Mary was a good person and had a sinful nature like all of us.

[rturner76]

He came to earth for the sake of sinful vessels.
He mixed it up with sinful vessels, to the Pharisees' dislike.
He died for the redemption of sinful vessels.

Christ's whole life was about sinful vessels.

True, he was here to SAVE sinful vessels, not to BE a sinful vessel himself. Here is an analogy that is not written in the Bible but it makes sense to me:

When you go to wash dirty dishes or even a grimey toilet, would it do to use already dirtied water? Do you think it would be more fruitful to wash away grime with clean water? During the process, the clean soap and water take on the filth in order to make it clean. I think that is similar to what Christ did. As a perfectly clean vessel, he took on the punishment of our sins and made us clean. Do you see why it is more logical to dlean dirt with clean water and how ineffective it would be to clean filth with dirty water? As the word says:

• John 4:13–14
  Jesus says, “Whoever drinks of the water that I shall give him will never thirst. But the water that I shall give him will become in him a fountain of water springing up into everlasting life”.
  
  
  
• John 7:38
  Jesus says, “Whoever believes in me, as Scripture has said, rivers of living water will flow from within them”. "Rivers of living water" cannot flow from a fetid stream.

 

[Clare73]

It's not that they disagreed with the Bible but it is possible that the Bible is the most essential teachings but not ALL of the teaching of God's original Church. The status of Mary's sin is not really relevant to the message of salvation so it is not one of the most essential of teachings. Therefore like I said, not every single solitary teaching is included in the Bible but the most essential teachings are. Whether one belives that Mary was or was not sinful is not essential to the Gospel so there was no need to include it. That doesn't mean that the theology of the original Church is invalid. This is where we get into Bible worship as an Idol.

Interesting twist of spiritual truth. . .

Regarding the God-breathed Scriptures (2 Tim 3:16) as authoritative is worshiping the Bible as an idol.

So, is the regarding of your denomination as authoritative also worshiping your denomination as an idol?

Well, actually they did. God did not take up a pen a write scripture. He did not pen the Bible he inspired it.

Actually, Scripure is God-breathed (theopnuestos).

And the penmen did not author the Bible, they merely penned it.

The Bible was written by men. Men with a special insight into the gospel but they were in fact men and
no book of the Bible was actually written when Jesus walked the Earth.

The OT was written when Jesus walked the earth.

It is inspire by God but not written down by God. It was written down by the Church

It is God-breathed (theopnuestos).

The NT church did not write the OT.

he founded and like I said, the most essential teachings but not every single solitary teaching ever taught.

Right, and that was the original Church. There were also other teachings passed down but the Bible was approved as the most concise and important teachings. Mary's sin nature is a teaching but it is not essential to the gospel. that doesn't mean it wasn't taught,it's just a detail and not the meat and potatoes of the Gospel.
Like I said, it's NOT in disagreement, it just wasn't included in the same books.

Mary's sinless nature is contrary to NT apostolic teaching in Ro 3:9-10, 20 ("no one is righteous, not even one," "no one will be declared righteous").
Mary's sinless nature is in disagreement with NT doctrine, making it heresy.

The Bible is the most important writing of the Church but like I said to another poster, the Church wrote the Bible,

The church, the body of Christ, penned the Bible, the Holy Spirit, not the church, is its Author.

the Bible did not create the Church

According to the Bible, Christ created the church (Mt 16:18, 18:17), with the apostles as its first members.

 

[Clare73]

True, he was here to SAVE sinful vessels, not to BE a sinful vessel himself. Here is an analogy that is not written in the Bible but it makes sense to me:

He came to pay sinners' debts to God's justice, thereby saving them from having to pay it themselves.

When you go to wash dirty dishes or even a grimey toilet, would it do to use already dirtied water? Do you think it would be more fruitful to wash away grime with clean water? During the process, the clean soap and water take on the filth in order to make it clean. I think that is similar to what Christ did.

Actually, the NT presents Christ's sacrifice as removing our sin debt to God's justice by paying it himself.
Like my uncle going up to the Courthouse to remove my speeding-fine debt to the Court by paying it himself.

Jesus said he came to die as a ransom payment (Mt 20:28), to free us from God's justice.

 

[JulieB67]

You reckon He called her mom, or just "Hey, you..."?

I reckon he handled it just perfectly -

Matthew 12:50 "For whosoever shall do the will of My Father Which is in heaven, the same is My brother, and sister, and mother."

