/christian/ - Christian Discussion and Fellowship

>>745033

I am that's why I posted the icon!

Mary isn't my mother. It doesn't say that in scripture. But it does say Rebekah is my mother. Why don't you worship Rebekah, and not Mary?

>>745042

>Mary isn't my mother

Then you are not unified with christ

>>745048

Oh please

>>745049

Did Mary not give birth to the Body of Christ?

Are you denying you are part of the body?

You deny the sanctification of the one Holy Church.

>>745057

By that logic mary is the mother of the bread in the lord's supper

>>745057

>I am part of body of Christ

>therefore, I am the body of Christ

>therefore, Mary is my mother

>it also means that I was cruicified since I am the body

>I died for your sins

Do you also think this is true? Or do you just like cherry picking?

>>745125

Interesting post. It makes me think. Paul literally says "I was crucified with Christ" and multiple other times talks about dying with Christ. Yet another mark against penal substitutionary atonement. Being crucified with Christ would imply dying for my own sins. It's about being united to his righteousness rather than being swapped with him. Thank you anon

>>745071

Well yes, because the 'bread' is actually Christ's body and blood.

>>745048

Unity with Christ is through Christ alone.

Now accept Rebekah as your motherly lord and savior! Or may your gate be possessed, hater!

And they blessed Rebekah (meaning captivating), and said unto her, Thou art our sister, be thou the mother of thousands of millions, and let thy seed possess the gate of those which hate them. Genesis 24:60

If you're not captivated by Rebekah you gave no part with Christ! /sarc

>>745134

>But the truth is, you Protestants are just Jew worshippers

Blanket statement. It would be like me saying that Orthodox (or anyone) pay indulgences. Nonsense.

>>745134

>Outside of John the Baptist, she's just the greatest of saints since she would be the first to know the Gospel

It's Christmastime, have you heard Handel's Messiah?

The prophet Isaiah knew the gospel generations before Mary

see Isaiah 9

>possibly greater

impossibility given Luke 7:28

>God himself within her

I have that too

<Know ye not that ye are the temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwelleth in you? (1 Cor. 3:16 KJV)

>>745132

Good consistency but you're missing the obvious reality

"Body" has several meanings. Christ had a physical body, the congregation is the body of christ metaphorically, and the communion bread is also called his body

You don't have to reject transubstantiation to see this multi-usage, but I think you should

>>745144

Nah it's just a strawman. I've seen it on /islam/, they actually think that Mary is a fourth person of the trinity. I honestly wouldn't be surprised if this guy was a false flagger, I saw a screenshot once, wish I had it, where they say that they would false flag as baptists just to divide the board. Wild stuff.

>>745146

>The prophet Isaiah knew the gospel generations before Mary, see Isaiah 9

Isaiah was entrusted with a prophecy and Mary was entrusted with God himself, the source and object of that prophecy. What is your point?

>impossibility given Luke 7:28

Though of course the least in the kingdom of God could be even greater than him, given Luke 7:28.

>I have that too

So when are you due, Tuesday?

>>745028

Please help me, Mother.

>>745152

>What is your point?

You used "Mary being first to know the gospel" as a possible proof that Mary was greater than J the B, my point is that she wasn't the first.

>Though of course the least in the kingdom of God could be even greater than him, given Luke 7:28

Is this an argument against my conclusion, or are you conceding?

>So when are you due, Tuesday?

unfunny dodge of my point grounded in scripture that normalizing Mary among the saints does not "denigrate a vessel", since being a "temple of God" is the criterion for sainthood

<Know ye not your own selves, how that Jesus Christ is in you, except ye be reprobates? (2 Cor. 13:5 KJV)

>>745156

>You used "Mary being first to know the gospel" as a possible proof that Mary was greater than J the B, my point is that she wasn't the first

Not that other dude, and either way my point still stands.

>Is this an argument against my conclusion, or are you conceding?

