What does it matter?

[IamAdopted]

You know, I was willing to leave it at "let's agree to disagree", but I guess your not..lol







First of all, does the use of the word "all", in this passage, used to mean "all" as in everyone? Or "all" as in a large number? It is my understanding the Greek word for "all", can mean both.

Second, it says "death through sin, and so death spread to all men". How can it mean to all men here, because Enoch and Elijah, didn't die? So is it possible that the word "all" here, could just be referring to a large group of people, and not necessarly....everyone?

What about the scripture that tells us there are none that are righteous.. NO not one.. This ties in with all have sinned.. So therefore there has been no one other than Christ that has been without sin. This is why He came. To be a sinless spotless Lamb so He could take the sins of mankind upon Himself for He alone was without Sin..

 

[Iollain]

Enoch and Elijah will no doubt be the two witnesses, they will die.

 

[PassthePeace1]

What about the scripture that tells us there are none that are righteous.. NO not one.. This ties in with all have sinned.

If you read the whole passage in context, to the two previous chapters....you can see that Paul is talking about Jews, not being righteous just because they are Jews. They just like Mary, needed a Savior.

That is why reading this in context is so important, so one can get a picture of what the intent of the writer was, and I don't think Paul meant, no human being ever being righteous, or made righteous. LOOK.....

Genesis 6:9
These are the records of the generations of Noah. Noah was a righteous man, blameless in his time; Noah walked with God.

Genesis 7:1
[ The Flood ] Then the LORD said to Noah, "Enter the ark, you and all your household, for you alone I have seen to be righteous before Me in this time.

1 John 3:7
Little children, make sure no one deceives you; the one who practices righteousness is righteous, just as He is righteous

Matthew 23:35
so that upon you may fall the guilt of all the righteous blood shed on earth, from the blood of righteous Abel to the blood of Zechariah, the son of Berechiah, whom you murdered between the temple and the altar.

Luke 5:32
"I have not come to call the righteous but sinners to repentance

2 Peter 2:7
and if He rescued righteous Lot, oppressed by the sensual conduct of unprincipled men

5(A)In the days of Herod, king of Judea, there was a priest named Zacharias, of the (B)division of [a]Abijah; and he had a wife [b]from the daughters of Aaron, and her name was Elizabeth.
6They were both (C)righteous in the sight of God, walking (D)blamelessly in all the commandments and requirements of the Lord.

There are humpteen other examples, but I listed a few.

. So therefore there has been no one other than Christ that has been without sin. This is why He came. To be a sinless spotless Lamb so He could take the sins of mankind upon Himself for He alone was without Sin..

There has been no one born sinless, by their own nature than Jesus, which is why Mary also needed a Savior. She was born without the stain of original sin, because of grace, not by her own nature.

 

[Benedicta00]

There has been no one born sinless, by their own nature than Jesus, which is why Mary also needed a Savior. She was born without the stain of original sin, because of grace, not by her own nature.

And there we have it.

.

 

[PassthePeace1]

Enoch and Elijah will no doubt be the two witnesses, they will die.

If that be so, they still weren't dead at the time of the writing of Paul.

 

[Iollain]

So?

 

[Benedicta00]

What about the scripture that tells us there are none that are righteous.. NO not one.. This ties in with all have sinned.. So therefore there has been no one other than Christ that has been without sin. This is why He came. To be a sinless spotless Lamb so He could take the sins of mankind upon Himself for He alone was without Sin..

Do you see how you make scripture nothing but one big huge contradiction?

You just said the bible says, NOT one is with out sin.. but then you go and say only Jesus is with out sin..

Well which is it?

I thought you said that NO ONE, NOT one is sinless?

Jesus was...

So you know what, you have to be able to make sense of all this, you have to make all this stuff jive.

Jesus was free of sin becuase he was God-- that is his divine nature. Mary was made sinless becuase of grace.

Her soul maginfied the Lord, her spirit rejoyced in God her savior, he who is mighty has done great things to her and all generations shall call her blesseded.

Make it all jive, IAA if you really want to be bible only. Be one... stop breezing past facts that the bible reveal to us.

Mary's soul magnified the Lord and her spirit rejoyiced God her savior. God did great things to her... John the baptist as a fetus leaped for joy at the sound of her voice.

All of this said before Christ redeemed any of us. So what was up with all of that? Just what was Mary talking about? What was with Elizabeth who was filled with the Holy Spirit?

You can not have Paul contradict Luke and Luke contradcit Paul.

In light of Luke, Paul was not speaking in the way you have interpreted him to be speaking. If he was, then the bible is filled with contrdictions and error and thus, not the inspired word of God.

