Immaculation Conception - How to Defend

[The_Wizard]

I was thrown these two quotes to disprove the Immaculation Conception: 1) “all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God.” and 2) “No one is righteous not even one.”. I am going to need good solid information to even hold my own with this guy. What do I tell him.

By the way, This guy is big into sola scriptura so keep that in mind.

 

[tomarin]

I was thrown these two quotes to disprove the Immaculation Conception: 1) “all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God.” and 2) “No one is righteous not even one.”. I am going to need good solid information to even hold my own with this guy. What do I tell him.

By the way, This guy is big into sola scriptura so keep that in mind.

Tell him to stop proof-texting.

 

[The_Wizard]

I sent this to the members of a Bible study I am in at work when the subject of the Immaculate Conception was brought up:

Mary was preserved exempt from all stain of original sin at the first moment of her animation, and sanctifying grace was given to her before sin could have taken effect in her soul. The formal active essence of original sin was not removed from her soul; it was excluded, it never was in her soul. Simultaneously with the exclusion of sin, the state of original sanctity, innocence, and justice, as opposed to original sin, was conferred upon her, by which gift every stain and fault, all depraved emotions, passions, and debilities, essentially pertaining to original sin, were excluded. But she was not made exempt from the temporal penalties of Adam—from sorrow, bodily infirmities, and death. The immunity from original sin was given to Mary by a singular exemption from a universal law through the same merits of Christ, by which other men are cleansed from sin. Mary needed the redeeming Savior to obtain this exemption, and to be delivered from the universal necessity and debt (debitum) of being subject to original sin. The person of Mary, in consequence of her origin from Adam, should have been subject to sin, but, being the new Eve who was to be the mother of the new Adam, she was, by the eternal counsel of God and by the merits of Christ, withdrawn from the general law of original sin. Her redemption was the very masterpiece of Christ’s redeeming wisdom. He is a greater redeemer who pays the debt that it may not be incurred, than he who pays after it has fallen on the debtor.

I did this just to give “my wayward brothers” a idea of the concept. It is tough being the only “committed” Catholic in the group.

 

[Swiss_Guy]

Does “no one is righteous, not even one” include Jesus, the New Adam? If not, then why not the New Eve, Mary?

 

[SteveGC]

I was thrown these two quotes to disprove the Immaculation Conception: 1) “all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God.” and 2) “No one is righteous not even one.”. I am going to need good solid information to even hold my own with this guy. What do I tell him.

By the way, This guy is big into sola scriptura so keep that in mind.

Your defense of this doctrine lies primarily in the refutation of the bold above. Although there is implicit scriptural evidence for the doctrine, it is unlikely your friend will be swayed unless and until he sees, and submits to, the divinely appointed earthly authority in Rome. Some people come to see the truth of the Catholic faith through a sequential phase of becoming aware of the truth of individual doctrines. I don’t think that’s the case with this doctrine, however. The have to see the Church for what She truly is first. That being the case, there is scriptural evidence:

Genesis 3 contains, to me, a solid case for the doctrine. God put enmity between the serpent (the essence of Evil and Sin) and the woman. Honest Protestants, especially when reading their own scholars, will not refute that the woman referred to in Genesis is Mary.

So what is enmity. Hostility, yes. Hatred, yes. But more specifically, as it is used also in Ephesians 2:15, James 4:4, 1 Jn 2:15, Romans 8:7, it means "separation. It means that one thing has no part, possesses no share in the essence of, the thing with which it has enmity. Hence, if God put a separation between the essence of Evil and Mary, it follows that Mary (the woman) could not be conceived with original SIN, else there would be no enmity (separation).

 

[rdscheirer]

Why is it “Sola Scriptura” christians use the New Testament when the New Testament was formed by the Catholic Church?

When St. Paul says use the Scripture and Tradition we have taught you- what does that mean to a Soloist- there was no New Testament then at the formation of the church- so all references to Scripture must look to the Old Testament.

