Immaculate Conception - Why Did It Take 1,854 Years to Discover This Doctrine?

[sunlover1]

You could take a walk through some of the earlier posts. Repentant made a great exposition of the Greek on this topic. The word used in the original is kecharitomene, which means "full of grace"

I'm sorry,
please forgive my
ignorance Armor.


I don't know greek and will
have to take Repentant's word
for it.

 

[Epiphanygirl]

we can argue this over and over again. He said hail favored one. There is only one that was born Sin free. One and that would be Christ. We do not see in scripture anything about Marys birth. For this is not important for the Gosepel of Christ. It is Christ and His birth and His Death and ressurection that has importance. Mary being a human being was born with sin just like the rest of the Human beings. For there was only one that was born from God.

At the least, we do know that he didn't say....."Hey you, incubator girl.....God's gonna use you as a vessal....but remember, you ain't nothing special, you won't be His Mother"

 

[IamAdopted]

At the least, we do know that he didn't say....."Hey you, incubator girl.....God's gonna use you as a vessal....but remember, you ain't nothing special, you won't be His Mother"

And we can also see He did not call her sinless one and forever virgin either. He said Hail favored one. This is what is going to happen and she said be it according to your word.

 

[Epiphanygirl]

He says, "Hail, full of grace".

Weeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee.......same ol' same ol' huh?

Why do these threads remind me of the old "Yo Mama" jokes?

 

[ScottBot]

Weeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee.......same ol' same ol' huh?

Why do these threads remind me of the old "Yo Mama" jokes?

Sometimes I wish I had a auto-poster Bot to save wear and tear on my fingers

 

[simonthezealot]

You could take a walk through some of the earlier posts. Repentant made a great exposition of the Greek on this topic. The word used in the original is kecharitomene, which means "full of grace"

I missed this can someone post a link?

 

[Kepha]

Mary did not carry the blood of Jesus. He Did. She carried His body.

His blood was within His Body. All of Him (Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity) was being carried inside of Her womb. Stop denying this fact.

In the Ark sat the law of God. Jesus fulfilled and completed this law.

The main part of the Old Ark that we cannot deny was that it carried the Word of God. Mary carried the Word made flesh.

This mere blood you speak of is the only waythat we can have forgivness for this is the new covenant. That God Himself sent His only Begotten Son to shed His blood for the forgiveness of sin Once for all.

Again, blood does nothing without God's will to shed it for us. That was the ACT OF LOVE God did for us. Do you really think if His Blood was spilled without Him wanting it to be spilled it would mean the same? No way. Your taking away the actual Sacrifice part and focusing too much on the blood part. You need the Sacrifice part for the spilled blood to work. Combination of the two. Jesus is the New Covenant. The word of God. God's Promise to us.

If blood is nothing then why is it that it was the blood of animals that covered sin?

Animals blood is nothing. It was their act of doing what God wanted in Sacrificing the animals that pleased God. So now your saying this animal sacrifce was sufficient in having their sins forgiven. They didn't need Christ? Wow.

Why is it that the blood of Abel cried out to God?

That is metaphorically speaking, unless blood can talk.

Exactly and this is why he came through Mary. So He could get flesh. This is the only thing Mary gave Him.

She gave him love, only a mother can give.

Therefore she was the mother of Jesus the incarnate God.

She was the Mother of God Incarnate.

Mary being a human being was born with sin just like the rest of the Human beings.

That is just your assumption. Prove she sinned.

 

[Caedmon]

Ah, Nestorianism. That was struck down more than 1500 years ago, I believe. Nestorius denied Mary the title of God-bearer. Pesky little heresy. It's been popping up quite a bit during the last 200 years or so. But that is to be expected.
What has been, that will be; what has been done, that will be done. Nothing is new under the sun. Even the thing of which we say, "See, this is new!" has already existed in the ages that preceded us. Ecc.1.9-10.NAB.

 

[IamAdopted]

His blood was within His Body. All of Him (Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity) was being carried inside of Her womb. Stop denying this fact.

