Ag_nots Catholic Scriptural Challenge - just ONE proven example wins!!

[Matariel]

…But nothing in Scripture teaches she was sinless. **If she had been, of course, she wouldn’t need a Savior **and would miss out on the blessing God reserved for humans in eternity past, something even angels were excluded from

Besides this being against the o-pee’s intentions (not what is para-biblical or extra-biblical, but what is anti-biblical) the highlighted red phrase is incorrect; Mary needed a Redeemer, and Catholic doctrine states that. If it wasn’t for the grace from the Cross, which is not limited by time and space, Blessed Mary would not have been able to be concieved without sin. It was a singular grace, a gift from God from Heaven. And she wasn’t. I really don’t know why this is a sticking-point for protestants?

 

[twb1621]

Real simple

All have sinned
Mary is not given an exception to this rule.
So Mary has sinned.
To say otherwise is contrary to the bible.

Hisalone

again you continue avoiding Biblical proof that Mary was free of sin because you can not refute it with any credible response. Why not just say you can’t refute the verses presented?

 

[CHESTERTONRULES]

Mary did not come short of the glory of God.

Your statement.

She did not come short, she was chosen by God to be his mother.

How much sin do you think God would allow for his mother to commit?

Mary was chosen by God to be the vessel which brought him to earth in the flesh.

 

[CHESTERTONRULES]

Well thanks for the Greek grammar lesson. I studied it for over three years in seminary, but those in the know would probably say your explanation was much adieu about nothing! You quoted A T Robertson, but he would never give the time of day to the notion of Immaculate Conception. Mary had a lot of grace for the task at hand and was blessed to birth the Savior. But nothing in Scripture teaches she was sinless. If she had been, of course, she wouldn’t need a Savior and would miss out on the blessing God reserved for humans in eternity past, something even angels were excluded from

You completely ignored the point of my post.

What AT Robertson believes has nothing to do with what the greek words mean.

Full of grace, as in perpetual grace, means sinless.

 

[Matariel]

She did not come short, she was chosen by God to be his mother.

How much sin do you think God would allow for his mother to commit?

Mary was chosen by God to be the vessel which brought him to earth in the flesh.

Considering Hisalone’s protestantism, I doubt he even acknowledges that Mary is the Mother of God (even though denying that she is is a heresy, since Christ* is *God).

 

[Cinette]

You know that for sure?

Re: the Immaculate Conception and sinless,

in the angel’s greeting to Mary, (keep in mind Mary is a young teen at this point) The angel Gabriel said, “Hail, full of grace, the Lord is with you” [Luke 1:28].

The phrase “full of grace” is a translation of the Greek word kecharitomene χαριτόω charitoō ]. It expresses a characteristic quality of Mary.

Tense: Perfect,
Mood: Passive

Perfect tense means having been completed in the past, once and for all, not needing to be repeated.

Therefore, the grace given to Mary is at once permanent and of a unique kind. Mary was graced in the past but with continuing effects in the present and into the future.

• So, the grace Mary enjoyed from her beginning (conception), was not a result of the angel’s visit. It extended over the whole of her life, from conception onward. She was in a state of sanctifying grace from the first moment of her existence. And the archangel Gabriel was addressing her for who she is in the sight of God.
  Sin cannot be in her if she is perfectly and permamently graced.

Passive mood, means it was done to her without her doing anything on her own. It is truly a special gift from God.

Therefore, God made her without sin, just like He made Eve without sin, AND God preserved Mary without sin by a special grace perfectly applied

.

That is the truth!

 

[Cinette]

*Years ago when my husband and I were still revolutionaries and communist sympathizers living in a country that had undergone radical political change, we knew some very brave men. They were communists and would visit my parents-in-law frequently as they were also sympathizers. These men had strong moral consciences and had suffered years of imprisonment in solitary confinement and had experienced torture. I am thinking of two men in particular. They were both atheists and I daresay died that way.

