No Immaculate Conception, No Immutable God

[mcq72]

see now what you mean. But the way I see the verse is a poetic way of saying off spring. The Nab renders the verse this way

I agree…seed is offspring…geneology etc.

And Satan has offspring referring to unrepentant humans…Scripture in a handful of places is explicit about this… ("Your father the devil).

 

[MarysLurker]

Preposterous in my opinion to say only Jesus and Mary were enemies to Satan.

Nobody thinks that only Jesus and Mary are at enmity with the devil, but everyone agrees that Jesus is at complete enmity with the devil. Mary is listed alongside Him in Genesis 3:15 with no distinction as to the degree of enmity, leading to a conclusion that only Jesus and Mary are at complete enmity.

 

[ReadTheBible]

. It is obvious from this question that she did not intend to have a normal married life

Colossians 3:18 Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as it is fit in the Lord.

Ephesians 5:22 Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord.

1 Corinthians 7:4 The wife hath not power of her own body, but the husband: and likewise also the husband hath not power of his own body, but the wife.
5 Defraud ye not one the other, except it be with consent for a time, that ye may give yourselves to fasting and prayer; and come together again, that Satan tempt you not for your incontinency.

You’re incorrect in your understanding of the word until concerning Mary. You could take one word from lots of places in scripture and the definition changes based on the context. Your argument that the word until means different things in other places so it must mean what you want it to in Matthew isn’t a sound or valid point.

Mary was a married woman. I’m surprised Catholicism hasn’t tried denying this because the fact she’s married means her body doesn’t just belong to herself. She is to have sex with her husband as all wives and husbands are to do. How do we know this? Scripture says so. If Mary denied Joseph sex through the entirety of their marriage she wasn’t acting according to God’s will. Catholicism has painted itself into a corner. Either Mary sinned by not having sex with Joseph, thus destroying the idea she never sinned, or she had sex with Joseph (and had children) thus destroying the idea of perpetual virginity.

This is a real problem for Catholicism.

The facts are she did have sex with Joseph and had children (which is not a sin). But she did other sins as all mortals do but believed on Christ and was born again.

 

[MarysLurker]

You could take one word from lots of places in scripture and the definition changes based on the context.

You have to make God change the rules in order to get your definition of “until” to make your argument work. No Immaculate Conception, No Immutable God.

As a bonus, you make God change (covetousness is bad… no wait, welcome to Heaven you covetous thief) in order to eliminate Purgatory.

Anyone who makes God change is automatically wrong. (Mal. 3:6)

 

[ReadTheBible]

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

The entire point of Matthew 1:25 is to show the prophecy in Isaiah was fulfilled. Joseph didn’t have sex with Mary until after Christ was born fulfilling the prophecy he would be born of a virgin.

 

[ReadTheBible]

You are swimming in confusion.

The fact people can’t repent of their sins after their dead doesn’t change God’s nature. It’s the rules that God created.

 

[MarysLurker]

The fact people can’t repent of their sins after their dead doesn’t change God’s nature. It’s the rules that God created.

Maybe the problem is you don’t really grasp the word “repent.”

To actually repent of a sin you have to change your character. A thief who is forgiven of his sins still has the covetousness that caused him to sin. He can’t take his covetousness with him to Heaven. If he won’t let it go, it will hold him back. There’s a difference between forgiveness/justification and repentance.

To get rid of Purgatory, you’re saying that covetousness is no longer wrong after a person dies. So it’s wrong to be covetous while you’re alive, but OK once you’re dead. That way, the thief goes to heaven as long as he was forgiven for stealing, even though he’s still a thief. The sinner doesn’t change, God does. That’s wrong.

 

[ReadTheBible]

To actually repent of a sin you have to change your character. A thief who is forgiven of his sins still has the covetousness that caused him to sin.

You are wrong. The change is within our hearts which God can clearly see. The disciples were given this ability by the Holy Spirit. This is how they could choose to baptize people based on if the person truly had a change of heart.

The thief on the cross repented and believed Christ. That was all it took for God’s grace. This is why Christ says his yoke is easy and his burden is light. Christ promised the thief would see paradise. He said nothing about purgatory as it doesn’t exist.

 

[MarysLurker]

The thief on the cross repented and believed Christ. That was all it took for God’s grace. This is why Christ says his yoke is easy and his burden is light. Christ promised the thief would see paradise. He said nothing about purgatory as it doesn’t exist.

I was just waiting for you to mention St. Dismas, the Good Thief. In case you forgot, his repentance wasn’t an altar call on a leisurely Sunday morning. He was being crucified along with the Lord after having accepted that he was being punished justly. His agony purged him of his covetousness. Jesus could not have said what He did about being with Him that day in Paradise unless Dismas had in fact let go of his covetousness, which he did. He wasn’t declared righteous, he was actually made righteous through suffering.

