Did Jesus have a fallen human nature?

[Wesrock]

@HollowMan

Please show us where I even said she said that “Mary had to be sinless so that Jesus would be without sin”.

Catholics will tell you that Jesus did not have original sin because Mary was preserved from sin.

When asked for your source:

1KE in this very thread

And yet, literally the first response to the OP in this thread is from a Catholic saying Jesus did not have a sin nature because Mary was preserved from sin.

I am not being dishonest about what you said. You literally said it in nearly the exact same words multiple times.

 

[goout]

It’s not based on tradition because we have an authoritative and objective written record with codified doctrines on which to base our religion.

The scriptures were all over in the hands of faithful Jews, rabbis, etc. New scripture, as was written was disseminated among the churches.

So you are claiming the scriptures were found already written? When were they written?
Isn’t it a fact that before the scriptures were written, “all” you had was the Tradition of the Church, based on Christ and the oral testimony of His Body?

Please correct me if I am wrong, but your faith is based on the witness of human beings, prior to writ.

 

[HollowMan]

Yes. 2/3 of the scriptures were already written. That’s why Jesus said “It is written…” or “You have heard it said…”

Yes, you are wrong.

 

[goout]

Yes. 2/3 of the scriptures were already written. That’s why Jesus said “It is written…” or “You have heard it said…”

Yes, you are wrong.

You are not even answering the question. You are just claiming I am wrong.

When were the Gospels written?
Where were the Gospels when Jesus walked the earth?
Where were the Gospels when Jesus ascended?
Where were the Gospels for the decades after that?

The OT was not remotely canonized into the bible you are carrying now.
And the Gospels were not even written for decades after.
And you deny the Tradition of the Church?
Whose traditions are you following then?

Don’t reflex to “the bible” because as we just said:
The NT, the OT, and the bible did not exist for decades after Jesus lived. The OT existed as collections of writings, but not canonized.
You had collections of OT writings, and collections of NT oral Tradition, all handed down within the community, then committed to writ.
The living community is prior to the Gospels. So in that sense we can say Christ himself is The Word, and his Mystical Body contains the fullness of the faith.

 

[goout]

I am amazed at how many Christians have never thought about this question.
Good people who’s faith is based in the Holy Scriptures, and have never thought about how the Scriptures they revere came to be.

Scripture is not God. That’s bibliolatry.
Scripture reveals God. Revelation points to God, not to revelation for it’s own sake.

 

[HollowMan]

Actually, I did answer your question. If you meant the Gospels, you should have said the Gospels. But you did not. You said “the scriptures”. I’m not Catholic, so I cannot speak for Catholic traditions or folklore, but we Christians consider the books of the Old Testament, which were in existence, known by every Jew, and quoted frequently by Christ, to be the scriptures at the time of Christ’s incarnation.

I get that your natural inclination is to be rude to non-Catholics, even though I’ve been nothing but respectful to you, but your failure to express yourself clearly is not a refusal to answer a question on my part.