Mary, the right “type” of mother? (2)
Yesterday I took a break from my series on Mary, but today I would like to continue looking at some further objections raised by a reader, Monica in the comments section of an old post concerning The Ark of the New Covenant.
Today’s discussion will focus around the notion that Mary is enthroned as Queen of Heaven.
The Most Painted Lady in History
After her initial comments, Monica referred to some paintings she had seen of the Blessed Virgin in Heaven:
I have seen pictures of Mary sitting next to God in His throne as she was was co-equal with God when she was only a human like any of us.
I think it must first be said that perhaps it would be better to object to the actual dogmatic teaching of the Catholic Church, rather than criticizing some unnamed artwork whose creator might have taken some artistic liberties in his work. I would recommend the Catechism as a concise and accurate encapsulation of Catholic belief concerning Mary.
Regardless, I would still suggest that Monica has made something of a mental leap in her objection. Does being on a throne in Heaven automatically elevate Mary to equality with God? After all, in the Book of Revelation, we are told of twenty-four elders who also have thrones in Heaven (Revelation 4:4)…yet there’s no implication that they are therefore co-equal with God.
Perhaps the issue is the physical position of Mary in the painting? Is Monica objecting the fact that in this painting Mary is sitting “next to God”? Again, I don’t see why this would necessitate or even imply equality with God, particularly since the Church explicitly teaches that Mary is not divine.
I think it might be helpful to spend some time looking at the Biblical typology that is in the background here in the hope of clearing up the confusion…
Would you really not offer your mother a seat?
In Jesus, the Kingdom of David is restored, renewed and elevated. Therefore, to understand the Kingdom of God, we need to look at the earthly foreshadow recorded in the Old Testament. For our purposes today, I’d like to look at a particular event in the life of David’s son, Solomon, found in 1 Kings 2:13-25.
A man comes to the Queen and asks her to intercede on his behalf before the King. Sound familiar..? The Queen in this case is Bathsheba. Since the King had many wives, the Queen of the Kingdom was the King’s mother, a common practice among near eastern kingdoms of that era.
What is important to consider in this episode is how Solomon responds when his mother enters his throne room:
“…the king rose to meet her, and bowed down to her; then he sat on his throne, and had a seat brought for the king’s mother; and she sat on his right“ – 1 Kings 2:19
Solomon is the most powerful man in all of Israel and yet how does he respond to his mother’s entrance? He honours her with a bow and seats her at his right hand. Seating her next to him in no way threatens or diminishes his own glory! In fact, it magnifies his glory and righteousness, since by honoring his mother he is fulfilling God’s Law (Exodus 20:12).
If this was true in the Old Covenant, how much more is it true in the New! If this was true for the shadow, how much more true this should be for the fulfillment! In God’s Kingdom we have a great King Jesus who perfectly loves His mother and perfectly fulfils the Law by honouring her. Since He is our King, as His mother she is our Queen who petitions her Son on our behalf.
The Queen of Hearts
Later in her comments, Monica made reference to Mary’s title of “Queen of Heaven”. Hopefully this now makes sense given the Old Testament Davidic Kingdom background I gave above. Here’s what she said:
…pagans used to worship a goddess called the “Mother of God”, and “queen of heaven”. Read Jeremiah 7:18 and Jeremiah 44:17-25 where the Jews were worshipping this false goddess named “queen of heaven” provoking the Lord to anger. This is exactly what the Catholics are doing today.
Again, I find this logic presented here rather dubious. Does the fact that some people once worshipped a pagan “Queen of Heaven” automatically mean that Mary can’t be Queen of Heaven? Over the course of history, many people have claimed to be God or the Son of God. Does that therefore automatically invalidate Jesus’ own divine claim? Of course not! It invalidates Jesus’ claim no more than the existence of counterfeit money invalidates the real deal. The same is true for Mary as Queen of Heaven.
Although Monica does not explicitly say it, I get the impression that she would deny Mary the title of “Mother of God”, or its Greek equivalent, Theotokos. If this is the case, I would like to know why she doesn’t see this as a denial of the divinity of Christ, since when the Council of Ephesus (AD 431) declared Mary to be “Theotokos”, that is exactly what was being safeguarded.
