Immaculate conceptions in the Bible, ...Mary?

[John_oxios]

Uhh…

John—

Something doesn’t sound right on the what u say here on Adam & Eva … in the Garden, …that last paragraph above. Please clarify what u have posted !!

Hi BRB3,
Read your bible through, not just for proof-texts. Adam and** Eva**? don’t know that one!

Some people would have you believe Adam and Eve were Cursed, Biblically not so.
Eve looses the original ease of herself and surrounding environment, her equality with Adam by becoming subject to him Gen 3:16.

Adam is not cursed, but by his misdeed he will have to work laboriously, until the day he physically dies.

Now in Gen 3:20, Adam names his spouse Eve, because she is the mother of all living.
(God creates Woman, Adam names her Eve, Christ is the 2nd Adam, He calls Mary, ‘Woman,’ Mary becomes Our spiritual Mother of all who believe in Christ)

God’s expulsion of Adam and Eve from the Garden is an act of mercy, not punishment. They were forbidden to eat of the Tree of Knowledge, but could it freely of the Tree of Life.
So If God allowed adam and Eve to remain in or return to the Garden, and they ate of the Tree of Life prior to Christ’s Sacrificial death, well we’d all be damned for eternity.

See:

Gen 3:22 Then the LORD God said, “Behold, the man has become like one of us, knowing good and evil; and now, lest he put forth his hand and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever”–

Gen 3:23 therefore the LORD God sent him forth from the garden of Eden, to till the ground from which he was taken.

God bless,
John

 

[John_oxios]

So, for crying out loud …why didn’t early church bring this topic into their writings ? Were they too scared that 1-3 rd century church couldn’t handle such a revelation of a SuperSaint woman ? Did we have to wait 18 centuries to announce the news …officially ?

I forgot who it was who stated most heresies were born out of the Church’s lack Written Doctrines.

Most doctrines were made because someone challenged a Church teaching, the Bishops met, decided what the Teaching was according to the Apostles and then formed as Doctrine.

This didn’t happen in the East, mostly in the west.

It wasn’t till the ninth or tenth century til some asked What do we mean by Real Presence in the Eucharist, It was a monk in an Abbey, well he didn’t like his Abbot’s explanation. so he wrote a book, on his own, without consent or his abbot or others. the Book is condemned by the Church, however it brought up the question which remained What do we mean by Real Presence in the Eucharist. a hundred or two years later, it became a big enough problem to call the Council of bishops, Thomas Aquinas came up with the philosophical explanation ‘Transubstantion.’
With This explanation the Eastern Church bowed out and separated, Why? They say no one can explain the Mysteries of God philosophically, that’s why there mysteries. But in the West, people demanded explanations.

As far as Mary goes, the Immaculate conception has been around since 1st century, but the Church couldn’t explain it till the 17th century philosopher came up with this explanation (paraphrased): While we were al from the pool and Christ saves us by pulling us out, Mary was prevented from being in the pool, how? By Christ’s sacrifice in Eternity. God is out of time, therefore Christ is Mary’s savior by having been prevented in eternity from Original sin.

God bless,
John

 

[KP3243]

Part of the problem is Protestants do not read the Bible how Jesus taught the apostles to read the Bible. This is especially true for American protestants. You only get a comprehensive New Testament to Old Testament view of scipture in the Catholic Church. Where the obvious connection to the Old Testament and New Testament occurs the protestants pick up on it but they don’t see things like Mary being the Ark of the New Covenant. The fact that Saint Luke uses an extremely rare verb only time it is used in the New Testament is to describe the joy Elizabeth exclaims when she hears Mary’s voice during the Visitation, this goes right over protestants. The fact that the verb is only seen in the Old Testament when a Levite has an encounter with the Ark of the Covenant And the word for shout or the word for Elizabeth’s greeting, anafametzen, is very rare. It’s used only in connection with those Old Testament liturgical ceremonies that were centered around the Ark. It literally means to “cry aloud, to proclaim or to intone.”
Saint Luke also us shows how in 2nd Samuel 6, there was a journey to the hill country of Judah that the Ark of the Covenant took. Likewise, the same phrase is used to describe Mary’s journey to the hill country. In fact, the same phrase is used. Both David and Mary, “arose and made the journey.” In 2nd Samuel, 6:2 and Luke 1:39.

