Imagination is not evidence.
The Trinity is not like the Immaculate Conception.
Eve is not a type of Mary unless you reverse the plot.
Adam is a type of Christ only in that his actions impacted all who were in him.
You call sound reasoning "boohoo" because you can't answer to it. You are on the run.
Here's the "You're All Closet Papists" card being played.
No, you can't project your sin upon us in an attempt to identify us, simply because we refuse to allow the bishop of Rome to violate our consciences. The Pope model is a non-starter. We don't use it on ourselves, we simply accept personal responsibility for our beliefs. If you're not up to that, fine, but keep your anethemas to yourselves.
Yeah, I was kinda hopin' you'd've answered my more basic disagreements first, but if you're not takin' me seriously, it's up to you give a little before you get to take.
You have a set of different definitions of terms that you don't seem to be aware of having, otherwise you'd make simpler statements that weren't so problematic. The made-up interpretations of a few early church fathers do not comprise the entirety of "church history". You exaggerate their importance just as the correlations are stretched and admittedly reversed in an attempt to exaggerate Mary's role in salvation, prayer, etc.
The only thing respectable about the whole thing is that you said it with a straight face.
I believe you are thoroughly convinced of all that.
Fine.
I don't believe a bit of it.
I'm happy to tell ya why, but ya gotta quit with the hate-speech.
We are all servants of satan.
Religious freedom never was popular around Rome.
That's what they told you, right?
So you say.
I have the internet.
Did you name all of two? Is that "so many"?
You said this teaching is implicit in scripture! Now you want me to tell you why it doesn't "present that teaching" - something you yourself admit it doesn't when you say it's implicit.
Seriously.
I suppose we will have to agree to dissagree here. I think it would be fruitless for us to continue given that neither of us can seem to communicate were one understands each other on certain levels. Our hermeneutics and principles behind them differ very much.
I would simply close my conversation to you by saying that Catholics believe that we do have solid biblical reasons(implicit) ones for the dogma of the IC along with reasons from apostolic Tradition. There were many Father of the Church I did not name that also viewed Mary as the New Ark of the covenant and Eve(Far more than two ). Given that, whether a protestant agrees or disagrees with our interpretation of LK 1 Rev 11-12 and all the other scripture that goes into the dogma of the RC is up to them(some have some have not) For us Catholics it is important to realize that Christ Catholic Church does believe that scripture implies the Immaculate Conception based upon the typologies of Mary as the the New Ark of the Covenant and as the Second Eve as I have shown and as many of the early Christan fathers also taught.
So for now. I will say my goodbyes to Mr Otto and further dialog with him on this issue. May the peace of the Lord Jesus be with you Mr Otto.
For those of you(especially Catholics) who are just tuning in now and do not know what typologies of Mary I am referring to as evidence for the Immaculate Conception here it is again.
God bless you all:
Biblical typology is the study of how people and things in the Old Testament foreshadow certain fulfillments in the New Testament. Every typological fulfillment in the New Testament is greater and more real and powerful then its Old Testament type. For example, St. Paul reminds us that Jesus is a typological fulfillment of Adam. One can see parallels between Adam and Christ. For through Adam all death comes and through Christ all life comes. Jesus is everything that Adam was and more. Jesus obeyed the Father perfectly, unlike Adam. Jesus fulfills and destroys Adams curse.
Mary in the New Testament is also a fulfillment of certain types namely Eve and the Ark of the Covenant. In Genesis Eve is described as a Women who disobeyed God. Genesis describes one woman (Eve) and one man (Adam) who are created initially immaculate. The woman and man are approached by one angel (who is fallen, the Devil) and they choose freely to dis-obey God and eat one food from one tree that would cause death for a whole race. In Lukes gospel the same is seen but only in reversed and redemptive way. In Luke one woman (Mary) is visited by one angel (who is holy, Gabriel) and this one woman freely chooses to obey and ac-cept Gods plan for her, unlike Eve. This one women would give birth to one man -Jesus Christ- who would die for all on a tree and give the world one food to eat that would give life to the whole human race (Holy Communion). Mary is truly the fulfillment of Eve as Jesus is of Adam. Catholic Scripture scholar Dr. Scott Hahn demonstrates that Mary is called by the title woman by Jesus himself and in Rev 12:1-17 one discovers that the woman who is described as a ful-fillment of Eve is the Mother of God herself.