Do you realize sola scripture is what has caused many to become Athisit? For this reason I pointed out to you- the contradictions sola scripture creates.






.

 

[sunlover1]

John the baptist as a fetus leaped for joy at the sound of her voice.

You think it was the sound of Mary's voice
that made John leap?

Luke 1:41
41 And it came to pass, that, when Elisabeth heard the salutation of Mary, the babe leaped in her womb; and Elisabeth was filled with the Holy Ghost:

 

[Benedicta00]

You think it was the sound of Mary's voice
that made John leap?

Luke 1:41
41 And it came to pass, that, when Elisabeth heard the salutation of Mary, the babe leaped in her womb; and Elisabeth was filled with the Holy Ghost:

No, I think it was becuase she brought Christ to him in the flesh- who was living in her womb.

Let mke ask you a question, do you believe in the mystery of faith? Or do you think eveything is black and white?

There is a mystery here in this... it was recorded in scripture becuase it teaches us something of the mystery of faith.

Catholics and Orthodox believe in Christ's Real Presence in the Holy Eucharist. We can see this mystery hidden all over the scriptures if we are looking.

We all can encounter Christ the way John the baptist did and be sactified the way he was... we need NOT be 12 or be able to "accept" him formally and then we will be saved if we do.

John had a real encounter with Christ incarnate. He wasn't an infant-- he was a fetus! So much for the notion that babies can't accept Christ so they shouln't be baptized.

Before there was a Church, Mary is who brought him in contact with the Real Presence of Christ and we today are put in contact with Christ's Real Presence in the Eucharist through the Church.

We experience God in all of the sacraments of His Church, that is what a sacrament is, that is what His Church was given to us for... for us to be put in contact with the living God, not just spiritual but actual so we can have a personal, real, physical encounter with God the same way John the baptist did. The same way the women with the hemmorage did.

John the baptist could not see Christ... Christ was in the womb and so was John, but none the less, something real happened, John encounted Christ who was present but unseen and he leapped for joy...

Joy is what we associate the risen Lord with. Joy is not, we are just happy about smething, but joy is what we have when are saved.

John was sanctified in the womb of his mother before he was even born. He didn't need to formally accept Christ as his personal Lord and savior in order to be 'saved.' He only needed to be put in contact with Christ in the flesh.

Like the women with the hemmorage who said, "I only need to touch the hem of his garment if I will be healed." We associate redemption with healing, by his stripes we are healed.

Jesus says to the women that her faith has healed her (saved) her... we do have to believe, have faith that Christ saves and is our salvation, but he comes to us first and for those like babies or mentally handicapped, no they do not have to formally accept Christ intellectually or they go unsaved. No dichotomies here. It's ot one way or it's the other.

We see how God works in our soul not just in our mind, but in our soul. We see how he worked in the soul of a baby who was a fetus, 6 months in gestation. he can surly work in the soul of a baby who is born and he does, we call it baptism.

But back to Mary. Today we call the Church a mother.... symboliclly Mary is mother of the Church... she is our mother, she is who brings us Christ... she brought us Christ incarnate. Thus she is mother of the Church.

And it's okay to have a devotion to Mary our mother, you do not have to have one but it's okay to have a devotion to the mother of the Word incarnate for she is mother of the Church.

In a symbolic way, she birthed the Church becuase she is who birthed the one who gave us the Church and through the ministiry of His Church Jesus Christ is made present to us in the same way he was made present to John the baptist. Really and truly... physically.

So you need not have a fear of Mary detracting from Christ. She can only bring us closer to him and a true devotion to her renders it impossible for her to detract from him or lead us away from him.

JP and all the Marian saints since day one have been trying to tell us that devotion to Mary will deepen our life with Christ so this is why they write about it and encourge us but we do not have to take their advice.. if you are happy with your relationship with Christ then remain as you are.

In none of their writtings do they tell us we can not have a relationship with Christ if we do not 'give ourselves' to Mary. "Give ourselves" to Mary means have a devotion to her.

You do not have to go this route if it makes you uncomfortable or if you can not understand what the heck these saints and popes were even talking about.

We are all not on the same level nor are we all at the same place in our walk with God.

If what has been working for you, works, stick with it but you need not stay out of the Church for this reason-- becuase you do not want to practice Marian devotion. You are not asked to.








.

 

[sunlover1]

 

[Benedicta00]

You're welcome. I hope I didnt confuse any more. It's hard to articulate what I'm tryin to express.

