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

[Hentenza]

From the way you laugh at how easily you gave up on praying the Rosary, it sure sounds like you didnt seek the answers with a sincere heart on why the Church teaches this but you were already duped by the illigical theory of sola Scritpure long before.

You have no idea. I attended private Catholic elementary and high school and then attended Georgetown University which is also Catholic. Don't tell me that I didn't have a sincere heart. Braking from the Catholic church was very painful for me because I really did everything I could to believe in their teachings. At one point, when answers were not forthcomming I had to seek those answers outside of the Catholic church. So don't tell me what is in my heart because you don't really know. Only God knows.

 

[Rick Otto]

He couldn't confront "ALL men have sinned" with any more than 'it doesn't apply' to Mary.
Somehow, that failed to convince me, awesome as it sounds.
Be nice to him for awhile.

 

[Hentenza]

Why would I need to. All of you positions have been answered over and over again since the dawn of Christianity. History gives perspective.

Yeah, you are right. "Word of mouth" sure proves the point. Have you ever done the classroom game where a short story is told to the first student and told to tell it to the next and so on until the last student finally tells a story that is not close to the original?
The dawn of Christianity has not a thing to do with what the Catholic church teaches. If you don't have anything to add to this thread other than your arrogant insults then go away. Otherwise contribute to the thread and address my argument. So far nothing in your post has refuted my argument.
What do they say about sticks and stones?

 

[Hentenza]

He couldn't confront "ALL men have sinned" with any more than 'it doesn't apply' to Mary.
Somehow, that failed to convince me, awesome as it sounds.
Be nice to him for awhile.

Hi Rick,

I thought IWAS being nice to him.

 

[ScottBot]

Yeah, you are right. "Word of mouth" sure proves the point. Have you ever done the classroom game where a short story is told to the first student and told to tell it to the next and so on until the last student finally tells a story that is not close to the original?
The dawn of Christianity has not a thing to do with what the Catholic church teaches. If you don't have anything to add to this thread other than your arrogant insults then go away. Otherwise contribute to the thread and address my argument. So far nothing in your post has refuted my argument.
What do they say about sticks and stones?

Well, you might as well through the bible into that story, because that is exactly how the Pentateuch was transmitted until Moses put pen to paper (so to speak). So, which part of the OT do you want to throw out first? I say Deuteronomy, but I'm quirky like that. Not to mention the Gospels of Mark and Luke, since they were written by people who were told the Gospel stories by the APostles.....Oh wait, the main communication for Luke was from an Apostle who wasn't even an eye-witness....and around and around we go. Spin it how you like, without Tradition in some form, you wouldn't even have a bible.

 

[Hentenza]

Well, you might as well through the bible into that story, because that is exactly how the Pentateuch was transmitted until Moses put pen to paper (so to speak). So, which part of the OT do you want to throw out first? I say Deuteronomy, but I'm quirky like that.

I am yet to see you adress my posts with something resembling an argument. Either refute my argument or don't post. You do need to stop changing the subject.

 

[Rick Otto]

Hi Rick,

I thought IWAS being nice to him.

Well we should try something different... maybe we could think FOR him!

Is there any way YOU can think of why "All have sinned" doesn't apply to her?

Try hard.

 

[sunlover1]

You said She was not God so then absolutely needed to have sin on Her soul. I was making a point that not all of God's creatures are created with Sin.

Now I understand.
Right, Angels are without sin I guess,
except the devil and all his cohorts?
Adam and eve were 'created' not born.
Of course Jesus we know was
tempted in every way but without sin.
This seems to be a distinction made
throughout the NT,
but now you say
it's not a biggy because Mary never
sinned either.
I don't know Kepha.
It seems non sequitor to me.

No, I am saying He did not have Mary in mind nor he may not have even had us in mind when he wrote this since it was most likely directed at a certain group. It's like when our Priest preaches this verse to us yet would never feel as if he would have to include her either since it was about us and not Her.

You mean God. God didn't have us
in mind maybe when it was written.
That's sort of hard to believe for me,
and I am trying to be open.

Yes, we have already went over this though and it seems as usual, threads like this never end.

Yes, because you or I are mistaken,
and whoever that is is blinded to the
truth.
That bugs me.
sunlover

 

[ScottBot]

I am yet to see you adress my posts with something resembling an argument. Either refute my argument or don't post. You do need to stop changing the subject.

Catholic Answers, “Immaculate Conception and Assumption" (San Diego: Catholic Answers, 2001)

Catholic Answers, “Mary: 'Full of Grace'” (San Diego: Catholic Answers, 2001)

OH, and you may want to reconsider telling other people when to post and when to not post. Just a suggestion.

 

[Kepha]

Verse 5-"5O God, thou knowest my foolishness; and my sins are not hid from thee."

Same issue, the sins are psalmist not Jesus. Didn't the Catholic church show you how to interpret a passage?

Of course it is not talking about Jesus since I never said it was. Can you even interpretate on here.
My point is that you are picking and choosing which verse of psalms 69 you want to be talking about Christ and which are not which again is zero proof by you. You quoted one to disprove our stance on Mary not having kids. That is your interpretation and not ours.

So Psalm 69 is not messianic? You quoted verse Mat 27:56, but look at what is being said in context. Mat 27:55-56

"55And many women were there beholding afar off, which followed Jesus from Galilee, ministering unto him: 56Among which was Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James and Joses, and the mother of Zebedees children."

