If Mary was born without original sin, why then did Jesus say?

[Giver]

cazayoux:

Church Authority: A quick guide for those with a couple of minutes… and who here doesn’t have a couple of minutes for truth?

---

**Jesus founded ONE church **
[Matt 16:18]

Jesus established an authoritative church
John 8:32; 14:6; 18:37; 18:15-17
1 Tim 3:15 (What IS the pillar and foundation of truth? … not the bible, but the church)

Remember that the bible has authority BECAUSE the church has authority. Remember that the bible is a Catholic book.

Jesus established a visible church
Eph 5:23
John 17:20-23
Acts 4:32
1 Cor 1:10

If it was an invisible church, how would we go to it to resolve issues? It had to be a church that we could go to.

THAT authority is apostolic
Matt 28:18-19 (all authority is given to Jesus)
John 20:21 (he gives THAT authority to the apostles)
Luke 10:16
John 14:16-17,26; 16:13

THAT church is infallible on teachings of faith and morals
Acts 8:30-31 (we need a guide … wouldn’t God give us an infallible guide?)
1 John 4:6
1 Peter 1:12

i know what some might be thinking: “that was then, those same apostles aren’t alive today. that authority is gone or no longer necessary.”

Apostolic succession
Matt 28:19-20 ("… to the end of the age …")
1 Cor 12:28 (“apostles, prophets, teachers”)
Acts 1:15-26 (filling Judas’s position - he was gone, yet the office remained)
1 Tim 1:18 (Paul passes on authority to Timothy)
1 Cor 4:17 (instruction to respect Timothy - FULL authority)
2 Tim 1: 13-14 (asserting his teaching authority)
2 Tim 2: 2 (4 generations of apostolic succession in this line)
Titus 1:5-7 (appoint elders)
1 Tim 1:3; 4:11-13 (“command and teach these things”)
2 Tim 1:6 (laying on of hands … to ordain others)
1 Tim 4:14; 5:22 (“which was conferred on you … hands”, “lay hands”)

With this knowledge and understanding that the one, holy, catholic and apostolic church founded by Jesus is authoritative, infallible, and alive through succession … which church would that be?
Only the Catholic Church can trace that visible, authoritative succession back to the first apostles.

Cheers!

michel

I am not trying to get into an argument about if the Catholic Church is the one true church or not, I haven’t studied enough church history for that.

I do have a question though; in THE BOOK OF REVELATION God tell John about seven different churches. Each and every one had (Revelation 2:4) Nevertheless, I have this complaint to make;” and then God goes on to tell them to repent. This was in the beginning of Christianity and already Jesus had to send a prophet because the Church wasn’t walking a straight line. So if there were multiple churches then and they were all in need of correction, why isn’t that so today?
Giver

 

[Giver]

FCEGM:

Yes - and this has to do what with the OP’s original question and Fergal’s and my responses?

I am sorry I believe I posted this in the wrong thread.
Giver

 

[Giver]

Della:

So, there are no Protestant ministers who have ever grievously sinned? And, Protestant ministers who have sinned grievously ought to be shunned by their fellow ministers instead of corrected and helped? You are applying a standard to individual Catholic bishops that you are not applying to Protestants bishops and ministers. Besides, the Church has never claimed impeccability for its priests and bishops. You plainly misunderstand the nature of the Church which is both human and divine. In its humanity its ministers are sinners just like everyone else. In its divinity, as the Body of Christ, it cannot err in matters of faith and morals because Christ is its head who cannot contradict himself.

As to “getting back the word of God,” the Church has the word of God given to it by Christ himself passed on to the Apostles and their successors. The Bible is a part of that body of teaching, which is called Sacred Tradition. The Bible is embedded in the Church not the other way around.

Because someone else is doing wrong does that justify your wrongdoing?

