Could The Blessed Virgin have lived a sinless life?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Church_Militant
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
michael777
Code: 
  someone wrote
"It makes no sense whatever for God to command us to do the impossible when the Word of God clearly says that “with God all things are possible”.
Click to expand...
Yes and God made all things possible by faith.
Click to expand...
Scripture specifically says no one can become rightious by obeying the law.
so if the augument anyone makes on this subject is this
Mary didnt sin by obeying the law totally
she still wasnt rightious.
Click to expand...
and those who arent rightious must be able to sin in some way.
isnt that true?
Click to expand...
for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God. - Romans 3:23
Click to expand...
the word of God cannot be borken
ALL includes Mary unless ofcourse she wasnt part of the human race in which case christ wasnty fully human!!!
Click to expand...
You have totally missed the point of this discussion but happily jumped in with a Couple of NT verses that you hear at every service you attend…

No one alleges that Mary could not have sinned, since that would make her essentially without free will and we know better.

What I am saying is that she was indeed sinless by the grace of God that she cooperated with.

Did God not call us all to be sinless as Christians? Certainly!

Would God command us to do something that was impossible for us as humans and then not supply us with the grace to do the impossible? I don’t believe so.

What is the key to leading a sinless life as God has commanded us? Obedience:in other words our cooperation with the superabundance of His gift of grace in our lives.

Is this salvation by works? NO. This is salvation by the grace of God since it is by HIS power that we are able to do this thing. Just as any miracle is not done by our own power or but by the power of God unleashed by our cooperative faith.

Mary’s life was one that was full of such miraculous cooperation with Almighty God’s grace.
Pax vobiscum,

non est hic sed surrexit (He is not here, but is risen)
 
40.png
michael777:
for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God. - Romans 3:23

the word of God cannot be borken
ALL includes Mary unless of course she wasnt part of the human race in which case christ wasnty fully human!!!
Click to expand...
Romans 3:23 has something other than your knee jerk, anti-Mother-Of God interpretation in mind, unless YOU are infallible.
ps. Get a spell checker, or a typing tutor, or both.

Luke 1 :48 Because he hath regarded the humility of his handmaid; for behold from henceforth all generations shall call me blessed.

Luke 1:52 He hath put down the mighty from their seat, and hath exalted the humble.

Matthew 18:4 Whosoever therefore shall humble himself as this little child, he is the greater in the kingdom of heaven.

Matthew 23:12 And whosoever shall exalt himself shall be humbled: and he that shall humble himself shall be exalted.

Luke 11 :28 But he said: Yea rather,** blessed** are they who hear the word of God, and keep it.
So, where is the “sin requirement” here?

Matthew 5 :10 Blessed are they that suffer persecution (from Michael777 et al) for justice’ sake: for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.

Matthew 5 :11 Blessed are ye (Mother) when they (Michael777 et al) shall revile you, and persecute you, and speak all that is evil against you, untruly, for my sake:

Good luck on your indictment of the “Mother of my Lord”. I’m sure Satan is patting you on the head. And Christ is looking at your audacity.
 
:Romans 3:23 has something other than your knee jerk, anti-Mother-Of God interpretation in mind, unless YOU are infallible.
ps. Get a spell checker, or a typing tutor, or both.:

Hi i have come here today and joined this baord only to find anger and nasty personal comments when i put forward concrete unrefutable qoutations from scripture.
Why do people resort to insults when they find something in scripture disagreable?

And why do people argue with me about “how i interpratate scripture”
when they are only dong the same thing.
 
As for pictures to convince anyone the validity of the truth or not of the mother of Jesus, spiritual state?

This is a totally inadequate argument.
its silly.
 
you wrote

If this is a sinner, I want to be one too.

you mean you want to be a picture?
 
TNT said:
Do you love your Mother?

