Protestants who believe Mary, the Mother of God sinned

[AmateurPianist]

Quite the contrary, It has been proven that Hinn uses deception in his “Healing Sessions” It is theatrics and its for profit. If Hinn actually had a true gift from God to heal as he pretends to, it would not be a circus act. He would be in the hospitals, and better yet in Haiti or Calcutta. As a side note, during our parishes RCIA class we were discussing the gifts of the Holy Spirit. One of them being speaking in tongues. Every “performance” that Hinn does he is always seen speaking in tongues at will. A person can not channel, control, force, or conjure up this gift at will. Only the Holy Spirit controls it and gives it as a gift by His will not mans or Hinns. I understand the question you are trying to put forth, however it is not accurate and is not comparable with the original subject. I apologize if this seem offensive, it is not my intent. Peace

Umm you miss my point. Maybe I wasn’t clear.

It is just that the same logic of “Anything is possible with God” can be used with respect to something that is false just as easily as it can be with something that is true.

Anyway, I don’t want to beat dead horses here.

 

[rev_kevin]

I don’t need any evidence except what the Archangel Gabriel said to Mary… FULL OF GRACE… and then the fact that… NOTHING IS IMPOSSIBLE FOR GOD, and also the fact that God cannot dwell in anyone impure so his Mother had to be completely pure… that is… IMMACULATE.
Blessings

Ok you have no evidence except the usual “full of grace thing.” Why can’t God/Jesus dwell in anyone impure and why does his mother have to be completely pure? As you stated nothing is impossible for God, so her original sin should not affect Jesus in any way shape or form.

 

[KathleenGee]

Lutherteach…

Mary was blessed of all women, before and after…she is a reflection of Christ…He was sinless and received His body and blood from her…

Then there is the reflections you have in adoration of the Eucharist…that reflect on Mary as well…

And then you have saints who have lived very pure lives…and yet she was and is more…

Her faith and prayers are greater than all the apostles combined…as the saying goes…
I would share more…a story but later.

Blessings

 

[ufamtobie]

Ok you have no evidence except the usual “full of grace thing.” Why can’t God/Jesus dwell in anyone impure and why does his mother have to be completely pure? As you stated nothing is impossible for God, so her original sin should not affect Jesus in any way shape or form.

Rev. Kevin,

Except the usual “full of grace thing.”

Rev Kevin, step back and listen, you don’t sound like a Rev. can’t you hear yourself, can’t you hear yourself mouthing off sarcastically, You are putting down the Mother Of Jesus Christ!

Rev. if you don’t believe, you don’t believe, you know, you don’t have to say: "Except for the usual “full of grace thing.”

I Know for a fact Our Lord is not happy with you in this regard!

Ufamtobie

 

[ufamtobie]

1. Didn’t forget to add her because she was human and born with sin. Show me proof that she wasn’t born with sin.

2.Do not call me a chauvinist because I don’t agree with you. Name calling is not a nice thing to do and I know you are a good Christian who will never do that to someone so don"t I don’t take it kindly.

Rev. Kevin, Its time you get it right! I never said God was a Chauvinist! Now don’t you change my words to fit Your Agenda.

UfamTobie

 

[LilyM]

Baby would not feel a thing. Mary’s sin has nothing to do with Jesus as He is sinless.

Except that ALL humans share in Adam’s sin - otherwise why is Christ required to repair the damage done to ALL humans by Adam’s sin. Why didn’t He just die for Adam’s salvation since our sinfulness by your logic has nothing to do with Adam’s?

Point is, Adam’s sin DOES affect all of us, it HAS been and IS passed on to all his offspring, in a very very real way. Mary would have received the stain of Adam’s sin, and passed on to Jesus who was fully human, had she not been spared from the stain of Adam’s sin herself.

Let me elaborate on my earlier comment.

The Father interfering in Mary’s conception as we claim He did was, we all acknowledge, an act of salvation on His part. Mary rightly called God her saviour, we acknowledge that He was. This is because she was pre-emptively saved from sin by being strengthened to completely resist it, rather than saved after the fact of having sinned and spared its consequences the rest of us are. Do you see the logic in this and agree that if God so acted upon Mary it would be an act of salvation?

