What is Mariology?

[face2face]

I know it's a log time ago but I answered that in post #6 when I said:
In Lk 1:43 Elizabeth says (while “filled with the Holy Spirit”) And why is this granted me, that the mother of my Lord (kuriou) should come to me? Several times in chapter 1 Luke uses kurios for God (indeed Mary herself does in verse 38). So Elizabeth calling Mary The mother of my Lord is calling her the mother of my God.

Mungo, are you suggesting the use of Kurios automatically means Jesus is God? That you believe that this single Greek word hangs all the complex dogmas of the Trinity? The word kurios is used in so many ways.

1. As the possessor, owner, master, e.g., of property (Matt. 20:8; 21:40; Gal. 4:1; Sept.: Ex. 21:28, 29, 34);

2. Of a supreme lord, sovereign, e.g., the Roman emperor (Acts 25:26); the heathen gods (1 Cor. 8:5).

3. As an honorary title of address, especially to superiors, equivalent to mister, sir, as a servant to his master (Matt. 13:27; Luke 13:8); a son to his father (Matt. 21:30); to a teacher, master (Matt. 8:25; Luke 9:54, equal to epistátēs [1988], superintendent, commander. See Matt. 7:21, 22; Luke 6:46); to a person of dignity and authority (Mark 7:28; John 4:11, 15, 19, 49); to a Roman procurator (Matt. 27:63). When addressing someone respectfully (John 12:21; 20:15; Acts 16:30; Sept.: Gen. 19:2; 23:6, 11, 15).

Spoken of God and Christ:

1. Of God as the supreme Lord and Sovereign of the universe, usually corresponding to Yahweh. With the art. ho Kúrios (Matt. 1:22; 5:33; Mark 5:19; Luke 1:6, 28; Acts 7:33; Heb. 8:2; James 4:15). Without the art. Kúrios (Matt. 27:10; Mark 13:20; Luke 1:58; Acts 7:49; Rom. 4:8; Heb. 7:21; 1 Pet. 1:25). With adjuncts, without the art., e.g., Kúrios ho Theós (2316), God, the Lord God, followed by the gen. (Matt. 4:7, 10; 22:37; Luke 1:16; Sept.: Ezek. 4:14); Kúrios Sabaṓth (4519), Lord Sabaoth, meaning Lord of hosts, armies, a military appellation of God (Rom. 9:29; James 5:4; Sept.: 1 Sam. 15:2; Is. 1:9); Kúrios Pantokrátōr (3841), Lord Almighty or ruler of all (2 Cor. 6:18; Sept.: 2 Sam. 7:8; Nah. 2:13); Kúrios ho Theós ho Pantokrátōr, Lord, the God, the Almighty (Rev. 4:8; 11:17); Kúrios tṓn kurieuóntōn (2961), Lord of lords referring to those who are ruling (1 Tim. 6:15); Lord of heaven and earth (Acts 17:24). In a similar manner applied also to God as the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ (Matt. 11:25, “Father, Lord of heaven and earth”; Luke 10:21 [cf. Sept.: 2 Chr. 36:23; Ezra 1:2; Neh. 1:5]).

2. Of the Lord Jesus Christ: (1) In reference to his abode on earth as a master and teacher, where it is equivalent to rhabbí (4461), rabbi, and epistátēs (1988), master, superintendent (Matt. 17:4 [cf. Mark 9:5; Luke 9:33]. See John 13:13, 14). Chiefly in the gospels before the resurrection of Christ and with the art. ho Kúrios, the Lord, used emphatically (Matt. 21:3; 28:6; Luke 7:13; 10:1; John 4:1; 20:2, 13; Acts 9:5; 1 Cor. 9:5). With adjuncts, e.g., ho Kúrios kaí ho didáskalos (1320), teacher, the Lord and the teacher (John 13:13, 14); ho Kúrios Iēsoús (2424), the Lord Jesus (Luke 24:3; Acts 1:21; 4:33; 1 Cor. 11:23). (2) As the supreme Lord of the gospel dispensation, “head over all things to the church” (Rom. 10:12; Rev. 17:14); with the art. ho Kúrios (Mark 16:19, 20; Acts 8:25; 19:10; 2 Cor. 3:17; Eph. 5:10; Col. 3:23; 2 Thess. 3:1, 5; 2 Tim. 4:8; James 5:7); with the gen. of person, ho Kúriós mou, my Lord (Matt. 22:44; Heb. 7:14; Rev. 11:8); without the art., Kúrios (Luke 1:76; 2 Cor. 3:16, 17; Col. 4:1; 2 Pet. 3:10). With adjuncts, e.g., with the art., ho Kúrios Iēsoús or Iēsoús ho Kúrios (Rom. 4:24); ho Kúrios hēmṓn Iēsoús, “our Lord Jesus” (1 Cor. 5:5; Heb. 13:20); ho Kúrios Iēsoús Christós, the Lord Jesus Christ, or Iēsoús Christós ho Kúrios, Jesus Christ the Lord (Acts 16:31: Rom. 1:4; 13:14; 1 Cor. 1:9); ho Kúrios hēmṓn Iēsoús Christós, our Lord Jesus Christ (Rom. 16:18; 1 Cor. 1:2, 10; Gal. 6:18); Iēsoús Christós ho Kúrios hēmṓn, Jesus Christ our Lord (Eph. 3:11; 1 Tim. 1:2).