So, with all due respect, no, this is not “exactly what the Catholics are doing today”. We worship the one true God, the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. We worship Jesus, our Lord and King; we honour the Theotokos, His Mother, the Queen Mother, the true Queen of Heaven (Revelation 12:1-6).
Since tomorrow is Good Friday, we’ll pick this up again on Saturday…
Introduction | Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3 | Part 4 | Part 5 | Part 6
I had a brief exchange on Facebook and I wanted to capture it here. This is what was said:
“Where in Jesus’ sermon does He say Mary is Queen? Where does Jesus’ refer to Mary as His mother. Yes she gave birth to Him but she is simply a vessel. Just like john, Paul and various other vessels that God uses to glorify Himself. Queen is a worship term”
Here was my response:
To give you a quick response, you’re assuming that the sum total of the Christian faith should be explicitly present not only in the Bible alone, but in the Sermon on the Mount alone. I don’t see the grounding for either of these assumptions.
Did John or Paul carry God in their wombs for nine months? Did they live at home with the saviour for the majority of his life? Those honours were given to Mary alone. It is because of these graces of God that Christians have from the most ancient of times (as I’ll demonstrate in the final post of this series) honored Mary.
You assert “Queen is a worship term” but don’t substantiate this. Why do you think “Queen” is a worship term? I’m English so my queen is – Elizabeth II – yet I don’t worship her. Bathsheba was a Queen but not worshiped by anyone. I don’t see the logic you’re presenting here.
You ask where Jesus refers to Mary as His mother. I’m rather puzzled by this – would you deny she was His mother?
Finally, I’d also invite you to interact with what I actually present in the article as I think the Biblical typology at work here is very strong.
I received the following reply:
“Jesus never referred to her as mother. Why is that? Did he make a mistake? Paul and John might have not carried Jesus in their physical womb but there’s no gospel In the bible that was granted to Mary. So In essence john and the other apostles were given those graces which were much longer lasting than 9 months. There’s both the physical and spiritual carrying of His message. As far as the logic with queen and worship I guess I get it with King and worship. Seeing Jesus being the only King and I worship Him. I wonder if Jesus made a mistake in not saying that when we pray we must reference Mary’s name too or always. All this time I’ve prayed directly to my father in heaven and only Him In Jesus’ name and He’s been so gracious to answer my prayers. I do respect Mary the mother and all the other women of the bible as equally as I respect and honor all the men of the Bible. They are vessels in which God Jesus and the Holy Spirit were glorified. Jesus was very clear in His ministry so I’m unsure why He didn’t elevate Mary as much as the Catholic Church has. What’s the link to your blog. I enjoy reading your stuff. As u recall I have a very active 10 month old who’s biting my legs right now to test his new teeth I’ll reply when I can”
I also know that you’re labeling her as queen but the question is did Jesus and if Jesus didn’t then why not?
Hey Gabriela, welcome to the Restless Pilgrim 🙂
If you take a look further down these comments you’ll see I response do you question. It boils down to your assumption that the Faith is only found within the explicit words of Jesus – He gave us something much better. We have the pillar and foundation of the truth, the Church.
To briefly answer your question though, I call her “Queen” for three reasons:
1. The Biblical typology of the Davidic Kingdom makes Jesus the King and thus makes His mother the Queen.
2. Since the earliest of times Christians have called her in such exalted terms.
3. That’s what I call a woman who wears a crown (Revelation 12:1,5).
> Jesus never referred to her as mother. Why is that?
I still don’t quite see what your point is here. Do you deny that Mary was His mother? Yes or No?
But to answer your question, I’m sure Jesus referred to Mary as “mommy” – I rather doubt His first earthly words were “woman”!
However, to your point, why do we not find those words recorded in the Sacred Scriptures? I would suggest that is for two reasons:
1. The Scriptures are not and were never intended to be an exhaustive catalogue of everything thing Jesus said and did (John 21:25).
2. The Biblical authors wanted to make a particular theological point. For example, this is clearest in John’s Gospel whose opening chapters parallel the Genesis creation account.
