Can Mary be Sinless and Intercede for you?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Truthfaithlove
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
placido said:
The Bible says:
  1. A son was born of a virgin [Mary]; Scientiphic says “Yes/No”.
  2. The Son is Mighty God; Scientiphic says “No”.
    The logical question to be asked is whether you believe that the “Mighty God” of Isaiah 9:6 is different from the Creator? If, yes, then you are a polytheist.
Click to expand...
Your question can be rephrased thus, bearing in MIND that Mary did NOT give birth to Jesus’ DIVINITY which is the entity that makes Jesus GOD.
  1. A man was seen coming out of the filthy HUT: Yes/No
  2. The man is the president:
Therefore the president is a resident of the HUT.

.
 
Scientiphic said:
Well, its YOU against the word of God!

Romans 3:10 As it is written: "There is no one righteous, not even one;
Click to expand...
Psalm 14 quote and Jewish/Gentile peoples. Accusations, Blatant Disrespect, and Pride do not become you. Mary is perfect and does not contradict this passage.
 
adstrinity said:
Psalm 14 quote and Jewish/Gentile peoples. Accusations, Blatant Disrespect, and Pride do not become you. Mary is perfect and does not contradict this passage.
Click to expand...
How was Scientiphic showing “blatant disrespect, and pride”? Can’t you disagree without the name calling?

You really think Paul didn’t mean “none are righteous”? Aren’t you over contextualizing? Indeed at verse 23 (in the same chapter) Paul sends the same message (in fact the message all are sinners permeates throughout Romans, particularly in chap. 5).

Sure, he made that particular statement in the context of Jews and Gentiles, however, it still doesn’t change the substance of what he said. None are righteous not even one. All are sinners, and yes in this context all means all. God bound all men to disobedience (and women too). Only God is good (or perfect), see Luke 18:19.

Scripture is full of these sorts of revelations. Mary was a sinner, however, she was justified freely and fully by grace because Jesus could not touch sin. However, if He was born of anything short of a fully human and imperfect mother there really wouldn’t have been much sense in His becoming flesh in the first place.
 
sola_scriptura said:
How was Scientiphic showing “blatant disrespect, and pride”? Can’t you disagree without the name calling?

You really think Paul didn’t mean none are righteous?
Click to expand...
I know it. Read the Psalm and the rest of that chapter. I will pray for you so that you will be able to see how unGodly the other poster was. May God grant you both mercy.
 
sola_scriptura said:
I’ll look at the thread – but I already know you have no proof for this idea, because it’s wrong.
Click to expand...
Well I think the important thing about this is you’re staying open-minded and charitable. Some people would go into that thread with their mind made up but I’m glad to see you’re looking at things objectively.
 
adstrinity said:
Well I think the important thing about this is you’re staying open-minded and charitable. Some people would go into that thread with their mind made up but I’m glad to see you’re looking at things objectively.
Click to expand...
This is why I need to stay clear of Mariology threads:) They always get me in trouble on this board …

I freely admit – my mind is closed on this issue (I’ve studied it more than enough to be convinced that my view is right).
 
adstrinity said:
I know it. Read the Psalm and the rest of that chapter. I will pray for you so that you will be able to see how unGodly the other poster was. May God grant you both mercy.
Click to expand...
God has granted me mercy – in fact even more than that God has predestined me from before the founding of the world. I pray that all men can come to knowledge of the truth as I have. Glory to God alone!
 
sola_scriptura said:
God has granted me mercy – in fact even more than that God has predestined me from before the founding of the world. I pray that all men can come to knowledge of the truth as I have. Glory to God alone!
Click to expand...
Fair enough, tell me how you are distinct from the other 30,000 Christian denominations that say that exact same thing.
 
sola_scriptura said:
huh? Provide a link & I’ll take a look.
Click to expand...
Below is what St. James believd about Mary. If you limit youself to Bible only, then you don’t have these resources for your faith. I don’t know if you are a bible only type guy, but if so, know that, bible only is a practice not found in the bible! But love Tradition, love the Saints. After all it was the Catholic Church that told you which books in God’s Word are inspired 😉

The Protoevangelium of James

“And behold, an angel of the Lord stood by saying, ‘Anne! Anne! The Lord has heard your prayer, and you shall conceive and shall bring forth, and your seed shall be spoken of in all the world.’ And Anne said, ‘As the Lord my God lives, if I beget either male or female, I will bring it as a gift to the Lord my God, and it shall minister to him in the holy things all the days of its life.’ . . . And [from the time she was three] Mary was in the temple of the Lord as if she were a dove that dwelt there” (Protoevangelium of James 4, 7 [A.D. 120]).

