All have sinned.. including Mary.

[mangy_dog]

That’s not what the Bible says.

Separate from the Church, you have nothing. Your belief system is incomplete.

The Catholic Church is the one, true church that Christ intended to exist after His ascension into heaven and of which He left Peter as its first Pope. 263 popes later to Pope Benedict XVI.

Whatever you believe is incomplete. Whatever you quote is incomplete.

You’re probably quoting from the KJV…incomplete.

Do you have the Eucharist??? No…incomplete. Without His body and blood - you have nothing…your words, quotes, “faith”, bible…et al - incomplete.

Gospa Mir!!!

 

[NDfan]

The Immaculate, Perpetual Virgin, Mother of God was, is and remains sinless - was Assumed into heaven and is the Woman Clothed with the sun, with a crown of twelve stars and her feet on the moon.
Her sinlessness since Her Immaculate Conception is in light of Christ’s virtues.
Our human condition carrys in the fleshly condition, the original sin. In order for Christ to be without this condition, Mary was pre-eminently saved and excluded from the original sin that every human is born into.

It doesn’t matter what you and others like you think. The Theotokos was, is and remains - Body, Soul and Spirit, Immaculate, sinless.

The kicker is that despite you and others like you - the 5th Marian dogma will (I have faith that it will) be proclaimed by the Pope in the not so distant future.

How’s about them apples?!

Slice it, dice it, analyze it, philosophize it all you want…the point is moot.

Pax Domini sit semper vobiscum.

I don’t think Protestants care about any dogmas that get created by the RCC nor are they trying to prevent them. In the end they have to answer to GOD just like the rest of us. I think if the 5th dogma gets created the RCC will lose many members. It’s not receiving good feedback now. Many RCs I personally spoke with disagree with it completely. Not that that constitues anything. Just an observation. If it does get declared then that will be one more topic that will get sliced and diced here

PEACE

 

[KJK80]

It’s all good natured discussion KJ. We all could be interpreting it wrong in the end. I try to make sense of it as well and when you say Mary can be prevented from sin, but Jesus can’t unless Mary was then that doesn’t make sense.

PEACE

Did I say that?

I can only reinforce what the Catechism says as an article of faith:

[490](javascriptpenWindow(‘cr/490.htm’) To become the mother of the Savior, Mary “was enriched by God with gifts appropriate to such a role.” The angel Gabriel at the moment of the annunciation salutes her as “full of grace”.133 In fact, in order for Mary to be able to give the free assent of her faith to the announcement of her vocation, it was necessary that she be wholly borne by God’s grace.
[491](javascriptpenWindow(‘cr/491.htm’) Through the centuries the Church has become ever more aware that Mary, “full of grace” through God, was redeemed from the moment of her conception. That is what the dogma of the Immaculate Conception confesses, as Pope Pius IX proclaimed in 1854:

The most Blessed Virgin Mary was, from the first moment of her conception, by a singular grace and privilege of almighty God and by virtue of the merits of Jesus Christ, Savior of the human race, preserved immune from all stain of original sin.
[492](javascriptpenWindow(‘cr/492.htm’) The “splendor of an entirely unique holiness” by which Mary is “enriched from the first instant of her conception” comes wholly from Christ: she is “redeemed, in a more exalted fashion, by reason of the merits of her Son”.The Father blessed Mary more than any other created person “in Christ with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places” and chose her “in Christ before the foundation of the world, to be holy and blameless before him in love”.
493 The Fathers of the Eastern tradition call the Mother of God “the All-Holy” (Panagia), and celebrate her as “free from any stain of sin, as though fashioned by the Holy Spirit and formed as a new creature”. By the grace of God Mary remained free of every personal sin her whole life long.

I do not claim to fully understand it, however as a whole it makes sense in relation to the Catholic faith as a whole. And it does not conflict with the Bible, unless you go out of your way to slant Bible verses to fit your interpretation of the concept.

So, again, I have no argument here. I accept it as an article of faith to be truth, even if I do not fully understand it.

 

[po18guy]

So you are saying God lied?

No. We’re saying thou dost Protest too much. Since your concept of Christianity is limited to the bible, and even less bible than Catholics have, you do not have God’s entire truth. You are lacking much of Christ.

Your bible itself is incomplete, and says so, unless you think it lies…
Luke 3:18
John 20:30
John 21:25

Commit the sin of detraction against Mary, Peter and other of God’s chosen at your own peril.

