Yes, a very true observation. Born again people will describe themselves as Christian whatever background they are from but a catholic will always say they are Catholic.
The Case for the Sinless Ever-Virgin Mary.
- Thread starter Soulx3
- Start date
-
Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.
You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Athanasius377
Member
I have to disagree with the exegesis because if what you say is true regrading John 20:17, then what do you do with do you do with Matt 28:9?
28 Now after the Sabbath, toward the dawn of the first day of the week, Mary Magdalene and the other Mary went to see the tomb. 2 And behold, there was a great earthquake, for an angel of the Lord descended from heaven and came and rolled back the stone and sat on it. 3 His appearance was like lightning, and his clothing white as snow. 4 And for fear of him the guards trembled and became like dead men. 5 But the angel said to the women, “Do not be afraid, for I know that you seek Jesus who was crucified. 6 He is not here, for he has risen, as he said. Come, see the place where he lay. 7 Then go quickly and tell his disciples that he has risen from the dead, and behold, he is going before you to Galilee; there you will see him. See, I have told you.” 8 So they departed quickly from the tomb with fear and great joy, and ran to tell his disciples. 9 And behold, Jesus met them and said, “Greetings!” And they came up and took hold of his feet and worshiped him. 10 Then Jesus said to them, “Do not be afraid; go and tell my brothers to go to Galilee, and there they will see me.”
The Holy Bible: English Standard Version. Crossway Bibles, 2016, p. Mt 28:1–10.
It would see to me, based on the fact that Mary Magdalene touched the feet of Jesus and that the prohibition from touching him will be reversed in John 20:27 that the command is to "stop doing something" rather than to "not start doing something". We simply are not told why Jesus gave Mary Magdalene this command and anything beyond this would be pointless speculation.
Matthew's account of the physical contact with Mary Magdalene et al, and John's account of Jesus telling Mary Magdalene not to touch him, are just different, and there's no need to try to harmonize them. John simply had a different point he wanted to make. His gospel often differs from the Synoptics. It's no big deal. The Bible is chock full of different accounts of the same event. (See my Post # 252.)
Ronald Nolette
Well-Known Member
All of this is lying about me.
Repeating the same line doesn't change your responsibility to provide evidence. This is a discussion, either defend your points you make or stop being part of the discussion.
How will we know if you keep them hidden. You make a claim then simply say, you won't believe it, or trust me, but refuse to show why you believe what you believe, this is foolishness.
YOur second paragraph is irrelevant to this discussion. Your third paragraph makes you sound like a Mormon" if you pray on it long enough, you will see the truth of what I say".
Now you have added abominations to this discussion. what abominations are you even talking about? You have not written one in your responses to me.
Correction: it would be a waste of your time to quote from Maria Valtorta. Her writings are not "Scripture." Ditto for Anne Emmerich's The Dolorous Passion of Our Lord Jesus Christ (1833). Ditto for lots of books that purport to recount events pertaining to Christ.
Which is (partially) WHY God chose a particular female’s UN-DEFILED VIRGIN WOMB to enter…NOT the corrupt Flesh of a female.
IF Jesus, God incarnate WERE FULLY HUMAN….
He would be A LIAR, and THE CREATED out of Dust of the Earth, as expressly APPLIES to Humans.
How did you MISS Scriptural teaching, that SPIRITS, have the POWER and ABILITY, “can and have and do” APPEAR in the “LIKENESS” of men?
Do you REALLY BELIEVE “SPIRITS”…
BECOME humans?
IF so, WHAT information and source taught you that?
Last edited:
No.
It is according to Scriptural Teaching to USE Scripture to VERIFY what one hears, being claimed to be Scriptural.
Regarding SIN, the exact words, “WITHOUT SIN”, are not necessary, BUT words that reveal, having had no sin, sinless, IN CONTEXT that would reveal your point regarding Mary.
What Scriptural teaching speaks ABOUT Mary having NO SIN?
Athanasius377
Member
I don't disagree at all. Where I was taking exception was trying to define the why not the what. I have a ridiculous number of commentaries and ALL of them turn themselves inside out trying to define the why in John 20:17. At the end of the day I am happy letting the text stand as is and like other passages, I will ask the Lord when I meet him as to why.
