Can Mary be Sinless and Intercede for you?

[RobGentner]

It is a boundary in the sense that it alone is inspired-inerrant Word of God.

Where does it say that in scripture?

There is no higher source than this that we can confidently say is the Word of God.

Where does it say that in scripture?

It is important to understand its message and derive our doctrines and practices from it.

Where does it say that in scripture?

Outside of it we are left with the speculations of men.

Where does it say that in scripture?

The Catholic church said all of that. You follow what we teach that you want to and disregard the rest! OK! That makes sense…

That’s why it is impossible to get the Marian doctrines are not biblical doctrines since they cannot be grounded in the Scriptures. To say that she is sinless and can intercede for you is not found in the Scriptures and the apostles never taught such a doctrine.

And you know that how? Where does it say that in scripture?

 

[RobGentner]

JustAsking4, You asked how the Catholic Church is Justified. My answer dear:

**[SIGN]FOUR ASPECTS OF JUSTIFICATION:

1. JUSTIFICATION BY GRACE (Rom. 3:24) – Its Source is found only in the unmerited favor and undeserved kindness of God! Through the HS.
2. JUSTIFICATION BY BLOOD (Rom. 5:9) – Its Basis is in the work which the Saviour did on the cross. And the death of the early christians in the Church
3. JUSTIFICATION BY FAITH (Rom. 3:28) – It comes to us through the RCC’s belief in every true teaching.
4. JUSTIFICATION BY WORKS (James 2:24) – Its Evidence by which we clearly show to others that we are truly Christians.[/SIGN]**

If the inspired-inerrant Scriptures are not the complete message from God then what else is inspired-inerrant?

THE HOLY CATHOLIC CHURCH!

( If there is a message from God outside it would have to be inspired-inerrant) Do you you have some specific examples from Sacred Tradition that your church calls inspired-inerrant?

You have to write the Vatican about that. I explained why before didn’t I?

True he did add it. However it is still true that salvation is found only in Christ alone.

True, through His church!
.
Does your church call Mary’s encounter with the angel a prayer?

Nope

Where has your church defined intercession in the way you are stating it here?

:yawn: Not sure what you are saying. Can you clarify?

Good to hear he was safe and i pray he continues to be. What would you say to a Mormon who prays to Joseph Smith for help and has a close connection with him?

That does raise an interesting question! Can souls in Hell pray to God for us like the saints can? A new thread?

This still would not justify in doing so. The Scriptures never mention any powers attributed to her to intercede. The only One is the Lord Jesus.

That is one opinion against 30 million in USA alone! Way to go, Sweetheart!

The Scriptures only mention that she was at the crucifixion site. The Passion of the Christ is not totally accurate biblically if this is where you are getting this idea.

The Bible Lies? It is flawed? :bigyikes:

The “boundary” are what the Scriptures teach and say. It alone is revelation from God and there is no other.

Now where is that written in the Bible?

To go beyond what is written is to speculate.

My dearest JA4T1T,:flowers: to even go with what is written is to speculate! Unless you are the Pope or learnt from the RCC what was meant:

A few examples: Please tell me which one is True and which one is False OK?

You cannot be saved by works. (Ephesians 2:8-9)

You cannot show that you are saved without works (James 2:14,18).

How is a person saved? > By faith alone (Rom. 3:28)

How can a person show that he is saved? How can he “show his faith”? > Only by works (James 2:18)

Faith without works saves.> (Romans 3:28)

Faith without works does not save > (James 2:14).

This is a living faith > (Romans 3:28)

This is a dead faith > (James 2:17,20,26)

A person is not saved by works. (“Meritorious works", that is, works done to try to merit or earn salvation are rejected by Paul as the means of salvation: He said it is wrong to say that a person must do good works in order to be saved.)

(“Works” are understood by James to be the result of salvation: a person does good works because he is saved.) These are faith works, that is, works that spring from a faith that is real and living.

Paul agreed with James He taught that good works must accompany saving faith (Eph. 2:10; Tit. 3:8; Gal. 5:6; Phil. 2:11-12).