 

[KJK80]

Matthew 17:20

And He said to them, "Because of the littleness of your faith; for truly I say to you, if you have faith the size of a mustard seed, you will say to this mountain, ‘Move from here to there,’ and it will move; and nothing will be impossible to you.

Luke 17:6

And the Lord said, "If you had faith like a mustard seed, you would say to this mulberry tree, ‘Be uprooted and be planted in the sea’; and it would obey you.

 

[NDfan]

Did I say that?

I can only reinforce what the Catechism says as an article of faith:

I do not claim to fully understand it, however as a whole it makes sense in relation to the Catholic faith as a whole. And it does not conflict with the Bible, unless you go out of your way to slant Bible verses to fit your interpretation of the concept.

So, again, I have no argument here. I accept it as an article of faith to be truth, even if I do not fully understand it.

I fully respect your acceptance of it as an article of faith. I would disagree on the scripture piece though. I think you have to slant the scripture to get it to fit the sinless nature doctrine.

Romans tells us that all have sinned. The word used there is PAS which literally means everyone. In the very next verse the same word is used when it says Jesus saves all. We know Jesus will not save everyone but he will save all who believe in HIM. Scripture also tells us that Jesus did not sin so we know he was an exception. Scripture does not tell us Mary was sinless. That’s not even stated anywhere.

PEACE

 

[KJK80]

I fully respect your acceptance of it as an article of faith. I would disagree on the scripture piece though. I think you have to slant the scripture to get it to fit the sinless nature doctrine.

Romans tells us that all have sinned. The word used there is PAS which literally means everyone. In the very next verse the same word is used when it says Jesus saves all. We know Jesus will not save everyone but he will save all who believe in HIM. Scripture also tells us that Jesus did not sin so we know he was an exception. Scripture does not tell us Mary was sinless. That’s not even stated anywhere.

PEACE

That’s your interpretation of it. I must put my faith in the Church’s interpretation over yours; I’m sorry, but if I’m going to put my faith in something, it will be the church and not you.

This does not make me a mindless fool as you might be thinking (I was a die-hard, 4th generation Protestant for 25 years, being a Catholic was about as foreign as breathing under water for me and just about as stupid). However, I do submit to the Church’s authority, similar to the way you submit to the Bible’s authority. However, with the Church I know that I have a complete and correct interpretation of the entire Gospel message (through the Holy Scripture and Holy Tradition). As a Protestant, everything was open to debate to a certain degree. Which isn’t necessarily a good thing in my book.

 

[NDfan]

That’s your interpretation of it. I must put my faith in the Church’s interpretation over yours; I’m sorry, but if I’m going to put my faith in something, it will be the church and not you.

You certainly don’t have to apologize to me As I said it’s all good natured discussion. I was Roman Catholic for over 40 years. I at one time condemned all non-Roman Catholics similar to how some do on this web site. I would never believe that the RCC could be wrong until I started reading the Bible and attended Bible college. I’m not saying the RCC is wrong on everything as some Protestants do. But I believe they have errored on some doctrines. In some cases doctrines were made without scriptural support. Now the church scrambles to find scriptural support.

This does not make me a mindless fool as you might be thinking (I was a die-hard, 4th generation Protestant for 25 years, being a Catholic was about as foreign as breathing under water for me and just about as stupid). However, I do submit to the Church’s authority, similar to the way you submit to the Bible’s authority. However, with the Church I know that I have a complete and correct interpretation of the entire Gospel message (through the Holy Scripture and Holy Tradition). As a Protestant, everything was open to debate to a certain degree. Which isn’t necessarily a good thing in my book.

I certainly don’t think you are a mindless fool. The only thing I would say is that over time you will meet plenty of Roman Catholics who disagree with some of their own teachings. Claiming doctrinal unity doesn’t mean you have unity of belief. I have many friends and family members that are Roman Catholic who don’t understand many Roman Catholic teachings. The ones they do understand they don’t completely agree with. But the RCC is where they feel most comfortable worshipping. For you it seems maybe you struggled with being a Protestant. So GOD moved you to the RCC. I struggled with the RCC and prayed vehemently to GOD for help. He led us to a non-denominational church which as it turns out is 85% Roman Catholic. Go figure

 

[Gabriel_of_12]

Thanks for the kind words GOD certainly does care for HIS children.

Where does HE make this prophecy?

