Sinless Mary

[Mannyfit75]

Manny - you keep referring to the “early Church Fathers” - who were they ??? - are you referring to any of the Apostles - or the “early Church Fathers” that represent the “Catholic church.”

The Early Church Fathers consist of the Apostolic Fathers, Igatius, Clement of Rome (Bishop of Rome, 4th Successor of St. Peter), Polycarp, and Papias were all taught by the Apostles.

St. Ignatius was a disciple of John, and ordain by Peter.

The ones that succeeded them, are Early Church Fathers. They represent the whole of Christianity. Since in the Beginning of the Church, it was One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic.

In those days, the Eastern Orthodox Church and the Catholic Church were one until 1054 AD.

You’d be hard pressed to find any mother who would reject their son in such a plight.

A mother who loves her son so much, would be incapable of sinning. She could if she wanted too but Mary remain faithful to God.

I hardly think in any sense that after’s Mary’s accepting God’s will by her “be it done unto me according to your word,” would suddenly change her mind and start sinning. For nine months, the Word who became flesh remain in Mary’s womb. The flesh of Jesus comes from Mary, a created being.

We know Jesus to be the spotless Lamb of God. It seem hard to believe that a God who hates and is offended by sin would allow his Only Son to be born of someone who is dirty with sin. Mary had to be pured through God’s grace. She is not pure by her own will. She is pure and perfect because God, the most perfect uncreated Being wanted her to be the Mother of His Son, Jesus Christ.

She is afterall the virgin in Issiah 7:14 and the woman in Genesis 3:15, whose seed (Jesus) will crushed the serpent. I do not think Mary after giving birth to Jesus suddenly decided to live in sin. The Bible shows no text that she actually committed any personal sin.

She was the most loyal Handmaid of the Lord, the Blessed Virgin Mary. She remain with her son even at the foot of the cross when the majority of Jesus’ disciple abandoned him. She did not betray her son. She did not deny him three times. At the wedding feast at Cana, she told the servant. “Do whatever he tells you.” She points us to her Son. She seeks no attention to herself.

Even Jesus praised his Mother when he said, “Yea rather, blessed are they who hear the word of God, and keep it.” (Luke 11:28").

Mary heard the word of God and keep it. How many of us have keep the word of God? I mean keep his commandments? We fail, but Mary remain faithful. She is God’s Handmaid, the Mother of Our Lord, God.

Her sinlessness does not make her equal to God. Her example, shows us all that through God’s grace. We can be saved and be made perfect! So as long we persevere in the end and not fall into sin.

 

[Leeann]

Hi Goodfella

I take it you believe Arius or Nestorious may have been right, that Jesus was either human or two persons in one body: one human and the other divine

You “take” a lot for granted.

since you reject the teaching authority of the Catholic Church. And since you believe the Church’s Marian dogma of the Immaculate Conception is erroneous, you cannot be sure whether the same Church erred in her Christological dogmas. To claim otherwise would be intellectually dishonest. Moreover, if the Catholic Church got some things right and other things wrong, then Jesus couldn’t have sent his Church the Paraclete to guide her in all truth as he promised his apostles he would.

You got that right - especially the part about not sending the Holy Spirit to the “Catholic church”…I believe the promise was fulfilled to the Apostles most definitely as they established the “early churches”.

I could never consider becoming a Protestant, since the countless Protestant denominations can’t agree among themselves what the true Gospel is. Protestants still can’t agree with each other, for instance, what baptism essentially signifies.

Hhhhmmm…yes…I see your point…similar to how some Catholics can’t agree on whether Mary was really sinless before or at the time of conception or forever…and that’s even after a firm authorative doctrine has been set in place.

Are you trying to convince me that the Holy Spirit revealed the truth of the Holy Trinity to you after you opened your Bible? Are you saying that you were unaware of the existence of the Holy Trinity until you read the scriptures all by your lonesome self?

Not trying to convince you of anything…simply stating a fact!
Isn’t it simply amazing what God can do…no limits placed on His authority! And obviously I wasn’t “alone” while reading it.

The concept of the Trinity originates from Sacred Tradition, not Scripture.

Really??? You might want to read 1 John Ch 5: V7
“For there are three that bear witness in heaven: the Father, the Word and the Holy Spirit, and these three are one.”

What have the different lay apostolate movements in the Catholic Church got to do with Christian disunity? You’ve created a faulty analogy. Their members all share the same Catholic faith.

Oh…I see…and they practice and worship all the same…no differences…no “disunity” or schisms “within” the same Catholic faith.

Picking and choosing what one personally wants to believe, according to her private interpretation of Scripture, again…taking is the underlying principle of a divided and fragmented Protestant movement. When do you think you’ll found your own church and add a new denomination to the list of thousands? Christianity is divided because individuals presume they are their own authority. Ironically each dissenting individual mistakenly believes her authority is the written word of God and she is guided by the Holy Spirit. Call it religious free enterprise.

Or perhaps you could call it “the truth shall set you free”.
I’m in complete “unity” with the Father/the Son/the Holy Spirit and my prayer and hope for you is that one day you will be too…whether in your denomination which happens to be the Catholic church …or in another denomination…we’re all under HIS umbrella if we are true believers.