James agreed with Paul. He taught that a person inherits the kingdom only by faith (James 2:5) and that Abraham was justified by faith (2:23).

Paul used the example of Abraham when he first believed in God (Rom. 4:3 and compare Genesis 15:6).
James used the example of Abraham when his faith was tested by God, about 40 years later (James 2:21 and compare Genesis 22).

The error Paul corrected:
Salvation is by the works of the law (the error of legalism).

The error that James corrected:
Works are unnecessary after a person is saved (the error of antinomianism).

Paul wrote about how a guilty sinner may be justified before God.

James wrote about how a believer can show that his faith is genuine (justification or vindication before men).

At the Jerusalem Council in Acts 15 the key issue was that salvation is by grace through faith and not by the works of the law. Look at the error in Acts 15:1 and Peter’s conclusion in Acts 15:9,11. James, who took a lead role in this discussion never voiced any disagreement with Peter or Paul over this crucial matter.

Paul’s perspective: He was viewing the guilty sinner who needed to be right with God. (The sinner is in view.)

James’ perspective: He was viewing the believer (or professing believer) who needed to demonstrate that his faith was real. (The believer is in view.)

So see JA4? Only the Catholic Church has the knowledge needed to make these type judgement calls. No one else was given the authority!

God Bless

 

[guanophore]

What i’m trying to do first and of first importance is: Is the claim or teaching found in the Scriptures? If not, it cannot be apostolic since the apostles never taught such a thing.
Secondly then we need to see where it did begin and by whom.

What do you think?

I think that you are making an erroneous conclusion, based on an erroneous premise. You seem to believe that all the apostolic teaching can be found in the NT, which is not accruate.

What you have in Luke is an angel sent by God to Zechariah to announce to him what is about to happen to him. This passage is not about a prayer.

I would very much like to hear your definition of prayer. For us, prayer includes having a conversation with an angel.

Where is the angel in Luke 1:5-20 interceding for Zechariah? Did Zechariah ask for help for help from the angel?

A person does not have to “ask for help” in order for intercession to happen, though it does not hurt to ask.

There are many forms of prayer, in addition to intercession. The angel was bringing tidings and commandments to ol’ Zachy.

Zachy wanted an explanation, which was presumptuous of him. If he had restricted himself to asking for help, he would not have been mute.

There is no indication in the passage that this angel heard some prayer from Zechariah.

Again one has to wonder about your definition of "prayer’. For those of Apostolic faiths, this includes conversation with an angel. Zachy clearly had a conversation with an angel. We call it prayer because the angel is not physically present, so normal human “vocal” communication cannot occur.

What you are doing is speculating that angels and saints can hear your prayers when such a thing is not taught in Scripture.

How do you explain the fact that angels and people communicate with one another?

The above example is a case in point. This passage is not about prayer or any intercession from a prayer.

I agree on the intercession point. However, Catholics consider any communication that occurs with a non-corporeal being a prayer, so I cannot see how you consider that the conversations with angels were otherwise.

The Lord Jesus is the greatest example of God’s grace. In fact John 1:17 makes this very point when it says— For the Law was given through Moses; grace and truth were realized through Jesus Christ.

It is very Catholic of you to say this.

You can make this claim that “there are saints in Heaven at this moment praying” but you cannot ground such a belief in the Scriptures.

I guess we read them differently.

Catholics accept the witness of St. Paul, that to be absent from the Body is to be present with Christ.

What I do know is that Lord Jesus Christ alone is out Great High Priest Who intercedes before the Father for us. He alone has this role.

Indeed! And He is so generous, to share this with us. We are eternally grateful!

You don’t need Mary or any saint in heaven to pray for you. You have the Lord Jesus Who alone has this power to intercede for you. He is more than sufficient.

Indeed, He is more that sufficient, and it is not a 'need" but a great privilege in which He has permitted us to participate.

We must never just accept a teaching from the church or anyone unless it can be shown to be firmly grounded in the Scriptures.

