Immaculate Conception?

[kepha31]

The claim has been made here that Anne and Joachim were conceived without sin?? I'd have to see that to believe it, kepha. But the point remains that the logic that's often used to prop up the belief in Mary's Immaculate Conception, if followed through, would require a belief also in the sinlessness of her parents. I take it that you don't believe that they were sinless.

Anne and Joachim were sinners like the rest of us, but they lived holy lives. The sinlessness of Mary's parents is a stupid argument, because it denies the power of God.

How long did it take you to think up all that nonsense? You couldn't verify any of those allegations if you took a week to work on it.

If you say it's nonsense then why do you reject the IC?

 

[Albion]

If you say it's nonsense then why do you reject the IC?

First, there's no excuse for that tirade and all those false charges you made against me. But the reason I oppose the IC, is exactly as I've explained before. There is no Biblical evidence to support it. If there were, it probably wouldn't have taken your own church almost 2000 to decide to make it a dogma.

 

[kepha31]

Here's the problem. Either we hold to a set of men's beliefs, statements, positions ... as absolute truth "AFTER" the scriptures were written OR we hold to the bible itself OR we just hold to our own opinion and the opinions of those that agree with us. Since there were tons of false doctrines corrected even in the writings of the New Testament, even quoting things that were taught at that time are subject to question as to whether or not they are correct or erroneous.

The point is this, apart from the scriptures accepted as authoritative by 95% or more of all those who believe themselves to be Christians, there is no source of knowledge about Christ AT ALL... except for a few secular references. In other words, apart from the scriptures themselves we only have opinions, feelings, thoughts ... about what is right and wrong that are no more authoritative than my own thoughts on the issues.

We already saw the scriptures on the traditions of men, according to Jesus. It is the word of God that is profitable, not the opinions and traditions of men or of a particular belief group. And yes, you and everyone is entitled to believe whatever traditions and beliefs they want. Believe Jesus is a spirit brother of Satan, or that Jesus was really the angel Michael ... but as I state, the final authority is either the bible or it is the traditions, beliefs, feelings, views ... of men who have to alter what the scriptures say and mean to hold fast to their traditions, beliefs, feelings, experiences ... You can't get Mary being sinless "from" scripture, so guess where that belief came from. Guess where all those other beliefs I just stated came from? Someplace other than the bible.

Mary rejoiced in God her savior. Question: Why state this if you are already "saved"? All have sinned and have fallen short of the glory of God. The blessed assumption, according to scripture has nothing blessed about it. It's just an assumption. It's just a tradition that contradicts scripture. Just like many other beliefs. So decide. Scripture says:

Joh 3:13 "No one has ascended into heaven, but He who descended from heaven: the Son of Man.

Your traditions, and the opinions of the men you trust, say something different. So if the bible is wrong on this point, or on Jesus having brothers and sisters, and on Joseph not knowing Mary UNTIL AFTER Jesus was born ... thus resulting in the brothers and sisters, then you must assume that it could be wrong about absolutely everything, INCLUDING the passages some people use to state Peter was the first pope. Pick one. Either the bible is authoritative in, and of itself, and is correct in it's teachings, ALL OF THEM, or it isn't. If it isn't reliable and trustworthy in the whole, then we can't even trust that there was a Mary or a Peter, or even a Jesus, and absolutely everything in scripture is up for grabs, and we waste our time even worrying about what scriptures say and mean. Untrustworthy is untrustworthy.

Otherwise the only question is how do we determine how to get to truth of what it says and means. We all have to pick one. Tradition and the opinions of men are the ultimate authority, the bible is the ultimate authority, or we are the ultimate authority. If it's your traditions and the opinions of men, don't even bother with scripture. If it's you, again, don't even bother with scripture.

Your use of the word "tradition" has nothing to do with Oral or Sacred Tradition that the Bible commands us to follow. Tradition, properly understood, is the words of Jesus and the Apostles 'handed down', preserved in apostolic succession. For example, their would be no Bible without the tradition of the episcopate, because the Bible took 4 centuries to mature. There is a complementary relationship between the two. There is no contradiction. The spoken Word and the written Word have the same source.

 

[kepha31]

First, there's no excuse for that tirade and all those false charges you made against me. But the reason I oppose the IC, is exactly as I've explained before. There is no Biblical evidence to support it. If there were, it probably wouldn't have taken your own church almost 2000 to decide to make it a dogma.

Sorry, I mistook all your posts for the other 50 in this thread. Biblical evidence has been presented by myself and others, but since you insist there is no biblical evidence, you are in denial of all the biblical evidence thus far posted. So my charges aren't all that false. Making something dogmatic does not mean inventing it. So again you are wrong.

 

[prodromos]

The claim is stupid because Mary was made sinless by the power of God

And thus the Catholic dogma removes any virtue from the mother of God.

 

[MJFlores]

Luke 1:38
And Mary said, “Behold, I am the handmaid of the Lord; let it be to me according to your word.” And the angel departed from her.

Luke 1:35-38 New International Version (NIV)

The angel answered, “The Holy Spirit will come on you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you. So the holy one to be born will be called the Son of God. Even Elizabeth your relative is going to have a child in her old age, and she who was said to be unable to conceive is in her sixth month. For no word from God will ever fail.”

“I am the Lord’s servant,” Mary answered. “May your word to me be fulfilled.” Then the angel left her.

About 30 years later (or after 11 Chapters)

Luke 11:27-28 New International Version (NIV)

As Jesus was saying these things, a woman in the crowd called out, “Blessed is the mother who gave you birth and nursed you.”

He replied, “Blessed rather are those who hear the word of God and obey it.”

 

[LostMarbels]

Jesus is fully man, and fully God.

I believe it is true that: the Holy Spirit's seed and Mary's seed produced Jesus?

For Jesus to be sinless, would Mary need to be either:
a) Saved and or Filled with the Holy Spirit
b) Sinless

I can't see, God in the flesh could be conceived if Mary was a sinner.

From what I have read in the bible genealogical cures and/or sins is passed down by the Fathers of those children/generations.


Exo 20:5 Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the LORD thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me;

Exo 34:7 Keeping mercy for thousands, forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin, and that will by no means clear the guilty; visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children, and upon the children's children, unto the third and to the fourth generation.

Num 14:18 The LORD is longsuffering, and of great mercy, forgiving iniquity and transgression, and by no means clearing the guilty, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation.