No one is suggesting he is belittling his mother. He's just not raising her up above anyone else that does that will of God, as so many continue to do.

You think maybe there was more to what He was saying there than simply slagging off His mom?

No, there wasn't more to what he was saying. He made it perfectly clear. The scripture speaks for itself.

He sets the example, not man. If he didn't raise her up above anyone else that does the will of God, than we should follow that example.

The disciples and apostles in what letters we have certainly didn't raise her up as above anyone else as well. Paul calls her "a woman" and that wasn't even about her it was about Christ- as it should be. And we know by his letters, he set up many churches.

I'spect it doesn't take much respect shown for the Blessed Virgin for y'all to declare it "worship". Gotta make sure you're not mistaken for - shudder!- Catholics

Well, you and I have different opinions on simply paying respect and what could be considered worship. There's nothing wrong with showing respect but raising her up is the issue. Christ didn't. That's my point.

"Hail, holy Queen, Mother of Mercy,
Hail our life, our sweetness and our hope.
To thee do we cry,
Poor banished children of Eve;
To thee do we send up our sighs,
Mourning and weeping in this valley of tears.

Turn then, most gracious advocate,
Thine eyes of mercy toward us;
And after this our exile,
Show unto us the blessed fruit of thy womb, Jesus.
O clement, O loving,
O sweet Virgin Mary.

℣ Pray for us, O holy Mother of God,
℟ that we may be made worthy of the promises of Christ.

Let us pray:
Almighty, everlasting God, who by the co-operation of the Holy Spirit didst prepare the body and soul of the glorious Virgin-Mother Mary to become a dwelling-place meet for thy Son: grant that as we rejoice in her commemoration; so by her fervent intercession we may be delivered from present evils and from everlasting death. Through the same Christ our Lord. Amen."

One is placing her as an advocate to Christ when actually we can straight to the Father through Christ. There is only one intercessor. So yes, this prayer above goes way beyond paying respect.

. Gotta make sure you're not mistaken for - shudder!- Catholics.

I had no problem leaving my Baptist church years ago when they taught false doctrines. So this point is kind of meaningless to me.

Again, I follow Christ's lead, not man's.

 

[NotUrAvgGuy]

I reckon he handled it just perfectly -

Matthew 12:50 "For whosoever shall do the will of My Father Which is in heaven, the same is My brother, and sister, and mother."

No one is suggesting he is belittling his mother. He's just not raising her up above anyone else that does that will of God, as so many continue to do.


No, there wasn't more to what he was saying. He made it perfectly clear. The scripture speaks for itself.

He sets the example, not man. If he didn't raise her up above anyone else that does the will of God, than we should follow that example.

The disciples and apostles in what letters we have certainly didn't raise her up as above anyone else as well. Paul calls her "a woman" and that wasn't even about her it was about Christ- as it should be. And we know by his letters, he set up many churches.


Well, you and I have different opinions on simply paying respect and what could be considered worship. There's nothing wrong with showing respect but raising her up is the issue. Christ didn't. That's my point.

"Hail, holy Queen, Mother of Mercy,
Hail our life, our sweetness and our hope.
To thee do we cry,
Poor banished children of Eve;
To thee do we send up our sighs,
Mourning and weeping in this valley of tears.

Turn then, most gracious advocate,
Thine eyes of mercy toward us;
And after this our exile,
Show unto us the blessed fruit of thy womb, Jesus.
O clement, O loving,
O sweet Virgin Mary.

℣ Pray for us, O holy Mother of God,
℟ that we may be made worthy of the promises of Christ.

Let us pray:
Almighty, everlasting God, who by the co-operation of the Holy Spirit didst prepare the body and soul of the glorious Virgin-Mother Mary to become a dwelling-place meet for thy Son: grant that as we rejoice in her commemoration; so by her fervent intercession we may be delivered from present evils and from everlasting death. Through the same Christ our Lord. Amen."

One is placing her as an advocate to Christ when actually we can straight to the Father through Christ. There is only one intercessor. So yes, this goes way beyond paying respect.


I had no problem leaving my Baptist church years ago when they taught false doctrines. So this point is kind of meaningless to me.

Again, I follow Christ's lead, not man's.

℣ Pray for us, O holy Mother of God,
℟ that we may be made worthy of the promises of Christ.

Poor theology as we can never be made worthy of the promises of Christ. That's why salvation is by grace alone. Grace means "unmerited favor." We are not made actually worthy but we are imputed the righteousness of Christ so that we have a worthy standing before God. We do nothing, and can do nothing, to be worthy.

