Mary - sinner - Romans 3?

[joe370]

perro sarnoso;8371477]First error: the Bible (73 books, catholic) does not contradict itself.

I agree!

First clarification: Genesis speaks of two very different women - one on whom the penalty of sin falls: and the who will crush the head of the serpent…the same woman between whom the seed of Satan and Her seed there will be enmity.

Agreed!

Second clarification: Mary is the Immaculate, Perpetual Virgin, Mother of God.

Agreed.

Second error: Mary is sinless, as a matter of fact, faith and dogma - Mary is The Immaculate Conception.

I do agree that Mary is sinless, as a matter of catholic fact, faith and dogma.

Third error: Paying attention and giving validity to what protestants say about the Theotokos.

Your first error: I said nothing of the sort. This thread has nothing to do with paying attention and giving validity to what protestants say about the Theotokos. What was your answer to the hypothetical in the original post?

 

[joe370]

JohnVIII;8367518]If they can be interpreted in a miaphysite fashion then yes, but if not then no. If you talk to Brother [user]mardukm[/user] about this he will tell you that the Council of Chalcedon can and should be understood in a miaphysite fashion. But, as for me, that council seems pretty diophysite, and so as I understand it I would have to say that I do disagree with part of it.

Deification is also called theosis. We have to “work out your own salvation with fear and trembling” (Philippians 2:12). One Church Father (I can’t remember which one) said to the effect that when a saint gets closer to God his physical body starts to acquire some of the characteristics of what it will be like in the resurrection, and this is why we have incorruptible relics of saints! So it is a progression on the way to the Resurrection of the just.

That seems reasonable, if, by deification, you mean the soul eventually achieving perfect oneness, perfect unification with God’s divinity and perfect conformity to God’s will?

I do not believe Mary is in the Godhead because She is sinless, that is not the reason. It is the other way around, God cannot sin! I am also not saying that She “progressed” to this via theosis either. And yes, it does appear that I might be alone on this, but I do confess to believe that the Person of the Holy Spirit and the Person of Mary are one and the same person! Is that clear enough?

It seems you are suggesting that Mary is part of the Trinity, since you believe that the Holy Spirit and the Person of Mary are one and the same person? Hey, you definitely points for originality, and sadly bolster the lies spread by many protestants claiming that catholics worship Mary.

You have asked me questions about my orthodoxy or heterodoxy (as the case may be), to put is simple, I believe the same as all Eastern Orthodox believe with 3 exceptions. Well more like three and a half; the half would be that I believe the Pope of Rome does hold a primacy in the Catholic Church (Eastern Orthodox included).

Two of the three we have already talked about (Mary & miaphysite). The only other is I do not believe the Catholic Church (or the Eastern Orthodox - to me both are spiritually the same) is the only true Church. I believe Jesus and the Apostles established Churches (plural) mainly for the Gentile Christians and Jesus and the Apostles also established Christian Synagogues for Jewish and Samaritan Christians. There is no one true Church, so I believe, but several true Churches.

Good questions!

Peace and God Bless my brother!

Jesus said: “I will build my church…” (singular)

From that you get:

1. “Jesus and the Apostles established Churches (plural) mainly for the Gentile Christians.”
2. “Jesus and the Apostles established Christian Synagogues for Jewish and Samaritan Christians.”

Who holds the primacy in church #1 and church #2?

Considering the scriptural fact that Jesus prayed that His community be one and united just as He and the Father are one, do you believe that Jesus wanted those gentile Christians belonging to one church and those Jewish/Samaritan Christians belonging to another church, to be one and united as a community as well as doctrinally speaking?

 

[GaryTaylor]

How is God born Free of Sin, if St Mary is of sin?

“the most Blessed Virgin Mary, in the first instance of her conception, by a singular grace and privilege granted by Almighty God, in view of the merits of Jesus Christ, the Savior of the human race, was preserved free from all stain of original sin” – Ineffabilis Deus

 

[JohnVIII]

That seems reasonable, if, by deification, you mean the soul eventually achieving perfect oneness, perfect unification with God’s divinity and perfect conformity to God’s will?

It is perfect oneness with Jesus, through the Holy Spirit.

Hey, you definitely points for originality, and sadly bolster the lies spread by many protestants claiming that catholics worship Mary.

There was a time in our history when Arians far out numbered orthodox and most outsiders saw the Arians as if they were the Church. But the few that worshiped Jesus as God would bolster the lie the Church (actually the Arians) worshiped Jesus. It was a very hard thing to learn to confess that a man could be God. And like it or not, it is even harder to learn to confess that a woman could be God.