 

[ReadTheBible]

he was actually made righteous through suffering.

Wow, I feel sorry for you is about all I can say.

 

[MarysLurker]

Wow, I feel sorry for you is about all I can say

And I feel sorry for you, because I haven’t been able to make you understand that the days are over when you can just play the whole “are you saved” game, steal Catholic sheep and call that “evangelization.” Unless you’re willing to accept that God is not an exam administrator who created the devil to put us to a stupid test, you’re going to find that post-Millennials will have zero interest in even listening to you because you’re presenting God as evil.

Reconsider your biases, or find out the hard way.

I’ve seen too many Protestant churches turn into funeral homes and strip malls as the legacy anti-Catholic people age out, or get foreclosed on because they built a shiny megachurch thinking they’d always have people, only to find their own children won’t practice the faith after they go to college and get convinced that God is evil. I’ve had too many friends and family who’ve tithed huge chunks of their income into these sinking ships, only to end up heartbroken. I’m offering you a way out but I can’t make you take it.

 

[ReadTheBible]

I’m offering you a way out but I can’t make you take it.

Christ is my way out

 

[MarysLurker]

Christ is my way out

Who is He? God? What does that even mean?

You can’t just take for granted that people will even know what you’re talking about today. As has been shown in this thread, you’re willing to present Him as a grand game-master who let the devil ruin paradise for fun just so He could supposedly show His glory by declaring everyone righteous without even cleaning up the mess (said mess consisting of all the death and suffering in the world.)

So that’s your conception of God. You’re gonna go up to an atheist and tell them “are you saved?” And they’re gonna ask you, what are you talking about…

You: “God loves you.”
Atheist: “But there’s no God.”
You: Argument from transcendental numbers borrowed from @MarysLurker
Atheist: “Wow, that’s interesting. But how can there be a God if there’s so much evil in the world?”
You: “God permits evil to show His glory by overcoming it. He declares us righteous even though we’re evil so He can show His power.”
Atheist: “Uh… no. You’re saying He let the devil cause all this damage and make us suffer so that He could just have fun. See, God is evil.”
@MarysLurker: “Hey atheist, here’s the answer. God wants to exalt us above the angels but in order to do that we have to have free will. That’s why God created the devil and puts up with him… it’s not because God wants there to be evil, or somehow enjoys it. It’s because we have to have the real ability to choose evil in order to be able to love. Love is God’s own nature. Even the angels aren’t capable of truly loving, but we are. Evil is the price of freedom, but the reward isn’t just to get declared righteous… it’s to actually be made righteous, to be sanctified…”
Atheist: “Well, who is like that?”
@MarysLurker : “…to become what the Virgin Mary is.”
Atheist: “Wow. That actually makes sense.”
You: “No way! They worship Mary! Don’t listen to that pagan goddess cult.”
@MarysLurker: “You’re saying God lets evil people into heaven without them actually changing. So you’re saying God changes the rules so there can be evil in heaven. No Immaculate Conception, No Immutable God.”

There’s no nice way to say it. Legacy Protestantism is obsolete. Today, we’ve got the Internet, we’ve got Wikipedia, lots of secular sources, not to mention Catholic apostolates like this one. You start talking smack about Catholicism, people start googling. They make their own decisions. The script from the soul-winning camp needs to go in the same drawer with the old flip-phone and the Commodore 64. Think. Reconsider. Breathe. Pray.

 

[ReadTheBible]

There’s no nice way to say it. Legacy Protestantism is obsolete. Today, we’ve got the Internet, we’ve got Wikipedia, lots of secular sources, not to mention Catholic apostolates like this one. You start talking smack about Catholicism, people start googling. They make their own decisions.

We have scripture. Everyone makes their own decisions to which they are responsible.

You don’t even debate things such as Mary was married thus owed the duty of sex to Joseph her husband (according to scripture). You are like many Catholics who forgo all understanding of scripture and stand firmly on your Church. We the Catholics were first and even though we make up dogmas as the centuries go on, a lot contrary to God’s word, we are the Church!

You want to somehow equate getting the entire world to like your message with winning souls to Christ. Christ is my authority. What did Christ say?

John 15:
18 If the world hate you, ye know that it hated me before it hated you.
19 If ye were of the world, the world would love his own: but because ye are not of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world, therefore the world hateth you.

We as Christians are to proclaim the truth, which is God’s word, even though we know many will reject the truth. Sadly scripture makes it clear Jesus says in Matthew 7
13 Enter ye in at the strait gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way, that leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go in thereat:
14 Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it.

We are to spread the word to anyone who will listen knowing most of the world will reject the gift of God.

You seem more worried about hurting feelings or the tone of your message rather than the heart of God’s truth. I’m not worried what the world thinks of me. The world is not my judge. Spiritually I answer to God’s authority only. It’s not the Pope, not any Church, not Mary or anything else.