Mary also cannot, "by her fervent intercession" deliver us "from everlasting death." As already pointed out, there is only one who intercedes for us and that is Christ. He alone can secure our salvation. Jesus said, "I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the father but through me." We also know the names of the elect were written in the Book of Life before yet one of us (including Mary) was created. God isn't adding new names because Mary interceded (not that she can).

 

[JulieB67]

Mary also cannot, "by her fervent intercession" deliver us "from everlasting death.

Exactly!

" As already pointed out, there is only one who intercedes for us and that is Christ.

Yes, that's why I pointed it out. He is the only one.

 

[Valletta]

So there is no requirement for Mary to have been sinless and Scripture does not teach that she was. While many in the early church may have believed this, that doesn't make them right nor can we argue from silence by saying not everything Jesus said was written down. What may or may not exist in the Vatican archives is of no bearing. Those writings are not Scripture.

Of course God can do whatever He wants, God is not "required" to do anything. While there is plenty of evidence pointing toward the sinlessness of Mary in the Bible, like the doctrine of the Holy Trinity(established by the Council of Nicea in 325 A.D.) it is not explicitly spelled out in the Bible.

 

[Valletta]

Exactly!


℣ Pray for us, O holy Mother of God,
℟ that we may be made worthy of the promises of Christ.

Poor theology as we can never be made worthy of the promises of Christ. That's why salvation is by grace alone. Grace means "unmerited favor." We are not made actually worthy but we are imputed the righteousness of Christ so that we have a worthy standing before God. We do nothing, and can do nothing, to be worthy.

Mary also cannot, "by her fervent intercession" deliver us "from everlasting death." As already pointed out, there is only one who intercedes for us and that is Christ. He alone can secure our salvation. Jesus said, "I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the father but through me." We also know the names of the elect were written in the Book of Life before yet one of us (including Mary) was created. God isn't adding new names because Mary interceded (not that she can).

James 5:16 Therefore confess your sins to one another, and pray for one another, that you may be healed. The prayer of a righteous man has great power in its effects. RSVCE

The saints in Heaven are righteous. I cannot stress enough the importance of prayer, not just for your self, but for others. We see Mary intercede at the wedding at Cana. She asks Jesus--that's what intercessory prayer is. That she asks should be no surprise because in the OT the role of the queen mother in the Davidic kingdom, beginning with Solomon, is to make requests of the king on behalf of the people. Do you disagree with James that the prayer of a righteous man has great power?

 

[JulieB67]

James 5:16 Therefore confess your sins to one another, and pray for one another, that you may be healed. The prayer of a righteous man has great power in its effects. RSVCE

We are to pray for one another -not to one another. That's a huge difference. The only one we should be praying to is the Father through Christ. Praying for one another happens while we are still in the flesh and all those prayers should be going to the Father.

We see Mary intercede at the wedding at Cana. She asks Jesus--that's what intercessory prayer is.

This is in her earthly life and it was not a prayer. You are adding an extra intercessor which to me, no offense because you honestly believe this but to me it is dangerous thinking. Why would we not go straight to the Father through Christ?

Do you disagree with James that the prayer of a righteous man has great power?

Yes, certainly. But again it is Father that answers prayer through Christ who is our only intercessor. And James is talking about the prayer of a righteous man on earth not in heaven -"pray for one another".

 

[Valletta]

We are to pray for one another -not to one another. That's a huge difference.

You have to address a person or saint to ask them to pray for you. As James said, the prayers of the righteous ones are powerful. So no, yours is a a misinterpretation of the Bible, perhaps started only because it was a Catholic practice.

 

[Valletta]

This is in her earthly life and it was not a prayer. You are adding an extra intercessor which to me, no offense because you honestly believe this but to me it is dangerous thinking.

There are prayers of petition, Mary was making a petition--asking. I'm not adding anything, just bringing up two examples of the Word of God-- the role of the queen mother in the Davidic kingdom and the wedding at Cana.

 

[Clare73]

Of course God can do whatever He wants, God is not "required" to do anything. While there is plenty of evidence pointing toward the sinlessness of Mary in the Bible,
like the doctrine of the Holy Trinity(established by the Council of Nicea in 325 A.D.) it is not explicitly spelled out in the Bible.