Since when did Jesus not come first when talking about Mary? I'm pretty sure if they meant Mary the Mother of Jesus, they wold have said just that or made sure we knew exactly which Mary it was as done in John 19 when still talking about who was at the cross. Oh and look, there were 3 Mary's there.

Jn 19:25, "Now there stood by the cross of Jesus His mother (Mary) and His mothers sister, Mary the wife of Cleophas, and Mary Magdalene."

Matthew is mere discribing who among women were at the crucifixion. The verse is merely telling who was there. The mother of the Zebedees is not Mary. That is why the phrases are separated by "and".

Actually, that is just you reaching for straw.

I'll tell my preacher to attend the Catholic church so that he can get a proper interpretation...not!

You have no clue how blessed he'd be if He did such a wonderful thing.

 

[Kepha]

Yeah, you are right. "Word of mouth" sure proves the point. Have you ever done the classroom game where a short story is told to the first student and told to tell it to the next and so on until the last student finally tells a story that is not close to the original?

You believe God can perserve His Written Word for us but not His Oral? It always irks me when I hear this actually as if there was no thought given before it was said.

 

[Hentenza]

Catholic Answers, “Immaculate Conception and Assumption" (San Diego: Catholic Answers, 2001)

Catholic Answers, “Mary: 'Full of Grace'” (San Diego: Catholic Answers, 2001)

OH, and you may want to reconsider telling other people when to post and when to not post. Just a suggestion.

Yes, I will seek answers from the very denomination that can't give it. mmm... I'll think about that. Been there, done that!

Again, If all you have to answer my posts are arrogant insulting answers, then what is that point of posting.

 

[Kepha]

You mean God. God didn't have us in mind maybe when it was written. That's sort of hard to believe for me, and I am trying to be open.

God had us in mind, just not Mary. Just like when our Priest teach us all have sinned. He doesnt have to say it, we just know it. Scripture was written for us but it was also influenced with whom they were speaking to at that time. Such as wearing coverings on your heads for example.

Yes, because you or I are mistaken,
and whoever that is is blinded to the
truth.
That bugs me.
sunlover

Yes which is why I question why God would leave his limited written word to a bunch of illiterates for 1000 years with no printing press to distribute them. And to then, when actually coming to the hands of someone who can read, be read and taught by fallible men such as Rick Otto. Who is to decide once and for all who is right and who is wrong. I'll take my chances with The Church and not men.

 

[DMagoh]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kepha

All Have Sinned does not apply to Jesus or Mary as both the Written and Oral Word of God assures us.

Where? Cite the verse that proves that.

Show me where it doesn't. Ive read nothing so far that proves this except your own fallible interpretation of Scripture.

Wow, Kepha, using that philosphy....

My religion teaches that Peter was actually Jesus' dog He brought with Him from heaven. Now, show me in the Bible that proves that's not true!

 

[IamAdopted]

53When Jesus had finished these parables, he moved on from there. 54Coming to his hometown, he began teaching the people in their synagogue, and they were amazed. "Where did this man get this wisdom and these miraculous powers?" they asked. 55"Isn't this the carpenter's son? Isn't his mother's name Mary, and aren't his brothers James, Joseph, Simon and Judas? 56Aren't all his sisters with us? Where then did this man get all these things?" 57And they took offense at him.
But Jesus said to them, "Only in his hometown and in his own house is a prophet without honor."
58And he did not do many miracles there because of their lack of faith.

This pretty much sums it up doesn't it?

 

[ScottBot]

Yes, I will seek answers from the very denomination that can't give it. mmm... I'll think about that. Been there, done that!

Again, If all you have to answer my posts are arrogant insulting answers, then what is that point of posting.

I'm truely sorry if you don't like the answers that have always been given to the question of the Immaculate Conception and Perpetual Virginity of Mary. I'm sorry you've rejected them in favor of your own counsel. I'm sorry if you can't see the hypocrisy of your own arrogance. But go right ahead, enlighten me with your new revelations and insight into the intended meaning of Scripture.

 

[Kepha]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kepha

All Have Sinned does not apply to Jesus or Mary as both the Written and Oral Word of God assures us.

Where? Cite the verse that proves that.

It's been done.

 

[IamAdopted]

It's been done.

I have not seen this scripture. No where. Please site it again. It is not in there. Can't be proven by God written word that is for correction reproof and fully equipping the man of God. Where do we see that God has spoken orally and it has not been written down?

 

[IamAdopted]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kepha

All Have Sinned does not apply to Jesus or Mary as both the Written and Oral Word of God assures us.

Where? Cite the verse that proves that.



Wow, Kepha, using that philosphy....

My religion teaches that Peter was actually Jesus' dog He brought with Him from heaven. Now, show me in the Bible that proves that's not true!

LOL..

 

[sunlover1]

God had us in mind, just not Mary. Just like when our Priest teach us all have sinned. He doesnt have to say it, we just know it. Scripture was written for us but it was also influenced with whom they were speaking to at that time. Such as wearing coverings on your heads for example.

Ohhh, I see where you're going with this
now.
I don't know that I agree, but I get it.
thank you.

Yes which is why I question why God would leave his limited written word to a bunch of illiterates for 1000 years with no printing press to distribute them. And to then, when actually coming to the hands of someone who can read, be read and taught by fallible men such as Rick Otto. Who is to decide once and for all who is right and who is wrong. I'll take my chances with The Church and not men

Alright.

sunlover