But it was His blood that was In His body that He shed for the remission of our sin. He carried this blood outside of Marys body also. This is the blood of the NEW covenant. His blood shed.

The main part of the Old Ark that we cannot deny was that it carried the Word of God. Mary carried the Word made flesh.

The flesh carried the Word of God. For it was the word that became flesh.

Again, blood does nothing without God's will to shed it for us. That was the ACT OF LOVE God did for us. Do you really think if His Blood was spilled without Him wanting it to be spilled it would mean the same? No way. Your taking away the actual Sacrifice part and focusing too much on the blood part. You need the Sacrifice part for the spilled blood to work. Combination of the two. Jesus is the New Covenant. The word of God. God's Promise to us.

Life is in the blood. For without shedding of Blood sins cannot be forgiven. This we see in all of scripture. In the OT we have the animal blood that just covered sin. In the NT we have Christs blood that removes sin. For His was shed once for all. Without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness of sin.

Animals blood is nothing. It was their act of doing what God wanted in Sacrificing the animals that pleased God. So now your saying this animal sacrifce was sufficient in having their sins forgiven. They didn't need Christ? Wow.

Now where in all my posts do you see where I have said this? If it was not for the shedding of the blood of the animals in the OT sins would not have been covered. Don't put words that you think in my mouth. With Christ we no longer have to sacrafice animals for Jesus is the Lamb of God who taketh away the sins. His shed blood was a one time act and it takes away the sins of those whom believe in Him. Even those in the OT that believed.

She gave him love, only a mother can give.

He calls all of us that obey Gods will His mother brother and sisters. And yes she did love Him.

That is just your assumption. Prove she sinned.

The bible clearly states that all were prisoner of sin. This is why Christ had to come. To redeem mankind.

21Is the law, therefore, opposed to the promises of God? Absolutely not! For if a law had been given that could impart life, then righteousness would certainly have come by the law. 22But the Scripture declares that the whole world is a prisoner of sin, so that what was promised, being given through faith in Jesus Christ, might be given to those who believe.

I don't see except Mary in here do you?

 

[ScottBot]

The flesh carried the Word of God? What the...... Jesus is the Word MADE flesh, not the Word encased in flesh.

 

[IamAdopted]

The flesh carried the Word of God? What the...... Jesus is the Word MADE flesh, not the Word encased in flesh.

The word was before He became flesh. Was He not? To therefore the Word was carried in the flesh of Christ. For He became flesh. But Being flesh He still was the word of God. So therefore this is why Jesus is translated God with us. Just as the Ark was known as God with us. Mary is not known as God is with us. Where ever Jesus walked God was with people. Not Mary. Where ever the Ark of the Old covenant was brought along being God is with us. Where ever two or three are gathered in His name there He is with us. We see in revelation 11

19Then God's temple in heaven was opened, and within his temple was seen the ark of his covenant. And there came flashes of lightning, rumblings, peals of thunder, an earthquake and a great hailstorm.

 

[Epiphanygirl]

The flesh carried the Word of God? What the...... Jesus is the Word MADE flesh, not the Word encased in flesh.

Makes ya dizzy doesn't it..weeeeeeeeeeeeeeee
*Wanna beer?

 

[Kepha]

But it was His blood that was In His body that He shed for the remission of our sin. He carried this blood outside of Marys body also. This is the blood of the NEW covenant. His blood shed. The flesh carried the Word of God. For it was the word that became flesh. Life is in the blood. For without shedding of Blood sins cannot be forgiven. This we see in all of scripture. In the OT we have the animal blood that just covered sin. In the NT we have Christs blood that removes sin. For His was shed once for all. Without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness of sin. Now where in all my posts do you see where I have said this? If it was not for the shedding of the blood of the animals in the OT sins would not have been covered. Don't put words that you think in my mouth. With Christ we no longer have to sacrafice animals for Jesus is the Lamb of God who taketh away the sins. His shed blood was a one time act and it takes away the sins of those whom believe in Him. Even those in the OT that believed. He calls all of us that obey Gods will His mother brother and sisters. And yes she did love Him. The bible clearly states that all were prisoner of sin. This is why Christ had to come. To redeem mankind. I don't see except Mary in here do you?