That there are three distinct persons in the one God is clearly presented in the Bible
(Mt 28:19, 3:16-17, Lk 1:35, Ac 2:33-39, Ro 8:16, 1 Co 12:4-6, Eph 1:14, 2:18, 2 Th 2:13, 1 Pe 1:2).
It's theological formulation is not explicitly spelled out in the Bible, but the three persons themselves most definitely are.

However, there is no evidence pointing to the sinless of Mary, while
there is apostolic teaching that Mary was not sinless:
1) Jews and Gentiles alike are all under sin (Ro 3:9), no exceptions,
2) no one is righteous, not even one (Ro 3:10), no exceptions,
3) there is no righteousness by observing the law (Ro 3:20), no exceptions,
4) death came to all men because all sinned (Ro 5:12), no exceptions,
5) all mankind is condemned by Adam's sin (Ro 5:18), no exceptions,
6) he died for Mary's sin just as he died for the sin of the rest of the body of Christ, no exceptions in the body of Christ,
7) etc., etc., etc.

There is no Biblical warrant for Mary's sinlessness.

 

[NotUrAvgGuy]

Of course God can do whatever He wants, God is not "required" to do anything. While there is plenty of evidence pointing toward the sinlessness of Mary in the Bible, like the doctrine of the Holy Trinity(established by the Council of Nicea in 325 A.D.) it is not explicitly spelled out in the Bible.

Actually, the doctrine of the Trinity is very clear in the Bible. The Bible teaches that there is only one God. Jesus calls the Father God. Jesus is called God. The Holy Spirit is called God. It is no stretch to see there is one God in three persons. There is no support for Mary being sinless. That is pure human supposition.

 

[NotUrAvgGuy]

There are prayers of petition, Mary was making a petition--asking. I'm not adding anything, just bringing up two examples of the Word of God-- the role of the queen mother in the Davidic kingdom and the wedding at Cana.

Accept, prayer is by the living on behalf of the living. Mary is no longer living. She is alive but in heaven. She cannot hear our prayers. Where in the Bible do you find an example of someone living praying to someone in heaven (other than to God)? Did anyone pray to Moses or Elijah? How about David? John the Baptist? Did those men not do things worthy of being called "saints" yet no one prayed to them but Catholics pray to "saints" all the time. Catholics make way too much of Mary's request at the wedding of Cana as though that sets a precedent of Jesus always honoring his mother's requests. A single incident has been turned into an entire theology.

 

[Valletta]

Accept, prayer is by the living on behalf of the living. Mary is no longer living. She is alive but in heaven. She cannot hear our prayers.

Who told you those in Heaven cannot hear our prayers?

 

[NotUrAvgGuy]

Interesting twist of spiritual truth. . .

Regarding the God-breathed Scriptures (2 Tim 3:16) as authoritative is worshiping the Bible as an idol.

So, is the regarding of your denomination as authoritative also worshiping your denomination as an idol?

Actually, Scripure is God-breathed (theopnuestos).

And the penmen did not author the Bible, they merely penned it.

The OT was written when Jesus walked the earth.

It is God-breathed (theopnuestos).

The NT church did not write the OT.

Mary's sinless nature is contrary to NT apostolic teaching in Ro 3:9-10, 20 ("no one is righteous, not even one," "no one will be declared righteous").
Mary's sinless nature is in disagreement with NT doctrine, making it heresy.

The church, the body of Christ, penned the Bible, the Holy Spirit, not the church, is its Author.

According to the Bible, Christ created the church (Mt 16:18, 18:17), with the apostles as its first members.

First, we need to differentiate between "church" and "Church." There is the "church universal." That is the body of Christ on earth and in eternity. It is made up of all who have put their faith in Jesus Christ as their Lord and Savoir. Then there are "Church"(es) as in the Roman Catholic Church, the Lutheran Church, the Greek Orthodox Church, etc. These are manmade institutions that contain "wheat and tares" and may contain human doctrine along with divine doctrine. The Apostles, and some closely associated with them, wrote the NT. They were a part of the "church" (the church universal). The church did not write the NT. Those men did as inspired by the Holy Spirit. Centuries later early church leaders met and recognized those writings that met certain criteria and were already treated as inspired. The Roman Catholic Church was not yet fully formed and those men were Christians not Catholics. The RCC wants to teach that they created the canon of Scripture. Not so. The RCC tries to prove a line of succession backward to Peter but that does not prove there was a line of succession nor do we see Jesus setting up an office that would have successors. Jesus did not establish a "Church" (as in a particular church) but rather a body of believers who were bound by the same profession of faith that Peter made. That universal church gets its authority from Scripture. Not from Peter or supposed successors of his.

