Judas Went to His Own Place – A Biblical Verdict of Eternal Judgment

[Origen]

From the earlier article I posted.

“A monument to pseudo-religiosity”: A case against <i>The Poem of the Man-God</i>

www.catholicworldreport.com

I don't think Maria's apostle actually read anything I shared and that proves she was not considered credible by the church.

" on April 17, 1993, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith directed the Italian Bishops’ Conference to order this disclaimer placed in future re-issues of the Poem: “…the ‘visions’ and ‘dictations’ referred to in it are simply literary forms used by the author to narrate in her own way the life of Jesus. They cannot be considered supernatural in origin.” "

That is the Doctrine of the Faith's current opinion (and they didn't even explain why), and they've been wrong before. You should read the following article: Response to the Vatican's 2025 Press Release on Maria Valtorta, as well as A Summa and Encyclopedia to Maria Valtorta’s Extraordinary Work, especially the chapters on proofs in support of her writings having a supernatural origin.

As Jesus himself explains to Valtorta, the New Testament needs to be supplemented (I: p. 432) because of the evangelists’ “unbreakable Jewish frame of mind.”

Firstly, according to your source, the words "unbreakable Jewish frame of mind" are found in The Poem of the Man-God: Vol. I, p. 432, but they aren't. Rather Vol. V, p. 479.

Secondly, your source claims that Jesus told Maria Valtorta that "the New Testament needs to be supplemented because of the evangelists’ “unbreakable Jewish frame of mind.” Jesus actually said, "Some people, when reading this Work, will object: "It does not appear from the Gospel that Jesus was in touch with Romans and Greeks, and consequently we reject these pages." How many things do not appear from the Gospel, or can just be detected behind thick curtains of silence, drawn by the Evangelists on episodes, of which they did not approve, because of their unbreakable Jewish frame of mind! Do you think that you know everything I did? I solemnly tell you that not even after reading and accepting this illustration of My public life will you know everything about Me. I would have killed My little John, in the fatigue of reporting all the days of My ministry and all the actions performed on each day, if I had made him acquainted with everything so that he might transmit everything to you! "Then there were other things done by Jesus, which if written one by one, I think that the world would not be able to contain the books that should be written" says John. Apart from the hyperbole, I solemnly tell you that if all My single actions had to be written, all My particular lessons, My penances and prayers to save a soul, it would have taken the halls of one of your libraries, and one of the largest, to contain the books speaking of Me. And I also solemnly tell you that it would be much more advantageous for you to burn so much useless dusty poisonous science, to make room for My books, than to know so little of Me and worship so much that press that is almost always soiled with lust and heresy."

Their “flowery and pompous” Hebrew style kept them from writing everything that God wished. (V: p. 947). So nineteen centuries later, he finds a worthy secretary in Valtorta, his "Little John," to expand what the Apostle St. John and the others wrote.

Firstly, according to your source, the words “flowery and pompous” are found in The Poem of the Man-God: Vol. V, p. 947, but they aren't. Rather Vol. V, p. 479.

Secondly, by "their" your source is referring to the apostles and is claiming that Jesus said the apostle's flowery and pompous Hebrew style kept them from writing everything that God wished for, which is a LIE. Jesus was actually referring to Maria Valtorta and what she heard Mary say to Jesus in the visions she received and described when He said, "To those who consider Mary's love for Jesus too affectionate, I say that they should consider who Mary was: the Woman without sin and therefore without fault in Her love towards God, towards Her relatives, towards Her spouse, towards Her Son, towards Her neighbor; they should consider what the Mother saw in Me beside seeing the Son of Her womb, and finally that they should consider the nationality of Mary. Hebrew race, eastern race, and times very remote from the present ones. So the explanation of certain verbal amplifications, that may seem exaggerated to you, ensues from these elements. The eastern and Hebrew styles are flowery and pompous also when commonly spoken. All the writings of that time and of that race prove it, and in the course of ages the eastern style has not changed very much.

