No Immaculate Conception, No Immutable God

  • Thread starter Thread starter MarysLurker
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
VanitasVanitatum said:
Some parts of scripture aren’t true like what Sennacherib said to Hezekiah.
Click to expand...
Nope. You are confused. All scripture is true.

The truthfulness of scripture is that it truthfully reports what was said.
This is what Sennacherib king of Assyria says…
Then Judas said surely not I rabbi…
Then satan told Eve surely you will not die…

This does not make the bible untrue.
 
MarysLurker said:
40.png
Lion_IRC:
How can Logos contradict Logos?
BTW - please stop labelling me a “legacy Protestant” or I will report you.
Click to expand...
The Bible is not the “Logos.” Jesus is. The Bible is the written Word of God but not the living Word. I too was a “legacy” Protestant (by which I mean coming from a denomination with a legacy of anti-Catholicism) and it had a bit of that bibliolatry streak going on where it was a sin to put other books in top of the Bible or spill coffee on it, etc. (Catholics will notice that bibliolatry confuses the Bible with the Eucharist.)
Click to expand...
  1. The bible can’t contradict itself.
  2. I don’t care whether you are a “legacy Protestant” I am not. So your straw argument is best saved for some other thread.
 
Last edited:
Lion_IRC said:
I don’t care whether you are a “legacy Protestant” I am not. So your straw argument is best saved for some other thread.
Click to expand...
You’ve shown a bias consistent with a tradition of bibliolatry, and those traditions do come from denominations with a legacy of anti-Catholicism. (And in the case of Australia and other former British Empire realms, specifically from Anglicanism and the Church of Scotland.) The whole point of bibliolatry is to claim that Catholics got it wrong for 1500 years (which implicitly blames the Holy Spirit for not fixing things for that long but that’s another topic.)
 
Last edited:
tafan2 said:
since how can we know what great abundance of grace was conferred on her to conquer sin in every way,
Click to expand...
Well, not sure but could be some vestiges of Ambrose, whom if I am not mistaken, thougt sex was a form of sin…therefore to these monks Mary must have remained a virgin after Christ also…some even say she remained a physical virgin, that the “gate” hymen, was never broken…others say it was miraculously regenerated…hence a virgin still…to me don’t buy it.
 
Last edited:
tafan2 said:
And considering the above, he would have strongly disapproved of the Immaculate Conception? Your logic is untenable.
Click to expand...
It is one thing to say she sinned not. It is another to say it was because no original sin. Not sure but thought Augustine was in the former group.

Do you deny some monks were against an IC proclamation?
 
Last edited:
MarysLurker said:
The Bible is the written Word of God but not the living Word.
Click to expand...
Well, His written word is certainly not “dead and dull” to any hearer or reader…it is alive then and does not return void…it is one with the Holy Spirit even as it is from Him.
 
Last edited:
mcq72 said:
It is one thing to say she sinned not. It is another to say it was because no original sin. Not sure but thought Augustine was in the former group.

Do you deny some monks were against an IC proclamation?
Click to expand...
And that’s one reason it took so long. Duns Scotus solved it by realizing that She was pre-redeemed.

But don’t confuse the promulgation of the doctrine with the origin of it. It does go back to the Fathers of the Church. The fact that the East (such as the Orthodox) have a similar but not identical Marian doctrine—Mary as Panagia—tells you it’s not something Rome made up.
 
Last edited:
mcq72 said:
Well, His written word is certainly not “dead and dull” to any hearer or reader
Click to expand...
Who said it was? What’s with the false quote? I never used those words “dead and dull.” Tell the emotional anti-Catholic who’s helping you to stop the canards.

Did you read Dei Verbum?
 
Last edited:
It’s not a far step from saying someone was so full of grace they conquers sin in every way to saying they were immaculately concieved. Indeed, even saying someone is without sin in their lives is quite amazing, certainly unique enough to doubt if the Immaculate Conception would be strongly denounced.

My overall point stands, Augustine obviously did not look upon the honor paid to Mary by Christians as mere sentimentality and harmless.
 
Last edited:
theorangeandblue said:
The verses I posted talk about on how everyone who has ever lived is a sinner.
Click to expand...
According to you it states that everyone who has ever lived is a sinner. Please tell me how my two year old,who died, sinned or her cousin who died 18 hrs after being born? The verses you quote make no exceptions not even for Jesus.
 
hope said:
According to you it states that everyone who has ever lived is a sinner. Please tell me how my two year old,who died, sinned or her cousin who died 18 hrs after being born?
Click to expand...
Thank you for your courage in sharing that… I am sure they are praying for us now.
 
40.png
Maryslurker:
The Bible is the written Word of God but not the living Word.
Click to expand...
quote from Maryslurker

Fixed the mis attribution of Maryslurker’s post to me.
 
Last edited:
tafan2 said:
My overall point stands, Augustine obviously did not look upon the honor paid to Mary by Christians as mere sentimentality and harmless.
Click to expand...
Well I said tradition, which is not mere…and describing her beyond explicit, biblical, apostolic terms is what we are talking about, not honoring per what scripture says.

Not sure Augustine ever endorsed Mary as our spiritual mother or co redeemer. For sure he wrote of her as an exemplary spiritual, saved by the Blood sister in Christ.
 
Last edited:
hope said:
According to you it states that everyone who has ever lived is a sinner. Please tell me how my two year old,who died, sinned or her cousin who died 18 hrs after being born? The verses you quote make no exceptions not even for Jesus.
Click to expand...
Hi Hope…have heard this before…does not say " any one who has ever lived"…
Says all. Along with other scriptures the implication that is taught us is one of original sin, and there after actual sin with an age of accountability, and that God is gracious ,merciful with His restorative covenants, from infants to old agers. But stiil all have original sin.

Not sure holding Jesus to that opens door for other exceptions. Jesus was not conceived in sin, as David puts “fallen” births. Jesus was conceived by the Holy Spirit so i guess anyone else born in that fashion qualifies for an explicit exception…plus the countless scripture that are explicit to being without blemish.

Furthermore the covenant only requires one to be free from blemish, the Lamb of God. Plus said verse contains “all” implicating need for “all” to have a Savior and all agree that includes Mary.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top