Much of what the RCC teaches about Mary is not found in the Bible and came about by human reasoning. Men musing that Mary must have been sinless for Jesus to be sinless when the Bible teaches no such thing nor requires it. I never read of them saying they got such teachings from the Apostles. The Apostles gave no such teachings. We just assume that because some of the lived 100-200 years after the Apostles that they must have gotten their doctrine as passed down from the Apostles. While the Apostles still lived and breathed you had men like the Judaizers and the Gnostics already teaching heresy. How much more so could doctrine be corrupted 100+ years later? Proximity to the time of the Apostles is not a guarantee of orthodoxy. All the early church councils met to counter heresy's going around. Satan was at work trying to corrupt the gospel as soon as he could. Appealing to early church fathers (not all of whom agreed on these things) as proof of Apostolic doctrine is meaningless. Jesus because someone lived in 200 AD doesn't mean their doctrine was pure.

Pagan religions often had a female component. Virgins were put on a pedestal as somehow holier. I think men added to Scripture to satisfy their need for answers rather than sticking to what Scripture actually taught. They invented doctrines that seemed right to them but could not be proved from the Scriptures. Since we don't have a written record of all the things Jesus taught, we cannot assume anyone knew those things he spoke to the Apostles that were not written down. We can trust that the Holy Spirit inspired and had written down everything we need for faith and salvation. To suppose there are major doctrines that got passed down orally and never written down in preserved in Scripture is an argument from silence. By that logical one can suppose anything. What about the early church fathers who did not agree on things like the sinlessness of Mary or her ever-virginity? What about writings to the contrary that may not have survived? Do those arguments from silence not count? Our only sure source of truth are the Scriptures. Putting equal stock in the teachings of sinful men their traditions is foolishness. When Jesus taught, he often quoted the OT. He never said, "Let me tell about something Moses did that didn't get written down..." He clarified and explained the OT doctrine but he did not add things to the OT that "never got written down." Same with the Apostles. We don't follow the traditions of men. We follow the inspired Word of God. Believe anything else at your own peril.

 

[NotUrAvgGuy]

Who told you those in Heaven cannot hear our prayers?

First prayer, by definition, is communication between man and God. God is the only one in heaven who can hear our prayers. You cannot "pray" to Mary or Saint So-and-So because they are not God. Cite one example from old or new Testament of anyone praying to anyone other than God. We are expressly forbidden from trying to contact the dead. Why? Because we have not be given the means to contact the dead and certainly not by prayer since that is by definition only possible with God. When people "communicate with the dead" they are actually conversing with demons not the dead. You can't communicate with your dead mother in heaven any more than you can communicate with Mary or some saint. There are NO examples of that in Scripture and NO teaching supporting it. It is a completely manmade teaching. We don't need an explicit statement about it when we have what I cited above. Prayer is how we communicate with God. We can ask others in this life to pray for us. We don't pray to them to ask them to pray for us. We speak or write to them as one living on earth to another. Mary is now in heaven. We cannot contact her and she cannot hear us. No offense to Mary but I can pray to God Almighty. Do you think God will change His mind regarding my prayers if a request were to come from Mary? Is God not sovereign? Does God not already know my prayers before I even pray? Is there any information God is missing that He needs to answer my prayers? Do not confuse Jesus turning water into wine on earth as proof that even now Mary holds sway over her Son. Jesus did not acquiesce to Mary at the wedding at Cana. It was already God's will for that miracle to take place. We don't pray to change God's mind. His mind is already made up. We pray because it draws us closer to God and helps us to understand and accept His will.

 

[rturner76]

What we call the Roman Catholic Church today, is a creation after the first 4 centuries. Most of the unique doctrines that define Catholicism came later. I would characterize the men who met and decided on the canon of Scripture as Christians, not Catholics. It was the church universal that decided on the canon of Scripture (recognized it really) and not the Catholic church.

So are you saying that St Peter didn't make it to Rome until 400 years after the resurrection of Christ? What you have been taught in this regard is the political teachings of mant Protestant churches. Are you aware of the littoral meaning of "Catholic?" I means "universal." So not only the Church of Rome but The Church of Jerusalem, Greece, Ethiopia, Athens, Alexandeia, Arminia, Bulgarian, Constantinople, Corinth, Cypres, Ephisious, and so on and so on. The Catholic or "Universal" Church was unified all over the globe and the Bishops from each Dioseys had a vote on the canon of Scripture because Emporer Constantine requested a summary of Christian teaching. They broke it down to the most essential teachings but thet circulated many other books written by the Apostles and their students.