As twenty centuries later you have to examine these pages, when the wickedness of life has killed so much love, would you expect Me to give you a Mary of Nazareth similar to the arid superficial woman of your days? Mary is what She is, and the sweet, pure, loving Girl of Israel, the Spouse of God. The Virgin Mother of God cannot be changed into an excessively morbidly exalted woman, or into a glacially selfish one of your days."

And, Jesus gave Maria Valtorta the nickname "little John" for the following reason: "John, to place her close to the Evangelist who was the favorite disciple. Little, because of the dependence of her Work, although quite extensive, on those of the Evangelists who, in short manuscripts, enclosed what is essential." And, Jesus's seven reasons for The Poem of the Man-God can be read here.

“There is nothing of my own in this work,” she insists. (I: p. 57) She presents herself as a mere transmitter of Divine content."

Firstly, according to your source, the words "There is nothing of my own in this work" are found in The Poem of the Man-God: Vol. I, p. 432, but they aren't. Rather Vol. I, p. 34.

Secondly, after a vision Maria Valtorta received and described on September 2nd, 1944, Maria Valtorta added the following: "A note of mine. All day yesterday I thought I was going to see the news of the death of Her parents being given to Mary by Zacharias, I do not know why. I also thought, in my way, that Jesus would have dealt with the point « remembrance of God by the saints ». This morning, when the vision started, I said to myself: « Here we are, they will now tell Her that She is an orphan » and my heart was already trembling because I would have experienced my own sadness of these past days. Instead there has been absolutely nothing of what I thought I was going to see or hear. Not even one word by mistake. I am very happy about this because it confirms that there is nothing of my own in this work, not even an honest suggestion with regard to one situation. It all comes from a different source. My continuous fear ceases... until the next time because I shall always be afraid of being deceived and deceiving."

This is why it's important to be properly knowledgeable about the subject, in this case The Poem of the Man-God, and verify your source's claims, @Sister-n-Christ.

 

[Scott Downey]

Firstly, according to your source, the words “flowery and pompous” are found in The Poem of the Man-God: Vol. V, p. 947, but they aren't, rather Vol. V, p. 479.

Secondly, by "their" your source is referring to the apostles and is claiming that Jesus said the apostle's flowery and pompous Hebrew style kept them from writing everything that God wished for, which is a LIE. Jesus was actually referring to what Maria Valtorta heard Mary say to Jesus in the visions she received and described when He said, "To those who consider Mary's love for Jesus too affectionate, I say that they should consider who Mary was: the Woman without sin and therefore without fault in Her love towards God, towards Her relatives, towards Her spouse, towards Her Son, towards Her neighbor; they should consider what the Mother saw in Me beside seeing the Son of Her womb, and finally that they should consider the nationality of Mary. Hebrew race, eastern race, and times very remote from the present ones. So the explanation of certain verbal amplifications, that may seem exaggerated to you, ensues from these elements. The eastern and Hebrew styles are flowery and pompous also when commonly spoken. All the writings of that time and of that race prove it, and in the course of ages the eastern style has not changed very much."

You said "I say that they should consider who Mary was: the Woman without sin and therefore without fault in Her love towards God, towards Her relatives, towards Her spouse, towards Her Son, towards Her neighbor; they should consider what the Mother saw in Me beside seeing the Son of Her womb, and finally that they should consider the nationality of Mary."

Thing is no one is without sin, but we are forgiven our sin, as in God does not recall them to judgment. Our sin is not imputed against us.
All have sinned, but that does not mean they continue to sin after they are converted.
Mary was not a sinner, but she must have had sin, as all have sinned.
Believers are not sinners, as that which is born of God cannot and does not sin.
And it is our spirit that is born again, but we still live in a sinful world, and our mind and body can and does sin.
So in that sense we all have sinned.

Romans 8:10
And if Christ is in you, the body is dead because of sin, but the Spirit is life because of righteousness.

