Don’t Ignore Or Dismiss The LORD’s Return; You Could Be Caught Unprepared And Be Left Behind To Deal With The Beast = Matthew 24;32-42, Revelation 13

  • 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!

WPM

Well-Known Member
May 10, 2022
5,399
2,199
113
USA
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
If you want to know what the Catholic Church actually teaches - go to the Catechism.

Former Catholics are some of the most ignorant people I've ever met.
That's why they're "former" Catholics . . .

Former Catholics verify the heresy, blasphemy and idolatry of this apostate "church."
 
  • Love
Reactions: amigo de christo

ewq1938

Well-Known Member
Jul 11, 2015
5,846
1,213
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
You're so rabid you can't see straight. As far as the millennium goes, we tend to agree with Augustine and, derivatively, with the amillennialists, as do most Protestants. THAT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE JESUITS, an off-topic flaming zinger.

Amill is a Catholic/Jesuit invention.


"What’s the Catholic Position?

As far as the millennium goes, we tend to agree with Augustine and, derivatively, with the amillennialists. The Catholic position has thus historically been “amillennial” (as has been the majority Christian position in general), though Catholics do not typically use this term. The Church has rejected the premillennial position, sometimes called “millenarianism” (see the Catechism of the Catholic Church 676). In the 1940s the Holy Office judged that premillennialism “cannot safely be taught,” though the Church has not dogmatically defined this issue."
 

BreadOfLife

Well-Known Member
Jan 2, 2017
20,915
3,368
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Former Catholics verify the heresy, blasphemy and idolatry of this apostate "church."
And yet, I've NEVER heard or read a single charge that I cannot easily refute or expose as a lie.
 

amigo de christo

Well-Known Member
Sep 12, 2020
22,820
39,116
113
52
San angelo
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
the BEST anti-catholic Book i ever read = the HOLY BIBLE

Faithful Witness = "Do not call anyone on earth your father; for One is your Father, He who is in heaven."

i suggest that you set your whole heart on Christ and His Word = the only Source of Truth

Peace to you Today from a former RCC member
Sound it out my friend . We gonna point to JESUS and not to men gone wrong .
 

Illuminator

Well-Known Member
Jan 11, 2020
3,389
1,194
113
72
Hamilton
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
Ok then. How about the immaculate conception. Was Mary perfect? Did she ascend up physically to heaven?
"Mary" is always the perfect derailer when anti-Catholics' absurd lies get exposed. They are too proud to be corrected so they MUST change the topic with every post, trying to keep Catholics running in circles. That's because they are afraid of the truth.
 
Last edited:

BreadOfLife

Well-Known Member
Jan 2, 2017
20,915
3,368
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Ok then. How about the immaculate conception. Was Mary perfect? Did she ascend up physically to heaven?
To understand Mary’s Immaculate Conception, you need to first understand the OT types of Mary.

For example – the Ark of the Covenant is a foreshadowing of Mary. Just as the Ark had to be blessed and purified from both the inside and outside because it carried symbols of God's power within it - how much more purified and blessed must the vessel that actually carried GOD Himself within her be? NT fulfillments are ALWAYS more glorious and perfect than their OT Types - without exception.

The following with answer BOTH of your questions.

OT - The Tabernacle that housed the Ark was overshadowed by the cloud of glory of the Lord (Shekinah glory) filled the Tabernacle (2 Chron. 5:13-14).
NT - Mary was overshadowed by the power of the Most High (Luke 1:35).

OT - The Word was written by God on Tablets of Stone (Ex. 25:10) placed inside the Ark (Deut. 10:1)
NT -
The Word of God became Flesh (John 1) conceived inside Mary (Luke 2:38) who carried the Word of God.

OT - "Who am I that the Ark of my Lord should come to me?" (2 Sam. 6:9)
NT -
"Who am I that the mother of my Lord should come to me?" (Luke 1:43)

OT -
The When the Ark carrying the Word of God returned “David was leaping and dancing before the Lord” (2 Sam. 6:14)
NT -
When Mary came into Elizabeth's presence carrying the Word of God, the baby “leaped for joy” in Elizabeth's womb (Luke 2:38)

OT -
The Ark carrying the Word of God is brought to the house of Obed-Edom in the hill country of Judea for 3 months, where it was a blessing. (2 Sam. 6:11)
NT - Mary (the new Ark) carrying the Word of God
goes to Elizabeth's house in the hill country of Judea for 3 months, where she is a blessing (Luke 1:56)

OT -
The Ark is captured (1 Sam 4:11) and brought to a foreign land and later returns (1 Sam 6:13)
NT -
Mary (the new Ark) is exiled to a foreign land (Egypt) and later returns (Matt. 2:14)

OT -
On the Day of the Dedication of the Temple which Solomon built, there were 120 priests present (2 Chron. 5:11). The Ark of the covenant was carried into the Temple (2 Chron. 5:7) and fire came down from Heaven to consume the burnt offering (2 Chron. 7:7).
NT - On the Day of Pentecost, there were 120 disciples of Jesus present in the Upper Room (Acts 1:15). Mary, the Mother of Jesus and the Ark of the NEW Covenant was also present while the Holy Spirit came down as tongues of fire (Acts 2:3).

