Too Much Emphasis Of The Virgin Mary?

[MIKolbe]

i'm was kinda hoping someone throws in the beating-a-dead-horse emoticon.

[Nihil Obstat]

[img]http://www.bjacked.net/LuvToHunt/forums/phpBB2/modules/gallery/albums/album01/Beat_Dead_Horse.jpg[/img]

[HisChildForever]

Well he has been nice to me, I thought I would take the opportunity to engage in civil dialogue.

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='HisChildForever' date='06 June 2010 - 01:20 PM' timestamp='1275852048' post='2124677']
Well he has been nice to me, I thought I would take the opportunity to engage in civil dialogue.
[/quote]
I agree. His posts have been a bit less vitriolic of late, not charitable [i]per se[/i], but less offensive.

[Apotheoun]

It might be better for Phatmassers to actually engage Damiano intellectually, rather than simply belittle him. Now, I admit that I have made fun of many of his posts in the past, because he uses a style (all caps and the like) that looks rather foolish, but in certain recent threads he has presented his viewpoint with less [i]ad hominem[/i] attacks, and we should encourage him to present his views without anti-Catholic polemics.

Once he has done that, we should engage his theological arguments, and show why he is in doctrinal error (see for example my post in the [url="http://www.phatmass.com/phorum/index.php?showtopic=105559&view=findpost&p=2124634"]Marian Devotion[/url] thread where I point out the Nestorian nature of his comments). He may not listen to what we say, but that is beyond our control. All we can do is respond by presenting the Catholic position clearly and with charity.

Edited June 6, 2010 by Apotheoun

[Archaeology cat]

[quote name='Apotheoun' date='06 June 2010 - 11:32 PM' timestamp='1275863557' post='2124895']
It might be better for Phatmassers to actually engage Damiano intellectually, rather than simply belittle him. Now, I admit that I have made fun of many of his posts in the past, because he uses a style (all caps and the like) that looks rather foolish, but in certain recent threads he has presented his viewpoint with less [i]ad hominem[/i] attacks, and we should encourage him to present his views without anti-Catholic polemics.

Once he has done that, we should engage his theological arguments, and show why he is in doctrinal error (see for example my post in the [url="http://www.phatmass.com/phorum/index.php?showtopic=105559&view=findpost&p=2124634"]Marian Devotion[/url] thread where I point out the Nestorian nature of his comments). He may not listen to what we say, but that is beyond our control. All we can do is respond by presenting the Catholic position clearly and with charity.
[/quote]
Agreed

[Bennn]

[quote name='Apotheoun' date='07 June 2010 - 12:32 AM' timestamp='1275863557' post='2124895']
It might be better for Phatmassers to actually engage Damiano intellectually, rather than simply belittle him. Now, I admit that I have made fun of many of his posts in the past, because he uses a style (all caps and the like) that looks rather foolish, but in certain recent threads he has presented his viewpoint with less [i]ad hominem[/i] attacks, and we should encourage him to present his views without anti-Catholic polemics.

Once he has done that, we should engage his theological arguments, and show why he is in doctrinal error (see for example my post in the [url="http://www.phatmass.com/phorum/index.php?showtopic=105559&view=findpost&p=2124634"]Marian Devotion[/url] thread where I point out the Nestorian nature of his comments). He may not listen to what we say, but that is beyond our control. All we can do is respond by presenting the Catholic position clearly and with charity.
[/quote]

Amen.

+Pax Domini,
Ben

[jmjtina]

[quote]Because of that you and I can never have a meaningful dialogue. I don't want to insult you by saying this because you seem like a pretty nice person...but I do think that we should end it all here because it will get us nowhere.[/quote]

Wow, I don't know if I should go after your Sola Scriptura or your Mother of God diss. I could state that your need for the bible instead of your need for Jesus is heretical. I could also state that instead of having "Bible" colleges and schools, you should have "Christian" colleges and schools. Instead of having "Jesus alone" you have "Scripture Alone", thus your focus is on the bible and not the Lord Jesus. Don't you think that a person who makes the statements above knows NOTHING about the bible OR what you believe in or the basics of Sola Scriptura? You'd probably think I'm an idiot.