“Those, therefore, who desert the preaching of the Church, call in question the knowledge of the holy presbyters, not taking into consideration of how much greater consequence is a religious man, even in a private station, than a blasphemous and impudent sophist. Now, such are all the heretics, and those who imagine that they have hit upon something more beyond the truth…proceeding on their way variously, inharmoniously, and foolishly, not always keeping to the same opinions with regard to the same things, as blind men are led by the blind, they shall deservedly fall into the ditch of ignorance lying in their path, ever seeking and never finding out the truth. It behooves us, therefore, to avoid their doctrines, and to take careful heed lest we suffer any injury from them; but flee to the Church, and be brought up in her bosom, and be nourished with the Lord’s Scriptures.”
Irenaeus, Against Heresies, 5, 20:2 (A.D. 180)

PAX :harp:

Do we place our implicit faith in God and His promises that were before any organized religion of men, as we know them today - the promise that Christ spoke of and the Apostles preached, the promise of the Holy Spirit to each and every believer and the need to trust in GOD above all things? Especially if there is doubt, or confusion, or strife about any doctrine in any church. Do we go to the ones teaching it and have them simply confirm “they are right” - and then simply believe them because “they tell us so” or do we pray, search His word, seek His truth with a humble and contrite spirit and put our implicit faith in HIM, that He will lead us into His truth?

Peace and God Bless

 

[Leeann]

The Early Church Fathers consist of the Apostolic Fathers, Igatius, Clement of Rome (Bishop of Rome, 4th Successor of St. Peter), Polycarp, and Papias were all taught by the Apostles.

St. Ignatius was a disciple of John, and ordain by Peter.

The ones that succeeded them, are Early Church Fathers. They represent the whole of Christianity. Since in the Beginning of the Church, it was One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic.

In those days, the Eastern Orthodox Church and the Catholic Church were one until 1054 AD.

A mother who loves her son so much, would be incapable of sinning. She could if she wanted too but Mary remain faithful to God.

I hardly think in any sense that after’s Mary’s accepting God’s will by her “be it done unto me according to your word,” would suddenly change her mind and start sinning. For nine months, the Word who became flesh remain in Mary’s womb. The flesh of Jesus comes from Mary, a created being.

We know Jesus to be the spotless Lamb of God. It seem hard to believe that a God who hates and is offended by sin would allow his Only Son to be born of someone who is dirty with sin. Mary had to be pured through God’s grace. She is not pure by her own will. She is pure and perfect because God, the most perfect uncreated Being wanted her to be the Mother of His Son, Jesus Christ.

She is afterall the virgin in Issiah 7:14 and the woman in Genesis 3:15, whose seed (Jesus) will crushed the serpent. I do not think Mary after giving birth to Jesus suddenly decided to live in sin. The Bible shows no text that she actually committed any personal sin.

She was the most loyal Handmaid of the Lord, the Blessed Virgin Mary. She remain with her son even at the foot of the cross when the majority of Jesus’ disciple abandoned him. She did not betray her son. She did not deny him three times. At the wedding feast at Cana, she told the servant. “Do whatever he tells you.” She points us to her Son. She seeks no attention to herself.

Even Jesus praised his Mother when he said, “Yea rather, blessed are they who hear the word of God, and keep it.” (Luke 11:28").

Mary heard the word of God and keep it. How many of us have keep the word of God? I mean keep his commandments? We fail, but Mary remain faithful. She is God’s Handmaid, the Mother of Our Lord, God.

Her sinlessness does not make her equal to God. Her example, shows us all that through God’s grace. We can be saved and be made perfect! So as long we persevere in the end and not fall into sin.

Thank you Manny for your response and insights.

 

[Mannyfit75]

Hi Manny

Not “early enough” - the earliest post was 100 or 110 A.D. - many false teachings had already been introduced throughout the original “true church” of believers. Obviously these ones were in support of them.

Answer this questions, does God will that his son be born of a woman that full of spots of sin? Remember, Jesus the Lamb of God, without sin?

I do not believe that Mary is sinful nor she commit sin. It would be turning back on her word when she said, "Be it done onto me according to your world.

There is no Scriptural Proof text to show that she commit sin. There is proof text that Mary was in the beginning of Christ’s minister and she was there in the end. She was even there at the foot of the cross.

 

[Mannyfit75]

Thank you Manny for your response and insights.

This is something I reflect about. People often accused Catholic that Mary distracts us from Jesus. I beg to differ on that opinion. She leads us to Jesus. She is after all the first woman or human being to be accept God and with her consent, the Word became flesh. You know who this Word is? Jesus Christ! Our Lord and Savior!

 

[Good_Fella]

Hi Goodfella

You got that right - especially the part about not sending the Holy Spirit to the “Catholic church”…I believe the promise was fulfilled to the Apostles most definitely as they established the “early churches”.

Hhhhmmm…yes…I see your point…similar to how some Catholics can’t agree on whether Mary was really sinless before or at the time of conception or forever…and that’s even after a firm authorative doctrine has been set in place.