Do you worship the Holy Spirit?

" The true worshippers shall worship the Father in Spirit and in Truth: for the Father seeketh such to worship Him. God is a Spirit [lit. “The Spirit is God”] : and they that worship Him must worship Him in Spirit and in Truth. " (John 4:23-24)

Jesus said: “I will build my church…” (singular)

From that you get: …

I don’t get anything from that verse in so-called “Gospel according to Matthew”. There is a very good reason that verse is ONLY in Matthew and not in the other Gospels. But we would go WAY OFF topic to get into that, so continue …

1. “Jesus and the Apostles established Churches (plural) mainly for the Gentile Christians.”
2. “Jesus and the Apostles established Christian Synagogues for Jewish and Samaritan Christians.”

Who holds the primacy in church #1 and church #2?

Getting off topic a bit. I brought this up because I thought you needed to know where I was coming from since I am the only one speaking up for the Most Holy Virgin’s full divine honor. But, at the risk of starting a major tangent, the short answer is that before anyone started to speak of a primacy in St Peter, it was St James (Jacob - I hate calling him James because the name is Jacob, but no one will understand me if I don’t say James) in Jerusalem that lead all Churches and Synagogues in the beginning. Consider this one verse from the so-called “Gospel according to Philip”, " The disciples said to Jesus “We know that You will depart from us. Who is to be our leader?” Jesus said to them “Wherever you are you are to go to James the righteous for whose sake heaven and earth came into being.” " (According to Philip, verse 12)

Considering the scriptural fact that Jesus prayed that His community be one and united just as He and the Father are one, do you believe that Jesus wanted those gentile Christians belonging to one church and those Jewish/Samaritan Christians belonging to another church, to be one and united as a community as well as doctrinally speaking?

" And other sheep I have, which are not of this fold: them also I must bring, and they shall hear my voice; and there shall be one fold, and one shepherd. " (John 10:16)

Ok, about this oneness that all Christians have: I will use this to get back on topic. (There’s that word “all” again! “all have sinned…”). “One Lord, One Faith, One Baptism”. It is baptism that gives us our oneness (not the Pope, sorry, the episcopal oneness of the Pope is for the Gentile Churches only).

“Can he enter the second time into his mother’s womb [that would be the womb of the Virgin Mary!], and be born? … Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit [lit. “of water even the Spirit”], he cannot enter into the Kingdom of God. … That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is Spirit”, “as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ”, “For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit.” (various Bible versus)

How does baptism make us “put on Christ”? By the Holy Spirit we spiritually enter the womb of the Virgin Mary and are born (baptized) into Christ. We are “born again” from the womb of the Virgin Mary (physically water, spiritually the womb of the Holy Spirit) into the perfect oneness of Jesus. This is why the Church was “born” on the day of Pentecost by the Holy Spirit, even Mary, who was the central figure on that day because She was and is the Holy Spirit!

So, “For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God” means that, “For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of [the Father]”, “For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of [the Son - Jesus]”, “For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of [the Holy Spirit - Mary]”

I confess that I am a sinner and I fall short of the glory of the one Whom the Church says is “more honorable than the Cherubim, and beyond compare more glorious then the Seraphim”, the one Who without corruption gave birth to God!

 

[joe370]

Hey John…

JohnVIII;8378357] It is perfect oneness with Jesus, through the Holy Spirit.

But we agree that Mary was not part of the Trinity prior to her birth or after she departed from this world?

Do you worship the Holy Spirit?

Yes…But, like you, I do not worship Mary. Only God deserves to be worshiped, with which I’m sure you agree?

I don’t get anything from that verse in so-called “Gospel according to Matthew”. There is a very good reason that verse is ONLY in Matthew and not in the other Gospels. But we would go WAY OFF topic to get into that, so continue …

What is that good reason? I don’t mind if we go off on a tangent for a moment.

Getting off topic a bit. I brought this up because I thought you needed to know where I was coming from since I am the only one speaking up for the Most Holy Virgin’s full divine honor. But, at the risk of starting a major tangent, the short answer is that before anyone started to speak of a primacy in St Peter, it was St James (Jacob - I hate calling him James because the name is Jacob, but no one will understand me if I don’t say James) in Jerusalem that lead all Churches and Synagogues in the beginning. Consider this one verse from the so-called “Gospel according to Philip”, " The disciples said to Jesus “We know that You will depart from us. Who is to be our leader?” Jesus said to them “Wherever you are you are to go to James the righteous for whose sake heaven and earth came into being.” " (According to Philip, verse 12)

I agree that James, or Jacob was the bishop of Jerusalem, and therefore was in charge in Jerusalem, and I enjoy reading apocryphal books. Perhaps you could provide some proof regarding James primacy of Jesus’ church, if that was what you were suggesting? If not then just ignore that question.