Deu 5:9 Thou shalt not bow down thyself unto them, nor serve them: for I the LORD thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me,

This being said: with the seed of the father having been from God, that seed is without sin, and Jesus The Christ adopted God's sinless nature. Sin in the bible is passed down by the Father. Mary's sin would not be applicable.

We also have an account of Mary admitting she indeed needed a savior:

Luk 1:46 And Mary said, My soul doth magnify the Lord,
Luk 1:47 And my spirit hath rejoiced in God my Saviour.
Luke 1:48 For he hath regarded the low estate of his handmaiden: for, behold, from henceforth all generations shall call me blessed.

Firstly, all men have sinned, including Mary, and fallen short of the glory of God [Rom 3:23], and through one man sin entered the world and death spread to all men [Rom 5:12]. King David writing in Psalms says that he was brought forth in iniquity and in sin when his mother conceived him - biblical proof of mankind's sinful nature from the time of conception.

So, again... since Mary "conceived by the holy spirit". (Mat 1:20, Luke 1:35) Jesus did not receive Man's sinful seed, but God's sinless one. And again, that had nothing to do with Mary.

[Psa 51:5]. According to the law of Moses every mother that conceived, either a male or female, had to after an appointed time offer sacrifices to God: one as a burnt offering, and one as a sin offering [Lev.12]. Mary, after conceiving Jesus made these sacrifices in accordance and obedience to the Law God gave to Moses. This is clearly indicated to us in the book of Luke chap. 2 ver. 21-24, as Mary applies this very observance as is required of every Jewish woman who conceives her first born son. Read Leviticus 12 is first, understand what is being said, then read Luke 2:21-24. Once reading and understanding what is being said, it is clear that the offering Mary offers makes according to ... law of the Lord, A pair of turtledoves, or two young pigeons. [Lk.2:24], ... the one for the burnt offering, and the other for a sin offering: ... [Lev. 12:8]. The sin offering Mary gives is sufficient evidence Mary's carnality.

The Scriptures also categorically state the family Jesus had, and that Mary did conceive after the birth of Jesus. She never remained a virgin, and can never be considered "immaculate" as the Roman Catholic Church has exalted her to be. "Is not this the carpenter's son? is not his mother called Mary? and his brethren, James, and Joses, and Simon, and Judas? And his sisters, are they not all with us? Whence then hath this man all these things?" (Mat 13:55,56).

 

[EmethAlethia]

Your use of the word "tradition" has nothing to do with Oral or Sacred Tradition that the Bible commands us to follow. Tradition, properly understood, is the words of Jesus and the Apostles 'handed down', preserved in apostolic succession. For example, their would be no Bible without the tradition of the episcopate, because the Bible took 4 centuries to mature. There is a complementary relationship between the two. There is no contradiction. The spoken Word and the written Word have the same source.

Anything that nullifies what the word of God says and means, whether it was during the time of the writing of scripture or afterwards is included in heretical teachings. Men, regardless of the claims of authority or apostolic succession, are subject to the word of God. If the word of God does not stand on it's own as the absolute authority, then all claims to have ANY authority based on that Word of God are also null and void. This isn't a "I'll keep the part that claims Peter is a the rock the church is founded upon" and reject the following verses that say. "Get thee behind me Satan" issue. Either the bible is the authority and supersedes all authority or there is no claiming you have any authority based on what scripture says.

The bible did not take 4 centuries to "mature". Yes people were adding things like the end of Mark TO the scripture centuries later but anyone who wants to get to that truth can find it. Personally I have been combining ALL of the major documents all of our modern New Testament translations into one manuscript along with all of the differences from the over 50,000 fragments dating back to 70n AD. I can not only tell you, but show you, that there are no differences in meaning. Plus, over 95% of the world who believes themselves to be Christian accepts the same 70 books as scripture. Some groups add other things like the Book of Mormon, Maccabees ... but 95% accept the 70. People were distorting the gospel and what the word of God said and meant even as scripture was being written. Look at 1st and 2nd Corinthians. The opinions of people AFTER the scriptures were completed are just the opinions of men, just like my opinions and your opinions. And you can't claim apostolic succession if the bible itself, ON IT'S OWN, is not reliable and trustworthy, WITHOUT that apostolic succession.

Anyone who claims to be speaking for God, and that contradicts the fullness of the word of God, when everything that pertains is rightly divided, is a false prophet. This includes me. Again, apostolic succession cannot trump the Word of God or you have no apostolic succession. If all of it is not reliable and trustworthy, with regards to doctrine and beliefs, AS WRITTEN, none of it is.

That said, based on ALL of the scriptures, and that Peter was in subjection to Paul, when Paul opposed him to His face, and that right after Jesus statement on His church being founded on the rock Jesus calls Peter Satan ... along with what the word of God says the ultimate authority is, I cannot accept your conclusion as to Peter being in charge.

 

[EmethAlethia]

Your use of the word "tradition" has nothing to do with Oral or Sacred Tradition that the Bible commands us to follow. Tradition, properly understood, is the words of Jesus and the Apostles 'handed down', preserved in apostolic succession. For example, their would be no Bible without the tradition of the episcopate, because the Bible took 4 centuries to mature. There is a complementary relationship between the two. There is no contradiction. The spoken Word and the written Word have the same source.

If the bible is not reliable and accurate "BY ITSELF" then any claim to authority based on the authority of scripture is null and void as well. You can't pick and choose and say this one piece stands on it's own the rest has to be interpreted by the men God gave the authority to. Can you trust the words that you believe say that Peter is in charge? Then you can trust the words that follow that call Peter Satan as well.

 

[EmethAlethia]

Your use of the word "tradition" has nothing to do with Oral or Sacred Tradition that the Bible commands us to follow. Tradition, properly understood, is the words of Jesus and the Apostles 'handed down', preserved in apostolic succession. For example, their would be no Bible without the tradition of the episcopate, because the Bible took 4 centuries to mature. There is a complementary relationship between the two. There is no contradiction. The spoken Word and the written Word have the same source.

If they are the same, then when all of the passages that pertain are "rightly divided" there will be no difference. The problem is, unless you CHANGE the word of God, those that claim authority make MANY changes that completely contradict the word of God. Anyone can claim their beliefs are true and gather passages and verses to prove their beliefs true and passages and verses to prove all opposing beliefs are false, and interpret everything in the light of their beliefs. That is why there are so many different belief groups all claiming the gospel is simple but that believe in completely different "simple" gospels.

