How ironic.
Here we have 2 protâs that canât agree on the basic belief of original sin⌠A Catholic dogma
Sp-Word believes (correct me if wrong) all are born w/ Original sin. and thatâs the fuller meaning of âAllâ have sinned. Thus he baptizes infants. Thus here he practices Catholic dogma.
Then we have OUDAVE who canât reconcile âAllâ have sinned because he denies the need for infant baptism. He thinks âAllâ means only âactualâ sins commited
after the age of reason.
Originally Posted by oudave
âŚI have never read anything that says that Mary was born without original sin, as a matter of fact I didnt know anyone was born being a sinner. Where do you get this from? I would like to read it.
⌠Dave.
Notice how OUDAVE puts on the âtwistâ with the ACTIVE commital of sin: "
being a sinner " vs the passive:
Rom 5:12 Wherefore as by one man sin entered into this world, and by sin death; and so death passed upon all men, in whom all have sinned.
There is no doubt that the sin of Adam passed on to all men passively. Any cemetary with an infant grave proves the point.
BUT OUDAVE effectively says âAllâ are born free of all sin. and REMAIN so until the age of reasonâŚif it ever arrives. So, OUDAVE does not even baptize the mentally handicapped who never reach the age of reason. OUDAVE DOESNâT believe in original sin inheritance EXCEPT death and disease. But why stop there? Heâll drag up an OT verse. That is is only proof.
From all this prot. contradiction, we Catholics are supposed to be convinced of their ideasâŚBOTH FROM SOLA SCRIPTURA!
Yet, neither one of them can even give proof of the NT books without bowing to the Church of RomeâŚanother irony.
Now:
**The angel tells Joseph:
Matt 1: **
21 And she shall bring forth a son: and thou shalt call his name JESUS. For
he shall save his people from their sins.
Code:
Now it is clear from everyday life that one can receive after payment, OR one can receive with promise of future payment.
A home or car mortgage is the receipt now with promise of later payment.
This is exactly how OT repentent people were saved. âŚLater promise to pay in Christ.
The NT repentent people are saved after the payment.
Code:
So, we know for certainty that there were at least 2 MODES of humanity being "saved" from their sins.
The Catholic Bible and the Catholc Church who certified what books shall and shall not be considered "inspired" NT, infallibly so, also teaches a 3rd mode of being "saved from sin", BEFORE any NT Bible arrived in 27 books.
That 3rd mode is vanquishing original sin at the moment of conception.
First example:
Christ was conceived
fully human. YET, original sin is prevented from being part of that conception.
Yet, Christ is a true flesh and blood descendent of another human.(Son of David). This being so, He would have, by His FULL human nature, received what His Mother had as we all do. And that would include (in Adam) Original sin. IF that were so, then Christ was born of a sinful woman. A no no.
Code:
**One must SOMEWHERE break the chain of inheriting Original sin.
** The Catholic Church teaches, even before she certified the NT collection that the chain was broken at Maryâs conception. Thus** banishing ANY thought that Christ was involved with Original sin from the womb.
**
Code:
Therefore, Christ was born in the sinless womb of a sinless woman.
Mary was therefore simply "saved" from sin by God vanquishing Original sin at her conception. This does not make her a goddess or any other "fundy" diatribe. It simply means that the New Adam was conceived in the womb of a New (sinless) Eve (meaning mother of all).. But unlike Eve, she was "saved" from what she deserved by a promise of future payment on the Cross. She also received all the undeserved gifts of the first EVE, ie freedom from defect, disease, from decay to "dust" etc.
God Bless
Whats the score now? 
God Bless