By calling Mary “woman” at the Galilee Wedding, John is showing us a fulfillment of Genesis. If you recall, God promised that the seed of “the woman” would strike the serpent (the protoevangelium). Mary is “the woman”!
We also find something similar going on at the foot of the cross. Christ is the New Adam, Mary is the New Eve and, whereas the tree of the Garden brought death, the tree of the cross brings life.
The first generation of Christians recognized these parallels. As I mentioned above, I’ll demonstrate the historicity of honouring Mary in the final post.
> Paul and John might have not carried Jesus in their physical womb but there’s no gospel In the bible that was granted to Mary. So In essence john and the other apostles were given those graces which were much longer lasting than 9 months. There’s both the physical and spiritual carrying of His message.
I don’t understand why you think it is a greater grace to write a Gospel than to bear in her body God incarnate! To carry Him for nine months, to give birth to Him, to nurse Him, hold Him, kiss Him, to watch Him grow in wisdom and stature and to instigate His first miracle at the beginning of His ministry.
Through the Holy Spirit the Evangelists brought forth the scriptural word of God (Gk: “graphe”), but only as a consequence of Mary, through that same Holy Spirit, bringing forth the Word Himself (Gk: “Logos”). As a result of Mary’s “Yes”, she was ontologically changed forever after being the Mother the Saviour for all eternity.
To instigate His first miracle … ??That’s an assumption. You’re assuming without Her He would not have done so. Are you sure He wasn’t saying to her, woman on my time not yours? What about Jesus after His baptism versus before? His reference to her as woman is after His baptism. He’s in no longer need of Her motherly attention. You’re only assuming He called her mommy there’s no reference so you can’t lean on it. I’m assuming if I had the God almighty as my child Hed be perfect in nature and I would probably lean on Him for advice occasionally. I’m just saying As a mom. Id probably have the most Obiedoent child ever. I’m going to try to b more organized with my responses by replying after each segment you’ve set aside. Forgive me for my excitement. My baby is sleeping.
> To instigate His first miracle … ??That’s an assumption. You’re assuming without Her He would not have done so. Are you sure He wasn’t saying to her, woman on my time not yours?
I think you’re reading a little too much into my words here. My point was simply to state that it was His mother who came and told Him that the wine had run out and that it was Mary who gave the servants the same advice she gives to all Christians: “Do whatever He tells you”.
For a solid treatment of that text from the Catholic point of view, please see this post by one of my priests in DC.
> What about Jesus after His baptism versus before? His reference to her as woman is after His baptism. He’s in no longer need of Her motherly attention. You’re only assuming He called her mommy there’s no reference so you can’t lean on it.
I find it odd that you tell me I can’t lean on “mommy” because there’s no Scriptural text to reference, yet you do exactly the same when you suggest that Jesus’ relationship to His mother changed following His baptism.
His calling of His mother “woman” is significant, but not for the reasons I think you’re suggesting.
> I’m assuming if I had the God almighty as my child Hed be perfect in nature and I would probably lean on Him for advice occasionally
No argument here.
> I’m just saying As a mom. Id probably have the most Obiedoent child ever.
We know He was as Scripture says so (Luke 2:51).
> I’m going to try to b more organized with my responses by replying after each segment you’ve set aside. Forgive me for my excitement. My baby is sleeping.
No worries. I’ve got no problem responding to your various questions, just as long as we do eventually deal with the central issue of each post. For example, in your comments about my Sola Scriptura post, you didn’t actually reference anything in the series. As long as we get there eventually, all is well 🙂
I also appreciate seeing that I’m a mother myself that you’re elevating our role but to be honest I would rather carry a baby kiss him and feed him then travel the world and be persecuted by strangers who want to kill you over my beliefs. That’s hard I would also rather remain in my house then have to preach the gospel to a bunch of people every Sunday. That’s hard. Yes I strive to lead by example and I read the gospel to my son but I’ve been blessed with a hormonal constantly changing womanly body with long hair who could look great on certain days but with work and on other days with less work I look less presentable. Men and woman are equally important and carry wonderful roles for the church of Christ just like my liver has a role and my heart has a role and my kidneys have a role. Each it’s own vessel.