 

[anrmenchaca47]

I sent this to the members of a Bible study I am in at work when the subject of the Immaculate Conception was brought up:

Mary was preserved exempt from all stain of original sin at the first moment of her animation, and sanctifying grace was given to her before sin could have taken effect in her soul. The formal active essence of original sin was not removed from her soul; it was excluded, it never was in her soul. Simultaneously with the exclusion of sin, the state of original sanctity, innocence, and justice, as opposed to original sin, was conferred upon her, by which gift every stain and fault, all depraved emotions, passions, and debilities, essentially pertaining to original sin, were excluded. But she was not made exempt from the temporal penalties of Adam—from sorrow, bodily infirmities, and death. The immunity from original sin was given to Mary by a singular exemption from a universal law through the same merits of Christ, by which other men are cleansed from sin. Mary needed the redeeming Savior to obtain this exemption, and to be delivered from the universal necessity and debt (debitum) of being subject to original sin. The person of Mary, in consequence of her origin from Adam, should have been subject to sin, but, being the new Eve who was to be the mother of the new Adam, she was, by the eternal counsel of God and by the merits of Christ, withdrawn from the general law of original sin. Her redemption was the very masterpiece of Christ’s redeeming wisdom. He is a greater redeemer who pays the debt that it may not be incurred, than he who pays after it has fallen on the debtor.

I did this just to give “my wayward brothers” a idea of the concept. It is tough being the only “committed” Catholic in the group.

Hey, your not alone. I’m going through the same thing, but now we are on the topic of the deuterocanonical books and the priest scandals. Everyone here is very helpful so don’t get discouraged keep that fire burning!

 

[Rainaldo]

I was thrown these two quotes to disprove the Immaculation Conception: 1) “all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God.” and 2) “No one is righteous not even one.”. I am going to need good solid information to even hold my own with this guy. What do I tell him.

By the way, This guy is big into sola scriptura so keep that in mind.

Point out his interpretation of “no one is righteous, not even one” directly contradicts the scripture “Joseph her husband, being a just man” (Matthew 1:19).

Sola scripturists typically believe that when they “get saved”, the benefits of Jesus’ death are applied all at once to every sin they have committed or will ever commit. So if we grant his soteriology for the sake of argument, if God can apply the salutary effects of Jesus’ atonement to people in the future for sins not yet committed, he should be able to apply them a few decades in the past to prevent sins that could be committed.

 

[SteveGC]

Point out his interpretation of “no one is righteous, not even one” directly contradicts the scripture “Joseph her husband, being a just man” (Matthew 1:19).

And not only that, the clear context upon a full reading of Romans 3 reveals that St Paul is referring to righteousness “under the law”. The quote hearkens back to David’s prayers in Psalms, where he is clearly praying to God to judge the unrighteousness of his enemies. St Paul is using it to emphasize that those who stray from God are unrighteous, those that attempt to be righteous strictly under the law are unrighteous. Heck, show your friend this Protestant evangelical website that even refutes the universality of the quote. Click here.

Sola scripturists typically believe that when they “get saved”, the benefits of Jesus’ death are applied all at once to every sin they have committed or will ever commit. So if we grant his soteriology for the sake of argument, if God can apply the salutary effects of Jesus’ atonement to people in the future for sins not yet committed, he should be able to apply them a few decades in the past to prevent sins that could be committed.

Excellent point

 

[ConstantineTG]

Of course everyone needs to be saved. If not for the Immaculate Conception, how is Mary saved? God still did something for her, its not like she will herself to be immaculately conceived. How is that not consistent with scripture?

 

[AmbroseSJ]

Point out his interpretation of “no one is righteous, not even one” directly contradicts the scripture “Joseph her husband, being a just man” (Matthew 1:19).

Sola scripturists typically believe that when they “get saved”, the benefits of Jesus’ death are applied all at once to every sin they have committed or will ever commit. So if we grant his soteriology for the sake of argument, if God can apply the salutary effects of Jesus’ atonement to people in the future for sins not yet committed, he should be able to apply them a few decades in the past to prevent sins that could be committed.

Very Good!

 

[perro_sarnoso]

If I had a penny for every time… anyway,

Protestants are not even in the same arena as catholics when it come to the Immaculate, Perpetual Virgin, Mother of God.

Why oh why do we catholics think that we need to be on the same measuring stick as protestants?

How do you measure 2000 + years of Magisterium, Divine Revelation and Scriptural Authority with a protestant ruler?

A life of prayer and a life of the spirit have taught me many things but the simplest things are the most impacting. I believe and I answer as a catholic.

Take the Rosary for example - It was revealed to us by an apparition of Mary to St. Dominic around the year 1245 on or abouts. The Scapular in another apparition to St. Simon Stock some years later. I believe this truly and sincerely!! It doesn’t matter what anybody else thinks.