" And other sheep I have, which are not of this fold: them also I must bring, and they shall hear my voice; and there shall be one fold, and one shepherd. " (John 10:16)

Hmm, I always took that to mean gentiles (not of this foldOk, about this oneness that all Christians have: I will use this to get back on topic. (There’s that word “all” again! “all have sinned…”). “One Lord, One Faith, One Baptism”. It is baptism that gives us our oneness (not the Pope, sorry, the episcopal oneness of the Pope is for the Gentile Churches only).

If baptism gives us our oneness then baptism has failed miserably at maintaining our oneness for Christianity has become terribly fractured since the reformation.

How does baptism make us “put on Christ”? By the Holy Spirit we spiritually enter the womb of the Virgin Mary and are born (baptized) into Christ. We are “born again” from the womb of the Virgin Mary (physically water, spiritually the womb of the Holy Spirit) into the perfect oneness of Jesus. This is why the Church was “born” on the day of Pentecost by the Holy Spirit, even Mary, who was the central figure on that day because She was and is the Holy Spirit!

Well, I guess that answers my question.

I confess that I am a sinner and I fall short of the glory of the one Whom the Church says is “more honorable than the Cherubim, and beyond compare more glorious then the Seraphim”, the one Who without corruption gave birth to God!

Yes, I do believe that the mother of God is more honored…

 

[joe370]

JohnVIII, your focus on Mary, the mother of God, as being part of the Trinity, is quite disturbing. Please admit right now that Mary is not God!!! If you believe that Mary, the mother of God, is part of the Trinity, then please say so right now!!!

Yes or no?

I get the feeling that you are either being an agitator or a man of supreme principle. If the latter, and you really believe that Mary should be worshiped, like the holy spirit, (as a God) - then I apologize. You are entitled to believe what you believe my friend.

If you see Mary as being God, go for it, but respect the catholic position that rejects that belief!

 

[Lucky102]

Protestants, scripture says:* “all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God.”* Romans 3:23

Meaning that Mary must have been a sinner too…

Scripture says: For just as through the disobedience of the one man the many were made sinners…" Romans 5:19

Meaning that it was the disobedience of just the one man, as opposed to the first man and woman, that many were made sinners.

Those who believe that Jesus’ mother Mary was a sinner:

Could it possibly be wrong to interpret Romans 3 to include the woman Mary, the new Eve of creation, as a sinner, if it’s wrong to assume that Romans 5 contradicts Genesis 3 by excluding the first woman from Romans 5?

Do not take everything in the bible literally. When we say everyone does something do we literally mean EVERYONE?

 

[JohnVIII]

…respect the catholic position that rejects that belief!

There is no catholic position that rejects that belief. But, in an effort to help you out, there is one dogma of the Roman Catholic Church that contradicts this belief. It is the “filioque”, that is the idea that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son. This is not a dogma in any of the Eastern Churches, but Rome holds it as dogma. So you see if you hold that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Son then it cannot be said that the Holy Spirit is the Mother of the Son; therefore the Holy Spirit cannot be Mary.

I don’t wish to be an agitator nor do I wish to disrespect Roman teaching, so I hope that the argument I just made against my own position helps to un-disturb you.

My position runs contrary to Roman dogma in that I hold that it is the Son Who proceeds from the Father and the Holy Spirit.

I do think that the reason that the Holy Virgin is sinless is going to be very hard to prove from a Roman Catholic viewpoint. What Bible verse can you use? What train of logic can you use? Indeed She is sinless and I believe I have made it clear why this is so, but I do not use a Roman Catholic argument to prove this.

I have said all I can on this issue and I see no reason to try to say more. I pray that you are successful in proving to all that Holy Mary is sinless from a Roman Catholic point of view! I personally don’t know how this argument can be made, not from a Roman dogmatic viewpoint anyway, but I hope you succeed. I wish you well!

