Mary without original sin?

[Toms777]

the same place the bible came from, Tradition.

This is another claim that I would like to see substantiated and that is the Bible supposedly came from tradition, a tradition which can be used to add doctrines which are not found in scripture and which can in fact be contradictory to scripture.

 

[RhetorTheo]

Galatians 1:8,9 But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed. As we said before, so say I now again, if any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed.

That doesn't say all of the Gospel is recorded in the New Testament. Obviously not, as the New Testament wasn't assembled at the time that it was being written.

The question is where in the Bible does it say that all of Christianity, the Gospel, etc. is located in the Bible? The answer is nowhere - that is a teaching of men, a teaching of the flesh.

 

[Toms777]

That doesn't say all of the Gospel is recorded in the New Testament. Obviously not, as the New Testament wasn't assembled at the time that it was being written.

The question is where in the Bible does it say that all of Christianity, the Gospel, etc. is located in the Bible? The answer is nowhere - that is a teaching of men, a teaching of the flesh.

We are to establish doctrine on what God has said, not on what he has not said. tell us where it says that we are to use sources outside of the God's written word.

If one just says that we can establish doctrinme on what has not been said, then we could end up with all sorts of very strange doctrines.

 

[Serapha]

sorry, I wont play this game. Until you answer the questions I have asked about the premise of your argument, I will not answer any of your questions.

sorry, I wont play this game. Until you answer the questions I have asked about the premise of your argument, I will not answer any of your questions.

Excuse me...

May I interject a point here.


Sir, you deviated the thread on the 3rd reply to establish a baseline that you thought was important, and now you say, "I wont play this game".


So, if someone doesn't play the game with the rules your way, then you don't play?


Perhaps you need to back to your first posting and delete your demands and keep the thread on subject rather than demand in each of your postings.


~serapha~

 

[Serapha]

I want to apologize for my last posting... it was addressing the person instead of the issue.





The issue is this... if someone doesn't want to discuss the thread and keep it on subject, and contribute to the thread, then perhaps it would be better to read and not write responses.





Again, though, my apologies for addressing the person instead of the issue.





~serapha~

 

[Serapha]

Well, maybe it was just how it came across but it does appear that way. Good to hear that is not the way it was meant. Sometimes typing can fail in passing emotion or intent. God bless.

Well, after reading further in the thread, I guess I have to apologize again...


I thought that demands were being tossed right and left, but I guess I was wrong.

My apologies.


~serapha~

 

[Serapha]

974 The Most Blessed Virgin Mary, when the course of her earthly life was completed, was taken up body and soul into the glory of heaven, where she already shares in the glory of her Son's Resurrection, anticipating the resurrection of all members of his Body.

Hi there!





source please.


~serapha~

 

[Serapha]

Where does the Bible say that the Bible is the ONLY authority?

I know you can provide Scripture that says ALL Scripture is inspired. But I've yet to see anything that says ONLY Scripture is inspired.

Michelle

Hi there!



The thread isn't about the "authority" of the Bible, and it should stay on subject....

agreed?


~serapha~

 

[Serapha]

Hello all...




This thread has gotten way off subject,


let's get it back on subject, okay?

Mary without original sin?



I would like for anyone but mainly the Catholics here to show from scripture that Mary was without original sin. Thanks

LetsBeLogical²

Isnt it amazing how my post gets edited and yet I dont see that happen on other posts that direct a question to a certain group. I am now asking that any moderator that reads this to PM me for the bias here is getting ridiculous.

 

[Serapha]

Can you defend the false teaching of Mary, and why do you resort to smoke and mirrors.

Hi there!



Agreed...


"red herring"


Let's get the thread back on subject.

~serapha~

 

[Frankie]

That doesn't say all of the Gospel is recorded in the New Testament. Obviously not, as the New Testament wasn't assembled at the time that it was being written.

The question is where in the Bible does it say that all of Christianity, the Gospel, etc. is located in the Bible? The answer is nowhere - that is a teaching of men, a teaching of the flesh.

Isn't this the same reasoning the the JW and LDS use to preach and justify their teachings that are unbiblical?