Sorry I can't help much with the Why. Above my pay grade . . .
Nancy
Well-Known Member
Why would Mary say this to Jesus if she did not need a savior??
Luke 1:46–47 “My soul proclaims the greatness of the Lord; my spirit rejoices in God my savior.”
And, If she were a perpetual virgin, would she not have had to be born to "perfect parents", so on, and so on, and so on and...?
Luke 1:46–47 “My soul proclaims the greatness of the Lord; my spirit rejoices in God my savior.”
And, If she were a perpetual virgin, would she not have had to be born to "perfect parents", so on, and so on, and so on and...?
Nancy
Well-Known Member
17" Jesus saith unto her, Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father: but go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and to my God, and your God."
It says in Matthew 28:9, that some other women held Jesus's feet and worshiped him. Also, He invited all the disciples to touch Him, not just Thomas, not sure of the verse but, you know the one
It says in Matthew 28:9, that some other women held Jesus's feet and worshiped him. Also, He invited all the disciples to touch Him, not just Thomas, not sure of the verse but, you know the one
Luke 1:26-28 – In the sixth month the angel Gabriel was sent from God to a city of Galilee named Nazareth, to a virgin betrothed to a man whose name was Joseph, of the house of David; and the virgin's name was Mary. And he came to her and said, “Hail, full of grace, the Lord is with you!”
Article 1. Whether the Blessed Virgin was sanctified before her birth from the womb?
Objection 1. It would seem that the Blessed Virgin was not sanctified before her birth from the womb. For the Apostle says (1 Corinthians 15:46): "That was not first which is spiritual but that which is natural; afterwards that which is spiritual." But by sanctifying grace man is born spiritually into a son of God according to John 1:13: "(who) are born of God." But birth from the womb is a natural birth. Therefore the Blessed Virgin was not sanctified before her birth from the womb.Objection 2. Further, Augustine says (Ep. ad Dardan.): "The sanctification, by which we become temples of God, is only of those who are born again." But no one is born again, who was not born previously. Therefore the Blessed Virgin was not sanctified before her birth from the womb.
Objection 3. Further, whoever is sanctified by grace is cleansed from sin, both original and actual. If, therefore, the Blessed Virgin was sanctified before her birth from the womb, it follows that she was then cleansed from original sin. Now nothing but original sin could hinder her from entering the heavenly kingdom. If therefore she had died then, it seems that she would have entered the gates of heaven. But this was not possible before the Passion of Christ, according to the Apostle (Hebrews 10:19): "We have [Vulgate: 'having'] therefore a confidence in the entering into the Holies by His blood." It seems therefore that the Blessed Virgin was not sanctified before her birth from the womb.
Objection 4. Further, original sin is contracted through the origin, just as actual sin is contracted through an act. But as long as one is in the act of sinning, one cannot be cleansed from actual sin. Therefore neither could the Blessed Virgin be cleansed from original sin as long as she was in the act of origin, by existence in her mother's womb.
On the contrary, The Church celebrates the feast of our Lady's Nativity. Now the Church does not celebrate feasts except of those who are holy. Therefore even in her birth the Blessed Virgin was holy. Therefore she was sanctified in the womb.
I answer that, Nothing is handed down in the canonical Scriptures concerning the sanctification of the Blessed Mary as to her being sanctified in the womb; indeed, they do not even mention her birth. But as Augustine, in his tractate on the Assumption of the Virgin, argues with reason, since her body was assumed into heaven, and yet Scripture does not relate this; so it may be reasonably argued that she was sanctified in the womb. For it is reasonable to believe that she, who brought forth "the Only-Begotten of the Father full of grace and truth," received greater privileges of grace than all others: hence we read (Luke 1:28) that the angel addressed her in the words: "Hail full of grace!"
Moreover, it is to be observed that it was granted, by way of privilege, to others, to be sanctified in the womb; for instance, to Jeremias, to whom it was said (Jeremiah 1:5): "Before thou camest forth out of the womb, I sanctified thee"; and again, to John the Baptist, of whom it is written (Luke 1:15): "He shall be filled with the Holy Ghost even from his mother's womb." It is therefore with reason that we believe the Blessed Virgin to have been sanctified before her birth from the womb.