Do you not agree that then, if the process were moved a generation later as so many non-Catholics insist it could have been, so that it was CHRIST who had this action done upon Him, it would in fact mean that God the Father ‘saved’ His Son, the second person of the Trinity? Can you see why to suggest that CHRIST had anything special about His conception of the kind that He must have had if Mary was a sinner, is an absurdity and an impossibility?

 

[KathleenGee]

Mary at her conception exclaimed, ‘Yes!’ to the Lord, she was converted at her conception…she does not have the same constitution as us…she has no receptacle to be soiled by our sinfulness…

Thus we can embrace her as our mother.

I heard a homily by this priest and it was the best I heard on Mary.

An American pilot was shot down over Austria during WWII. He knew they were Nazi sympathizers, but he also knew they were Catholic. When they found him, they were going to turn him over to the Nazis. So he made the Sign of the Cross and showed them his crucifix. They didn’t care. Then he began to recite his altar boy prayers in Latin, and they proceeded to take him. Then he showed them his little medal of Mary, and then they took him in as brother.

Mary makes us a family. I learned more about devotion to Mary among European Latin Catholics who have a lot more wholesome and fraternal faith. We don’t have quite the integrated, familial culture they have.

I also think we get on the defensive too much when we say we follow Scripture and the Bible.

Point is the Bible is open to interpretation and that is the great drawback of Sola Scriptura…the fragmenting of the Body of Christ and when you have such an individualistic culture such as ours, the fragmenting exacerbates the problem.

The Church’s Living Tradition goes hand in hand with Scripture…not just the Word of God, the Word Made Flesh…which we knows is drawn from Mary’s flesh. The Tradition is the truth of the universal church that believers have come together in the Apostolic tradition through the Holy Spirit.

It is the Holy Spirit through the wholeness and entirety of Scripture – not fragments,bits and pieces taken out of context— but wholeness for the wholeness of the universal church, meaning every person alive–that makes us one…found in the visible, concrete Church.

The more people come into Catholicism, they realize how concrete everything is…not some mystery puzzle to spend alot of time on searching…there is too much need in the world.

I was in a shared Bible study in my neighborhood started by this wonderful Nazarene couple. They had friends from their church come. There were 3 of us Catholics. We ended up by osmosis sitting together. When we would come to a word, the Nazarenes would get out their dictionaries and starting searching for contexts of the meaning of the word—rather than its place in its history in time of people, and we would just sit there and wait for them.

We hear the Word of God and receive the Eucharist, and can do so as well during the weekdays. When Mass is done, we go – to serve and bring Christ to others in the life He gave us. I don’t know any Bible passage by book or verse, etc. Except Psalm 23…is that it??? on the Good Shepherd…neither do priests. But we recognize the passages, the stories, the events, and all the different ‘takes’ on these same passages down through the years.

 

[Dokimas]

I don’t need any evidence except what the Archangel Gabriel said to Mary… FULL OF GRACE… .
Blessings

Where does the Bible say Mary was ‘full of grace’?

 

[AmericanJosiah]

Josiah:

“With God ALL THINGS are POSSIBLE.” But that doesn’t make all things dogmatic facts.

Is it hard for you to believe that God created 5 billion furry brown creatures on the Moon of Endor? Do you lack the faith to accept that possibility? Does it mean that ERGO, it is a dogmatic fact of highest importance that there are 5 billion furry brown creatures on the Moon of Endor? Get my point? See the flaw in your premise?

Friend, the “burden of proof” in apologetics is always, only and exclusively with the one taking the affirmative position. It is not accepted in any form of debate that it is necessary to disprove a non-reality (try to disprove the creaters on the Moon of Endor and you’ll see my point). It is The Catholic Church alone that has this dogma. It is the exclusive responsibility of The Catholic Church to substantiated as a dogmatic fact - not simply as “possible” for ALL THINGS are “possible” but not necessarily true.

.

We know that Endor is a made up place, not…okay, the MOON of Endor, the planet, is a made up place, not found in the Bible (I would hate for Samuel to come back and prove me wrong with my initial statement). Furthermore, Ewoks have nothing to do with the birth of Jesus Christ.