Also, in regards to the OP, I have not seen the scriptures that support the belief that Mary was without orginal sin, if I have missed them, would someone please point them out? Thank you.

Frankie

 

[MizDoulos]

Note to all: Let's keep on topic. Any comments other than the topic of this thread should be sent through your e-mail or PM, especially to resolve personal conflicts. If the thread continues off topic and heads downhill, it will be closed. Please keep the rules in mind when responding.

Thank you for your cooperation.

 

[ukok]

Hi there!





source please.


~serapha~

I quoted the Source, the Catechism of the Catholic Church. The Church built upon St. Peter, the Original Church. That is still the Original Church.

Anyway, let's move on, i will post this to relate to the questioning line of the Assumption and then let's get back on Topic...Mary without Original Sin.

Bishop Theoteknos of Livias (c. 550-650) was one Catholic theologian who believed that Mary, above all, deserved at least the same treatment (as Enoch and Elijah). In his sermon he states:

"For Christ took His immaculate flesh from the immaculate flesh of Mary; and if He had prepared a place in heaven for the Apostles, how much more for His mother. If Enoch had been translated and Elijah had gone to heaven, how much more Mary, who like the moon in the midst of the stars shines forth and excels among the prophets and Apostles? For even though her God-bearing body tasted death, it did not undergo corruption, but was preserved incorrupt and undefiled and taken up into heaven with its pure and spotless soul."

So Mary is above and beyond anyone who ever lived with the exception of her son, Jesus. It is a firm belief among Catholics that from her conception, Mary was free of original sin, the sin that we all inherit from Adam. The angel Gabriel, in announcing to Mary her imminent pregnancy, called her highly favored one the Lord is with you and blessed are you among women. So Mary is chosen to be the mother of God incarnate, through a virgin birth by the power of the Holy Spirit. "

Like the dogma of Mary's Immaculate Conception, the dogma of the Assumption is not explicitly stated in the Bible. The teaching that 'at the end of her earthly course, Mary was assumed into heavenly glory, body and soul' was dogmatically defined by Pius XII in 1950 in Munificentissimus.

Arise, O Lord, into thy resting place: thou and the ark, which thou hast sanctified. (Ps 131:8) ...who is the Ark?

The precise point of Mary's death has not been dogmatically defined, i don't believe...but nowhere is it stated in the Bible that Mary's death was a consequence of sin, rather that it was a consequence that Mary's body was mortal by nature.



And yet there is the opportunity for thought that Mary did not physically die, Elijah was bodily assumed into Heaven: was he the God-bearer?

Elijah:

2Ki 2:11 And as they went on, walking and talking together, behold, a fiery chariot and fiery horses parted them both asunder: and Elias went up by a whirlwind into heaven.

Do you think that God would have Elijah assumed so as to avoid all possibility of physical corruption and yet the God-bearer, the woman without stain of sin, full of grace, not so?

what of Enoch ?

Heb 11:5 By faith Enoch was translated that he should not see death; and he was not found, because God translated him: for he hath had witness borne to him that before his translation he had been well-pleasing unto God:

Enoch didn't give birth to Christ either and yet he was assumed into Heaven so that he would not see death....was not Mary, mother of our Lord, even more pleasing to God?

Mary's assumption into heaven is at the end of her earthly life, can we explicitly state that she died physically, fell asleep, or was assumed bodily into heaven without having died physically? , no. But nowhere does it state in the Bible precisely what happened to Mary, the Mother of Our Lord....what will you believe, anything but the possibility that it may be so, even though you have no Scriptural evidence to back up your stance ?

When Pope Pius formally defined the doctrine of the Assumption he was not adding to what the church already believed, he was simply affirming what the Church had believed for centuries past.

We must guard against confusing Christ's Ascension and Mary's Assumption, they are entirely different. by suggesting that Mary was assumed into Heaven does not equate Mary with God.



It is important to note also, that nowhere claims home to the remains of Mary's physical body, and yet at the time, cities lobbyed against one another to attest that 'they' could lay claim to the remains of the Saints.

God Bless.

P.S. I would be interested to know what you believe happened to Mary, Serapha...since it seems that you do not give her any special honour as the Mother of Our Lord?