The Ark was so powerful anyone who touched it died. A Catholic view of sacred scripture reveals that all types or precursors in the Old Testament are inferior to their New Testament or Messianic types. Moses, Noah, Issaic and David are all inferior to Jesus. David’s mother the Queen Mother is inferior to Mary as is the Ark of the Covenant. God didn’t just use Joseph’s wife as a holding place until he she bore Him a son, Jesus. She was part of the plan of salvation from the beginning.

 

[peterorigenes]

Adam, Eve, Isaac & John the Baptist…are supported in Sacred Scripture. Do we have support for Mary or other of great saints?

If not, why not ?

The interesting word here is “supported”.

Life in Christ is the one essential thing for the original Church, I think. For St Paul the sacred Scriptures all had to be understood in this Christ-life, Jesus Christ as ressurected, the Risen One.

So nothing else really has to be supported.

 

[KP3243]

The Church usually defines a dogma when confusion enters the picture. No one questioned the Immaculate Conception for 1800 years until protestants in a effort to not be Catholic came up with this idea that she wasn’t immacuately conceived even though the apostles who were taught by Jesus himself and the Church had been teaching this for 1800 years.

 

[peterorigenes]

A Catholic view of sacred scripture reveals that all types or precursors in the Old Testament are inferior to their New Testament or Messianic types.

This is confused. For St Paul there was no “new testament”. For the first true and catholic movement of the Risen Christ, there was no New Testament. That is a much later compilation.

St Paul would not dream of putting a “new” testament after the sacred Scriptures. The whole Toran, prophets, psalms and wisdom literature was essentially about Messias and now the Messias is risen and we live in Him.

 

[John_oxios]

Tim…
Where did u come up with these scriptural connections to Mary ? Which ECF first searched scriptures for such & wrote of ? Origen perhaps ?

Hi,
It’s called typology, we also use allegory.

The Church teaches there are four ways to read scripture:

1 The literal or historical

2 the allegorical

3 the anagological

4 the tropilogical

 

[KP3243]

This is confused. For St Paul there was no “new testament”. For the first true and catholic movement of the Risen Christ, there was no New Testament. That is a much later compilation.

St Paul would not dream of putting a “new” testament after the sacred Scriptures. The whole Toran, prophets, psalms and wisdom literature was essentially about Messias and now the Messias is risen and we live in Him.

Saint Paul is one of the first to use the old testament type with the Messanic type. When the New Testament treats of the relation between Christ and Adam, the accent is largely on contrast. We are told, for example, that whereas Adam introduced sin and death into the world, Christ brought justification [Rom. 5.12-21]. Whereas corruption came from Adam, incorruptibility came from Christ [1 Cor. 15.20-49]. Disobedient Adam succumbed to temptation in the Garden, whereas the obedient Christ submitted to God’s will in the garden.

These contrasts would not be possible, however, unless the early Christians had already recognized between Christ and Adam some structure of analogy that prompted them to compare the two.

 

[KP3243]

St Paul, even as he contrasted Adam and Christ, called Adam ‘a type of him who was to come’ and went on immediately to speak of ‘the one Man Jesus Christ’ [Rom. 5.14-15). That is to say, the perceived analogy between Adam and Christ was the basis for contrasting them. They are both Adam,’ wrote Paul: ‘The first man Adam became a living being. The last Adam became a life-giving spirit’ [1 Cor. 15.45]. And he went on, ‘The first man was of the earth, made of dust; the second Man is the Lord from heaven’ [15.47].

Christ, according to the Apostle, is not only the ‘second Man,’ He is also ‘the last Adam,’ ‘the final Adam,’ the Adam by whom the world’s last age comes to be.