1 John 3:8-10
New King James Version
8 He who sins is of the devil, for the devil has sinned from the beginning. For this purpose the Son of God was manifested, that He might destroy the works of the devil. 9 Whoever has been born of God does not sin, for His seed remains in him; and he cannot sin, because he has been born of God.

10 In this the children of God and the children of the devil are manifest: Whoever does not practice righteousness is not of God, nor is he who does not love his brother.
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1 John 3&version=NKJV

Romans 3
19 Now we know that whatever the law says, it says to those who are under the law, that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become [e]guilty before God. 20 Therefore by the deeds of the law no flesh will be justified in His sight, for by the law is the knowledge of sin.

God’s Righteousness Through Faith​

21 But now the righteousness of God apart from the law is revealed, being witnessed by the Law and the Prophets, 22 even the righteousness of God, through faith in Jesus Christ, to all [f]and on all who believe. For there is no difference; 23 for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, 24 being justified [g]freely by His grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, 25 whom God set forth as a [h]propitiation by His blood, through faith, to demonstrate His righteousness, because in His forbearance God had passed over the sins that were previously committed, 26 to demonstrate at the present time His righteousness, that He might be just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus.
*****************************************
No one should believe that Mary was born without sin, specially conceived.

 

[Big Boy Johnson]

They're wrong all the time.

There, fix it for ya!

 

[Origen]

Thing is no one is without sin [...]

And no one conceived, carried, gave birth to, and raised God the Word in the flesh, except Mary. I'm going to ask you to use your God-given reason and then give your explanation for why God, the Most Pure and Holy Being, Who lives in Heaven, a place where no sin or evil can dwell, would become incarnate in the womb of and be raised by a sinful and impure woman? And, then explain to me why Mary couldn't have been without sin through God's and Her own will?

 

[Big Boy Johnson]

explain to me why Mary couldn't have been without sin through God's and Her own will?

Here's a couple of things she did that were falling short of God's absolute perfection (sin) we see recorded in God's Word:

In Luke 2:41-52, Mary was unaware Jesus was not in their group traveling back from Jerusalem reflecting poor motherhood skills in that she did not verify where her Son was when they started their journey home which is not an error a sinless mother would be making (verses 43,44,45)

In verse 48 Mary is accusing the Son of God of wrongdoing which is not an error a sinless mother would be making.

 

[Origen]

Here's a couple of things she did that were falling short of God's absolute perfection (sin) we see recorded in God's Word:

In Luke 2:41-52, Mary was unaware Jesus was not in their group traveling back from Jerusalem reflecting poor motherhood skills in that she did not verify where her Son was when they started their journey home which is not an error a sinless mother would be making (verses 43,44,45)

In verse 48 Mary is accusing the Son of God of wrongdoing which is not an error a sinless mother would be making.

Firstly, nowhere in that post is my question that you quoted answered. Secondly, sin is defined as a deliberate transgression of God's law, specifically a thought, word, or deed that is contrary to the eternal law, not being unaware someone left their company, and once finding them asking them why they had left...

:face palm:

 

[Big Boy Johnson]

Firstly, nowhere in that post is my question that you quoted answered. Secondly, sin is defined as a deliberate transgression of God's law, specifically a thought, word, or deed that is contrary to the eternal law, not being unaware someone left their company, and once finding them asking them why they had left...

The references I provided prove Mary made a mistake when she lost Jesus when packing up to go home. In that situation she made a mistake and fell short of God's absolute perfection which she would not have done had she actually been sinless.

The other one is a straight up sin in that she accused Jesus, the Son of the Living God who never made any mistakes or did any sin, of wrongdoing. Anybody that claims God is doing wrong is committing sin.

:face palm:

 

[Gottservant]

The Gate in Heaven, that Judas overlooked, remains closed (not locked, closed).

The Gate in Heaven, that Thomas overlooked, remains nearly closed (not always nearly closed, but mostly).

 

[Origen]

The references I provided prove Mary made a mistake when she lost Jesus when packing up to go home. In that situation she made a mistake and fell short of God's absolute perfection which she would not have done had she actually been sinless.