“And when she was twelve years old there was held a council of priests, saying, ‘Behold, Mary has reached the age of twelve years in the temple of the Lord. What then shall we do with her, lest perchance she defile the sanctuary of the Lord?’ And they said to the high priest, ‘You stand by the altar of the Lord; go in and pray concerning her, and whatever the Lord shall manifest to you, that also will we do.’ . . . [A]nd he prayed concerning her, and behold, an angel of the Lord stood by him saying, ‘Zechariah! Zechariah! Go out and assemble the widowers of the people and let them bring each his rod, and to whomsoever the Lord shall show a sign, his wife shall she be. . . . And Joseph [was chosen]. . . . And the priest said to Joseph, ‘You have been chosen by lot to take into your keeping the Virgin of the Lord.’ But Joseph refused, saying, ‘I have children, and I am an old man, and she is a young girl’” (ibid., 8–9).

“And Annas the scribe came to him [Joseph] . . . and saw that Mary was with child. And he ran away to the priest and said to him, ‘Joseph, whom you did vouch for, has committed a grievous crime.’ And the priest said, ‘How so?’ And he said, ‘He has defiled the virgin whom he received out of the temple of the Lord and has married her by stealth’” (ibid., 15).

“And the priest said, ‘Mary, why have you done this? And why have you brought your soul low and forgotten the Lord your God?’ . . . And she wept bitterly saying, ‘As the Lord my God lives, I am pure before him, and know not man’” (ibid.).
 
SimonArizona said:
Below is what St. James believd about Mary. If you limit youself to Bible only, then you don’t have these resources for your faith. I don’t know if you are a bible only type guy, but if so, know that, bible only is a practice not found in the bible! But love Tradition, love the Saints. After all it was the Catholic Church that told you which books in God’s Word are inspired 😉

The Protoevangelium of James

“And behold, an angel of the Lord stood by saying, ‘Anne! Anne! The Lord has heard your prayer, and you shall conceive and shall bring forth, and your seed shall be spoken of in all the world.’ And Anne said, ‘As the Lord my God lives, if I beget either male or female, I will bring it as a gift to the Lord my God, and it shall minister to him in the holy things all the days of its life.’ . . . And [from the time she was three] Mary was in the temple of the Lord as if she were a dove that dwelt there” (Protoevangelium of James 4, 7 [A.D. 120]).

“And when she was twelve years old there was held a council of priests, saying, ‘Behold, Mary has reached the age of twelve years in the temple of the Lord. What then shall we do with her, lest perchance she defile the sanctuary of the Lord?’ And they said to the high priest, ‘You stand by the altar of the Lord; go in and pray concerning her, and whatever the Lord shall manifest to you, that also will we do.’ . . . [A]nd he prayed concerning her, and behold, an angel of the Lord stood by him saying, ‘Zechariah! Zechariah! Go out and assemble the widowers of the people and let them bring each his rod, and to whomsoever the Lord shall show a sign, his wife shall she be. . . . And Joseph [was chosen]. . . . And the priest said to Joseph, ‘You have been chosen by lot to take into your keeping the Virgin of the Lord.’ But Joseph refused, saying, ‘I have children, and I am an old man, and she is a young girl’” (ibid., 8–9).

“And Annas the scribe came to him [Joseph] . . . and saw that Mary was with child. And he ran away to the priest and said to him, ‘Joseph, whom you did vouch for, has committed a grievous crime.’ And the priest said, ‘How so?’ And he said, ‘He has defiled the virgin whom he received out of the temple of the Lord and has married her by stealth’” (ibid., 15).

“And the priest said, ‘Mary, why have you done this? And why have you brought your soul low and forgotten the Lord your God?’ . . . And she wept bitterly saying, ‘As the Lord my God lives, I am pure before him, and know not man’” (ibid.).
Click to expand...
oh … not the protoevangelium of James, been down this road before?

