No Immaculate Conception, No Immutable God

  • Thread starter Thread starter MarysLurker
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
But was Jesus the man pre existent?..o…of course not…Mary was definitely pregnant…there was a conception of sorts, and a normal birth to a normal baby boy, who was also divine
 
Last edited:
But was Jesus the man pre existent?..o…of course not…Mary was definitely pregnant…there was a conception of sorts, and a normal birth to a normal baby boy, who was also divine
More Adoptionism.

There’s no such thing as “Jesus the man.” Jesus is a Person and that Person is God. Jesus has always existed. He became incarnate meaning He took on a human nature in time. He did NOT begin at His conception which is why the Nicene Creed is more precise.

When you get rid of Mary the price you pay is horribly sloppy Christology. Those who do not study history are doomed to repeat it.

It makes ZERO sense to get rid of Mary to glorify Christ if you can’t figure out what Christ is as a result. And that’s what just blows my mind. You guys are so obsessed with getting rid of Mary. And for what reason? It isn’t to glorify Christ, clearly.

I can’t answer that question. Why it is that you just go on attacking something you just don’t understand. Like this, which is even worse.
Mary needed a savior like every other mortal and scripture records it.
If you don’t understand, learn! Don’t assume that we are so dumb that we can’t read Luke 1:47. We know She said the Lord is Her Savior as much as ours. She was pre-redeemed, we were post-redeemed, all of us were redeemed.

Why? Why do you fight so hard? It isn’t for Christ! Then who is it for?

I need to take a break.
 
Last edited:
It’s not possible for any bible verse to be used against Jesus’ divinity.
You can’t even do it accidentally - if that’s what you are accusing me of doing.
 
It’s not possible for any bible verse to be used against Jesus’ divinity.
That is exactly what the Christological heretics is the first centuries did. It’s what Jews do to reject the New Testament. And it’s also what the Mormons and Jehovah’s Withesses (modern Arians) do today. You can make the Bible say whatever you say because you pick the hermeneutics and interpretive mechanisms. And if that’s true for you it’s true for everyone. The Episcopalians, Presbyterians and most other mainline Protestants figured out how to make same-sex marriage and abortion quote-unquote biblical. Just because some Protestant says something is biblical does not mean that it is, no matter how many verses they cough up.

Here’s why I’m so mad. If you are teaching your kids that “It’s not possible for any bible verse to be used against Jesus’ divinity,” the single most important thing in the Bible, you’re teaching them that it’s not possible to use any Bible verse against anything at all. You have your interpretation. The Mainliners have theirs. The only thing you guys agree on is that the Catholics are wrong. This charade needs to stop or the secular culture will wipe your church out. I don’t want that. Please give Mary a chance.

But as for me… like I said, I need a break.
 
Last edited:
There’s no such thing as “Jesus the man.”
I beg to differ…there is such a thing as the the son of God becoming the son of man…the "I Am " was also not called “Jesus” until He incarnated…there is significance to the name Jesus to refer to when God, the Son, became man…to say Jesus the man does not take away from His divinity, jusy as calling Jesus God does not take away from His humanity.

Have no idea what adoptionism is…will have to google.
 
Last edited:
When you get rid of Mary the price you pay is horribly sloppy Christology. Those who do not study history are doomed to repeat it.
No one gets rid of Mary…thou be zealous though so I will too…you can get rid of Mary by creating a false image, a false history, a false persona also…what if she wasn’t perfect or was a fallen creature yet graced by faith in God’s covenant like other Jewish maidens, and what if she had other children, even had sex, and what if she had normal burial and saw corruption of her flesh, and what if she be properly exalted along with other great saints but shunning any co redeemer or queen of heaven accolade ?
 
Last edited:
you can get rid of Mary by creating a false image, a false history, a false persona also
Catholicism can only be false if there is in fact a gap between the early Church and the Protestant Reformation such that the Reformation fixed the “false” history. Otherwise, the Reformation IS the false history. Of course, for the Reformation to be legitimate, 1 Tim 2:3-4 must be false, John 17 was prayed in vain, and on and on.