Yep, I’d even turn water into wine if She asked me.
You would? Yep, and I’d give Her a crown of stars, if it was in my power, that is.
http://truecatholic.bizland.com/images/OurLady/OurLady29.jpg
Scripture in a picture
I’d even put the moon under her feet!
Really? Surely you’re exagerating. Wouldn’t that be …well, idolotry? Sort of?
Click to expand...

that i must point out is in the book of Revelation and is itself a symbolic description of fistly ISREAL BRINGING FORTH THE MESSIAH THROUGH MARY
AND ALSO THE WOMAN IS THE CHIRCH OF CHRIST
" the rest of here offspring"
Mary wasnt the only target of satans wrath!!
Just imagine one person being satans only target!!

thank God.
 
michael777 said:
:Romans 3:23 has something other than your knee jerk, anti-Mother-Of God interpretation in mind, unless YOU are infallible.
ps. Get a spell checker, or a typing tutor, or both.:

Hi i have come here today and joined this baord only to find anger and nasty personal comments when i put forward concrete unrefutable qoutations from scripture.
Why do people resort to insults when they find something in scripture disagreable?

And why do people argue with me about “how i interpratate scripture”
when they are only dong the same thing.
Click to expand...

Dear “friendly” protestant,
  1. We love for you to quote Irrefutable Scripture. It’s the Diary of the Catholic Church. Without her you wouldn’t know there was a NT “inspired” set of 27 books.
  2. When you have no authority to interpret it, and proceed to do so against the Catholic Church, what were you expecting? A party for you maybe.
  3. When you indict the Mother of my Lord as a mere sinner who goes around sinning against Her own Son, expect a little adversarial response. At least a little rain on your parade.
  4. Tell me, in front of God, why do you post here?
    I’d really like to know.
    Our impression is that you came to teach protestant theology of one sort or another.
    Are we wrong?
ps. We never get angry. Sometimes we do rebuke.
 
posted by michael777

Hi i have come here today and joined this baord only to find anger and nasty personal comments when i put forward concrete unrefutable qoutations from scripture.
Why do people resort to insults when they find something in scripture disagreable?

And why do people argue with me about “how i interpratate scripture”
when they are only dong the same thing
Click to expand...
.

Irrefutable? Not quite. I do realize you are new here, but if you had read before, this scripture has been discussed.

Are you aware that Martin Luther would not have agreed with your interpretation of Scripture? No Christian for over 1600 years interpreted Scripture in the way you have.

Scripture does however, tell us to beware of those who will come with false doctrines. Historically, all Christian denominations have come after the Catholic Church. Historically, we can provide documentation that scripture has been interpreted as other Catholic Christians here have stated. Historically, you come preaching false doctrine when you deny Mary’s sinlessness.

All are sinners. Does that mean infants are sinners? What about mentally handicapped? Are they sinners even though they can not tell right from wrong? Is it possible that those that Paul was speaking to understood when he said all, they already understood there were exceptions that weren’t listed one by one? There are other places in Scripture where All is used but clearly does not mean all. Have you read this? catholic.com/library/Immaculate_Conception_and_Assum.asp

History agrees with the Catholic interpretation of Scripture. I sincerly hope you actually read the very short tract that I provided a link to.

Please do.

Your sister in Christ,
Maria

p.s. And you will encounter hostility when you denigrate a person’s mother. What you fail to comprehend, is the very realness of Mary not only being Jesus’ Mother but our Mother also. When Jesus said on the cross to John this is your mother, this is also been taught that Jesus was not only giving His mother to John, but the whole Church. When you innocently (As in you know no better), yet falsely, speak of our Mother, of your Mother, you will be corrected. Sometimes harshly.
 
40.png
michael777:
that i must point out is in the book of Revelation and is itself a symbolic description of fistly ISREAL BRINGING FORTH THE MESSIAH THROUGH MARY
AND ALSO THE WOMAN IS THE CHIRCH OF CHRIST
" the rest of here offspring"
Mary wasnt the only target of satans wrath!!
Just imagine one person being satans only target!!

thank God.
Click to expand...
There you go, interpreting again. We did that 1000’s of years ago.
Let us know when your Authorized Interpretor Certificate gets posted, so we can throw down 2000 years of exegesis by the greatest minds in Church history, and cling to yours.
However, I must admit you are closer to the truth that the Church teaches on this one. It’s just incomplete.
ps. I wonder why Mary was such a big target if she was Satans’s ally by being a sinner…against Her own Son?
 
michael777 said:
:
And why do people argue with me about “how i interpratate scripture”
when they are only dong the same thing.
Click to expand...

