Why doesn't the Bible say that Mary was sinless?

[emeraldisle]

Okay, show me where the Trinity is clearly taught in the Bible.

And then answer the “yes or no” question: does the Bible declare itself to be the sole rule of faith?

16All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:

17That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works. 2 Tim 3:16-17

But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in My name, He will teach you all things, and bring to your remembrance all things that I(Jesus) said to you. John 14:26

.

 

[emeraldisle]

Hey Emerald, this one too, by the way:

But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in My name, He will teach you all things, and bring to your remembrance all things that I said to you. John 14:26

The Holy Spirit teaches me the following truth;

16All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:

17That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works.
2 Tim 2:16-17

.

 

[guanophore]

Then why do it at all if Christ alone is more than sufficent?
Secondly, the catholic church promotes the hail Mary more than than any other prayer in the church. I would bet that there are more prayers said to Mary than Christ or God by a long shot.

I am curious about why you make this assertion about the Hail Mary prayer. What makes you think this?

Also, it seems that you are making a distinction between prayers that have Mary’s name in them and others. There is none. We approach Christ just as the wise men did with their gifts. We are pleased that His Mother is there with him.

No, but it is sufficent for everything we need in regards to our life in Christ.

If this is true for you, ja4, why are you on CAF? Clearly your bible is not sufficient to meet all of your needs, or you wouldn’t spend so much time in here!

It alone causes us to grow in respect to salvation:
…like newborn babies, long for the pure milk of the word, so that by it you may grow in respect to salvation, (1 Pe 2:2).

Where do you see any limitation here to written words? Where does it say that “it alone” does this?

Even though Christ alone is sufficent for all my needs, He also wanted those who are in this world to help each other by prayer also. It is a command and an exhortation to pray for others. There are many examples of this in Scriptrue.

Yes, but those examples are written by people that believed what the Apostles taught, what is preserved in the Apostles Creed about the Communion of Saints.

What you are saying is that Jesus wants you to do something that is unneeded. Why would Jesus command you to do unnecessary things?

What you don’t see ever exhorted or taught in scripture is the idea that you are to pray to those who have died. It is Christ alone Who is our “connection” between Himself and the Father. There is no other mediator between us and Him.

Your predecessors took out some books from the Bible so that would not be so easily seen. But, the part that is left is still clear that there is only one body, and that all who are in Christ are part of that Body. And it clearly states that God is the God of the living, not the dead (or do you think those who die in Christ are separated from Him by death?)

Jesus is generous to allow us to participate in His ministry of reconciliation.

 

[bookgirl32]

16All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:

17That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works. 2 Tim 3:16-17

But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in My name, He will teach you all things, and bring to your remembrance all things that I(Jesus) said to you. John 14:26

.

None of these say that scripture is the only source of revelation, or that it is to be taken by itself.

 

[bookgirl32]

But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in My name, He will teach you all things, and bring to your remembrance all things that I said to you. John 14:26

The Holy Spirit teaches me the following truth;

16All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:

17That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works.
2 Tim 2:16-17

.

This doesn’t really list the inspired “table of contents” of the Bible, does it?

 

[garysibio]

The problem is I have asked the question of why the Bible doesn’t say that Mary was sinless and no-one has been able to give evidence from the Bible that Mary was sinless.

However clear biblical evidence has been given to prove that Mary was a sinner like all of the rest of humanity.

Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned: Rom 5:12

.

If I were to ask you “Are you going to the party? Everyone is going to be there.” would you assume that I meant that all 6 billion of the world’s inhabitants were going to show up for chips and dip? I don’t think so. You would understand from the context that I meant there was going to be a big crowd. “Everyone” was not meant to be taken in a absolute sense in this context. Greek has the same idea. When St. Paul says “all have sinned” he might mean it literally or he might not. We have to determine what he meant from the context.