 

[javelin]

all4one:

Forgive me, but I can not in any way see how you can just claim that J the B was ‘without the stain of original sin’ just because he was ‘greatest born of a woman’. These are the kind of speculations that make me bonkers. Why does everything have to be nailed down and filed in a nice little catholic box instead of reading the scripture as if it were the Living Word of God and see what it’s saying about the grace of the Kingdom. Could it possibly mean that John truly followed the commandments and the prophetic teachings and taught others also (including his introducing the Messiah)? Could it mean the Jesus was illustrating that even though John was a perfect Jew - that still he could not enter the Kingdom except by GRACE. As great as his works were- only Grace gets you in. John did get in but it was by GRACE. ‘The least in the Kingdom is greater the John’ meaning *In Christ * one is far greater than any personality.
Al

I’m sorry if there was a misunderstanding, but what you said above (bolded) is not what was claimed. I don’t think that that one statement makes any particular claim about J the B’s spiritual state at birth. Other passages of Sacred Scripture support the idea that John was baptised in the womb of his mother:
Luke 1:

Luke 1:13 But the angel said to him: Fear not, Zachary, for thy prayer is heard; and thy wife Elizabeth shall bear thee a son, and thou shalt call his name John: 14 And thou shalt have joy and gladness, and many shall rejoice in his nativity. 15 For he shall be great before the Lord; and shall drink no wine nor strong drink: and he shall be filled with the Holy Ghost, even from his mother’s womb.

Thus, since J the B was filled with the Holy Spirit in his mother’s womb, at the time of his birth he must have been free from Original Sin.

Seems scriptural to me.

The reason why this was brought up in the first place was the question by the OP, which said, essentially, how could Mary have been born without Original Sin if J the B was the greatest person born of woman? Well, J the B was born without Original Sin also, so at least on that issue there is no difference between the two.

The biggest problem with the question is that it assumes being born (or conceived) without sin makes one “great.” Just because someone receives a “better” gift from God does not make them “greater” than someone else. Both the Immaculate Conception and John’s pre-birth baptism are gifts from God, unmerited by their receipients, and therefore have no bearing on their respective “greatness”.

I think your interpretation is pretty good.

It could also take a slightly different meaning, though, if you consider that at times the “Kingdom of Heaven” referred not to Heaven itself, but to the Church era of the new, everlasting covenant. We are living in that kingdom now, as we have been baptised into Christ and serve Him as our Lord, High Priest, and King. So, that means that even the least of us living Christians is “greater” than John the Baptist.

Think about that a bit.

Peace,
javelin

 

[all4one]

I’m sorry if there was a misunderstanding, but what you said above (bolded) is not what was claimed. I don’t think that that one statement makes any particular claim about J the B’s spiritual state at birth. Other passages of Sacred Scripture support the idea that John was baptised in the womb of his mother:

Thanks for clearing that up.

The biggest problem with the question is that it assumes being born (or conceived) without sin makes one “great.” Just because someone receives a “better” gift from God does not make them “greater” than someone else. Both the Immaculate Conception and John’s pre-birth baptism are gifts from God, unmerited by their receipients, and therefore have no bearing on their respective “greatness”.

Yes, I see what you mean. It’s what we do (by His grace)with the gift that determines real greatness.

It could also take a slightly different meaning, though, if you consider that at times the “Kingdom of Heaven” referred not to Heaven itself, but to the Church era of the new, everlasting covenant. We are living in that kingdom now, as we have been baptised into Christ and serve Him as our Lord, High Priest, and King. So, that means that even the least of us living Christians

is “greater” than John the Baptist.
This is very good. I couldn’t agree more. Special emphasis on LIVING Christians, meaning active faith.

Think about that a bit.

I hope to think about it the rest of my life. Peace to you, Al
Peace,
javelin

 

[Della]

Giver:

Because someone else is doing wrong does that justify your wrongdoing?

Who said anything about wrongdoing by Protestant ministers “justifying” anything? Not me.

Your point was that ONLY the Catholic Church could be in trouble/wrong BECAUSE of the wrongdoings of SOME of it’s bishops and priests.

MY point was simply that NOT ONLY CATHOLIC PRIESTS BUT PROTESTANT MINISTERS SIN TOO!!!

GET IT NOW???

Or should I have been more subtle?

