Question for Protestants who deny Mary's Virginity

[Josiah]

Truth matters. 

Either that or you just love picking fights and have a compulsive need to win every argument.   

.... it's that truth matters.  For some of us, anyway.




.

[Cobalt1959]

Why are we arguing about this?

As I've said before, I'm a Christian, which means that my faith is about Jesus.  Not Mary.  Tempers are flaring all over the place in here.  Mods, can we bring this fruitless discussion to a merciful end?  Pleeeez?

So. . . if there are people going around preaching false doctrine, you could really care less?

[stevehut]

I care, Cobalt.  But as I said before, tempers are flaring and ungodly attitudes are showing.    Nothing godly about that, and we shouldn't encourage such in here.

[chestertonrules]

Why are we arguing about this?

As I've said before, I'm a Christian, which means that my faith is about Jesus.  Not Mary.  Tempers are flaring all over the place in here.  Mods, can we bring this fruitless discussion to a merciful end?  Pleeeez?

Your comment exposes the fundamental flaw in protestant thinking about Mary.  Everything about Mary is about Jesus.  Mary's role is relevant to Christians because she is the mother of Jesus, chosen by God to bring him into the world. 

Much of the theology regarding Mary is directly related to the Arian heresies, which denied the divinity of Christ.  In defending his divinity, theologians were forced to examince the role of Mary more closely.

From the Catechism:

970 "Mary's function as mother of men in no way obscures or diminishes this unique mediation of Christ, but rather shows its power. But the Blessed Virgin's salutary influence on men . . . flows forth from the superabundance of the merits of Christ, rests on his mediation, depends entirely on it, and draws all its power from it."513 "No creature could ever be counted along with the Incarnate Word and Redeemer; but just as the priesthood of Christ is shared in various ways both by his ministers and the faithful, and as the one goodness of God is radiated in different ways among his creatures, so also the unique mediation of the Redeemer does not exclude but rather gives rise to a manifold cooperation which is but a sharing in this one source."514

[Cobalt1959]

Your comment exposes the fundamental flaw in protestant thinking about Mary.  Everything about Mary is about Jesus.  Mary's role is relevant to Christians because she is the mother of Jesus, chosen by God to bring him into the world. 

Much of the theology regarding Mary is directly related to the Arian heresies, which denied the divinity of Christ.  In defending his divinity, theologians were forced to examince the role of Mary more closely.

From the Catechism:

970 "Mary's function as mother of men in no way obscures or diminishes this unique mediation of Christ, but rather shows its power. But the Blessed Virgin's salutary influence on men . . . flows forth from the superabundance of the merits of Christ, rests on his mediation, depends entirely on it, and draws all its power from it."513 "No creature could ever be counted along with the Incarnate Word and Redeemer; but just as the priesthood of Christ is shared in various ways both by his ministers and the faithful, and as the one goodness of God is radiated in different ways among his creatures, so also the unique mediation of the Redeemer does not exclude but rather gives rise to a manifold cooperation which is but a sharing in this one source."514

No, actually it exposes the fundamental flaw in Catholic doctrine, that there is always something else required beyond the finished work of Christ on the cross.  That something else is always focused on instead of Christ.  Because Mary worship does not lead one to Christ, it leads one to Mary.  It elevates Mary to a position that she does not, and never has, in all actuality, occupied and it lowers Jesus into a subservient position to Mary.  The Bible's central figure is always Christ.  Not Mary.  Not Saints.  Not works.  Not the Pope.  If the RCC took the statement above seriously, there would be no worship or veneration of Mary, because it is nowhere required in scripture.  Mary play no signifigant role, that we know of, in the founding of the church.  She is not even mentioned in the Bible after Jesus commands John to care for her as his own mother.  The whole premise of the thread is bogus anyway, since we have clear scripture that says Joseph had sex with Mary.  So you aren't arguing with us, you are arguing with the Bible.

[chestertonrules]

Your comment exposes the fundamental flaw in protestant thinking about Mary.  Everything about Mary is about Jesus.  Mary's role is relevant to Christians because she is the mother of Jesus, chosen by God to bring him into the world. 

Much of the theology regarding Mary is directly related to the Arian heresies, which denied the divinity of Christ.  In defending his divinity, theologians were forced to examince the role of Mary more closely.