 

[joe370]

JohnVIII;8395422]There is no catholic position that rejects that belief. But, in an effort to help you out, there is one dogma of the Roman Catholic Church that contradicts this belief. It is the “filioque”, that is the idea that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son. This is not a dogma in any of the Eastern Churches, but Rome holds it as dogma. So you see if you hold that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Son then it cannot be said that the Holy Spirit is the Mother of the Son; therefore the Holy Spirit cannot be Mary.

Not sure what the filioque has to do with anything so I digress. Also, I never thought that you were suggesting that the Holy Spirit was Mary. What you said was that the HS and Mary were one.

I don’t wish to be an agitator nor do I wish to disrespect Roman teaching, so I hope that the argument I just made against my own position helps to un-disturb you.

Well, I didn’t want you to abandon your belief system. I just wanted you to clarify because I do believe that you are man of principle as opposed to being an agitator.

My position runs contrary to Roman dogma in that I hold that it is the Son Who proceeds from the Father and the Holy Spirit.

Not the father who proceeds from the son and the holy spirit? LOL… Just joshing…
I respect your right to believe what you want to believe…

I do think that the reason that the Holy Virgin is sinless is going to be very hard to prove from a Roman Catholic viewpoint. What Bible verse can you use? What train of logic can you use? Indeed She is sinless and I believe I have made it clear why this is so, but I do not use a Roman Catholic argument to prove this.

I have said all I can on this issue and I see no reason to try to say more. I pray that you are successful in proving to all that Holy Mary is sinless from a Roman Catholic point of view! I personally don’t know how this argument can be made, not from a Roman dogmatic viewpoint anyway, but I hope you succeed. I wish you well!

Ok…

I absolutely respected your right to embrace Mary, the Mother of God as actually being one with the holy Spirit, but now, you seem to have recanted, focusing on the filioque, but that is off topic so I will digress.

The purpose of this thread was never to prove to all that our Mother Mary is sinless. People have a right to reject the teachings of the CC. I was merely asking a thought provoking question vis-a-vis Romans 3…

God bless JohnVIII…

 

[Richard_Kastner]

Hey Richard…
Sure, the Father sent His Son in the likeness of sinful man to be a sin offering, just as Hebrews reminds us, *"Therefore, when Christ came into the world, he said: “Sacrifice and offering you did not desire, but a body you prepared for me.” *

Romans 8:3: "The law of Moses was unable to save us because of the weakness of our sinful nature. So God did what the law could not do. He sent his own Son in a body like the bodies we sinners have. And in that body God declared an end to sin’s control over us by giving his Son as a sacrifice for our sins."

Not sure what Jesus’ “body” has to do with Jesus’ mother Mary? Romans 8:3 is not telling us that “Mary is the ONLY flesh that Jesus came in the likeness of…” It has nothing to do with Mary. It clearly tells us that God sent his own Son in the likeness of sinful man to be a sin offering. Of course God sent His only Son, again, in the likeness of sinful man, to the world - via Mary.

Your not sure what Jesus’ body has to do with His mother? Let me see if I can explain it. Mary was Jesus mother right? His Father was not flesh, but our heavenly Father, right? So again the ONLY flesh that Jesus came in the likeness of was Mary. Therefore according to Romans 8:3 Mary was a sinner.

Romans 8
3For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh:

 

[adrift]

Your not sure what Jesus’ body has to do with His mother? Let me see if I can explain it. Mary was Jesus mother right? His Father was not flesh, but our heavenly Father, right? So again the ONLY flesh that Jesus came in the likeness of was Mary. Therefore according to Romans 8:3 Mary was a sinner.

Romans 8
3For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh:

This is false reasoning. Paul was making the point that Jesus was human. Humans were in a sinful state but Mary had been preserved. Now when you are making a point it is useless to point out the exceptions. Jesus was like us accept for sin. If than you say that he was in the likeness of Mary you must than say He was sinful. The truth of it is that this scripture is not trying to make the point that All have sinned but that Jesus has redeemed us. To try to stretch the meaning that Mary sinned is wrong headed.

 

[Richard_Kastner]

This is false reasoning. Paul was making the point that Jesus was human.

Paul was making the point that Jesus came in the LIKENESS of sinful flesh.

Humans were in a sinful state but Mary had been preserved.

Humans are in a sinful state. Including Mary. There is no evidence from scripture that she was “preseved”.

Now when you are making a point it is useless to point out the exceptions.

What do you mean by this?

Jesus was like us accept for sin. If than you say that he was in the likeness of Mary you must than say He was sinful.