In Rom 5:12 St. Paul is picking up an idea that he first spoke of in Rom 3. However, this is not St. Paul’s writing; he is quoting Ps 14. Now, would you agree with me that, especially when writing to a Jewish audience as he is in Romans, that St. Paul is not going to take a passage out of context? I think you would agree to that and I will proceed on that assumption.

Take a look at Ps 14. It speaks of two groups of people. The first group are those who deny God’s existence. He calls them “fools” and “children of men.” Of these people David uses the language that St. Paul quotes in Romans.

However David talks about another group of people in Ps 14:7, the Lord’s people. What he has said about the children of men does not necessarily apply to the Lord’s people. It might apply, but it is not mandatory.

So to say that “all have sinned” applies to every single person who ever walked the Earth is to twist the meaning of the passage which St. Paul is using as the foundation for his teaching.

Now let’s say that argument doesn’t sway you. If St. Paul use of "everyone"or “all” is to be taken in an absolute sense, then it must also include Jesus. To follow your interpretation of this passage means that Jesus also had to be a sinner. Of course, that is not only foolishness, it’s heresy, but it is the logical end of your interpretation.

Gary

 

[Jennifer123]

If I ask you to pray for me, brother or sister in Christ, you are a mediator, are you not?

"What will separate us from the love of Christ? Will anguish, or distress, or persecution, or famine, or nakedness, or peril, or the sword? As it is written: “For your sake we are being slain all the day; we are looked upon as sheep to be slaughtered.” No, in all these things we conquer overwhelmingly through him who loved us. For I am convinced that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor present things, 9 nor future things, nor powers, nor height, nor depth, 10 nor any other creature will be able to separate us from the love of God in Christ Jesus our Lord. "

Rom 8:35-39

We are one body in Christ. We are not separated from Christ’s love in death. We are alive in Christ, even in death. We ask those with Him to pray for us, here on Earth and also from those in Heaven, those who have persevered and are perfected in Him. Those righteous prayers will availeth much!!!

 

[Jennifer123]

Mary is never referenced as an archtype in Scripture. .

I think you should dust off the OT and read about the Ark!!

I think this is reading into the scriptures what is not there. For one the OT never predicted nor implied that the mother of the messiah would be like an ark. .

The Jews say that the Messiah would never be a human being capable of being slain by man, but we know how the story goes…

Mary was born under the curse of Adam and so was a sinner. .

Are infants capable of sin? Are the mentally challenged capable of sin? ALL - was Jesus subject to sin? CAN God set aside someone from the stain of original sin IF he wanted to?

For one the scriptures never make this connection with her. Secondly, the differences between a wooden ark and Mary counts against this being a good fit. One of the differences is that the ark was made by man while a human being is made by God.

Read 2 Sam. 6. and then Luke 1. The Ark carried the Word. Mary carried the Word made flesh. The Ark was so holy and pure that God slew Uzziah when he touched it. God had to spare Mary from original sin or else Jesus would be tainted with sin! That is heretical!! King David leapt for joy - How can the Ark of the Lord come to me? John the Baptist leapt for joy in Elizabeth’s womb, Elizabeth cried out - How can the mother of my Lord come to me?

Oh - and the Ark wasn’t just made of wood. It was made of the purest gold with holy engravings, carvings, and statuaries. Moses went on in length about the very precise instructions God gave about its construction. It was much more than a wooden box.

 

[Jennifer123]

Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned: Rom 5:12

.

What about Enoch and Elijah? Did death pass upon them?

 

[Jennifer123]

16All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:

.

Yes, but it doesn’t say it’s the ONLY authority and it would have been referencing the OT, as the NT didn’t exist.

 

[CentralFLJames]

The main thrust of the doctrine of predestination is not concerned with whether or not one can know infallibly that they have been justified.

The thrust of it, as stated in scripture, is that those that God justifies will certainly never lose that justification.

But this does not in any way give any credence to the Protestant error of “once saved always saved” from the context of human perception and belief. No one other than God can know God’s mind.