Well, ok. One wonders why you are here on CAF, ja4. It is clear that Catholics are not limited to scriptures for the teachings of the Apostles. Why would you expose yourself to thngs that you believe are a threat to faith?

If its not grounded in the Scriptures it’s a teaching of men and men can and do err.

Wow! We are in deep doggie doo doo! I wonder how we ever got a man on the moon without the theory of gravity? It was not taught in the scripture, and therefore, is a speiculation of men (and must be false!).

We are to examine all things carefully as I Thess 5:21 exhorts us. Don’t just accept something because its been taught for a long time or because it sounds reasonable but compare it to the Scriptures. Do the Scriptures teach it?

Certainly not! Scriptures do not “teach”, ja4. Teaching is an activitiy that requires intellect and will. The Holy Writings, as valuable as they are, do not have intellect and will. These activies require a person, which is why Jesus gave the teaching authority to the Church.

 

[guanophore]

If the inspired-inerrant Scriptures are not the complete message from God …]

They are not, but that is off topic here.
justasking4;4366187:

True he did add it. However it is still true that salvation is found only in Christ alone.

Sorry, ja4, but you have been misinformed. Christ is never alone. The Father and the Spirit are always with Him, and He now identifies Himself completely with His Holy Bride, the Church.

.

 Does your church call Mary's encounter with the angel a prayer?

Yes, the Catholic Church has a much broader understanding of prayer. We believe that angels are spirit beings with no bodies, hence, no vocal chords, hence, communication with them is not like communication we have with one another.

Where has your church defined intercession in the way you are stating it here?

No. We consider intercession to be only one of many forms of prayer.

What would you say to a Mormon who prays to Joseph Smith for help and has a close connection with him?

Same thing I say to you! You will be in my prayers.

This still would not justify in doing so. The Scriptures never mention any powers attributed to her to intercede. The only One is the Lord Jesus.

I just read a posting of examples of intercession. If you deny these, your denial is for the scripture, not the Catholic Church.

The Scriptures only mention that she was at the crucifixion site. The Passion of the Christ is not totally accurate biblically if this is where you are getting this idea.

OH MY LANDS!! :bigyikes: :bigyikes: :bigyikes:

“The Passion of the Christ is not totally accurate biblically”

Let me get this straight. You claim that the Scriptures are inspired-inerrant,a nd that there is nothing else that compares, yet you are saying tha tthey are “not totally accurate biblically”? I have to save this one to a file. I is priceless!

The “boundary” are what the Scriptures teach and say. It alone is revelation from God and there is no other. To go beyond what is written is to speculate.

Wow. I think you just totally disqualifed you.

 

[notsmart]

Mary is created, not creator.

You are confused in this matter and imply that Mary is God.
God alone creates.

Mark 10:18 “Why do you call me good?” Jesus answered. "No one is good—except God alone.

Is Mary, god? No. she’s a mortal. So how can she be good or sinless when Jesus says ONLY GOD IS GOOD?

A lot of Catholics do not understand why, since Mary can give birth to Jesus how could she have sin? And since Jesus is God, therefore Mary must be the mother of God.

The Bible clearly states, where God says ‘I am the Alpha and the Omega, the beginning and the end’. This means that God does NOT have ANYBODY else before Him. IN OTHER WORDS, He does NOT have parents. So, how can Mary be God’s mother?

Well, Mary did indeed give birth to Jesus. But Jesus is BOTH Man & God. The fleshly body of Jesus is Man, the Spirit that is in Him is God. Mary was used as a vessel to give birth to the FLESH that God used while He was on earth. There is no way that a mortal being can give birth to the immortal God.

John 3:6 Flesh gives birth to flesh, but the Spirit gives birth to spirit.

Insisting that God was born by Mary is B-L-A-S-P-H-E-M-Y.