**Genesis 3:15
3 I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your offspring and hers; He will strike at your head, while you strike at his heel."
16
To the woman he said: “I will intensify the pangs of your childbearing; in pain shall you bring forth children. Yet your urge shall be for your husband, and he shall be your master.” **

**Isaiah 62:5
As a young man marries a virgin, your Builder shall marry you; And as a bridegroom rejoices in his bride so shall your God rejoice in you. **

**Isaiah 66:7
2 Before she comes to labor, she gives birth; Before the pains come upon her, she safely delivers a male child.
8
Who ever heard of such a thing, or saw the like? Can a country be brought forth in one day, or a nation be born in a single moment? Yet Zion is scarcely in labor when she gives birth to her children.
9
Shall I bring a mother to the point of birth, and yet not let her child be born? says the LORD; Or shall I who allow her to conceive, yet close her womb? says your God.
10
Rejoice with Jerusalem and be glad because of her, all you who love her; Exult, exult with her, all you who were mourning over her! **

I disagree. Jesus cannot be tainted for 2 reasons.

1. HE is GOD incarnate and GOD cannot be tainted with sin
2. Mary conveived through the Holy Spirit. Sin is from the seed of man and Mary did not conceive from a man.

I agree also that is why Mary is without sin. Her father Joachim is not accredited to have given his seed to her mother St. Anna in his old age. She was immaculately concieved. Nor was Mary concieved from a man, nor was John the baptist. God cannot be tainted with sin, because he could have revealed himself to us by a cloud, or fire etc. But he chose Mary a placed enmity between her and the serpent. This means satan cannot touch Mary with sin, that is why the dragon got upset with her in Revelations and went to wage war on her offspring. Us.

Exactly. This is why Jesus could not be tainted. Mary conceived through the power of the Holy Spirit. She didn’t have to be sinless for Jesus to not be tainted.

If you could prove Mary was with sin, and she gave birth to the son of God and claim him to be without sin, I would be the first to walk away from christianity, to know that God cant come from sin, who says who knew no sin. The wrong belief in Mary translates into a confused belief in Jesus her son.

How do you know Mary had no birth pains? Have you ever read this quote from Pope Innocent the third:

No from the Prophet Isaiah, and God himself in Gen.see above.

“She (Eve) was produced without sin, but she brought forth in sin, she (Mary) was produced in sin, but she brought forth without sin.”

He’s basically stating that Eve was produced without sin but brought sin into the world. Mary was produced with sin but brought Jesus forth who had no sin.

**No, that is not what is being revealed here. He is clarifying Mary as being a person who is born after the sin of Eve, to which Mary is born to, He is clarifying that Mary reversed the sin of Eve. Mary brought forth no sin into the world from her yes, and Eve brought forth sin from her yes. He in no way is claiming Mary had sin, only that she brought forth no sin where there is sin.**PEACE

 

[KJK80]

I certainly don’t think you are a mindless fool. The only thing I would say is that over time you will meet plenty of Roman Catholics who disagree with some of their own teachings. Claiming doctrinal unity doesn’t mean you have unity of belief. I have many friends and family members that are Roman Catholic who don’t understand many Roman Catholic teachings. The ones they do understand they don’t completely agree with. But the RCC is where they feel most comfortable worshipping. For you it seems maybe you struggled with being a Protestant. So GOD moved you to the RCC. I struggled with the RCC and prayed vehemently to GOD for help. He led us to a non-denominational church which as it turns out is 85% Roman Catholic. Go figure

I would not disagree that a great deal Catholic’s do not understand their own faith… I would also not say that Republican’s understand everything about their political party, or that Democrats understand everything about their political party, or that environmentalists know everything about the Earth…

God works in mysterious ways and I will never deny that. I’m extremely grateful to the Catholic Church and what it has done in my life. I will say this, and it is meant as no offense… but from my life experiences, studies and how God has worked on my life, I see three places I could be… Catholic, Jewish or Agnostic. That’s it… Judaism and Agnostic are out for me, so Catholic it is. There are too many inconsistencies for me outside of Catholicism (within Christianity). While my understanding of Catholicism is far from complete, it is accepted (if that makes sense?). The Scriptures are made complete for me by Catholicism not made inconsistent. In fact, I would say while I was a Protestant, the Scriptures made much less sense than they do now.

Now on the other hand, I could “vanilla-up” things and make the Scripture’s entirely easy… Just to not take an actual stand on what the Scripture’s say, but rather point out where other’s definitions are incomplete by my interpretation… But this is not what the Scripture’s are for, so that doesn’t work for me either.

Regardless, that’s where I’m coming from–sorry for the diversion, back to the topic, I’ll butt out now.