From the Catechism:

970 "Mary's function as mother of men in no way obscures or diminishes this unique mediation of Christ, but rather shows its power. But the Blessed Virgin's salutary influence on men . . . flows forth from the superabundance of the merits of Christ, rests on his mediation, depends entirely on it, and draws all its power from it."513 "No creature could ever be counted along with the Incarnate Word and Redeemer; but just as the priesthood of Christ is shared in various ways both by his ministers and the faithful, and as the one goodness of God is radiated in different ways among his creatures, so also the unique mediation of the Redeemer does not exclude but rather gives rise to a manifold cooperation which is but a sharing in this one source."514

No, actually it exposes the fundamental flaw in Catholic doctrine, that there is always something else required beyond the finished work of Christ on the cross.  That something else is always focused on instead of Christ.  Because Mary worship does not lead one to Christ, it leads one to Mary.  It elevates Mary to a position that she does not, and never has, in all actuality, occupied and it lowers Jesus into a subservient position to Mary.  The Bible's central figure is always Christ.  Not Mary.  Not Saints.  Not works.  Not the Pope.  If the RCC took the statement above seriously, there would be no worship or veneration of Mary, because it is nowhere required in scripture.  Mary play no signifigant role, that we know of, in the founding of the church.  She is not even mentioned in the Bible after Jesus commands John to care for her as his own mother.  The whole premise of the thread is bogus anyway, since we have clear scripture that says Joseph had sex with Mary.  So you aren't arguing with us, you are arguing with the Bible.

Given that Christ is the central figure in the universe, God made flesh, then isn't the fact that God chose Mary to be his own Mother relevant to our faith?


You don't seem to know much about Catholicism, which is probably not your fault.

Here are the first words from the prologue of the Catholic Catechism:

PROLOGUE
"FATHER,... this is eternal life, that they may know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom you have sent."
"God our Saviour desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth."
"There is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved"- than the name of JESUS.

[Josiah]

.

Proof?

A word you use a LOT...

Okay.  Let's recall YOUR mandate and the ISSUE here:  "PROVE IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! And I don't mean just some interpretation of something or some implication you see, I mean PROVE IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! that it is a dogmatic fact of highest importance to all and greatest certainty of Truth that MARY HAD NO SEX EVER!"  

We're waiting.  
Still
(Can't fault us for impatience!)


 





.

[Hehealedme]

.

[chestertonrules]

Your comment exposes the fundamental flaw in protestant thinking about Mary.  Everything about Mary is about Jesus.  Mary's role is relevant to Christians because she is the mother of Jesus, chosen by God to bring him into the world. 

Much of the theology regarding Mary is directly related to the Arian heresies, which denied the divinity of Christ.  In defending his divinity, theologians were forced to examince the role of Mary more closely.

From the Catechism:

970 "Mary's function as mother of men in no way obscures or diminishes this unique mediation of Christ, but rather shows its power. But the Blessed Virgin's salutary influence on men . . . flows forth from the superabundance of the merits of Christ, rests on his mediation, depends entirely on it, and draws all its power from it."513 "No creature could ever be counted along with the Incarnate Word and Redeemer; but just as the priesthood of Christ is shared in various ways both by his ministers and the faithful, and as the one goodness of God is radiated in different ways among his creatures, so also the unique mediation of the Redeemer does not exclude but rather gives rise to a manifold cooperation which is but a sharing in this one source."514

No, actually it exposes the fundamental flaw in Catholic doctrine, that there is always something else required beyond the finished work of Christ on the cross.  That something else is always focused on instead of Christ.  Because Mary worship does not lead one to Christ, it leads one to Mary.  It elevates Mary to a position that she does not, and never has, in all actuality, occupied and it lowers Jesus into a subservient position to Mary.  The Bible's central figure is always Christ.  Not Mary.  Not Saints.  Not works.  Not the Pope.  If the RCC took the statement above seriously, there would be no worship or veneration of Mary, because it is nowhere required in scripture.  Mary play no signifigant role, that we know of, in the founding of the church.  She is not even mentioned in the Bible after Jesus commands John to care for her as his own mother.  The whole premise of the thread is bogus anyway, since we have clear scripture that says Joseph had sex with Mary.  So you aren't arguing with us, you are arguing with the Bible.

Given that Christ is the central figure in the universe, God made flesh, then isn't the fact that God chose Mary to be his own Mother relevant to our faith?


You don't seem to know much about Catholicism, which is probably not your fault.

Here are the first words from the prologue of the Catholic Catechism:

PROLOGUE
"FATHER,... this is eternal life, that they may know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom you have sent."
"God our Saviour desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth."
"There is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved"- than the name of JESUS.