If you just want to hold fast to what you want to believe this methodology allows everyone to believe everything they want. Don't believe me, LOOK at all the other belief groups and what they do. Tradition CANNOT trump the accuracy and reliability of the scriptures or tradition has no authority because scripture has no authority. Claiming you have authority based on scripture and then claiming the scripture has no authority unless your group interprets it is what every group that "uses" scripture claims. Look at the Mormon's, Jehovah's Witnesses, Christian Science, the lost religious of Jesus time...

 

[kepha31]

Luke 1:35-38 New International Version (NIV)

The angel answered, “The Holy Spirit will come on you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you. So the holy one to be born will be called the Son of God. Even Elizabeth your relative is going to have a child in her old age, and she who was said to be unable to conceive is in her sixth month. For no word from God will ever fail.”

“I am the Lord’s servant,” Mary answered. “May your word to me be fulfilled.” Then the angel left her.
View attachment 193316

About 30 years later (or after 11 Chapters)

View attachment 193317

Luke 11:27-28 New International Version (NIV)

As Jesus was saying these things, a woman in the crowd called out, “Blessed is the mother who gave you birth and nursed you.”

He replied, “Blessed rather are those who hear the word of God and obey it.”

You are repeating yourself. I explained your abuse of this verse in post #266.

 

[kepha31]

If they are the same, then when all of the passages that pertain are "rightly divided" there will be no difference. The problem is, unless you CHANGE the word of God, those that claim authority make MANY changes that completely contradict the word of God. Anyone can claim their beliefs are true and gather passages and verses to prove their beliefs true and passages and verses to prove all opposing beliefs are false, and interpret everything in the light of their beliefs. That is why there are so many different belief groups all claiming the gospel is simple but that believe in completely different "simple" gospels.

If you just want to hold fast to what you want to believe this methodology allows everyone to believe everything they want. Don't believe me, LOOK at all the other belief groups and what they do. Tradition CANNOT trump the accuracy and reliability of the scriptures or tradition has no authority because scripture has no authority. Claiming you have authority based on scripture and then claiming the scripture has no authority unless your group interprets it is what every group that "uses" scripture claims. Look at the Mormon's, Jehovah's Witnesses, Christian Science, the lost religious of Jesus time...

It is impossible for Tradition, properly understood, to trump the word of God. The problem here is the way you change its meaning. You can't seem to unlock yourself from an unbiblical definition. This thread is not about Tradition, it's about the Immaculate Conception. If you want the truth about what Catholics believe about Tradition here are some links. Please stop making up nonsense:
Scripture and Tradition | Catholic Answers
http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p1s1c2a2.htm #74=80
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/davearmstrong/2006/11/bible-church-tradition-canon-index.html scroll to part II
Scripture is authoritive, I never said otherwise. Scripture came from the Catholic Church, a church did not come from a Bible. That is not an opinion or a mere belief, it is a historical fact. You are forced to invent Bible origin fantasies because you refuse to admit the authority of the Church that canonized the holy books in the first place.
NOWHERE in the Bible is the Bible pitted against the Church. You do it because it is a man made Protestant tradition.

 

[Rhamiel]

Dear Rhamiel,

What do you mean by "our first parents kinda ruined everything for us"? They helped making us aware of good and bad. Would you prefer not having those qualities? Not being able to recognize the love of God? Even ants have limited abilities to distinguish between good and bad. I don't think you would want to wander around the Garden of Eden, for thousands of years, stark naked, with nothing to do since allegedly everything is already perfect.
God bless

Adam and Eve knew that it was good to keep the commands of God and evil to go against Him
the "knowledge of good and evil" that was gained was experiential knowledge, they had intellectual knowledge before, hence they were able to have guilt when they went against God, because they knew even before hand that they should not have done that, to have guilt there must be culpability

who said there would be nothing to do?
Genesis 2:15
The LORD God took the man and put him in the Garden of Eden to work it and take care of it.
there would be work, there would be family life
but there would not have been war
or little kids who got cancer
we would have been born at peace with ourselves, each other, and with God
rather then being born into a world were there is so much pain and suffering

 

[Albion]

Sorry, I mistook all your posts for the other 50 in this thread. Biblical evidence has been presented by myself and others, but since you insist there is no biblical evidence, you are in denial of all the biblical evidence thus far posted.

I just don't think they come close to testifying to anything like IC. You want to believe it, so anything that can be interpreted as in any way complimentary towards Mary (which is not hard to do, since we all consider her special) you see as vindicating this theory that's part of the all-too-human tendency to heap more and more praise upon her. So first, it's one legend, then another tops it, and each one is seen by devotees as true because they think she deserves it.

 

[Galilee63]

Sin-less entirely.

God our Heavenly Father 'chose' His Blessed Virgin Mary to not only be our Lord Jesus Christ our Merciful Saviour's Mother, but the Mother of God - Jesus, God and The Holy Spirit - starting out as an Infant here being raised by strict loving earthly Parents through God whom obeyed God's Commandments, frequented God's Temples/Church daily and whom knew, through God and The Holy Spirit that their Daughter was Blessed and Gifted by God The Most High to be His Favoured One.

One Saint out of hundreds of Saints whom have recorded each Century their visitations from Jesus and our Blessed Virgin Mother Mary with The Holy Spirit.

Refer to Saint Ann Catherine Emmerich's writings.