 

[meandean]

Did Jesus sin?

nope. jesus recieved his nature from his father, as did mary. so whats the difference? mary had a sin nature and human nature. that she recieved from her father.which goes back to adam.jesus on the other hand recieved his nature from his father in heaven and through mary he recieved a human nature. so jesus had no sin nature.

 

[Gabriel_of_12]

I’m confused by your answer. I was asking why she would have to be sinless? In other words, why couldn’t Mary be a normal person who sinned like the rest of us?

GOD all throughout history has used sinful people to do great things. If Mary was sinless then why did she take a sin offering to the Temple after Jesus was born? Why aren’t the scriptures emphatic about her sinlessness? Considering that every human being that ever lived and walked the face of the earth committed sin except Jesus, I would think Mary’s lack of sin would be a huge topic that would get major attention in scripture.

In fact it’s not directly stated that she was sinless. It’s being drawn out of the word kecharitooménee which means highly favoured. It wasn’t until the Latin version of this translation to English made it full of grace. The Greek clearly means highly favoured. Jesus never refers to Mary as sinless, neither does Paul. Mark’s Gospel which is the earliest mentions Mary only one time. The book of Acts also has only one reference to her. In church history there is little or no adoration of Mary recorded for about the first 4 centuries.

Surely this unbelievable historical attribute of Mary being sinless would be seen somewhere in scripture.

PEACE

I dont think it is reasonable to assume this about Mary. For one Her son was just executed, his followers are now being persecuted. If anything John protected Mary from their enemies, any exposure of her fidelity to God, would have brought on fierce persecution. We cant sit in our comforts and state things so easily when these times meant life or death, for your belief in Jesus from both Jews and Romans. We have Sacred Tradition and Oral Tradition that was handed down to us, during a time when it meant death for the Christian belief. I believe on the surface of sacred scripture Mary is hidden, just like God protected her from satans sin when she walked the earth. Mary is fully revealed through the eyes of the Spirit, because Mary is revealed from the book of Genesis, through the Law and the prophets, all the way into the The Gospels, and finally in heaven in the book of Revelations. 11,12

 

[mangy_dog]

nope. jesus recieved his nature from his father, as did mary. so whats the difference? mary had a sin nature and human nature. that she recieved from her father.which goes back to adam.jesus on the other hand recieved his nature from his father in heaven and through mary he recieved a human nature. so jesus had no sin nature.

yep. you start out right, then you go wrong and then continue wrong…yep.

you are either a confused catholic or you’re a protestant.

yep.

Pax Domini sit semper vobiscum.

 

[meandean]

yep. you start out right, then you go wrong and then continue wrong…yep.

you are either a confused catholic or you’re a protestant.

yep.

Pax Domini sit semper vobiscum.

thats a wide open guess there, mmm… kinda wild for a theologian of your caliber don’tcha think?

 

[heisenburg]

I was Roman Catholic for over 40 years… . I would never believe that the RCC could be wrong until I started reading the Bible

ND… please understand I am not trying to be rude. But this is a horribly arrogant statement…

“I was Catholic then I read the bible…” says that you trust your own interpretation over 2000 years of interpreting…

If you don’t agree with a teaching… fine… take it to the church… Maybe you did, and maybe you didnt get answers YOU liked. And I am not making judgments on you but why on earth would you think you alone can personally interpret…

If you came about decision because you went to a bible college… then either (1) you already decided on a subconscious level the ‘church was wrong’ or you were taught the church was wrong by your protestant bible college…

If you came to this because you were reading AND due to what others showed you… of course a protestant would show you perceived errors… would you really expect a Baptist, ND, or what have you to say the church is right???

Why do you think you can interpret scripture properly when even scripture says these are hard things to understand. (Peter even said Paul was hard to understand)…

By saying "I was catholic then i read the bible " means you truest more in yourself and thus you never decreased so that he might increase…

Again though, I am not saying that you have not blossomed as a Christian in your ND church. You may very well have… but your reasons for transition are at best horribly flawed…

Again, I mean no disrespect but it is such an arrogant statement. Am I as a catholic that reads the bible regularly missing something?

What about the countless other catholics that read the bible daily…

Are they also incapable of understanding?

Anyway, if I over simplified your reasons for leaving the Church, I do apologize… but this statement is rather peculiar…

In Christ

 

[brkn1]

There is no claim for cloned female humans… where do you see one?