Really??? You might want to read 1 John Ch 5: V7
“For there are three that bear witness in heaven: the Father, the Word and the Holy Spirit, and these three are one.”
Peace and God Bless

Jesus never said anything about establishing churches or denominations. On the contrary, he assured Peter and the Apostles that on them he would found one catholic (universal) Church:

“And so I say to you, you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.”
Matthew 16, 18

This is the One Apostolic Catholic Church Paul describes as “the pillar and foundation of the truth” that the Holy Spirit will enlighten and protect against false teachings until the end of this age, not until the demise of the last New Testament apostle. When Jesus told his apostles that he would not leave them orphans, he had his church in mind, promising them he would be with the one church he had founded on them until the end of time.

“Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all I have commanded you. And behold, I am with you until the end of time.”
Matthew 28, 19-20

The Paraclete arrived at Pentecost and descended upon the apostles in the cenacle, but he has remained wih the One Catholic Apostolic Church to help the Episcopacy gradually understand and explicitly teach what Christ reveals to his church until he returns. In order for the promised Paraclete to guide the Church in all truth until the end of this age, Apostolic Succession should be necessary. For there is only one truth as there is one God.

The proposal was acceptable to the whole community, so they chose Stephen, a man filled with faith and the holy spirit, also Philip, Prochorus, Nicanor, Timon, Parmenos, and Nicholas of Antioch, a convert to Judaism. They presented these men to the apostles who prayed and laid hands on them. The word of God continued to spread, and the number of disciples in Jerusalem increased greatly.
Acts 6, 5-7

While they were worshipping the Lord and fasting, the Holy Spirit said, “Set apart for me Barnabas and Saul for the work to which I have called them.” Then, completing their fasting and prayer, they laid hands on them and set them off.
Acts 13, 2-3

Do not neglect the gift you have, which was conferred on you through the prophetic word with the imposition of hands of the presbyterate.
1 Timothy 4, 14

I charge you in the presence of God and of Christ Jesus,…proclaim the word;…convince, reprimand, encourage through all patience and
teaching…perform the work of an evangelist; fulfill your ministry. For I am already being poured out like a libation, and the time of my departure is at hand.
2 Timothy 4, 1-6

We belong to God, and anyone who knows God listens to us, while anyone who does not belong to God refuses to hear us. This is how we know the spirit of truth and the spirit of deceit.
1 John 4, 6

“And thus preaching through countries and cities, they appointed the first fruits of their labours, having first proved them by the Spirit, to be deacons and bishops of those who should afterwards believe…For such saith the Scripture a certain place, ‘I will appoint their bishops in righteousness, and their deacons in faith.’…Our apostles also knew, through our Lord Jesus Christ, there would be strife on account of the office of the episcopate. For this reason, therefore, inasmuch as they had obtained a perfect foreknowledge of this, they appointed those ministers already mentioned, and afterwards gave instructions, that when these should fall asleep, other approved men should succeed them in their ministry…For our sin will not be small if we eject from the episcopate those who have blamelessly and holily fulfilled its duties.”
Pope Clement, Epistle to the Corinthians 42, 44 (A.D. 98)

In the post-Apostolic period of implicit faith there was One Holy Apostolic Catholic Church which reflected the existence of one God in the unity of one faith.

“Wheresoever the bishop appears, there let the people be, even wheresoever Christ is, there is the Catholic Church.”
Ignatius of Antioch, Epistle to the Smyrnaeans 8,2 (A.D.110)

The early Church was comprised of four bishoprichs: Jerusalem, Rome, Alexandria, and Antioch. Constantinople would be included later after the conversion of the Emperor Constantine. These Holy Sees and all the churches or communities under their governance shared one, catholic, and apostolic faith handed down from the apostles through the divine institution of apostolic succession.

In the Infancy Narrative of his gospel, Luke draws a parallel between Mary and the ark of the Old Covenant, implying she was pure and undefiled in nature, since she was granted the singular privilege of carrying the Word made flesh in her womb. The evangelist may have been aware of a traditional belief that could imply Mary was in fact personally sinless. Luke may even have written without meaning to that Mary was exempt from hereditary sin as well. Scripture tells us that no prophet is the interpreter of his own prophecy, since it is the Holy Spirit who speaks for the benefit of future generations of believers. It is the Holy Spirit who interprets what is implicit in the scriptures through the Apostolic teaching authority of the Church. Isaiah had no idea that his prophecy of the Virgin Birth (7:14) pointed toward a Divine Messiah in a secondary context. Christ’s apostles made that connection after having received the Holy Spirit at Pentecost. It was after Pentecost that Matthew penned 1:25 in acknowledgement of the true meaning and fufillment of Isaiah’s prophecy. Scripture comes from Tradition. Luke writes to Theophilus in his opening prologue that he is confirming an existing traditional set of beliefs in the life of the Church. And the church in Palestine may have regarded Mary as sinless in light of the Judaic concept of sin, verbally expressed in Luke’s account of the Annunciation: “Hail, full of grace. The Lord is with you.”

 

[Good_Fella]

Hi Goodfella

I believe the promise was fulfilled to the Apostles most definitely as they established the “early churches”.

Catholics can’t agree on whether Mary was really sinless before or at the time of conception or forever…and that’s even after a firm authorative doctrine has been set in place.