 

[Pedro]

Giver:

I do have a question though; in THE BOOK OF REVELATION God tell John about seven different churches. Each and every one had (Revelation 2:4) Nevertheless, I have this complaint to make;” and then God goes on to tell them to repent. This was in the beginning of Christianity and already Jesus had to send a prophet because the Church wasn’t walking a straight line. So if there were multiple churches then and they were all in need of correction, why isn’t that so today?
Giver

The Church does not teach that anyone is impeccable (unable to sin), not even the pope. It does not teach that individual priests and bishops are infalliable (unable to teach error).

The Church teaches that the pope is infalliable only when officially teaching on faith and morals.

As you see, Church teaching does not contradict Rev 2:4. So now the question - when someone needs correcting or there is disagreement on an major issue, who has the authority to resolve it? Read Acts 15 to see how they did it during the apostle’s time.

Which church today listens to the successor of Peter?

 

[Giver]

Pedro:

The Church does not teach that anyone is impeccable (unable to sin), not even the pope. It does not teach that individual priests and bishops are infalliable (unable to teach error).

The Church teaches that the pope is infalliable only when officially teaching on faith and morals.

As you see, Church teaching does not contradict Rev 2:4. So now the question - when someone needs correcting or there is disagreement on an major issue, who has the authority to resolve it? Read Acts 15 to see how they did it during the apostle’s time.

Which church today listens to the successor of Peter?

What make you so sure that the present Pope is Peter’s successor? I believe the history of the succession is quite murky.

 

[Giver]

Della:

Who said anything about wrongdoing by Protestant ministers “justifying” anything? Not me.

Your point was that ONLY the Catholic Church could be in trouble/wrong BECAUSE of the wrongdoings of SOME of it’s bishops and priests.

MY point was simply that NOT ONLY CATHOLIC PRIESTS BUT PROTESTANT MINISTERS SIN TOO!!!

GET IT NOW???

Or should I have been more subtle?

All you are telling me is that there are protestant ministers as well as Catholic ministers, who don’t know God.

(1 John 3: 3 - 9) “Surely everyone who entertains this hope must purify himself, must try to be as pure as Christ. Any one who sins at all breaks the law, because to sin is to break the law. Now you know that He appeared in order to abolish sin, and that in Him there is no sin; anyone who lives in God does not sin, and anyone who sins has never seen Him or known Him. My children do not let anyone lead you astray; to live a holy life is to be holy just as He is holy; to lead a sinful life is to belong to the Devil, since the Devil was a sinner from the beginning. It was to undo all that the Devil has done that the Son of God appeared. No one who has been begotten by God sins: because God’s seed remains inside him, he cannot sin when he has been begotten by God.”

By the way I am in no way trying to defend any Christian denominational Church.

 

[Promotor_Fidei]

Giver:

What make you so sure that the present Pope is Peter’s successor? I believe the history of the succession is quite murky.

Are you one of those who believes that true Christianity disappeared just after St. Paul penned his letters and was rediscovered a millennia and a half later by Martin Luther? I’m curious.

 

[MGEISING]

Giver:

I think the Catholic Church needs to repent and go back to the Word of God, so it can again walk in the powers of the Holy Spirit.

(1 Corinthians 4:19-21) “but I will be visiting you soon, the Lord willing, and then I shall want to know not what these self-important people have to say, but what they can do, since the kingdom of God is not just words, it is power. It is for you to decide: do I come with a stick in my hand or in a spirit of love and goodwill?

If the Catholics Bishops were the successors of the apostles would they have not come to the priest, as Paul said he would have come, who committed all those evil deeds? What power are the Catholics Bishops walking in?

(1 Corinthians 5:11) “What I wrote was that you should not associate with a brother Christian who is leading an immoral life, or is a usurer, or idolatrous, or a slanderer, or a drunkard or is dishonest; you should not even eat a meal with people like that.”

Were not the Bishops and priest eating with these evil priest?
Giver

Who did Jesus most dine and associate with the most?

As far as the Bishops/Priests are concerned - they were/are wrong and they will be judge - but it shouldn’t come from sinners like you and I. IT shall come from God.

Becareful Giver … when I read your posts, you tend to be on the verge offensiveness. It would be nice if your posts were filled with the Holy Spirit.

Have a Blessed and Holy Day.