 

[ukok]

mizDoulos, i read your post after i had posted, sorry. I don't know whether to leave it there now or delete it and pm Serapha...since the question was asked me however, i felt that i should answer, as there are many who view this thread who also may have a miguided and misinformed belief of what the Catholic Church believes on this issue.

Do what you feel is best though, i don't wish to overstep forum rules.

 

[ukok]

And now let's get back on track:



The Catholic Church asserts that Original sin does not make a person evil but has the affect of predisposing one to the consequences of illness and death and deprives one of being in full union with God. The Catholic Church asserts that just as we are all cleansed of the stain of original sin through our baptism, Mary recieved this freedom from the stain of Original sin at the very moment of her conception. this was not something that she obtained for herself, Mary was not God and had no power or authority with which to bring this about. God enabled this to happen, through His grace, and His alone, Mary was concieved without the stain of original sin.



To imagine that she was born as we are, with the stain of original sin, is in my own view, alarming to say the least. Are we then to suppose that we are of the same calabre as Mary? That Gabriel could have appeared to anyone of us and said :

Luk 1:28 And the angel being come in, said unto her: "Hail, full of grace, the Lord is with thee: blessed art thou among women".

what is it that makes Mary so blessed? If she is not without sin, why is she 'full of grace" ? How then do you define 'grace' and what does being full of grace imply, if not that she is completely full of the grace of God...do we then have the potential to be 'full of grace' in our earthly life time? Remember that Mary had not at that initial point, accepted the role of Mother of the Son of God and yet she was 'full of grace' already, how was this so, if not that she had been kept free of Original Sin?



Once more we see that Mary is held as the Most Blessed ;

Luk 1:42 And she cried out with a loud voice and said: "Blessed art thou among women and blessed is the fruit of thy womb. "

Why was Mary most Blessed amongs women...precisely because no one else could have been the Mother of Our Lord than one who had been carefully prepared to hold within her womb the very Son of God! Can you imagine God choosing an imperfect Mother to be the Mother of His Son? Mary was not, as has been suggested, superhuman, this would imply that she was 'untouchable' or without the normal emotions, feelings, temptations of every human being. Mary was really human, fully human, but with the grace to avoid the temptations of Sin. Did Mary not agonise when her son was brutally beaten almost to death, mocked and spat upon and then crucified ? Of course she did! Was Mary unemotional, was she cold and clinically carrying out the will of God the Father..of course not. It is Mary's very humanity that we aspire to, the perfect disciple of God's will, we can only hope to be something of a little like her. Mary is holy by the grace and the merits of her Son..she did not obtain this by any undertaking of her own.

In short, though Mary could have given in to temptation to sin, through God's grace she was able to resist it, making her the perfect Mother, not only of the Lord Jesus Christ, but as the spiritual Mother of us all.

God Bless

 

[Toms777]

And now let's get back on track:

The Catholic Church asserts that Original sin does not make a person evil but has the affect of predisposing one to the consequences of illness and death and deprives one of being in full union with God.

For the most part, I would agree, except I would not agree that the original sin keeps people out of fellowship with God, but rather scripture says that it is our own sin which results from the orientation towards sinful behaviour, which comes from the original sin,

The Catholic Church asserts that just as we are all cleansed of the stain of original sin through our baptism, Mary recieved this freedom from the stain of Original sin at the very moment of her conception.

This is what we do not see in scripture.

To imagine that she was born as we are, with the stain of original sin, is in my own view, alarming to say the least. Are we then to suppose that we are of the same calabre as Mary? That Gabriel could have appeared to anyone of us and said :

Luk 1:28 And the angel being come in, said unto her: "Hail, full of grace, the Lord is with thee: blessed art thou among women".

what is it that makes Mary so blessed?

She was chosen to carry the Messiah, God in the flesh into the world, the only woman so chosen....seems quite a blessing to me.

If she is not without sin, why is she 'full of grace" ?

Grace is "underserved favour" which is how some translation say it. Clearly if she was without original sin, then she would be deserving of favour, since she would be the only woman without sin, but yet the Bible says that she was given underserved favour. That does not in the slightest imply that she was without sin. Indeed quite the contrary.

