China Cat Sunflower
Nimrod
- Messages
- 2,924
- Reaction score
- 13
- Points
- 0
Thomas said:
No. But if all one had was the gospels Mary would be just a bit player in the story.
Chris
The Trinity
- Thread starter Dondi
- Start date
No. But if all one had was the gospels Mary would be just a bit player in the story.
Chris
Jeannot
Jeannot
Quahom1 said:
"Man" can mean either a specific man, or it can mean humankind. When we say, for example, "A dog is man's best friend," do we mean only males? And there are many other examples.
But the most conservative theology says that God is pure spirit--therefore, NEITHER male nor female. How could God be one or the other (or even both), since male and female are BIOLOGICAL distinctions. God has no biology. It is a cultural, historical assumption that God is somehow male.
Dondi
Well-Known Member
Jeannot said:
Agreed, to a point. I would argue that the differences between men and women are not merely biological. There are psychological, emotional, and physiological factors as well, each having their respective strengths and weakness. It is in this area of these intangibles that make up who we are in our soul, our spirit and how we relate to each other.
To suppose God is NEITHER male nor female would destroy the idea that we are made in His image. What part IS made in His image if not in these intangible traits?
I would offer that God is andrygenous (though that term is imprecise - maybe thelarrhenic?), exhibiting the intangible traits of both men and women. Yes, yes, I know God is Spirit. And I don't want to take away from God the Father. And I have no problem viewing God as such, but the term Father is taken in the cultural/patriarchal sense, not in a biological sense. We are all adopted as His children, in that sense we look to God to care for our needs as Provider. But God is all in all, too. So why is it a stretch not to think that He can relate to His children as both Mother and Father?
Man is always trying to make G-d in his image, as it were Men that wrote the Bible...the Priests, Elohists, and Yahwists that composed Genesis imparted their views on the stories.. And as the editors that put them all together didn't notice the differences between creation 1 and creation 2 we got two versions from differing male authors. And as for the image part...again after they ate from the apple...and as G-d said they became like US...then She put skin on them....could be we were spirit prior to becoming flesh...Dondi said:
Dondi
Well-Known Member
wil said:
Now you're arguing inspiration. I try to take things at face value, wil. Which means that I believe that the nature of God, Man, Jesus, Spirit, Soul, Blue Sky, & Rain can be derived from a study of scriptures, whether mythical or not. I kinda like to think that God inspired some truth in the Words we read in scripture. Even if there were more than author of genesis, that doesn't mean that God can't inspire them all, or one if you believe it to be Moses.
But your argument would be a interesting topic in another thread, particularly in regards to the differences in Genesis 1 & 2. Perhaps you can start?
Sorry to confuse...no not intending to argue inspiration of the various authors...or even intent...but discussing various interpretations of what they wrote. Absolutely agree that the prose, stories, songs depict various aspects and understandings of their explanation of creation. It seems quite apparent that their are a number of understandings, various levels of understanding and each has its time and purpose.Dondi said:
China Cat Sunflower said:
A "bit" player? She was 14 when she said yes to the tremendous role God had for her. She trusted that God would take care of her, despite the repercussions she would normally have faced...
She had to manage, nuture, raise and teach a human and the Son of God all roled into one child, and she had no manual, or previous experience to fall back on.
Then she had to watch, helpless as her child agonized and died a gruesome death, for which he committed no crime to warrant.
And she knew full well what Jesus' role was to be, because she was specifically told such.
Finally, she started Jesus on His path to carry out his mission, the day she compelled Him to change the water into wine. He had just turned 30 years of age by most accounts, fully a man.
Bit player is hardly the term I'd use to describe Mary, even strictly by biblical standards and writings about her.
v/r
Q
China Cat Sunflower said:
Oh, and one other thing Chris, for such an open minded individual such as yourself, the point you made was rather "profiled", or biased, or whatever you wish to call Predjudicial judgement, and against a 14 year old girl...
things that make you go hmmm.
Not to derail the topic but, the references here to 14 year old girl...and becoming a man at 30 confuse me.
In the US only 150 years ago...education was largely complete for 90% of our youth at 14 years old... getting married and having children at this age was far from uncommon. Having adult responsibilities like providing income for the family was the norm. 30 was well beyond middle age.
2000 years ago marriage and children and adult responsibilities by the age of 14 was completely common. Think 18-20 as too old to find a mate...
In the US only 150 years ago...education was largely complete for 90% of our youth at 14 years old... getting married and having children at this age was far from uncommon. Having adult responsibilities like providing income for the family was the norm. 30 was well beyond middle age.