Let’s not also forget that Mary called herself a slave/servant of God, and she too prayed feverishly with the other disciples after Christ’s resurrection for the coming Holy Spirit. She Did Not pray For the others, but WITH the others. In other words, she is just another sinner like you and me. At the 1st miracle of water to wine at the wedding in Capernaum (John 2) when she informed Jesus that the wine had ran out, Jesus replied her bluntly ‘what has this concern of yours to do with me, woman’? ‘My hour has not yet come’.

This incident shows clearly that Mary has no involvement with the works of God, neither does she know what God has in store. She is a humble and obedient servant of God.

Job 25:4 How then can a man be righteous before God? How can one born of woman be pure?

Indeed, if Jesus was born of woman, He would be impure. But Jesus is NOT born of woman!

For Jesus also said ‘Verily I say unto you, Among them that are born of women there hath not risen a greater than John the Baptist: notwithstanding he that is least in the kingdom of heaven is greater than he.’

If Jesus was also born of woman, would He not even be lesser than John the Baptist?

Jesus said ‘I am the Truth, the Way and the Life. No man goes to the Father except through me’.

Now, do you still need to go through Mary??? No, you obviously don’t.

Mary had sin in her just like you and me, BUT she was highly regarded enough to be chosen by God as His earthly mother while He abided on earth. Mary cannot intercede for you just like nobody can intercede for you. That is why Jesus is both the judge & mediator.

Galatians 3:20 Now a mediator is not a mediator of one, but God is one.

Yes, for God mediates for us unto Himself through Jesus Christ.

Jesus, for there is no other name under heaven given to people by which we must be saved (Acts 4:12). Not the Pope, not Peter and certainly not Mary.

Catholics, read the Bible for yourself before its too late.

.

 

[happilycatholic]

"The Lord Jesus is the greatest example of God’s grace. In fact John 1:17 makes this very point when it says— For the Law was given through Moses; grace and truth were realized through Jesus Christ.

 

[happilycatholic]

Just Asking:

“The Lord Jesus is the greatest example of God’s grace. In fact John 1:17 makes this very point when it says— For the Law was given through Moses; grace and truth were realized through Jesus Christ”

Okay, let me get this straight…

First you disagree with me and then you pretty much quote me?

Give me a big fat break!

You are without a doubt ,completely without shame.

You come on this forum and run circles around yourself spouting, “Where is that in scripture?” all the while contridicting your own posts and proving others theories. You refuse to go on the apologetics thread where the real answers are.

I can see why folks get frustrated with you.

 

[placido]

What “Apostlolic Tradition -Apostles’ preaching” do you possess that is not in the NT? /QUOTE]

I leave that question for others to answer, but in the meantime I will tell something you have no problem with, yet it was never “preached” by the Apostles: that is a 39-books Old Testament and a 27-books New Testament.

 

[rinnie]

justasking4 I have explained this to you many of times. But you still feel some kind of need to ignore the truth. Why I just don’t understand? So I am going to explain this for you AGAIN.

When you are a MEDIATOR you settle something. You go between two people and settle a dispute.

When you are a intercessor it is to pray for someone. You go to God on someones behalf and Pray For them. You ask God to have mercy on them.

THERE IS A HUGE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE TWO. THE BLESSED MOTHER NEVER SETTLES ANYTHING, SHE DOES NOT HAVE NOR DOES THE CHURCH CLAIM SHE HAS THIS POWER.

ALL SHE HAS IS THE POWER TO GO TO HER SON, AND ASK HIM TO ALSO HAVE MERCY ON. US. AND IT IS THROUGH HER PRAYERS AND PRAYERS OF OTHERS THAT CAN HELP US SUCCEED.

But for some reason you cannot or will not understand this. Like all of scripture you see things your way and your way only. And you will argue points over and over again, even when people are showing you and trying to help you understand the truth.

You must have the Power of the Holy Spirit to define scripture, Do you feel you have this power? And if indeed so, when and how did you receive it?

 

[justasking4]

guanophore;4367300]
Quote:
Originally Posted by justasking4
What i’m trying to do first and of first importance is: Is the claim or teaching found in the Scriptures? If not, it cannot be apostolic since the apostles never taught such a thing.
Secondly then we need to see where it did begin and by whom.