I am very pragmatic in this are and see the entire topic of predestination as an artifact of theology that arises out of human minds trying to “fit” God to the confines of human understanding. The truth is that predestination is of the providence of God not man. It is only useful in theology in logically proofing and accessing the consistency of other derivative theological concepts. As such it will always be mostly pure mystery to us and not a thing any of us need worry about since we can rely on God being a just God and a good God. There is even a little logic game that non-theologians such as myself can do to confound the academics that is 100% consistent with Church Teaching and can’t be refuted. This is the ascetical maxim : “Si non es prædestinatus, fac ut prædestineris” (if you are not predestined, so act that you may be predestined). Strict theology, it is true, cannot approve this bold saying, except in so far as the original decree of predestination is conceived as at first a hypothetical decree, which is afterwards changed to an absolute and irrevocable decree by the prayers, good works, and perseverance of him who is predestined, according to the words of the Apostle (2 Peter 1:10): “Wherefore, brethren, labour the more, that by good works you may make sure your calling and election.” More here: Predestination.

The Bottom Line is predestiny is God’s providence and we rely on God in all cases both for the grace for our salvation and for “God doing the right thing”. If we can’t trust God then that is a good sign that one is likely not predestined to salvation. Moral of the story - it is self defeating to doubt God or worry since man has no choice but to cooperate with God or go to Hell anyway. But then there is God’s mysterious and profound Mercy. Who is like unto God and who can fathom God?

Trust.

James

 

[LilyM]

But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in My name, He will teach you all things, and bring to your remembrance all things that I said to you. John 14:26

The Holy Spirit teaches me the following truth;

16All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:

17That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works.
2 Tim 2:16-17

.

That phrase is similar to saying that if I have enough money I can become a great scholar, since I will be enabled and equipped to study whatever discipline suits me at whatever university suits.

But is money the ONLY thing necessary? Of course not. I need at least some natural aptitude for scholarship, I need self-discipline to study hard, I need good teachers, I need loads of other things.

So it is with scripture - it is profitable, sure, but it is not all that is necessary, neither does that verse imply that it is all that is necessary. We just need to look at the number of absolute scoundrels who know their Bible from A to Z to know that much more than scripture necessary on even the most basic of levels.

Neither is it ACTUALLY necessary in any sense, simply profitable (in other words useful). For abundant proof of this we just need to look at the number of early Christians who, without knowing all or significant parts of scripture, which hadn’t yet been written, nonethless were every bit as well-equipped to become perfect as you or I.

 

[Pier]

Mary is the Mother of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, and remained a virgin - because God can do whatever He wants and wills…

Therefore, how implausible would it be for her, the mother of our sinless Lord, to have been conceived without the stain of original sin? Does anyone think that would be impossible for God to do?

I’ll tell you what, those of you who doubt His abilities…

YOU ask Him!

 

[Randy_Carson]

Mary is never referenced as an archtype in Scripture.

Really? Then what do you think the following scripture parallels are trying to convey?

The ark of the Old Covenant contained the words of God written on Stone. (Deut. 10:5, Hebrews 9:4) Mary, the Ark of the New Covenant, contained the Word of God made flesh. (John 1:1)

The ark of the Old Covenant contained the jar of manna which came down from heaven. Those who ate of this bread still died. (Exodus 16:32, Hebrews 9:4) Mary, the Ark of the New Covenant, contained Jesus, the bread of life which came down from heaven. Those who eat of this bread will live forever. (John 6:31-41)

The ark of the Old Covenant contained the staff of Aaron which had budded as proof as his priesthood. (Number 17:1-9) Mary, the Ark of the New Covenant, contained Jesus, our high priest, Himself. (Hebrews 4:14)

The ark of the Old Covenant was overshadowed by the glory cloud. (Exodus 40:34-35) Mary, the Ark of the New Covenant, was overshadowed by the Holy Spirit. (Luke 1:35)