I was present one day when one of them was visiting my father-in-law and there was a discussion regarding the new political regime which had strong Marxist leanings. We were all critical of measures that had been taken and how society had changed. We saw a lot of turncoats – people who in the old regime had been anti-Marxists and who now acted as if they had invented it.

My Father-in-law then said, “And to think that I was mistaken! To think that I had been wrong all those years!” I looked at Egidio, our communist friend and suddenly realized that he would never talk like that with his other friends; he would never have the courage to admit that he had been wrong! And I knew why and it made me sad. Egidio would not be able to meet with his communist friends with whom he had met for coffee at the Café and talk politics. He would have to abandon his friends. So, he limited himself rather than become isolated. He knew that he could criticize the regime with my parents-in-law but when he was with his other friends he would have to pretend to be someone who he no longer really was. Egidio had once spent 56 days in a dark cupboard under some stairs in solitary confinement. People looked up to him for his bravery because he never talked, he never yielded.

But now he would be imprisoned for the rest of his life – he would be a prisoner of the mind.

I let you figure out why I am bringing this up.

*

 

[Martin777]

Hi, Martin777

You had a chance to make me proud … and, you blew it.
Hisalone;4539307:

The proper approach is to simply answer the question asked of YOU, as opposed to ignoring it (as you have so often done) and then trying to divert the topic to something totally unrelated. You still have failed to identify ONE THING in the thread that is CONTRARY (against) Scripture taught by the Catholic Church. Saying something is not contained in Scripture is quite different from saying that somethng contained in Scripture is denied by the Catholic Church. Please keep this distinction in mind when you respond.

This approach (or non-approach) has become a standard and really does not hold up to the most casual examination.

Here is a hint for the original question: the Catholic Church had a lot to do with the Bible you are so dearly reading.

Here is a link that may help you in formulating your answer: newadvent.org/cathen/03267a.htm

But, do not stop at this link - it really is important for you to know where the Bible came from.

Now, you have a second chance to make me proud… Can you do it?

God Bless

Well, I’m driven by a higher power than your pride! But I am certainly trying to answer every question, at least the heart of the question. I post a lot on a couple of threads and do a lot from my bnlackberry, so hard to see all the responses. If I have already addressed something I may not address it again. Some times I feel people don’t digest what I say and would rather just argue. But iprobably come off the same way sometimes. What point of hers did I fail to address?

 

[Patrick_Murebil]

Cool.

Are you the arc of the new covenant?

I would have to say no on that. The Ark of the Covenant in the OT was a box built to God’s specifications which contained the bread from heaven (manna), Aaron’s staff (the symbol of the High Priest) and the tables of stone (the Law, 10 commandments).

Mary is the True Ark of the Covenant (notice below that it is referred to as the Ark of HIS Covenant)…She is the Woman who was pregnant and gave birth to a son, a male child, who will rule all nations and be taken up to God, to His throne.

Mary as the True Ark contained Jesus our True Bread from Heaven (John 6), Jesus our True High Priest, Jesus our fulfillment of The Law.

I would have to say that I am not the Ark of His Covenant…but by participating in the New Covenant, His Covenant, I am a member, a part, of His Body…and so are all who enter into God’s Covenant through Jesus Christ!! And that is soooooooooo good to me!!!

---

Revelation 11:19Then God’s temple in heaven was opened, and within his temple was seen the ark of his covenant. And there came flashes of lightning, rumblings, peals of thunder, an earthquake and a great hailstorm. 20:1A great and wondrous sign appeared in heaven: a woman clothed with the sun, with the moon under her feet and a crown of twelve stars on her head. 2She was pregnant and cried out in pain as she was about to give birth. 3Then another sign appeared in heaven: an enormous red dragon with seven heads and ten horns and seven crowns on his heads. 4His tail swept a third of the stars out of the sky and flung them to the earth. The dragon stood in front of the woman who was about to give birth, so that he might devour her child the moment it was born. 5She gave birth to a son, a male child, who will rule all the nations with an iron scepter. And her child was snatched up to God and to his throne.***

God bless all!!!