Ok I'm a little upset here. I lost all my hour and a half's worth of work here. This is the only forum I have been on where if you hit the back button it doesn't save that previous page. I'm kind of fuming at the moment big time here so i'll make this brief.

I see what your trying to get. The Divine part of God was not enclosed in a human shell. If that were true he wouldnt' have been human. He was 100 percent man and 100 percent Divine. Mary carried the Word of God. His Flesh did not. His flesh is what made Him human. It wasnt a suit he wore.

And again about the blood. He was the New Covenant since again, it was through HIS Sacrifice for us. Not just the shedding of blood.

The bible clearly states that all were prisoner of sin. This is why Christ had to come. To redeem mankind.
Quote:
21Is the law, therefore, opposed to the promises of God? Absolutely not! For if a law had been given that could impart life, then righteousness would certainly have come by the law. 22But the Scripture declares that the whole world is a prisoner of sin, so that what was promised, being given through faith in Jesus Christ, might be given to those who believe.
I don't see except Mary in here do you?

Your Bible seems to have added it's own word in there. It should read:

22 But the scripture hath concluded all under sin, that the promise, by the faith of Jesus Christ, might be given to them that believe.

That word all never always meant 'all' as in everything like we say it today so that verse does not hold water in your case against The Blessed Virgin Mary.

 

[IamAdopted]

Ok I'm a little upset here. I lost all my hour and a half's worth of work here. This is the only forum I have been on where if you hit the back button it doesn't save that previous page. I'm kind of fuming at the moment big time here so i'll make this brief.

I see what your trying to get. The Divine part of God was not enclosed in a human shell. If that were true he wouldnt' have been human. He was 100 percent man and 100 percent Divine. Mary carried the Word of God. His Flesh did not. His flesh is what made Him human. It wasnt a suit he wore.

And again about the blood. He was the New Covenant since again, it was through HIS Sacrifice for us. Not just the shedding of blood.



Your Bible seems to have added it's own word in there. It should read:

22 But the scripture hath concluded all under sin, that the promise, by the faith of Jesus Christ, might be given to them that believe.

That word all never always meant 'all' as in everything like we say it today so that verse does not hold water in your case against The Blessed Virgin Mary.

And where do you get this from that all never means all. We see in scripture that there was only one without sin. This being Christ. Not one of but one.

25Therefore he is able to save completely those who come to God through him, because he always lives to intercede for them. 26Such a high priest meets our need—one who is holy, blameless, pure, set apart from sinners, exalted above the heavens. 27Unlike the other high priests, he does not need to offer sacrifices day after day, first for his own sins, and then for the sins of the people. He sacrificed for their sins once for all when he offered himself.

We can see that all are born prisoners to sin. This is why Christ had to come.

 

[IamAdopted]

IF Jesus had not shed His blood would there be a new covenant? If Jesus had not shed His blood would there be forgiven of our sins? If Jesus was the word before He became flesh. Then were is the word contained? Not in Mary. For Jesus was in the womb for 9 months. If the Ark of the covenant contained Gods word the Torah and Christ came and made a new covenant And He is the word of God then how may I ask how Mary is the Ark. She cannot be. Once again. In Jesus was the fulness of truth. Only in Jesus.

 

[PassthePeace1]

But it was His blood that was In His body that He shed for the remission of our sin. He carried this blood outside of Marys body also. This is the blood of the NEW covenant. His blood shed. The flesh carried the Word of God. For it was the word that became flesh. Life is in the blood. For without shedding of Blood sins cannot be forgiven. This we see in all of scripture. In the OT we have the animal blood that just covered sin. In the NT we have Christs blood that removes sin. For His was shed once for all. Without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness of sin. Now where in all my posts do you see where I have said this? If it was not for the shedding of the blood of the animals in the OT sins would not have been covered. Don't put words that you think in my mouth. With Christ we no longer have to sacrafice animals for Jesus is the Lamb of God who taketh away the sins. His shed blood was a one time act and it takes away the sins of those whom believe in Him. Even those in the OT that believed. He calls all of us that obey Gods will His mother brother and sisters. And yes she did love Him. The bible clearly states that all were prisoner of sin. This is why Christ had to come. To redeem mankind. I don't see except Mary in here do you?

