Sinless Mary? Another Roman Catholic myth...

[Solo]

Yes, however, the early christian church was not going to lose the Mother of Christ. They wouldnt have put her in a bathtub, but the grave would not have been lost... and her relics would have been distributed. No relics. No grave. Kinda like Jesus.. No relics, no grave... and he was assumed! And its not like Jimmy Hoffa. He had real enemies who wanted to kill him and then probably did. Please, do not compare Hoffa to Mary. Even as an analogy. I somehow doubt someone wanted to kill her and then hid her.

That is precisely why the doctrine of Mary's assumption is supremely ridiculous. Mary is no where close to Jesus, and she is dead in the grave until she is redeemed with the rest of the sinners that believed. The 12 Apostles don't have their graves marked, but they have their names emblazened on the New Jerusalem for eternity. Mary's name isn't even mentioned in the structure of New Jerusalem. Mary and Hoffa were both sinners, and both are in their graves, and if Hoffa became born again prior to his death, he will be resurrected on the same day as Mary.

Roman Catholic hierchy needs relics, and tombs, and false doctrines that are not in the scriptures. Why is that? To control and deceive the people. Why does Jesus speak against the Roman Catholic practice of the Nicolaitans?

6 But this thou hast, that thou hatest the deeds of the Nicolaitans, which I also hate. Revelation 2:6

What is the practice of the Nicolaitans?

• 
  The root of the word Nicolaitans comes from Greek nikao, to conquer or overcome, and laos, which means people and which the word laity comes from. The two words together especially means the destruction of the people and refers to the earliest form of what we call a priestly order or clergy which later on in church history divided people and allowed for leadership other than those led by the spirit of the risen Lord. A good translation of Nicolaitan would be "those who prevail over the people." This clerical system later developed into the papal hierarchy of priests and clergy lording over the flock. The Council of Trent stated, "If anyone shall say that there is not in the Catholic Church a hierarchy established by the divine ordination, consisting of bishops, presbyters and ministers, let him be anathema." It is not the question of the ministries but rather in the separation of them into a hierarchy over the people. This very idea was taken over by the Protestants with their own corruption of leadership roles and coverings. The Church of Ephesus was commended for hating the deeds of the Nicolaitans. The wrong separation of the clergy from the laity is a great evil in God's sight and He hates the lust for religious power over others. There is an ungodly spiritual authority in the Church today, which is nothing more than the prideful spirit of control, manipulation, domination and intimidation and a rebellion of the rightful authority of God.
  
  Retrieved from http://latter-rain.com/eschae/nicola.htm

It is pretty easy to be deceived, especially if one is brought up believing that belonging to the Roman Catholic Church saves you, instead of believing on the work of Jesus Christ, being born from above.

 

[Fulton Sheen's Warrior]

+JMJ+

And of course, you still haven't provided scripture that says Mary was sinless.

The English translation, "Hail, Full of Grace," or "Hail, Favored One," is based on the Greek of Luke 1:28, Χαιρε κεχαριτωμενη Chaire kecharitomene. The latter word has the verb "to grace" as its root, and the Greek syntax indicates that the action of the verb was passive, fully completed in the past, with results continuing into the future. Put another way, it means that the subject (Mary) was graced fully and completely at some time in the past, and continued in that fully graced state.

While I am certain that Mary was an upright woman, I don't think she was sinless. I know that Catholics disagree with me, but I also believe that she and Joseph had other children after Jesus. Sex between a married couple is not sinning, by any means.
I don't want to pooh-pooh the Catholics belief by any means, but that is what I believe.

I concur with with Beloved Wolf of God... Thankyou for your charity Christine..... Very Christ-like.

 

[Heidi]

+JMJ+

And of course, you still haven't provided scripture that says Mary was sinless.

The English translation, "Hail, Full of Grace," or "Hail, Favored One," is based on the Greek of Luke 1:28, Χαιρε κεχαριτωμενη Chaire kecharitomene. The latter word has the verb "to grace" as its root, and the Greek syntax indicates that the action of the verb was passive, fully completed in the past, with results continuing into the future. Put another way, it means that the subject (Mary) was graced fully and completely at some time in the past, and continued in that fully graced state.