Are you comparing yourself to chopped liver?! 😉
If you really want to blow your mind as to the mystery and dignity of motherhood, take a look at this.
Scientists have found that the relationship between mother and child may be even closer than we ever previously imagined. For example, they found that when the mother is ill, cells from her unborn child rush to the sick area in an attempt to protect the mother.
I certainly don’t consider myself chop liver and I’m not belittling the relationship that I have with my son. But everything you referenced is of the physical nature between mother and child and maybe even in “some” cases the spiritual relationship (just bc scientists discovered something physically unique between mom and baby doesn’t mean it applies to all moms and babies. Are you saying that it’s impossible for God the almighty to have the same relationship he had with Mary with any other human being? If God has experienced all physical emotion why would that physical relationship he had with Mary be of higher value than the spiritual? Are you elevating the physical over the spiritual relationship. I’m not at home with my bible so I can’t reference the convo in detail bt Jesus and nicodemous but I recall that Jesus made a distinction between physical and spiritual and no other type of relationship. Is Mary a child of God? I also want to cement about baptism and Jesus but I’m exhausted I’m also pregnant again so I’ll try to get back maybe next week.
Happy Easter!
> But everything you referenced is of the physical nature between mother and child and maybe even in “some” cases the spiritual relationship
I’m afraid I don’t understand – the Incarnation was a physical event in history – that’s what makes it so special.
> just bc scientists discovered something physically unique between mom and baby doesn’t mean it applies to all moms and babies
How so?
> Are you saying that it’s impossible for God the almighty to have the same relationship he had with Mary with any other human being?
Ontologically, that’s correct. Unless you gave birth to the second person of the Trinity, your relationship is going to be different. You are not going to a have a maternal relationship to Him.
> If God has experienced all physical emotion why would that physical relationship he had with Mary be of higher value than the spiritual?
I don’t really understand the question, but it sounds like you’re limiting motherhood to a purely physical process?
> Are you elevating the physical over the spiritual relationship
Nope.
> I’m not at home with my bible so I can’t reference the convo in detail bt Jesus and nicodemous but I recall that Jesus made a distinction between physical and spiritual and no other type of relationship
I’m not quite sure what you’re going for here. I assume you’re talking about when Jesus told Nicodemus about the need to be reborn by water and the spirit (i.e. Baptism). This is necessary for us since we are born children of Adam but we need to be born again as children of God, to have our sonship restored by grace.
> Is Mary a child of God?
Yes.
> I also want to cement about baptism and Jesus but I’m exhausted I’m also pregnant again so I’ll try to get back maybe next week.
Yay babies! 🙂
>As far as the logic with queen and worship I guess I get it with King and worship.
So “queen” is not, in fact, a term of worship. You’re only reaching that conclusion because you’re switching categories. Jesus is divine. Mary is not.
If one applied the logic you’re using, one would have to conclude that all Christians should be worshipped because they are Christ’s brother or sister (Hebrews 2:11).
> Seeing Jesus being the only King and I worship Him.
This is the problem. You worship Jesus because He’s divine. Solomon was the greatest king of antiquity, a son of God, the wisest of all men, author of Scripture, builder of the temple, etc. You won’t find a more impressive resume! However, he wasn’t he wasn’t worshiped because he was a creature, not the Creator.
So if queen is not a word of worship why then should we worship the king? So in reference to Mary is not Devine and neither r His children then why are Catholics praying to Mary again? Why don’t they pray to me?
> So if queen is not a word of worship why then should we worship the king?
Because that King is divine. David, Solomon etc. were all kings…but not divine. That is why they were due honour, but not worship. Jesus is divine and therefore worthy of worship.
> So in reference to Mary is not Devine and neither r His children then why are Catholics praying to Mary again?
You don’t ask your friends to pray for you?
> Why don’t they pray to me?
Because they are in Heaven, perfected (Hebrews 12:22-23) and before the throne of God. I think they’re slightly better placed… 😉
> I wonder if Jesus made a mistake in not saying that when we pray we must reference Mary’s name too or always.
Please see my earlier comments about having unrealistic expectations when coming to the Scriptures. When I speak to Muslims I’m often challenged with “Where does it ever record Jesus saying ‘I am God. Worship me'”. It’s an unrealistic standard.