What do you think?

guanophore;
I think that you are making an erroneous conclusion, based on an erroneous premise. You seem to believe that all the apostolic teaching can be found in the NT, which is not accruate.

The can you or anyone else point specifically to what apostle wrote that Mary is sinless and can intercede for you? Who was the apostle who taugth this?

Quote:
Originally Posted by justasking4
What you have in Luke is an angel sent by God to Zechariah to announce to him what is about to happen to him. This passage is not about a prayer.

guanophore;
I would very much like to hear your definition of prayer. For us, prayer includes having a conversation with an angel.

Here is a defintion from the New Advent:
"Prayer
tt=76
(Greek euchesthai, Latin precari, French prier, to plead, to beg, to ask earnestly).

An act of the virtue of religion which consists in asking proper gifts or graces from God. In a more general sense it is the application of the mind to Divine things, not merely to acquire a knowledge of them but to make use of such knowledge as a means of union with God. This may be done by acts of praise and thanksgiving, but petition is the principal act of prayer."

You can access this article here: newadvent.org/cathen/12345b.htm

I did not see anything in the article that the mere communicating with your fellow man is considered prayer. However i could be wrong since so many catholics here consider normal everyday conversations prayers…

 

[justasking4]

Just Asking:

“The Lord Jesus is the greatest example of God’s grace. In fact John 1:17 makes this very point when it says— For the Law was given through Moses; grace and truth were realized through Jesus Christ”

Okay, let me get this straight…

First you disagree with me and then you pretty much quote me?

Give me a big fat break!

You are without a doubt ,completely without shame.

You come on this forum and run circles around yourself spouting, “Where is that in scripture?” all the while contridicting your own posts and proving others theories. You refuse to go on the apologetics thread where the real answers are.

I can see why folks get frustrated with you.

Huh? What post of mine are you referring to?

 

[justasking4]

rinnie;4367988]justasking4 I have explained this to you many of times. But you still feel some kind of need to ignore the truth. Why I just don’t understand? So I am going to explain this for you AGAIN.

When you are a MEDIATOR you settle something. You go between two people and settle a dispute.

When you are a intercessor it is to pray for someone. You go to God on someones behalf and Pray For them. You ask God to have mercy on them.

I agree.

THERE IS A HUGE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE TWO. THE BLESSED MOTHER NEVER SETTLES ANYTHING, SHE DOES NOT HAVE NOR DOES THE CHURCH CLAIM SHE HAS THIS POWER.

ALL SHE HAS IS THE POWER TO GO TO HER SON, AND ASK HIM TO ALSO HAVE MERCY ON. US. AND IT IS THROUGH HER PRAYERS AND PRAYERS OF OTHERS THAT CAN HELP US SUCCEED.

But for some reason you cannot or will not understand this. Like all of scripture you see things your way and your way only. And you will argue points over and over again, even when people are showing you and trying to help you understand the truth.

The core issue here is that you believe that Mary can intercede for you even though she has been dead for 2000 years. She is no longer part of this world. You believe that even though she died 2000 years ago that she can still hear your spoken and unspoken prayers wherever you may be. Not only you but millions of other catholics who pray to here. This is what is not taught in Scripture. Once a person dies they no longer have anything to do with this world. The only One Who does even though He had died and rose again is the Lord Jesus Christ. He is our only mediator between God and men. There is no other.

You must have the Power of the Holy Spirit to define scripture, Do you feel you have this power? And if indeed so, when and how did you receive it?

Power is not necessary to define and interpret Scripture. What is necessary is to understand the context and various other things that will help us to understand what the Scriptures mean and how they are to be applied. In terms of Mary being sinless and interceding for you there is no passage that even suggest such a thing.

 

[guanophore]

Not so. The context is the meeting of the angel with Mary. Its not a prayer from the angel to Mary.

I am curious to know how you think they communicated. Catholics believe that conversing with angels is a form of prayer.

