Mary Sinless?

[dinomight]

I Thessalonians 4:


sleep was jsut a way to describe it (as accurate a word as I could come up with)...

But this verse seems to imply that the dead in Christ rise right before those who are alive and reman rise to meet Christ in the air to stay with Him forever... No one is coming from Heaven to the meeting but Christ (seemingly)

Yeah, this is definitely where our views diverge on what happens after death. I believe that the verse you quoted is referring not to our souls but to our bodies. I believe that our souls go to Heaven after death, but that we will receive new, glorified bodies later.

 

[dinomight]

Mary was sinless. Jesus didn't die for just our sins, but people of that era as well. When you repent, God forgives and forgets your sins...

Yes, Jesus died for the sins of the whole world, and our sins are cast as far as the east is from the west when we repent.

 

[larry_boy_44]

Yeah, this is definitely where our views diverge on what happens after death. I believe that the verse you quoted is referring not to our souls but to our bodies. I believe that our souls go to Heaven after death, but that we will receive new, glorified bodies later.

so our souls go to heaven and our bodies stay here and then Jesus just meets a bunch of soulless bodies in the sky???

Could you provide scripture for any of that?

 

[bbbbbbb]

Thank you for your suggestion, but perhaps you noticed that I am a new member. Surely I'm not expected to be familiar with every thread from the get go. I have come across the Mariology thread since making this post, and I'm sure there are good discussions there as well. Still, in answer to your question, I believe that this thread is equally at home in the denomination-specific theology thread. After all, wouldn't you agree that the Immaculate Conception is quite a significant piece of Catholic theology?

I can appreciate that you're trying to be helpful, but I just thought the tone of your question was a bit condescending. I've participated in other types of forums, and I always see new members being talked down to because they posted a topic that has already been discussed in the past or because some people don't like the placement of the person's topic. I guess that's just a pet peeve of mine, and I'm sorry if I'm being a bit harsh.

I think this is a great community so far, but the multitude of branching topics on the homepage is a bit overwhelming. Oh well. Nice to meet you all the same.

I did not intend to come across as condescending to you and apologize for that. It has not been that long ago that I was a newbie here and I certainly made more than my fair share of blunders.

The reason I suggested posting this thread in the Mariology section is that there are many posters in that section who, I believe, could provide lots of valuable insights that you are not receiving here. As I am sure you are aware, with all the possibilities on this site, we tend to gravitate toward only a few areas of interest. I make an occasional visit to this forum but spend most of my time in other areas. I think many of the folks in the mariology section are similar in their interests.

In any event, I still recommend that you read some of the threads there on this same topic. I think it will give you a fuller understanding than what I have been reading here. This is only my suggestion.

 

[JimR-OCDS]

Mary required the saving sacrifice of Jesus. However, God granted her forgiveness at her conception, in anticipation of Jesus sacrifice, who would come into the world through her.

Mary was in fact, the first Christian for no other human, knew and accepted who Jesus was, before she did, when she answered the Angel Gabriel, "Lord, let it be done to me according to your will."

Jim

 

[calluna]

Mary was in fact, the first Christian for no other human, knew and accepted who Jesus was, before she did, when she answered the Angel Gabriel, "Lord, let it be done to me according to your will."

Why did that make her a Christian?

 

[JimR-OCDS]

Nonsense.

Except that there were no brothers and sisters of Jesus, at the foot of the cross with His mother. Instead, Jesus, from the cross, places the care of His mother into the hands of John.

Standing by the cross of Jesus were his mother and his mother's sister, Mary the wife of Clopas, and Mary of Magdala.
When Jesus saw his mother and the disciple there whom he loved, he said to his mother, "Woman, behold, your son." Then he said to the disciple, "Behold, your mother." And from that hour the disciple took her into his home. John 19:25-26.

Why didn't Mary go and live with Jesus brothers and sisters if he had any?

Jim

 

[calluna]

Except that there were no brothers and sisters of Jesus, at the foot of the cross with His mother.

How do you know?

Instead, Jesus, from the cross, places the care of His mother into the hands of John.

What does that prove?

 

[JimR-OCDS]

How do you know?


What does that prove?

It proves the statement you posted, "nonsense," is really nothing more than nonsense.


Jim

 

[calluna]

It proves the statement you posted, "nonsense," is really nothing more than nonsense.

So it is not known that there were no brothers and sisters of Jesus at the crucifixion; and it is not known what, if anything, is proved by Jesus placing the care of His mother into the hands of John, if that is actually what he did, which is not known anyway. So the following statement:

'My studies so far have also led me to believe that, no, Jesus did not have literal siblings, simply cousins.'

is truly nonsense.

 

[Clifford B]

and of course:
1 Tim 2:5 For there is one God and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus,

Prayer to Mary is not in the deal.