IAA, Jesus is both the High Priest and the Sacrificial Lamb. It was His actions as High Priest, as He offered Himself up that resulted in our redemption, not necessarily His death it's self, true He had to die..inorder for this to take place, however...it's the priestly action that atoned for our sins. This is also true in the OT, it wasn't the killing of the lamb....that atone for their sins, but the offering up of the blood.

 

[IamAdopted]

IAA, Jesus is both the High Priest and the Sacrificial Lamb. It was His actions as High Priest, as He offered Himself up that resulted in our redemption, not necessarily His death it's self, true He had to die..inorder for this to take place, however...it's the priestly action that atoned for our sins. This is also true in the OT, it wasn't the killing of the lamb....that atone for their sins, but the offering up of the blood.

The Lamb had to be sacraficed. They had to sprinkle the blood on the alter. He even had to do this for his own sin. There is no forgiveness of sin without the shedding of blood.

Once a year Aaron shall make atonement on its horns. This annual atonement must be made with the blood of the atoning sin offering for the generations to come. It is most holy to the LORD."

Romans

Since we have now been justified by his blood, how much more shall we be saved from God's wrath through him!

Ephesians

In him we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins, in accordance with the riches of God's grace

Hebrews

But only the high priest entered the inner room, and that only once a year, and never without blood, which he offered for himself and for the sins the people had committed in ignorance.

 

[PassthePeace1]

The Lamb had to be sacraficed.

Agree

They had to sprinkle the blood on the alter. He even had to do this for his own sin.

Yes, that was the priestly act....at that point is when the atonement of sins took place, not at the actual killing of the animal.

There is no forgiveness of sin without the shedding of blood. Romans EphesiansHebrews

Okay, so the priestly action of Our Lord, could be preformed....His blood had to be shed. The Romans killed Jesus, He didn't kill Himself....so it was His priestly action, as the High Priest, in the offering of His blood in atonement for our sins...therefore, our redemption.

Hebrews
Quote:
But only the high priest entered the inner room, and that only once a year, and never without blood, which he offered for himself and for the sins the people had committed in ignorance.

See, that is what the scripture you quoted says..."which he offered for himself and for the sins the people had committed"....it's the priestly action of presenting the offering of the blood from the sacrifice, from the priest....that was accepted by God, for the atonement of sins.
I am not saying that the blood, isn't an essential element, just not the only element....there has to be a priest to offer it to God. Jesus is both the High Priest and the Pascal Lamb, both essential actions in our redemption.

 

[PassthePeace1]

When we read, the whole chapter in context, we can see that both the blood, and the priestly action, of using the blood of the sacrifice is necessary. Basically, on one point I am agreeing with you....I am just pointing out, that the functions of the priest in the offering was also necessary.

In a nutshell---Jesus is the Second Person of the Trinity, both with totally united two natures, one divine and one human...they can't be separated. This is necessary, to fulfill the requirements of being the Paschal Lamb....if He was just God, in a human shell, it wouldn't have been an acceptable sacrifice for the redemption of mankind, because it would have been a human sacrifice...which is forbidding. However because of the hypostatic union of Jesus's two wills, that took place at the time of Incarnation, He is a perfect sacrifice, for the redemption of mankind.


Hebrews 9

The Old and the New

1Now even the first covenant had (A)regulations of divine worship and (B)the earthly sanctuary.


2For there was (C)a tabernacle prepared, the outer one, in which were (D)the lampstand and (E)the table and (F)the sacred bread; this is called the holy place.