That's exactly how you sound. You won't even try to know the basics of what we believe? We aren't asking you to convert, we are asking you to understand where we are coming from, justify and defend your position, and have an open dialogue. Statements such as "Since you don't believe XYZ, we can't have a meaningful conversation" is ridiculous. Why are you here anyway? Luckily for you, when people have misconceptions about Sola Scriptura, I can clear it up. Not because I believe in it (I have to add near the end of the conversation why it isn't scripturally based) but If I had to explain it, I could. I understand it. And probably better than some other christians who did believe in it. I don't say this to boast, I say it to illustrate my point. You couldn't even state what a marian devotion is, it's history, without sounding like a tabloid that feeds on misconceptions and lies. At least, if you aren't going to believe in it, know what you aren't believing in! We've had different denominations who understood what we believed and could really debate. Open dialouge starts with understanding the discussion. Something your choose not to educate yourself on at all. Which isn't the first time someone who believed in Sola Scriptura has done and it won't be the last.

Mary, points us to her Son. There is something about Mary, and if one of your early "Protestant Church Father's" is Athanasius, then you are disagreeing with him as well. I don't know how much time to spend on you. I've got to clean anyway.

[Damiano]

*["Then how could she be full of grace at the time of the Annunciation?"]

***You evidently don"t know what "full of grace" means. "Full of grace" is a term used of ALL BELIEVERS in [Ephesians 1:6], where it is translated "accepted." This portrays Mary as a RECIPIENT, NOT a DISPENSER, of divine grace. Here's what [Ephesians 1:6] says...to wit: "To the praise of the glory of his GRACE, wherein he hath made US (i.e., believers) ACCEPTED in the beloved" [Ephesians 1:6].

Damiano

[Damiano]

*["Wow, I don't know if I should go after your Sola Scriptura or your Mother of God diss..."]

***Toss a coin.


*["...I could state that your need for the bible instead of your need for Jesus is heretical. I could also state that instead of having 'Bible' colleges and schools, you should have 'Christian' colleges and schools. Instead of having 'Jesus alone' you have Scripture Alone', thus your focus is on the bible and not the Lord Jesus. Don't you think that a person who makes the statements above knows NOTHING about the bible OR what you believe in or the basics of Sola Scriptura? You'd probably think I'm an idiot..."]

***I don't think about you at all.


*["That's exactly how you sound. You won't even try to know the basics of what we believe? We aren't asking you to convert..."]

***I know exactly what you believe because my whole family is Catholic and I was educated in Catholic schools through college.


*["...we are asking you to understand where we are coming from, justify and defend your position, and have an open dialogue..."]

***I always justify and defend myself...that's what infuriates you and your friends. As for having an open dialogue with you---it is impossible. Your standard of authority (Sola Ecclesia) is contrary to mine (Sola Scriptura)...so we have NOTHING to talk about.


*["...Why are you here anyway?..."]

***I am here to preach the gospel according to the Scriptures (which you DON'T accept) so that your blood will not be on my hands when you come before the Saviour at the Great White Throne judgment seat and He consigns you into the Lake of Fire for denying Him as the ONLY SAVIOR for your sins.


*["Luckily for you, when people have misconceptions about Sola Scriptura, I can clear it up. Not because I believe in it (I have to add near the end of the conversation why it isn't scripturally based) but If I had to explain it, I could. I understand it..."]

***You understand nothing. If you understood the things you boast about you would not be a member of the Catholic Church.


*["And probably better than some other christians who did believe in it. I don't say this to boast, I say it to illustrate my point..."]

***You are not a Christian...you are a Catholic who doesn't know what she is talking about...and somewhat of a "blowhard" to boot.


*["...You couldn't even state what a marian devotion is..."]

***Yes I can...and I can define it in one word--->IDOLATRY!!!


*["...We've had different denominations who understood what we believed and could really debate. Open dialouge starts with understanding the discussion..."]

***True Christians don't have ecumenical dialogue with apostates, unbelievers, deceivers, etc., but, rather, reproves them.


