The Holy Mother Virgin Mary

[popeman]

I guess we can talk volumes about Moses parting the seas and striking stones for water but i thought there was a Mary discussion here? Something about Mary being less than what Catholic Christians believe? Popeman

[RND]

I guess we can talk volumes about Moses parting the seas and striking stones for water but i thought there was a Mary discussion here? Something about Mary being less than what Catholic Christians believe? Popeman

I'll ask the question again then, "Does the Torah or Tanakh speak of Mary directly?"

[RND]

<< cough cough >>

Remember, when Abraham received all of God's promises he was still a "gentile."

[darinhouston]

RND wrote:
Do Moses or any of the other prophets count? They were "technically" Christian.

<< cough cough >>

Did you mean "practically?" "Technically," they were not Christian if by that you mean "follower of Christ." They were justified (in my mind), but I don't think we could call them Christians.

[RND]

RND wrote:
Do Moses or any of the other prophets count? They were "technically" Christian.

<< cough cough >>

Did you mean "practically?" "Technically," they were not Christian if by that you mean "follower of Christ." They were justified (in my mind), but I don't think we could call them Christians.

I see what you mean Darin but due to their faith, the same faith in Christ that we have, they were "technically" followers of Christ. Abraham "rejoiced" to see the day of the Messiah.

[popeman]

Not knowing about this man, I had to Google him. Amongst the many things said about him….Arthur Schopenhauer (February 22, 1788 – September 21, 1860) was a German Philosopher for his atheistic pessimism and philosophical clarity.…..Schopenhauer favored a lifestyle of negating human desires, similar to the teachings of Buddhism.

I guess your choice of early authors is questionable when trying to relate subjects of faith/reflection to the forum readers. If you could pick a Christian reference with less atheistic, Buddhist leanings maybe it may mean more. We are still waiting for some earlier Christians rather than “atheistic philosophers” from the 1800’s. With that, let me leave you with one….

Irenaeus, Against Heresies: Book V, Chapter XIX.—A comparison is instituted between the disobedient and sinning Eve and the Virgin Mary, her patroness.

“That the Lord then was manifestly coming to His own things, and was sustaining them by means of that creation which is supported by Himself, and was making a recapitulation of that disobedience which had occurred in connection with a tree, through the obedience which was [exhibited by Himself when He hung] upon a tree, [the effects] also of that deception being done away with, by which that virgin Eve, who was already espoused to a man, was unhappily misled,—was happily announced, through means of the truth [spoken] by the angel to the Virgin Mary, who was [also espoused] to a man. The text is here most uncertain and obscure. For just as the former was led astray by the word of an angel, so that she fled from God when she had transgressed His word; so did the latter, by an angelic communication, receive the glad tidings that she should sustain (portaret) God, being obedient to His word. And if the former [Eve] did disobey God, yet the latter [Mary] was persuaded to be obedient to God, in order that the Virgin Mary might become the patroness [This word patroness can be ambiguous. The Latin may stand for Gr. ἀντίληψις, —a person called in to help, or to take hold of the other end of a burden. The argument implies that Mary was thus the counterpart or balance of Eve.] of the virgin Eve. And thus, as the human race fell into bondage to death by means of a virgin, so is it rescued by a virgin; virginal disobedience having been balanced in the opposite scale by virginal obedience. For in the same way the sin of the first created man (protoplasti) receives amendment by the correction of the First-begotten, and the coming of the serpent is conquered by the harmlessness of the dove, those bonds being unloosed by which we had been fast bound to death.”

Irenaeus holds a high place in Christian ecclesiastical writings. He was also the Bishop of Lyons who was born in Proconsular Asia in the first half of the second century approximately 115 and 125AD. When Irenaeus was very young, Irenaeus had seen and heard the Bishop Polycarp who was a disciple of Apostle John. He wrote Adversus haereses, about the "Detection and Overthrow of the False Knowledge" Gnosticism. His writing are spoken about with affirmation in the writings of Eusebius, Bishop of Cæsarea about 260AD.

