Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Mary's mother was born carrying her egg, right? Was that a sinless egg too?
Okay, so Mary's sinless conception was a miracle and her parents were sinful human beings. (Obviously, the chain of sinless eggs has to end somewhere, and the sooner the better). But if Mary could be miraculously born without sin even though her parents were sinful, I don't see why Jesus couldn't have been miraculously born without sin even though his mother was sinful.
I respect other beliefs and as a Protestant I have a lot in common with Catholics, but it strikes me as odd that the Bible is so full of teaching about Jesus and so strangely silent about Mary. If we are to believe in Jesus as the Son of God, there's a whole book about it. If we are to believe in Mary as a sinless human and co-mediatrix etc., well... Where is that? Is there anything about Jesus which is comparable to Mary in being all about oral tradition and mystic visions rather than Scripture?
Well, Mary does have her own book in the Quran, and while she isn't specifically said to be sinless, she is known from birth to be "pure" and given to Allah by her mother to grow up in the temple with a special guardian.
She does have labor pains, however, and held on to a palm tree which gave her dates and a rivulet of water.
Interestingly, in Islam, her mother is named Hannah, which in English is Anna or Anne. In Catholicism, the mother of Mary is St. Anne.
Well, Mary does have her own book in the Quran, and while she isn't specifically said to be sinless, she is known from birth to be "pure" and given to Allah by her mother to grow up in the temple with a special guardian.
She does have labor pains, however, and held on to a palm tree which gave her dates and a rivulet of water.
Interestingly, in Islam, her mother is named Hannah, which in English is Anna or Anne. In Catholicism, the mother of Mary is St. Anne.
Interesting post, MQ. I would have to agree that Mary probably did experience some labor pain (as John seems to indicate at Rev 12:2), but likely would have been 'less intense', as the verse at Genesis 3:16 says He will 'intensify' toil/pain; indicating that there wasn't 'none' to start with.
The question here is when "ensoulment" takes place. It's absurd to project the concept of sinlessness or sinfulness onto an unfertilized egg, as it does not have a human soul - or else every woman is carrying around hundreds of thousands of unique persons with eternal souls who, by natural process, will never see the light of day.
I agree with you there. But if so, then why did Mary have to be born free of sin, in order to have a child who was free of sin? Her half of the fertilized was already sinless. As you said, an egg can't be sinful.
I know I sound like I'm arguing but it has always perplexed me. The New Testament has four entire books about the life of Jesus, and many more books written about Jesus's teachings. That was obviously important enough to write down. But you can write what the Bible explicitly says about Mary on one page. The importance of Mary to Catholics is way out of proportion to anything said about her in Scripture; it just seems odd.
I agree with you there. But if so, then why did Mary have to be born free of sin, in order to have a child who was free of sin? Her half of the fertilized was already sinless. As you said, an egg can't be sinful.
I don't believe she had to be born free of sin. Her sinlessness was a gift to her from her Son. Jesus, being God, could not have been stained by sin no matter how He would have chosen to enter the world.
Quote:
Originally Posted by saibot
I know I sound like I'm arguing but it has always perplexed me. The New Testament has four entire books about the life of Jesus, and many more books written about Jesus's teachings. That was obviously important enough to write down. But you can write what the Bible explicitly says about Mary on one page. The importance of Mary to Catholics is way out of proportion to anything said about her in Scripture; it just seems odd.
I'm with you. As a former Protestant myself, I didn't understand the Catholic emphasis on Mary either.
While Scripture is an integral part of the Catholic faith, it is not the limit or extent of it. Scripture is only a part of the Sacred Deposit of Faith that has been handed down to us from the Apostles.
As John 21:25 says, "Now there are also many other things that Jesus did. Were every one of them to be written, I suppose that the world itself could not contain the books that would be written."
The teachings we have regarding Mary are part of the unwritten Tradition that John referenced here. The unwritten Tradition was also mentioned by Paul in 2 Thessalonians 2:15: "So then, brothers, stand firm and hold to the traditions that you were taught by us, either by our spoken word or by our letter."
I don't believe she had to be born free of sin. Her sinlessness was a gift to her from her Son. Jesus, being God, could not have been stained by sin no matter how He would have chosen to enter the world.
I'm with you. As a former Protestant myself, I didn't understand the Catholic emphasis on Mary either.
While Scripture is an integral part of the Catholic faith, it is not the limit or extent of it. Scripture is only a part of the Sacred Deposit of Faith that has been handed down to us from the Apostles.
As John 21:25 says, "Now there are also many other things that Jesus did. Were every one of them to be written, I suppose that the world itself could not contain the books that would be written."
The teachings we have regarding Mary are part of the unwritten Tradition that John referenced here. The unwritten Tradition was also mentioned by Paul in 2 Thessalonians 2:15: "So then, brothers, stand firm and hold to the traditions that you were taught by us, either by our spoken word or by our letter."
Obviously we need to separate things, but when things are separated and divided will be dependent on the different times/seasons/days and also there needs to be an understanding of what and why things are to be divided
And we are told Gods times/seasons/days are not our times/seasons/days nor are His thoughts our thoughts nor His ways our ways, etc
I don't believe she had to be born free of sin. Her sinlessness was a gift to her from her Son. Jesus, being God, could not have been stained by sin no matter how He would have chosen to enter the world.
I'm with you. As a former Protestant myself, I didn't understand the Catholic emphasis on Mary either.