The ark traveled to the house of Obed-edom in the hill country of Judea. (2 Sam. 6:1–11) Mary, the Ark of the New Covenant, traveled to the house of Elizabeth and Zechariah in the hill country of Judea. (Luke 1:39)

A man touched the ark of the Old Covenant to steady it without God’s permission and was struck dead on the spot. David was filled with awe and said, “Who am I that the Ark of the Lord should come unto me?” (2 Samuel 6:9) Elizabeth is filled with the Holy Spirit and said, “Who am I that the mother of my Lord should come unto me?” (Luke 1:43)

The ark of the Old Covenant remained in the house of Obed-edom for three months. (2 Sam. 6:11) Mary, the Ark of the New Covenant, remained in the house of Elizabeth for three months (Luke 1:56).

The house of Obed-edom was blessed by the presence of the ark of the Old Covenant. (2 Sam. 6:11) In the account of Mary’s visit to Elizabeth, the word blessed is used three times; surely Elizabeth’s house was blessed by God. (Luke 1:39–45)

The ark of the Old Covenant returns home and ends up in Jerusalem, God’s presence and glory is revealed in the temple. (2 Sam. 6:12; 1 Kgs. 8:9–11) Mary, the Ark of the New Covenant, returns home and eventually ends up in Jerusalem, where she presents God incarnate in the temple. (Luke 1:56; 2:21–22)

Dressed as a priest, David danced and leapt in front of the ark of the Old Covenant. (2 Sam. 6:14) John the Baptist—of priestly lineage—leapt in his mother’s womb at the approach of Mary, the Ark of the New Covenant. (Luke 1:41)

David shouts in the presence of the ark of the Old Covenant. (2 Sam. 6:15) Elizabeth “exclaimed with a loud cry” in the presence of the Mary, the Ark of the Old Covenant. (Luke 1:42)

The ark of the Old Covenant disappeared, and no trace of it can be found anywhere on earth. Mary, the Ark of the New Covenant, was assumed bodily into heaven by God at the end of her earthly life, and no trace can be found of her anywhere on earth.

 

[StevenFrancis]

Gods infallible written Word is a divine masterpiece. It’s Gods written Word and it’s awesome that God has given us His infallible written Word and how He did it is just wonderful but then it is Gods masterpiece.

Now back to the question of this thread, where in Gods infallible written Word does it say that Mary was sinless?

.

I, and others, have already posted the passages. It is unfortunate that your heart is hardened to seeing this interpretation. It has also been pointed out to you that Jesus left us a Church as well. Many teachings are elaborated upon by the Holy Church, with authority given by Jesus Christ either directly or through his apostles. I am digressing however. Your question is answered fairly clearly in 1 Luke. May the Lord help you to see it there, since you have no visible interest in the teachings from the Church established by our Lord, and the magesterium set up precisely to help us find the true answer to any question perplexing us. I heartily recommend the Church Fathers as supplement. Anyway, thank you for being here, and I appreciate your interest in our faith. May the Lord open you to the fullness of His Church and His teachings.

Peace to you,

Steven

 

[Peter_Da_Rock]

JustAsking4, I hereby challenge you to address individually and in detail and refute them as best as possible all 12 points Randy Carson presented in post 651. 12 is such a good number.

The ball is in your court JustAsking4.

Matter of fact, I challenge every non-catholic that has participated in this thread to the same challenge.

Are you ready to rumble?

 

[sandusky]

Randy Carson:

Really? Then what do you think the following scripture parallels are trying to convey?