*["Something your choose not to educate yourself on at all. Which isn't the first time someone who believed in Sola Scriptura has done and it won't be the last."]

***Correct.


*["...Mary, points us to her Son..."].

***The Mary of the Bible does indeed point to her Son...but the "mary" of Catholicism is "another mary" which conflicts with the blessed Mary of Sola Scriptura.


*["I don't know how much time to spend on you. I've got to clean anyway."]

***Don't spend any time on me...clean your house and make dinner for yours kids.

Damiano

[Bennn]

Damiano

You repeat yourself over and over, yet you find no way to actually refute our points. You say that we will burn in hell because of our beliefs, we say that our beliefs are the true Christian faith. You say that giving Mary the honour She deserves as the Mother of God is idolatry, we say it isn't. (I advise you to read the Scriptures where King David is venerated, not as God but as a true man of God)

If you will not take the time to try and actually refute our beliefs, which are founded in Scripture and the Tradition of the Apostles, then this debate goes no further than a simple 'yes' 'no' game, which will lead to nothing but arguing and frustration. You have already made your point that you think we are all going to be condemned if we do not submit to your personal interpretation of Sacred Scripture, and obviously we are not buying it. But instead of going more in depth, you keep repeating the same things over and over again.

Besides, if you are truly honest to yourself you cannot say that the Bible passages you throw at us are contrary to Catholic belief.

And about what you said on being raised Catholic: I was also raised in a 'catholic' school and in a 'catholic' society, yet my teachers spouted even more anti-Catholic doctrine at me than you are doing right now. It was only on my 17th that I actually got in touch with the true Catholic and Apostolic faith. So please don't use the old argument of 'I was raised this and that etc.' It is invalid. I wish you would actually do some in depth research about our faith before spitting on it, because you are putting your soul in grave danger.

You have a false view of ecumenism as well. True ecumenism is what we are doing right here.

+Pax Domini,
Ben

Edited June 8, 2010 by Bennn

[HisChildForever]

[quote name='Damiano' date='08 June 2010 - 06:37 AM' timestamp='1275993472' post='2125584']
*["I don't know how much time to spend on you. I've got to clean anyway."]

***Don't spend any time on me...[b]clean your house and make dinner for yours kids.[/b]

Damiano
[/quote]

WHAT??

[HisChildForever]

Oh, and post 106 has yet to be answered. Just a reminder.

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='Damiano' date='08 June 2010 - 01:59 AM' timestamp='1275983964' post='2125578']
You evidently don't know what "full of grace" means. "Full of grace" is a term used of all believers in [Ephesians 1:6], where it is translated "accepted." This portrays Mary as a recipient, not a dispenser, of divine grace. Here's what [Ephesians 1:6] says...to wit: "To the praise of the glory of his grace, wherein he hath made us (i.e., believers) accepted in the beloved" [Ephesians 1:6].

Damiano
[/quote]
No one has argued in this thread that Mary was not a recipient of grace; and so I am unclear as to why you have asserted this point against us when in fact all Catholics agree that Mary received grace from God, who alone is the source of grace.

Now with that out of the way, I am sure that you are aware of the fact that [i]Luke 1:28[/i] and [i]Ephesians 1:6[/i] use two different forms of the Greek word for "grace." In the case of the text from [i]Luke[/i] the word used is κεχαριτωμένη (perfect past participle), which conveys the meaning of an action completed fully in the past, but which continues in the present moment, and without any indication that it will end in the future; while in [i]Ephesians[/i] the word ἐχαρίτωσεν (indicative active aorist) is used, which conveys the sense of a past action regardless of its extent, progress, or duration. Moreover, the Angel Gabriel in the Gospel pericope from [i]Luke[/i], instead of addressing Mary by her proper name, hails her as κεχαριτωμένη, thus using that word in a titular manner, which means that the word κεχαριτωμένη becomes a name for Mary, just as Πέτρος became a name for the Apostle Simon bar Jonah in the Gospel of [i]Matthew[/i] (see [i]Matthew 16:18[/i]). In the former case, Mary - by the word of the Angel - is addressed with the title "she who has been, and is, completely graced"; while in the latter case, Jesus calls the Apostle Simon by the name "Rock" after Simon affirms Christ's divine sonship as an act of revelation given to him (i.e., to Simon Peter) by the power of God the Father. Finally, as I am sure you are aware, this renaming of individuals is a fairly common practice in sacred scripture, where God (either directly or through an angel) gives a person a new name in order to indicate something important about his character and his place in the divine economy (e.g., [i]Genesis 32:24-32[/i]).

