Mary as Immaculate Conception

[Leslie_Polley]

I am NOT making a distinction, other than God the Father was still in heaven on the throne and He send His Son Jesus to earth to set us free from sin, When Jesus assended into heaven He left us the Holy Spirit, so I guess they made the distinction of the Ttinity. I am reading what you say…title Mother of God…no. Mother of the manchild Jesus, …who is the Son of God and the Second of the Trinitly.
[/quote]

 

[Leslie_Polley]

You have a seriously deficient understanding of Original Sin, here is something to help you understand:

The above is the always held, orthodox, and true understanding of Original Sin.

This is a non argument, there is nothing in the Bible that says she DID sin. I don’t see why this matters to you anyway. Nowhere in the Bible does it say that we are saved by faith alone, or that the Bible is the only source of Christian truth and the only rule of faith, yet you believe those are true. PLUS, there is biblical evidence that says we are not saved by faith alone, and also that the Bible is not the only source of Christian truth, etc., etc. Since these are not in Bible (plus they were not believed by the early Church, where as the the Immaculate Conception [of Mary, not Jesus] was), why do you believe they are true?

And you are wrong.

If by “perfect” you mean “sinless,” then yes, Mary was and is a perfect person. Now, if being without sin means you are on the same level as Christ, you would have to say that Adam and Eve were gods . . . so, yeah, being sinless is not limited to God; all people are sinless in heaven.

No Catholic has ever, nor will ever, claim that Mary was the “sinnless [sic] sacrifice,” it is absurd that you would say Catholics believe this; it is simply further evidence that you really do not know the Catholic faith. Then again, you really don’t care.

It is unclear to you, it is clear to us. This is yet another problem with Protestantism, Protestants seem to think that their perspective is the only perspective.

Name one.

Yes, it was made clear about Christ, and it was made clear about Mary too; we have different perspectives. What matters is which one holds up to scrutiny. Why does the dogma of the Immaculate Conception bother you so much?

Prove it, show me one verse that says, “Christ Jesus alone is without sin.”

Christ’s sacrifice was not efficacious simply because He is sinless, it is because He is God. An infinite offense committed by a finite creature can only be atoned for by an infinite being, i.e. God, aka Jesus Christ.

We’ve shown you how God’s and man’s writings prove that she is sinless plenty of times.

If you went completely by God’s words, and not you fallible interpretation of them, you would see that Mary lived a sinless life.

This is false as I have shown you, Jesus’ sacrifice was not efficacious simply because He is sinless, it’s because He is God.

If being sinless means you are God, then you would have to say there are at least three gods, our God and Adam and Eve. If you believe that souls are truly sinless when they get to heaven then you will have to believe that there are more gods than the ancient Greeks believed in . . .

For crying out loud…God created Adam for companionship and saw that he needed someone so He created Eve as a helpmate. God 's creations are not equil to God, It speaks of them being without sin and commiting sin…Its in the Word…It does not speak of Mary being sinnless…the Immaculate Conception or the infilling of Mary with Christ was HIS sinnless birth, not Marys…iits important because Mary was just a human who was chosen to give birth toChrist, as Paul was chosen to preach to the Gentiles, and Peter to the Jews. Non of them where sinnless, but God choose them. I don’t care what Thomas Aquinus (SP) of the tribunals or anything else…the tribunals killed many protestants during the dark ages and called them heritics, so they mean very little to me and I do not want to discuss that erra…It was bleak and full of ignorance.

 

[Leslie_Polley]

Wrong, just erase all of the bias from your mind, and go back: read the entire thread, you will see the truth.

You erase all of the bias from your mind and stop adding to the Bible.

 

[Randy_Carson]

Mother of God…no. Mother of the manchild Jesus, …who is the Son of God and the Second of the Trinitly.

Here, Leslie continues to assert an idea that is unquestionably heretical.

Although the early Christians rejected this false teaching 1500 years ago, many modern Christians have fallen back into this error because they are ignorant of sound doctrine and history - both products of the “Bible Alone” mentality.