Mgeising

 

[Will_Pick]

steveandersen:

let’s not go off on an evolution tangent

Mary was “CONCEIVE” WITH OUT SIN JOHN THE BAPTIST WAS BORN WITH OUT OR.

 

[MGEISING]

Richard_Hurtz:

Satan was not ‘born of a woman’.

The devil was not a man - he was an angel - and fell from grace!

 

[David_Zampino]

Giver:

What make you so sure that the present Pope is Peter’s successor? I believe the history of the succession is quite murky.

Upon what do you base your belief?

What is your understanding of the history of Papal Apostolic Succession?

Blessings,

 

[E.E.N.S]

MGEISING:

Becareful Giver … when I read your posts, you tend to be on the verge offensiveness. It would be nice if your posts were filled with the Holy Spirit.

He’s the same way on other forums as well…

 

[Jake99]

John the Baptist was more special and talented than any other of his time, aside from Jesus. And yet John was so off course that the least of those who accept the Messiah as leader, will be greater than John the Baptist. That is to say that Jesus stood against the ways of John to a degree that is infinate. And yet in this wicked world which is the same as today, John the Baptist was a relative of Jesus. John the Baptist lost his head because he was the best of this way of life and the worst in the next. Remember, John and Judas were important people in the mission of Jesus and very special to and loved by God and Jesus. Just as Satan was built by God to fall under the foot of Jesus and be cast into the lake of fire when the world stands behind the the Messiah.

What you are looking for is the most talented family on the planet, and especially the one among them that stands against them and the governing systems of this world. The story was writen yesterday so all would understand who they seek. The Messiah stands alone far above you, but all can in the twinkling of an eye be greater than the greatest of today and much closer to Christ.

 

[Richard_Hurtz]

MGEISING:

The devil was not a man - he was an angel - and fell from grace!

No kidding.

If you had read further back, I was actually responding to someone had given the ‘answer’ of Satan to the question “Name someone who was not born of a woman.”

The reponses of Adam, Eve, Satan, etc…all fail for the same resaon: they were all created (none was born of a woman).

But thanks for ‘correcting’ me.

Blessings,
Richard

 

[MGEISING]

Richard_Hurtz:

No kidding.

If you had read further back, I was actually responding to someone had given the ‘answer’ of Satan to the question “Name someone who was not born of a woman.”

The reponses of Adam, Eve, Satan, etc…all fail for the same resaon: they were all created (none was born of a woman).

But thanks for ‘correcting’ me.

Blessings,
Richard

Hi -sorry for the mis-communication - I wasn’t correcting you - I was just re-iterating that you were correct

I know many people who do not know the status of the Devil. Kind of scary - and their Catholic!

So - hopefully - you aren’t offended - that wasn’t my intention!

Have a Blessed Day!

Mgeising

 

[MGEISING]

E.E.N.S.:

He’s the same way on other forums as well…

Well that is too bad - because you can never win anyone with that type of attitude - don’t you agree.

I think I will ignore HIS posts fron now on … he seems prejudice … and I am not comfortable with that feeling!

Thanks for the time!

 

[TobyLue]

Upon what do you base your belief?

What is your understanding of the history of Papal Apostolic Succession?

Blessings,

and

He’s the same way on other forums as well…

No sense trying to make Giver understand, because no matter how much proof he is given that his interpretations are all wrong, he closes his eyes, mind and reason because he was granted the gift of tongues and now Jesus speaks to him and told Giver to listen to Him only and that He would teach him. Thats why he comes here to convince us that we and the CC are all wrong. He was sent to give us the correct interpretations of scripture. I have seen same thing with others in different forums when they make claims that they have the Holy Spirit and only they have it right. The CC is wrong, the ECF’s were wrong even though there are many writings from the ECF’s that what they teach was learned directly from the apostles who were taught by Jesus. Apparently the apostles failed to give the ECF’s the correct information that is why Jesus now is giving Giver the correct interpretations. It’s a no win situation with him.

I think I will ignore HIS posts fron now on … he seems prejudice … and I am not comfortable with that feeling!

An excellent idea however, we must all pray for him.