www.ecatholic2000.com/anne/lom.shtml

• • PREFACE
  • I. ANCESTORS OF THE BLESSED VIRGIN
  • 1. THE ANCESTORS OF ST. ANNE --ESSENES.
  • 2. ST. ANNE AND ST. JOACHIM.
  • 2.1 JOACHIM IS SPURNED AT THE TEMPLE AND GOES TO STAY WITH HIS FLOCKS.
  • 2.2 ST. ANNE RECEIVES THE PROMISE OF FERTILITY AND TRAVELS TO THE TEMPLE.
  • 2.3 JOACHIM IS COMFORTED BY AN ANGEL AND RETURNS AGAIN TO THE TEMPLE TO SACRIFICE.
  • 2.4 JOACHIM RECEIVES THE BLESSING FROM THE ARK OF THE COVENANT.
  • II. THE IMMACULATE CONCEPTION
  • 1. JOACHIM AND ST. ANNE MEET BENEATH THE GOLDEN GATE.
  • 2. SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION ABOUT THE CONCEPTION OF THE BLESSED VIRGIN.
  • 2.1 THE ANGELS ARE SHOWN THE RESTORATION OF MANKIND.
  • 2.2 AN EGYPTIAN REPRESENTATION OF MARY PRIOR TO ELIJAH.
  • 2.3 ELIJAH'S VISION OF THE BLESSED VIRGIN.
  • 2.4 AN EXPOUNDING ON ELIJAH'S VISION OF THE BLESSED VIRGIN.
  • 2.5 A REPRESENTATION OF THE BLESSED VIRGIN IN EGYPT.
  • 2.6 MARY PROCLAIMED TO PIOUS PAGANS.
  • 2.7 THE LIFE STORY OF TOBIAS. AN ALLEGORY OF THE COMING OF SALVATION.
  • 2.8 THE GENEALOGICAL TREE OF THE MESSIAH.
  • 2.9 APPARITION OF SAINT ANNE.
  • 2.10 VISION OF THE FEAST OF THE IMMACULATE CONCEPTION.
  • 2.11 THE BLESSED VIRGIN REVEALS SECRETS ABOUT THEIR LIVEs.
  • 2.12 CELEBRATION OF THE CONCEPTION OF MARY IN VARIOUS LOCATIONS.
  • 2.13 THE HOLY KINGS CELEBRATE A FEAST HONORING MARY'S CONCEPTION.
  • 2.14 ELIMINATION OF HUMAN SACRIFICE BY THE STAR-WORSHIPPERS.
  • 2.15 A PARALLEL VISION OF CHILD SACRIFICE.
  • 2.16 HISTORY OF THE CELEBRATIONS OF THE CONCEPTION OF MARY.
  • 3. THE ACTUAL SEASON OF MARY'S CONCEPTION (NOTE BY THE WRITER).
  • 4. THE INFUSING OF MARY'S SOUL AND HER BIRTH.
  • 4.1 THE UNITING OF MARY'S SOUL AND BODY.
  • 4.2 MARY'S BIRTH.
  • 4.3 JOY AT MARY'S BIRTH IN HEAVEN.
  • 4.4 THE PROCLAIMING OF MARY'S BIRTH IN LIMBO.
  • 4.5 AGITATION IN NATURE AND MANKIND AT MARY'S BIRTH.
  • 4.6 THE PROCLAIMING OF MARY'S BIRTH IN CHALDEA.
  • 4.7 EVENTS IN EGYPT DURING MARY'S BIRTH.
  • 4.8 VISITS WITH THE NEWBORN BABY MARY.
  • 4.9 THE CHILD RECEIVES THE NAME MARY.
  • 5. CAUSE OF THE FEAST OF THE NATIVITY OF MARY.
  • 6. THE EFFECT OF PRAYING ON THE FEAST OF THE NATIVITY OF MARY.
  • 7. THE PURIFICATION OF ST. ANNE.
  • III. THE PRESENTATION OF THE BLESSED VIRGIN IN THE TEMPLE
  • 1. PREPARATION IN ST. ANNE'S HOUSE.
  • 2. THE DEPARTURE OF THE CHILD MARY FOR THE TEMPLE.
  • 3. BEGINNING THE JOURNEY.
  • 4. ARRIVAL IN JERUSALEM.
  • 5. MARY'S ENTRY INTO THE TEMPLE AND PRESENTATION.
  • IV. THE EARLY LIFE OF THE BLESSED VIRGIN AT THE TEMPLE
  • V. THE EARLY LIFE OF ST. JOSEPH
  • 1. AN ELDER BROTHER OF ST. JOSEPH
  • VI. A SON IS PROMISED TO ZECHARIAH
  • VII. MARRIAGE OF THE BLESSED VIRGIN TO JOSEPH
  • 1. ABOUT MARY AND JOSEPHS WEDDING AND NUPTIAL CLOTHES.
  • 2. MARY'S WEDDING-RING.
  • 3. FROM MARY'S RETURN HOME TO THE ANNUNCIATION.
  • VIII. THE ANNUNCIATION
  • IX. THE VISITATION
  • 1. MARY AND JOSEPH TRAVEL TO VISIT ELIZABETH.
  • 2. MARY AND JOSEPH ARRIVE AT THE HOUSE OF ELIZABETH AND ZECHARIAH.
  • 3. THE BIRTH OF JOHN. MARY RETURNS TO NAZARETH.
  • X. THE CENSUS AND THE JOURNEY OF THE HOLY FAMILY
  • 1. THE CENSUS OF THE EMPEROR AUGUSTUS IS PROCLAIMED. CHRIST'S BIRTH IN NOVEMBER.
  • 2. ST. ANNE'S HOUSE IN NAZARETH. PREPARING FOR CHRIST'S BIRTH.
  • 3. JOSEPH IS TOLD TO TRAVEL WITH MARY TO BETHLEHEM.
  • 4. JOSEPH REVEALS TO MARY THE ANGEL'S COMMANDMENT.
  • 5. ON THE JOURNEY TO BETHLEHEM
  • 5.1 THE FIELD GINIM. THE TRAVELERS ARE GIVEN A YOUNG SHE-ASS FROM ANNA'S PASTURE.
  • 5.2 TRAVELING AT NIGHT. MARY AND JOSEPH REST AT THE TEREBINTH OF ABRAHAM.
  • 5.3 TWO HOURS SOUTH OF THE TEREBINTH TREE. THEY REST IN AN EMPTY SHED.
  • 5.5 THEY TRAVEL FURTHER SOUTH-EAST. THEY SEE THE TEMPLE ON MOUNT GARIZIM.
  • 5.6 BETWEEN SAMARIA AND JUDEA. THE FRUITLESS FIG TREE NORTH-EAST OF BETHANY.
  • 5.7 THEY STOP AT A SHEPHERD'S LARGE HOUSE.
  • 5.8 A HOUSE OWNED BY JOSEPH'S RELATIVES. THEY STAY AT AN INN CONDUCTING A FUNERAL.
  • 5.9 THE LAST STRETCH OF ROAD TOWARDS BETHLEHEM. THE GOODWILL OF THE INN OWNERS.
  • 6. THE ARRIVAL OF THE HOLY FAMILY IN BETHLEHEM.
  • 7. SEEKING LODGING IN BETHLEHEM.
  • 8. DESCRIPTION OF THE CAVE OF THE NATIVITY AND ITS SURROUNDINGS.
  • 9. THE BURIAL CAVE OF MARAHA, ABRAHAM'S NURSE, ALSO CALLED THE CAVE OF THE SUCKLINGS.
  • 10. THE HOLY FAMILY MOVES INTO THE CAVE OF THE NATIVITY.
  • 11. MARY CONCLUDES THE SABBATH IN THE BURIAL CAVE OF MARAHA.
  • XI. CHRIST'S BIRTH
  • 1. GREAT JOY IN NATURE. "GLORY TO GOD IN THE HIGHEST".
  • 2. OCCURRENCES DURING THE BIRTH OF CHRIST IN DIFFERENT LOCATIONS.
  • 3. REVELATIONS OF THE BIRTH TO THE KINSWOMEN AND FRIENDS OF THE BLESSED VIRGIN.
  • 4. OCCURRENCES DURING THE BIRTH OF CHRIST IN JERUSALEM.
  • 5. OCCURRENCES DURING THE BIRTH OF CHRIST IN ROME.
  • 6. OCCURRENCES DURING THE BIRTH OF CHRIST IN EGYPT.
  • 7. VISIONS APPEAR DURING THE BIRTH OF CHRIST TO THE THREE HOLY KINGS.
  • 8. VISION FRAGMENTS WHICH DETERMINE THE EXACT DATE OF THE BIRTH OF CHRIST.
  • 9. THE ADORATION OF THE SHEPHERDS.
  • 10. THE SHEPHERDS ASSIST ST. JOSEPH. ESSENE WOMEN RENDER SERVICE TO THE BLESSED VIRGIN.
  • 11. THE DONKEY KNEELS BEFORE JESUS. ST. ANNE'S MAID FROM NAZARETH COMES TO MARY.
  • 12. THE BLESSED VIRGIN HIDES FROM EMISSARIES OF HEROD.
  • 13. THE ANGEL'S APPEARANCE TO THE SHEPHERDS HAS BECOME WIDESPREAD.