The Fathers of the Church saw Mary as the fulfillment of Eve too. St. Justin Martyr in 155 A.D. made direct comparisons to Mary and Eve on a redemptive level. St. Ireneuas spoke of Mary as a fulfillment of Eve stating that in Lukes Gospel Mary loosed the knot of sin that Eve bound the world in. Even as early as the late 1st century the writings of Mathetes spoke of a new incorrupt Eve who was a Virgin.
The typology of Mary as New Eve is important to the Immaculate Conception because it shows implicit evidence for the doctrine. Remembering that all New Testament fulfillments are far greater and more powerful than their Old Testament types one can only conclude that Mary is immaculately conceived. Eve and Adam were created without sin; Jesus and Mary fulfill their types. Just as the new Adam, Jesus is sinless, so too the new Eve, Mary. If Mary was not con-ceived sinless she would be a inferior type to Eve. This is why many fathers of the church, such as St. Augustine in his work Nature and Grace , freely and confidently proclaimed Mary to be sinless.
Another type Mary fulfills is the Ark of the Covenant. The Ark of the Covenant contained three things: the Manna from heaven, the rod of Aaron (a sign of high priestly Authority), and the ten words (or Ten Commandments) of God. Mary carried in her womb the fulfillment of all three of those things. Jesus Christ is the new manna from heaven and is the new covenant high priest who rules the new kingdom (the church with a rod of iron). Like the ten words carried in the Ark, Jesus is the Word of God incarnate himself. The United States Catholic Bishops show how St. Luke presented Mary as the new Ark of the Covenant in parallels in their pastoral letter. For example, if one compares 2 Sam 6 with Luke 1 they will find Mary being presented as the new Ark. In 2 Sam 6:2 David arose and went to Judah; in Luke 1:39 Mary arose and went to Judah. In 2 Sam 6:9 David ask How can the ark of the Lord come to Me. In Luke 1:43 Elizabeth uses almost identical language saying why is this granted me that the Mother of my Lord should come to me. In 2 Sam 6:11 the Ark remained for three months. In Lk 1:56 Mary stays three months with Elizabeth. In 2 Sam 6:12 David rejoices; in Lk 1:47 Marys spirit rejoices. In 2 Sam 6:16 there is leaping and dancing. In Lk 1:41 the babe leaps in Elizabeth's womb. Also interesting to note is the Ark of the Covenant was overshadowed by the Spirit of God. Luke used similar language that the Septuagint (Greek translations of the Old Testament) use in Exodus describing the Ark being overshadowed to describe Mary being overshadowed by the Holy Spirit. Clearly St. Luke sees Mary as typologically the fulfillment of the Ark.
Scripture Scholar Dr. Scott Hahn also shows how gospel writer John reveals Mary as the New Ark in the Book of Revelation(Rev 11:19). The ark of Gods heavenly covenant is revealed, and in the very next verse(Rev 12:1) the woman, Mary, who gave birth to Jesus, appears. Dr. Hahn reminds readers that when Scripture was written there were no chapters and verses, and when the Book of Revelation is read in its immediate and typological context the Ark is revealed as Mary.
Fathers of the Church like St. Hippolytus, St. Jerome, and St. Ambrose had openly proclaimed Mary as the new Ark of the Covenant and many of the fathers of the church also spoke of her being sinless. The earliest hymns written in praise of Mary spoke of Mary as with-out stain or blemish and also spoke of her as Ark Gilded by the Holy Ghost. If Mary is truly a fulfillment of the Ark then her Immaculate Conception makes sense. What the old ark contained could not be touched by sin. One had to be sanctified from sin just to carry the ark due to its precious cargo(1 Chron 15:12-14). Uzzuh was himself killed because he was a sinful man who touched the ark (2Sam 6:6-8). If the old covenant ark could not be touched by sin because of what it carried, how much more would the new covenant fulfillment of the ark (Mary) not be touched by sin for what she carried. For the wisdom of God will not dwell in a body under the debt of sin(Wis 1:4), and Jesus Christ is wisdom personified(1 Cor 1:24). Hence Marys Immaculate Conception is biblically implicit.
This is a great lesson for all Catholics. enjoy my fellow Catholics.