Reply to Objection 1. Even in the Blessed Virgin, first was that which is natural, and afterwards that which is spiritual: for she was first conceived in the flesh, and afterwards sanctified in the spirit.
Reply to Objection 2. Augustine speaks according to the common law, by reason of which no one is regenerated by the sacraments, save those who are previously born. But God did not so limit His power to the law of the sacraments, but that He can bestow His grace, by special privilege, on some before they are born from the womb.
Reply to Objection 3. The Blessed Virgin was sanctified in the womb from original sin, as to the personal stain; but she was not freed from the guilt to which the whole nature is subject, so as to enter into Paradise otherwise than through the Sacrifice of Christ; the same also is to be said of the Holy Fathers who lived before Christ.
Reply to Objection 4. Original sin is transmitted through the origin, inasmuch as through the origin the human nature is transmitted, and original sin, properly speaking, affects the nature. And this takes place when the off-spring conceived is animated. Wherefore nothing hinders the offspring conceived from being sanctified after animation: for after this it remains in the mother's womb not for the purpose of receiving human nature, but for a certain perfecting of that which it has already received.
SUMMA THEOLOGIAE: The sanctification of the Blessed Virgin (Tertia Pars, Q. 27)
Was the Blessed Virgin, Mother of God, sanctified before her birth from the womb? Was she sanctified before animation? Was the fomes of sin entirely taken away from her in virtue of this sanctification? Was the result of this sanctification that she never sinned? In virtue of this...
It is commonly described as consisting of three parts. The first, "Hail (Mary) full of grace, the Lord is with thee, blessed art thou amongst women", embodies the words used by the Angel Gabriel in saluting the Blessed Virgin (Luke, I, 28). The second, "and blessed is the fruit of thy womb (Jesus)", is borrowed from the Divinely inspired greeting of St. Elizabeth (Luke 1:42), which attaches itself the more naturally to the first part, because the words "benedicta tu in mulieribus" (I, 28) or "inter mulieres" (I, 42) are common to both salutations. Finally, the petition "Holy Mary, Mother of God, pray for us sinners now and at the hour of our death. Amen." is stated by the official "Catechism of the Council of Trent" to have been framed by the Church itself. "Most rightly", says the Catechism, "has the Holy Church of God added to this thanksgiving, petition also and the invocation of the most holy Mother of God, thereby implying that we should piously and suppliantly have recourse to her in order that by her intercession she may reconcile God with us sinners and obtain for us the blessing we need both for this present life and for the life which has no end."
www.newadvent.org
CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA: Hail Mary
Analysis of the prayer Ave Maria: origins and development
The fact of the Annunciation of the Blessed Virgin Mary is related in Luke 1:26-38. The Evangelist tells us that in the sixth month after the conception of St. John the Baptist by Elizabeth, the angel Gabriel was sent from God to the Virgin Mary, at Nazareth, a small town in the mountains of Galilee. Mary was of the house of David, and was espoused (i.e. married) to Joseph, of the same royal family. She had, however, not yet entered the household of her spouse, but was still in her mother's house, working, perhaps, over her dowry. (Bardenhewer, Maria Verk., 69). And the angel having taken the figure and the form of man, came into the house and said to her: "Hail, full of grace (to whom is given grace, favoured one), the Lord is with thee." Mary having heard the greeting words did not speak; she was troubled in spirit, since she knew not the angel, nor the cause of his coming, nor the meaning of the salutation. And the angel continued and said: "Fear not, Mary, for thou hast found grace with God. Behold thou shalt conceive in thy womb, and shalt bring forth a son; and thou shalt call his name Jesus. He shall be great, and shall be called the Son of the Most High; and the Lord God shall give unto him the throne of David his father; and he shall reign in the house of Jacob forever. And of his kingdom there shall be no end." The Virgin understood that there was question of the coming Redeemer. But, why should she be elected from amongst women for the splendid dignity of being the mother of the Messiah, having vowed her virginity to God? (St. Augustine). Therefore, not doubting the word of God like Zachary, but filled with fear and astonishment, she said: "How shall this be done, because I know not man?"
www.newadvent.org
CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA: The Annunciation of the Blessed Virgin Mary
In the sixth month after the conception of St. John the Baptist by Elizabeth, the angel Gabriel was sent from God to the Virgin Mary
Looks like the whole doctrine comes from "full of grace", I guess as a cleansing from sin.