3Behind (G)the second veil there was a tabernacle which is called the (H)Holy of Holies,

4having a golden (I)altar of incense and (J)the ark of the covenant covered on all sides with gold, in which was (K)a golden jar holding the manna, and (L)Aaron's rod which budded, and (M)the tables of the covenant;

5and above it were the (N)cherubim of glory (O)overshadowing the mercy seat; but of these things we cannot now speak in detail.

6Now when these things have been so prepared, the priests (P)are continually entering the outer tabernacle performing the divine worship,

7but into (Q)the second, only (R)the high priest enters (S)once a year, (T)not without taking blood, which he (U)offers for himself and for the (V)sins of the people committed in ignorance.

8(W)The Holy Spirit is signifying this, (X)that the way into the holy place has not yet been disclosed while the outer tabernacle is still standing,

9which is a symbol for the present time. Accordingly (Y)both gifts and sacrifices are offered which (Z)cannot make the worshiper perfect in conscience,

10since they relate only to (AA)food and (AB)drink and various (AC)washings, (AD)regulations for the body imposed until (AE)a time of reformation.

11But when Christ appeared as a (AF)high priest of the (AG)good things [a]to come, He entered through (AH)the greater and more perfect tabernacle, (AI)not made with hands, that is to say, (AJ)not of this creation;

12and not through (AK)the blood of goats and calves, but (AL)through His own blood, He (AM)entered the holy place (AN)once for all, having obtained (AO)eternal redemption.

13For if (AP)the blood of goats and bulls and (AQ)the ashes of a heifer sprinkling those who have been defiled sanctify for the cleansing of the flesh,

14how much more will (AR)the blood of Christ, who through (AS)the eternal Spirit (AT)offered Himself without blemish to God, (AU)cleanse your conscience from (AV)dead works to serve (AW)the living God?

15For this reason (AX)He is the (AY)mediator of a (AZ)new covenant, so that, since a death has taken place for the redemption of the transgressions that were committed under the first covenant, those who have been (BA)called may (BB)receive the promise of (BC)the eternal inheritance.

16For where a covenant is, there must of necessity be the death of the one who made it.

17For a covenant is valid only when men are dead, [b]for it is never in force while the one who made it lives.

18Therefore even the first covenant was not inaugurated without blood.

19For when every commandment had been (BD)spoken by Moses to all the people according to the Law, (BE)he took the (BF)blood of the calves and the goats, with (BG)water and scarlet wool and hyssop, and sprinkled both (BH)the book itself and all the people,

20saying, "(BI)THIS IS THE BLOOD OF THE COVENANT WHICH GOD COMMANDED YOU."

21And in the same way he (BJ)sprinkled both the tabernacle and all the vessels of the ministry with the blood.

22And according to the Law, one may (BK)almost say, all things are cleansed with blood, and (BL)without shedding of blood there is no forgiveness.

23Therefore it was necessary for the (BM)copies of the things in the heavens to be cleansed with these, but (BN)the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these.

24For Christ (BO)did not enter a holy place made with hands, a mere copy of (BP)the true one, but into (BQ)heaven itself, now (BR)to appear in the presence of God for us;

25nor was it that He would offer Himself often, as (BS)the high priest enters (BT)the holy place (BU)year by year with blood that is not his own.

26Otherwise, He would have needed to suffer often since (BV)the foundation of the world; but now (BW)once at (BX)the consummation of the ages He has been (BY)manifested to put away sin (BZ)by the sacrifice of Himself.

27And inasmuch as (CA)it is appointed for men to die once and after this (CB)comes judgment,
28so Christ also, having been (CC)offered once to (CD)bear the sins of many, will appear (CE)a second time for (CF)salvation (CG)without reference to sin, to those who (CH)eagerly await Him.

 

[Kepha]

And where do you get this from that all never means all. We see in scripture that there was only one without sin. This being Christ. Not one of but one. We can see that all are born prisoners to sin. This is why Christ had to come.

I'll have to try to answer this later. No time at the moment.