To assume Kurious means Jesus is "Deity" and to assume Elizabeth had the doctrine of the Trinity in her mind when calling Jesus Lord is doing some major injustice to the text. To understand Christ as Lord is to confess that “he was appointed by the Father to have us under his power, to administer the Kingdom of God in heaven and earth” but nowhere in the Gospel or Letters are we told kurious = (Jesus is God).

 

[face2face]

And error certainly has as evidenced by the tens of thousands of ever splintering Protestants denominations and sects.

No admission of error in your body though?

 

[face2face]

@Mungo those "whatifs" are looking like rather serious questions from where I am sitting in this conversation.

1. What if Jesus Christ isn’t God?

2. What if Mary had a normal marriage with Joseph and further children were born to them?

Matt 13:55 is rather compelling – Note the order (Stepfather, Mother & Children)

“Isn’t this the carpenter’s son? Isn’t his mother’s name Mary, and aren’t his brothers James, Joseph, Simon and Judas?

I mean, it’s not a difficult Scripture to decipher would you agree?

Note the people’s amazement because they know the members of Jesus’ family, who seem ordinary enough. Mungo, have you considered the context here could suggest people in the audience were residents of Nazareth and remember Jesus’ childhood and young adulthood?

Do you believe the reference “Carpenter’s son” speaks to Joseph’s occupation?
Who do you believe are "his brothers" in Matthew 13:55 & Matthew 12:46-50?
Does the Catholic Church have an alternative understanding for these passages?
Does the Catholic Church acknowledge Jesus' rebuke of Mary anywhere in the Gospel record?

Mungo, we have already started to accumulate a number of "whatifs" and I suggest before our conversation is done we shall have added a whole lot more. I wonder at what point do you confess the Catholic Church isn’t in possession of absolute truth and accept the possibly that error will be found in her?

We shall see.

F2F

 

[Mungo]

Mungo, are you suggesting the use of Kurios automatically means Jesus is God? That you believe that this single Greek word hangs all the complex dogmas of the Trinity? The word kurios is used in so many ways.

1. As the possessor, owner, master, e.g., of property (Matt. 20:8; 21:40; Gal. 4:1; Sept.: Ex. 21:28, 29, 34);

2. Of a supreme lord, sovereign, e.g., the Roman emperor (Acts 25:26); the heathen gods (1 Cor. 8:5).

3. As an honorary title of address, especially to superiors, equivalent to mister, sir, as a servant to his master (Matt. 13:27; Luke 13:8); a son to his father (Matt. 21:30); to a teacher, master (Matt. 8:25; Luke 9:54, equal to epistátēs [1988], superintendent, commander. See Matt. 7:21, 22; Luke 6:46); to a person of dignity and authority (Mark 7:28; John 4:11, 15, 19, 49); to a Roman procurator (Matt. 27:63). When addressing someone respectfully (John 12:21; 20:15; Acts 16:30; Sept.: Gen. 19:2; 23:6, 11, 15).