Having said that, Scripture does record the prophecy that all generations will call Mary blessed (Luke 1:48). In what way does this prophecy find fulfillment in your own life and that of your congregation?
> All this time I’ve prayed directly to my father in heaven and only Him In Jesus’ name and He’s been so gracious to answer my prayers
That’s excellent and I’m glad you do that. What if I told you that I had prayed to Mary and through her intercession I had also been granted a grace from God?
> I do respect Mary the mother
…the mother of…God.
> and all the other women of the bible as equally as I respect and honor all the men of the Bible. They are vessels in which God Jesus and the Holy Spirit were glorified. Jesus was very clear in His ministry so I’m unsure why He didn’t elevate Mary as much as the Catholic Church has.
I think we keep coming back to the same problem. You’re expecting everything pertaining to the Faith to be explicitly recorded as the words of Jesus in the Gospels. Why?
Having said that, I don’t doubt Jesus honoured her just as much as all the ancient Churches do (Catholic, Orthodox and Coptic). Jesus kept the Law perfectly and one of those commandments was to “Honour thy…mother” (Exodus 20:12). We know He did that perfectly. If Jesus is my model, why would I not want to do the same?
Wow I’m amazed that you consider the work of the Holy Spirit unrealistic standard. I’m also stunned you weren’t able to defend against a Muslim. Why did the Jewish people crucify Jesus again? What claim was He making? My favorite verse is john 14: 8-11 there r many more where He reference Himself as The father but you’re right He doesn’t sayHe’s God but His works testify to Him being God as defined by the OT prophets in exact detail.
> Wow I’m amazed that you consider the work of the Holy Spirit unrealistic standard
You’re implying something I never said nor even came close to saying. The Scriptures are God-inspired, inspired and inerrant. What I said you was that you were bringing unrealistic expectations to the text.
> I’m also stunned you weren’t able to defend against a Muslim. Why did the Jewish people crucify Jesus again? What claim was He making? My favorite verse is john 14: 8-11 there r many more where He reference Himself as The father but you’re right He doesn’t sayHe’s God but His works testify to Him being God as defined by the OT prophets in exact detail.
Again, that’s not what I said. My point was that the standard set by the Muslim apologist was unreasonable. He was setting up an unrealistic standard by restricting evidence to the words of Christ alone (discounting St. Paul) and demanding the exact statements “I am God” and “Worship me”. That’s an unreasonable standard.
Naturally I defended the divinity of Christ, but it necessitates looking at the full range of Scriptural data, looking at the context and doing some interpretation.
> He reference Himself as The father
By the way, strictly speaking, this is not the doctrine of the Trinity: The Son is not the Father
Re: Scripture:
You didn’t understand what “Pilgrim” was saying.
Let’s put it a little differently, Gabriella:
It would be one thing if the Holy Spirit had inspired the writing of a series of texts and, among the various items inspired, made the following promises:
1. These texts deal with various topics;
2. Each one is inerrant;
3. Here is a perfectly-explicit rule you can use to distinguish between Holy Spirit-inspired, inerrant texts and other texts;
4. If you gather together a collection of ONLY the inspired, inerrant texts (and no other texts), the resulting collection will give you EVERYTHING you need to know to completely reconstruct the Christian faith from that book alone, even if all knowledge of it had been lost or corrupted for hundreds of years. This collection not only tells you all the moral requirements and required beliefs of Christianity, but tells you them sufficiently explicitly so that there will be no misunderstanding about what the text means unless the reader is actively trying to warp the text to justify some sin or heresy.
That would be one thing.
If that had happened, you could find the text which contained these promises, and just so long as you could prove that IT was inerrant, you could trust that its articulation of the rule for discerning inspired-inerrant texts (Item 3) and the promise of what a complete collection of inspired-inerrant texts can do for us (Item 4) were true.
After that point you could use the rule for discerning texts (Item 3) to form the collection. And then you could use that collection to know everything you ever needed to know about Christianity (Item 4).
That would be interesting.
But that’s not what happened.