I assumed that people on this fourum would know that Jesus is without sin.
Heb.4
14Seeing then that we have a great high priest, that is passed into the heavens, Jesus the Son of God, let us hold fast our profession.
15For we have not an high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin.

And I’m not saying it Paul is in Romans 8:3 3For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh: The only flesh that Jesus shared with the rest of humanity was the flesh of His mother. Therefore she is the sinful flesh that Jesus came in the likeness of.

The truth of it is that this scripture is not trying to make the point that All have sinned but that Jesus has redeemed us.

Actually scripture is making both points. We are ALL sinners and Jesus being the ONLY one without sin and the son of God was the ONLY one qualified to redeem us ALL. Even His mother.

To try to stretch the meaning that Mary sinned is wrong headed.

I’m not stretching anything, merely pointing out what this scripture clearly says.

 

[Tantum_ergo]

Paul was making the point that Jesus came in the LIKENESS of sinful flesh.

Humans are in a sinful state. Including Mary. There is no evidence from scripture that she was “preseved”.

What do you mean by this?

I assumed that people on this fourum would know that Jesus is without sin.
Heb.4
14Seeing then that we have a great high priest, that is passed into the heavens, Jesus the Son of God, let us hold fast our profession.
15For we have not an high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin.

And I’m not saying it Paul is in Romans 8:3 3For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh: The only flesh that Jesus shared with the rest of humanity was the flesh of His mother. Therefore she is the sinful flesh that Jesus came in the likeness of.

Actually scripture is making both points. We are ALL sinners and Jesus being the ONLY one without sin and the son of God was the ONLY one qualified to redeem us ALL. Even His mother.

I’m not stretching anything, merely pointing out what this scripture clearly says.

Want to explain to me how a newborn baby is personally a sinner?

How about a child born with Down syndrome?

Do you believe in original sin?

 

[adrift]

Paul was making the point that Jesus came in the LIKENESS of sinful flesh.

Humans are in a sinful state. Including Mary. There is no evidence from scripture that she was “preseved”.

What do you mean by this?

I assumed that people on this fourum would know that Jesus is without sin.
Heb.4
14Seeing then that we have a great high priest, that is passed into the heavens, Jesus the Son of God, let us hold fast our profession.
15For we have not an high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin.

And I’m not saying it Paul is in Romans 8:3 3For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh: The only flesh that Jesus shared with the rest of humanity was the flesh of His mother. Therefore she is the sinful flesh that Jesus came in the likeness of.

Actually scripture is making both points. We are ALL sinners and Jesus being the ONLY one without sin and the son of God was the ONLY one qualified to redeem us ALL. Even His mother.

I’m not stretching anything, merely pointing out what this scripture clearly says.

Scripture does not clearly say that Mary was with sin. Your statement that the only flesh He shared was with Mary is untrue. Your statement is if Jesus was born of Mary than that must mean she is the sinful flesh. The statement is incorrect. The sinful flesh came from Adam
Matthew 1:1-17

17Thus the total number of generations from Abraham to David is fourteen generations; from David to the Babylonian exile, fourteen generations; from the Babylonian exile to the Messiah, fourteen generations.*

Luke 3: 23-38

38the son of Enos, the son of Seth, the son of Adam,the son of God

Sin came through Adam. Yes I know Jesus was sinless but your reasoning says otherwise.

When you are trying to make a point you distract from your point if you list all the exceptions.

Paul was trying to point out that Jesus was human just like the rest of us.

 

[Richard_Kastner]

Scripture does not clearly say that Mary was with sin.

According to Rom.8:33For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh: it does.

Your statement that the only flesh He shared was with Mary is untrue.

Whose flesh other than Mary did Jesus share?

Your statement is if Jesus was born of Mary than that must mean she is the sinful flesh.

Well, again it’s not my statement it’s Paul’s and it doesn’t say Mary’s flesh it says “in the likeness of sinful flesh” and the again the ONLY flesh that Jesus came in the likeness of was Mary ergo Mary is sinful.

The statement is incorrect.

You will have to talk to Paul about that.

The sinful flesh came from Adam
Matthew 1:1-17
Luke 3: 23-38
Sin came through Adam.

All this is irrelevant. The question is not where sin started but whether or not Mary was sinless and Rom.8:3 says she wasn’t.

Yes I know Jesus was sinless but your reasoning says otherwise.

Howso?

When you are trying to make a point you distract from your point if you list all the exceptions.

Howso?

Paul was trying to point out that Jesus was human just like the rest of us.