The catholic church is the one, true church that Christ intended to exist after His ascension into heaven and of which He left Peter as its first pope…264 popes later to Pope Benedict XVI. And the gates of hell have not and will not prevail against her.

How can anything a protestant tells me make any sense in light of 2000+ years of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic truth!!

How could Mary be sinful if she is the Mother of God, Theotokos?! Did God keep her pure up until the moment of Jesus’ birth and then dispose of her like a tissue - tossing her to sin?!

Who is my mother and my brother and my sister?? Those that hear the word of God and keep it in their hearts…that’s Mary. Jesus is telling us to be like Mary!

She is the woman of genesis that is to crush the head of the serpent. She is the Ark of the New Convenant and the Woman clothed with the sun, with her feet on the crescent moon (Islam), with a crown of 12 stars and clothed with the sun.

Who cares what a protestant says about these mysteries. If they don’t like my answers then they shouldn’t ask me questions.

 

[wiggbuggie]

you can point in gospel in luke that mary was full of grace but your friend will probably fight back saying its a wrong translation. Other than that in genesis 20:6 we see God kept Abraham from sinning, we see Gods grace wich kept Abraham from sinning in his situation. And if mary is full of grace and preserved and protected by God, then why not her whole life she was free from original sin?

 

[thistle]

I was thrown these two quotes to disprove the Immaculation Conception: 1) “all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God.” and 2) “No one is righteous not even one.”. I am going to need good solid information to even hold my own with this guy. What do I tell him.

By the way, This guy is big into sola scriptura so keep that in mind.

Even the founders of Protestantism believed in the Immaculate Conception.

 

[Swiss_Guy]

Even the founders of Protestantism believed in the Immaculate Conception.

Not after they broke. Except Luther.

 

[Swiss_Guy]

IF he’s big into sola scriptura, I’d say you’d have to start with the Bible. Ask him why he trusts the canon? Who put it together and when? (Obviously the CC but he probably doesn’t know.) Why should he trust something that the Catholic Church put together when he doesn’t trust the Catholic Church. Why did St. John say in his Gospel that not everything Jesus did (which includes teachings) were written down, and that they couldn’t be written down? Would Jesus let his disciples and his Church down by having his teachings lost? Why would God let his teachings get lost?

That’s a start.

 

[PeterGStanley]

How about the Prophet Isaiah

Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign: Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel.
Isaiah 7:14

 

[thistle]

Not after they broke. Except Luther.

You are right. I got mixed up. By mistake I was talking about Mary’s perpetual virginity which they all believed in, even after they broke.

 

[trebiasgreg]

How to defend Immaculate Conception of Mary?

1. Sola scriptura is not found in the Bilble, but inspired Scripture and Apostolic Tradition are found (see 1 Corinthians 11:2, 2Thessalonians 2:15 3:6), not the tradition (by men) condemned by Jesus Christ. John 12:25 - not everything Jesus said was recorded in Scripture
2. Jesus Christ is both man and God, this does not mean He sinned otherwise the Scripture will contradict proving the sinless nature of Christ as man, in Hebrews 4:15 and in 1 Peter 2:22.
3. Mary is excluded from the word “all” in Romans 3:23, just like Jesus. How and Why? Mary being highly favoured, and to be spoused with the Holy Spirit can not have sin and Jesus being a man who is sinless should therefore did not inherit any sin from His mother. If Mary would have sinned, can she be higlhy favoured or full of grace, to be overshadowed by the Holy Spirit and to be a Mother of God?

Peace be to you

 

[Matt86]

Why is it “Sola Scriptura” christians use the New Testament when the New Testament was formed by the Catholic Church?

When St. Paul says use the Scripture and Tradition we have taught you- what does that mean to a Soloist- there was no New Testament then at the formation of the church- so all references to Scripture must look to the Old Testament.

It’s crazy isn’t it? Most scripture scholars of any religious background will hold that the earliest Gospel was written at least 25-30 years after Jesus’ death, maybe even later.

So HOW did the Early Church (AD 33-60) pass on the Good News? Why can’t protestants take the notion of unwritten, passed-on teaching and tradition into account?

I mean, even St. Paul refers to this practice when he writes about how he passed on the apostlolic teaching regarding the Eucharist.

Sorry but sometmes they seem as blind as the pharisees, refusing to see something unless it’s there, smacking them in the face, in black and white.