The Bible simply does not contain Item 3. Anyone who claims that it does is “adding to the words of Scripture.” (And anyone who does THAT is in deep trouble, if John’s curse on “anyone who adds to the words of this book” at the end of Revelation is supposed to apply to the whole Bible and not just the book of Revelation.)
Also, the Bible never promises Item 4. The Scriptures never, ever claim that if you’ve got all the right inspired-inerrant texts, you’ll have everything you need to know what all the critical doctrines of Christianity are.
Take a look: That promise IS NOT IN THERE.
Now, the problem is that a lot of people pretend that Item 3 and Item 4 are part of the Bible, even though they are not.
This seems like “giving due honor to Scripture.” It seems like a way of giving special respect to what the Holy Spirit has inspired. It seems like it would be a good thing, to adopt this “Scripture is all you need! Scripture gives you everything! Christians will know all they need to know with perfect clarity if they only study the Scriptures!” idea.
But it actually isn’t. It’s actually making stuff up and adding it to what the Holy Spirit inspired.
Christians should not do that.
Instead, Christians should take the Bible for exactly what it claims to be, and no more than that:
1. The New Testament contains the teaching of the Apostles;
2. The teaching of the Apostles (whether written down or delivered orally) is inspired-inerrant;
3, Therefore the text of the New Testament is inspired-inerrant;
4. The New Testament treats the books of the Greek Old Testament (a.k.a. Septuagint) as inspired-inerrant by quoting liberally from it and assigning divine authority to what is quoted;
5. Therefore the Old Testament (in its original text, which the Septuagint is assumed by New Testament authors to faithfully convey) is inspired-inerrant;
6. Therefore the whole collection of books (Old and New) is inspired-inerrant;
7. The collection covers many topics but we have no promise that it covers every topic we’ll ever need to know;
8. It covers some topics glancingly or obscurely;
9. Peter warns us that some topics are covered in a way which is easily misunderstood;
10. Some foundational topics are explicitly NOT covered but are skipped over, because it is assumed that the reader was raised/trained in a community of faith which had already taught him those topics. Consequently, unless the reader already has that rearing/training, he will not get that foundational information from the text unless he can infer it or tease it out…and that process, requiring human interpretation and supposition, is notoriously prone to error.
Therefore, while the intended meaning of Scripture is always an inspired-inerrant message from God, we know that not all critical topics are covered in a way which guarantees we will understand them.
If you want an inspired-inerrant text in which ALL critical topics are covered in a clear-and-explicit way, then what you need is an inspired-inerrant Exhaustive Catechism.
But the Bible is not an Exhaustive Catechism. It never claims to be.
Anyone who says that’s what it is, or what it is for, is (however unintentionally) disrespecting the Scriptures by treating them as something they never meant or promised to be.
They’re holding it to an “unrealistic standard.”
It isn’t “unrealistic” because the Holy Spirit isn’t ABLE to make an inspired-inerrant Exhaustive Catechism. Saying that would be to disrespect the Holy Spirit!
No, it’s “unrealistic” because the Holy Spirit never DID make an inspired-inerrant Exhaustive Catechism. He never claimed to do so. He never intended to do so. Saying that He did is just telling lies about Him (however unintentionally).
Make sense?
When you said, Did they live at home with the saviour for the majority of his life? I don’t understand this.. has Mary been with Jesus the majority of His life? I thought He was the alpha and the omega the first and the last if Mary was there for the majority of His life then she must have been there before genesis. Right? Like I said I don’t deny her wonderful role but her role is similar to Paul, johns and the various other apostles of the bible. I also don’t believe that the bible should be added onto but Ill need to read more about you’re rejection of sola scriptura after I clean the floors. All I know is Jesus is King and He’s all powerful I believe the Holy Spirit wrote the bible through the various vessels going back to the OT. I do believe that these saints are changed forever just like I’ve been changed forever. There is a still a lot i have yet to learn as I’m sure yourself would agree but one thing I’m not confused about is that Mary should be elevated above or close to Jesus. It’s as if there are tiers Jesus then Mary and everyone else? Or Jesus and Mary together and everyone else second? Jesus, the Holy Spirit and God are one. Jesus loves you and he’s free and humble no need to have intermediaries.hes humble! He washes your feet! He died on the cross for you! He never said that you need to pray through intermediaries so why complicate it. Is it because you need help with prayer bc your prayers are not being answered? That’s another issue. But go ahead step up to the plate and pray directly Him. He’s that free. Are you scared? I did it and God answers my prayers so you can too.