Even though the first mention of “Catholic” was around 100AD to reference a “general, universal” faith/church (Gk: katholikós , Latin: Catholicus). Protestants always reference the start of the “heretical” Catholic faith as a “state” religion at the 1st Council of Nicea with Emperor Constantine in 325AD. The implication being that Christianity was tainted after 325AD by Catholic doctrine and everyone prior was a good Christian (which we know is not the case with the numerous interpretations).

So here you have ancient, early Christians before the Catholic Church was formed (per Protestant standards) arguing about Mary being the 2nd Eve.

Al I have asked for is a little research on your part to show me what I asked for in several comments before, yet all I get is an atheist German philosopher from the 1800’s. You would show the readers of this forum volumes if you did some of this research. If there was so much Protestant theology agreement in these early years than there should be volumes of writing to support your contention. I did just a little bit above for you and others to read. Peace, Popeman

[Jill]

.

[SteveF]

popeman wrote

Protestants always reference the start of the “heretical” Catholic faith as a “state” religion at the 1st Council of Nicea with Emperor Constantine in 325AD. The implication being that Christianity was tainted after 325AD by Catholic doctrine and everyone prior was a good Christian (which we know is not the case with the numerous interpretations).

Popeman, I'm not Catholic, but I must admit this is a widespread misconception in Protestant circles. I was fed this simplistic notion and, after learning otherwise, have had to inform others of the truth. I will say though, the Church never looked the same again after the early to mid 300's. The amalgamation of the Church with the state also paved the way for a lot of future corruption.

Having said that, it must be frustrating talking with many Protestants who don't realize that a number of RC doctrines have their seedlings in existence prior to 325. Since the Galatian Church proved Christians could quickly shift from the teachings of the apostles, my preference is to give priority to the message of Jesus and his immediate messangers (the apostles).

[RND]

Not knowing about this man, I had to Google him. Amongst the many things said about him….Arthur Schopenhauer (February 22, 1788 – September 21, 1860) was a German Philosopher for his atheistic pessimism and philosophical clarity.…..Schopenhauer favored a lifestyle of negating human desires, similar to the teachings of Buddhism.

I guess your choice of early authors is questionable when trying to relate subjects of faith/reflection to the forum readers. If you could pick a Christian reference with less atheistic, Buddhist leanings maybe it may mean more. We are still waiting for some earlier Christians rather than “atheistic philosophers” from the 1800’s. With that, let me leave you with one….

Popeman, the reason I quote Schopenhauer, in spite of probably knowing more about him than a simple Google search could reveal is simply this: "A blind squirrel finds a nut once in a while."

I don't know which is more tragic his quote or you associating his atheism with me.

Al I have asked for is a little research on your part to show me what I asked for in several comments before, yet all I get is an atheist German philosopher from the 1800’s.

I hope you aren't a defense attorney. The charge that Mary is the typological antitheses of the Ark is not mine to have to justify, it's yours. I just ask questions and comment when necessary. But, I will remind you of my question whenever I get a chance. ""Does the Torah or Tanakh speak of Mary directly?""

BTW, everybody that reads a post of mine, whether it involves Mary or marionettes gets Schopenhauer. You aren't that special!

You would show the readers of this forum volumes if you did some of this research. If there was so much Protestant theology agreement in these early years than there should be volumes of writing to support your contention. I did just a little bit above for you and others to read. Peace, Popeman

Knowing that "Protestantism" didn't officially begin until some Judiatephobe nailed his 95 thesis on the door of the cathedral at Worms it is easy to see why there is so little in the way of "Protestant" though on religious matters and theology at the turn of the 1st century. Seeing that a number were finally unshackled from the chains of bondage of unrelenting dogmatism of Pagan Rome it appears simply we're making up for lost time.

[popeman]

Thanks, SteveF,

Your coments were refreshing compared to what I have been reading. I will acknowledge corruption in the church congregation (found in all christian faiths), but not in Church doctrine. Another day, another time. I think by the tone of circular reasoning ( gets boring because there is no education of the mind) I need to retire from this site for another and/or take my kids out. Tom, email me if you can and I can get you in touch with some pretty good refernce books. Peace baby, Popeman