Luke 1:35
Christian Standard Bible
35 The angel replied to her, “The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you. Therefore, the holy one to be born will be called the Son of God.
Luke 1:35
Christian Standard Bible
35 The angel replied to her, “The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you. Therefore, the holy one to be born will be called the Son of God.
Jn. 20:17 is an example of God dwelling among sinners, but evil (sin) being unable to dwell with God, which supports my statement that Ps. 5:4 and Jn. 1:14 are both true. How this ties into your belief that dwelling within a sinful human is the same as dwelling among them is that while God became human and dwelt among sinners, He is still the Most Holy and Pure One, Who lives in the Kingdom of Purity where no one impure can enter, and through Scripture says that the virtues of holiness and purity are to be respected in Him and achieved within ourselves with His help. Additionally, God says those pure in heart (not impure in thought, word, and deed) will see Him (Matt. 5:8). For these reasons and others, why would God (Purity) enter and Incarnate Himself within One Who is not completely Pure, and when He could have done so in someone who is completely Pure? Or, do you not have an answer to that?
I see you didn't do a thorough research into Maria Valtorta and her writings. Do you want to go back and fact check the information in the articles you've supposedly read?
You say that as if you've read Maria Valtorta's following writings, but you haven't. In 1943, Maria took dictation from Jesus and other heavenly persons, as well as received visions of scenes from the Gospels, including scenes not mentioned in the four Gospels. At Jesus’ request, she wrote everything she saw and heard, filling 122 notebooks totaling 15,000 pages. Maria received most of the revelations before 1947, but they continued until 1953. Her writings were compiled into the following books: The Gospel As It Was Revealed To Me, or The Poem of the Man-God: Vols. I–V (a Work on the Life of Jesus), The Notebooks: 1943, The Notebooks: 1944, The Notebooks: 1945-1950, The Little Notebooks, The Lessons of St. Paul to the Romans, The End Times, and The Book of Azariah.
As for me, I do own and have read/are re-reading all those books. I've also familiarized myself with the arguments of those who criticize and support Maria Valtorta's writings. I and others have been refuting her critics for years with ease. I know, for example, that they come from Jesus on a spiritual, historical, mathematical, astronomical, geographical, agricultural, and cartographical, standpoint, thanks to Him, further validated by the professionals in the aforementioned fields who have analyzed and tested the credibility of Maria Valtorta personally and her literary works. Below are just a few. If you're unwilling to read the thousands of pages she's written, hopefully you're capable of reading a handful of paragraphs:
(i) The results from the mathematical analysis of Maria Valtorta's Work by Professor Emilio Matricciani and Dr. Liberato De Caro, where they concluded:
(ii) The results from the astronomical and meteorological analysis of Maria Valtorta's Work by Professor Emilio Matricciani and Dr. Liberato De Caro, where they concluded:
(iii) In David Webster, M.Div.'s chapter "Proof by Geography and Topography and Archaeology" of A Summa and Encyclopedia to Maria Valtorta’s Extraordinary Work, he relates:
(iv) In professional engineer Jean-François Lavère's The Valtorta Enigma, he writes:
Last edited:
While God became human and dwelt among sinners, He is still the Most Holy and Pure One, Who lives in the Kingdom of Purity where no one impure can enter, and through Scripture says that the virtues of holiness and purity are to be respected in Him and achieved within ourselves with His help. Additionally, God says those pure in heart (not impure in thought, word, and deed) will see Him (Matt. 5:8). For these reasons and others, why would God (Purity) enter and Incarnate Himself within One Who is not completely Pure, and when He could have done so in someone who is completely Pure?
Jesus and Mary Herself explicitly explain why God preserved Her from inheriting the stain of original sin, as well as why She didn't commit sins. However, again, their explicit words (spoken in modern day) are found in books that aren't found in the books that make up the Bible, and thus you automatically reject it. Therefore, it'd be a waste of my time to quote from Scripture that you reject. Unfortunately, you presently limit the knowledge of God to the books that make up the Bible (despite His apostle John mentioning twice that not everything Jesus said and did is written, etc.), but I don't because God can't and shouldn't be limited to any book(s). There is and will only ever be four Gospels (Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John), but you can't forbid God from revealing information about His and His Mother's earthly life that isn't mentioned in the writings that make up the Bible, and they have/do.
