Mary without original sin?

[ukok]

LightBearer,

please tell me if the WTS claim to be guided as the One True Authority by the Holy Spirit?

 

[LightBearer]

LightBearer,

please tell me if the WTS claim to be guided as the One True Authority by the Holy Spirit?

But you already know the answer.

Are you though as a member of the Roman Catholic Church claiming that the Holy Spirit guided you to two World Wars and the slaughter of countless thousands of Catholics by Catholics.


Having said that lets do get back on topic (Mary without original sin) wasn't it.

LB

 

[Toms777]

Post Four

Peace be with you LBL!

Yes the Holy Father is truly a descendent of Peter, here is a list of all the Popes that the Apostolic Leadership was passed onto ;

THE COMPLETE LIST OF POPES

A suggestion for future reference - for lengthy posts such as this, a simple link would be much more effective.

Second, I have seen this list before, but what is more important is whether it can be validated - perhaps we should start with where in the Bible do we find proof of #1 being made "pope"?

 

[LogicalFallacy]

Hi ukok,

I don’t see how your claims can be held up when I open the Bible;

Matt. 16:18, in context is talking of Jesus’ leadership.

(1) Whom did the apostles Peter and Paul understand to be the “rock,” the “cornerstone”?

Acts 4:8-11, JB: “Peter, filled with the Holy Spirit, addressed them, ‘Rulers of the people, and elders… it was by the name of Jesus Christ the Nazarene, the one you crucified, whom God raised from the dead, by this name and by no other that this man is able to stand up perfectly healthy, here in your presence, today. This is the stone rejected by you the builders, but which has proved to be the keystone [“cornerstone,” NAB].’”

1 Pet. 2:4-8, JB: “Set yourselves close to him [the Lord Jesus Christ] so that you too . . . may be living stones making a spiritual house. As scripture says: See how I lay in Zion a precious cornerstone that I have chosen and the man who rests his trust on it will not be disappointed. That means that for you who are believers, it is precious; but for unbelievers, the stone rejected by the builders has proved to be the keystone, a stone to stumble over, a rock to bring men down.”

Eph. 2:20, JB: “You are part of a building that has the apostles and prophets for its foundations, and Christ Jesus himself for its main cornerstone.”

Did the other apostles view Peter as having primacy among them?

Luke 22:24-26, JB: “A dispute arose also between them [the apostles] about which should be reckoned the greatest, but he said to them, ‘Among pagans it is the kings who lord it over them, and those who have authority over them are given the title Benefactor. This must not happen with you.’” (If Peter were the “rock,” would there have been any question as to which one of them “should be reckoned the greatest”?)

Since Jesus Christ, the head of the congregation, is alive, does he need successors?

Heb. 7:23-25, JB: “Then there used to be a great number of those other priests [in Israel], because death put an end to each one of them; but this one [Jesus Christ], because he remains for ever, can never lose his priesthood. It follows, then, that his power to save is utterly certain, since he is living for ever to intercede for all who come to God through him.”

Rom. 6:9, JB: “Christ, as we know, having been raised from the dead will never die again.”

Eph. 5:23, JB: “Christ is head of the Church.”



(2) What were “the keys” entrusted to Peter?

Matt. 16:19, JB: “I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven: whatever you bind on earth shall be considered bound in heaven; whatever you loose on earth shall be considered loosed in heaven.”

In Revelation, Jesus referred to a symbolic key used by himself to open up privileges and opportunities to humans

Rev. 3:7, 8, JB: “Here is the message of the holy and faithful one who has the key of David, so that when he opens, nobody can close, and when he closes, nobody can open: . . . I have opened in front of you a door that nobody will be able to close.”

Peter used “keys” entrusted to him to open up (to Jews, Samaritans, Gentiles) the opportunity to receive God’s spirit with a view to their entering the heavenly Kingdom

Acts 2:14-39, JB: “Peter stood up with the Eleven and addressed them in a loud voice: ‘Men of Judaea, and all you who live in Jerusalem . . . God has made this Jesus whom you crucified both Lord and Christ.’ Hearing this, they were cut to the heart and said to Peter and the apostles, ‘What must we do, brothers?’ ‘You must repent,’ Peter answered ‘and every one of you must be baptised in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins, and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. The promise that was made is for you and your children, and for all those who are far away, for all those whom the Lord our God will call to himself.’”

Acts 8:14-17, JB: “When the apostles in Jerusalem heard that Samaria had accepted the word of God, they sent Peter and John to them, and they went down there, and prayed for the Samaritans to receive the Holy Spirit, for as yet he had not come down on any of them: they had only been baptised in the name of the Lord Jesus. Then they laid hands on them, and they received the Holy Spirit.” (ÞAc 8 ÜVerse 20 indicates that Peter was the one taking the lead on this occasion.)

