Quote:
Originally Posted by Troy
Mary is shown to have made mistakes in the Bible that stem from disobedience and sin, so the RCC is wrong that Mary was preserved from original sin since the Scriptures do not agree with this claim, though man's traditions very well may, but such traditions are certainly not holy.
I'm not talking about man's traditions, but Holy Tradtion, apostolic teaching. The bible does not suggest Mary ever sinned.
Quote:
Christians can be full of grace. This is compatible with being saved. Some are carnal, some are spiritual. Morever, the purpose of the Bible is not to pick away at Mary's sins, so recording her sins through her years serves no purpose. Nonetheless, we know that no person has never not sinned, including Mary. Though her mistakes in the Bible should not be construed as directly being sin, they were disobedience and mistakes made through overassuming, not in harmony with God's will.
Sin takes away grace, which is the problem of being 'full of grace'. If you would like to cite examples of Mary 'sinning', go for it.
Quote:
The early church did not believe Mary was sinless, for the early church recording is the NT, and nothing indicates in the Scriptures she became sinless after the mistakes she made and preserved in the Word. Therefore, she is not a co-redeemer, but she was redeemed by the atonement.
We both agree she was redeemed by the atonement, your understanding of co-redeemer is wrong. "The mistakes she made"- I see no mistakes. Thus, the early Church and the NT do not express she was a sinner.
Quote:
God said all flesh is born of the flesh. It is stated plainly, "that which is born of the flesh is flesh" (John 3.6). All flesh is corruptible and must die because of sin. God is the only exception in the flesh for we know God broke into creation to take on the likeness of flesh. There is no exception to the rule of the flesh except God when God breaks into creation. Mary is not a co-redeemer.
Co-redeemer- wrong understanding, again. You are taking verses which we know have exceptions and trying to apply them generally.
Quote:
Specifics were already given. Your conscience is not attuned to what was already said. That is why when she erred Jesus had to correct her, "woman, what have I to do with thee? mine hour is not yet come" (John 2.4) as was the case elsewhere in the Scriptures when she erred. She was mistaken in both presumptuously overassuming the timing and her thinking she had something to do with Jesus. Such is lack of humility and obedience, and overt and inordinate self-interest as mothers may tend towards to their children. This part of the human condition needs to be overcome. Don't you make the same mistake!
That has nothing to do with not being humble or being disobedient. As far as not knowing, even Jesus did not know everything. Your argument is that not knowing and stating so is 'disobedient' and sinful.
Quote:
Jesus had to correct her. Who can deny this?
"John 2:1 And the third day there was a marriage in Cana of Galilee; and the mother of Jesus was there:
John 2:2 And both Jesus was called, and his disciples, to the marriage.
John 2:3 And when they wanted wine, the mother of Jesus saith unto him, They have no wine.
John 2:4 Jesus saith unto her, Woman, what have I to do with thee? mine hour is not yet come.
John 2:5 His mother saith unto the servants, Whatsoever he saith unto you, do [it]."
You are exaggerating Jesus' words. She is hardly being unhumble or disobedient. "They have no wine". You are adding words and seeing an attitude clearly not there. What you are doing is creating an attitude to his words, then making judgments about Mary from that attitude.
Quote:
Does this mean all Roman Catholics are going to hell. Certainly not, but a great percentage are, more than most denominations given such a heretical teaching of the idolatry of a goddess, which is a false fruit that does not flow from Christ, and a symption of unsalvation.
Believing Mary was not sinless, because of Jesus' death and resurrection is not 'idolatry of a goddess'. The idea that such a belief is salvation dependent makes non sense. Finally, God is the only judge of mankind.
Quote:
If you say Mary was not born sinless then you are saying she was born into sin and that all who are born into sin do sin. So you would be agreeing with me Mary was a sinner and the RCC is wrong in claiming Mary was sinless.
I disagree with you- Mary was born without original sin. The Catholic Church is right on the issue.
Quote:
It takes the eye off Christ since it places Mary on equal position with Jesus in both being sinless.
It does not place Mary equal with Jesus.
Jesus is God, the second person of the Godhead. God is divine, Mary is mortal. Mary is the child of man, Jesus is the Son of God. Jesus was born without sin. Mary was born without original sin only because of the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. That is not 'equal'
Quote:
I agree. Mary was not preserved from original sin, and thus, those who believe that she was, though may not absolutely guarantee their unsalvation, but certainly in general terms would indicate a greater percentage per capita of Roman Catholics would be unsaved than would be the case in other denominations. That seems to be a fair statement, since most other denominations do not have this goddess idolatry of a sinless goddess.
Catholics do not have a goddess idolatry, so your threats of condemnation are non-applicable. Again, neither are you God and not the judge of a human soul.