  • 14. MANY PEOPLE VISIT THE CHILD JESUS ON THE WAY TO BETHLEHEM. JOSEPH PAWNS THE SHE-ASS.
  • XII. THE CIRCUMCISION OF JESUS
  • 1. PREPARATION FOR THE CIRCUMCISION. JOSEPHS FETCHS THE PRIESTS FROM BETHLEHEM.
  • 2. THE CIRCUMCISION OF CHRIST. THE NAME JESUS.
  • 3. ELIZABETH VISITS THE MANGER.
  • 4. FAMILIARITY BETWEEN MARY AND ELIZABETH. MARY CONFIDES HER PAINS AND JOYS.
  • XIII. THE JOURNEY OF THE THREE HOLY KINGS TO BETHLEHEM.
  • 1. THE KINGS SEE THE STAR AND BEGIN THEIR TRAVEL.
  • 2. VISIONS OF ABRAHAM, HAGAR, AND ISHMAEL.
  • 3. THEOKENO CATCHES UP TO THE TRAIN OF MENSOR AND SAIR IN A DESERTED CITY.
  • 4. THE HISTORICAL COLORS AND NAMES OF THE THREE HOLY KINGS.
  • 5. THE TRAIN OF THE THREE HOLY KINGS RESTS AT A SPRING.
  • 6. ABOUT THE HOMELANDS AND LENGTHS OF THE JOURNEYS OF THE THREE HOLY KINGS.
  • 7. NIGHT TRAVEL OF THE KINGS.
  • 8. THE ANCESTORS OF THE KINGS. THEIR STAR OBSERVATIONS - JACOB'S LADDER AND ITS PROPHESIES.
  • 9. THE KINGS TRAIN IS AUGMENTED WITH OTHER TRAVELERS.
  • 10. THE BLESSED VIRGIN FORESEES THE APPROACH OF THE THREE HOLY KINGS.
  • 11. JOSEPH CELEBRATES THE FEAST OF THE CONSECRATION OF THE TEMPLE.
  • 12. JOSEPH WANTS TO SETTLE DOWN IN BETHLEHEM.
  • 13. END OF THE FEAST OF THE CONSECRATION OF THE TEMPLE.
  • 14. THE TRAIN OF THE KINGS. ARRIVAL IN MANATHEA.
  • 15. ST. ANNE JOURNEYS TO BETHLEHEM.
  • 16. THE TRAIN OF THE KINGS CROSSES THE JORDON.
  • 17. THEOKENO IS SUMMONED TO HEROD'S PALACE.
  • 18. THE THREE HOLY KINGS APPEAR BEFORE HEROD.
  • 19. HEROD'S STATE OF MIND - A MURDER.
  • 20. THE HOLY THREE KINGS GO TO BETHLEHEM. THEY REST BY A SPRING.
  • 21. ARRIVAL OF THE THREE KINGS AT THE TAX-COLLECTION HOUSE IN BETHLEHEM.
  • 22. JOSEPH ENTERTAINS THE THREE HOLY KINGS.
  • 23. THE KINGS VISIT WITH THE HOLY FAMILY AGAIN. THEIR GENEROSITY TO THE SHEPHERDS.
  • 24. DEPARTURE OF THE KINGS.
  • XIV. THE HOLY FAMILY IN BETHLEHEM AFTER THE DEPARTURE OF THE KINGS.
  • 1. MEASURES TAKEN IN BETHLEHEM AGAINST THE KINGS. JOSEPH IS EXAMINED AND BLACKMAILED.
  • 2. ST. ANNE RETURNS WITH ELIUD.
  • 3. THE HOLY FAMILY HIDES IN THE BURIAL CAVE OF MARAHA.
  • 4. JOSEPH TAKES THE BABY JESUS FROM MARY BECAUSE OF DANGER.
  • 5. COMMEMORATION OF MARY'S WEDDING.
  • 6. PREPARARIONS FOR THE DEPARTURE OF THE HOLY FAMILY.
  • XV. PERSONAL NOTES: RELICS NEARBY THAT THE THREE KINGS HAD GIVEN TO THE HOLY FAMILY.
  • XVI. THE PURIFICATION OF MARY
  • 1. A VIEW OF THE THREE HOLY KINGS ON THEIR JOURNEY HOME.
  • 2. SIMEON'S DEATH.
  • 3. THE ARRIVAL OF THE HOLY FAMILY AT ST. ANNE'S HOUSE.
  • 4. THE WEATHER IN PALESTINE.
  • 5. CANDLEMAS.
  • XVI. THE FLIGHT INTO EGYPT AND ST. JOHN THE BAPTIST IN THE DESERT.
  • 1. THE AGE OF THE CHILD JESUS DURING THE FLIGHT TO EGYPT.
  • 2. NAZARETH. THE HOUSE OF THE HOLY FAMILY.
  • 3. JERUSALEM. HEROD'S PREPARATIONS FOR THE MURDER OF THE CHILDREN.
  • 4. HEROD PLACES SOLDIERS IN VARIOUS PLACES SURROUNDING JERUSALEM.
  • 5. PERSONAL NOTES: PRAYER DURING THE SEASON OF THE MARTYRDOM OF THE HOLY INNOCENTS.
  • 6. NAZARETH. ST. ANNE AND HER MAID BRING FOOD TO THE HOLY FAMILY.
  • 7. NAZARETH. A LOOK AT THE LIFESTYLE OF THE HOLY WOMEN.
  • 8. NAZARETH. AN ANGEL WAKES JOSEPH TO FLEE.
  • 9. NAZARETH. THE HOLY WOMEN PUT THINGS IN ORDER AND LEAVE JOSEPH'S HOME.
  • 10. THE GROVE OF MOREH. ABRAHAM'S TEREBINTH TREE.
  • 11. THE HOLY FAMILY RESTS BY A STREAM.
  • 12. JUTTAH. ELIZABETH TAKES JOHN INTO THE WILDERNESS.
  • 13. EPHRAIM BY THE MAMBRE WOODS.
  • 14. SOUTH OF HEBRON. JOHN SENDS THE THIRSTING JESUS A SPRING OF WATER.
  • 15. NEAR ANIM. THE LAST INN IN THE REGION OF HEROD.
  • 16. NIGHT TRAVEL. THE HOLY FAMILY STARTLES SNAKES AND FLYING LIZARDS.
  • 17. MARA (?). AN INHOSPITABLE DESERT.
  • 18. THE ROBBERS HUT. THE ROBBERS BECOME FRIENDLY.
  • 19. THE WILDERNESS. SNAKES AND FLYING LIZARDS.
  • 20. THE DESERT. A SPRING ARISES FROM MARY'S PRAYER.
  • 21. HELIOPOLIS, OR ON.
  • 22. HELIOPOLIS, ON. JOSEPH BUILDS A PLACE FOR JEWISH PRAYER.
  • 23. THE MASSACRE OF THE INNOCENTS.
  • 24. THE BOY JOHN ESCAPES AGAIN TO THE WILDERNESS.
  • 25. TRAIN TO MATAREA. AN IDOL FALLS AT THE FAMILY'S PASSING.
  • 26. MATAREA AND ITS POVERTY.
  • 27. ELIZABETH TAKES THE BOY JOHN AGAIN TO THE WILDERNESS.
  • 28. HEROD HAS ZECHARIAH CAPTURED, QUESTIONED, AND KILLED. ELIZABETH DIES.
  • 29. MATAREA. THE HOLY VIRGIN DISCOVERS A SPRING NEAR THEIR HOUSE.
  • 29.1 THE SPRING AT MATAREA - DISCOVERED BY JOB.
  • 29.2 THE SPRING AT MATAREA - ABRAHAM LIVES A LONG TIME BY IT.
  • XVII. THE RETURN OF THE HOLY FAMILY FROM EGYPT
  • XVIII. THE DEATH OF THE BLESSED VIRGIN MARY AT EPHESUS
  • 1. REGARDING MARY'S AGE.
  • 2. MARY'S HOUSE IN EPHESUS.
  • 3. MARY'S MAIDSERVANT AND JOHN THE APOSTLE.
  • 4. MARY TRAVELS FROM EPHESUS TO JERUSALEM.
  • 5. RELATIVES AND FRIENDS OF THE HOLY FAMILY WHO ALSO LIVE IN EPHESUS.
  • 6. THE HOLY VIRGIN MAKES THE WAY OF THE CROSS FOR THE LAST TIME.
  • 7. TWO APOSTLES HAVE NOT YET ARRIVED.
  • 8. ARRIVAL OF SIMON THE APOSTLE.
  • 9. JERUSALEM AT THE TIME OF THE DEATH OF THE HOLY VIRGIN.
  • 10. THE APOSTLES HOLD A SERVICE.
  • 11. JAMES THE GREATER AND PHILIP ARRIVE.
  • 12. HOW THE APOSTLES WERE CALLED TO MARY'S DEATHBED.
  • 13. THE EFFECT OF RELICS OF THE APOSTLES ON THE VISIONS.
  • 14. THE DEATH OF THE HOLY VIRGIN.
  • XIX. THE BURIAL AND ASSUMPTION OF THE BLESSED VIRGIN
  • SCRIPTURE INDEX AND RELATED WORKS BY OR ABOUT ANN CATHERINE EMMERICH.
  • FOOTNOTES