Acts 10:24-48, JB: “They reached Caesarea the following day, and Cornelius [an uncircumcised Gentile] was waiting for them. . . . Peter addressed them . . . While Peter was still speaking the Holy Spirit came down on all the listeners.”

Did heaven wait on Peter to make decisions and then follow his lead?

Acts 2:4, 14, JB: “They were all filled with the Holy Spirit, and began to speak foreign languages as the Spirit gave them the gift of speech. . . . Then [after Christ, the head of the congregation, had stirred them up by means of the holy spirit] Peter stood up with the Eleven and addressed them.” (See ÞAc 2 Üverse 33.)

Acts 10:19, 20, JB: “The Spirit had to tell him [Peter], ‘Some men have come to see you. Hurry down, and do not hesitate about going back with them [to the home of the Gentile Cornelius]; it was I who told them to come.’”

Compare Matthew 18:18, 19.

From (The one and the only) ‘Reasoning from the scriptures’ Watchtower Bible and Tract Society pg.39-41.



You seem to be suggesting that a teaching that so severely contradicts the Bible can be changed by men who don’t even have the authority to change it!

Faith,

 

[ukok]

But you already know the answer.

Are you though as a member of the Roman Catholic Church claiming that the Holy Spirit guided you to two World Wars and the slaughter of countless thousands of Catholics by Catholics.


Having said that lets do get back on topic (Mary without original sin) wasn't it.

LB

too funny! start a thread on this very topic and i'll be glad to respond...clarify exactly what role you believe the Catholic church played in this scenario,please

 

[ukok]

A suggestion for future reference - for lengthy posts such as this, a simple link would be much more effective.

Second, I have seen this list before, but what is more important is whether it can be validated - perhaps we should start with where in the Bible do we find proof of #1 being made "pope"?

thanks for the advice, but the list actually was condensed until i posted it and then it kind of extended it's length by about 20 inches! As you will see if you click on the link provided!

The first Pope was Peter, what part of my previous post was incomprehensible to you?

Who did Jesus tell to 'feed my sheep', who was given the keys of the kingdom' ? Do you seriously think that Jesus chose the Apostles so that they could each interpret his message in any way they felt like doing? He left a visible Church behind...provide me with Scripture that says that he didn't.

Edited to add that i have used an alternative to list the Popes, this one doesn't elongate itself quite so much

 

[KennySe]

What is this "a critical view of the Catholic Church through history" thread?

it didn't start that way.

How about gettin g back to the topic, folks?

 

[LogicalFallacy]

What is this "a critical view of the Catholic Church through history" thread?

it didn't start that way.

How about gettin g back to the topic, folks?

We are on the topic. Ukok asserts that the CC has authority to change or add teaching to the Bible, so we'll see if that's the case!

 

[KennySe]

We are on the topic. Ukok asserts that the CC has authority to change or add teaching to the Bible, so we'll see if that's the case!

I thought the topic was if Mary was sinless, and is this found in the Bible.

 

[LogicalFallacy]

Ukok + breathen, this point seems to have been lost in the back and forth;

Matthew 1: 24,25 Then Joseph being raised from sleep did as the angel of the Lord had bidden him, and took unto him his wife:

25 And knew her not till she had brought forth her firstborn son: and he called his name JESUS

Tell me ukok what does "knew her not TILL she brought forth her firstborn son" mean?

Response;

Well. Let's compare the way that "until" is used in some other biblical verses:

Matt 28.20:

"..and surely I am with you always, until the end of the age."

John 21.22: Jesus answered. "If I want him to remain alive until I return, what is that to you?"

2 Sam 6.23: "no son was born to Michol, the daughter of Saul until her dying day."

In all these examples, the word "until" does not mean that Jesus will cease to be with us after the end of the age, that John was intended to die should he still be alive when Jesus returned, or that Michol had a son after death. The word "until" shows that the writer is concerned to inform us what happens before a specific event - not after.

Exactly! What happened after the birth of Jesus?… Mary had sexual relations with Joseph and they had children. True or False?

 

[LogicalFallacy]

I thought the topic was if Mary was sinless, and is this found in the Bible.

It was, and it isn't. So now the question is whether you can add this tradition.

 

[ukok]

That's not the subject of this thread, please begin a new thread in an appropriate thread if you want to discuss the Sacred Tradition of the Catholic church.

 

[rebazar]

Original sin does NOT exist and never did exist, so the question; "Was Mary without original sin", is moot. The "original sin" is the product of very CONFUSED MINDS who know nothing about our loving Father!!




Cheers

 

[ukok]

Original sin does NOT exist and never did exist, so the question; "Was Mary without original sin", is moot. The "original sin" is the product of very CONFUSED MINDS who know nothing about our loving Father!!




Cheers

could you elaborate a little as to why you believe this to be so?

God bless.

 

[KennySe]

Original sin does NOT exist and never did exist, so the question; "Was Mary without original sin", is moot. The "original sin" is the product of very CONFUSED MINDS who know nothing about our loving Father!!