The ark of the Old Covenant contained the words of God written on Stone. (Deut. 10:5, Hebrews 9:4) Mary, the Ark of the New Covenant, contained the Word of God made flesh. (John 1:1)

The ark of the Old Covenant contained the jar of manna which came down from heaven. Those who ate of this bread still died. (Exodus 16:32, Hebrews 9:4) Mary, the Ark of the New Covenant, contained Jesus, the bread of life which came down from heaven. Those who eat of this bread will live forever. (John 6:31-41)

The ark of the Old Covenant contained the staff of Aaron which had budded as proof as his priesthood. (Number 17:1-9) Mary, the Ark of the New Covenant, contained Jesus, our high priest, Himself. (Hebrews 4:14)

The ark of the Old Covenant was overshadowed by the glory cloud. (Exodus 40:34-35) Mary, the Ark of the New Covenant, was overshadowed by the Holy Spirit. (Luke 1:35)

The ark traveled to the house of Obed-edom in the hill country of Judea. (2 Sam. 6:1–11) Mary, the Ark of the New Covenant, traveled to the house of Elizabeth and Zechariah in the hill country of Judea. (Luke 1:39)

A man touched the ark of the Old Covenant to steady it without God’s permission and was struck dead on the spot. David was filled with awe and said, “Who am I that the Ark of the Lord should come unto me?” (2 Samuel 6:9) Elizabeth is filled with the Holy Spirit and said, “Who am I that the mother of my Lord should come unto me?” (Luke 1:43)

The ark of the Old Covenant remained in the house of Obed-edom for three months. (2 Sam. 6:11) Mary, the Ark of the New Covenant, remained in the house of Elizabeth for three months (Luke 1:56).

The house of Obed-edom was blessed by the presence of the ark of the Old Covenant. (2 Sam. 6:11) In the account of Mary’s visit to Elizabeth, the word blessed is used three times; surely Elizabeth’s house was blessed by God. (Luke 1:39–45)

The ark of the Old Covenant returns home and ends up in Jerusalem, God’s presence and glory is revealed in the temple. (2 Sam. 6:12; 1 Kgs. 8:9–11) Mary, the Ark of the New Covenant, returns home and eventually ends up in Jerusalem, where she presents God incarnate in the temple. (Luke 1:56; 2:21–22)

Dressed as a priest, David danced and leapt in front of the ark of the Old Covenant. (2 Sam. 6:14) John the Baptist—of priestly lineage—leapt in his mother’s womb at the approach of Mary, the Ark of the New Covenant. (Luke 1:41)

David shouts in the presence of the ark of the Old Covenant. (2 Sam. 6:15) Elizabeth “exclaimed with a loud cry” in the presence of the Mary, the Ark of the Old Covenant. (Luke 1:42)

The ark of the Old Covenant disappeared, and no trace of it can be found anywhere on earth. Mary, the Ark of the New Covenant, was assumed bodily into heaven by God at the end of her earthly life, and no trace can be found of her anywhere on earth.

Quintessential demonstration of eisegetical interpretation.

Very clever, very creative, and further, it demonstrates that one can make things up, and twist scripture to support anything they want it to support, IMO.

I give it a ZERO.

Furthermore, unless your 2000-year-old infallible teaching magisterium has infallibly defined those verses, and I’m fairly certain they haven’t, they are nothing more than the personal interpretation of those who’ve confabulated them.

Further, furthermore, anyone who believes the notions put forward above, is not discerning, and will believe anything, IMHO.
Peter Da Rock:

Matter of fact, I challenge every non-catholic that has participated in this thread to the same challenge.

Are you ready to rumble?

:tiphat:

 

[Peter_Da_Rock]

Sandusky, Give it a shot. Disprove each one.

It’s not a matter of interpretation. No interpretation is being done.

It’s a matter of recognizing the parallels as fore-shadowings and pre-figurements.

Of course you can say it’s all just coincidence.

Is it just coincidence?

 

[sandusky]

CentralFLJames:

But this does not in any way give any credence to the Protestant error of “once saved always saved” from the context of human perception and belief. No one other than God can know God’s mind.