I would be willing to bet that if the pastor of her church were to get up one Sunday morning and give a sermon on why Mary is called the Mother of God, she would accept it easily enough.

But coming from Catholics, she simply cannot hear the truth…

 

[Yellow_Belle]

I doubt she’ll be able to LionHeart, her poor catechesis has firmly set a “Catholics are absolutely wrong all the time, no matter how logically correct their arguments are ( )” mentality within her.

There’s a corollary (if that’s the word) to that mentality and Facebook has a group dedicated to it: *Realising you’re wrong *[and outclassed!] *in the middle of an argument but continuing to argue anyway. *

 

[Leslie_Polley]

I know you meant it, and in that post I proved beyond a shadow of a doubt that you were (still are) wrong. The word has two meanings and anyone semi educated in linguistics will tell you the same thing. You need to cling to this false notion that there is only one definition of “until” because you need your false theology to work somehow, it just doesn’t.

You proved nothing except you cannot accept a fact when it is put in front of you…Until is a rather simple word…I gave you the deffinitions and still you do not see. It says what it says and you are desperet to prove me wrong no matter what I say and by the way, can you read this …konw taht you are radenig tihs, it swhos we can raed aynhtnig if the fsrit and lsat lreters are croerct. Tihs was an etxnesvie clolgee sutdy, Just thought you would have fun with this because I am told my spelling is sometimes off…See we can still have fun…

 

[Leslie_Polley]

There’s a corollary (if that’s the word) to that mentality and Facebook has a group dedicated to it: *Realising you’re wrong *[and outclassed!] *in the middle of an argument but continuing to argue anyway. *

Yellow Belle, I think you are amusing.

 

[PRmerger]

There’s a corollary (if that’s the word) to that mentality and Facebook has a group dedicated to it: *Realising you’re wrong *[and outclassed!] *in the middle of an argument but continuing to argue anyway. *

LOVE that!! Quite amusing.

 

[Leslie_Polley]

Here, Leslie continues to assert an idea that is unquestionably heretical.

Although the early Christians rejected this false teaching 1500 years ago, many modern Christians have fallen back into this error because they are ignorant of sound doctrine and history - both products of the “Bible Alone” mentality.

I would be willing to bet that if the pastor of her church were to get up one Sunday morning and give a sermon on why Mary is called the Mother of God, she would accept it easily enough.

But coming from Catholics, she simply cannot hear the truth…

Thank God the CC can no longer drag people out of their homes and torture and kill them for not agreeing, as happened during the dark ages…and the crusades…and if the pastor of my church started teaching that Mary was sinnless and was assumed into heaven body and soul etc, he would not be my pastor, so you see, you really dont know how I think or what I would accept. If something is not true to the Word, it is not true anywhere includinng the church I attend. If it does not line up with the inspired Word of God, I don’t have to take it to heart, nor will I.

 

[Leslie_Polley]

LOVE that!! Quite amusing.

PR your back, I would miss your comments…

 

[Leslie_Polley]

You’re swinging wildly and missing badly at this point.

May I again suggest that you stop typing and spend more time reading some good books?

Alternatively, you could ask questions and actually reflect upon the answers given here by people who have read good books.

Just a thought since not much else is being accomplished here…

Perhaps that is good advice…however it would do no good how much more I read, or for how long I did not type we would still disagree. If you do not think that we are accopmplishing anythng…stop answering me. I guess that would stop our communications, right.

 

[zach_dunn]

I am NOT making a distinction, other than God the Father was still in heaven on the throne and He send His Son Jesus to earth to set us free from sin, When Jesus assended into heaven He left us the Holy Spirit, so I guess they made the distinction of the Ttinity. I am reading what you say…title Mother of God…no. Mother of the manchild Jesus, …who is the Son of God and the Second of the Trinitly.

Is “the Mother of our Lord,” better for you? It means the exact same thing.