 

[dinomight]

So it is not known that there were no brothers and sisters of Jesus at the crucifixion; and it is not known what, if anything, is proved by Jesus placing the care of His mother into the hands of John, if that is actually what he did, which is not known anyway. So the following statement:

'My studies so far have also led me to believe that, no, Jesus did not have literal siblings, simply cousins.'

is truly nonsense.

What???? It is not known if "Jesus placed the care of His mother into the hands of John?" So, are you now denying the veracity of the Gospel of John? If so, what is your point of reference in this discussion? Are there other pieces of Scripture that you disagree with? It seems like you are unwilling to defend your ideas with Scripture, as the rest of us have tried to do. You just use inflammatory statements, such as summarizing my comment as "nonsense." Why, sir, is it nonsense? Is it nonsense because it leads to the idea that the Catholic Church may have possibly correctly interpreted something from the Bible?

I've really thrown a lot of questions at you in the previous paragraph, but maybe you can see that I'm once again trying very hard to rationalize the mindset that has led you to make some of your statements. Earlier, I was browsing through another thread on Catholicism, and I noticed that you were quite opinionated there as well. Please correct me if I'm wrong, but it just appears that you are anti-Catholic for the very sake of being anti-Catholic. Frankly, I'm not sure what to make of your worldview other than you seem to harbor ill feelings towards anything remotely Catholic.

 

[dinomight]

I did not intend to come across as condescending to you and apologize for that. It has not been that long ago that I was a newbie here and I certainly made more than my fair share of blunders.

The reason I suggested posting this thread in the Mariology section is that there are many posters in that section who, I believe, could provide lots of valuable insights that you are not receiving here. As I am sure you are aware, with all the possibilities on this site, we tend to gravitate toward only a few areas of interest. I make an occasional visit to this forum but spend most of my time in other areas. I think many of the folks in the mariology section are similar in their interests.

In any event, I still recommend that you read some of the threads there on this same topic. I think it will give you a fuller understanding than what I have been reading here. This is only my suggestion.

I really do appreciate you taking the time to explain your intentions. I also apologize for kind of going off on you yesterday. I agree with you that I will probably find many good discussions with a broader range of views in the actual Mariology subcategory, and I've actually already spent a little time looking through some of the current discussion topics already. So, no hard feelings or anything.

 

[calluna]

What???? It is not known if "Jesus placed the care of His mother into the hands of John?" So, are you now denying the veracity of the Gospel of John?

What did John actually write?

 

[dinomight]

and of course:
1 Tim 2:5 For there is one God and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus,

Prayer to Mary is not in the deal.

Tell me, have you ever asked someone to pray for you? Do you believe that Jesus listens to people who pray on your behalf? I know that it makes me feel good to know that not only am I praying about some issue, but that others are also praying for me. I also believe that the souls of those who are saved are now in Heaven. These are the saints. I think that more than likely these fellow Christians who have gone before us, heavenly saints, still care for Christians living on the earth, that is earthly saints. Something that's really great about Heaven is that the people there no longer have to struggle with sin as we do. They are immeasurably happy and enjoying being in the presence of God. They pray and they worship. So, why would it not be permissible to ask these Christian brethren of ours, who still live, to join us in prayer to Jesus, our one intercessor before the Father?

Revelation 5 (King James Version):



5And one of the elders saith unto me, Weep not: behold, the Lion of the tribe of Judah, the Root of David, hath prevailed to open the book, and to loose the seven seals thereof.
6And I beheld, and, lo, in the midst of the throne and of the four beasts, and in the midst of the elders, stood a Lamb as it had been slain, having seven horns and seven eyes, which are the seven Spirits of God sent forth into all the earth.
7And he came and took the book out of the right hand of him that sat upon the throne.
8And when he had taken the book, the four beasts and four and twenty elders fell down before the Lamb, having every one of them harps, and golden vials full of odours, which are the prayers of saints.
9And they sung a new song, saying, Thou art worthy to take the book, and to open the seals thereof: for thou wast slain, and hast redeemed us to God by thy blood out of every kindred, and tongue, and people, and nation;
10And hast made us unto our God kings and priests: and we shall reign on the earth.

 

[Kat8765]

and of course:
1 Tim 2:5 For there is one God and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus,




We don't deny this. What we do say is that since Mary and the other saints are actually alive in the body of Jesus we can ask them to pray for us just like you would ask anyone alive here on Earth. This means that since the saints are as one with the Body of Christ, their intercession cannot be equal to Jesus mediation but is one with Jesus mediation. That's why we say one body in Christ.

Here's some scpritural references:

Therefore confess your sins to one another, and pray for one another, that you may be healed. The prayer of a righteous man has great power in its effects" (James 5:16-17).