We are NOT doing the same thing. Watch the difference:
  1. You interpret to suit your own pre-ordered private beliefs, whatever they may be today, tomorrow or next year.
    That’s why we demand your “Authority Certificate”. And it better have The True Church of Christ Apostle’s signature on it…preferably Peter.
  2. We only “ECHO” accurately the constant teaching of the one who has authority to interpret - The True Church of Christ - to whom He gave that authority.
BIG DIFFERENCE, NO?
 
TNT said:
Do you love your Mother?

Yep, I’d even turn water into wine if She asked me.
You would? Yep, and I’d give Her a crown of stars, if it was in my power, that is.
http://truecatholic.bizland.com/images/OurLady/OurLady29.jpg
Scripture in a picture
I’d even put the moon under her feet!
Really? Surely you’re exagerating. Wouldn’t that be …well, idolotry? Sort of?
Click to expand...

That i must point out is in the book of Revelation and is itself a symbolic description of ISREAL(The woman) BRINGING FORTH THE MESSIAH THROUGH MARY (the woman)
AND ALSO THE WOMAN IS THE CHURCH OF CHRIST (the women)
ie." the rest of her offspring"

Mary wasnt the only target of satans wrath!!
Just imagine one person being satans only target!!

thank God.
 
40.png
michael777:
As for pictures to convince anyone the validity of the truth or not of the mother of Jesus, spiritual state?

This is a totally inadequate argument.
its silly.
Click to expand...
It says in all cases: “Scripture in a picture”.

It’s a representation of belief. Unless one is a scriptural bimbo.

t wasn’t an argument, unless YOU want to make it one.

RE:
If this is a sinner, I want to be one too.
you mean you want to be a picture?
Click to expand...
You must have missed the under Title which says:
Sinner being honored by an Archangel
But your smart alec immature know-it all remark is so noted.
 
40.png
TNT:
We are NOT doing the same thing. Watch the difference:
  1. You interpret to suit your own pre-ordered private beliefs, whatever they may be today, tomorrow or next year.
    That’s why we demand your “Authority Certificate”. And it better have The True Church of Christ Apostle’s signature on it…preferably Peter.
  2. We only “ECHO” accurately the constant teaching of the one who has authority to interpret - The True Church of Christ - to whom He gave that authority.
BIG DIFFERENCE, NO?
Click to expand...
you are making asumptions here
You interpret to suit your own pre-ordered private beliefs, whatever they may be today, tomorrow or next year.
i dont do that at all.

Did Peter have sole authority to interprete scripture?
no.

I have one teacher and his name is the christ
And also i have the spirit of truth
you may think or disagree and say i havent but i know i have, And that spirit leads me into ALL truth.

So i rely on Jesus christ and my faith in him To guide me by The Holy spirit, i dont rely on mens teachings.
This was the truth and always has been.
If im listeneing to other people be they men or women, I judge what they are saying in regards to the truth By THE TRUTH.

simple as that

That is why i dont listen to the pope when he says Jesus has the same father as allah
He did that when he said Muslims and christians adore and worship the same God.
Not even allah himself would agree with your pope on that.

And that to me is a sure sign of total lack of the Spirit of truth coming from The pope.

There is no argument.
Unless you deny the words of both the new testament and the koran also.
 
I don’t like to argue from silence, but since none of the Gospels tell us Mary was at the tomb on Easter Sunday waiting for her son to appear alive, I think it’s fair to say she was not there.

Why?

Were she sinless, wouldn’t she (unlike the disciples) have had no difficulty believing his promise to arise from the dead? What mother that you know would NOT be at the grave if she expected her son to arise that day?