 

[zach_dunn]

Here, Leslie continues to assert an idea that is unquestionably heretical.

Although the early Christians rejected this false teaching 1500 years ago, many modern Christians have fallen back into this error because they are ignorant of sound doctrine and history - both products of the “Bible Alone” mentality.

I would be willing to bet that if the pastor of her church were to get up one Sunday morning and give a sermon on why Mary is called the Mother of God, she would accept it easily enough.

But coming from Catholics, she simply cannot hear the truth…

:yup:

 

[zach_dunn]

For crying out loud…God created Adam for companionship and saw that he needed someone so He created Eve as a helpmate. God 's creations are not equil to God,

There you go! Finally! So you admit that being sinless (as Adam and Eve were) does not make someone equal to God, therefore, by your admittance, you cannot say that Catholics make Mary equal to God because we say she is sinless.

It speaks of them being without sin and commiting sin…Its in the Word…

Yes, and before sin, they were not equal to God, therefore Mary being sinless does not make her equal to God. You’ve yet to address the problem of angels being equal to God considering that they are without sin.

I’ll finish this in a little bit . . .

 

[Yellow_Belle]

Yellow Belle, I think you are amusing.

Ditto, Leslie

 

[zach_dunn]

It does not speak of Mary being sinnless…the Immaculate Conception

Yes, it does. You cannot see because you purposefully ignore what we’re saying. As you’ve said in this thread already, no matter what you read you will disagree . . . it really shows that you are not open to intelligently discussin a different point of view; i say “intelligently” because you will not even admit that there is more than one meaning of the word “until.”

or the infilling of Mary with Christ was HIS sinnless birth, not Marys…

What?

iits important because Mary was just a human who was chosen to give birth toChrist, as Paul was chosen to preach to the Gentiles, and Peter to the Jews. Non of them where sinnless, but God choose them.

None of them were sinless except Mary.

I don’t care what Thomas Aquinus (SP) of the tribunals or anything else…

sigh Yet again you admit that you are not here for intelligent debate. This leads me to believe you jave a hidden agenda . . .

the tribunals killed many protestants during the dark ages and called them heritics, so they mean very little to me and I do not want to discuss that erra…It was bleak and full of ignorance.

FYI, there were no Protestants during the dark ages.

 

[zach_dunn]

Thank God the CC can no longer drag people out of their homes and torture and kill them for not agreeing, as happened during the dark ages…and the crusades…

The mark of a person defeated in an argument is ad hominem attacks that are unrelated to the subject. The history of the Church does not disprove its doctrines and dogmas, there is wheat and chaff, sinners and saints in Christ’s Church. Also, if a bad history disproves Catholic teaching, you would really be lost considering the canon of your Bible would be wrong. ALSO, you kind of just overlook all of the persecutions of Catholics, it doesn’t surprise me that you don’t look at all of history, it’s called “militant ignorance.”

and if the pastor of my church started teaching that Mary was sinnless and was assumed into heaven body and soul etc, he would not be my pastor, so you see, you really dont know how I think or what I would accept. If something is not true to the Word, it is not true anywhere includinng the church I attend. If it does not line up with the inspired Word of God, I don’t have to take it to heart, nor will I.

All Catholic dogmas are in accord woth the Bible, you just have to believe they aren’t because you couldn’t bear to think the Church you “know” is false could actually be true.

 

[LionHeart777]

I doubt she’ll be able to LionHeart, her poor catechesis has firmly set a “Catholics are absolutely wrong all the time, no matter how logically correct their arguments are ( )” mentality within her. The only purpose I see in prolonging this thread is for the lurkers. That’s right, lurkers, we’re doing this for you!

I feel it is hard to get through too, and by her posts it seems that she can’t understand why we don’t see what seems “clear” to her.