God wants us to pray for one another. This must mean that prayer for one another cannot take away from the role of Jesus Christ as our one mediator with God.

and prayer to the saints:

John saw the Lamb, Christ Jesus, on a throne in the midst of four beasts and 24 elders. When the Lamb took the book with the seven seals, the 24 elders fell down before the Lamb in worship, "each one having a harp and golden bowls of incenses, which are the prayers of the saints." Rev 5:8

Another angel came and stood on the altar, having a golden censer, and many incenses were given to him, in order that he will give it with the prayers of all the saints on the golden altar before the throne. And the smoke of the incenses went up with the prayers of the saints from the hand of the angel before God." Rev 8:3-4

Kind of off topic, but I thought I would address it.

 

[dinomight]

and of course:
1 Tim 2:5 For there is one God and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus,




We don't deny this. What we do say is that since Mary and the other saints are actually alive in the body of Jesus we can ask them to pray for us just like you would ask anyone alive here on Earth. This means that since the saints are as one with the Body of Christ, their intercession cannot be equal to Jesus mediation but is one with Jesus mediation. That's why we say one body in Christ.

Here's some scpritural references:

Therefore confess your sins to one another, and pray for one another, that you may be healed. The prayer of a righteous man has great power in its effects" (James 5:16-17).

God wants us to pray for one another. This must mean that prayer for one another cannot take away from the role of Jesus Christ as our one mediator with God.

and prayer to the saints:

John saw the Lamb, Christ Jesus, on a throne in the midst of four beasts and 24 elders. When the Lamb took the book with the seven seals, the 24 elders fell down before the Lamb in worship, "each one having a harp and golden bowls of incenses, which are the prayers of the saints." Rev 5:8

Another angel came and stood on the altar, having a golden censer, and many incenses were given to him, in order that he will give it with the prayers of all the saints on the golden altar before the throne. And the smoke of the incenses went up with the prayers of the saints from the hand of the angel before God." Rev 8:3-4

Kind of off topic, but I thought I would address it.

Isn't that strange? At the exact same time we posted almost the exact same response with the same Bible verse. Maybe it is off topic, but I do think it's an important point.

 

[MrStain]

something that happened in the past and the result is her present state of being??

how are you not getting "SHE'S PREGNANT" out of that?

Something happened in the past (the Spirit came upon her and she was with child) and it resulted in her current state (being pregnant with Jesus, who is the saviour of mankind and her God manifest in flesh)...

and grace doesn't help us resist sin, grace is why God cares enough about us to have anything to do with us (and thus is the reason God gives us the other stuff)... Grace itself is nothing but favor (undeserved favor)..

Sorry for the delay. I was watching my Seahawks get spanked.

uhh. What bible are you reading? Mary was not pregnant when the angel gave her the salutation of "full of grace" (kecharitomene) as recorded in Luke 1:28. Kecharitomene (full of grace) is a perfect passive participle of charitoo which is reference to the past action with present perfection. This was a reference to her grace filled characteristic, not a reference to her pregnancy which was obviously to occur later. The announcment of the Spirit coming upon her was definitely after the salutation.

Again, I am pleased that you agree that grace (charis) cannot be removed from the greeting/title given to Mary. You are right about grace being unmerited, but wrong about it helping us overcome sin. Scripture tells us otherwise and I posted this earlier. Romans 6 is a good example when it says, "For sin shall not have dominion over you, for you are not under law but under grace." The Bible clearly informs us that grace helps us overcome sin. You really should stop selectively trumpeting the power of God's grace, for He so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son.

 

[dinomight]

What did John actually write?

Ok, you didn't answer any of my questions. Here is the list of books of which there is a general consensus that John was the writer: The Gospel of John, 1 John, 2 John, 3 John, and Revelation. Of course, if you're trying to somehow show that John did not actually write that Gospel, that wouldn't do anything to take away from its legitimacy as the inspired Word of God.

So, really, my question had nothing to do with who wrote the Gospel of John, but rather, are there books in the Protestant canon that you do not believe to be authentic? Furthermore, I still would really like to have an answer to the other questions I posed to you.

 

[MrStain]

pretty sure Moses wrote the second tablets. Either way, however, the "word of God" (anything God says/writes) is not the same as the "Word of God" (Jesus)

You are expecting too much if you need an exact comparison. The word of God vs. the Word of God is a type, a similar comparison between the old covenant occurance and the New covenant. It does not have to be exactly the same. Thankfully the fullness of the OT is revealed in the new as Peter referenced in his 1st Catholic epistle (1 Pet 3:18-22). If you go as far as you seem to be going in exactness I'm not surprised you don't ask for a boat to be present at every Baptism.