Mary is seen symbolically as the proto-Church. We believe Christ is present to us in His Church in a real literal physical way.

So when we say Mary brings Christ to us, we mean she symbolically represents His Church becuase she is who first brought Christ to us in this way.

Jesus of course had to come, establish his kingdom on earth, die, rise, acsend, and then send the HS before His actaul Church was born (Penecost) but before that, before Christ even came into the world we can see how God, even though His plan fufilled ends this way, we can see how indeed worked outside of the actual event of Christ's redemption.

God can and did work in men in anticipation of our salvation, before it was actualized.

We see Abraham, Moses, as prefigures of Jesus. We see that Elijha and even Moses may have even been taken up to heaven before Christ opened heaven.

We can not look at this as if this contradicts what we know is true, that through Christ we enter heaven. We can not see everything as it's either/or.

We have to be able to see everything God does/did in through the eyes of the both & and.

These ppl could have enter heaven in anticipation of Christ's coming becuase God is not bound to time and space. He can save anyone outside of the confounds of when these events happened.

God certainly saves us now through an event that happened 2000 years ago. He could have surly saved a person 2000 years before the event took place.

God certainly created His plan and ordained that we are all to be saved the way we all are, but he is not bound to this.

God could have certainly applied Christ mertis to anyone before Christ actully came and died.

We see him doing this. We se Him crediting Abraham's rightousness as faith before we ever had Christ to put our faith in.

We see God rasing up certain ppl and give them extrordinary faith in anticipation of Christ.

When you look at it like this, that we can take God outside of this box of time ad events we have put him in, it is no longer a fantastic notion to think God created Mary to be His mother and created her free from sin.

She like every other OT figure who was made for God's plan has her part in it's fullfilment, like any other OT figure had, but she has the greatest part- she is His mother.

She is who brought us what everyone was waiting for with anticipation.

Through the Virgin birth, salvation was actulized. It was no longer an anticipated event. It was real, it was physical..

 

[Uphill Battle]

Do you see how you make scripture nothing but one big huge contradiction?

You just said the bible says, NOT one is with out sin.. but then you go and say only Jesus is with out sin..

Well which is it?

I thought you said that NO ONE, NOT one is sinless?

Jesus was...

So you know what, you have to be able to make sense of all this, you have to make all this stuff jive.

Jesus was free of sin becuase he was God-- that is his divine nature. Mary was made sinless becuase of grace.

uh, Bene... we have a biblical account that Jesus was sinless. We have no such thing for Mary.
You're presenting a false dichotomy.

Her soul maginfied the Lord, her spirit rejoyced in God her savior, he who is mighty has done great things to her and all generations shall call her blesseded.

and again (as has been asked many many times, what does this have to do with sinlessness?)

Make it all jive, IAA if you really want to be bible only. Be one... stop breezing past facts that the bible reveal to us.

what facts?

Mary's soul magnified the Lord and her spirit rejoyiced God her savior. God did great things to her... John the baptist as a fetus leaped for joy at the sound of her voice.

and? still nothing about sinlessness.

All of this said before Christ redeemed any of us. So what was up with all of that? Just what was Mary talking about? What was with Elizabeth who was filled with the Holy Spirit?

um... still looking for evidence of sinlessness.

You can not have Paul contradict Luke and Luke contradcit Paul.

and they don't.

In light of Luke, Paul was not speaking in the way you have interpreted him to be speaking. If he was, then the bible is filled with contrdictions and error and thus, not the inspired word of God.

correction. In light of what you claim Luke is actually saying, then the bible would be filled with contradictions. If you don't inject Marian sinlessness with the syringe of Catholicism, there is not problems.

Do you realize sola scripture is what has caused many to become Athisit? For this reason I pointed out to you- the contradictions sola scripture creates.

That red herring could feed a whole village, it's so big!

 

[repentant]

You know, I was willing to leave it at "let's agree to disagree", but I guess your not..lol

But I can't agree on you disagreeing...

First of all, does the use of the word "all", in this passage, used to mean "all" as in everyone? Or "all" as in a large number? It is my understanding the Greek word for "all", can mean both.

Romans 3:23
for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God

All is all.

The Greek word used here is pantes, which means pertaining to the whole, or everybody..in other word's all.

Second, it says "death through sin, and so death spread to all men". How can it mean to all men here, because Enoch and Elijah, didn't die? So is it possible that the word "all" here, could just be referring to a large group of people, and not necessarly....everyone?

Well Enoch and Elijah are the two witnesses of Revelation, who will come back and die. So even they won't escape death..

 

[PassthePeace1]

But I can't agree on you disagreeing...