The Scriptures contain all we need and anything beyond them is human reasoning, tradition, or conjecture.

It contains all a Protestant needs because they mistakenly believe that all one needs is a Bible and the Holy Spirit as a teacher. If that were true, why are there over 1,000 different Protestant denominations? If every single Bible reader only needs the Hoy Spirit, why would that Holy Spirit lead them nto over 1,000 different directions? No, in the beginnig there was one Church founded by Christ and he handed the eys of the Church to St Peter, as it is written:

And so I say to you, you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of the netherworld shall not prevail against it.

He changed Imon's name to Peter which means "rock." Also:

“And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.”

Who is it better to folow, the word of the Church founded by Christ or a Church founded by some random dud to took what they liked from the Catholic Church and threw away what they didn't like. Do we worship the Bible or God?

Mary did not have to be sinless for Jesus to be so. If Mary was sinless, how is it her mother wasn't? If God preserved Mary from sin, being born of a sinful mother, why couldn't He do the same for Jesus?

Perhaps she did not have to be but she was. Wven with the sinful nature borne in here she lived by faith and was found more worthy than any woman on Earth.

Mary had a sin nature as she was fully human but not divine. Jesus is an exception because he was fully divine in addition to being fully human.

And the exception need to come through a clean vessel to remain clean.Jesus was tempted but he lacked a sin nature that could give into temptation. Mary not only gave birth to Christ but she raised him to know who he was and what his mission was. That is why she allowd him to spend 3 days teachin at Temple in his adolecence.

So there is no requirement for Mary to have been sinless and Scripture does not teach that she was. While many in the early church may have believed this, that doesn't make them right nor can we argue from silence by saying not everything Jesus said was written down. What may or may not exist in the Vatican archives is of no bearing. Those writings are not Scripture.

Since the only knowledge of Christ's mission is contained within the Bible and that is where all of the answers of the Universe lay. Why don't you quote the Bible passage that explains clearly when, where, and how, Mary sinned?

 

[rturner76]

And the penmen did not author the Bible, they merely penned it.

The OT was written when Jesus walked the earth.

It is God-breathed (theopnuestos).

Mary's sinless nature is contrary to NT apostolic teaching in Ro 3:9-10, 20 ("no one is righteous, not even one," "no one will be declared righteous").
Mary's sinless nature is in disagreement with NT doctrine, making it heresy

The church, the body of Christ, penned the Bible, the Holy Spirit, not the church, is its Author.

The Holy Spirit is the inspiration. You see, your church believes whatever it wants so it can change "breathed" into "written

According to the Bible, Christ created the church (Mt 16:18, 18:17), with the apostles as its first members.

Agreed, and then Jesus passed the keys to the kingdom to St Peter, the founder of the Church in Rome. Not the Church in Holland, England, America, or Germany.

He came to pay sinners' debts to God's justice, thereby saving them from having to pay it themselves.

He paid our debts by obedience, not by suffering. Again with freestyle theology you believe whatever some dud says is the truth.

Actually, the NT presents Christ's sacrifice as removing our sin debt to God's justice by paying it himself.
Like my uncle going up to the Courthouse to remove my speeding-fine debt to the Court by paying it himself.

Jesus said he came to die as a ransom payment (Mt 20:28), to free us from God's justice.

Agreed, so what's the probem

 

[Clare73]

The Holy Spirit is the inspiration. You see, your church believes whatever it wants so it can change "breathed" into "written

So you have no understanding of God-breathed (2 Tim 3:16), which all Scripture is.

Agreed, and then Jesus passed the keys to the kingdom to St Peter, the founder of the Church in Rome. Not the Church in Holland, England, America, or Germany.

And the founder of the church in Jerusalem?

He paid our debts by obedience, not by suffering.

He paid our debt by choosing to be our atoning sacrifice (Ro 3:25), which occurred on the cross of Calvary, and which involved unimaginable suffering.

Again with freestyle theology

The OT sacrificial system, the pre-figure of Christ's atoning sacrifice, is anything but "freestyle theology."
It is rigorous in its detail, its requirements and its typology.

It is not mine that is the freestyle theology. . .

you believe whatever some dud says is the truth.

That dud being the author of the OT sacrificial system (Lev 1:1).