Edited June 8, 2010 by Apotheoun

[Damiano]

*["You keep repeating yourself over and over..."]

***I keep repeating myself because you have ears but do not "hear"...and eyes but do not "see". The Word of God describes you best: "But if our gospel be hid, it is hid to them that are lost: In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them" [2 Corinthians 4:3-4].


*["...You say that we will burn in hell because of our beliefs, we say that our beliefs are the true Christian faith..."]

***Your faith is nothing but "christianized" paganism. Your can say anything that you want about your faith according to your Traditions...but you cannot say that your faith is the true faith and back it up with the dictates of Scripture...for the dictates of most of your dogmas are in direct OPPOSITION to Scripture. That is the reason why you and your church are in opposition to "sola scriptura"---->for if you can DESTROY the credibility of the Scriptures you can then postulate anything that you wish UNHINDERED from the dictates of "thus saith the Lord."


*["...You say that giving Mary the honour She deserves as the Mother of God is idolatry, we say it isn't..."]

***It does not matter WHAT you say...it only matters what the Scriptures say and they do NOT support you contentions. Too, your traditions are NOT inspired of God---ONLY the Scriptures are [2 Timothy 3:16]. You are not unlike the Pharisees of Jesus' day who trusted in their traditions and were rebuked by Christ for them: "...ye made the commandments of God of none effect by your tradition" [Matthew 15:6].


*["...If you will not take the time to try and actually refute our beliefs, which are founded in Scripture and the Tradition of the Apostles..."]

***I have gone to great lengths to refute your specious and unbiblical doctrines and document everything I say---you know it and I know it. Your objections are just a strawman to try and minimize my remarks so as to justify your errors. You get no cigar here.

The vast majority of your doctrines are NOT founded on the Scriptures. In point of fact your church holds the Scriptures in LOW REGARD and uses them SPARING because your doctrines are in OPPOSITION to them. The reality is that your dogmas are the end result of speculations, assumptions not supported in Scripture and extra-biblical writings which have no basis in fact.


*["...You have already made your point that you think we are all going to be condemned if we do not submit to your personal interpretation of Sacred Scripture..."]

***The Scriptures speak for themselves...and they are CLEAR about WHO the ONLY Saviour is IS---and that WHO is the Lord Jesus Christ ALONE: "Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is NONE other name UNDER HEAVEN given among men, whereby we must be SAVED" [Acts 4:12]. Isn't that clear enough for you? Are you so dense that you can't understand that? Jesus Christ has NO need of a co-redeemer to assist Him in the dispensing of salvation for He alone is the Lord of Salvation...and that is the VERY NAME that the angel told Mary to give Him in [Luke 1:31]...JESUS = "The Lord is salvation."


*["...and obviously we are not buying it..."]

***I have no control over that.


*["But instead of going more in depth, you keep repeating the same things over and over again."]

***Another strawman. The truth of the matter is you don't understand the Scriptures nor believes them that you might be saved.


Damiano

[Marie-Therese]

Damiano,

Your attitude is despicable. You lack in the simplest graces and exhibit no true love for your brethren, as you claim to...not because you are 'reproving your brethren' but because you preach your viewpoint with nothing but contempt.

Btw, I was raised a Southern Baptist and was in the protestant faith for 30 years. I am probably more aware of what the Catholic Church actually says (hence my conversion), than what you exhibit as an apostate from a Catholic family who was, obviously, poorly catechized...not to mention I also understand the protestant faith much more profoundly. When you have been protestant for 30 years, get back to me.