 

[Martin777]

Martin, if you’re listening, I’m at the office now and really need to get some work done (so hard to pull away from this thread!). But I would like your comment on this - anytime say, this weekend?

Peace to all during this beautiful Advent.

Well, yes!..in that case, maybe I do believe in purgatory. I believe in a process that goes on in the life of the Christian, where God disciplines his child to bring about more holy living, more love, more pure worship! But is never punishment. It is always training and purging from the loving hand of the Father. But if you look at I John 3:1-4 and Paul’s words in Romans 8 about longing for the end of life in the flesh, AND if you note Paul’s comment that we shall not all sleep, but we shall all be CHANGED at the sound of the trumpet upon Christ’s return, THAT all speaks to the doctrine that we will be SUDDENLY experience that final sanctification! Let’s deal with this CLEAR scripture rather than deduction from less relevant verses!

 

[Matariel]

Sheesh. I thought protestants knew that Blessed Mary was the Ark of the New Covenant.

The Old Ark carried manna from Heaven. The New Ark carried the Bread of Life from Heaven. The Old Ark carried the symbols of the Law. The New Ark carried Grace Himself.

St. Luke further implies that Mary is the Anti-type of the Ark in the narrative of the visitation. Here, like the first two chapters of Luke in general, there is allusion to the hooks of Samuel; in this case it is 2 Samuel 6:2, where the Ark of God is being transferred to Jerusalem by King David. This comparison shows some of the parallel details of both narratives. (from R Laurentine)

2 Samuel 6:2 (David arose and went from Baal- Judah to bring up from there the Ark of God)

Luke 1:3 (Mary arose and went into the hill country to a city of Judah)

2 Samuel 6:9 (how can the Ark of the Lord come to me!)

Luke 1:43 (and why is this granted me, that the mother of my Lord should come to me?)

2 Samuel 6:11 (The Ark of the Lord remained in the house of Obededom three months.)

Luke 1:56 Mary remained with her (Elizabeth) about three months.

In both episodes the similarities are undeniable. Similarities of words in the Bible are not coincidences. There is a similar expression made by Elizabeth as by King David (although David’s expression is a result of holy fear because of the episode with Uzzah).
There is a manifestation of joy both with Elizabeth when John the Baptist leaped inber womb for joy and with King David and all the people as they danced with shouts of joy before the Ark (2 Sm.6:5,l5).
**One should note that the word which Luke uses to express Elizabeth’s loud acclamation (anaphonesen) is one which is used specifically for liturgical acclamations (1 Chr.16:45,42.) And especially for those which accompany the transfer of the Ark of YHWH (I Chr.l5:28, 2 Chr.5:13.) **

 

[Martin777]

And we ourselves will be saved, but only as through** fire**. You forgot that part.

Um, this is just not so. What about David? Peter? Moses? And a whole slew of others who suffered for their sin even after they repented, suffered a temporal punishment. It’s straight out of the Bible.

Pft! Please.

I guess 1st Corinthians is an affront to the Cross too.

The fires of Purgatory are the fires of God’s purifying Love. If it wasn’t for Christ on the Cross, there would be no Purgatory. You can’t just toss out verses or paragraphs from the Bible you don’t like. Will you be saved, but “only as through fire?” Or did you throw that phrase out?

You are welcome to laugh, but my friend the cross accomplished so much more than you have yet to see! It provided a grace that is so scandalous it’s scary. And Paul knew it. He knew it was so great that it makes people think they can have a license to sin. Please ask God to show you if you have only seen a small part of the glorious grace provided at the cross.

 

[Realcatholicgk]

NONONONONONONONONONONONONONONO
Mary is not Jesus Mary is not God.

All have sinned it means all even Mary.
Jesus did not sim because He is God.
He was tempted in everway as we are. How could He be tempted if He did not have sin nature in His flesh.?