> When you said, Did they live at home with the saviour for the majority of his life? I don’t understand this.. has Mary been with Jesus the majority of His life? I thought He was the alpha and the omega the first and the last if Mary was there for the majority of His life then she must have been there before genesis. Right?
Nope. I was referring to His earthly life. His infancy, childhood, adolescence and early adult life.
> Like I said I don’t deny her wonderful role but her role is similar to Paul, johns and the various other apostles of the bible.
Similar, but do you agree that she has an absolutely unique role in Salvation History? There have been many prophets, evangelists, even Gospel writers. However, there is only one mother of our Lord (Luke 1:43).
> There is a still a lot i have yet to learn as I’m sure yourself would agree but one thing I’m not confused about is that Mary should be elevated above or close to Jesus
Mary is not elevated to an equal or higher status than the triune God, such a thing would be heresy and idolatry.
> Jesus loves you and he’s free and humble no need to have intermediaries.
I address the issue of mediation in my next post when I respond to Monica’s objections.
> Is it because you need help with prayer bc your prayers are not being answered?
Do you ask your friends to pray for you? If so, please allow me to ask a provocative question: is it because your prayers aren’t being answered? Of course that’s not the reason. The same reason you ask for his prayers (and for the prayers of others) is the same reason why I ask for Saints to pray for me.
Hi Gabriela,
1. Do you think Christians should honor Mary? (Yes or no.)
If yes, in what ways should we honor her?
2. What is your source of information about the Catholic Church? (Catechism?, Vatican website? Book title? …)
I believe you honor your parents my mother and father on earth, i have no business needing to honor your parents only mine. I do have to love my neighbor though. I believe Jesus honored Mary but after he was baptized he was reborn not by Mary. My experience with Catholicism I’m Mexican grew up in LA every single friend and family of mine is catholic or was and is now atheist. The Christians I’ve met who follow the same doctrine as I do. Who believe the whole Bible is fact and more than sufficient remain Christian. Every friend of mine who grew up catholic is now an atheist or just goes to church for tradition. They are not believers. They don’t believe God wS almighty enough to create the world in seven days they find the bible to b fiction and not sufficient. I guess the road to salvation is truly very narrow. I’ve been a loner until recently when I made a decision to only befriend Christians w my doctrine meaning the King James Bible is fact. All of it. I don’t have questions or doubts nor have I experienced fear other than with God. I have confidence bc God is truth and sufficient. I feel sorry for those who still have doubt I really don’t know how they could live like that. I do admit to know little and keep in mind I’m talking about the modern Catholic Church . I guess they say it’s now an apostate? Same thing is starting to happen with the Christian church. I believe that the NKJ IS. Based on the William tindell bible guy I guess who came up w English prose. I’m not English major if u haven’t guessed already. It’s said he looked at the catholic bible and said it wasn’t an exact interpretation of the Hebrew and Greek and since he died at the stake defending his work I’d support him. But not blindly we now live in the Information Age where cultural texts such as the bible can be properly considered and interpreted. I heard that the catholic bible only has 7 items that r different than the original. So eventhough there r differences Gods message His word is still delivered. When Muslims say man created the Bible I say wow man is powerful much more than God. Seeing that some OT prophets we’re known to write and not even understand what they wrote. Today was fun. Thanks David. I’m walking my boy now have a nice evening.
Hi Gabriela,
You’ve said “i have no business needing to honor your parents only mine.” but in the NKJV it says “Honor all people” 1 Peter 2:17.
So far, your position is: Question 1. Should Christians honor Mary – No. (Or did I misunderstand?)
Question 3: Should Christians call Mary “blessed”?
Thanks. (I may not be able to respond until after Easter Sunday.)
> I believe Jesus honored Mary but after he was baptized he was reborn not by Mary.
Wait, you think Jesus was reborn?