In the Book of Revelation, we see the New Ark of the Covenant in Heaven being spoken of at the very end of Chapter 11, verse 19: Then God's temple in heaven was opened, and the ark of his covenant could be seen in the temple. There were flashes of lightning, rumblings, and peals of thunder, an earthquake, and a violent hailstorm.

The very next verse is in Chapter 12 (Rev 12:1): A great sign appeared in the sky, a woman clothed with the sun, with the moon under her feet, and on her head a crown of twelve stars.

Verse 2
says: She was with child and wailed aloud in pain as she labored to give birth.

We know that this child is Jesus because in verse 4, we read: She gave birth to a son, a male child, destined to rule all the nations with an iron rod.

There is simply no getting around the fact that the Woman here in Revelation 12 is Mary.

Finally, this “Woman” (Mary) is the ONLY being in ALL of Revelation who is described as having a full body – from head to toe - indicating that Mary resided in Heaven bodily.

Finally - The Greek word is Kecharitomene that Luke used in his Gospel (v.1:28), which is the perfect passive participle, indicates a completed action with a permanent result. Thus it translates, “completely, perfectly, enduringly endowed with grace.” Kecharitomene is not a mere description here. It is used as a title – a name.
The Angel didn’t say, “Hail Mary, full of grace.” He said, Hail, Kecharitomene.”
Mary is the ONLY person in ALL of Scripture to be given this title.

Was Mary “perfect”? No – just sinless.
 

WPM

Well-Known Member
May 10, 2022
5,399
2,199
113
USA
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
To understand Mary’s Immaculate Conception, you need to first understand the OT types of Mary.

For example – the Ark of the Covenant is a foreshadowing of Mary. Just as the Ark had to be blessed and purified from both the inside and outside because it carried symbols of God's power within it - how much more purified and blessed must the vessel that actually carried GOD Himself within her be? NT fulfillments are ALWAYS more glorious and perfect than their OT Types - without exception.

The following with answer BOTH of your questions.

OT - The Tabernacle that housed the Ark was overshadowed by the cloud of glory of the Lord (Shekinah glory) filled the Tabernacle (2 Chron. 5:13-14).
NT - Mary was overshadowed by the power of the Most High (Luke 1:35).

OT - The Word was written by God on Tablets of Stone (Ex. 25:10) placed inside the Ark (Deut. 10:1)
NT -
The Word of God became Flesh (John 1) conceived inside Mary (Luke 2:38) who carried the Word of God.

OT - "Who am I that the Ark of my Lord should come to me?" (2 Sam. 6:9)
NT -
"Who am I that the mother of my Lord should come to me?" (Luke 1:43)

OT -
The When the Ark carrying the Word of God returned “David was leaping and dancing before the Lord” (2 Sam. 6:14)
NT -
When Mary came into Elizabeth's presence carrying the Word of God, the baby “leaped for joy” in Elizabeth's womb (Luke 2:38)

OT -
The Ark carrying the Word of God is brought to the house of Obed-Edom in the hill country of Judea for 3 months, where it was a blessing. (2 Sam. 6:11)
NT - Mary (the new Ark) carrying the Word of God
goes to Elizabeth's house in the hill country of Judea for 3 months, where she is a blessing (Luke 1:56)

OT -
The Ark is captured (1 Sam 4:11) and brought to a foreign land and later returns (1 Sam 6:13)
NT -
Mary (the new Ark) is exiled to a foreign land (Egypt) and later returns (Matt. 2:14)

OT -
On the Day of the Dedication of the Temple which Solomon built, there were 120 priests present (2 Chron. 5:11). The Ark of the covenant was carried into the Temple (2 Chron. 5:7) and fire came down from Heaven to consume the burnt offering (2 Chron. 7:7).
NT - On the Day of Pentecost, there were 120 disciples of Jesus present in the Upper Room (Acts 1:15). Mary, the Mother of Jesus and the Ark of the NEW Covenant was also present while the Holy Spirit came down as tongues of fire (Acts 2:3).