[quote:03299]While I am certain that Mary was an upright woman, I don't think she was sinless. I know that Catholics disagree with me, but I also believe that she and Joseph had other children after Jesus. Sex between a married couple is not sinning, by any means.
I don't want to pooh-pooh the Catholics belief by any means, but that is what I believe.

I concur with with Beloved Wolf of God... Thankyou for your charity Christine..... Very Christ-like.[/quote:03299]

So you disagree with Jesus that among those born of women there is no greater one than John the Baptist. Is that correct?

 

[Fulton Sheen's Warrior]

+JMJ+

Not at all.


Saint John represents the final prophet of the Old Testament and its perfection, even as he serves as a bridge to the New Testament through his immediate connections to Christ. In the text you have in mind, our Lord was contrasting the very best that the Old Testament could offer as less than the least of the New Covenant, and not as a comparison between the two persons of Saint John and the Blessed Mother. In other words, the least Christian in sanctifying grace has more advantage than those who lived in the pre-Christian period.

Besides, I answered with Sacred Scripture.... Do you disagree with Scripture?

 

[belovedwolfofgod]

Heidi, how we define greater and how God define greater are very different. We define as greater those with more deeds, those who do more, or have more. God defines greater as those who have less and are less. John had a great deal. Followers, prestige, etc. Everyone knew John the Baptist. Mary, well, she followed Jesus around. She was pretty humble. She had very little, very little mention, and was very little. So it would make sense that John is great and yet least in the kingdom of God. Yet that Mary could be greater than John. The dichotomy of the verse speaks very much to this. Because if John is least in heaven, then obviously there are some greater than he.

(This is just an additional argument. FSW covers it pretty well.)

And have you even addressed what FSW has mentioned at all? Do you even read it? Meh... I hope my above explanation satisfies you. Just because Im Catholic doesnt mean I dont know a thing or two about the confusing nature of humility and various other virtues. I feel that this particular verse does not apply to this discussion as demonstrated by my explanation. Unless you want to read my paper on humility (its gettin kinda long.)

And Solo, I wasnt raised Catholic. I was raised baptist. Saved when I was twelve. So if the RCC turns out to be the crock of lies some of yall make it out to be, at least I got fire insurance ;-). I converted in my freshman year of college two years ago. And I started to refute your statement, but what does it have to do with Mary? So I stopped. But if it relates to my Mother, then please tell me and I will deal with your statements.

 

[Heidi]

+JMJ+

Not at all.


Saint John represents the final prophet of the Old Testament and its perfection, even as he serves as a bridge to the New Testament through his immediate connections to Christ. In the text you have in mind, our Lord was contrasting the very best that the Old Testament could offer as less than the least of the New Covenant, and not as a comparison between the two persons of Saint John and the Blessed Mother. In other words, the least Christian in sanctifying grace has more advantage than those who lived in the pre-Christian period.

Besides, I answered with Sacred Scripture.... Do you disagree with Scripture?

Old Testament? :o John the Baptist was in the New testament! So sorry, you are in error.

And what Jesus meant by the least in the kingdom of heaven is that all those born of God are greater than anyone who is not.

What Jesus meant was that John the Baptist prepared the way for Jesus. He was the first to baptize with water in anticipation of Jesus who would baptize with the Holy Spirit. Therefore, both Jesus and John the [b]baptist were ordained in the womb to complete the task that God had assigned them.

So again, do you disagree with Jesus that among those born of women, there is no greater one than John the Baptist. Yes or no. I do.
Jesus did not qualify it. He simply told the truth. You either believe him or you don't. "He who is not with me is against me."

 

[Heidi]

My response is also verified by Matthew 11:12, "From the days of John the Baptis until now, the kingdom of heaven has been forcefully advancing., and forceful men lay hold of it." So now there are 2 passages of Christ with which you disagree.

So Jesus makes it quite clear that John was the beginning of the New testament. And that's why he was greater than all other people.

By contrast, what Jesus says of Mary can be found in Mark 6: 4, "Only in his hometown, among his relatives and in his own house is a prophet without honor." Now there are 3 passages of Christ with which you disagree.

Luke 11:27, When a woman in the crowd yelled,; "Blessed is the mother who gave you birth and nursed you", Jesus replied; "Blessed rather are those who hear the Word of God and obey it." Now there are 4 passages of Christ with which you disagree.