It's an odd point given that Christ immediately said that there are, in fact, people greater than John in the kingdom, especially given that that point was made before you rolled it back. Merit in the kingdom is via littleness; by those who make themselves the least in order to let God be the greatest. "I must decrease, so that he may increase", as John the Baptist said. Jesus even goes so far once to humble his own humanity to prove that point" And when he was gone forth into the way, a certain man running up and kneeling before him, asked him, Good Master, what shall I do that I may receive life everlasting? And Jesus said to him, Why callest thou me good? None is good but one, that is God. -John 10-17-18. Between Mary and John, both of whom were the only ones who were besides Christ at the cross, which one did God shine through the most, the one who was of the same spirit, or the one of the same spirit and of the same flesh? I just have no idea why you say that it is impossible for any to be greater than John when Jesus says just the opposite a line later.

>unfunny dodge of my point grounded in scripture that normalizing Mary among the saints does not "denigrate a vessel", since being a "temple of God" is the criterion for sainthood

It certainly is a criterion, but you can't just be dodging the distinction between possessing the God in spirit and raising God in the flesh. No one on earth in 2000 years has had the honor of even meeting Christ outside of a handful of visionary saints; and yet she raised him as a child for three decades. Salvation was her own flesh and blood. I can't take you seriously unless you at least acknowledge that scripture affords no other saint anything close to such a duty and honor.

>>745163

>1

If the "point" here is still "Mary was the first to know the gospel" it's explicitly wrong as shown and does not stand.

>2

I'm not sure what we're arguing here

John the Baptist was the greatest living person in the same generation as Mary, but upon initiation in the kingdom you an entirely different strata higher. As "those born of women", John the Baptist was greater, and there's no avoiding this in the text.

Mary was chosen for her virtue and played a wonderful role that nobody else will ever experience. We are reasoning from the text whether certain catholic views of her are appropriate.

>3

The terminology used is directly applied to all saved Christians whom the spirit indwells. I am not saying this is equivalent with mothering a tangible human Christ.

Here's my evangelical hot take: We all have a greater duty than mothering Jesus in the Great Commission to win souls

To clarify my larger goals here I'm intending to disprove a few mischaracterizations of Mary that I think lead to heresy. I am not making Mary out to be an average historical figure.

>>745175

I really don't know what you mean

What is the point that still stands?

>>745184

Incorrect. The gospel is not the event of the birth, crucifixion, and resurrection, it's the message. That is the deliberate intent of the terminology "good news".

I have the gospel today even though I am so far detached by time from the events of the NT. Isaiah likewise had the gospel before Christ's birth. Mary received the gospel in the prologue to Matthew when the Angel visited her.

https://biblehub.com/greek/2097.htm

https://biblehub.com/greek/2098.htm

>>745168

>If the "point" here is still "Mary was the first to know the gospel" it's explicitly wrong as shown and does not stand.

It was not, my point was the point I made in my post. Isaiah was entrusted with a prophecy and Mary was entrusted with God himself, the source and object of that prophecy. Knowing the a foretaste of the gospel, one which Isaiah didn't even know fully as he never entered heaven until Christ, and knowing it in person are two vastly separate honors.

>As "those born of women", John the Baptist was greater, and there's no avoiding this in the text.

If we take this line in the context of it's first utterance, in Matthew 11, then the proper meaning becomes clear.

And when they went their way, Jesus began to say to the multitudes concerning John: What went you out into the desert to see? a reed shaken with the wind?

But what went you out to see? a man clothed in soft garments? Behold they that are clothed in soft garments, are in the houses of kings.

But what went you out to see? a prophet? yea I tell you, and more than a prophet.

For this is he of whom it is written: Behold I send my angel before thy face, who shall prepare thy way before thee.

Amen I say to you, there hath not risen among them that are born of women a greater than John the Baptist: yet he that is the lesser in the kingdom of heaven is greater than he.

And from the days of John the Baptist until now, the kingdom of heaven suffereth violence, and the violent bear it away.

For all the prophets and the law prophesied until John:

And if you will receive it, he is Elias that is to come.

He that hath ears to hear, let him hear.

