The Immaculate Conception Error!

[tom55]

I don't create strawman scenarios tom. The Bible says what it says and the ONLY person it says NEVER sinned was Jesus. In fact, the angel said BLESSED ARE YOU AMONG WOMEN. That does NOT connote being perfect.
Using human rational to get around the lack of evidence for your POV, is not acceptable as far as hermeneutics is concerned. If you can't show it from scripture, don't invent it.

ONCE AGAIN.....I only quoted the Immaculate Conception Doctrine, I have NEVER said it was in scripture. If I have then please quote me!


I have only suggested it could be possible because I believe, as I am sure you do also, all things are possible with God.

 

[tom55]

tom55,

I am no expert on this doctrine, but from my understanding, Catholics believe in the concept of original sin and feel that all who are born of Adam are culpable with the guilt of Adam. Thus, Mary had to be born miraculously to prevent her body from the original sin, passed on through Adam's "seed." This "original sin" is passed on by birth, not by sinful acts. So the idea is that Mary was born without a human father in order to prevent her from being tainted from birth with the effects of Adam's original sin.

From what I have read on the Catholic website you are correct and I agree with you about their teaching on original sin and that Mary was born without original sin. However, I haven't read anything saying Mary was born without a human father. I think they say by the grace of God she was born without original sin because God wanted Jesus to be born from a sinless body.

The concept that a person is not a sinner unless they knowingly commit a sinful act is not a Catholic doctrine.

I agree with your above statement. I believe, as scripture says, that man is born with sin or what I like to call the "first" sin. (also known as original sin)

If this was their view then there would be no need for the doctrine of the immaculate conception (Mary being born without the aid of a man). Again, I am not an expert on the matter but that is my understanding of how the logic behind the doctrine goes.

I don't think I ever suggested that Mary was born without the aid of man. IF I did write that I can't find it and if you can find it please ignore it....it was a typo.

 

[Wormwood]

tom55,

I am no expert on this doctrine, but from my understanding, Catholics believe in the concept of original sin and feel that all who are born of Adam are culpable with the guilt of Adam. Thus, Mary had to be born miraculously to prevent her body from the original sin, passed on through Adam's "seed." This "original sin" is passed on by birth, not by sinful acts. So the idea is that Mary was born without a human father in order to prevent her from being tainted from birth with the effects of Adam's original sin.

From what I have read on the Catholic website you are correct and I agree with you about their teaching on original sin and that Mary was born without original sin. However, I haven't read anything saying Mary was born without a human father. I think they say by the grace of God she was born without original sin because God wanted Jesus to be born from a sinless body.

The concept that a person is not a sinner unless they knowingly commit a sinful act is not a Catholic doctrine.

I agree with your above statement. I believe, as scripture says, that man is born with sin or what I like to call the "first" sin. (also known as original sin)

If this was their view then there would be no need for the doctrine of the immaculate conception (Mary being born without the aid of a man). Again, I am not an expert on the matter but that is my understanding of how the logic behind the doctrine goes.

I don't think I ever suggested that Mary was born without the aid of man. IF I did write that I can't find it and if you can find it please ignore it....it was a typo.

Yes, that is what I gathered from justaname as well, tom. I was mistaken about the Catholic view of how Mary was supposedly born without original sin. Personally, I do not believe in either doctrine (immaculate conception or original sin) but I was just reflecting on what I thought I remembered from a class long ago. Haha, clearly my memory is not that great :). Either way, it was my error and not your typo!

 

[StanJ]

ONCE AGAIN.....I only quoted the Immaculate Conception Doctrine, I have NEVER said it was in scripture. If I have then please quote me!


I have only suggested it could be possible because I believe, as I am sure you do also, all things are possible with God.

Playing the devil's advocate will always generate this type of response from me tom. Personally I don't understand why you do this unless you ARE trying to justify IT.
With God, ALL things are possible but NOT all things are expedient. That is the context of that scripture, but bottom line is God cannot contradict His own word, anymore than He can BE the devil.