**Hi Hisalong, **

**Please try not to be so arogant, it doesn’t look good. People are starting to talk! Everyone knows Mary is not Jesus, she is His Mother, Everyone knows Mary is not God. Don’t worry we are all your friends here. If you can dial 911 and tell them you think people are saying Mary is Jesus and Mary is God. The can get you medication to stop these delusions. **

Mary obtained a special gift from God Almighty Himself! He allowed her to be born sinless to have a pure container for Jesus to be born. Does it bother you that God does what He wants and not what you command? Tell 911 about that also please!

You said:

All have sinned it means all even Mary.
**Where does it say all have sinned even Mary? Aren’t there exceptions to every rule? I wonder is there an exception to the excemption rule? **

Jesus did not sim because He is God.
Dulll

He was tempted in everway as we are.
Now where did you read that?

How could He be tempted if He did not have sin nature in His flesh.?
**Because He allowed it! Or isn’t God allowed to do whatever He wants to in your world? **

God Bless

 

[Realcatholicgk]

Hi Martin,

You are welcome to laugh,

Thanks, we never laugh without permission! its kind of a 'charity thing!

freesmileys.org/smileys/laughing024.giffreesmileys.org/smileys/laughing024.giffreesmileys.org/smileys/laughing024.giffreesmileys.org/smileys/laughing024.giffreesmileys.org/smileys/laughing024.gif
%between%
but my friend the cross accomplished so much more than you have yet to see!

But you have seen it?

It provided a grace that is so scandalous it’s scary. And Paul knew it. He knew it was so great that it makes people think they can have a license to sin.

Jesus died for all sins every committed. Then and Now, His sacrafice was enough to have every sin forgiven. It was His gift to us we have the free will to turn down His Gift. He would not, even with his power as God and his sacrafice on the cross save people who did not want to be saved. He also would not save people who thought they were following Him but were being lead by the devil. Even if they drove out demons in His name. So everyobe isn’t 'saved" some are not children of God, they are creations of God but many are children of the god of this world Satin!
If it was that powerful Please ask God to show you if you have only seen a small part of the glorious grace provided at the cross.

**Send me a video clip if you have one! It seems God talks to youor maybe you misread what is being told? **Are you a relative of Hidalone?

 

[Ag_not]

I have just got in and am oiling the nunchuks

Some of you, and you know who you are, are NOT respecting the rules of this thread. :tsktsk:

Can we please keep focused on the original question - my non catholic brothers and sisters, I need to clarify something which I hope not to have to repeat:

Saying that The Immaculate Conception is NOT in the Bible, does NOT refute this dogma. You are asked to PROVE that this teaching is contrary to the Bible. To refocus, that is what I am asking you to do. Prove that there is one single teaching of the catholic church that contradicts the Bible. OK. Now, saying ALL have sinned, is NOT proving that the Immaculate Conception either. You are required to develop an arguement.

Imagine if you will, I say I am tall. Me saying I am tall does not prove it to someone a thousand miles reading this. I could then say yeah but Im of Roma stock and all Roma women a slim and tall. Therefor I must be tall. Well, no. It doesnt follow. I could have had a genetic throwback to when my ancestors were like 3 feet 6 inches tall

Im going to try and tidy this thread up a bit and keep the arguments easier to follow and discuss.

Hisalone - be warned now I am going to give you strike three - well, maybe 2.5 because I still want to hear you, for an earlier post I scanned, I just need to go back and find it.

Now, while I do some reading, Hisalone, can you PLEASE respond to this and explain your understanding of All v. the generation of the righteous. Do you agree with the contextual understanding, or have you a different take on this.

forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=4535856&postcount=254

I’m going to go back and find posts I think need to be addressed further or answered more clearly and hope you and Martin777 and others will elaborate more.

 

[twb1621]

I have just got in and am oiling the nunchuks

Some of you, and you know who you are, are NOT respecting the rules of this thread. :tsktsk:

Can we please keep focused on the original question - my non catholic brothers and sisters, I need to clarify something which I hope not to have to repeat:

Saying that The Immaculate Conception is NOT in the Bible, does NOT refute this dogma. You are asked to PROVE that this teaching is contrary to the Bible. To refocus, that is what I am asking you to do. Prove that there is one single teaching of the catholic church that contradicts the Bible. OK. Now, saying ALL have sinned, is NOT proving that the Immaculate Conception either. You are required to develop an arguement.