2000 years ago marriage and children and adult responsibilities by the age of 14 was completely common. Think 18-20 as too old to find a mate...
wil said:
According to Jewish law, a man was not a fully mature man until obtaining the age of 30. Until such time he could not hold office, nor lead the people. What is so confusing? A woman on the other hand was of ripe child bearing years between 14 and 20. That is when the body could/can heal the fastest. Again, what is confusing?
Joseph died an old man, when Jesus was around 30. Mary on the other hand was middle aged @ around 44-46.
I find nothing confusing about the reality of the times, nor the fact of biology.
v/r
Q
China Cat Sunflower
Nimrod
- Messages
- 2,924
- Reaction score
- 13
- Points
- 0
Quahom1 said:Oh, and one other thing Chris, for such an open minded individual such as yourself, the point you made was rather "profiled", or biased, or whatever you wish to call Predjudicial judgement, and against a 14 year old girl...
things that make you go hmmm.
All I'm saying is that Mary only shows up a couple times in the story. At the beginning (of course), at Caana and a couple other places, and at the end. She's not a major character.
Now, where do you get that she was fourteen?
Chris
China Cat Sunflower said:
There is no exact age in the cannonized biblical works, to be sure. However the Qu'RAn places her age at 13. In apocryphal works such as the Protoevangelism of James (7-9), she is placed at 13-14 years of age. Secular history of the time shows that a woman was eligible for marriage and child bearing by age 12 years six months, and that was the standard for getting married for Jewish women. Isaiah 7:1-17 (with significant focus on 7:14) also prophecies who, what and how old Mary was, at the time Jesus would be born.
The Catholic Encyclopidia as well as the speculative arguements of theological scholars tend to place Mary between 13-14 years of age when she had Jesus.
Much is drawn on the history of Mary prior to the conception of Jesus, in order to find her age. We know for example, that she was brought to the Temple for presentation while young (this is customary especially for the oldest male and other favored children). Mary being considered favored by her parents for being blessed with her in their old age, was presented. Some opine that she was brought at age three (which is reasonable and historically accurate for the times). Most children would not stay past age seven, however there were exceptions, and Mary seems to be one of them.
One of the reasons this is possible is due to the high priest advising Mary that it was her time to be given to marriage (this would put her at 12 1/2 years of age). When she reminded the priest of her vow of virginity, he went in embarrasement before the Lord for an answer. After gathering the sons of David, Joseph was picked, and he and Mary were betrothed.
The time between Betrothal and espousment (or contract of marriage) was usually three months. And during this time, Mary visited her cousin Elizabeth (also pregnant six months with John the Baptist). Mary stayed until the birth (about nine months) of John then returned to Joseph (pregnant three to six months). This would place Mary between the age of 13 years three months and 13 years six months.
Within the given time frame, it is strong speculation that Mary gave birth to Jesus between the ages of 13 years nine months up to 14 years six months of age.
my thoughts
v/r
Q
edit: Here is some excerpts from the Catholic Encylopdia for consideration:
Jewish maidens were considered marriageable at the age of twelve years and six months, though the actual age of the bride varied with circumstances. The marriage was preceded by the betrothal, after which the bride legally belonged to the bridegroom, though she did not live with him till about a year later, when the marriage used to be celebrated. All this agrees well with the language of the Evangelists. St. Luke (1:27) calls Mary "a virginespoused to a man whose name was Joseph"; St. Matthew (1:18) says, when as his mother Mary was espoused to Joseph, before they came together, she was found with child, of the Holy Ghost". As we know of no brother of Mary, we must suppose that she was an heiress, and was obliged by the law of Numbers 36:6 to marry a member of her tribe. The Law itself prohibited marriage within certain degrees of relationship, so that the marriage of even an heiress was left more or less to choice.
According to Jewish custom, the union between Joseph and Mary had to be arranged by the parents of St. Joseph. One might ask why Mary consented to her betrothal, though she was bound by her vow of virginity. As she had obeyedGod's inspiration in making her vow, so she obeyedGod's inspiration in becoming the affianced bride of Joseph. Besides, it would have been singular among the Jews to refuse betrothal or marriage; for all the Jewish maidens aspired after marriage as the accomplishment of a natural duty. Mary trusted the Divine guidance implicitly, and thus was certain that her vow would be kept even in her married state.
Hi Chris:
No. But if all one had was the gospels Mary would be just a bit player in the story.
If that's all one saw.