Prayer is more than just communication. When you talk with your loved ones and friends do you and they consider it prayer?

When we are together communicating with God, yes.

Hi justasking,

You won’t find any reference in the NT to “praying to Mary” or “praying to the saints”. Why? Because they didn’t call it that back then. (I’m not sure when the phrase “praying to the saints / Mary” became popular, but it is not a recent invention. If you’d like I’d be happy to find a quote from St. Thomas Aquinas defending “praying to Mary”.)

They probably just hiked over to her house, and prayed with her there.

What i’m trying to do first and of first importance is: Is the claim or teaching found in the Scriptures? If not, it cannot be apostolic since the apostles never taught such a thing.
Secondly then we need to see where it did begin and by whom.

What do you think?

I think your spiritual life has been unjustly sterilized by the Sola Scriptura philosophy. I am also sure that was the desired result from the one who spawned it.

Yes, in the original sense of the word “pray,” it certainly is. Sometimes in legal papers we still use “pray” in that fashion: “Wherefore your affiant prays the court to grant the following relief…” That doesn’t mean the affiant is worshipping the judge. It means “communicate.”

I think it is more specific. When used in court documents, it is always making a request. I think, in this context, it is specifically to supplicate (ask) for some action.

We are to pray for each other. That is taught in Scripture. Paul asked for the prayers from people in the churches he was working with. What you never find in Scripture is prayer being said to deceased person.

Or anything that says that those who die in Christ are somehiow separated from HIs love by death.

You never find any teaching or exhortation of imploring the living of those who are in the next world for help here.

Well, we read it differently, don’;t we?

The only One we are to pray to is God. It is the Lord Jesus Who is the “bridge” between us here and the Father.

Again one has to wonder what narrow definition you are using for prayer. Do you believe the attorneys are in sin because they pray to the court?

The deceased saints and Mary are not given this role.

Can you give the chapter and verse for this? I have not been able to find it in my bible.

 

[rinnie]

ja4 first of all in our faith we do not believe in death. We believe that when Jesus came and died on the cross he took away death. To say that you have to be seen in this world and have no power in the next world is insane. If what you say is true what about the angels. do you see them flying around? Or are they of the spiritual world.

Next everyone has told you that not all is written in the bible. You refuse to believe this even though the bible itself says this. And even when they do show you, you ignore it.

So again I guess the big difference between our faiths is we do not believe in death. We believe that Jesus took away death on the cross. We believe in the Power of the Holy Spirit, and we believe in the Power of prayer and intercession. You I can see don’t. So I guess its what you believe and do not believe. We believe this because Jesus told us I am alway’s with you. We believe that you can exist and not be seen. We do not believe in life after death, we believe there is no death. We believe we will see our loved ones again, just like Christ promised, and we believe that they are with him in heaven. Just like The Blessed Mother, Jesus, the angels and saints. We believe that Jesus can give them the power to help us by their prayers because the bible tells us. We believe that they also can use our prayers.

 

[Yeshualuver]

I don’t know where you got that weird idea of Trinity from, about 2nd person or 3rd person etc…because God is ONE.

Deuteronomy 6:4 Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God, the LORD is one.

Jesus is God Himself, not another God.

Romans 5:12 Therefore, just as sin entered the world through one man (Adam), and death through sin, and in this way death came to all men, because all sinned—

Mary is no exception

.

(Deutoronomy) D’varim 6:4 states in Hebrew (I’ll transliterate):

Sh’ma Yisrael, YHVH eloheynu, YHVH echad.

That word “echad” in Hebrew can indeed mean one as in an absolute singularity. However it can, and very often, is used to indicate a plurality within one. Here’s what I mean: “echad” is used in Genesis when the Lord says “and the two (notice there are two here) will become one (echad) flesh”

A plurality in unity.

There is a word in Hebrew that ALWAYS means an absolute singularity, and that word is “yachid.” If God had wanted no one to mistake that…why didn’t He inspire Moses to use that word?