So it is clear that Mary was not high on Jesus's list of great people. I believe him. You don't have to.

 

[Fulton Sheen's Warrior]

+JMJ+

Our Lord was drawing a comparison between the Old and New Covenant periods, not between the Baptist and the Blessed Mother.

The chief role of the Old Testament prophet was to prepare the way of the Lord.
In effect, John the Baptist was the last prophet of the Old Testament and greatest of all the Old Testament figures.

Yet in the order of grace given in the New Testament, even the least exceeds what the Old had to offer.

Jesus was saying that no one of the old covenant was greater than John the Baptist.

But the least of the New Covenant are still greater than John the Baptist.

Summing up:

Fallen Man- John was the greatest man born of a woman

Redeemed Man- The least of the redeemed are still greater than John

 

[Heidi]

+JMJ+

Our Lord was drawing a comparison between the Old and New Covenant periods, not between the Baptist and the Blessed Mother.

The chief role of the Old Testament prophet was to prepare the way of the Lord.
In effect, John the Baptist was the last prophet of the Old Testament and greatest of all the Old Testament figures.

Yet in the order of grace given in the New Testament, even the least exceeds what the Old had to offer.

Jesus was saying that no one of the old covenant was greater than John the Baptist.

But the least of the New Covenant are still greater than John the Baptist.

Summing up:

Fallen Man- John was the greatest man born of a woman

Redeemed Man- The least of the redeemed are still greater than John

You know, how anyone can blatantly lie like you do with no conscience and call himself a Christian is someone who is deceived beyond comprehension. You not only blatantly and openly disagree with Jesus, but John the Baptist is not in the list of OT prophets. Your desperation at trying to justify calling Mary sinless leads you to have to lie about the bible. And since you have to lie to make a point, then you have no point. Therefore, it's a waste of time talking to a dishonest person.

 

[belovedwolfofgod]

You know, how anyone can blatantly lie like you do with no conscience and call himself a Christian is someone who is deceived beyond comprehension. You not only blatantly and openly disagree with Jesus, but John the Baptist is not in the list of OT prophets. Your desperation at trying to justify calling Mary sinless leads you to have to lie about the bible. And since you have to lie to make a point, then you have no point. Therefore, it's a waste of time talking to a dishonest person.

Charity...

and he wasnt lieing... no more than anyone else... and his methods dont seem desperate... he doesnt keep changing the subject with random verses... and he responds to what you have to say Heidi.

But for the sake of discussion, prove that he is lying. Build a case. State it.

 

[Heidi]

You know, how anyone can blatantly lie like you do with no conscience and call himself a Christian is someone who is deceived beyond comprehension. You not only blatantly and openly disagree with Jesus, but John the Baptist is not in the list of OT prophets. Your desperation at trying to justify calling Mary sinless leads you to have to lie about the bible. And since you have to lie to make a point, then you have no point. Therefore, it's a waste of time talking to a dishonest person.

Charity...

and he wasnt lieing... no more than anyone else... and his methods dont seem desperate... he doesnt keep changing the subject with random verses... and he responds to what you have to say Heidi.

But for the sake of discussion, prove that he is lying. Build a case. State it.

So please show me where John the Baptist is listed as an OT prophet and we can see who is lying right now.

 

[Heidi]

And by the way, John the Baptist did not preach OT law, he preached the forgiveness of sins through repentence and baptism, which is the new convenant, not the old. He also lived at the time of Jesus, not at the time of the OT prophets. And most importantly, Jesus said that ever since John the Baptist, the kingdom of heaven has been advancing. So you are blatantly lying and have no conscience about it. Therefore, I'll leave you to your deceptions. My conscience is clear.

You have also not explained what a made-up gospel is, belovedwolf, so it is clear that you can't distinguish between truth and fantasy. So even listening to you is a waste of time.

 

[thessalonian]

You know, how anyone can blatantly lie like you do with no conscience and call himself a Christian is someone who is deceived beyond comprehension. You not only blatantly and openly disagree with Jesus, but John the Baptist is not in the list of OT prophets. Your desperation at trying to justify calling Mary sinless leads you to have to lie about the bible. And since you have to lie to make a point, then you have no point. Therefore, it's a waste of time talking to a dishonest person.