If, on the other hand, one had the gospels, and an authentic exegesis of the content thereof, and access to the treasury of tradition enshrined in liturgy, practice and common belief, and the benefit of 2,000 years philosophical, contemplative, mystical and prayerful reflection ...
... then you have something else altogther.
You have illumination.
Origen:
"There is not one jot or tittle written in the Bible which does not accomplish its special work for those capable using it."
Jerome:
"In the Divine Scriptures every word, syllable, accent and point is packed with meaning."
The Scriptures are full of many things, but no-one, especially those mentioned by name, is a bit player!
Thomas
No. But if all one had was the gospels Mary would be just a bit player in the story.
If that's all one saw.
If, on the other hand, one had the gospels, and an authentic exegesis of the content thereof, and access to the treasury of tradition enshrined in liturgy, practice and common belief, and the benefit of 2,000 years philosophical, contemplative, mystical and prayerful reflection ...
... then you have something else altogther.
You have illumination.
Origen:
"There is not one jot or tittle written in the Bible which does not accomplish its special work for those capable using it."
Jerome:
"In the Divine Scriptures every word, syllable, accent and point is packed with meaning."
The Scriptures are full of many things, but no-one, especially those mentioned by name, is a bit player!
Thomas
Dor
Bible Thumper
So basically if you go by bible Mary was a small part(Im not gonna say bit part cause she was important).Thomas said:
If you listen to man she becomes so much more!
Dor
Bible Thumper
And why are we discussing Mary in a Trinity thread??
Dor said:And why are we discussing Mary in a Trinity thread??
Most likely due to Mary being addressed by the Lord and filled with the Holy Spirit at the time of her conception of the Son of God. Also when Mary visited Elizabeth, while carrying Jesus, the Holy Spirit filled John and Elizabeth, causing John to turn over in her womb. More evidence of the Trinity I opine.
v/r
Q
Dondi
Well-Known Member
Hmmm...I was amazed just today to discover something that I had no idea would relate to the idea of the feminine aspect of God. I was researching something unrelated on a Judaism website when I came across this:
"Although we usually speak of G-d in masculine terms, there are times when we refer to G-d using feminine terms. The Shechinah, the manifestation of G-d's presence that fills the universe, is conceived of in feminine terms, and the word Shechinah is a feminine word."
Source: Judaism101, http://www.jewfaq.org/g-d.htm
This really blew me away for it kinda goes with my conjecturing.
Now I've heard the term "Shekinah Glory" mentioned in several churchs, particularly in Pentacostal/Charasmatic churchs, of being the manifest Presence of God during services. In the OT, the Glory of the Lord is shown in the pillar of cloud by day and pillar of fire by night as the Israelites wandered the desert, following wherever it went and it would fill the Holy of Holies and the Mercy Seat of the Ark of the Covenant. The Presence of God filled Solomon's Temple when it was dedicated. But interestingly enough, it didn't fill the Second Temple, no mention of it in Ezra, probably because the Ark had disappear by that time.
As Christians, we are taught that we are temples of the Holy Spirit. That through Christ we have access to the throne of God. That we are the royal Priesthood. The Holy Spirit dwells within us according to John 14. (There is an intersting study by Chuck Missler correlating the Tabernacle with the body of the Christian, BTW. I'll have to fish for it).
I dunno, this feminine angle just got more interesting for me.
Another quote I just found:
Shechinah
"According to Jewish tradition the radiance of the Shechinah, with its untold blessings, "rests" upon all those who are pious and righteous. According to ancient Rabbis the Shekinah appears in the midst of at least a minyan of worshipers when they pray in congregation, and of two or more Jews when they engage in the study of Torah, or on a man when he recites the Shema. The Shekinah is said also to rest upon the chaste, the benevolent, and the hospitable, and upon husband and wife when they live in peace and harmony. The ancient Rabbis also said that the Shekinah appeared before Moses at the burning bush, rested upon the Tabernacle in the Wilderness on the day of its dedication, and in the holy of holies in the Temple at Jerusalem, and it has illuminated the bliss of the righteous (Heb. tzaddikim) in the world-to-come ever since."
Source: http://www.bible-history.com/tabernacle/TAB4The_Shekinah_Glory.htm
Sound familiar? Here's what Jesus said:
"For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them." - Matthew 18:20
"Although we usually speak of G-d in masculine terms, there are times when we refer to G-d using feminine terms. The Shechinah, the manifestation of G-d's presence that fills the universe, is conceived of in feminine terms, and the word Shechinah is a feminine word."
Source: Judaism101, http://www.jewfaq.org/g-d.htm
This really blew me away for it kinda goes with my conjecturing.