Regarding your claims, you, like most Protestants, demand others to provide scriptural verses that explicitly appear in the Bible for what they believe in order to be true, but you don't abide by that standard yourself. If you did, then you wouldn't be stating as a fact that Mary of Joseph inherited the stain of original sin and committed sins, because nowhere in Scripture does it say "only Jesus was without sin," nor that "only Jesus never committed sins." Jesus, including, for example, children who have died without having committed sins, are exceptions to the "all have sinned" (Rom. 3:22). For these reasons, Rom. 3:22 isn't proof Mary sinned, nor that She can't also be an exception. Therefore, either accept that and abide by your own standard, or stop participating in the discussion on this topic.
Expressly HOW ?
Do you KNOW ?
Can you SAY?
within ?
Completely? Completely Pure?
According to SCRIPTURE…
* The WORD of God “IS” a “Holy THING”.
* THAT “Holy Thing” came forth out from God.
* THAT “Holy Thing” (while it came forth out from God, ALSO Remained IN and WITH God.
* THAT “Holy Thing”, WAS SENT TO an UNDEFILED VIRGIN WOMB….NOT the “COMPLETE” impure human being called Mary.
* THAT “Holy Thing”, was NOT CREATED…but SENT FORTH out FROM GOD.
* THAT “Holy Thing”, entered Mary’s VIRGIN WOMB, BY the POWER of God COMING “UPON” Mary, NOT WITHIN the Whole Complete OF Mary’s BODY.
* God PREPARED a BODY, FOR “THAT (HIS) HOLY THING”.
* PREPARED, does not mean ”CREATED”
* THAT “HOLY Thing”, IN God, called Gods Word, called God, God Named JESUS….ALREADY HAD a BODY…
A Heavenly Holy Body….WHICH IS INVISIBLE TO THE EYES OF HUMAN MANKIND!
* THE PREPARATION God DID, By and Through and Of HIS DESIRE, HIS WILL, HIS POWER….WAS to “MAKE” Gods BODY HAVE, FLESH, (APPEAR to manKIND, IN THE LIKENESS AS Man-KIND Expressly FOR “MAN-KIND” to have the ability TO “SEE” HIM, face to face.
* Likeness AS does not mean IS .
WHEN God, by, through, of Christ Jesus, OFFERED, and “MAKES” a Human man “IN” the “LIKENESS AS GOD”…
Do you BELIEVE…God “IS” MAKING a HUMAN man BECOME “God”?
SAME…as YOU PREACH, God BECAME a “CREATED HUMAN MAN” ?
That is a FALSE presumption.
No HUMAN man IS naturally born completely Pure, (holy).
Human manKIND BODY, is created from the Dust of the Earth.
* YOU preach YOUR SAVIOR “IS” Human manKIND.
No where does Scripture State or Imply, Gods WORD, Gods SON, Gods Offered SAVIOR “OF” human manKIND, Bodily came forth OUT from the Dust of the Earth.
You have fallen FOR, corrupt false teaching OF MEN, reducing Gods Savior of ManKIND, to an on its face, ridiculous, mathematical equation of 100% AND 100% equals ONE WHOLE.
WHEN, whatever you FIRST Learned …. And should have CONTINUED Learning ABOUT Jesus Christ…
“He IS THE SAME, yesterday, today, and forever”… Heb 13:8
IF Jesus was A HUMAN…(AS YOU SAY)…that IS WHAT Jesus WAS yesterday, IS today, and SHALL BE forever.
However I BELIEVE God…(as God REVEALS and APPROVED) that His (Gods) Word came forth OUT OF Gods Mouth, and appeared to manKIND, in the “LIKENESS” AS an Earthly manKIND of being (human), IN A BODY God “PREPARED”, for WHEN He would be SENT forth OUT of Gods MOUTH, TO Earth, TO be SEEN by, HEARD of, TAUGHT to Earthly men.
Glory to God,
Taken
Last edited:
Similar threads