Leslie, have you understood the response to your “until” argument?

basically, as others have pointed out, there are two ways to take the word. **One ** of the ways is the way you explain it.

example 1: “I’m going to remain a virgin until I get married” my intent here is to say that after I get married, I no longer intend to remain a virgin

(this is not about me as a sidenote, I am married w/ a 21 month old gaughter)

example 2: “I’m going to remain a virgin until the day I die.” My intent here is not to say that I am planning on having “relations” in the afterlife.

To me that seems “clear” to us, and I can’t understand why you couldn’t cede the point that until can be taken either way.

It is one thing to disagree w/ example 2 in Mary’s case but another to dismiss it and insist that example 1 is the only way the word until can be used.

Now if you insist on #1 even though admitting #2 is a way that until can be used, the we will just disagree. But it’s hard for some of us to fathom how (if we set the disputed passage in Romans aside), you could not concede that point.

That being said, Romans 3 was dealt w/ also-- if you want to try to understand how Catholics understand that passage, please go back and look at the posts or ask a fresh ?

also, I said this to you earlier:

I was trying to get you to see that sinlessness doesn’t necessarily = God

although God is sinless.

can you at least give us Catholics this much?

that the teaching that Mary did not sin and was spared from the stain of original sin doesn’t elevate her to the status of God.

Would you mind addressing my comments here as well when time permits?

Please excuse my persistance.

I think Leslie, although it is not likely that we are going to change your mind hear & now or vice versa, but at least we could walk away w/ a better understanding of each others position- all those who read.

I will say that I understand that you were Catholic (we would argue that you still are and are 1 confession away from being in good standing), anway; please don’t be offended but as others have mentioned, it seems that some of the things that you thinks that Catholics believe or that the Church teaches are not so; there seems to be some misinformation. I admit that, generally speaking, there is mis-info on both sides, which result in “straw man” arguments.

I can understand your position on the topic at hand as I was formerly Evangelical in my Theology; you being a convert to Evangelical Christianity might be more less likely to accept the Catholic teachings on Mary, at this time, than I was… but I was pretty obstinate.

Also, a big disconnect between “us” and “you” is the fact that we do not adhere to Sola Scriptura. This is a big part to this equation- perhaps, even though there has been many threads on it, we could start a new one and respectfully dialogue about it.

Peace, and Happy New Year to all

 

[Randy_Carson]

Thank God the CC can no longer drag people out of their homes and torture and kill them for not agreeing, as happened during the dark ages…and the crusades…and if the pastor of my church started teaching that Mary was sinnless and was assumed into heaven body and soul etc, he would not be my pastor, so you see, you really dont know how I think or what I would accept. If something is not true to the Word, it is not true anywhere includinng the church I attend. If it does not line up with the inspired Word of God, I don’t have to take it to heart, nor will I.

I did not reference the Immaculate Conception in the post you are taking issue with. I specifically mentioned the dogma that Mary is the Mother of God, a Christological doctrine that all thinking Christians should understand and accept. I guess that’s just wishful thinking on my part.

However, your response to the hypothetical teaching of your pastor is revealing. Rather than humbly consider the words of a man who probably knows more and studies more than you do, you would bolt.

Kind of a microcosm of the Protestant Rebellion, isn’t it?

In other words, if your Pastor does not continue to tell you what you already want to hear, you will reject his teaching. You are admittedly unteachable.

You could say this is biblical…it’s not good…but it’s in the Bible!

[2 Timothy 4:3](http://forums.catholic-questions.org/passage/?search=2 Timothy+4:3&version=NIV)
For the time will come when men will not put up with sound doctrine. Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear.

 

[guanophore]

So let me see if I’m getting this right.
The Church is thinking and will probably elevate Mary’s position right up there as having the same importance as Jesus,as if they are coworkers,if you will.

I think you misunderstand what it means for God to make humans into co-workers, Lou.

In any case, the Church can only proclaim what God has already done. We cannot elevate anyone, only He can. He chose her to bring His Salvation into the world.

Participation in Jesus’ mission of reconciling the world to himself does not make us equal to God. It does not replace or replicate the work that only He could do for us on the cross. We have the great privilge of participating in it.