This eschatology pertains to the Incarnation, of which Paul had written earlier, 'when the fullness of the time had come, God sent forth his Son, born of a woman [Gal. 4.4]. The ‘fullness of time’ is the world’s last age. Although all of biblical history was a period of preparation for the Son’s assumption of our flesh, that assumption radically altered the direction and destiny of history. Adam was replaced.

 

[Gorgias]

The Church usually defines a dogma when confusion enters the picture. No one questioned the Immaculate Conception for 1800 years until protestants in a effort to not be Catholic came up with this idea that she wasn’t immacuately conceived even though the apostles who were taught by Jesus himself and the Church had been teaching this for 1800 years.

Well… this isn’t exactly true. It’s not that “no one questioned it” – see Aquinas’ issues with it, and Duns Scotus’ solution to resolve the problem – but, more to the point, in the 1800s, it was decided that the latest outbreak of ‘confusion’ warranted a dogmatic statement of faith.

 

[BiologyBrain]

Except for Mary’s own testimony, as told to Luke, and recorded in his Gospel. /// Where Mary acknowledged Jesus as her SAVIOR. (From Orig. Sin no doubt, and possibly Personal sin,)------- …if she was 'saved in adulthood, prior to (or at) Gabriel’s appearance.

Parsimony still indicates that since Jesus was the Word and the Word was God & not one thing was created without the Word, He transcends time. Mary did indeed require a Savior. However, you’re supposing that she had to have sin on her soul in order to be saved. Instead, in His infinite wisdom & mercy, Jesus’s sanctifying sacrifice made Mary the first to be saved. He saved her from original sin before it stained her soul. Just as a man can be saved from falling into a ravine either after he has already fallen or before he has fallen, so too did Jesus save Mary from sin too make her His true and worthy Mother. The most parsimonious theory is that Mary was saved by Christ’s sacrifice before the stain of sin could marr her soul. She, as the NT Ark was created by the use of pure materials. The OT Ark was not just created out of scraps laying around… No God laid out a very precise materials list and ordered only the finest materials be used. Again, parsimony and logic lead to the supposition that God would have no less care in the creation of the NT Ark, Mary.

 

[peterorigenes]

but the Church couldn’t explain it …

Explain ?

It is not about explaining, of course. It is about love for God. No one has ever explained Christ !! Try and it falls as dead leaves to the ground.

 

[John_oxios]

Explain ?

It is not about explaining, of course. It is about love for God. No one has ever explained Christ !! Try and it falls as dead leaves to the ground.

Hello Peterorigenes,

    is this your writing, or something you endorse:  From  'humiebo.nu'  on your personal page (public profile)

"Eastern and western religious practises often include control over passions. There is puritanism in hinduism, buddhism as well as conventional Christianity. This is the mind controlling content. Much of what is going on under the rubric of prayer and worships is simply the ego trying to control impulses, impressions, thoughts, feelings. Methodists in the Wesley tradition sometimes try to root out every sinful impulse from the body and brain. Much of catholic penitence is about the same endeavour.

Be at ease in Christ instead of this fretful mind control ! Look around, listen to sounds right hear, feel the body sitting or standing or walking. This is where Christ abides in you, nowhere else. In your fantasy there is only content about God, not the real thing. In you theology there is merely content and categories, not the embrace of Christ. But right here, in this very here-ness, God is talking as this life itself. It is not hard to realize this. My yoke is lights as air, says Christ in the Gospel."

Doesn’t seem like Byzantine Catholicism, which I have had some experience with locally.

As far as my statement of explaining, All of Paul’s letters his travels were/ are about explaining Christ to the known world, the entire Bible is about God as creator, The psalms are man’s prayers to God and God answers to man.

The Church is the living witness to Christ through the Apostles and which Christ Himself, established till His return.

God bless,
John

Chr

 

[John_oxios]

The interesting word here is “supported”.

Life in Christ is the one essential thing for the** original Church**, I think. For St Paul the sacred Scriptures all had to be understood in this Christ-life, Jesus Christ as ressurected, the Risen One.

So nothing else really has to be supported.