 

[LostMarbels]

It is impossible for Tradition, properly understood, to trump the word of God. The problem here is the way you change its meaning. You can't seem to unlock yourself from an unbiblical definition. This thread is not about Tradition, it's about the Immaculate Conception. If you want the truth about what Catholics believe about Tradition here are some links. Please stop making up nonsense:
Scripture and Tradition | Catholic Answers
http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p1s1c2a2.htm #74=80
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/davearmstrong/2006/11/bible-church-tradition-canon-index.html scroll to part II

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/davearmstrong/2006/11/bible-church-tradition-canon-index.html

I was wondering if you have any comments on my post: 294

Scripture came from the Catholic Church, a church did not come from a Bible.

No, no, no... can't let that one pass by me unchallenged.

2Ti 3:10 But thou hast fully known my doctrine, manner of life, purpose, faith, longsuffering, charity, patience,
2Ti 3:11 Persecutions, afflictions, which came unto me at Antioch, at Iconium, at Lystra; what persecutions I endured: but out of them all the Lord delivered me.
2Ti 3:12 Yea, and all that will live godly in Christ Jesus shall suffer persecution.
2Ti 3:13 But evil men and seducers shall wax worse and worse, deceiving, and being deceived.
2Ti 3:14 But continue thou in the things which thou hast learned and hast been assured of, knowing of whom thou hast learned them;
2Ti 3:15 And that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.
2Ti 3:16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
2Ti 3:17 That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.