You missed the obvious point of what you quoted…

Simply stating something is not an affirmation that it is a dogmatic fact. And the “burden of proof” lies exclusively with the one with the affirmative position. It’s NOT the task of others to disprove a non-reality, that’s not permitted under ANY debate rules known to me, since it is impossible and moot. It is the task of the one in the affirmative to prove the position to be true.

The rubric being used in this thread is absurd and a debate violation. Something is NOT dogmatic fact simply because it is claimed to be true or because others have not proven it to be false. The apologetic, “It MUST be a dogmatic fact unless you can prove it false” is simply absurd - as all know (or at least should!).

This is dogma only and exclusively in The Catholic Church, unique to it alone. It alone has the 'burden of proof" to substantiate it as a dogmatic fact. That it never has (and very rarely even attempts to do so) is revealing to me.

Thank you.

Pax

• Josiah

.

 

[AmericanJosiah]

Interesting, you state “With God ALL THINGS are POSSIBLE.” only to turn around and do as I had just stated, Put limits on God.

No.

I’m simply disagreeing with the point that if it is POSSIBLE, ergo it is a dogmatic fact. I find that supremely absurd. Is it POSSIBLE that Mary was 15 feet tall, had pink hair, loved fish tacos and had 100 children? Sure - unless you want to put limits on what God CAN do. Does that mean ERGO, it is a dogmatic fact that She was 15 feet tall, had pink hair, loved fish tacos and had 100 children? I hope you finally see the absurity of your “apologetic.” “Well, it’s POSSIBLE” is no apologetic, no defense, no support AT ALL. Obviously. Undeniably. And if that’s all you’ve got - that’s supremely telling.

.

 

[wmscott]

No.

I’m simply disagreeing with the point that if it is POSSIBLE, ergo it is a dogmatic fact. I find that supremely absurd. Is it POSSIBLE that Mary was 15 feet tall, had pink hair, loved fish tacos and had 100 children? Sure - unless you want to put limits on what God CAN do. Does that mean ERGO, it is a dogmatic fact that She was 15 feet tall, had pink hair, loved fish tacos and had 100 children? I hope you finally see the absurity of your “apologetic.” “Well, it’s POSSIBLE” is no apologetic, no defense, no support AT ALL. Obviously. Undeniably. And if that’s all you’ve got - that’s supremely telling.

.

You assertions are a little lacking here. You are reducing a logical argument to a absurdity. Maybe for the sake of humor, who knows, I hope so.

I am not sure about this, so you or anyone else feel free to correct me, but wasn’t the facts surround the Blessed Mother with regards to the Assumption and the Immaculate Conception, Her sinless state and perpetual virginity not really an issue that need infallible declarations. It was a simple fact and common knowledge within the Catholic Church, However because of the errors of the Reformers and later Protestants, it was then that it needed to be infallible proclaimed.

So from the beginning until now the Catholic Church has been teaching this truth, but you don’t like it so you reduce it to a finite human fallible concept. Its not a matter of apologetics, its a simple matter of truth. Truth does not need apologetics or defending, it can stand on its own. Because so many rely on man made theology to tell them what is truth, they have then limited themselves and God. Peace

 

[wwolverine]

The most interesting threads that I have found on this forum have been on Mother Mary and it does go on unending, sometimes in thousands. Isnt it amazing that even thou there are many who have some distinct dislike for Mother Mary, yet they do like the discussion. The ones who dont accept Mother Mary as Catholics and Orthodox do, assume her to be an ordinary woman, a woman just taken from the millions, maybe they feel that God was playing lottery and the name of Mother Mary came and so was decided.

But to what I know, Mother Mary was born miracelously. She was born to St Anna and St Joaquim in their old age, an age which was impossible for her to be a mother. But God did this miracle, because He had a plan and He wanted mankind to be rescued from the clutches of satan. All this time do you think satan was quite? He too was aware of God’s plans and he wanted to be a winner. Remember what happened when the three kings came to see Jesus, how King Herod killed thousands of children? Why? because satan did not know who that child would be.

Mother Mary was a miracle child and hence she had to be without original sin. We can argue unending on this subject, but we Catholics believe that and we will stick to that. Whether non catholics like it or not.

 

[rev_kevin]

Rev. Kevin,

Except the usual “full of grace thing.”