Jesus never said anything about establishing churches or denominations. On the contrary, he assured Peter and the Apostles that on them he would found one catholic (universal) Church:

 

[East_and_West]

St. Augustine (Protestants love this guy)
“Having excepted the holy Virgin Mary, concerning whom, on account of the honor of the Lord, I wish to have absolutely no question when treating of sins—for how do we know what abundance of grace for the total overcoming of sin was conferred upon her, who merited to conceive and bear him in whom there was no sin?—so, I say, with the exception of the Virgin, if we could have gathered together all those holy men and women, when they were living here, and had asked them whether they were without sin, what do we suppose would have been their answer?” (Nature and Grace 36:42 [A.D. 415]).

St.Ephraim the Syrian

“You alone and your Mother are more beautiful than any others, for there is no blemish in you nor any stains upon your Mother. Who of my children can compare in beauty to these?” (Nisibene Hymns 27:8 [A.D. 361]).

 

[Leeann]

This is the One Apostolic Catholic Church Paul describes as “the pillar and foundation of the truth” that the Holy Spirit will enlighten and protect against false teachings until the end of this age, not until the demise of the last New Testament apostle. When Jesus told his apostles that he would not leave them orphans, he had his church in mind, promising them he would be with the one church he had founded on them until the end of time.

“Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all I have commanded you. And behold, I am with you until the end of time.”
Matthew 28, 19-20

The Paraclete arrived at Pentecost and descended upon the apostles in the cenacle, but he has remained with the One Catholic Apostolic Church to help the Episcopacy gradually understand and explicitly teach what Christ reveals to His Church until he returns. In order for the promised Paraclete to guide the Church in all truth until the end of this age, Apostolic Succession should be necessary. For there is only one truth as there is one God.

The proposal was acceptable to the whole community, so they chose Stephen, a man filled with faith and the holy spirit, also Philip, Prochorus, Nicanor, Timon, Parmenos, and Nicholas of Antioch, a convert to Judaism. They presented these men to the apostles who prayed and laid hands on them. The word of God continued to spread, and the number of disciples in Jerusalem increased greatly.
Acts 6, 5-6

While they were worshipping the Lord and fasting, the Holy Spirit said, “Set apart for me Barnabas and Saul for the work to which I have called them.” Then, completing their fasting and prayer, they laid hands on them and set them off.
Acts 13, 2-3

Do not neglect the gift you have, which was conferred on you through the prophetic word with the imposition of hands of the presbyterate.
1 Timothy 4, 14

We belong to God, and anyone who knows God listens to us, while anyone who does not belong to God refuses to hear us. This is how we know the spirit of truth and the spirit of deceit.
1 John 4, 6

In the post-Apostolic period of implicit faith there was One Holy Apostolic Catholic Church which reflected the existence of one God in the unity of one faith. Those heretics, among the clergy, who arose after this period to challenge the Church’s Trinitarian, Christological, and Marian teachings are not counted among the custodians of the true faith who participated in the Ecumenical Councils under the jurisdictional authority of the Bishop of Rome to denounce these heretics and their false teachings.

“Wheresoever the bishop appears, there let the people be, even wheresoever Christ is, there is the Catholic Church.”
Ignatius of Antioch, Epistle to the Smyrnaeans 8,2 (A.D.110)

The early Church was comprised of four bishoprichs: Jerusalem, Rome, Alexandria, and Antioch. Constantinople would be included later after the conversion of the Emperor Constantine. These Holy Sees and all the churches or communities under their governance shared one, catholic, and apostolic faith handed down from the apostles through the divine institution of apostolic succession.

In the Infancy Narrative of his gospel, Luke draws a parallel between Mary and the ark of the Old Covenant, implying she was pure and undefiled in nature, since she was granted the singular privilege of carrying the Word made flesh in her womb. The evangelist must have been aware of a traditional belief that could imply Mary was in fact personally sinless. He couldn’t have been aware, however, of the full theological implications of the concept of original sin which took the Church almost four centuries to get straightened out between the East and West. Still Luke may have written without meaning to that Mary was exempt from hereditary sin as well. Scripture tells us that no prophet is the interpreter of his own prophecy (2 Pet 1:20), since it is the Holy Spirit who speaks for the benefit of future generations of believers. It is the Holy Spirit who later interprets what is implicit in the scriptures through the Apostolic teaching authority of the Church.

Indeed, it’s unlikely Isaiah had any idea that his prophecy of the Virgin Birth (7:14) pointed toward a Divine Messiah. Christ’s apostles made that connection after having received the Holy Spirit at Pentecost. It was after Pentecost that Matthew penned 1:25 in acknowledgement of the true meaning and fufillment of Isaiah’s prophecy. Scripture comes from Tradition. Luke writes to Theophilus in his opening prologue that he is confirming an existing traditional set of beliefs in the life of the Church. The church in Palestine may have regarded Mary as sinless in light of the Judaic concept of sin, verbally expressed in Luke’s account of the Annunciation: “Hail, full of grace. The Lord is with you,” to be translated afterwards into the true Christian understanding.

The Church had implicitly perceived the notion of the Trinity before John wrote his first epistle toward the end of the first century.