Spoken of God and Christ:

1. Of God as the supreme Lord and Sovereign of the universe, usually corresponding to Yahweh. With the art. ho Kúrios (Matt. 1:22; 5:33; Mark 5:19; Luke 1:6, 28; Acts 7:33; Heb. 8:2; James 4:15). Without the art. Kúrios (Matt. 27:10; Mark 13:20; Luke 1:58; Acts 7:49; Rom. 4:8; Heb. 7:21; 1 Pet. 1:25). With adjuncts, without the art., e.g., Kúrios ho Theós (2316), God, the Lord God, followed by the gen. (Matt. 4:7, 10; 22:37; Luke 1:16; Sept.: Ezek. 4:14); Kúrios Sabaṓth (4519), Lord Sabaoth, meaning Lord of hosts, armies, a military appellation of God (Rom. 9:29; James 5:4; Sept.: 1 Sam. 15:2; Is. 1:9); Kúrios Pantokrátōr (3841), Lord Almighty or ruler of all (2 Cor. 6:18; Sept.: 2 Sam. 7:8; Nah. 2:13); Kúrios ho Theós ho Pantokrátōr, Lord, the God, the Almighty (Rev. 4:8; 11:17); Kúrios tṓn kurieuóntōn (2961), Lord of lords referring to those who are ruling (1 Tim. 6:15); Lord of heaven and earth (Acts 17:24). In a similar manner applied also to God as the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ (Matt. 11:25, “Father, Lord of heaven and earth”; Luke 10:21 [cf. Sept.: 2 Chr. 36:23; Ezra 1:2; Neh. 1:5]).

2. Of the Lord Jesus Christ: (1) In reference to his abode on earth as a master and teacher, where it is equivalent to rhabbí (4461), rabbi, and epistátēs (1988), master, superintendent (Matt. 17:4 [cf. Mark 9:5; Luke 9:33]. See John 13:13, 14). Chiefly in the gospels before the resurrection of Christ and with the art. ho Kúrios, the Lord, used emphatically (Matt. 21:3; 28:6; Luke 7:13; 10:1; John 4:1; 20:2, 13; Acts 9:5; 1 Cor. 9:5). With adjuncts, e.g., ho Kúrios kaí ho didáskalos (1320), teacher, the Lord and the teacher (John 13:13, 14); ho Kúrios Iēsoús (2424), the Lord Jesus (Luke 24:3; Acts 1:21; 4:33; 1 Cor. 11:23). (2) As the supreme Lord of the gospel dispensation, “head over all things to the church” (Rom. 10:12; Rev. 17:14); with the art. ho Kúrios (Mark 16:19, 20; Acts 8:25; 19:10; 2 Cor. 3:17; Eph. 5:10; Col. 3:23; 2 Thess. 3:1, 5; 2 Tim. 4:8; James 5:7); with the gen. of person, ho Kúriós mou, my Lord (Matt. 22:44; Heb. 7:14; Rev. 11:8); without the art., Kúrios (Luke 1:76; 2 Cor. 3:16, 17; Col. 4:1; 2 Pet. 3:10). With adjuncts, e.g., with the art., ho Kúrios Iēsoús or Iēsoús ho Kúrios (Rom. 4:24); ho Kúrios hēmṓn Iēsoús, “our Lord Jesus” (1 Cor. 5:5; Heb. 13:20); ho Kúrios Iēsoús Christós, the Lord Jesus Christ, or Iēsoús Christós ho Kúrios, Jesus Christ the Lord (Acts 16:31: Rom. 1:4; 13:14; 1 Cor. 1:9); ho Kúrios hēmṓn Iēsoús Christós, our Lord Jesus Christ (Rom. 16:18; 1 Cor. 1:2, 10; Gal. 6:18); Iēsoús Christós ho Kúrios hēmṓn, Jesus Christ our Lord (Eph. 3:11; 1 Tim. 1:2).

To assume Kurious means Jesus is "Deity" and to assume Elizabeth had the doctrine of the Trinity in her mind when calling Jesus Lord is doing some major injustice to the text. To understand Christ as Lord is to confess that “he was appointed by the Father to have us under his power, to administer the Kingdom of God in heaven and earth” but nowhere in the Gospel or Letters are we told kurious = (Jesus is God).

I know that kurios is used in many ways. What I claimed was that Luke uses kurios to mean God before Elizabeth spoke.
Luke 1:6, 11, 17, 25, 28, 32, 38 - all the instances in Luke 1 before Elizabeth spoke. Clearly they all refer to God

And remember all this was written under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit.
Elizabeth was filled with the Holy Spirit when she spoke.
Why should Luke mean something different in this one instance.

Elizabeth continues to use the word Lord, obviously meaning God, in vs 45 as Mary does in vs 46.

Do you think Jesus is not God.
Do you think there is some other Lord that Luke was referring to?

 

[Mungo]

No admission of error in your body though?

No doctrinal error.

 

[Addy]

I still want to know WHO was in Mary and Joseph's bedroom night after night to PROVE this BOLD declaration of perpetual virginity???
It never ceases to amaze me what people will swallow and believe... because the CHURCH told them to.

