Mary without original sin?

[rebazar]

thereselittle flower writes:

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.

Mary could NOT have been immaculate in any way, shape or form. Mary was a human being, just like the rest of us, mortals.There was not any requirement for Mary to be immaculate in order to borne Jesus. I don't remember that any of the angels told Mary that the reason she was chosen to borne Jesus was because she was immaculate.
If Jesus is God, it is totally irrelevant, and absolutely not necessary, for Mary to be immaculate.
This is an EVOLUTIONARY and EXPERIENTIAL CREATION, and as such there can NOT be an "original sin" or any "stain" of an original sin. The story of Adam and Eve and the 'original sin" is 99% wrong. Just ask any scientist!!



Cheers

 

[Toms777]

thereselittle flower writes:
Mary could NOT have been immaculate in any way, shape or form. Mary was a human being, just like the rest of us, mortals.There was not any requirement for Mary to be immaculate in order to borne Jesus. I don't remember that any of the angels told Mary that the reason she was chosen to borne Jesus was because she was immaculate.
If Jesus is God, it is totally irrelevant, and absolutely not necessary, for Mary to be immaculate.
This is an EVOLUTIONARY and EXPERIENTIAL CREATION, and as such there can NOT be an "original sin" or any "stain" of an original sin. The story of Adam and Eve and the 'original sin" is 99% wrong. Just ask any scientist!!
Cheers

First, you are right that there is no reason that Mary need be sinless and indeed Mary said herself that she needed a Saviour. One who is sinless does not need a Saviour.

However, you are wrong on scientists telling you that there is no "original sin". Scripture is also clear on gthat and no scientist can prove or disprove it.

 

[rebazar]

Toms777 writes:

However, you are wrong on scientists telling you that there is no "original sin". Scripture is also clear on gthat and no scientist can prove or disprove it.

Evolution and "original sin" are mutually exclusive.The story of Adam and Eve as depicted in the Bible is only about 1% correct. The other 99% is missing and can be found in The Urantia Book. I recommend it very highly!!


Cheers

 

[Toms777]

Toms777 writes:



Evolution and "original sin" are mutually exclusive.The story of Adam and Eve as depicted in the Bible is only about 1% correct. The other 99% is missing and can be found in The Urantia Book. I recommend it very highly!!

Cheers

I would not recommend it at all - it is completely contrary to Christianity and is certainly contrary to the topic of this thread.

 

[Toms777]

Just an fyi for those who are interested....the thread on whether Men become God
(CCC Article 460) has been revived and is now located in General Theology.

 

[rebazar]

Evolution and "original sin" are mutually exclusive.The story of Adam and Eve as depicted in the Bible is only about 1% correct. The other 99% is missing and can be found in The Urantia Book. I recommend it very highly!!

Cheers

I would not recommend it at all - it is completely contrary to Christianity and is certainly contrary to the topic of this thread.

It is the story of Adam and Eve that started this "original sin" business, which has confounded and confused millions of people. "Original sin" as depicted in the Bible makes NO sense whatsoever. The recommendation to read The Urantia Book was for those people who might be interested in knowing the truth about Adam and Eve and the "original sin", and was NOT an invitation to debate the Urantia Book !!



Cheers

 

[thereselittleflower]

[/i]





It is the story of Adam and Eve that started this "original sin" business, which has confounded and confused millions of people. "Original sin" as depicted in the Bible makes NO sense whatsoever. The recommendation to read The Urantia Book was for those people who might be interested in knowing the truth about Adam and Eve and the "original sin", and was NOT an invitation to debate the Urantia Book !!



Cheers

Of course it is an invitation!

Mary's immaculate conception is a belief of an Orthodox Christian faith, and should not be openly debated here in the UNorthodox Forum . .

The Urantia Book is most definitely UNorthodox and VERY mudh open to debate here in this forum . .

 

[Toms777]

Of course it is an invitation!
Mary's immaculate conception is a belief of an Orthodox Christian faith, and should not be openly debated here in the UNorthodox Forum . .

It may be a belief, but can it be substantiated from the Bible?

 

[Toms777]

[/i]
It is the story of Adam and Eve that started this "original sin" business, which has confounded and confused millions of people. "Original sin" as depicted in the Bible makes NO sense whatsoever.
Cheers

1 Cor 1:20-22
21 For since, in the wisdom of God, the world through wisdom did not know God, it pleased God through the foolishness of the message preached to save those who believe.
NKJV

 

[thereselittleflower]

It may be a belief, but can it be substantiated from the Bible?

Yes, but I am not about to debate our doctrine here in the Unorthodox forum.

If you would like this answered more in depth, please ask us in OBOB.


Thanks!


Peace in Him!

 

[mawuvi]

Yes, but I am not about to debate our doctrine here in the Unorthodox forum.

If you would like this answered more in depth, please ask us in OBOB.


Thanks!


Peace in Him!

Oooohhhh! Give me Ukok anyday

 

[LightBearer]

Yes, but I am not about to debate our doctrine here in the Unorthodox forum.

If you would like this answered more in depth, please ask us in OBOB.


Thanks!


Peace in Him!

Isn't this a pointless invitation. Those of us who are considered "Unorthodox" are also considered "Non-Christian" and therefore cannot post in the OBOB forum. Or am I mistaken?

Puts us at a slight disadvantage dont you think. You can question our doctrine but we cant question yours unless you arnswer here in UT.

LB

 

[LogicalFallacy]

Ukok + breathen, I did ask (restate) this a few pages back but i still haven't had a reply, perhaps i missed it!

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?

 

[lared]

Of course she had sexual relations with Joseph. She was a human woman who was engaged to Joseph in the first place.

She later went on the have other children. I think everyone knows that.

Perhaps Der Alter can help us out.

 

[thereselittleflower]

Isn't this a pointless invitation. Those of us who are considered "Unorthodox" are also considered "Non-Christian" and therefore cannot post in the OBOB forum. Or am I mistaken?

Puts us at a slight disadvantage dont you think. You can question our doctrine but we cant question yours unless you arnswer here in UT.

LB

Hi LB You're right . . please accept my apologies . . for some reason, it slipped my mind that you all could not post there.


Peace to all!

 

[thereselittleflower]

Ukok + breathen, I did ask (restate) this a few pages back but i still haven't had a reply, perhaps i missed it!


Response;


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

False


Peace in Him!

 

[thereselittleflower]

Of course she had sexual relations with Joseph. She was a human woman who was engaged to Joseph in the first place.

She later went on the have other children. I think everyone knows that.

Perhaps Der Alter can help us out.

Actually, no. .. amost 1.5 billion people know she didn't have other children.


Peace in Him!

 

[LogicalFallacy]

False

True!
Now there's an interesting counter argument. Can you show me from the Bible why your conclusion is correct?

 

[LogicalFallacy]

Actually, no. .. amost 1.5 billion people know she didn't have other children.


Peace in Him!

Believe my friend, I think you'll find the word is Believe. Almost "1.5 billion" people "believe" that, which doesn't make it true. "Argumentum ad populum".

 

[mawuvi]

Actually, no. .. amost 1.5 billion people know she didn't have other children.


Peace in Him!

Oh my how could you put yourself out on a limb like this knowing there are some very smart and knowledgeable Christians on this side of the board. Care to share with us how Jesus other brothers came about?