The apostles themselves were slow to understand what Jesus was telling them, for the ineffable divine mysteries cannot be grasped over night. Flesh and blood do not reveal these mysteries to us, but the grace of God through the agency of the Holy Spirit in God’s time. In the post-Apostolic era of the early Church in the East and West, the Church Fathers of the first two centuries were unanimous in believing and teaching that Mary was pure and spotless, without venial or mortal sin; although Origen, influenced by the Alexandrian understanding of sanctification by grace, piously opined the mother of our Lord had personal faults such as maternal vanity and doubt. (The Son of Man expressed doubt on the cross: “My God, why have you foresaken me!”) All the same, he believed she was personally sinless: “immmaculate”.

No Church Father at this time or after explicitly taught against the norm that Mary was a sinner. (Cyril of Alexandria was admonished for trying to.) She couldn’t have been in light of her doctrinally accepted position as the New Eve, Ark of the New Covenant, and Mother of God. It wasn’t until the Church in the West resolved the problem of original sin and the operation of God’s grace in the early fifth century (the period of explicit faith) with the arrival of Ambrose and Augustine that the idea of the Immaculate Conception emerged in speculative theology.

Once the teaching of the Immaculate Conception was introduced by these Church Fathers and Doctors of the faith, the period of controversy would set in among theologians, notably the scholastics of the Mediaeval period. Aquinas piously ‘questioned’ whether Mary was preserved free from original sin at the precise moment she was conceived, but Dun Scotus corrected him. The Franciscan’s explanation is actually cited in the Apostolic Constitution of Pope Pius lX, of 1854, which dogmatically defines this teaching. Meanwhile, Aquinas said that he would accept this doctrine if it were declared a dogma by the Magisterium.

The universal feast of the Immaculate Conception was established by Pope Sixtus lV on 8 December 1476. He did not declare and define this doctrine as a dogma. Thus Roman Catholics were free to privately accept or reject it without incurring heresy. This freedom was reiterated by the Council of Trent. But the situation has changed since 1854.

PAX :harp:
THE CHURCH…the Church…early CHURCH Fathers…bible verses quoted as intepreted by …who?..The CHURCH…a POPE…leader of THE CHURCH…Council of Trent…The CHURCH…Why would you think that any of this information would compel anyone to believe it or accept it as being absolute truth…simply because “the Church” states it to be so…but of course!!!..they’re the ones that have stated that they are the only true church…so it MUST be true!!!

 

[PerryJ]

And then you go on to post lists and lists of quotations.

See this post and next as Biblical proof of Mary being sinless.
I do this even thou as a Catholic I do not need to.

Pope Pius IX in 1854 infallibly defined the dogma of the Immaculate Conception: The Most Holy Virgin Mary was, in the first moment of her conception, by a unique gift of grace and privilege of Almighty God and in view of the merits of Jesus Christ the Redeemer of mankind, preserved free from all stain of original sin.

The three points of this statement are:
1)Mary was protected from original sin and the effects of original sin from the first moment of her existence.
2)IC only deals with Mary’s protection from original sin
3)This protection was via the merits of Jesus. She was proactively redeemed by Christ versus retroactively

Genesis 3:15 ”I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your offspring and hers; He will strike at your head, while you strike at his heel”

God is speaking to Satan and tells him that the woman’s offspring will strike at the serpents head. All Christians believe this is Jesus. The enmity that is between Jesus and Satan is the same enmity that is between the serpent and the woman. This woman must be Mary and as Jesus is not ensnared by the devil also Mary must not be.

Revelation 12:17 “And the dragon was angry against the woman: and went to make war with the rest of her seed, who keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ.

Why would Satan be angry with Mary if she was as all other people? It is because she was sinless as is Christ. She was sinless by the proactive redemptive of Christ. We will see later why this verse is referring to Mary.

Luke 1:28And 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.

Verse 29 shows that this salutation was not a normal salutation. It is a salutation giving Mary a new name. This is shown as Mary was not used in the salutation. She was given a new name just as Peter was given a new name, the rock. A new name means that God was giving her a special grace.

In verse 28 we see that the grace was given from the beginning. The grace given to Mary is at once permanent and of a unique kind. Kecharitomene is a perfect passive participle of charitoo, meaning “to fill or endow with grace.” Since this term is in the perfect tense, it indicates that Mary was graced in the past but with continuing effects in the present. So, the grace Mary enjoyed was not a result of the angel’s visit. In fact, Catholics hold, it extended over the whole of her life, from conception onward. She was in a state of sanctifying grace from the first moment of her existence.

The refutation of Ephesians is incomplete Luke 1:28 uses a special conjugated form of “charitoo.” It uses “kecharitomene,” while Ephesians 1:6 uses “echaritosen,” which is a different form of the verb “charitoo.” Echaritosen means "he graced (bestowed grace.) Echaritosen signifies a momentary action, an action brought to pass. (Blass and DeBrunner, Greek Grammar of the New Testament, p.166.) Whereas, Kecharitomene, the perfect passive participle, shows a completeness with a permanent result. Kecharitomene denotes continuance of a completed action (H. W. Smyth, Greek Grammar (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1968 ) 108-109, sec 1852:b also Blass and DeBrunner p.175.

This title “full of grace” also shows that one is not touched by sin. Sin diminishes grace. To be full of grace one must not have been touched by grace.