Rabbi Machmonides (Rambam) was so “befuddled” (my word, not his) by the use of echad over yachid in Deut. 6:4 that he actually wrote that “yachid” is what Moses meant instead. Now that’s stretching it!!

1. You’re right Mary is NOT the mother of God. God was, is and always will be. God has not mother. However, she was used as a vessel whereby God took on a human form. While Mary is the mother of human Yeshua, Yeshua was always God and didn’t need to be birthed.
2. When you say that an imperfect, sinful human could not give birth to a perfect, sinless man. I agree. But let’s look at the Word of God

Gal 3:19 What, then, was the purpose of the law? It was added because of transgressions until the Seed to whom the promise referred had come. The law was put into effect through angels by a mediator.

What seed that was promised? Let’s look at Genesis 3:15

Gen 3:15 And I will put enmity
between you and the woman,
and between your offspring [1] and hers;
he will crush your head,
and you will strike his heel."

That word in Hebrew for “offspring” is better translated “seed”, it’s
“zehrah”

God promised Eve that her “seed” would conquer the enemy. But women don’t have seed, men do. So, it is through men that the sin of Adam is passed, not women. Since Yeshua had no earthly Father, was Mary conceived in her womb was from the Holy Spirit, the sin nature was not passed on to Yeshua.

Does that help?

 

[rinnie]

Also ja4 you are going by the word of a man. His name is Luther. Let me give you a luther quote

quote: we are obliged to YIELD many things to the Catholics that they possess the word of God, Which we received from them, otherwise we should have known nothing at all. unquote

Just because he took books out of the bible does not mean we did. see maccabees Chapter 12 39-46.

It may also interest yout to know that the earliest mention for the dead public Christian Worship is by the writer tertullian in 211 ad.

mach. 12:46 It is therefore a holy and wholesome thought to pray for the dead, that they may be loosed from sins.

Again what gave Luther the authority to take out books from the bible. What bible was here first the Catholic or SJV. The truth is the truth. But you still refuse to accept it.

 

[guanophore]

(Deutoronomy) D’varim 6:4 states in Hebrew (I’ll transliterate):

Sh’ma Yisrael, YHVH eloheynu, YHVH echad.

That word “echad” in Hebrew can indeed mean one as in an absolute singularity. However it can, and very often, is used to indicate a plurality within one. Here’s what I mean: “echad” is used in Genesis when the Lord says “and the two (notice there are two here) will become one (echad) flesh”

A plurality in unity.

There is a word in Hebrew that ALWAYS means an absolute singularity, and that word is “yachid.” If God had wanted no one to mistake that…why didn’t He inspire Moses to use that word?

Rabbi Machmonides (Rambam) was so “befuddled” (my word, not his) by the use of echad over yachid in Deut. 6:4 that he actually wrote that “yachid” is what Moses meant instead. Now that’s stretching it!!

1. You’re right Mary is NOT the mother of God. God was, is and always will be. God has not mother. However, she was used as a vessel whereby God took on a human form. While Mary is the mother of human Yeshua, Yeshua was always God and didn’t need to be birthed.
2. When you say that an imperfect, sinful human could not give birth to a perfect, sinless man. I agree. But let’s look at the Word of God

Gal 3:19 What, then, was the purpose of the law? It was added because of transgressions until the Seed to whom the promise referred had come. The law was put into effect through angels by a mediator.

What seed that was promised? Let’s look at Genesis 3:15

Gen 3:15 And I will put enmity
between you and the woman,
and between your offspring [1] and hers;
he will crush your head,
and you will strike his heel."

That word in Hebrew for “offspring” is better translated “seed”, it’s
“zehrah”

God promised Eve that her “seed” would conquer the enemy. But women don’t have seed, men do. So, it is through men that the sin of Adam is passed, not women. Since Yeshua had no earthly Father, was Mary conceived in her womb was from the Holy Spirit, the sin nature was not passed on to Yeshua.

Does that help?

