In Christ and the Blessed Virgin

Hi Yelsew,

You wrote, "The fact is Carson, you offer no proof that God made Mary Sinless for life.

And Kelly would say that I offer no proof that Jesus is God and Bob would say that I offer no proof that we should replace Sabbath worship with Sunday worship and for the same reason that ME2 would say that I offer no proof that there are multiple persons in the Godhead.

If you disagree with your opponent and are stubborn enough, any proof is no proof. That's why apologetics is such a dry endeavor; the faith can't be "proven"; ultimately, it must be accepted, in faith, on apostolic authority. That's the situation that is unthinkable for the Protestant-at-heart; Protestants set themselves up as the final arbitrator, the final determiner of what they believe through a sort of post-mortem determination as to what Scripture means to them.

Was Mary excluded from "For all have sinned"?

Was Jesus excluded from "For all have sinned"? I don't see any exclusion for Jesus mentioned in the immediate context of this passage? Also, I would note for you that this is a reference to the Old Testament. Check the reference out, and you'll see that Paul means all in the collective, not in the distributive sense.

There is nothing in writing to indicate that Mary did not sleep with Joseph her husband and have sexual relations with Him.

Of course there is. There is her response to the Angel Gabriel, which has been seen to point to a previous vow of virginity: "How can this be, for I know not man." Remember, the Angel didn't say: "you're pregnant"; Gabriel prophesied a future birth and Mary is about to get married. So, if she's going to have normal marital relations with the man whom she is currently with and about to marry, then she should definitely know how such can be, for she will know man (in the Biblical sense) quite soon.

 

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Was Mary excluded from "For all have sinned"?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Classic misdirection.

The subject of Jesus's sinless nature is Explicitly addressed in scripture and REPEATEDLY addressed in scripture.

And what of Mary's? Not Once!.

The subject of our being found "IN Christ" is addressed REPEATEDLY in scripture. And what of our being found "In MARY" or "IN Christ and IN MARY" - not once!

So the RC argument is that IF these characteristics for Christ ARE repeatedly asserted in scripture - and NOT ONCE for Mary in God's Word - THEN they must ALSO be true for Mary.

And of course our Catholic bretheren find that argument irresistably compelling - them to "reach" for tradition as the "proof" of the argument NOT God's Word.

Hence the non-compelling reception of that view on a board like this.

To add to the RC mythology here - Carson pretends that there are volumous statements on "Keeping Sunday Holy" (without providing one of course) and claims that this "somehow" justifies the acceptance of Mary as Godlike- all powerful, sinless, co-redemptrix, queen of heaven, divine being before whose altars we are to pray to her using our incense and worship candles - (etc etc)

What a stretch for the RC to insert this "other ruler of heaven" among the trinity.

In Christ (but not IN Mary),

Bob

 

Hi Carson, I read all over the bible where Jesus was without sin, but have yet to find where it is written the same of Mary or even remotely implies it.

So then with that being said, where would I look to verify this. As it stands from what I have read that it is written that aside from Jesus all have sinned and fall short of Gods glory.

I appreciate your response earlier but still disagree with what you believe happened. If something of this magnitude happened with someone other than Jesus, wouldnt it have been written of them?

also it is written that Mary had other children one of which is believed the author of the book of James. I have read earlier in this post that some believe that they were Josephs other marriage? (wherever they got that from I dont know) but if this is the case, why were they called the brothers and sisters of Jesus, seeing as Joseph wasn't His father? therefore there is no blood connection at all.

If you could, please give scripture reference and not some author whom voices his opinion and does nothing to back it up with Gods written word.

I look forward to your reply

In the mighty name of Jesus! (there is so much power and love in that name alone)

 

Hi JesusisGod2,

You wrote, "I read all over the bible where Jesus was without sin, but have yet to find where it is written the same of Mary or even remotely implies it."

The doctrine of Mary being without sin is based upon the foretypes of Mary in the Old Testament (such as Eve) as well as the apostolic Tradition that Mary was all-holy as the ark of the New Covenant. I would do a grave injustice to the Immaculate Conception if I were to attempt this survey here, but I can refer you to one good resource, Newman's Memorandum:

http://www.cin.org/liter/memoimma.html

It should also be noted that both John Calvin and Martin Luther, the two most popular "Reformers", held to this doctrine alongside their doctrine of Sola Scriptura.

As it stands from what I have read that it is written that aside from Jesus all have sinned and fall short of Gods glory.

In Romans 3, where the Bible says this, Paul is quoting Psalm 14. Look up this Psalm in context, and you'll realize that if Paul is using "all" in the distributive sense (i.e., "Mary" and "Jane" and "Susan" and every other individual human), he is taking Psalm 14 out of context; if Paul is using "all" in the collective sense (i.e. "Jew" and "Gentile") to demonstrate that all - both Jew and Gentile - have sinned, then he is taking Psalm 14 within its original context. The collective sense does not speak of every individual, but to the fact that there are sinners among the Geniles as well as among the Jews. In the second half of Psalm 14, there are "the just" among David's camp who are not a part of "all" who "have gone astray".

If something of this magnitude happened with someone other than Jesus, wouldnt it have been written of them?

It was.. Mary's Immaculate Conception is prophesied in Genesis 3:15. Mary is the woman who is at enmity (total opposition) with Satan. One cannot be in arms with Satan through the bondage of sin and simultaneously remain at enmity with him. Mary, as the New Eve - the woman prophesied of in this passage known as the Protoevangelium, is at total enmity with Satan, saved as she was by a singular grace of God won on the cross by her son Jesus Christ.

I have read earlier in this post that some believe that they were Josephs other marriage? (wherever they got that from I dont know) but if this is the case, why were they called the brothers and sisters of Jesus, seeing as Joseph wasn't His father?

I don't have the time to give a complete exposition of this, so I will refer you to this article, which explains the reasons succinctly and clearly:

http://www.catholic.com/library/Brethren_of_the_Lord.asp

This article is wholly based in the Word of God and explains the situation thoroughly. It is precisely the substance of the response I were to give you, only in my own words.