Honestly... of all the many debates about Catholicism... this one is the lamest in my estimation...

No one is arguing that Mary gave birth to Jesus as a VIRGIN.... ABSOLUTELY that is true.... but what occurred after that in the PRIVATE bedroom of Mary and Joseph is NO bodies business. THIS is UNPROVEABLE.... Like seriously...

 

[Mungo]

@Mungo those "whatifs" are looking like rather serious questions from where I am sitting in this conversation.

1. What if Jesus Christ isn’t God?

2. What if Mary had a normal marriage with Joseph and further children were born to them?

Matt 13:55 is rather compelling – Note the order (Stepfather, Mother & Children)

“Isn’t this the carpenter’s son? Isn’t his mother’s name Mary, and aren’t his brothers James, Joseph, Simon and Judas?

I mean, it’s not a difficult Scripture to decipher would you agree?

Note the people’s amazement because they know the members of Jesus’ family, who seem ordinary enough. Mungo, have you considered the context here could suggest people in the audience were residents of Nazareth and remember Jesus’ childhood and young adulthood?

Do you believe the reference “Carpenter’s son” speaks to Joseph’s occupation?
Who do you believe are "his brothers" in Matthew 13:55 & Matthew 12:46-50?
Does the Catholic Church have an alternative understanding for these passages?
Does the Catholic Church acknowledge Jesus' rebuke of Mary anywhere in the Gospel record?

Mungo, we have already started to accumulate a number of "whatifs" and I suggest before our conversation is done we shall have added a whole lot more. I wonder at what point do you confess the Catholic Church isn’t in possession of absolute truth and accept the possibly that error will be found in her?

We shall see.

F2F

Oh no, not again.
These arguments have been thrashed through so many times.
What next?
The 'until' clause?
the 'firstborn' argument?
If you really want answers just read the Biblical Mary thread. The answers are all in there. At the moment it's on post #1387 so have a good read.

A few short answers
1. Do you believe the reference “Carpenter’s son” speaks to Joseph’s occupation? Yes
2. Who do you believe are "his brothers" in Matthew 13:55 & Matthew 12:46-50? There are many possibilities other than them being Mary's children. The word Adelphos can be used for many different relationships. Nowhere does Scripture say Mary had other children.
3. Does the Catholic Church have an alternative understanding for these passages? I don't think the Catholic Church has dogmatically declared an alternative understanding. But as The Church has dogmatically defined that Mary remained ever-Virgin
individual Catholics have produced alternatives. Read the Biblical Mary thread to find them.
4. Does the Catholic Church acknowledge Jesus' rebuke of Mary anywhere in the Gospel record? No, Jesus did not rebuke Mary.

I'm not sure where you are going with all this but if you are just going to go over stuff that has been gone over already ad nauseam then count me out. Also I'm going away in a couple of days (Covid permitting) so I don't have much time now.

 

[Abaxvahl]

Exactly where is the confession of the divinity of Jesus?

The whole passage and where St. Elizabeth calls Him "Lord" here.

 

[Abaxvahl]

I still want to know WHO was in Mary and Joseph's bedroom night after night to PROVE this BOLD declaration of perpetual virginity???
It never ceases to amaze me what people will swallow and believe... because the CHURCH told them to.

Honestly... of all the many debates about Catholicism... this one is the lamest in my estimation...

No one is arguing that Mary gave birth to Jesus as a VIRGIN.... ABSOLUTELY that is true.... but what occurred after that in the PRIVATE bedroom of Mary and Joseph is NO bodies business. THIS is UNPROVEABLE.... Like seriously...

Nous of Christ.

 

[Illuminator]

THE GREAT MODERNIST PROTESTANT COVERUP RAGES ON

NONE of the reformers believed Mary had other children or that she was a sinner. Quotes from them have been posted time and time again, only to fall of deaf ears. The great flip flop didn't occur until after the false philosophies of the Enlightenment Era, that "enlightened" the world with formalized atheism and communism. They influenced liberal Protestants and skeptics and this nonsense about Mary spread like a virus. No Protestant church fell into these traps until the mid 18th century. Clearly they are traditions of men. If the reformers were wrong about Mary, then how can anyone be sure they were right about anything else?

THE PROTESTANT REFORMERS ON MARY
When Fundamentalists study the writings of the "Reformers" (or founders of their particular sect) on Mary, the Mother of Jesus, they will find that the "Reformers" accepted almost every major Marian doctrine and considered these doctrines to be both scriptural and fundamental to the historic Christian Faith.