That is not an opinion or a mere belief, it is a historical fact. You are forced to invent Bible origin fantasies because you refuse to admit the authority of the Church that canonized the holy books in the first place.

You are correct. I refute the authority of the RCC. Jesus Christ is High Priest under the order of Melchizedek.

Mat 28:18 And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth.

Act 4:12 Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved.

Or women mind you... 'Mary' is a name.

NOWHERE in the Bible is the Bible pitted against the Church.

That is because the Church is the body, and bride of Christ. Not a building here on earth.

 

[kepha31]

From what I have read in the bible genealogical cures and/or sins is passed down by the Fathers of those children/generations.
Exo 20:5 Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the LORD thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me;
Exo 34:7 Keeping mercy for thousands, forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin, and that will by no means clear the guilty; visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children, and upon the children's children, unto the third and to the fourth generation.
Num 14:18 The LORD is longsuffering, and of great mercy, forgiving iniquity and transgression, and by no means clearing the guilty, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation.
Deu 5:9 Thou shalt not bow down thyself unto them, nor serve them: for I the LORD thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me,

This being said: with the seed of the father having been from God, that seed is without sin, and Jesus The Christ adopted God's sinless nature. Sin in the bible is passed down by the Father. Mary's sin would not be applicable.

You miss the point of an angel declaring Mary to be Full of Grace, and all that it implies. In fact, you ignore the numerous indications in Scripture, yet you accept non-existing indications for sola scriptura, and probably faith alone.

We also have an account of Mary admitting she indeed needed a savior:

Luk 1:46 And Mary said, My soul doth magnify the Lord,
Luk 1:47 And my spirit hath rejoiced in God my Saviour.
Luke 1:48 For he hath regarded the low estate of his handmaiden: for, behold, from henceforth all generations shall call me blessed.

God saved Mary by preserving her from the "pit" of sin, while He pulls the rest of us out of it. This is why God is every bit as much her Savior as He is ours (LK 1:47).

Read more: http://www.catholicfidelity.com/apologetics-topics/mary/biblical-overview-the-blessed-virgin-mary-by-dave-armstrong/

Firstly, all men have sinned, including Mary, and fallen short of the glory of God [Rom 3:23], and through one man sin entered the world and death spread to all men [Rom 5:12]. King David writing in Psalms says that he was brought forth in iniquity and in sin when his mother conceived him - biblical proof of mankind's sinful nature from the time of conception.

"All" does not always mean "every single one".
Rom. 3:23 - Some Protestants use this verse "all have sinned" in an attempt to prove that Mary was also with sin. But "all have sinned " only means that all are subject to original sin. Mary was spared from original sin by God, not herself. The popular analogy is God let us fall in the mud puddle, and cleaned us up afterward through baptism. In Mary's case, God did not let her enter the mud puddle.

Rom. 3:23 - "all have sinned" also refers only to those able to commit sin. This is not everyone. For example, infants, the retarded, and the senile cannot sin.

Rom. 3:23 - finally, "all have sinned," but Jesus must be an exception to this rule. This means that Mary can be an exception as well. Note that the Greek word for all is "pantes."

1 Cor. 15:22 - in Adam all ("pantes") have died, and in Christ all ("pantes") shall live. This proves that "all" does not mean "every single one." This is because not all have died (such as Enoch and Elijah who were taken up to heaven), and not all will go to heaven (because Jesus said so).

Rom. 5:12 - Paul says that death spread to all ("pantes") men. Again, this proves that "all" does not mean "every single one" because death did not spread to all men (as we have seen with Enoch and Elijah).

Rom. 5:19 - here Paul says "many (not all) were made sinners." Paul uses "polloi," not "pantes." Is Paul contradicting what he said in Rom. 3:23? Of course not. Paul means that all are subject to original sin, but not all reject God.

Rom. 3:10-11 - Protestants also use this verse to prove that all human beings are sinful and thus Mary must be sinful. But see Psalm 14 which is the basis of the verse.

Psalm 14 - this psalm does not teach that all humans are sinful. It only teaches that, among the wicked, all are sinful. The righteous continue to seek God.

So, again... since Mary "conceived by the holy spirit". (Mat 1:20, Luke 1:35) Jesus did not receive Man's sinful seed, but God's sinless one. And again, that had nothing to do with Mary.

Where do you suppose Jesus got His humanity from? You are asserting Docetism, a Gnostic heresy that denies Christ's humanity.

[Psa 51:5]. According to the law of Moses every mother that conceived, either a male or female, had to after an appointed time offer sacrifices to God: one as a burnt offering, and one as a sin offering [Lev.12]. Mary, after conceiving Jesus made these sacrifices in accordance and obedience to the Law God gave to Moses. This is clearly indicated to us in the book of Luke chap. 2 ver. 21-24, as Mary applies this very observance as is required of every Jewish woman who conceives her first born son. Read Leviticus 12 is first, understand what is being said, then read Luke 2:21-24. Once reading and understanding what is being said, it is clear that the offering Mary offers makes according to ... law of the Lord, A pair of turtledoves, or two young pigeons. [Lk.2:24], ... the one for the burnt offering, and the other for a sin offering: ... [Lev. 12:8]. The sin offering Mary gives is sufficient evidence Mary's carnality.

Wrong. Mary made the sin offering for the same reason Jesus was baptized by John, though he had no sins to repent. Mary fulfilled the Law. It would have been a scandal in the community had Mary not made it.The purification had to do with ritual uncleanliness and didn't imply a moral fault in childbirth. As Jesus would later, Mary fulfilled all the precepts of the Law, which, clearly, wasn't written to make allowances for a sinless man (the Messiah) or his sinless mother.
According to your logic, Jesus must have been a sinner because He was baptised.

The Scriptures also categorically state the family Jesus had, and that Mary did conceive after the birth of Jesus. She never remained a virgin, and can never be considered "immaculate" as the Roman Catholic Church has exalted her to be. "Is not this the carpenter's son? is not his mother called Mary? and his brethren, James, and Joses, and Simon, and Judas? And his sisters, are they not all with us? Whence then hath this man all these things?" (Mat 13:55,56).

Even John Calvin opposed that nonsense. That man made tradition was invented in the 19th century by liberal Protestant heretics.
Luke 1:36 - Elizabeth is Mary's kinswoman. Some Bibles translate kinswoman as "cousin," but this is an improper translation because in Hebrew and Aramaic, there is no word for "cousin."