Of coarse he was and he did that by saying Jesus came in the LIKENESS of sinful flesh. Sinful flesh just like the rest of us including His mother.

 

[JosephConroy]

Can someone clean (Jesus) come from someone unclean (Mary) ?

This is an argument I hear made everytime this subject comes up in my personal
experience and if there is any consistency to it it opens up a major theological can of worms. To say that since Jesus was sinless his MOTHER had to be sinless then leads to saying that if his mother had to be sinless then HER mother AND father would have had to be sinless (unless she too were a virgin birth) which would mean that both sets of parents of their parents would have had to be sinless which … well can you see where that goes? OF COURSE someone clean can come from someone unclean. Jesus being the one. I also think that if Mary was sinless than SHE could have become the proptitiation for our sins.

Consistency seems to me to preclude THIS argument.

 

[Nicea325]

hawkeye;8327295:

Can someone clean (Jesus) come from someone unclean (Mary) ?

This is an argument I hear made everytime this subject comes up in my personal
experience and if there is any consistency to it it opens up a major theological can of worms. To say that since Jesus was sinless his MOTHER had to be sinless then leads to saying that if his mother had to be sinless then HER mother AND father would have had to be sinless (unless she too were a virgin birth) which would mean that both sets of parents of their parents would have had to be sinless which … well can you see where that goes? OF COURSE someone clean can come from someone unclean. Jesus being the one. I also think that if Mary was sinless than SHE could have become the proptitiation for our sins.

Consistency seems to me to preclude THIS argument.

False premise. Simply because Mary was sinless does not mean her parents had to be sinless too. God can freely choose whomever he pleases from original sin. OF COURSE God (Jesus) would not be conceived by a sinner. Why on earth would God santcify the OT Ark and not a woman to carry His Only beotten Son? You basically are saying God would not and cannot be conceived from a CLEAN VESSEL------- Mary.That is one my arguments against Protestanism: Placing limits on God.

 

[joe370]

Richard Kastner;8402218]Your not sure what Jesus’ body has to do with His mother? Let me see if I can explain it. Mary was Jesus mother right? His Father was not flesh, but our heavenly Father, right? So again the ONLY flesh that Jesus came in the likeness of was Mary. Therefore according to Romans 8:3 Mary was a sinner.

Romans 8
“…God did by sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful man to be a sin offering. And so he condemned sin in sinful man…”

Romans 8 does not say: …by sending his own Son in the likeness of Mary.

Romans 8 says: “…by sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful man…”

That’s not me saying it; it’s scripture. If you want to interpret Romans 8 as …by sending his own Son in the likeness of Mary - that’s cool.

 

[joe370]

hawkeye;8327295:

Can someone clean (Jesus) come from someone unclean (Mary) ?

I also think that if Mary was sinless than SHE could have become the proptitiation for our sins.

So in your mind the only qualification for one becoming a propitiation for the sins of the world is sinlessness? Let’s say for the moment that you were convinced of Mary’s sinlessness. With that said, surely only God can atone for the sins of the world?

 

[CopticChristian]

Seeing as Mary is the ONLY flesh that Jesus came in the likeness of, doesn’t Romans 8:3 say that Mary was a sinner?

Romans 8
3For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh:

No. I disagree. If Jesus was in the likeness of sin in His flesh, coming from Mary also in the likeness of sin in Flesh. There is no conclusion that Mary is with sin.

Romans is directed to Judaizing Christians and the contrast of Old and New Covenant. In Romans 7 Paul tells us of the Death of the Old Covenant likening it to marriage.

No one disagrees that life begins in the womb. The New Covenant is life and the new life of the New Covenant began in the womb and we can deduce that the New Covenant culimnating in the death of Christ was embryonic in the womb yet still the New Covenant and for Mary, the Old Covenant did not bind her.

3For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh:

That flesh became flesh at the moment of conception and if He was sent in the likeness to the likeness then there was no sin in either of those entities as the blood of one is the blood of the other. The flesh of the mother is united by the Placenta and there is no differentiating this from that. The mother/baby/placenta are life without designating one or the other. We just call them by name. Life is these parts.

9But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his.

Did the spirit of God not dwell in Mary?

QU

OTE]19Thou wilt say then unto me, Why doth he yet find fault? For who hath resisted his will? 20Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, Why hast thou made me thus? 21Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour?

If God can bless who He chooses to bless and Curse who He chooses to Curse How can you say how is that God has made Mary sinless.