But regardless, we cannot establish doctrine on what is not said, but on what God does say. Rather than trying to give an interpretation of this to argue that it was possible (which as I showed, I do think you have done either), show us the verse that actually says that she was without sin.

Once more we see that Mary is held as the Most Blessed ;

Luk 1:42 And she cried out with a loud voice and said: "Blessed art thou among women and blessed is the fruit of thy womb. "

What did Jesus say when people carried this too far and tried to say similar things in the 1st century?

Luke 11:27-28
27 And it happened, as He spoke these things, that a certain woman from the crowd raised her voice and said to Him, "Blessed is the womb that bore You, and the breasts which nursed You!" 28 But He said, "More than that, blessed are those who hear the word of God and keep it!"
NKJV

God's focus is not on Mary, but the gospel. She was not the focus of why Jesus came to earth, nor do we find much about her in the Bible after the start of Jesus ministry opr indeed the birth of Jesus.

She was honoured by God by having been given the privilege of being the vessel through whom God manifest in the flesh would enter the world...scripture says nothing more.

 

[LogicalFallacy]

Ukok,
The Bible itself says: “Well then, sin entered the world through one man [Adam], and through sin death, and thus death has spread through the whole human race because everyone has sinned.” (Rom. 5:12, JB) The Bible reports that with the requirement of the Mosaic Law, 40 days after Jesus’ birth Mary offered at the temple in Jerusalem a sin offering for purification from uncleanness. She, too, had inherited sin and imperfection from Adam.—Luke 2:22-24; Lev. 12:1-8.

Faith,

 

[LetsBeLogical]

Sorry folks,

My off days are Sunday and Mondays and I rarely get on the computer on those days unless I have a little time between family activities.

I have noticed a couple of things here:

1) No one has explained my first point of why Mary offered a sin offering.

2) Of course she was blessed, but I think everyone is forgetting a couple of things here. Jesus had to be born from a certain lineage. Hence, there could (and Im sure there was) other women that could have taken the responsibility had they been in that lineage. Also, was not Elizabeth blessed among women also? I mean her child was John of whom the bible says there has not been raised up a greater among men.

3) Jesus warned about traditions of men and he also scolded the Pharisees for their traditions which "made the word of God false". Since Mary was a human and a decendant of Adam she also was born in sin hence her offering a sin offering according to the Levitical law. Also, the reason she could be sinful and yet her child be perfect is because the father of the child was perfect and sinless. We know through genetics that most things are passed on via the father of the offspring. Havent you ever wondered why it says that sin entered the world through Adam and yet it was Eve that actually sinned before Adam?

LetsBeLogical²

 

[JVAC]

2) Of course she was blessed, but I think everyone is forgetting a couple of things here. Jesus had to be born from a certain lineage. Hence, there could (and Im sure there was) other women that could have taken the responsibility had they been in that lineage. Also, was not Elizabeth blessed among women also? I mean her child was John of whom the bible says there has not been raised up a greater among men.

Ok, I am going to try and field this one. According the Evangelist St. Luke, we have Mary, in the Magnificat, and Elizabeth, in the visitation, both declaring, under the influence of the Holy Spirit, that Mary is the Most blessed. Therefore, Mary is without comparison in the world, for she is infallably declared, by the holy spirit, as most blessed. (1:28, 1:41-42, 1:48). Elizabeth cannot say the same.

You are right to think there are other women, however, there was no other woman as faithful as Mary (Lk 1:45). Jesus reiterates this later in St. Luke's Gospel, 11:27-28 when someone says blessed be Mary, Jesus looks to Mary's faith.

-James

 

[lared]

Israelite women looked forward to giving birth to a male baby as perhaps it would be the promised seed, the Messiah.

Mary was chosen and used for this priviledge, and for this she was most blessed. Not for any special merit on her part, other then the fact she was a faithful worshiper of God Almighty, our heavenly Father, Jehovah.

As mentioned in a previous post, there were other women in the lineage that could have been blessed in this regard if they had been born at God's appointed time.

Mary inherited sin and imperfection from her parents and their parents stemming back to Adam and Eve. She needed to exercise faith in the ransom sacrifice of Jesus just as much as anyone else.