Rev Kevin, step back and listen, you don’t sound like a Rev. can’t you hear yourself, can’t you hear yourself mouthing off sarcastically, You are putting down the Mother Of Jesus Christ!

Rev. if you don’t believe, you don’t believe, you know, you don’t have to say: "Except for the usual “full of grace thing.”

I Know for a fact Our Lord is not happy with you in this regard!

Ufamtobie

Except the full of grace thing is what is said by Catholics about Mary, like you did.
I’m not putting Mary down, just because I don’t see it your way and believe that only 3 were without sin. Your religion says Mary was without sin so back that up.

Just because I disagree with your teachings the Lord is not happy with me.LOL

 

[rev_kevin]

Rev. Kevin, Its time you get it right! I never said God was a Chauvinist! Now don’t you change my words to fit Your Agenda.

UfamTobie

I. Lets see ALL have sinned and fall short of the grace of God. Notice the word All not SOME. So Mary is part of the All. There is my evidence, now show me yours and show me the exception of this in the Bible.
Now you’re questioning my faith because I question and want you to back up your teachings.

1. It just a observation not name calling.
2. Look I’m not your son and I don’t know how old you are for you to be calling me son. So please don’t call me son. Once again its your religion that says this now back it up.
3. Again back it up. Prove me wrong Show me where it says she never sinned.
4. I don’t believe I said she wasn’t blessed. She was blessed because she was going to carry our Savior which no other woman can say. So in that reguards she is blessed.
   I have no fear of becoming a Catholic, I was a Catholic born and raised even was going to be a priest but while in siminar school and after learning more about what was being taught I could not agree with the teachings so I left. I don’t fear calling her blessed because she was like I said. Being blessed don’t mean you can’t sin. She was blessed because, like I said, she was going to carry our Savior.
5. Back up that it means without sin.
6. No the evidence is in the Bible about nails in his hands and feet and that he rose.
7. Your correct you didn’t call God that but you used him to ask me if I was one and you called me one.

 

[adstrinity]

The most interesting threads that I have found on this forum have been on Mother Mary and it does go on unending, sometimes in thousands. Isnt it amazing that even thou there are many who have some distinct dislike for Mother Mary, yet they do like the discussion. The ones who dont accept Mother Mary as Catholics and Orthodox do, assume her to be an ordinary woman, a woman just taken from the millions, maybe they feel that God was playing lottery and the name of Mother Mary came and so was decided.

When I went to a “Full Gospel” school for 7th & 8th grade we were taught there was nothing special about Mary, “She was at the right place at the right time.”

If I may, I do not find rev_kevin’s postings to be disrespectful. Please stop making it personal at him.

Douay-Rheims Bible: www.drbo.org

Luke, 1:26-30 –
26 And in the sixth month, the angel Gabriel was sent from God into a city of Galilee, called Nazareth, 27 To a virgin espoused to a man whose name was Joseph, of the house of David; and the virgin’s name was Mary. 28 And the angel being come in, said unto her: Hail, full of grace, the Lord is with thee: blessed art thou among women. 29 Who having heard, was troubled at his saying, and thought with herself what manner of salutation this should be. 30 And the angel said to her: Fear not, Mary, for thou hast found grace with God.

Romans 3:21 - 26–
21 But now without the law the justice of God is made manifest, being witnessed by the law and the prophets. 22 Even the justice of God, by faith of Jesus Christ, unto all and upon all them that believe in him: for there is no distinction: 23 For all have sinned, and do need the glory of God. 24 Being justified freely by his grace, through the redemption, that is in Christ Jesus, 25 Whom God hath proposed to be a propitiation, through faith in his blood, to the shewing of his justice, for the remission of former sins, 26 Through the forbearance of God, for the shewing of his justice in this time; that he himself may be just, and the justifier of him, who is of the faith of Jesus Christ.

Not each and every person sinned, it is a continuation of Romans 3:22 stating that all sorts of people and all types of people (the Jews are not above the Romans, the Romans are not above the Jews, the Greeks, Persians, etc., are also not so great…). It is not a seperate sentence, it is a continuation seperated by a colon. Most all other translations on this site bible.cc/romans/3-22.htm do have this verse as a dependant clause.