The subject being discussed had to do with human flesh such as Mary’s. I did not know that animal flesh could also be referenced when talking about immaculate conception, as guanophore did. Please pardon my ignorance.

 

[Lampo]

This smart man doesn’t think she ever sinned:

“We must except the Holy Virgin Mary, concerning whom I wish to raise no question when it touches the subject of sins, out of honour to the Lord; for from Him we know what abundance of grace for overcoming sin in every particular was conferred upon her who had the merit to conceive and bear Him who undoubtedly had no sin.” Augustine, Nature and Grace,4 2[36] (A.D.415).

 

[NDfan]

Gabriel your post is hard to work with since you quote everything.

Genesis 3:15
3 I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your offspring and hers; He will strike at your head, while you strike at his heel."
16
To the woman he said: “I will intensify the pangs of your childbearing; in pain shall you bring forth children. Yet your urge shall be for your husband, and he shall be your master.”

I’m familiar with this part of Genesis. The woman is Eve which we are all off-spring from.

Isaiah 62:5
As a young man marries a virgin, your Builder shall marry you; And as a bridegroom rejoices in his bride so shall your God rejoice in you.

Isaiah 66:7
2 Before she comes to labor, she gives birth; Before the pains come upon her, she safely delivers a male child.
8
Who ever heard of such a thing, or saw the like? Can a country be brought forth in one day, or a nation be born in a single moment? Yet Zion is scarcely in labor when she gives birth to her children.
9
Shall I bring a mother to the point of birth, and yet not let her child be born? says the LORD; Or shall I who allow her to conceive, yet close her womb? says your God.
10
Rejoice with Jerusalem and be glad because of her, all you who love her; Exult, exult with her, all you who were mourning over her!

Sorry Gabriel I’m not making the connection here.

I agree also that is why Mary is without sin. Her father Joachim is not accredited to have given his seed to her mother St. Anna in his old age. She was immaculately concieved. Nor was Mary concieved from a man, nor was John the baptist. God cannot be tainted with sin, because he could have revealed himself to us by a cloud, or fire etc. But he chose Mary a placed enmity between her and the serpent. This means satan cannot touch Mary with sin, that is why the dragon got upset with her in Revelations and went to wage war on her offspring. Us.

Mary is not the woman that GOD puts enmity between. We are not off-spring of Mary. We are off-spring of Eve. GOD puts enmity between all of Eve’s off-spring. As far as John the Baptist. Where do you get that he wasn’t conceived from a man?

Luke 1:13 But the angel said to him, “Do not be afraid, Zechariah, for your prayer has been heard, and your wife Elizabeth will bear you a son, and you shall call his name John.

Zechariah questioned this because of his age and the Lord made him silent until John was born. Zechariah didn’t believe. Are you suggesting Elizabeth was overcome by the Holy Spirit? We know she was filled with the Holy Spirit after Mary visited her. But she was already pregnant.

If you could prove Mary was with sin, and she gave birth to the son of God and claim him to be without sin, I would be the first to walk away from christianity, to know that God cant come from sin, who says who knew no sin. The wrong belief in Mary translates into a confused belief in Jesus her son.

So you are saying that if Jesus was born without sin from Mary who was sinful then you would walk away from Christianity?

As far as proof. I don’t have to prove she was sinful because the Bible says all have sinned. You need to prove she was sinless which scripture does not state. If Mary was not sinful then why did she take a sin offering to the Temple after Jesus was born?? The Roman Catholic church says it’s because she was following the law. Since this is GOD’s law then Mary should be exempt from it since GOD made her sinless.

No from the Prophet Isaiah, and God himself in Gen.see above.

You’r interpreting Genesis wrong. The woman is not Mary. The woman clearly is Eve.

Genesis 3:13: 13 Then the Lord God said to the woman, “What is this that you have done?” The woman said, “The serpent deceived me, and I ate.”

The woman here is Eve. Last I checked, Eve ate the apple and not Mary.

Genesis 3:14 The Lord God said to the serpent,

“Because you have done this,
cursed are you above all livestock
and above all beasts of the field;
on your belly you shall go,
and dust you shall eat
all the days of your life.
15 I will put enmity between you and the woman,
and between your offspring [5] and her offspring;
he shall bruise your head,
and you shall bruise his heel.”

GOD is giving the serpent his punishment for deceiving EVE. Also the woman here.

Genesis 13:16 To the woman he said,

“I will surely multiply your pain in childbearing;
in pain you shall bring forth children.
Your desire shall be for [6] your husband,
and he shall rule over you.”