How can she be sinless Romans 3:23 states all have sinned. Peter in this verse is speaking of personnel sin versus original sin. If we also believe that it truly includes all then Jesus would have to be included. Paul though here is referring back to Psalm 14 which is David talking about rebellion in Israel. The rebellion includes not just gentiles but also fellow Israelites. In this context he is using the collective all not the distributive all. We know this because he then distinguishes the evildoers. He also refers to the generation of the righteous. This shows that he was using a collective all and not a distributive all.

If we look at Romans 5:12 and 5:18-19 where Paul teaches that men inherit original sin we have three examples that it was not inherited: Jesus, Adam and Eve. There exist exceptions for inheriting original sin. We Catholics believe Mary is the knew Eve and as such would not inherit original sin.

What about the words of Jesus in Luke 11:27-28 ( Mt. 12:46-50 and Mk 3:35)? A woman in the crowd exclaimed: “Blessed is the womb that bore you…” He replied: “Rather blessed are they who hear the word of God and keep it.”

Does this show that Mother Mary wasn’t truly blessed as we believe? No, Jesus is teaching that ones grace can grow. Even Mother Mary’s grace could continue to grow as she hears and obeys the Lord. Why is this needed if she is to remain sinless? It is not needed for her; however, it shows her grace or soul could continue to grow.

We next see Mary and the Covenant of the Ark compared in Luke’s gospel. Notice the cloud of God covering both Mary and the Ark. There are more I just listed some.

Luke 1:35 “And the angel answering, said to her: The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the most High shall overshadow thee. And therefore also the Holy which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God.”

Numbers 9:15 “Now on the day that the tabernacle was reared up, a cloud covered it. But from the evening there was over the tabernacle, as it were, the appearance of fire until the morning.”

Exodus 40:32 “The cloud covered the tabernacle of the testimony, and the glory of the Lord filled it.”

Mary stays with Elizabeth is compared to the ark staying with Obedom. Both are for three months. The keeper of the covenant was blessed. This blessing is for keeping just the word of the Lord not Christ himself.

Luke 1:26 “And in the sixth month, the angel Gabriel was sent from God into a city of Galilee, called Nazareth”

Luke 1:40 “And she entered into the house of Zachary, and saluted Elizabeth.”

2nd Samuel 6:11 – 12 “And the ark of the Lord abode in the house of Obededom the Gethite three months: and the Lord blessed Obededom, and all his household. 12 And it was told king David, that the Lord had blessed Obededom, and all that he had, because of the ark of God. So David went, and brought away the ark of God out of the house of Obededom into the city of David with joy. And there were with David seven choirs, and calves for victims.”

King David, receiving the Ark and Elizabeth receiving Mary ask a similar questions. Not a strong case by itself; however it adds to the case.

Luke 1:43 “And whence is this to me, that the mother of my Lord should come to me?”

2nd Samuel 6:9 “And David was afraid of the Lord that day, saying: How shall the ark of the Lord come to me?”

In addition compare what the Ark contained: the Word of God written on stone, the bread from heaven in the form of manna, and the priestly staff of Aaron; the new ark contains the Word of God enfleshed, the true bread of heaven, and the high priest of the New Covenant.

Revelation also shows a comparison between the Ark and Mary. Some denote the woman as Israel. This does not make sense as in the verse that follows Satan and Jesus are shown. The person referred to in Revelation has to be Mary.

Revelation 11:19-12:1 “And the temple of God was opened in heaven: and the ark of his covenant was seen in his temple, and there were lightning’s, and voices, and an earthquake, and great hail. And a great sign appeared in heaven: A woman clothed with the sun, and the moon under her feet, and on her head a crown of twelve stars:”

Revelation 12:3 “And there was seen another sign in heaven: and behold a great red dragon, having seven heads, and ten horns: and on his head seven diadems:

Revelation 12:9 “And that great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, who is called the devil and Satan.”

Revelation 12:5 “And she brought forth a man child, who was to rule all nations with an iron rod: and her son was taken up to God, and to his throne.”

She brought forth a man child. This is Mary not just Israel as Christ is not the redeemer of just Jews. Jesus is the redeemer of all man and Mary is the New Eve that brings him forth.

Why should we believe in typology? Other examples are Matthew 12:40 Jesus teaches that Jonah’s three days in the belly of the great fish is foreshadowed Jesus three days.
In John 3:14 Jesus says that bronze serpent of Numbers 21:9 symbolized his crucifixion.

There are many more; however, this shows that even Christ used typology.

See next post

 

[PerryJ]

More telling is the verses specifically about the Ark. God took great care in creating a vessel that was only housing the Ark. What more would he have done to the one bringing Christ into the world. The vessel was made of acacia wood and pure gold. It was to be without stain or defect. This is an important point. It was made without stain or defect! Oza that dared to touch the Ark was instantly killed

2nd Samuel 6:14-16And when they came to the floor of Nachon, Oza put forth his hand to the ark of God, and took hold of it: because the oxen kicked and made it lean aside. And the indignation of the Lord was enkindled against Oza, and he struck him for his rashness: and he died there before the ark of God.

Interactions with God shows that one has to be clean in the presence of the Lord:

Not even animals could be present when God visited Mount Sinai. The people also had to be sanctified and even had to wash their garments.