Whew. What a relief. I'll sleep better now.

 

[rebazar]

Ukok writes:

could you elaborate a little as to why you believe this to be so?

God bless

It is plainly obvious that we exist in an EVOLUTIONARY and EXPERIENTIAL creation. You and everything around you is involved in growing and evolving.Our own lives are testament to this truth as we evolve from babies to adults to old people. Growth and evolvement is the NATURE of this time-space physical creation, and our Father made it so. It is through trials and tribulations of life that we learn about our Father and in our ascent towards Him we gain the necessary insight as to the way creation works so that one day we can be responsible citizens, as well as co-workers, of His creation.
Our Father is NOT a moron and neither is He some kind of psychopath who enjoys torturing HIS OWN CHILDREN. He is a loving and caring Father who could NEVER, NEVER, NEVER paint all of his children with the same brush, just because ONE of them did something wrong.
The "original sin" theory, and consequently all of us being born sinners, is total rubbish.
This time-space physical creation WAS NOT CREATED PERFECT, as evidenced by our ability to make mistakes. Without making mistakes we can NOT grow and if there is no growth , we can't learn to know God.
Sin is defined as: "conscious and deliberate transgression against God's law". In light of that definition of sin, we are ALL POTENTIAL sinners but we could NEVER have been born sinners.


Cheers

 

[Amatsyahu]

Romans 5:12 Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned

 

[thereselittleflower]

Ukok writes:



It is plainly obvious that we exist in an EVOLUTIONARY and EXPERIENTIAL creation. You and everything around you is involved in growing and evolving.Our own lives are testament to this truth as we evolve from babies to adults to old people. Growth and evolvement is the NATURE of this time-space physical creation, and our Father made it so. It is through trials and tribulations of life that we learn about our Father and in our ascent towards Him we gain the necessary insight as to the way creation works so that one day we can be responsible citizens, as well as co-workers, of His creation.
Our Father is NOT a moron and neither is He some kind of psychopath who enjoys torturing HIS OWN CHILDREN. He is a loving and caring Father who could NEVER, NEVER, NEVER paint all of his children with the same brush, just because ONE of them did something wrong.
The "original sin" theory, and consequently all of us being born sinners, is total rubbish.
This time-space physical creation WAS NOT CREATED PERFECT, as evidenced by our ability to make mistakes. Without making mistakes we can NOT grow and if there is no growth , we can't learn to know God.
Sin is defined as: "conscious and deliberate transgression against God's law". In light of that definition of sin, we are ALL POTENTIAL sinners but we could NEVER have been born sinners.


Cheers

Hi rebazar

I think perhaps some confusion exists regarding what original sin is . . and I believe that is the result of how it has been spoken of in times past and made to be understood intoday's language to mean we are born with the guilt of Adam and Eve's sin, so we are doomed to hell because of it.

The viewpoint of the Catholic and Orthodox on this matter is that we are born with the stain of original sin . . that means we are born with a wounded human nature that is prone to sin, that is inclined to sin. A baby is not personally guilty of sin and is not punished for the sin of Adam and Eve.

Mary being immaculate conceived means that she was preserved free of this "stain" this wounding of her human nature. Thus, she could truly freely choose to say yes to God just as Eve was truly free to say no to God. And thus, the human nature Jesus Christ received from Mary was free of the stain of original sin, free of this wounding of the human nature.


And regarding your comments on God the Father . . may I recommend a book to you . .. "Good Goats: Healing Our Image of God"
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0809134632/103-7248197-9134242?v=glance

I think you will like what you find in it.


Peace in Him!

 

[LightBearer]

Hi

Mary being immaculate conceived means that she was preserved free of this "stain" this wounding of her human nature. Thus, she could truly freely choose to say yes to God just as Eve was truly free to say no to God. And thus, the human nature Jesus Christ received from Mary was free of the stain of original sin, free of this wounding of the human nature.Peace in Him!

Actually it was because Jesus perfect life was originally from God and transferred from heaven to Mary’s womb that Jesus was born as a perfect and sinless Son and free from God’s condemnation to death. Nothing to do with Mary's nature.

Again, you say Mary was born free from the "stain" of sin. This is clearly in contradiction to scripture which leaves us in no doubt when it states: "For all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God" Romans 3:23



Question? Why is she not excluded from the above statement at Romans as is Jesus at Hebrews 7:26 "For such a high priest as this was suitable for us, loyal, guileless, undefiled, separated from the sinners".
And again at 1 Peter 2:22 "He committed no sin, nor was deception found in his mouth".

This evidently indicates that he alone is the exception to the rule.

LB

 

[Toms777]

thanks for the advice, but the list actually was condensed until i posted it and then it kind of extended it's length by about 20 inches! As you will see if you click on the link provided!

The first Pope was Peter, what part of my previous post was incomprehensible to you?

Where is that in the Bible?