BTW James (that is James the Just) could not have authored this work, since it was written by someone who had no contact with Second Temple Jewish custom (hence it’s authorship is dubious because the author describes himself as James of Jerusalem).

There’s a reason why this book isn’t part of canon. Indeed the RCC doesn’t even buy into this story since many Catholic commentators believe the siblings of Jesus mentioned in scripture were actually His cousins (and not Josephs children from a prior marriage as this book alleges).

This is because at one time the RCC believed Joseph was a virgin as well. Moreover, the Eastern Church obviously doesn’t buy into this since it has not endorsed the doctrine of the immaculate conception (although it does overwhelmingly endorse the idea that Joseph brought kids into the marriage).

In short this book has no apostolic connection and we can say with certainty it had no connection with James. Moreover, we also know its author lied about his identity because He could not have been a Jew from Jerusalem who lived during the Second Temple period. We also know this a second century work. The totality of the facts tell us this book has little value (if any at all).
 
sola_scriptura said:
different parts of the same body – all with different functions.
Click to expand...
I think St. Paul didn’t mean denominations when he said wrote that.

The problem is these 30,000 disagree with each other about what Scripture teaches. And when they disagree among themselves, they splinter again, then again, then again.

Which one is of the Holy Spirit?

They all claim to be, or else they would assimilate into each other in full agreement.

This is called the Protestant Fissiparousness. How can it be a work of the Holy Spirit? Are we to conclude that the Spirit of Truth is teaching all men different Gospel? When Jesus prayed as recorded by St. John that “they’d all be one.” so the world would believe.

So again brother, I repeat, What makes yours the truth?
 
sola_scriptura said:
oh … not the protoevangelium of James, been down this road before?

BTW James (that is James the Just) could not have authored this work, since it was written by someone who had no contact with Second Temple Jewish custom (hence it’s authorship is dubious because the author describes himself as James of Jerusalem).

There’s a reason why this book isn’t part of canon.
Click to expand...
Who says its not authentic? Are you aware that the bible you read is second or third or other multitudes of copies, not the original?
And the reason why it’s not in the Canon, isn’t because it has some type of error, but because if the Canon contained every book that was inspired well…

“Not all the books in the world could contain all that Jesus did.”-St. John

You wouldn’t have a Bible, but a library of Sacred books<—thats what I have.😉
 
SimonArizona said:
I think St. Paul didn’t mean denominations when he said wrote that.

The problem is these 30,000 disagree with each other about what Scripture teaches. And when they disagree among themselves, they splinter again, then again, then again.

Which one is of the Holy Spirit?

They all claim to be, or else they would assimilate into each other in full agreement.

This is called the Protestant Fissiparousness. How can it be a work of the Holy Spirit? Are we to conclude that the Spirit of Truth is teaching all men different Gospel? When Jesus prayed as recorded by St. John that “they’d all be one.” so the world would believe.

So again brother, I repeat, What makes yours the truth?
Click to expand...
It’s an old and tired argument. There’s no more disunity in Protestantism than there is in Catholicism. There’s the EOC, the RCC, the Oriental Orthodox churches, several orders within Catholicism who disagree with each other on core issues, etc.

Within the protestant community there are many denominations yes, but we recognize each others valid standing before God. We have brotherly ecumenical relations with each other. That’s more than sufficient with regard to unity. That line of reasoning is wholly unpersuasive.
 
SimonArizona said:
Who says its not authentic? Are you aware that the bible you read is second or third or other multitudes of copies, not the original?
And the reason why it’s not in the Canon, isn’t because it has some type of error, but because if the Canon contained every book that was inspired well…
Click to expand...
not the same thing. In the case of the protoevangelium it has been shown that the author could not have been James, which is not the case with the canonical books. Furthermore, the author claimed to be James, which means he or she was untruthful. Again, there’s a reason why your church has excluded this book from canon. No serious Catholic theologian would rely on this book for any purpose, except to say someone out there in the second century thought this to be true (but of course they could have just as easily manufactured the story since we already know they lied about their identity).
“Not all the books in the world could contain all that Jesus did.”-St. John
Click to expand...
Indeed – but of course that’s a red herring in this case.
You wouldn’t have a Bible, but a library of Sacred books<—thats what I have.😉
Click to expand...
so what’s the point?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top