> My experience with Catholicism I’m Mexican grew up in LA every single friend and family of mine is catholic or was and is now atheist.
It’s a common story I’m afraid, but doesn’t really demonstrate anything as I now many who were brought up Protestant and have also since walked away from the Faith.
> Every friend of mine who grew up catholic is now an atheist or just goes to church for tradition. They are not believers.
Ouch… Do you think you’re appropriately placed to make such a judgement?
(1 Corinthians 2:11)
> I’ve been a loner until recently when I made a decision to only befriend Christians w my doctrine meaning the King James Bible is fact. All of it. I don’t have questions or doubts nor have I experienced fear other than with God
I think this would be an interesting discussion some other time as I’d like to hear how you think evangelism, being salt and light, fits in if you restrict your friends to only those who share you beliefs identically.
> I believe that the NKJ IS. Based on the William tindell bible guy… It’s said he looked at the catholic bible and said it wasn’t an exact interpretation of the Hebrew and Greek and since he died at the stake defending his work I’d support him
That’s not quite the whole story. I’ll do a post on William Tyndale at some point in the future. For now I’d just ask you to consider how it is you know that Tyndale’s translation was superior.
> I heard that the catholic bible only has 7 items that r different than the original.
I’m afraid you have been misinformed. The seven books (“Deuterocanon”/”Apocrypha”) were removed by the Reformers at the Reformation. For 1,500 years prior, books such as Tobit were regarded as Scripture. These books were removed because they conflicted with the Reformer’s doctrine. I’d invite you to read this short extract from the book of Wisdom to see the kind of thing it contains.
> Today was fun. Thanks David. I’m walking my boy now have a nice evening.
You’re welcome. Any time 🙂
I pray direct to God I’m not in the habit of asking anyone to pray for me. I’m trying to because I guess it’s trendy. But to be frank I’ve prayed to God all my life and all my life God has protected and kept my family close. I was the poor, the fatherless and I was and continue to be blessed through good and bad.
> I pray direct to God I’m not in the habit of asking anyone to pray for me. I’m trying to because I guess it’s trendy. But to be frank I’ve prayed to God all my life and all my life God has protected and kept my family close. I was the poor, the fatherless and I was and continue to be blessed through good and bad
Really? You don’t ask anyone to pray for you? That’s a a real shame. Scripture constantly exhorts us to pray for one another (2 Timothy 2:1, Ephesians 6:19, …).
That’s it, you’re going to get prayed for when I go to church this afternoon :-p
Done! 😀
There is only one Paul, one John each individual is unique in their own way. Would you agree that Paul’s ministry has a unique role in salvation history? Yes of course!! Paul’s ministry is very different and awesome in it’s own way. We have two kidneys, one heart one brain. but if you took both kidneys out I’m not sure if the body will work with the heart and the rest of the organs I would assume all need to be present working uniquely independently together. What’s awesome about God is that He can make us all equal and different at the same time.
There is only one Paul, one John each individual is unique in their own way. Would you agree that Paul’s ministry has a unique role in salvation history? Yes of course!! Paul’s ministry is very different and awesome in it’s own way. We have two kidneys, one heart one brain. but if you took both kidneys out I’m not sure if the body will work with the heart and the rest of the organs I would assume all need to be present working uniquely independently together. What’s awesome about God is that He can make us all equal and different at the same time.
You’re referencing Paul’s theology where the Church is spoken of as the Body of Christ which, of course, I don’t deny. However, I was just making the point that the grace of bearing the God-Man, to usher in the incarnation and redemption, was a singular privilege of just one lady.
Monica commented on this subject in another thread:
> Also, if you read the verses I gave you from Jeremiah 7:18 it says “The children gathered wood, and the men used it to build altars to worship false gods. The women were engaged in kneading dough and baking cakes of bread for the “Queen of Heaven”” In this verse, God is viewing gathering wood, building altars and kneading dough and baking cakes for the queen of heaven as worship. You Catholics engage in all these kinds of practices when you build altars to Mary. To God this is all considered worship.
You’re repeating yourself again and you haven’t responded to my rebuttal. For the record though, I don’t ever recall gathering wood or kneading dough in a Lady Chapel.