Original Church? There’s the Early Catholic Church, there’s today’s Catholic Church

Hbr 13:7 Remember your leaders, those who spoke to you the word of God; consider the outcome of their life, and imitate their faith.

mys·ta·gogue [mis-tuh-gawg, -gog]
noun
someone who instructs others before initiation into religious mysteries or before participation in the sacraments.
a person whose teachings are said to be founded on mystical revelations.

God Bless,
John

 

[John_oxios]

Adam, Eve, Isaac & John the Baptist…are supported in Sacred Scripture. Do we have support for Mary or other of great saints?

If not, why not ?

Well, obviously I must add Christ to the list … so 5 I see.

Mary’s not supported by Scripture? Her Cousin Elizabeth call her, Mother of our Lord"

An angel of God Hails her as full of Grace,& declares the LORD is with you

The only other use of the LORD is with you is in
Jdg 6:12 And the angel of the LORD appeared to him and said to him, “The LORD is with you, you mighty man of valor.”

Gideon is chosen to save Israel, Mary is also the Lord’s choice to save us through her role in our salvation in Christ incarnate.

As far as The Immaculate Conception

ewtn.com/library/papaldoc/jp2bvm23.htm

MMACULATE CONCEPTION DEFINED BY PIUS IX
Pope John Paul II

[excerpt of]

1. Down the centuries, the conviction that Mary was preserved from every stain of sin from her conception, so that she is to be called all holy, gradually gained ground in the liturgy and theology. At the start of the 19th century, this development led to a petition drive for a dogmatic definition of the privilege of the Immaculate Conception.

Around the middle of the century, with the intention of accepting this request, Pope Pius IX, after consulting the theologians, questioned the Bishops about the opportuneness and the possibility of such a definition, convoking as it were a “council in writing”. The result was significant: the vast majority of the 604 Bishops gave a positive response to the question.

After such an extensive consultation, which emphasized my venerable Predecessor’s concern to express the Church’s faith in the definition of the dogma, he set about preparing the document with equal care…

. Granted “by a singular grace and privilege of almighty God”, this preservation from original sin is an absolutely gratuitous divine favour, which Mary received at the first moment of her existence.

The dogmatic definition does not say that this singular privilege is unique, but lets that be intuited. The affirmation of this uniqueness, however, is explicitly stated in the Encyclical Fulgens corona of 1953, where Pope Pius XII speaks of “the very singular privilege which was never granted to another person” (AAS 45 [1953], 580), thus excluding the possibility, maintained by some but without foundation, of attributing this privilege also to St Joseph.

The Virgin Mother received the singular grace of being immaculately conceived “in view of the merits of Jesus Christ, Saviour of the human race”, that is, of his universal redeeming action.

The text of the dogmatic definition does not expressly declare that Mary was redeemed, but the same Bull Ineffabilis states elsewhere that “she was redeemed in the most sublime way”. This is the extraordinary truth: Christ was the redeemer of his Mother and carried out his redemptive action in her “in the most perfect way” (Fulgens corona, AAS 45 [1953], 581), from the first moment of her existence. The Second Vatican Council proclaimed that the Church “admires and exalts in Mary the most excellent fruit of the Redemption” (Sacrosanctum Concilium, n. 103)…

God bless,
john

 

[KP3243]

You can also apply common sense, God created his own human mother if Jesus was going to be the New and Final Adam he was going to need a perfect New Eve. One thing God is, is fair, if both Adam and Eve brought original sin into the world, it was going to take a male and a female to undo what they did. Notice in Genesis that it says, She shall be called woman. What does Jesus always call Mary when he addresses her, he never directly calls her mother he always addresses her as woman which to non Catholics it seems weird like Jesus is scolding her but in fact he is giving her the only title that can completely address her role in salvation, she is mother, daughter and bride all in one.

 

[brb3]

.
What does Jesus always call Mary when he addresses her, he never directly calls her mother he always addresses her as woman which to non Catholics it seems weird like Jesus is scolding her but in fact he is giving her the only title that can completely address her role in salvation, she is mother, daughter and bride all in one

.