 

[KingJ]

What the 'imaculate conception' doctrine also accomplishes very successfully is to remove Jesus as our nearest kinsman. Because according to RCC lies, Jesus did not take the seed of David according to the flesh...nor even the seed of Abraham...both fallen men...fallen flesh...but took upon Himself the seed of Mary..."unfallen and immaculate flesh". So therefore Jesus is so far removed from us, He can no longer be our Mediator, Friend, nor even Messiah. Thus the Vatican denies that He is even Christ. Not only so, but if Jesus did not partake of sinful flesh, as Paul informs us, then we can no longer partake of His righteousness, and the law can no longer be fulfilled in us. (Romans 8:3,4)
I fact, it goes further. If Jesus was born of an immaculate mother, the the following is also made null and void. 2 Cor. 5:21 For he hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him. ....thus the entire plane of salvation is turned on ts head...Mary becomes our Savior, Jesus is just a by-product, and incidental appendage. No wonder Mary becomes the worshiped Mediatrix...no wonder Jesus is removed from us...He is too good...too holy...too inaccessable to be our help in time of need...no, no, we have to go to Mary who becomes our intercessor.
Satan knew exactly what he was doing when he inspired the pope to utter that foolishness ....‘Yes! We must believe that the Blessed Virgin Mary was immaculate in her conception… There is no salvation to those who do not believe this dogma!’

This is interesting and worrying. The vatican really teach that? Do you have proof?

 

[Barrd]

This is interesting and worrying. The vatican really teach that? Do you have proof?

Check out the website:

http://www.catholiceducation.org/en/religion-and-philosophy/apologetics/why-catholics-believe-in-the-immaculate-conception.html

 

[tom55]

Playing the devil's advocate will always generate this type of response from me tom. Personally I don't understand why you do this unless you ARE trying to justify IT.
With God, ALL things are possible but NOT all things are expedient. That is the context of that scripture, but bottom line is God cannot contradict His own word, anymore than He can BE the devil.

I am not sure what you are saying to me in your above post. I don't understand how I am "playing the devils advocate" when I simply posted what the RCC teaches which contradicts what you said it teaches. I stated a fact, which was different than your belief. If me quoting RCC beliefs or saying that "anything is possible with God" is playing devils advocate then I guess everyone on this website is guilty of playing the devils advocate when they quote someone or say "anything is possible with God". However, I maybe confused at what you are trying to say.

 

[StanJ]

I am not sure what you are saying to me in your above post. I don't understand how I am "playing the devils advocate" when I simply posted what the RCC teaches which contradicts what you said it teaches. I stated a fact, which was different than your belief. If me quoting RCC beliefs or saying that "anything is possible with God" is playing devils advocate then I guess everyone on this website is guilty of playing the devils advocate when they quote someone or say "anything is possible with God". However, I maybe confused at what you are trying to say.

I'm saying that regardless of whether is comes from the RCC or your understanding, you and they are wrong.
Let's try to stick with what the Bible says about the issue.
Bottom line is do you believe the OP or the RCC?

 

[Barrd]

I am not sure what you are saying to me in your above post. I don't understand how I am "playing the devils advocate" when I simply posted what the RCC teaches which contradicts what you said it teaches. I stated a fact, which was different than your belief. If me quoting RCC beliefs or saying that "anything is possible with God" is playing devils advocate then I guess everyone on this website is guilty of playing the devils advocate when they quote someone or say "anything is possible with God". However, I maybe confused at what you are trying to say.

I'm afraid I must agree with Stan on this one, Tom.
Mary is not Jesus' equal...she is a sinner in need of a Savior, just like everyone else.

 

[tom55]

I'm saying that regardless of whether is comes from the RCC or your understanding, you and they are wrong.
Let's try to stick with what the Bible says about the issue.
Bottom line is do you believe the OP or the RCC?

If you want to stick with what the bible says about the issue then we should stick with what the bible says about everything we believe and practice as Christians. We then have to decide who has the authority to interpret scripture. Who do you, StanJ, has the authority to interpret scripture; the infallible word of God?

When you say we should "stick with what the Bible says about the issue" are you saying we should disregard all the writings of the Apostolic Fathers and early church leaders that were students of the Apostolic Fathers? Should I believe what they have to say about scripture or what someone 2000 years later says about scripture?


I think the bottom line is scripture does not come right out and say "Mary was born without sin". However, Scripture does not always come right out and say a lot of things we believe and practice as Christians which is why sometimes we have to interpret scripture. Hopefully we don't twist it to our own destruction. Scripture is not black and white. If it was we wouldn't be debating what various passages in scripture means.

Who, in your opinion, has the authority to interpret it without twisting it to their own destruction? Why is the RCC wrong and you are right? Who gave StanJ the authority to say that I or the RCC is wrong? Is it possible you are wrong?

 

[tom55]

I'm afraid I must agree with Stan on this one, Tom.
Mary is not Jesus' equal...she is a sinner in need of a Savior, just like everyone else.