Speaking of false history:
Here is why you hate Mary.
What really happened was that Queen Elizabeth I of England wanted to make an alliance with the Islamic Ottoman Empire and conquer Catholic Spain and France so as to get rich off their New World assets. So she violated Magna Carta Article 1 by seizing control of the English Church, had all her Catholic relatives that had not already been killed by Henry VIII executed, and then went to the Sultan with a theory. Catholicism was supposedly corrupted by the Roman Emperor Constantine who turned it into an idol worshipping cult of Mary.

The Sultan, as a Muslim, despised idolatry and saw Elizabeth as a sympathizer. He said that Islam and Protestantism had much more in common than either did with Catholicism, “as both rejected the worship of idols", “idols” there meaning Mary. Your rejection of Her is just more of the same.

So the Sultan made an alliance between England and the Ottoman Empire. Elizabeth funded his massive navy to go take over Rome, kidnap the Pope and end the Catholic Church. We fought the Sultan at the Battle of Lepanto and defeated their navy even though they had twice the men because we entrusted the battle to Mary. That’s why you’re a Christian and not a Muslim. But Elizabeth indoctrinated all Englishmen with her false history. And you still hold it.

A couple centuries later we Americans fought the empire Elizabeth had created to get our religious freedom back. We only won because Catholic France blockaded Cornwallis at Yorktown. When we fought Britain again in the War of 1812, we would have lost Louisiana but for some nuns there who asked Mary to help us again.

Go google it. Look at the Encyclopaedia Brittanica, Wikipedia or any secular source. It’s all true. Now stop fighting Mary. And start thanking Her.

I’ve said enough. Good night.
 
Last edited:
The Virgin Mary wasn’t sinless she was a sinner since she came from the bloodline of Adam and Eve just like everyone else. If Mary were sinless these verses wouldn’t be true-

As it is written there is none righteous not even one

Romans 3:10

For all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God

Romans 3:23

If we say that we have not sinned we make Him a liar and His word is not in us

1 John 1:10
This would also include Jesus which doesn’t sound right.
 
For all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God
They will say the exception makes the rule.

Augustine acknowledges these scriptures but seems to succumb to the pressure of tradition and sentimentality, and almost harmless…of course the development of Mariology was relatively in infancy…and would not want to put words in his mouth about current beliefs and practices…others say that regardless of development he would approve whatever the church says…some see that as a strenght others as a weakness.

I personally feel he would disprove strongly of later developments
 
Last edited:
Jesus’ saving grace doesn’t only have the strength to heal, but can prevent and preserve from sin. Mary is an example of the one saved from original and actual sin. She is a perfect work of Christ indeed a new Eve.
 
You must certainly suspect that at least a number of Catholics have come across these biblical texts. Try maybe to reading, research etc why Catholics belief Mary was sinless. Then maybe you can see if they’re own biblical backings fall short. At the end of it all, Christ still speaks to us. It will be different to hear a Christian say after prayers, the Lord told me e.g His mother was a sinner and Catholic teaching is false.
 
The Virgin Mary wasn’t sinless she was a sinner since she came from the bloodline of Adam and Eve just like everyone else.
Including Jesus. He had only one human parent. How did God prevent Him from taking a sinful human nature from Her?
As it is written there is none righteous not even one

Romans 3:10

For all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God

Romans 3:23

If we say that we have not sinned we make Him a liar and His word is not in us

1 John 1:10
Here’s Romans 3:9-25 (NRSV).
What then? Are we any better off? No, not at all; for we have already charged that all, both Jews and Greeks, are under the power of sin, as it is written:
There is no one who is righteous, not even one;
there is no one who has understanding,
there is no one who seeks God.
All have turned aside, together they have become worthless;
there is no one who shows kindness,
there is not even one.’
‘Their throats are opened graves;
they use their tongues to deceive.’
‘The venom of vipers is under their lips.’
‘Their mouths are full of cursing and bitterness.’
‘Their feet are swift to shed blood;
ruin and misery are in their paths,
and the way of peace they have not known.’
‘There is no fear of God before their eyes.’