REFORMERS ON MARY, MOTHER OF GOD
Classical Protestantism regarded Mary as the Mother of God. Despite the break from Rome, nearly all Protestant reformers held the historic doctrine on Mary’ Divine Maternity. Mary remained to them as the Theotokos – the God-bearer.

Protestant Reformers on the Ever-Virginity of Mary
Though the Orthodox Church does not follow the teachings of the Protestant Reformers, their views regarding the Theotokos’s ever-virginity are a point of commonality with Orthodoxy. Many of the major figures amongst the Protestant fathers in the faith believed in the Theotokos’s ever-virginity.

“Reformers on Mary”
An Assembly of Quotes

Sadly, anti-Mary Christians will defend their 200 year old man made traditions until they are blue in the face. They don't care what the reformers believed.

 

[face2face]

THE GREAT MODERNIST PROTESTANT COVERUP RAGES ON

THE PROTESTANT REFORMERS ON MARY
When Fundamentalists study the writings of the "Reformers" (or founders of their particular sect) on Mary, the Mother of Jesus, they will find that the "Reformers" accepted almost every major Marian doctrine and considered these doctrines to be both scriptural and fundamental to the historic Christian Faith.

 

[face2face]

The whole passage and where St. Elizabeth calls Him "Lord" here.

And....

 

[face2face]

Oh no, not again.
1. Do you believe the reference “Carpenter’s son” speaks to Joseph’s occupation? Yes

I asked that question to see if you believe Scripture.

2. Who do you believe are "his brothers" in Matthew 13:55 & Matthew 12:46-50? There are many possibilities other than them being Mary's children. The word Adelphos can be used for many different relationships. Nowhere does Scripture say Mary had other children.

Ah okay so you claim "other possibilities" here, but I sense you are not all that comfortable with the text. If I said, nowhere in the Bible does it say Mary was sinless, or that she remained a virgin for the remainder of her life etc – would you accept that as being true?

3. Does the Catholic Church have an alternative understanding for these passages? I don't think the Catholic Church has dogmatically declared an alternative understanding. But as The Church has dogmatically defined that Mary remained ever-Virgin
individual Catholics have produced alternatives. Read the Biblical Mary thread to find them.

This is called confirmation bias and is common throughout all religious bodies, even I suffer from it! It's being honest about it and understanding when you are at any given moment. Your post places you firmly in that zone.

4. Does the Catholic Church acknowledge Jesus' rebuke of Mary anywhere in the Gospel record? No, Jesus did not rebuke Mary.

I think this is a good place to conclude our conversation. Appreciate you sharing in the way you have thanks
Enjoy your getaway...we live in difficult times and Covid has added further pressures.
F2F

 

[Abaxvahl]

And....

Are you looking for more?

 

[face2face]

Honestly... of all the many debates about Catholicism... this one is the lamest in my estimation...

To mean the 4 Catholic dogmas concerning Mary are lame?
This thread revealed to me how deep and far reaching deception can take hold of people who for accounts appear capable of challenging their learned traditions and returning to God's Word. If the Church is wrong on Mary then what...? Where does the error lead you in the Roman Catholic Church? When the Master returns we all will see.
F2F

 

[face2face]

Are you looking for more?

Are you able to give more Bible truth or just Catholic teaching?

 

[Abaxvahl]

Are you able to give more Bible truth or just Catholic teaching?

Bible truth of what? I also do not acknowledge that dichotomy. I wouldn't be in the Church I am in if I did not think it was in accord with what the Lord taught. Any sect with errors of that level is not with God.

 

[face2face]

Bible truth of what? I also do not acknowledge that dichotomy. I wouldn't be in the Church I am in if I did not think it was in accord with what the Lord taught. Any sect with errors of that level is not with God.

In my defence, as Paul says: ‘I admit to you, that according to the Way, which you Abaxvahl call a sect (hairesis), I worship the God of our Fathers’ (Acts 24:14)

 

[Abaxvahl]

In my defence, as Paul says: ‘I admit to you, that according to the Way, which you Abaxvahl call a sect (hairesis), I worship the God of our Fathers’ (Acts 24:14)

In my defense, I say the same. God bless.

 

[Curtis]

Can’t spin the fact that scripture says Joseph had sex with Mary after Jesus was born - thus the accurate title is the ex-virgin Mary.

Matthew 1:24 So when Joseph woke up, he married Mary, as the angel of the Lord had told him to.

Matthew 1:25 But he had no sexual relations with her before she gave birth to her son. And Joseph named him Jesus.