But my problem is theological: how can someone born of a sinless woman qualify as a representative of those whose sins he would bear on the cross?

JohnRef
 
40.png
JohnRef:
I don’t like to argue from silence, but since none of the Gospels tell us Mary was at the tomb on Easter Sunday waiting for her son to appear alive, I think it’s fair to say she was not there.

Why?

Were she sinless, wouldn’t she (unlike the disciples) have had no difficulty believing his promise to arise from the dead? What mother that you know would NOT be at the grave if she expected her son to arise that day?

But my problem is theological: how can someone born of a sinless woman qualify as a representative of those whose sins he would bear on the cross?

JohnRef
Click to expand...
That is a good point

Wasn’t it God himself who told Eve that her seed (not literally eves but a descendent- MARY)
Would crush the serpents head and he would bruise his heel.

God said this AFTER EVE HAD SINNED!!!
 
40.png
michael777:
you are making asumptions here
You interpret to suit your own pre-ordered private beliefs, whatever they may be today, tomorrow or next year.
** i dont do that at all**.
Click to expand...
You certainly do. Name the person that gave you the interpretation. And I don’t mean GNOSTICALLY as in the Spirit of Wisom talks to and guides me. Anyone can claim that, because it can’t be proven.
I’m betting it was the Churches of Christ sect. But I may be wrong. It just sounds sooo familiar.
Did Peter have sole authority to interprete scripture?
no.
Click to expand...
If you read the bible the same lame way you read my posts, no wonder you’re so arragant.
I said ONE of the Apostles PREFERABLY Peter.
This comes off to you as “Peter have SOLE authority…”
I have one teacher and his name is the christ
Click to expand...
Oh yea, and no one else does. UNLESS they agree with YOU. Which in the end makes YOU the teacher.
And also i have the spirit of truth
you may think or disagree and say i havent but i know i have, And that spirit leads me into ALL truth.
Click to expand...
Great! Another GNOSTIC secret line of Exclusive Superior Knowledge. Just what we all needed!
So i rely on Jesus christ and my faith in him To guide me by The Holy spirit, i dont rely on mens teachings.
This was the truth and always has been.
If im listeneing to other people be they men or women, **I judge what they are saying **in regards to the truth By THE TRUTH.
Click to expand...
You got part of it right: "I judge what they are saying "
That is why i dont listen to the pope when he says Jesus has the same father as allah
Click to expand...
No Catholic has to take literally what a pope says when he is not speaking as a Universal Teacher. Certainly not when he is making a diplomatic remark to a group of Muslims.
Theoretically a pope could be a personal outrageous heretic. But the Church is protected by God Himself against him ever raising his heresy to the level of universal teaching.
We had a number of quacky popes; about 7% last I checked. They never once taught heresy as a Universal Truth that Catholics are required to believe.
And that is the TRUE protection of Truth by the Holy Spirit wherein “the Gates of Hell shall not PREVAIL against the CHURCH”. That is what we rely on. Not the personal remarks or personal theology of any one pope.

We have the whole 2000 yr history of Exegesis to look to when we seek to know with certainty what the Church of Christ requires us to believe. We don’t really need you for that or a pope’s diplomatic remarks to Muslims.

You, on the other hand have only yourself and a belief in secret divine knowledge that any lunatic could likewise claim, and no one could prove it either way. Clever, but pretty obvious that it is really no proof at all.

ps. Michael. I have nothing personal against. In fact I rather like your hutzpah. So don’t take it too personal. And think twice before you make childish remarks like “do you want to be a picture?” That Just crushes your credibility. Thanks.

BTW:
This is not a fertile field for converting people. Most of us are here because we long ago graduated from high school bible study and private interpretation. The best thing you can do is to make inquiry on questions that NO WHERE else, have you found an answer.
Remember, Catholcs have been answering prot’s for 500 years. We have a pretty solid set of exegesis to go back on.

I also admit that my apologetics can be pretty strong wine. Some call it Vinegar.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top