Yes, I have heard this before, and it is interesting. However, such a rendering would mean that we can clone someone, and since they did not have “father’s seed” they would be sinless. Don’t kid yourself that they cannot make a human clone. Do you really believe that such a person would be without sin?

Women do have “seed” in the form of an egg. It contains the same genetic material as the male “seed” in the sperm. One thing that no one ever seems to adddress is that it is the male seed that determines the gender of the child. The woman has only X chromasomes to contriubute, and no Y’s. If Jesus did not have any Y chromasomes, how did He come out male?

Sorry, just a musing, off topic here.

 

[justasking4]

rinnie;4368177]ja4 first of all in our faith we do not believe in death. We believe that when Jesus came and died on the cross he took away death.

This is not true. Jesus did not take death away but “tasted death” for everyone. Hebrews 2:9. The total defeat of death will not happen until He comes again. In the meantime we do expierence physical death and are deeply impacted by it when it happens.

To say that you have to be seen in this world and have no power in the next world is insane. If what you say is true what about the angels. do you see them flying around? Or are they of the spiritual world.

On what basis do you claim to have power in the next world or that a deceased saint does to impact this world?
Angels do have power to interact with this world when God allows it.

Next everyone has told you that not all is written in the bible. You refuse to believe this even though the bible itself says this. And even when they do show you, you ignore it.

I did not claim that all things true are written in the Bible. What am saying is that the claim that Mary is without sin and can intercede for you is not found or grounded in the Scriptures. It is not an apostolic doctrine since it was never taught by them.

So again I guess the big difference between our faiths is we do not believe in death. We believe that Jesus took away death on the cross. We believe in the Power of the Holy Spirit, and we believe in the Power of prayer and intercession. You I can see don’t. So I guess its what you believe and do not believe.

I do believe in these things. What i don’t believe that a prayer to a creature other than God is something a Christian is to do.

We believe this because Jesus told us I am alway’s with you.

I agree

We believe that you can exist and not be seen. We do not believe in life after death, we believe there is no death.

What do you when you go to funerals?

We believe we will see our loved ones again, just like Christ promised, and we believe that they are with him in heaven.

I to believe i will see my loved ones who believed in Christ. I don’t think this will be true of those that have rejected Him.

Just like The Blessed Mother, Jesus, the angels and saints. We believe that Jesus can give them the power to help us by their prayers because the bible tells us. We believe that they also can use our prayers.

You can believe this but you cannot ground this in Scripture. You must believe this on other grounds i.e. what your church says. However, when we look at their grounds for teaching these things they won’t be able to ground it in Scripture. Without the Scriptures you don’t have an apostolic foundation.

 

[rinnie]

yeshualuver. If Mary was not the Mother of God who was she? Why are we told that she is the Blessed One. The one who has found favor with God. The one God picked to be the Mother of Jesus. Is not Jesus also God. If Mary was a vessel are we not vessels. For Mary was Human. We are not saying she was not human. But Mary was chosen and given special Grace the moment she was conceived in Anna’s womb. Anna and her husband gave up Mary to God. Anna’s husband went out to the desert for 40 days and fasted just like Abraham. And Anna was also praying and asking for a child. He came back from the desert and Mary was conceived. You think thats just dumb luck. I don’t think so. It was what God choose. Not us God.

 

[justasking4]

Also ja4 you are going by the word of a man. His name is Luther. Let me give you a luther quote

quote: we are obliged to YIELD many things to the Catholics that they possess the word of God, Which we received from them, otherwise we should have known nothing at all. unquote

Just because he took books out of the bible does not mean we did. see maccabees Chapter 12 39-46.

It may also interest yout to know that the earliest mention for the dead public Christian Worship is by the writer tertullian in 211 ad.

mach. 12:46 It is therefore a holy and wholesome thought to pray for the dead, that they may be loosed from sins.

Again what gave Luther the authority to take out books from the bible. What bible was here first the Catholic or SJV. The truth is the truth. But you still refuse to accept it.

Interesting comments. However this is off topic and if i get into a dicussion here i will expierence the wrath of my “friends” and be accused of derailing the topic.