Now I've heard the term "Shekinah Glory" mentioned in several churchs, particularly in Pentacostal/Charasmatic churchs, of being the manifest Presence of God during services. In the OT, the Glory of the Lord is shown in the pillar of cloud by day and pillar of fire by night as the Israelites wandered the desert, following wherever it went and it would fill the Holy of Holies and the Mercy Seat of the Ark of the Covenant. The Presence of God filled Solomon's Temple when it was dedicated. But interestingly enough, it didn't fill the Second Temple, no mention of it in Ezra, probably because the Ark had disappear by that time.
As Christians, we are taught that we are temples of the Holy Spirit. That through Christ we have access to the throne of God. That we are the royal Priesthood. The Holy Spirit dwells within us according to John 14. (There is an intersting study by Chuck Missler correlating the Tabernacle with the body of the Christian, BTW. I'll have to fish for it).
I dunno, this feminine angle just got more interesting for me.
Another quote I just found:
Shechinah
"According to Jewish tradition the radiance of the Shechinah, with its untold blessings, "rests" upon all those who are pious and righteous. According to ancient Rabbis the Shekinah appears in the midst of at least a minyan of worshipers when they pray in congregation, and of two or more Jews when they engage in the study of Torah, or on a man when he recites the Shema. The Shekinah is said also to rest upon the chaste, the benevolent, and the hospitable, and upon husband and wife when they live in peace and harmony. The ancient Rabbis also said that the Shekinah appeared before Moses at the burning bush, rested upon the Tabernacle in the Wilderness on the day of its dedication, and in the holy of holies in the Temple at Jerusalem, and it has illuminated the bliss of the righteous (Heb. tzaddikim) in the world-to-come ever since."
Source: http://www.bible-history.com/tabernacle/TAB4The_Shekinah_Glory.htm
Sound familiar? Here's what Jesus said:
"For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them." - Matthew 18:20
lol in my email today...
B"H
Final Sight
----------
The angels who perceive all things from their haven above,
they will never know. They will never
confront the ruthless and the insensible, the mountains of
obstinate darkness, the futility of
screaming as mortal life flogs you against its cold, deaf
barriers. To them, all things have reason,
nothing is impossible, every event has its cause and that
cause its cause -- they will never escape
the prison of knowing.
Even the G-dly soul -- these are things she can never
comprehend until she passes through this world.
Here, cast beneath the blanket of earth's atmosphere, at some
point she can no longer close our eyes
to the real world He has made. And find there are things she
cannot face. Things that cannot be
uttered. Things that cannot be, but are.
The breath of G-d descends to this world, opens her eyes and
closes them. And will open them again.
At that time she will see the Essence That Has No Cause.
A Daily Dose of Wisdom from the Rebbe -words and condensation by Tzvi Freeman
Sivan 17, 5766 * June 13, 2006
If God is love, he has to love someone. There is no love "in the void," without an object. But, whom does God love to be defined love. Men? But men have existed only for thousands of years, no more. The cosmos? The universe? The universe has existed only for billions of years. Before, whom did God love, to be able to define himself love? We cannot say that he loved himself, because this would not be love but egoism and narcissism.
This is the answer of Christian revelation: God is love because from eternity he has "in his bosom" a son, the Word, the one he loves with an infinite love, that is, with the Holy Spirit. In every love there are always three realities or subjects: one who loves, one who is loved, and the love that unites them.
The Christian God is one and triune because he is communion of love. In love, unity and plurality are reconciled; love creates unity in diversity: unity of intentions, of thought, of will; diversity of subjects, of characteristics and, in the human realm, of sex. In this connection, the family is the least imperfect image of the Trinity. It was no accident that when creating the first human couple God said: "Let us make man in our image, after our likeness" (Genesis 1:26-27).
http://www.zenit.org/english/visualizza.phtml?sid=90681
This is the answer of Christian revelation: God is love because from eternity he has "in his bosom" a son, the Word, the one he loves with an infinite love, that is, with the Holy Spirit. In every love there are always three realities or subjects: one who loves, one who is loved, and the love that unites them.
The Christian God is one and triune because he is communion of love. In love, unity and plurality are reconciled; love creates unity in diversity: unity of intentions, of thought, of will; diversity of subjects, of characteristics and, in the human realm, of sex. In this connection, the family is the least imperfect image of the Trinity. It was no accident that when creating the first human couple God said: "Let us make man in our image, after our likeness" (Genesis 1:26-27).
http://www.zenit.org/english/visualizza.phtml?sid=90681