I have never said that Mary didn't need a savior and if you read what the Catholic Church teaches they do not teach that she didn't need a savior. They teach that Mary needed a savior! So I am not sure why you are putting words in my mouth or suggesting the Catholic Church teaches something (Mary is equal to Jesus) they do not teach. I have only quoted what scripture says; "Blessed art thou among women, and blessed is the fruit of thy womb" which clearly says that she is blessed and so was the child in her womb. That strongly suggest that she was as equally "blessed" as Jesus. The key is to define what "blessed" means.

Also, the genesis of my disagreement with StanJ is that he falsely stated what the RCC teaches about the Immaculate Conception when he wrote this: The Immaculate Conception means Mary was a virgin when she conceived. Simple and nothing more. Sadly the RCC has tried to attach much more to it, including her sinless nature and her perpetual virginity". I then informed him that he was wrong and quoted what the RCC teaches about the issue. He then accused me of believing what the RCC teaches even though he couldn't provide any evidence of that accusation; such as a quote from me. I am not defending the RCC doctrine, just quoting it! It's real easy to quote something when you cut and paste from the source.

Respectfully.....Tom55

 

[Deborah_]

I have never said that Mary didn't need a savior and if you read what the Catholic Church teaches they do not teach that she didn't need a savior. They teach that Mary needed a savior! So I am not sure why you are putting words in my mouth or suggesting the Catholic Church teaches something (Mary is equal to Jesus) they do not teach. I have only quoted what scripture says; "Blessed art thou among women, and blessed is the fruit of thy womb" which clearly says that she is blessed and so was the child in her womb. That strongly suggest that she was as equally "blessed" as Jesus. The key is to define what "blessed" means.

Also, the genesis of my disagreement with StanJ is that he falsely stated what the RCC teaches about the Immaculate Conception when he wrote this: The Immaculate Conception means Mary was a virgin when she conceived. Simple and nothing more. Sadly the RCC has tried to attach much more to it, including her sinless nature and her perpetual virginity". I then informed him that he was wrong and quoted what the RCC teaches about the issue. He then accused me of believing what the RCC teaches even though he couldn't provide any evidence of that accusation; such as a quote from me. I am not defending the RCC doctrine, just quoting it! It's real easy to quote something when you cut and paste from the source.

Respectfully.....Tom55

What are we to make of this passage, also from Luke's Gospel?

"As Jesus was saying these things, a woman in the crowd called out, 'blessed is the mother who gave you birth and nursed you!' He replied, 'Blessed rather are those who hear the word of God and obey it.'" (Luke 11:27,28)

If Mary is as blessed as Jesus, and those who obey God's word are more blessed than Mary, does that make them more blessed than Jesus as well?
I don't think that argument really stands up.

 

[tom55]

What are we to make of this passage, also from Luke's Gospel?

"As Jesus was saying these things, a woman in the crowd called out, 'blessed is the mother who gave you birth and nursed you!' He replied, 'Blessed rather are those who hear the word of God and obey it.'" (Luke 11:27,28)

If Mary is as blessed as Jesus, and those who obey God's word are more blessed than Mary, does that make them more blessed than Jesus as well?
I don't think that argument really stands up.

What are we to make of the passage, 'Blessed art thou among women, and blessed is the fruit of thy womb"?

Is that not saying that Mary and the child in her womb is Blessed? Making them equally blessed. What does blessed mean?

Where did I or scripture say that Mary is "as blessed as Jesus"? It seems to say they are equally blessed and she is more blessed than the average woman. (which clearly she is) Scripture also says, "From now on all generations will call me blessed".

I may be misunderstanding what you are trying to say but are you suggesting that Jesus is telling this woman in the crowd that His mother WASN'T blessed?

 

[StanJ]

Also, the genesis of my disagreement with StanJ is that he falsely stated what the RCC teaches about the Immaculate Conception when he wrote this:The Immaculate Conception means Mary was a virgin when she conceived. Simple and nothing more. Sadly the RCC has tried to attach much more to it, including her sinless nature and her perpetual virginity". I then informed him that he was wrong and quoted what the RCC teaches about the issue. He then accused me of believing what the RCC teaches even though he couldn't provide any evidence of that accusation; such as a quote from me. I am not defending the RCC doctrine, just quoting it! It's real easy to quote something when you cut and paste from the source.

Tom, FYI

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/07674d.htm

Their doctrine, not mine.

 

[tom55]

Tom, FYI

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/07674d.htm

Their doctrine, not mine.