And why is that? What's wrong with agreeing to disagree?

Romans 3:23

for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God

All is all.

The Greek word used here is pantes, which means pertaining to the whole, or everybody..in other word's all.

I google "pantes" and found that pantes is a derivative of pas, and that it can be used collectively and individually. So I don't see, how "all" is always "all"....it could also imply, a large group, or most.


Later, it's been a long 48 hours...need some sleep.

Peace be with you...Pam

 

[repentant]

And why is that? What's wrong with agreeing to disagree?

I don't know...it's more fun..

I google "pantes" and found that pantes is a derivative of pas, and that it can be used collectively and individually. So I don't see, how "all" is always "all"....it could also imply, a large group, or most.

Yes google, the definitive source for all knowledge...

Well right off the bat I can see a mistake you found on google..."pantes" is the plural of the word "pas", not a derivative of it..."pas" means "every" and "pantes" means "all".

Later, it's been a long 48 hours...need some sleep.

Peace be with you...Pam

You been on here for 48 hours...?

 

[Rick Otto]

I don't care if your mom dresses you funny & you hang out with wierdos. I like ya.

 

[repentant]

I don't care if your mom dresses you funny & you hang out with wierdos. I like ya.

How did you know?

Yea, you're not so bad yourself.

 

[racer]

As far as the doctrines themselves are concerned, the illustrate and defend several important principles

1. The reality of the Incarnation. Jesus REALLY became a man, a descendant of Mary and Davis and Adam. Jesus was also really still God while the Son of Mary.

Which Marian Dogma substantiates this?

2. The sinlessness and uniqueness of Jesus who required a sinless human parent, because He is God and also man.

Who established this requirement, that in order to remain sinless, Jesus must have a sinless parent?

3. The critical role of human choice in the decision to sin (Adam and Eve), and the decision to obey God (Mary)

Mary is one example among many in Scripture which show the importance of obeying God. Which doctrine specifically shows this according to the RCC or EOC? The sinlessness of Mary? She had nothing to say about that did she? Her PV? Becoming with child while remaining a virgin? Her bodily assumption into heaven? Which one?

Does anybody recall Mary being given a choice as to whether or not to be the Virgin Mother? Yes, she braved this like no other woman, but she was not asked to do this. She was told it would happen. She wasn't given the opportunity to say "yes."

Example, the difference between Mary and Eve:

Mary was told she would become impregnated and bear the Messiah, and with no action on her part she became pregnant. There was nothing she could do to prevent what God intended to happen.

Eve and Adam were told not to eat from the Tree of Knowledge. Eve did. But, when God forbade them to do this, did He remove the tree from their midst so they were not able to eat from the tree? Did He block their ability to pick fruit and eat from it? He gave them the freedom to choose.

Mary had no choice. She did so happily, humbly, lovingly, and graciously. But, she did not have a choice.

So, here's the question, "Do we know that Jesus is the Messiah because Mary was a virgin? Or do we know that Mary was indeed a virgin when she conceived because Jesus is the Messiah?

 

[Uphill Battle]

Which Marian Dogma substantiates this?

Who established this requirement, that in order to remain sinless, Jesus must have a sinless parent?

Mary is one example among many in Scripture which show the importance of obeying God. Which doctrine specifically shows this according to the RCC or EOC? The sinlessness of Mary? She had nothing to say about that did she? Her PV? Becoming with child while remaining a virgin? Her bodily assumption into heaven? Which one?

Does anybody recall Mary being given a choice as to whether or not to be the Virgin Mother? Yes, she braved this like no other woman, but she was not asked to do this. She was told it would happen. She wasn't given the opportunity to say "yes."

Example, the difference between Mary and Eve:

Mary was told she would become impregnated and bear the Messiah, and with no action on her part she became pregnant. There was nothing she could do to prevent what God intended to happen.

Eve and Adam were told not to eat from the Tree of Knowledge. Eve did. But, when God forbade them to do this, did He remove the tree from their midst so they were not able to eat from the tree? Did He block their ability to pick fruit and eat from it? He gave them the freedom to choose.

Mary had no choice. She did so happily, humbly, lovingly, and graciously. But, she did not have a choice.

So, here's the question, "Do we know that Jesus is the Messiah because Mary was a virgin? Or do we know that Mary was indeed a virgin when she conceived because Jesus is the Messiah?

cue the "What, is God a rapist?" or " Does God remove our free will?" argument....

 

[NewToLife]

cue the "What, is God a rapist?" or " Does God remove our free will?" argument....

A subtle variation of Poisoning the well?