In ancient Israel, men walked together and women walked together in separate groups within a caravan. Therefore, Jesus would've been preparing for departure from Jerusalem with Joseph and the other men, not Mary and the other women, before deciding to stay behind, unbeknownst to Joseph and Mary, Who both presumed He was with the caravan, until after the groups of men and women gathered together a day into the journey, and They realized that He wasn't with them (Lk. 2:43-45). But, whether your reproach is directed at Joseph or Mary, Their presumption of Jesus's whereabouts wasn't a sin, because sin is defined as a deliberate transgression of God's law, specifically a thought, word, or deed that is contrary to the eternal law.

[...] she accused Jesus, the Son of the Living God who never made any mistakes or did any sin, of wrongdoing. Anybody that claims God is doing wrong is committing sin.

Upon finding Jesus after three days of searching, Mary asked Him, "Why have You done this to us? Behold, Your Father and I were anxiously looking for You" (Lk. 2:48), highlighting Their anxiety, fatigue, and frustration at the situation, which wasn't a sin, because sin is defined as a deliberate transgression of God's law, specifically a thought, word, or deed that is contrary to the eternal law.

 

[Big Boy Johnson]

Upon finding Jesus after three days of searching, Mary asked Him, "Why have You done this to us? Behold, Your Father and I were anxiously looking for You" (Lk. 2:48), highlighting Their anxiety, fatigue, and frustration at the situation, which wasn't a sin, because sin is defined as a deliberate transgression of God's law, specifically a thought, word, or deed that is contrary to the eternal law.

Accusing Jesus, Who is God and Who is perfect in every way, of wrong doing is sin.

Try telling God he made a mistake by failing to put in the Bible that people should pray to Mary and see how it works out for ya.

Clearly Mary’s actions in these situations demonstrate that she did make some errors showing that she was not sinless as someone who is without sin would not be making errors and doing things that were in error as Mary had done.

In ancient Israel, men walked together and women walked together in separate groups within a caravan. Therefore, Jesus would've been preparing for departure from Jerusalem with Joseph and the other men, not Mary and the other women, before deciding to stay behind, unbeknownst to Joseph and Mary, Who both presumed He was with the caravan, until after the groups of men and women gathered together a day into the journey, and They realized that He wasn't with them (Lk. 2:43-45). But, whether your reproach is directed at Joseph or Mary, Their presumption of Jesus's whereabouts wasn't a sin, because sin is defined as a deliberate transgression of God's law, specifically a thought, word, or deed that is contrary to the eternal law.

Nice story sounding of presumption, non the less what mother does not see to it that her 12 year old son is not taken care of?

No good mother that actually loved her son I've ever heard of.

If it was actually Joseph's responsibility then a good mother would have made sure her young son was properly accounted for but she did not which is a mistake which is falling short of God's absolute perfection for which she needs Jesus to be her Savior in order for failure to literally be perfect to be cleansed.

Feel free to worship Jesus' momma, but I'll pass seeing Jesus is Lord and the only mediator between God and man.

 

[Origen]

[...] a good mother would have made sure her young son was properly accounted for but she did not which is a mistake which is falling short of God's absolute perfection for which she needs Jesus to be her Savior in order for failure to literally be perfect to be cleansed.

It's written that Joseph and Mary presumed Jesus was with them in the caravan (Lk. 2:44), probably because They saw Him with them prior to Him deciding to stay behind in Jerusalem (Lk. 2:43). And, presumption isn't a sin because sin is defined as a deliberate transgression of God's law, specifically a thought, word, or deed that is contrary to the eternal law.

Accusing Jesus, Who is God and Who is perfect in every way, of wrong doing is sin.

An accusation is a claim that someone has done something wrong or illegal, while a question is a statement seeking information. Upon finding Jesus after three days of searching, Mary asked Him the following question: "Why have You done this to us? Behold, Your Father and I were anxiously looking for You" (Lk. 2:48), highlighting Their anxiety, fatigue, and frustration at the situation, which wasn't a sin, because sin is defined as a deliberate transgression of God's law, specifically a thought, word, or deed that is contrary to the eternal law.