But now, irrespective of law, the righteousness of God has been disclosed, and is attested by the law and the prophets, the righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ for all who believe. For there is no distinction, since ** all have sinned **and fall short of the glory of God; they are now justified by his grace as a gift, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, whom God put forward as a sacrifice of atonement by his blood, effective through faith. He did this to show his righteousness, because in his divine forbearance he had passed over the sins previously committed; it was to prove at the present time that he himself is righteous and that he justifies the one who has faith in Jesus.
If “all” in Romans 3:23 means everyone who ever existed, then it has to mean the same thing everywhere throughout the surrounding verses too. So no one seeks for God and everyone’s a venomous viper. I guess that includes you, @theorangeandblue. “All” there must refer to the audience. Likewise 1 John there is referring to those who claim not to need Christ. Mary certainly didn’t.

You know what… I think the reason why you (and so many anti-Catholics) keep coming back to this verse to disprove the Immaculate Conception is that it’s actually true as applied to you. You’re psychologically protecting. You aren’t seeking God. You’re seeking to disprove Catholicism in order to prove imputed righteousness so that you don’t have to repent of your sins. Immaculate Mary is in your way, so She has to go, no matter the price. If you make God changeable or evil, or deny the divinity of Christ, so be it. Anything but Mary.
 
Last edited:
Anything but Mary.
Again you know we have Mary
Perhaps some need to think extremely and say we throw her out , and not face fact that there just might be another way to honor her and remember her.

People do have problem with how some go overboard and pray and receive literal guidance, more than by example, from her , as if she is all knowing, all hearing and all communicating back to us as only the Holy Spirit can and wishes to do…many say “Mary led me to say or do this”, and again, not by her example which is right, but by her present spirit communicating on in intimate level…again something some only reserve and attribute to Holy Spirit role.

Again, Jesus and apostles honored and remembered feats and faith of old testament saints, and can draw strength and encouragement from thier example but stiil do not see them praying to these deceased yet living saints, or from receiving communications back from them…the transfiguration was a special event and is the exception to the rule honoring the gulf between earth bound and those in paradise and heaven.

Again no rosary for apostles, no IC or Assumption or redemptrix or queen of heaven teaching from them directly…honoring her as we do is just as much a qualitative tradition as yours, and just because yours is more quantitative ( more widely practiced at one time) is not justification for its rightness over the other tradition.

There is a reason those two class of monks arguing for a few centuries over IC begore pope finally settled the matter in 1854…were those monks against IC throwing Mary totally out, as you accuse us? I think not.
 
Last edited:
all hearing and all communicating back to us as only the Holy Spirit can and wishes to do…many say “Mary led me to say or do this”,
When you have a funeral there is always a eulogy along the lines of, “I miss grandma but I know she’s with Jesus now watching over us.”

That’s the same thing as “St. Granny, pray for us.” And when some miracle happens and one of the grandkids says, “see, I know Granny was praying for us because I saw a cardinal and I know she loved cardinals,” they do not mean that Granny is a goddess or performed the miracle herself. The Holy Spirit did it. We all know that. No one is going overboard, but someone is engaging in a double standard. Grandmom is a saint but Jesus’s Mom isn’t.
 
always a eulogy along the lines of, “I miss grandma but I know she’s with Jesus now watching over us.”
No. Some do much more than that…they say " gramma told me
…"

Again I say some…if you wanna say none ok, but that is your experience of others…but words have meanings and from my experience some say about Mary what is reserved for Holy Spirit…i am not sure there is evidence saints are all seeing as God is
 
Last edited:
No. Some do much more than that…they say " gramma told me
…"
And what’s wrong with that versus “the Holy Spirit told me about grandma today?” As long as the person doesn’t think that grandma is walking around doing miracles on her own, which they don’t (whether Protestant or Catholic!), I don’t see what the big deal is.
 
And what’s wrong with that versus “the Holy Spirit told me about grandma today…
Words have meaning…totally different understanding between two examples given…nothing is wrong with Holy Spirit talking to us. Mary talking to us yes,(wrong) unless you mean by example of her life speaking to us
 
Last edited:
Words have meaning…totally different understanding between two examples given…nothing is wrong with Holy Spirit talking to us. Mary talking to us yes, unless you mean by example of her life speaking to us
What’s the difference between Grandma sitting next to me and talking to me, and Grandma doing the same thing through the Holy Spirit from Heaven?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top