I truly, truly do not understand what you are trying to say here. YOU are the one who said that "the RCC has tried to attach much more to it (Immaculate Conception doctrine), including her sinless nature and her perpetual virginity".

I am saying that the Immaculate Conception doctrine WAS created by the Catholic Church AND that doctrine has ONLY to do with her being born without original sin! The link YOU provided supports what I said.

The link YOU provided says NOTHING in the definition of Immaculate Conception about her perpetual virginity. If it does would you please quote it for me?

Also, since the doctrine was created by the Catholic Church they can add OR delete anything they want from it and you shouldn't really care since it doesn't effect you.

(From the link you provided here is their definition of Immaculate Conception: in the first instant of her conception, by a singular privilege and grace granted by God, in view of the merits of Jesus Christ, the Savior of the human race, was preserved exempt from all stain of original sin") Nothing about perpetual virginity

 

[Deborah_]

What are we to make of the passage, 'Blessed art thou among women, and blessed is the fruit of thy womb"?

Is that not saying that Mary and the child in her womb is Blessed? Making them equally blessed. What does blessed mean?

Where did I or scripture say that Mary is "as blessed as Jesus"? It seems to say they are equally blessed and she is more blessed than the average woman. (which clearly she is) Scripture also says, "From now on all generations will call me blessed".

I may be misunderstanding what you are trying to say but are you suggesting that Jesus is telling this woman in the crowd that His mother WASN'T blessed?

To my mind, "Mary and Jesus are equally blessed' and "Mary is as blessed as Jesus' are saying the same thing. Was that not what you meant?
What I understand from Luke 11:28 is not that Mary wasn't blessed at all (she obviously was!) but that Jesus is warning us not to venerate her. She was especially (uniquely) blessed by having the unique privilege of being His mother, but she doesn't have some intrinsic state of blessedness greater than any other mortal person.

 

[Barrd]

To say that Mary was born without the taint of original sin, would mean that she did not sin, yes?
If she did not sin, then why would she need a Savior?
If she did not sin, why could she not have been the Savior, herself?

 

[tom55]

To my mind, "Mary and Jesus are equally blessed' and "Mary is as blessed as Jesus' are saying the same thing. Was that not what you meant?
What I understand from Luke 11:28 is not that Mary wasn't blessed at all (she obviously was!) but that Jesus is warning us not to venerate her. She was especially (uniquely) blessed by having the unique privilege of being His mother, but she

I guess we need to define or agree on "blessed" first before we can discuss what it means in context to scripture. I think the dictionary definition is a good start: Made holy or consecrated

To me that clearly defines both Mary and Jesus (holy and dedicated to a divine purpose). Would you agree?

If you are suggesting we should not venerate (regard with great respect) Mary, I am willing to bet God, Jesus and people that walked and talked with Mary held her in high regard and great respect. Wouldn't you? Jesus respected her enough to perform his first miracle at her insistence. He even told her it wasn't His time yet but she told him to do it (change water into wine) so he did it out of respect for her.

And to say "she doesn't have some intrinsic state of blessedness greater than any other mortal person" is contrary to scripture which says From now on all generations will call me blessed AND Blessed are you among woman.


If you mean venerate = worship, I agree with you. We should not worship her and scripture does not suggest we should.

 

[tom55]

To say that Mary was born without the taint of original sin, would mean that she did not sin, yes?
If she did not sin, then why would she need a Savior?
If she did not sin, why could she not have been the Savior, herself?

That is what I have read (born without original sin) from the doctrine/teachings of the RCC. I suspect if you wanted to read their rationale on it you could go to a reliable Catholic website and read how they have come to believe it. I have read that they do not believe that she did not need a savior as you have suggested. When I research I use catholic.com (my preference) or newadvent.org

I suspect that if God wanted to keep her sinless then God could do that. However, maybe you don't think He has that power?

 

[StanJ]

I truly, truly do not understand what you are trying to say here. YOU are the one who said that "the RCC has tried to attach much more to it (Immaculate Conception doctrine), including her sinless nature and her perpetual virginity".
I am saying that the Immaculate Conception doctrine WAS created by the Catholic Church AND that doctrine has ONLY to do with her being born without original sin! The link YOU provided supports what I said.

Well that does seem to be a problem for you. The keyword would be "attached", and that is factual. As I said, the ONLY immaculate conception was Jesus'.
ALL have sinned, ALL fall short, even Mary, and the RCC has indeed tried to justify their dogma over the years with papal edicts that of course don't fly with what the Bible does teach.