 

[GodLovesTheSpek]

Jesus might not be pleased about what is being said about his mother and her alleged sins. Anyone dare to cast a stone upon her?

In most charitable societies “innocent until proven guilty” but for discussion – let’s set that aside. With or without Sola Scriptura there is no evidence or proof that Mary (specifically) was guilty of any sin. If Rom 3:23 (using the KJV for sake of discussion) is applied “For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God.”, I would counter that Mary Luke 1:28 (KJV): “… Hail, thou that art highly favoured, the Lord is with thee: blessed art thou among women”, was favored from other women and blessed. To further solidify: Luke 1:30 (again KJV) “And the angel said unto her, Fear not, Mary: for thou hast found favour with God”. Next Luke 1:35 (KJV) “And the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God.” Favor to give birth to He who is Holy, Truth, and Perfection. Anyone dare to apply Rom 3:23 to Him?

Apparently, Mary was good enough for God AND Jesus AND The Holy Spirit and be in presence of all three. Jesus had not been born as human nor had he died (yet). Mary was not “born again and saved” (in contemporary thinking), yet she was still worthy of the entire Holy Trinity while on earth.

I sure wouldn’t cast stones or accuse Jesus’ mother of sins.

 

[wmscott]

The most interesting threads that I have found on this forum have been on Mother Mary and it does go on unending, sometimes in thousands. Isnt it amazing that even thou there are many who have some distinct dislike for Mother Mary, yet they do like the discussion. The ones who dont accept Mother Mary as Catholics and Orthodox do, assume her to be an ordinary woman, a woman just taken from the millions, maybe they feel that God was playing lottery and the name of Mother Mary came and so was decided.

But to what I know, Mother Mary was born miracelously. She was born to St Anna and St Joaquim in their old age, an age which was impossible for her to be a mother. But God did this miracle, because He had a plan and He wanted mankind to be rescued from the clutches of satan. All this time do you think satan was quite? He too was aware of God’s plans and he wanted to be a winner. Remember what happened when the three kings came to see Jesus, how King Herod killed thousands of children? Why? because satan did not know who that child would be.

Mother Mary was a miracle child and hence she had to be without original sin. We can argue unending on this subject, but we Catholics believe that and we will stick to that. Whether non catholics like it or not.

You raise a good point. You state “Isn’t it amazing that even thou there are many who have some distinct dislike for Mother Mary, yet they do like the discussion” However a different angle may be that because these folks feel that they need to tell Catholics how wrong we are, that if they keep at the lie long enough, them maybe they can bring one over to their viewpoint. To them that would be a victory because they saved a soul from the the evil institution of the Catholic Church. Truth does not have anything to do with it, it is about discrediting and tearing down the Catholic Faith. Repeat a lie often and loud enough, then folks start to believe the lie.

 

[Justy90]

I. Lets see ALL have sinned and fall short of the grace of God. Notice the word All not SOME. So Mary is part of the All. There is my evidence, now show me yours and show me the exception of this in the Bible.
Now you’re questioning my faith because I question and want you to back up your teachings.

1. It just a observation not name calling.
2. Look I’m not your son and I don’t know how old you are for you to be calling me son. So please don’t call me son. Once again its your religion that says this now back it up.
3. Again back it up. Prove me wrong Show me where it says she never sinned.
4. I don’t believe I said she wasn’t blessed. She was blessed because she was going to carry our Savior which no other woman can say. So in that reguards she is blessed.
   I have no fear of becoming a Catholic, I was a Catholic born and raised even was going to be a priest but while in siminar school and after learning more about what was being taught I could not agree with the teachings so I left. I don’t fear calling her blessed because she was like I said. Being blessed don’t mean you can’t sin. She was blessed because, like I said, she was going to carry our Savior.
5. Back up that it means without sin.
6. No the evidence is in the Bible about nails in his hands and feet and that he rose.
7. Your correct you didn’t call God that but you used him to ask me if I was one and you called me one.

None of it is Scriptural so they can’t back it up other than saying that it comes from the magisterium which is also not Scriptural. The Mary of the Bible is not the Mary of Catholic theology. Big problem.

 

[Teneas]

Here is a question:

Who was made sinless on this earth?

 

[Justy90]

Here is a question:

Who was made sinless on this earth?

here’s your answer, Nobody.