Exodus Chapter 19:10-14 10 And he said to him: Go to the people, and sanctify them today, and tomorrow, and let them wash their garments. 11 And let them be ready against the third day: for on the third day the Lord will come down in the sight of all the people upon Mount Sinai. 12 And thou shalt appoint certain limits to the people round about, and thou shalt say to them: Take heed you go not up into the mount, and that ye touch not the borders thereof: every one that toucheth the mount dying he shall die. 13 No hands shall touch him, but he shall be stoned to death, or shall be shot through with arrows: whether it be beast, or man, he shall not live. When the trumpet shall begin to sound, then let them go up into the mount. 14 And Moses came down from the mount to the people, and sanctified them. And when they had washed their garments

Below “No uncleanness” should be in their camp as it would drive away God.

Deuteronomy 23:14 That which thou art eased of: (for the Lord thy God walketh in the midst of thy camp, to deliver thee, and to give up thy enemies to thee and let thy camp be holy, and let no uncleanness appear therein, lest he go away from thee.

If nothing unclean can enter heaven why would God touch one that is unclean at birth?

Revelation 21:27 There shall not enter into it anything defiled, or that worketh abomination or maketh a lie, but they that are written in the book of life of the Lamb.

Although Exodus does not specifically mention cleanliness Moses was not even allowed to see God. How much more would Mary have to be then Moses?

Exodus Chapter 33:18-23 And he said: show me thy glory. 19 He answered: I will show thee all good, and I will proclaim in the name of the Lord before thee: and I will have mercy on whom I will, and I will be merciful to whom it shall please me. 20 And again he said: Thou canst not see my face: for man shall not see me and live.
21And again he said: Behold there is a place with me, and thou shalt stand upon the rock. 22 And when my glory shall pass, I will set thee in a hole of the rock, and protect thee with my right hand, till I pass: 23 And I will take away my hand, and thou shalt see my back parts: but my face thou canst not see.

As a Catholic I do not need to prove this Biblically; however, from the above verses one can see why Mary is considered to have Immaculate Conception. She is above all except Jesus and although she is a creature she interacts with God as no others have or will. She has to be fully cleansed as shown by the requirements of the Ark. This concept is also shown in Biblical verses such as those in Deuteronomy. She is shown to be the enemy of Satan by Bible verses and this demonstrates that she is beyond original sin. If she was stained by sin she would not be named as an enemy of Satan. She would just be another woman stained and under his power. Mary is shown to be free from sin by one being full of grace. If she was stained by sin she would not be full of grace as sin reduces grace. She is presented a new name which throughout the Bible shows a grace being bestowed.

To the Catholic’s I am sure I left out some proof. Feel free to add on.

 

[East_and_West]

THE CHURCH…the Church…early CHURCH Fathers…bible verses quoted as intepreted by …who?..The CHURCH…a POPE…leader of THE CHURCH…Council of Trent…The CHURCH…Why would you think that any of this information would compel anyone to believe it or accept it as being absolute truth…simply because “the Church” states it to be so…but of course!!!..they’re the ones that have stated that they are the only true church…so it MUST be true!!!

Its because the Catholic Church is the only Church that historically goes back to Christ and the Apostles. Thus, it must be the Church that Christ promised that the gates of hell would not prevail against. It must be the Church which Christ promised that the Holy Spirit would guide into all truth. It must be the Chruch that the bible calls the pillar and foundation of truth because any student of history would have to admitt that it is the same Church establish by Christ.

 

[Leeann]

Its because the Catholic Church is the only Church that historically goes back to Christ and the Apostles. Thus, it must be the Church that Christ promised that the gates of hell would not prevail against. It must be the Church which Christ promised that the Holy Spirit would guide into all truth. It must be the Chruch that the bible calls the pillar and foundation of truth because any student of history would have to admitt that it is the same Church establish by Christ.

…hahahahahaha…and so it continues…

 

[East_and_West]

…hahahahahaha…and so it continues…

Well. Then where does the Catholic Church come from? Honestly? It goes back to the first century. Where did Protestantism come from? Martin Luther in the 1500s. How is anyone missing this?

 

[Mannyfit75]

Well. Then where does the Catholic Church come from? Honestly? It goes back to the first century. Where did Protestantism come from? Martin Luther in the 1500s. How is anyone missing this?

Protestants will ignore HIStory. I heard a priest once said that history is God’s story. That is why it is called, HIStory.

 

[PerryJ]

…hahahahahaha…and so it continues…

Your statement is very flip considering thousands of people have died for the Faith. The Faith that gave you the Bible. The Faith that manually wrote the Bible for over a thousand years. Did you know that it took a Catholic monk over one year to write a Bible. A Faith that lived through the two great persecutions of the Romans. A Faith that 19,000 people alone died for the Eucharist in Lyon. The faith that pulled humanity out of the dark ages.

Read a little history. The early Church Fathers show that the first christians were Catholic. They were tortured and killed so that you would even have a Faith. Your response to all these saints is “and so it continues.”

Before you respond with something like the Inquistion or some other nonsense I would check your facts. We know our history on this site very well.

Of course no response to my post showing that Mary is sinless via the Bible. I guess your right “so it continues” it is easier to denigrate than search for the truth?

