the Savior, Jesus. "Just as through one man's disobedience, many were made sinners, so through the obedience of one shall many be made righteous." Romans 5:19 ___________________________ As in Genesis 3:6, Eve prodded Adam into disobedience and sin, so in John 2:3-5, Mary instigates the beginning of the saving ministry of Jesus by her prodding at Cana. "So she took some of the fruit and ate it; and she also gave some to her husband who was with her and he ate it." Genesis 3:6 "The mother of Jesus said to him, 'They have no wine.' Jesus said to her, 'Woman, how does your concern affect me? My hour has not yet come.' His mother said to the servers, 'Do whatever he tells you.' " John 2:3-5 Those are the last words of Mary recorded in scripture: "Do whatever he tells you." |
||||||
2 | When did the catholic church go wrong? | Bible general Archive 1 | Reformer Joe | 26889 | ||
Demonstrate to me that Revelation 12 literally refers to a single individual. Then go through the whole chapter and demonstrate to me that it refers to Mary. Is Satan really a dragon, too? If your view of Revelation 12 is the best you have to go on in proving Mary is the "new Eve," you have a pretty paper-thin argument. Christ is specifically called the Second Adam in Scripture. We see NO such reference to Mary being the second Eve outside of Catholic dogma. Why can't you just read the New Testament in its entirety and realize that while Mary was indeed blessed by God and honored to bear Jesus in her womb, that she is not in any way a central figure in the Biblical narrative. Jesus? Absolutely; first and foremost. Paul? Certainly. Peter? Without a doubt. Mary? A few scant references outside of the Advent story. It just doesn't wash. Stop making so much of the wedding at Cana! It is such blasphemy to suggest that Mary has to "prod" Jesus -- very God of very God -- into doing what He purposed to do before the foundation of the world. A contemptible heresy is what it is, Emmaus. A violation of the First Commandment, too, at its heart. Romans 5:19 refers to Christ, not Mary. Stop ripping it out of its context and that becomes crystal clear. Hint: refer to verse 17 to see who "the One" is. When tradition takes precedence over the clear understanding of Scripture, theological gymnastics results. --Joe! |
||||||
3 | When did the catholic church go wrong? | Bible general Archive 1 | Emmaus | 26951 | ||
Joe,You make many demands and three serious accusations in your post. "Demonstrate to me that Revelation 12 literally refers to a single individual. Then go through the whole chapter and demonstrate to me that it refers to Mary." And just how much of Revelation and especially Revelation 12 do you take "literally"? Am I to suppose you do no interpretation at all? "Is Satan really a dragon, too?" The correct question is: "Is the dragon really Satan, too?" Yes. And is the son of the woman Jesus? Yes, but does it say that literally naming Jesus? No. And if the other two main characters are persons, logic would allow that the woman is also a real person. It might even be Mary, don’t you think? Or do you have another real person candidate that follows logically? "If your view of Revelation 12 is the best you have to go on in proving Mary is the "new Eve," you have a pretty paper-thin argument. Christ is specifically called the Second Adam in Scripture. We see NO such reference to Mary being the second Eve outside of Catholic dogma." Do you mean that the opinions of the Church Fathers are not outside Catholic dogma? Or are you admitting that they agree with Catholic dogma? "Why can't you just read the New Testament in its entirety and realize that while Mary was indeed blessed by God and honored to bear Jesus in her womb, that she is not in any way a central figure in the Biblical narrative. Jesus? Absolutely; first and foremost. Paul? Certainly. Peter? Without a doubt. Mary? A few scant references outside of the Advent story. It just doesn't wash." Jesus is the central figure in the biblical narrative and all history for that matter. It is just that Mary was literally wrapped around Him body and soul. He was flesh of her flesh and bone of her bone. Is there any better example of complete dedication to God? "Stop making so much of the wedding at Cana! It is such blasphemy to suggest that Mary has to "prod" Jesus -- very God of very God -- into doing what He purposed to do before the foundation of the world. A contemptible heresy is what it is, Emmaus. A violation of the First Commandment, too, at its heart." I did not say Mary “prodded” Jesus, I said Eve prodded Adam and Mary instigated the beginning of Jesus’ ministry. Webster’s defines instigate as "to urge on". "Romans 5:19 refers to Christ, not Mary. Stop ripping it out of its context and that becomes crystal clear. Hint: refer to verse 17 to see who "the One" is." "I did not say Romans 5:19 referred to Mary. I was using it to draw the parallel analogy of Eve and Mary. "When tradition takes precedence over the clear understanding of Scripture, theological gymnastics results." And there is no Calvinist tradition that influences your understanding of scripture? |
||||||
4 | When did the catholic church go wrong? | Bible general Archive 1 | Reformer Joe | 26954 | ||
You wrote: "And just how much of Revelation and especially Revelation 12 do you take 'literally'? Am I to suppose you do no interpretation at all?" Of course I do, but you are the one claiming that it is undoubtedly Mary. You cited Revelation 12 as proof positive that Mary is somehow the "queen of heaven" or whatever you want to call her. Is it really a lamb opening seals in Rev. 4? No. Is Satan actually and literally a dragon? No. Then why must we conclude that the woman in Revelation 12 is literally a woman? I am not stating unequivocally that you MUST be wrong, but your argument needs a lot more support than citing verse 1. Show us how the rest of the narrative reflects that the woman is Mary. You also wrote: "Jesus is the central figure in the biblical narrative and all history for that matter. It is just that Mary was literally wrapped around Him body and soul. He was flesh of her flesh and bone of her bone. Is there any better example of complete dedication to God?" Sur ethere is....Christ's sinless life, obedience to God the Father in all things. While I certainly do not despise Mary, and agree that God chose her, I would not say that being the biological mother of anyone in itself makes one dedicated. I teach public high school, and I see lots of biological mothers who are anything but dedicated. Not saying that Mary wasn't, but Mary was blessed BECAUSE God chose her, and not the other way around. You wrote: "I did not say Mary 'prodded' Jesus, I said Eve prodded Adam and Mary instigated the beginning of Jesus’ ministry. Webster’s defines instigate as 'to urge on'." I quote your last post: "Mary instigates the beginning of the saving ministry of Jesus by her prodding at Cana." Prodding. You wrote: "I did not say Romans 5:19 referred to Mary. I was using it to draw the parallel analogy of Eve and Mary." It doesn't talk about Eve or Mary at all. Please elaborate how Romans 5:19 supports your argument. You wrote: "And there is no Calvinist tradition that influences your understanding of scripture?" Of course I am influenced by it, because it is actually SCRIPTURAL. Sola Scriptura, not riding sidesaddle with man-man doctrine which has no support in the Bible. Any Reformed doctrine does not come from Church pronouncements or fallible men, but solely from the word of God. That is the difference between searching like crazy to find support for veneration of Mary and building a confession of faith from the Word alone. --Joe! |
||||||
5 | When did the catholic church go wrong? | Bible general Archive 1 | Emmaus | 26983 | ||
Well I guess we can now agree on one thing. I did use the word prod instaed of urge after instigate. My mistake. I can only say I did not intend it in the meaning you attributed to me. On the rest we will have to disagree. |
||||||