Search results

Yet you admitted you were puzzled by the verse from Romans, which I helped clear up. You're inconsistent.

The Vatican website, in Pope Pius IX's Apostolic Constitution, Ineffabilis Deus, discusses the dogma of the Immaculate Conception, highlighting that Mary was preserved free from original sin. Ineffabilis Deus describes Mary as being "preserved free from all stain of original sin" from the moment...

Yeah, to me, the Bible is already complicated enough, impossible, so, I try not to add to it or remove from it.

By "too much" I mean definitively stating "Mary is a type". I do not position myself that way. You may feel comfortable with making such pronouncements, but I am not. It is not, on the other hand, "too much" for the Apostle to refer to the Law as containing types and shadows, nor for me to...

LOL

No, "in the context", he's just being "hyperbolic"!

Anything beyond "yes, yes", or "no, no" is of the evil one--a vow that you will do this or that, that, by your word, it is a certainty, as sure as the Sun will rise in the morning, that the thing will occur, falls under "beyond 'yes, yes' or 'no, no'". When people ask, "Well, do you disagree...

Then James could be using hyperbole when he says "not by faith alone" LOL

The dogma of Mary's immaculate conception is BASED on the idea that she had to be without sin just as Eve had been without sin, because they view Mary as the New Eve--undermining the speculation that Mary is the New Eve puts a huge crack in the foundation of that dogma at the very least.

OK If an empty assertion somehow disproves my actual argument, then I can do the same and it disproves any argument you bring : "context is your enemy". There's the discussion is over. LOL Make no oath--I take Jesus and James at their word.

I'm not sure why you would see "Paul's Gospel" would differ--he also warns that those who do not persist in faith can be cut off (Ro 11:17-22).

@Doug If "faith comes by hearing God's Word", and there is only "one faith", that would mean that there is only one "Word of God" that people hear--ie, "one Gospel", God's testimony about His Son (1 Jn 5).

Being that the topic of the entire thread is debunking Mary as the New Eve, and how people make too much of Mary, to me, other instances of people magnifying Mary falls in line with the topic--to say that Mary is an example where someone obeyed God is one thing, and, obviously I agree, but to...

1. The Law contained concessions. 2. God's commands can change : incest used to be a holy command ("Be fruitful and multiply" meant "commit incest"), however, now, God calls it an abomination. I've already debunked your argument, and, now, it is your job to respond to my response.

Adam was a type of Christ (Ro 5). Adam's bride, Eve, was his own body; Christ's bride, the Church, is "the body of Christ". Ergo, the only New Eve that could exist would be the Church. It's no coincidence Paul directly compares the Church to Eve (2 Co 11:3).

More than not "liking" them, He nullifies them, because they're made for hard-hearted people, but hard-heartedness has to do with an unbelieving heart falling away from the living God (Heb 3), so there's no place for them in the New Covenant--and oath-taking was one of those concessions. If it...

To proceed from "all Scripture is profitable" to "Mary is a type" is uncalled for--I think it is "making hay". To say something is a "type" is a very serious matter. For Mary to be an example is one thing, but to proceed to say she is a "type" is too much for me. I let the Apostles make those...

LOL Jesus also calls the Samaritan woman "woman" (Jn 4)--is she ANOTHER "New Eve" just because of that? How many "New Eve"s do you need?

Yeah, I've already presented my arguments for why it is the Church who would be the New Eve--you're free to interact with my arguments.

Literally every person in the Bible had to receive God's Word and obey it. Mary is not anomalous in that regard. I really don't get the drive to make hay about her. It is idolatry.