 

[justasking4]

More telling is the verses specifically about the Ark. God took great care in creating a vessel that was only housing the Ark. What more would he have done to the one bringing Christ into the world. The vessel was made of acacia wood and pure gold. It was to be without stain or defect. This is an important point. It was made without stain or defect! Oza that dared to touch the Ark was instantly killed

2nd Samuel 6:14-16And when they came to the floor of Nachon, Oza put forth his hand to the ark of God, and took hold of it: because the oxen kicked and made it lean aside. And the indignation of the Lord was enkindled against Oza, and he struck him for his rashness: and he died there before the ark of God.

Interactions with God shows that one has to be clean in the presence of the Lord:

Not even animals could be present when God visited Mount Sinai. The people also had to be sanctified and even had to wash their garments.

Exodus Chapter 19:10-14 10 And he said to him: Go to the people, and sanctify them today, and tomorrow, and let them wash their garments. 11 And let them be ready against the third day: for on the third day the Lord will come down in the sight of all the people upon Mount Sinai. 12 And thou shalt appoint certain limits to the people round about, and thou shalt say to them: Take heed you go not up into the mount, and that ye touch not the borders thereof: every one that toucheth the mount dying he shall die. 13 No hands shall touch him, but he shall be stoned to death, or shall be shot through with arrows: whether it be beast, or man, he shall not live. When the trumpet shall begin to sound, then let them go up into the mount. 14 And Moses came down from the mount to the people, and sanctified them. And when they had washed their garments

Below “No uncleanness” should be in their camp as it would drive away God.

Deuteronomy 23:14 That which thou art eased of: (for the Lord thy God walketh in the midst of thy camp, to deliver thee, and to give up thy enemies to thee and let thy camp be holy, and let no uncleanness appear therein, lest he go away from thee.

If nothing unclean can enter heaven why would God touch one that is unclean at birth?

Revelation 21:27 There shall not enter into it anything defiled, or that worketh abomination or maketh a lie, but they that are written in the book of life of the Lamb.

Although Exodus does not specifically mention cleanliness Moses was not even allowed to see God. How much more would Mary have to be then Moses?

Exodus Chapter 33:18-23 And he said: show me thy glory. 19 He answered: I will show thee all good, and I will proclaim in the name of the Lord before thee: and I will have mercy on whom I will, and I will be merciful to whom it shall please me. 20 And again he said: Thou canst not see my face: for man shall not see me and live.
21And again he said: Behold there is a place with me, and thou shalt stand upon the rock. 22 And when my glory shall pass, I will set thee in a hole of the rock, and protect thee with my right hand, till I pass: 23 And I will take away my hand, and thou shalt see my back parts: but my face thou canst not see.

As a Catholic I do not need to prove this Biblically; however, from the above verses one can see why Mary is considered to have Immaculate Conception. She is above all except Jesus and although she is a creature she interacts with God as no others have or will. She has to be fully cleansed as shown by the requirements of the Ark. This concept is also shown in Biblical verses such as those in Deuteronomy. She is shown to be the enemy of Satan by Bible verses and this demonstrates that she is beyond original sin. If she was stained by sin she would not be named as an enemy of Satan. She would just be another woman stained and under his power. Mary is shown to be free from sin by one being full of grace. If she was stained by sin she would not be full of grace as sin reduces grace. She is presented a new name which throughout the Bible shows a grace being bestowed.

To the Catholic’s I am sure I left out some proof. Feel free to add on.

Since Jesus and His diciples knew Mary best where do we see any of them speaking of Mary like this? Where do we see them referring to her as an ark type?
Secondly, in Luke 1:47 she refers to God as her Savior. This is an admittance of being a sinner on her part.
Thirdly, where in the Gospel accounts do we see her engaging the devil directly? Do the Scriptures say she is in any passages?

 

[PerryJ]

Since Jesus and His diciples knew Mary best where do we see any of them speaking of Mary like this? Where do we see them referring to her as an ark type?
Secondly, in Luke 1:47 she refers to God as her Savior. This is an admittance of being a sinner on her part.
Thirdly, where in the Gospel accounts do we see her engaging the devil directly? Do the Scriptures say she is in any passages?

I often called my mother the ark?

Mary being sinless has nothing to do with Jesus not saving her.

He saved her proactivly as my post shows.

She engages in Revelations.

Two pages of post and this is the rebuttal? Nothing serious to refute my statements.

 

[justasking4]

PerryJ;4170934]I often called my mother the ark?

Mary being sinless has nothing to do with Jesus not saving her.

He saved her proactivly as my post shows.

Don’t defenders of this doctrine claim she was saved “from” sinning? If so, where is the evidence for this?

She engages in Revelations

.
I know many try to make Mary part of Revelation but it does not fit well with contexts.

Two pages of post and this is the rebuttal? Nothing serious to refute my statements.

 

[guanophore]

Since Jesus and His diciples knew Mary best where do we see any of them speaking of Mary like this?

This is why Luke wrote her story paralleling it with that of the Ark.

Where do we see them referring to her as an ark type?

You have it backwards son. The Ark was the type. Mary is the fulfillment of what was forshadowed by it.

Secondly, in Luke 1:47 she refers to God as her Savior. This is an admittance of being a sinner on her part.

No, it is an admission that she is aware that she was saved from sin.

Thirdly, where in the Gospel accounts do we see her engaging the devil directly? Do the Scriptures say she is in any passages?

We see many figures of this in many places. It begins in Gen. 3.