Your hatred and vitriol are pathetic excuses for evangelization. I don't ordinarily post such language, but your lack of even common civility is inexcusable. May God have mercy on your soul.

I also don't do this either, but I am stating publicly that I am putting you on ignore, so you don't have to waste time responding to me.

[KnightofChrist]

[quote name='Apotheoun' date='08 June 2010 - 02:50 PM' timestamp='1276023052' post='2125771']
No one has argued in this thread that Mary was not a recipient of grace; and so I am unclear as to why you have asserted this point against us when in fact all Catholics agree that Mary received grace from God, who alone is the source of grace.

Now with that out of the way, I am sure that you are aware of the fact that [i]Luke 1:28[/i] and [i]Ephesians 1:6[/i] use two different forms of the Greek word for "grace." In the case of the text from [i]Luke[/i] the word used is κεχαριτωμένη (perfect past participle), which conveys the meaning of an action completed fully in the past, but which continues in the present moment, and without any indication that it will end in the future; while in [i]Ephesians[/i] the word ἐχαρίτωσεν (indicative active aorist) is used, which conveys the sense of a past action regardless of its extent, progress, or duration. Moreover, the Angel Gabriel in the Gospel pericope from [i]Luke[/i], instead of addressing Mary by her proper name, hails her as κεχαριτωμένη, thus using that word in a titular manner, which means that the word κεχαριτωμένη becomes a name for Mary, just as Πέτρος became a name for the Apostle Simon bar Jonah in the Gospel of [i]Matthew[/i] (see [i]Matthew 16:18[/i]). In the former case, Mary - by the word of the Angel - is addressed with the title "she who has been, and is, completely graced"; while in the latter case, Jesus calls the Apostle Simon by the name "Rock" after Simon affirms Christ's divine sonship as an act of revelation given to him (i.e., to Simon Peter) by the power of God the Father. Finally, as I am sure you are aware, this renaming of individuals is a fairly common practice in sacred scripture, where God (either directly or through an angel) gives a person a new name in order to indicate something important about his character and his place in the divine economy (e.g., [i]Genesis 32:24-32[/i]).
[/quote]

Wonder if you will receive a response to this wonderful post?

[HisChildForever]

[quote name='Damiano' date='08 June 2010 - 06:52 PM' timestamp='1276037571' post='2125962']
The Word of God describes you best:
[/quote]

After reading your latest post, I am afraid to see what verse in the Scriptures describes [i]you[/i] best.

[Mark of the Cross]

[quote name='Damiano' date='08 June 2010 - 10:37 PM' timestamp='1275993472' post='2125584']

***I always justify and defend myself...that's what infuriates you and your friends. As for having an open dialogue with you---it is impossible. Your standard of authority (Sola Ecclesia) is contrary to mine (Sola Scriptura)...so we have NOTHING to talk about.


[/quote]

Sola Scriptura presents a problem in that language can be interpreted/translated in different ways or misinterpreted to suit some people. This we have seen time and again and is why we have so many splits from the Church. If it could be clearly understood by all then we all could rely entirely on our own reading and Sola Scriptura would be valid. Because of these problems God gave the Spirit to the apostles to teach and carry on the work of Jesus. For an individual to say they can rely on Sola Scriptura is to put themselves high up on a pedestal, which is not in line with the Christian teaching of humility.

[quote name='Damiano' date='09 June 2010 - 10:52 AM' timestamp='1276037571' post='2125962']

***Another strawman. The truth of the matter is you don't understand the Scriptures nor believes them that you might be saved.


Damiano
[/quote]

The logistics say that the many are more likely to be correct rather than the lone wolf who is easy prey for the devil. God is not a fool, he would not send his son to fail which would be the case if you are correct and the Catholic Church is wrong.

Edited June 8, 2010 by Mark of the Cross

[Selah]

[quote name='HisChildForever' date='08 June 2010 - 08:18 PM' timestamp='1276039118' post='2125970']
After reading your latest post, I am afraid to see what verse in the Scriptures describes [i]you[/i] best.
[/quote]