Wow ! At first read it sounds logical…

except, Christ always refers to himself as SON OF MAN…not Son of WOMAN.
Rather telling… don’t u think ?

 

[John_oxios]

Wow ! At first read it sounds logical…

except, Christ always refers to himself as SON OF MAN…not Son of WOMAN.
Rather telling… don’t u think ?

!Wow!
Are you sure you’re Catholic?

Are you not a son of a man? Does that exclude Your Mother?

Jesus obeyed Torah, Honor thy Father and thy Mother… there’s no getting around that!

Christ incarnate was born of a woman that woman chosen by the LORD is Mary.

Luk 2:5 to be enrolled with Mary, his betrothed, who was with child.

Luk 2:11 for to you is** born this day in the city of David a Savior**, who is Christ the Lord.

It is a poetical symbol for the ideal man,

It is a title that Identifies Christ as the Messiah,
‘Son of Man’ is a title easily recognized by the Hebrews of Jesus’ day

In the great vision of Daniel after the appearance of the four beasts, we read: “I
beheld therefore in the vision of the night, and lo, one like a son of man came with the clouds of heaven, and he came even to the Ancient of days: and they presented him before him. And he gave him power, and glory, and a kingdom: and all peoples, tribes, and tongues shall serve him: his power is an everlasting power that shall not be taken away: and his kingdom shall not be destroyed”

The employment of the expression in the Gospels is very remarkable. It is used to
designate Jesus Christ no fewer than eighty-one times –

thirty times in St. Matthew, fourteen times in St. Mark, twenty-five times in St. Luke, and
twelve times in St. John.
Contrary to what obtains in the Septuagint, it appears everywhere with the article, as
. Greek scholars are agreed that the correct translation of this
is “the son of man”, not “the son of the man”. The possible ambiguity may be one of the
reasons why it is seldom or never found in the early Greek Fathers as a title for Christ.
But the most remarkable thing connected with “the Son of Man” is that it is found only
in the mouth of Christ. It is never employed by the disciples or Evangelists, nor by the
early Christian writers. It is found once only in Acts, where St. Stephen exclaims:
“Behold, I see the heavens opened, and the Son of Man standing on the right hand of God”

Son of Man is a title easily recognized by the Hebrews of Jesus’ day,

God bless,
John

 

[LilyM]

Wow ! At first read it sounds logical…

except, Christ always refers to himself as SON OF MAN…not Son of WOMAN.
Rather telling… don’t u think ?

Except which man exactly was Jesus the son of? Joseph? He was not son of any man, only of a woman - Mary.

 

[John_oxios]

Adam, Eve, Isaac & John the Baptist…are supported in Sacred Scripture. Do we have support for Mary or other of great saints?

If not, why not ?

Well, obviously I must add Christ to the list … so 5 I see.

Judaism was/is never a religion of The Book Alone, Christianity/ Catholicism was and is not a religion of the Book alone. Protestantism developed sola scriptura to the point Luther had problems with it.

 First of all the only scriptures were the Torah, stories of the Prophets and the Hebrews also had sacred Oral Tradition, not everything had to be written down, but was taught and practiced and passed down generation to generation.

If you are Catholic then you have to believe your Church, Oral Tradition, doctrines and dogmas because Scripture tells us so.

1Ti 3:14 I hope to come to you soon, but I am writing these instructions to you so that,

1Ti 3:15 if I am delayed, you may know how one ought to behave in the household of God, which is** the church of the living God**, the pillar and bulwark of the truth.

The Bible says the Church is the Pillar and Bulwark of Truth! and it is through the Church God’s manifold of wisdom is revealed, not scripture alone!

Eph 3:8-10 To me, though I am the very least of all the saints, this grace was given, to preach to the Gentiles the unsearchable riches of Christ,

and to make all men see what is the plan of the mystery hidden for ages in God who created all things;

that through the church the manifold wisdom of God might now be made known to the principalities and powers in the heavenly places.

God bless,
              John