 

[MarysLurker]

We the Catholics were first

That’s game, set, match right there if you’re admitting the Catholic Church was here first. Because for you to even be heard, you’d have to explain the gap between your 19th/20th-century congregation and Calvary in 33 AD.

What you just don’t get is that the Bible can be made to say anything you want it to say. It’s been used to justify everything from white nationalism and slavery to abortion and divorce to wars and revolutions. It’s been used both to prove and to disprove Christianity, the divinity of Christ, and every remotely Christian teaching. “I go by the Bible (alone)” means absolutely nothing.

Remember that anti-Catholic I was talking about earlier? I wasn’t a Catholic yet when I knew him. I was at an office building one time and he came up and started saying the things you have said. And then another fellow came along who is a Catholic, and he listened to some of the conversation. We started talking about sanctification/divinization/theosis/Christian perfection (which you reject in favor of imputed righteousness and people somehow taking their evil with them through the pearly gates). At one point he said he respected the Episcopal Church as a true Christian church, having all the smells and bells of Catholicism with none of the heresy.

By the way, this was in 2009.

Anyone who is even remotely informed about the state of the Episcopal Church at that time would have realized that the anti-Catholic was an uninformed fool, especially now in 2019 looking back at what else has gone wrong in that church. Even the liberals admit that it has, at most, 20 years left before Episcopalianism is extinct. Maybe you really are just ignorant of how fast the ship you’re on is sinking, in which case you’d be well served to look around a little before you start throwing stones again.

 

[ReadTheBible]

The we the Catholics were first is what Catholics say. That doesn’t make it true.

(which you reject in favor of imputed righteousness and people somehow taking their evil with them through the pearly gates)

I’m really not sure how confused you are concerning scripture so I can only point out each time you seem to assume things rather studying scripture.

Christ’s blood shed on the cross, being the sacrifice for all humanity, is the only way we have to reach God the Father and enter Heaven. Why would I think in glorified bodies we would bring sin into Heaven? I’ve already stated numerous times there will be no sin in Heaven.

Ephesians 1:7 In whom we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins, according to the riches of his grace;

Hebrews 9:14 How much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without spot to God, purge your conscience from dead works to serve the living God?

1 John 1:7 But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship one with another, and the blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin.

Hebrews 10:16 This is the covenant that I will make with them after those days, saith the Lord, I will put my laws into their hearts, and in their minds will I write them;
17 And their sins and iniquities will I remember no more.
18 Now where remission of these is, there is no more offering for sin.
19 Having therefore, brethren, boldness to enter into the holiest by the blood of Jesus,

Revelation 1:5 And from Jesus Christ, who is the faithful witness, and the first begotten of the dead, and the prince of the kings of the earth. Unto him that loved us, and washed us from our sins in his own blood,

Romans 5:8 But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.
9 Much more then, being now justified by his blood, we shall be saved from wrath through him.

Maybe you never knew that when Christ gave his life on the cross it paid for every sin of every human from that point until the world ends. It’s up to the human to repent and accept that gift.

 

[mcq72]

Nobody thinks that only Jesus and Mary are at enmity with the devil, but everyone agrees that Jesus is at complete enmity with the devil. Mary is listed alongside Him in Genesis 3:15 with no distinction as to the degree of enmity, leading to a conclusion that only Jesus and Mary are at complete enmity.

Ok. Your bible has Mary in Genesis 3:15. My bible version has 73 ish names listed, last one being Mary. Interesting.

 

[ReadTheBible]

You might want to pass that along to MarysLurker

 

[ReadTheBible]

The Catholic bible is the only version that changed Genesis 3:15 to the female form when it talks about it crushing or bruising the serpents head. This is a mistake by Catholic theologians. Every other form of the Bible has it, referring to the seed, or He will bruise the serpents head.

The Greek septuagint is clearly masculine. The Latin vulgate mistranslated this to She. The council of Trent made the decision that the latin vulgate was to be the only acceptable translation to Catholicism.

Mary doesn’t bruise or crush the serpents head. Christ does. This is the beginning of the snowball in Catholic theology of espousing things to Mary that only Christ has the power to do.

 

[MarysLurker]

The Catholic bible is the only version that changed Genesis 3:15 to the female form when it talks about it crushing or bruising the serpents head. This is a mistake by Catholic theologians. Every other form of the Bible has it, referring to the seed, or He will bruise the serpents head.

The Masoretic Text your Bible is based on was made 1000 years after Christ, by Jews who rejected Him as the Messiah, so maybe you shouldn’t be so haughty about what the original text actually said. Yes, I’m aware of what the LXX says. But the Church Fathers had other manuscripts much closer in time to the Apostles and attest to “she shall crush” being a thing. But it actually doesn’t matter. Nobody claims Mary or the Church is the one doing the actual crushing of satan’s head. Christ is the One who crushes. I talked about this a lot earlier on the thread.