Now we’re back to Eve again. She is receiving her punishment for sinning.

Genesis 3:17 And to Adam he said,

“Because you have listened to the voice of your wife
and have eaten of the tree etc. etc.

Now Adam is receiving his punishment for sinning. The wife here is Eve who is also the same woman referred to in the previous verses.

You’re trying to mix Mary in here where she doesn’t belong.

No, that is not what is being revealed here. He is clarifying Mary as being a person who is born after the sin of Eve, to which Mary is born to, He is clarifying that Mary reversed the sin of Eve. Mary brought forth no sin into the world from her yes, and Eve brought forth sin from her yes. He in no way is claiming Mary had sin, only that she brought forth no sin where there is sin.PEACE

Sorry I disagree. He’s not saying Mary is born after the sin of Eve. He’s saying Eve was created without sin. Then brought sin into the world. Mary was born into sin but brought a sinless person in Jesus into the world.

Gotta run

PEACE

 

[estesbob]

You certainly don’t have to apologize to me As I said it’s all good natured discussion. I was Roman Catholic for over 40 years. I at one time condemned all non-Roman Catholics similar to how some do on this web site. I would never believe that the RCC could be wrong until I started reading the Bible and attended Bible college. I’m not saying the RCC is wrong on everything as some Protestants do. But I believe they have errored on some doctrines. In some cases doctrines were made without scriptural support. Now the church scrambles to find scriptural support.

I

With all due respect how did you decides that your personal interpretation of Scripture was superior te the Church’s?

 

[justinthemartyr]

Gabriel your post is hard to work with since you quote everything.

I’m familiar with this part of Genesis. The woman is Eve which we are all off-spring from.

Sorry Gabriel I’m not making the connection here.

Mary is not the woman that GOD puts enmity between. We are not off-spring of Mary. We are off-spring of Eve. GOD puts enmity between all of Eve’s off-spring. As far as John the Baptist. Where do you get that he wasn’t conceived from a man?

Luke 1:13 But the angel said to him, “Do not be afraid, Zechariah, for your prayer has been heard, and your wife Elizabeth will bear you a son, and you shall call his name John.

Zechariah questioned this because of his age and the Lord made him silent until John was born. Zechariah didn’t believe. Are you suggesting Elizabeth was overcome by the Holy Spirit? We know she was filled with the Holy Spirit after Mary visited her. But she was already pregnant.

So you are saying that if Jesus was born without sin from Mary who was sinful then you would walk away from Christianity?

As far as proof. I don’t have to prove she was sinful because the Bible says all have sinned. You need to prove she was sinless which scripture does not state. If Mary was not sinful then why did she take a sin offering to the Temple after Jesus was born?? The Roman Catholic church says it’s because she was following the law. Since this is GOD’s law then Mary should be exempt from it since GOD made her sinless.

You’r interpreting Genesis wrong. The woman is not Mary. The woman clearly is Eve.

Genesis 3:13: 13 Then the Lord God said to the woman, “What is this that you have done?” The woman said, “The serpent deceived me, and I ate.”

The woman here is Eve. Last I checked, Eve ate the apple and not Mary.

Genesis 3:14 The Lord God said to the serpent,

“Because you have done this,
cursed are you above all livestock
and above all beasts of the field;
on your belly you shall go,
and dust you shall eat
all the days of your life.
15 I will put enmity between you and the woman,
and between your offspring [5] and her offspring;
he shall bruise your head,
and you shall bruise his heel.”

GOD is giving the serpent his punishment for deceiving EVE. Also the woman here.

Genesis 13:16 To the woman he said,

“I will surely multiply your pain in childbearing;
in pain you shall bring forth children.
Your desire shall be for [6] your husband,
and he shall rule over you.”

Now we’re back to Eve again. She is receiving her punishment for sinning.

Genesis 3:17 And to Adam he said,

“Because you have listened to the voice of your wife
and have eaten of the tree etc. etc.

Now Adam is receiving his punishment for sinning. The wife here is Eve who is also the same woman referred to in the previous verses.

You’re trying to mix Mary in here where she doesn’t belong.

Sorry I disagree. He’s not saying Mary is born after the sin of Eve. He’s saying Eve was created without sin. Then brought sin into the world. Mary was born into sin but brought a sinless person in Jesus into the world.

Gotta run

PEACE

False, if we are IN Christ, then we are sons and daughters of God and therefore we are also sons and daughters of Mary because we are IN Christ and Christ is born from Mary. We are His brothers and sisters.