Imagine if you will, I say I am tall. Me saying I am tall does not prove it to someone a thousand miles reading this. I could then say yeah but Im of Roma stock and all Roma women a slim and tall. Therefor I must be tall. Well, no. It doesnt follow. I could have had a genetic throwback to when my ancestors were like 3 feet 6 inches tall

Im going to try and tidy this thread up a bit and keep the arguments easier to follow and discuss.

Hisalone - be warned now I am going to give you strike three - well, maybe 2.5 because I still want to hear you, for an earlier post I scanned, I just need to go back and find it.

Now, while I do some reading, Hisalone, can you PLEASE respond to this and explain your understanding of All v. the generation of the righteous. Do you agree with the contextual understanding, or have you a different take on this.

forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=4535856&postcount=254

I’m going to go back and find posts I think need to be addressed further or answered more clearly and hope you and Martin777 and others will elaborate more.

** OK… but at least martin777 normally responds and give his interpretation… even if he is mean to me sometimes… **

 

[Ag_not]

And I am not going to mention anyones name including hisa----, so don’t try to get it out of me.

careful … Youre a very lovely man, provocation does not look good on you, it clashes with your eyes

 

[twb1621]

I have just got in and am oiling the nunchuks

Some of you, and you know who you are, are NOT respecting the rules of this thread. :tsktsk:

Can we please keep focused on the original question - my non catholic brothers and sisters, I need to clarify something which I hope not to have to repeat:

Saying that The Immaculate Conception is NOT in the Bible, does NOT refute this dogma. You are asked to PROVE that this teaching is contrary to the Bible. To refocus, that is what I am asking you to do. Prove that there is one single teaching of the catholic church that contradicts the Bible. OK. Now, saying ALL have sinned, is NOT proving that the Immaculate Conception either. You are required to develop an arguement.

Imagine if you will, I say I am tall. Me saying I am tall does not prove it to someone a thousand miles reading this. I could then say yeah but Im of Roma stock and all Roma women a slim and tall. Therefor I must be tall. Well, no. It doesnt follow. I could have had a genetic throwback to when my ancestors were like 3 feet 6 inches tall

Im going to try and tidy this thread up a bit and keep the arguments easier to follow and discuss.

Hisalone - be warned now I am going to give you strike three - well, maybe 2.5 because I still want to hear you, for an earlier post I scanned, I just need to go back and find it.

Now, while I do some reading, Hisalone, can you PLEASE respond to this and explain your understanding of All v. the generation of the righteous. Do you agree with the contextual understanding, or have you a different take on this.

forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=4535856&postcount=254

I’m going to go back and find posts I think need to be addressed further or answered more clearly and hope you and Martin777 and others will elaborate more.

** OK… but at least martin777 normally responds and give his interpretation… even if he is mean to me sometimes… **

 

[twb1621]

careful … Youre a very lovely man, provocation does not look good on you, it clashes with your eyes

hey how’d you get that, I deleted it…

 

[fbl9]

Well, yes!..in that case, maybe I do believe in purgatory. I believe in a process that goes on in the life of the Christian, where God disciplines his child to bring about more holy living, more love, more pure worship! But is never punishment. It is always training and purging from the loving hand of the Father. But if you look at I John 3:1-4 and Paul’s words in Romans 8 about longing for the end of life in the flesh, AND if you note Paul’s comment that we shall not all sleep, but we shall all be CHANGED at the sound of the trumpet upon Christ’s return, THAT all speaks to the doctrine that we will be SUDDENLY experience that final sanctification! Let’s deal with this CLEAR scripture rather than deduction from less relevant verses!

just who is to be suddnly changed??why those who have remained faithful during the tribulation…
At Christ’s return purgatory will be emptied out and cease to exist.