Feel free to worship Jesus' momma [...]

Feel free to continue ignoring what constitutes as sin.

 

[David Lamb]

And no one conceived, carried, gave birth to, and raised God the Word in the flesh, except Mary. I'm going to ask you to use your God-given reason and then give your explanation for why God, the Most Pure and Holy Being, Who lives in Heaven, a place where no sin or evil can dwell, would become incarnate in the womb of and be raised by a sinful and impure woman? And, then explain to me why Mary couldn't have been without sin through God's and Her own will?

But that just pushes the question back a generation. How could Mary, if sinless, be conceived in the womb of and be raised by a sinful and impure woman? Not only so, unlike Jesus, Mary had a sinful father.

 

[Scott Downey]

And no one conceived, carried, gave birth to, and raised God the Word in the flesh, except Mary. I'm going to ask you to use your God-given reason and then give your explanation for why God, the Most Pure and Holy Being, Who lives in Heaven, a place where no sin or evil can dwell, would become incarnate in the womb of and be raised by a sinful and impure woman? And, then explain to me why Mary couldn't have been without sin through God's and Her own will?

You do realize God has used all sorts of people to accomplish His purposes and will through all of history.
It was never said of Mary she was without sin her entire whole life from birth.
All of what you said to me you are adding in as requirements for God to act and do this work in Christ on the earth.
Why did the virgin conceive? Why the need for a virgin birth of Christ?
This is not because of sin, it was a sign from God about how His Son would be born. The sign was meant for people to understand who He would become.

Isaiah 7
10 Moreover the Lord spoke again to Ahaz, saying, 11 “Ask a sign for yourself from the Lord your God; [h]ask it either in the depth or in the height above.”

12 But Ahaz said, “I will not ask, nor will I test the Lord!”

13 Then he said, “Hear now, O house of David! Is it a small thing for you to weary men, but will you weary my God also?

Isaiah 7:14
Therefore the Lord Himself will give you a sign: Behold, the virgin shall conceive and bear a Son, and shall call His name Immanuel.

15 Curds and honey He shall eat, that He may know to refuse the evil and choose the good. 16 For before the Child shall know to refuse the evil and choose the good, the land that you dread will be forsaken by both her kings.

 

[Origen]

But that just pushes the question back a generation. How could Mary, if sinless, be conceived in the womb of and be raised by a sinful and impure woman? Not only so, unlike Jesus, Mary had a sinful father.

While Mary's parents weren't without sin, they were just. And, could God not have preserved Mary's soul from inheriting the stain of the original sin at the moment of Her conception? And could Mary's body and soul not have remained immaculate and in God's Grace of Her own free will throughout Her life?

 

[Origen]

Why did the virgin conceive? Why the need for a virgin birth of Christ? This is not because of sin, it was a sign from God about how His Son would be born. The sign was meant for people to understand who He would become.

The incarnation of God could've taken place in the womb of a Virgin Who was without sin as well, and it wouldn't change how He was born or Who He would become. So, give your explanation for why God, the Most Pure and Holy Being, Who lives in Heaven, a place where no sin or evil can dwell, would become incarnate in the womb of and be raised by a sinful/impure woman, when He could've by a sinless/pure woman? And, then explain to me why Mary couldn't have been without sin through God's and Her own will?

 

[Big Boy Johnson]

presumption isn't a sin

It is however a mistake and those who are sinless do not make mistakes.

It's clear that Mary made some mistakes which proves she is not sinless

Better luck on the next topic!

An accusation is a claim that someone has done something wrong

Mary accused Jesus of wrongdoing by staying behind being about His Father's Work.

She knew Who Jesus was, so to dress Him down for being about His Father's Work is sinful behavior.

Feel free to continue ignoring what constitutes as sin.

Worshiping Jesus's momma is sin as is worshiping angels and dead people

But that just pushes the question back a generation. How could Mary, if sinless, be conceived in the womb of and be raised by a sinful and impure woman? Not only so, unlike Jesus, Mary had a sinful father.