Luke 22:32 - Jesus tells Peter to strengthen his "brethren." In this case, we clearly see Jesus using "brethren" to refer to the other apostles, not his biological brothers.

Acts 1:12-15 - the gathering of Jesus' "brothers" amounts to about 120. That is a lot of "brothers." Brother means kinsmen in Hebrew. Mary would have to be consecutively pregnant for 90 years! Biblical eisegesis leads to all sorts of absurdities.

 

[EmethAlethia]

It is impossible for Tradition, properly understood, to trump the word of God. The problem here is the way you change its meaning. You can't seem to unlock yourself from an unbiblical definition. This thread is not about Tradition, it's about the Immaculate Conception. If you want the truth about what Catholics believe about Tradition here are some links. Please stop making up nonsense:
Scripture and Tradition | Catholic Answers
http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p1s1c2a2.htm #74=80
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/davearmstrong/2006/11/bible-church-tradition-canon-index.html scroll to part II
Scripture is authoritive, I never said otherwise. Scripture came from the Catholic Church, a church did not come from a Bible. That is not an opinion or a mere belief, it is a historical fact. You are forced to invent Bible origin fantasies because you refuse to admit the authority of the Church that canonized the holy books in the first place.
NOWHERE in the Bible is the Bible pitted against the Church. You do it because it is a man made Protestant tradition.

I get it, the Roman Catholic church is right, and if anything seems to differ, refer to the previous statement. The only correct interpretations are those that agree with the traditions of your church. The issue, as you state, is not with the authority of the scripture. The issue is with how the Roman Catholic church interprets all of it, i.e. like most belief groups do, in the light of their beliefs rather than in such as way as to make all the meanings of words/root words 100% consistent and God, His people and His Word 100% consistent. I agree, The Roman Catholic Church believes Mary had no sin. The Roman Catholic church believes Mary ascended into heaven. I agree the Roman Catholic Church believes that there is an eternal sacrifice where they pull Jesus out of heaven, body, blood and soul and re-sacrifice Him at every mass and that Roman Catholics actually eat the flesh, and on rare occasion, drink the blood of Christ, that Mary is a joint intercessor with Christ for the saints... I get Roman catholic church doctrine.

I get that they want to believe that that is what the bible teaches. I get that they have to alter the meaning of word/root words, and ignore large portions of hat the scriptures have to say to hold fast to their beliefs. But I also get that this is the norm. Those that hold to a consistent meaning, and to the consistency of God, His people and His word, are rare indeed. There are only 2 choices, hold to the consistency of all the passages that might pertain, and a consistency for the meaning of words/root words throughout the scriptures, or hold fast to your beliefs and interpret everything in the light of them.

No belief group that assumes the correctness of their belief groups experts ever sees that they are opposed to scripture or to scripture meaning. All of them simply say that if you interpret everything correctly you will see that our beliefs are the correct ones. Every group that uses that methodology can say exactly as you do. The problem is, that methodology always guarantees that whatever beliefs you want to prove true you prove true, and whatever beliefs you want to prove false you prove false. I couldn't care less about any tradition. I never even looked at any traditions. My ONLY focus is what the fullness of the word of God says and means regardless of the beliefs that result.

Again, I am not disagreeing that that is what your belief group believes and teaches. My point is that to get to a correct interpretation from your groups perspective, everything has to be interpreted in the light of your groups beliefs for it to be a correct interpretation regardless of what the words/root words mean, and regardless of whether or not it is consistent with all of the doctrine that pertains when all of it is cut straight. Church tradition and leadership trumps all that. That is where our issues lie.

 

[prodromos]

Luke 1:35-38 New International Version (NIV)

The angel answered, “The Holy Spirit will come on you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you. So the holy one to be born will be called the Son of God. Even Elizabeth your relative is going to have a child in her old age, and she who was said to be unable to conceive is in her sixth month. For no word from God will ever fail.”

“I am the Lord’s servant,” Mary answered. “May your word to me be fulfilled.” Then the angel left her.
View attachment 193316

About 30 years later (or after 11 Chapters)

View attachment 193317

Luke 11:27-28 New International Version (NIV)

As Jesus was saying these things, a woman in the crowd called out, “Blessed is the mother who gave you birth and nursed you.”

He replied, “Blessed rather are those who hear the word of God and obey it.”

Which is precisely why Mary is so blessed. She heard the word of God and was obedient to it.

 

[LostMarbels]

You miss the point of an angel declaring Mary to be Full of Grace, and all that it implies. In fact, you ignore the numerous indications in Scripture, yet you accept non-existing indications for sola scriptura, and probably faith alone.

Grace is unmerited favor of God, as manifested in the salvation of sinners, and the bestowal of blessings. That does not denote sinless.


No indications. I adhere to sola scriptura. If it isn't supported by scripture it is not true.

"All" does not always mean "every single one".

KJV 1611:
Rom 3:23 For all haue sinned, and come short of the glory of God,

KJV
Rom 3:23 For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God;

Textus Receptus:
Rom 3:23 παντες γαρ ημαρτον και υστερουνται της δοξης του θεου

Strongs G3956
πᾶς
pas
pas
Including all the forms of declension; apparently a primary word; all, any, every, the whole: - all (manner of, means) alway (-s), any (one), X daily, + ever, every (one, way), as many as, + no (-thing), X throughly, whatsoever, whole, whosoever.
Total KJV occurrences: 1238

Latin Vulgate:
Rom 3:23 omnes enim peccaverunt et egent gloriam Dei

omnes
Type: adjective;

• 
  
  all
  { determiner }
  every individual of the given class
• 
  
  everybody
  { pronoun }
  all people
• 
  everyone
  { pronoun }
  every person

Where do you suppose Jesus got His humanity from? You are asserting Docetism, a Gnostic heresy that denies Christ's humanity.

That is actualy silly.

This is going to come as a shocker but..... we were all created in God's image. WOW! Can you imagine? That means we look like God. We act like God. God is the creator of our psyche, self awareness, ability to reason, and any other facility and/or ability that makes us uniquely 'human'.'Humanity' is one of God's traits we emulate.

Even John Calvin opposed that nonsense. That man made tradition was invented in the 19th century by liberal Protestant heretics.

Well thank God I do not hold to traditions of men, nor any denomination. The bible, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit is all you need to understand his word.