If, as you say, there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved, then WHY FOCUS ON MARY SO MUCH ALL THE TIME?...WHAT'S THE PURPOSE OF THIS ? ??
After all, God could have very well chosen any other woman that believed as much as Mary did!...the Bible nowhere describes Mary as anything but an ordinary human female whom God chose to be the mother of the Lord Jesus Christ. Mary was undoubtedly a godly woman (Luke 1:28). She was surely a wonderful wife and mother. And Jesus definitely loved and cherished His mother (John 19:27).

Catholics focus on Jesus and all of his teachings.  Protestants are hung up on disregarding Mary.


Protestants have systematically disregarded much of the teachings of Christ and the Church over the past 500 years.

Protestants have watered down the faith through rationalism and humanism.

It is as if you don't really believe in the power of Jesus on earth.

[Josiah]

Given that Christ is the central figure in the universe, God made flesh, then isn't the fact that God chose Mary to be his own Mother relevant to our faith?

.... let's assume that it is.

Now, IF truth about Mary matters at all to you, IF not gossiping about Mary matters to you, then should it matter if what two denominations shout about Her is true?  If She is the most important and esteemed person in the universe, why does truth and honest matter not at all in Her case?

And how does THAT provide the MANDATE for views about Mary, as LightHammer put it (in one of his most Catholic moments):  "PROVE IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! And I don't mean just some interpretation of something or some implication you see, I mean PROVE IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! that it is a DOGMATIC FACT of highest importance to all and greatest certainty of Truth that MARY HAD NO SEX EVER?"

Here are the first words from the prologue of the Catholic Catechism:

PROLOGUE
"FATHER,... this is eternal life, that they may know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom you have sent."
"God our Saviour desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth."
"There is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved"- than the name of JESUS.

Thank you.   But the diversions, circumventions, evasions (now for over 160 PAGES of posts) only serve to avoid the issue.   Two denominations (among the 50,000 some Catholics insist exist) insist in the boldest, strongest way possible that it is a DOGMATIC fact of highest importance to all and greatest certainty of Truth that MARY HAD NO SEX EVER.  It's about Mary and it's about sex.  If you are correct and Mary is the most important, most esteemed human in the universe, then shouldn't truth and honesty matter MORE in her case rather than LESS?   If someone posted here how often you have sex, would it matter at all if such were true?  Would you care?  Would you consider it our business (indeed, a matter of HIGHEST importance to all and GREATEST certainty of Truth)?  I was taught in the CC that to spread a story about someone (especially a personal story of potential embarrassment and hurt) without personal confirmation is the definition of sin and is a rather serious sin, is Mary the single exception to that?  



.

[LightHammer]

HealedMe asked the legitimate question. It was not a diversion on our part at all, Josiah.

[Josiah]

Catholics focus on Jesus and all of his teachings.  Protestants are hung up on Mary.

Sorry, but that is silly and absurd.  And I find it incredible that you would post it.


Of the 50,000 denominations some Catholics insist exist, there are TWO (do you know what percentage that is?) that SHOUT - to the very highest level of importance - that Mary Had No Sex Ever.  And just one (do you know what percentage that is?) that SHOUTS - to the very highest level possible - that Mary Was Conceived Immaculately and that Mary Was Assumed Into Heaven Upon Her Death or Undeath - I Don't Know Which."  

In the 49,998 other denominations, there is SILENCE about all this.   Just as we find from Mary, Joseph, Jesus, all 13 Apostles and from God's Scriptures.   SILENCE.   How is this proof that the 49,998 denominations are obsessing over Mary whereas the RCC is silent?


 





.

[Lively Stone]

No, actually it exposes the fundamental flaw in Catholic doctrine, that there is always something else required beyond the finished work of Christ on the cross.  That something else is always focused on instead of Christ.  Because Mary worship does not lead one to Christ, it leads one to Mary.  It elevates Mary to a position that she does not, and never has, in all actuality, occupied and it lowers Jesus into a subservient position to Mary.  The Bible's central figure is always Christ.  Not Mary.  Not Saints.  Not works.  Not the Pope.  If the RCC took the statement above seriously, there would be no worship or veneration of Mary, because it is nowhere required in scripture.  Mary play no signifigant role, that we know of, in the founding of the church.  She is not even mentioned in the Bible after Jesus commands John to care for her as his own mother.  The whole premise of the thread is bogus anyway, since we have clear scripture that says Joseph had sex with Mary.  So you aren't arguing with us, you are arguing with the Bible.

Indeed! Manna to you!