Good point that cannot be explained away

God not have preserved Mary's soul from inheriting the stain of the original sin at the moment of Her conception?

But as has already been established, Mary did sin and she did make mistakes so she is not sinless because like everyone else she sinned and made mistakes after having been born

Romans 3:23
For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God, even Mary and all the catholic popes!

 

[Scott Downey]

The incarnation of God could've taken place in the womb of a Virgin Who was without sin as well, and it wouldn't change how He was born or Who He would become. So, give your explanation for why God, the Most Pure and Holy Being, Who lives in Heaven, a place where no sin or evil can dwell, would become incarnate in the womb of and be raised by a sinful/impure woman, when He could've by a sinless/pure woman? And, then explain to me why Mary couldn't have been without sin through God's and Her own will?

I am not saying Mary was sinful when she conceived Jesus.
I am saying Mary must have sinned at some point in her life.
Do you know that John's parents were also blameless and righteous in their walk in the Lord God?
I view Mary to be like them, blameless without sin.
Of note, the angel pronounces a small judgment on Zacharias because he questioned the angel's words, whereas Mary did not.
Naturally any normal old guy might do the same.
But the visitation was heavenly and highly unusual, so like Mary, he should have just said ok!

Luke 1
5 There was in the days of Herod, the king of Judea, a certain priest named Zacharias, of the division of Abijah. His wife was of the daughters of Aaron, and her name was Elizabeth. 6 And they were both righteous before God, walking in all the commandments and ordinances of the Lord blameless. 7 But they had no child, because Elizabeth was barren, and they were both well advanced in years.

8 So it was, that while he was serving as priest before God in the order of his division, 9 according to the custom of the priesthood, [c]his lot fell to burn incense when he went into the temple of the Lord. 10 And the whole multitude of the people was praying outside at the hour of incense. 11 Then an angel of the Lord appeared to him, standing on the right side of the altar of incense. 12 And when Zacharias saw him, he was troubled, and fear fell upon him.

13 But the angel said to him, “Do not be afraid, Zacharias, for your prayer is heard; and your wife Elizabeth will bear you a son, and you shall call his name John. 14 And you will have joy and gladness, and many will rejoice at his birth. 15 For he will be great in the sight of the Lord, and shall drink neither wine nor strong drink. He will also be filled with the Holy Spirit, even from his mother’s womb. 16 And he will turn many of the children of Israel to the Lord their God. 17 He will also go before Him in the spirit and power of Elijah, ‘to turn the hearts of the fathers to the children,’ and the disobedient to the wisdom of the just, to make ready a people prepared for the Lord.”

18 And Zacharias said to the angel, “How shall I know this? For I am an old man, and my wife is well advanced in years.”

19 And the angel answered and said to him, “I am Gabriel, who stands in the presence of God, and was sent to speak to you and bring you [d]these glad tidings. 20 But behold, you will be mute and not able to speak until the day these things take place, because you did not believe my words which will be fulfilled in their own time.”

 

[Origen]

It is however a mistake and those who are sinless do not make mistakes.

In order to be sinless one must not commit sins. Presumption isn't a sin because sin is defined as a deliberate transgression of God's law, specifically a thought, word, or deed that is contrary to eternal law.

Mary accused Jesus of wrongdoing by staying behind being about His Father's Work.

A question isn't an accusation, and a question is what Mary asked Jesus: "Why have You done this to us? Behold, Your Father and I were anxiously looking for You" (Lk. 2:48), highlighting Their anxiety, fatigue, and frustration at the situation, which wasn't a sin, because sin is defined as a deliberate transgression of God's law, specifically a thought, word, or deed that is contrary to the eternal law.

 

[Origen]

I am not saying Mary was sinful when she conceived Jesus.

So, you're saying that Mary didn't inherit the stain of original sin when She was conceived, and didn't commit any sins in thought and deed until the birth of Jesus?