As far as antinomianism, I agree; however, with respect to perseverance of the saints, you’re in disagreement with your Church as well, which teaches, as does biblical predestination, that God perseveres those He predestines (Rom 8:30).

Furthermore, Paul states that the Spirit testifies with the believers spirit that the believer is a child of God (Rom 8:6). If you’re not aware of the Spirit’s testimony, well, what can I say.

Also, all of the exhortations to “hope” is that biblical hope of confidence, not the contemporary “hope so.”

CentralFLJames:

I am very pragmatic in this are and see the entire topic of predestination as an artifact of theology that arises out of human minds trying to “fit” God to the confines of human understanding. The truth is that predestination is of the providence of God not man. It is only useful in theology in logically proofing and accessing the consistency of other derivative theological concepts.

Pragmatists miss out on so much.

It’s useful to the believer as a comfort, and reassurance, as it’s coupled with the understanding and yielding to Him who is in complete control of all things.

CentralFLJames:

As such it will always be mostly pure mystery to us and not a thing any of us need worry about since we can rely on God being a just God and a good God.

Mystery? I’ve always thought of it as revelation.

CentralFLJames:

there is even a little logic game that non-theologians such as myself can do to confound the academics that is 100% consistent with Church Teaching and can’t be refuted. This is the ascetical maxim : “Si non es prædestinatus, fac ut prædestineris” (if you are not predestined, so act that you may be predestined). Strict theology, it is true, cannot approve this bold saying, except in so far as the original decree of predestination is conceived as at first a hypothetical decree, which is afterwards changed to an absolute and irrevocable decree by the prayers, good works, and perseverance of him who is predestined, according to the words of the Apostle (2 Peter 1:10): “Wherefore, brethren, labour the more, that by good works you may make sure your calling and election.” More here: Predestination.

I know of no group more dedicated to working the works of God than predestinarians.

 

[CentralFLJames]

As far as antinomianism, I agree; however, with respect to perseverance of the saints, you’re in disagreement with your Church as well, which teaches, as does biblical predestination, that God perseveres those He predestines (Rom 8:30).

Nothing I have stated here limits in anyway the perseverance of the saints. But I object to the pompous implication that you pretend to know both God’s mind as well as my own. You are in disagreement with Jesus and His Church since you judge both in matters that you can not possibly understand and refuse to obey Christ’s authority on earth - His Vicar.

Furthermore, Paul states that the Spirit testifies with the believers spirit that the believer is a child of God (Rom 8:6). If you’re not aware of the Spirit’s testimony, well, what can I say.

You can say nothing nor is it your place to say anything. God speaks to the heart. Predestination in the Catholic sense of the word is signally present in the things I mentioned previously - love of prayer, love of Church, love of the sacraments etc. You do not Love His Church nor the sacraments so you might examine where you are with respect to predestiny. Do you think you can change your destiny?

Also, all of the exhortations to “hope” is that biblical hope of confidence, not the contemporary “hope so.”

Pragmatists miss out on so much.

You sound like you are pontificating from a superior moral context without any evidence to lend credibility to your assertions. How do you know? Those that do not partake of the Eucharist nor attend Mass miss out on everything. It seems you subscribe to the strange modern idea of more through the avenue of less yourself. Care to elaborate that mystery?

It’s useful to the believer as a comfort, and reassurance, as it’s coupled with the understanding and yielding to Him who is in complete control of all things.

Mystery? I’ve always thought of it as revelation.

I know of no group more dedicated to working the works of God than predestinarians.

As I mentioned the signs of predestiny previously mentioned are comforting to the individual soul - as are the inner revelations and fruits of the Holy Spirit.

I have no problem with you using “predestinarians” as a synonym of “the elect” or the “saints” though. But it seems you are focused in these forums more on splitting semantic hairs and the spewing of theological concepts and theories in a self serving sort of way. That is a sign of hubris that is strong marker for predestiny in the negative sense through reprobation. Again I ask, can you change your destiny?

James