While Scripture is an integral part of the Catholic faith, it is not the limit or extent of it. Scripture is only a part of the Sacred Deposit of Faith that has been handed down to us from the Apostles.
As John 21:25 says, "Now there are also many other things that Jesus did. Were every one of them to be written, I suppose that the world itself could not contain the books that would be written."
The teachings we have regarding Mary are part of the unwritten Tradition that John referenced here. The unwritten Tradition was also mentioned by Paul in 2 Thessalonians 2:15: "So then, brothers, stand firm and hold to the traditions that you were taught by us, either by our spoken word or by our letter."
This was worth repeating. Growing up Protestant, we used to always wonder "where Catholics got that" referring to teachings that were not in the Bible. I was well into adulthood before someone explained to me that the Bible alone is not the basis of Catholic beliefs. It was so ingrained into us that the Bible was the be-all and end-all that we never considered that others might see it differently.
I do remember my mother saying, "You know, we always say the Catholics put too much emphasis on Mary, but I don't think we give her enough consideration in our own church."
Mary was prepared to forego the blessing of children her whole life as she anticipated life as a consecrated virgin. That's why she was so surprised to find out from the angel that she would have a child.
Where do you come up with these things? All I can recall was that Mary was surprised that she would have a child because she had not yet married. Are there Bible verses that say all these other things?
All I can recall was that Mary was surprised that she would have a child because she had not yet married.
She was already betrothed to Joseph. If she had expected to have sexual relations with him, she would not have been surprised at all to find out that she was going to have a child. Yet alas, she was surprised...
This was worth repeating. Growing up Protestant, we used to always wonder "where Catholics got that" referring to teachings that were not in the Bible. I was well into adulthood before someone explained to me that the Bible alone is not the basis of Catholic beliefs. It was so ingrained into us that the Bible was the be-all and end-all that we never considered that others might see it differently.
I do remember my mother saying, "You know, we always say the Catholics put too much emphasis on Mary, but I don't think we give her enough consideration in our own church."
I understand all of that. I even agree that Protestants tend to neglect Mary as an example of faith and godliness, and that is a weakness of Protestantism. If Marian theology were a minor part of Catholic belief, I wouldn't be fazed by that. But prayers to Mary, reciting the Rosary, calling her Co-Mediatrix and Queen of Heaven, the doctrines of Immaculate Conception, Perpetual Virginity, Assumption of Mary, etc. are a HUGE, MAJOR part of Catholicism. The extreme devotion to Mary and her massive role is way out of proportion to the way Mary is actually presented in Scripture.
Why would Scripture tell us so much about Jesus but leave all this really important stuff about Mary out? The Bible itself says it is sufficient for all we need to know about salvation and the Christian life (II Timothy 3)...
Quote:
Originally Posted by EscAlaMike
She was already betrothed to Joseph. If she had expected to have sexual relations with him, she would not have been surprised at all to find out that she was going to have a child.
Mary was surprised to find that she would become pregnant before getting married. Protestants interpret her words to the angel, "How can this be, since I am a virgin?" to mean "I am a virgin right now," not "I will always be a virgin."
There's also the fact that Matthew says, "Joseph knew her not until she had given birth to a son." He doesn't say "Joseph knew her not, ever."
"I didn't do it until this time" implies that I did it do after that time, doesn't it?
If Marian theology were a minor part of Catholic belief, I wouldn't be fazed by that. But prayers to Mary, reciting the Rosary, calling her Co-Mediatrix and Queen of Heaven, the doctrines of Immaculate Conception, Perpetual Virginity, Assumption of Mary, etc. are a HUGE, MAJOR part of Catholicism. The extreme devotion to Mary and her massive role is way out of proportion to the way Mary is actually presented in Scripture.
Prayers to Mary including the Rosary are devotional practices. They are not required. The doctrines of the Immaculate Conception, Perpetual Virginity, and the Assumption are Catholic dogmas that are required beliefs. All Christians believed these doctrines until very recently.
Quote:
Originally Posted by saibot
Why would Scripture tell us so much about Jesus but leave all this really important stuff about Mary out? The Bible itself says it is sufficient for all we need to know about salvation and the Christian life (II Timothy 3)...
The books of the Bible were written separately and individually for specific purposes. Just because the books of the Bible are largely silent on Mary, that doesn't mean we ought to be satisfied with a bare-bones Marian theology. Much has been worked out and developed in the centuries since the books of the Bible were written.
Read 2 Timothy 3 again. It doesn't use the word "sufficient" in any sense.
Quote:
Originally Posted by saibot
Mary was surprised to find that she would become pregnant before getting married. Protestants interpret her words to the angel, "How can this be, since I am a virgin?" to mean "I am a virgin right now," not "I will always be a virgin."
The angel didn't tell her when she would conceive.
Quote:
Originally Posted by saibot
There's also the fact that Matthew says, "Joseph knew her not until she had given birth to a son." He doesn't say "Joseph knew her not, ever."
"I didn't do it until this time" implies that I did it do after that time, doesn't it?
It could mean that, but in this case it doesn't. There are other places in Scripture where the word "until" is used, that does not remotely imply that whatever is being described will end at a particular time.
2 Samuel 6:23: And Michal the daughter of Saul had no child to [until] the day of her death.
Did Michal then have children after her death?
1 Timothy 4:13: Until I come, attend to the public reading of scripture, to preaching, to teaching.
Did Timothy stop teaching when Paul came?
1 Corinthians 15:25: For he [Christ] must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet.
Will Christ stop reigning once His enemies are under His feet?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