So what do we we see here? Not a line praising John as the greatest human born of woman but a line praising him as the greatest prophet. The people went out to see the greatest prophet, and Jesus cites him as the greatest prophet by use of Malachi 3. The merits of a living and a dead saint are the same, and even that same chapter shows that the kingdom, which can suffer violence, is in this world even as it is not of it. John did not live to see the kingdom, as he died before Christ's atonement, yet Mary did. And, of course, the littlest spreader of grace is greater than the greatest prophet of the law because only grace has the power to save souls.

>We all have a greater duty than mothering Jesus in the Great Commission to win souls

None of us have a duty in mothering Jesus at all, only Mary did, and if she didn't then salvation would have never entered this world in the first place. She did more to further Christ's mission than any other saint period; the success of all of our work, the billions of us, was contingent on the success of her's. Christ's work, his life, was contingent on her success.

The immaculate conception is works based retardation

>>745204

this is basic greek literacy. This is in no way gnosticism

gospel, εὐαγγέλιον means good news

>>745202

>As evidenced by the transfiguration, Elijah and Moses were in heaven before the crucifixion.

"And no man hath ascended into heaven, but he that descended from heaven, the Son of man who is in heaven." -John 3:13'

>He was a prophet, and he was the greatest born of women. His greatness is related to his status as a prophet but the claim is made broadly.

Both the Church and the translators of the definitive form of the gospel for the english protestant world disagree with you. If that is the case, simply stating that the claim is made broadly does nothing to actually defend that claim.

>I am saying that preaching the gospel is a greater duty than physically mothering Jesus, but both are indispensable.

The preaching of the gospel is invaluable, yes, which is why the littlest preacher of it is greater than the greatest prophet. Yet, at most, the work of a single preacher will only affect and contribute to the salvation of the souls limited to your time and space. With Mary, her work was the care for salvation itself. All men's salvation is contingent on her just as it is contingent on Christ, ''because Christ's life and death, God's hypostasis with man and man's reconciliation with God, is contingent on her love, work, and obedience to God." We call her co-redemptrix for a reason; a lesser honor would be factually inaccurate.

>>745211

You keep adding long-winded commentary. Just tell me where you disagree and why from the Bible.

>John 3:13

"no one" implies teachers on earth at that time

Elijah went to heaven

<And Elijah went up by a whirlwind to heaven. (2 Ki. 2:11 NAS)

longer answer https://www.gotquestions.org/John-3-13.html

>Both the Church and the translators of the definitive form of the gospel for the english protestant world disagree with you

I'm not a kjv-onlyist and don't believe in such a doctrine. I'm not interested in debating that topic right now.

>If that is the case, simply stating that the claim is made broadly does nothing to actually defend that claim.

I shared the interlinear where you can see in the original text "en gennetois gynaikon": "among those born of women". This is called a primary source.

>3

we're so removed from the point here I'm not going to answer this one

>>745216

>You keep adding long-winded commentary. Just tell me where you disagree and why from the Bible.

That's called a debate dude. I'm not quite sure what is so frustrating about that.

>I shared the interlinear where you can see in the original text "en gennetois gynaikon": "among those born of women". This is called a primary source

Yes, and the context of the greater passage, the primary source, narrows this statement down to prophets, as opposed to all men. En gennetois gynakion does not negate the context of the previous lines, and it is worth noting that Christ was, of course, greater than John the Baptist, so the classification of him as simply the greatest of the prophets is consistent with this fact. That's all I have left say on the matter other than you shouldn't state that don't want to debate that topic and then reopen the debate in the next line.

>we're so removed from the point here I'm not going to answer this one

I have no idea what you're talking about dude. You are intending to disprove what you consider mischaracterizations, and I am intending to defend her proper characterization. Is there some other point that you are making here? If so, it needs clarifying.

And yes, thank you for the correction on Elijah, my mistake.

>The Jerusalem that is above is free, and she is our mother.

Galatians 4:26

>>745136

>Mary

>God

Pick one.

>>745221

I'm agitated for a completely unrelated issue this evening and I think I'm transmitting it, I'm sorry

I need to go now but I may revisit the thread in a couple days. thanks for talking it with me