Charity...

and he wasnt lieing... no more than anyone else... and his methods dont seem desperate... he doesnt keep changing the subject with random verses... and he responds to what you have to say Heidi.

But for the sake of discussion, prove that he is lying. Build a case. State it.

So please show me where John the Baptist is listed as an OT prophet and we can see who is lying right now.

My guess is many of your protestant brothers and sisters would disagree with you on whether JTB was an OT or NT prophet. They even think that Peter was preaching the old law. :o

 

[belovedwolfofgod]

You have also not explained what a made-up gospel is, belovedwolf, so it is clear that you can't distinguish between truth and fantasy. So even listening to you is a waste of time.

Sorry. I forgot about that point. :

A made up gospel.... how about the gospel of Thomas? Thats a good one. Its made up because it isnt inspired by the Holy Spirit... unlike Apotolic Tradition. :D

and I second what Thess said... to keep the topic on track, that it.

 

[Heidi]

You know, how anyone can blatantly lie like you do with no conscience and call himself a Christian is someone who is deceived beyond comprehension. You not only blatantly and openly disagree with Jesus, but John the Baptist is not in the list of OT prophets. Your desperation at trying to justify calling Mary sinless leads you to have to lie about the bible. And since you have to lie to make a point, then you have no point. Therefore, it's a waste of time talking to a dishonest person.

Charity...

and he wasnt lieing... no more than anyone else... and his methods dont seem desperate... he doesnt keep changing the subject with random verses... and he responds to what you have to say Heidi.

But for the sake of discussion, prove that he is lying. Build a case. State it.

So please show me where John the Baptist is listed as an OT prophet and we can see who is lying right now.

My guess is many of your protestant brothers and sisters would disagree with you on whether JTB was an OT or NT prophet. They even think that Peter was preaching the old law. :o

I don't care how many people agree or disgaree with me! John the Baptist is not in the OT because the New Testament starts out witht the birth of Jesus and John the Baptist. All you have to do is consult your bible to find that out. By your reasoning, then paul would also be an OT prophet! :roll:

But more importantly, Jesus tells us that "Ever since John, the kingdom of heaven has been slowly advancing." So it's what Jesus says, not what people say. But unfortunately, since you don't care what Jesus says, you look to your friends and neighbors for the truth. It is obviously them whom you worship or you'd agree with Jesus when he says we have one teacher and that is the Christ. But the way the catholics pervert the gospel is an embarrassment to their "faith."

 

[ChristineES]

Now I know why Ireland was at war all this time. :wink:

:-D

 

[Heidi]

Now I know why Ireland was at war all this time. :wink:

:-D

It's too bad. If everyone believed the bible and didn't make up their own gospels or doctrines and simply believed what the bible says, no more, no less, there would be no division.

 

[ttg]

Now I know why Ireland was at war all this time. :wink:

:-D

It's too bad. If everyone believed the bible and didn't make up their own gospels or doctrines and simply believed what the bible says, no more, no less, there would be no division.

Is this why there are 10,000+ Protestant denominations? Because they all agree with each other? Maybe you should (metaphorically) slap some of your Protestant friends with your Bible instead of attacking Catholics all the time.

Own a Bible? Thank a Catholic. :D

 

[Heidi]

Now I know why Ireland was at war all this time. :wink:

:-D

It's too bad. If everyone believed the bible and didn't make up their own gospels or doctrines and simply believed what the bible says, no more, no less, there would be no division.

Is this why there are 10,000+ Protestant denominations? Because they all agree with each other? Maybe you should (metaphorically) slap some of your Protestant friends with your Bible instead of attacking Catholics all the time.

Own a Bible? Thank a Catholic. :D

I said nothing about protestants and catholics. I disgree with anyone who disagrees with Christ whether or not they are catholic or protestant, and any Christian should do the same if their loyalty is to Christ alone.

 

[mutzrein]

Heidi

I've tried to skim through a few posts since I've been absent due to PC failure - and still struggling with the consequences of that. :

Anyway . . . could you please give me your understanding of the point in history at which the old covenant was superceded by the new.

Thanks