In the Book of Revelation, we see the New Ark of the Covenant in Heaven being spoken of at the very end of Chapter 11, verse 19: Then God's temple in heaven was opened, and the ark of his covenant could be seen in the temple. There were flashes of lightning, rumblings, and peals of thunder, an earthquake, and a violent hailstorm.

The very next verse is in Chapter 12 (Rev 12:1): A great sign appeared in the sky, a woman clothed with the sun, with the moon under her feet, and on her head a crown of twelve stars.

Verse 2
says: She was with child and wailed aloud in pain as she labored to give birth.

We know that this child is Jesus because in verse 4, we read: She gave birth to a son, a male child, destined to rule all the nations with an iron rod.

There is simply no getting around the fact that the Woman here in Revelation 12 is Mary.

Finally, this “Woman” (Mary) is the ONLY being in ALL of Revelation who is described as having a full body – from head to toe - indicating that Mary resided in Heaven bodily.

Finally - The Greek word is Kecharitomene that Luke used in his Gospel (v.1:28), which is the perfect passive participle, indicates a completed action with a permanent result. Thus it translates, “completely, perfectly, enduringly endowed with grace.” Kecharitomene is not a mere description here. It is used as a title – a name.
The Angel didn’t say, “Hail Mary, full of grace.” He said, Hail, Kecharitomene.”
Mary is the ONLY person in ALL of Scripture to be given this title.

You have not remotely proved anything part from your ignorance of Scripture and your ability to avoid what Holy Writ teaches. Nothing here proves your claims. The woman here is the elect of God - the bride of Christ. Where does it say Mary ascended up into bodily? Where is your Scripture. Nowhere! It was a delusion invented by Pope Pius XII defined it in 1950.

Was Mary “perfect”? No – just sinless.

Total nonsense. The RCC has deceived you. Only Jesus was sinless. All of Adam's race were born in sin and shapen in iniquity. Where is your Scripture to support your claims? She needed a Savior like the rest of us. That is why she acknowledged in Luke 1:46: "My soul doth magnify the Lord, And my spirit hath rejoiced in God my Saviour."

This is another lie invented by the RCC invented by the Council of Trent, held between 1545 and 1563. There is no Scripture to support this nonsense.
 
Last edited:
  • Love
Reactions: amigo de christo

Illuminator

Well-Known Member
Jan 11, 2020
3,389
1,194
113
72
Hamilton
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
Amill is a Catholic/Jesuit invention.
Amill is accepted by most trinitarian Protestants. Pre-mill was invented by one liberal Jesuit that went nowhere. You are as arrogant as WPM who is blind to the repeated evidence presented.
1676404680668.png

It's no accident radical made-in-America anti-trinitarian Bible clubs are anti-trinitarian AND anti-Protestant.
 
Last edited:

Illuminator

Well-Known Member
Jan 11, 2020
3,389
1,194
113
72
Hamilton
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
To understand Mary’s Immaculate Conception, you need to first understand the OT types of Mary.

For example – the Ark of the Covenant is a foreshadowing of Mary. Just as the Ark had to be blessed and purified from both the inside and outside because it carried symbols of God's power within it - how much more purified and blessed must the vessel that actually carried GOD Himself within her be? NT fulfillments are ALWAYS more glorious and perfect than their OT Types - without exception.

The following with answer BOTH of your questions.

OT - The Tabernacle that housed the Ark was overshadowed by the cloud of glory of the Lord (Shekinah glory) filled the Tabernacle (2 Chron. 5:13-14).
NT - Mary was overshadowed by the power of the Most High (Luke 1:35).

OT - The Word was written by God on Tablets of Stone (Ex. 25:10) placed inside the Ark (Deut. 10:1)
NT -
The Word of God became Flesh (John 1) conceived inside Mary (Luke 2:38) who carried the Word of God.

OT - "Who am I that the Ark of my Lord should come to me?" (2 Sam. 6:9)
NT -
"Who am I that the mother of my Lord should come to me?" (Luke 1:43)

OT -
The When the Ark carrying the Word of God returned “David was leaping and dancing before the Lord” (2 Sam. 6:14)
NT -
When Mary came into Elizabeth's presence carrying the Word of God, the baby “leaped for joy” in Elizabeth's womb (Luke 2:38)

OT -
The Ark carrying the Word of God is brought to the house of Obed-Edom in the hill country of Judea for 3 months, where it was a blessing. (2 Sam. 6:11)
NT - Mary (the new Ark) carrying the Word of God
goes to Elizabeth's house in the hill country of Judea for 3 months, where she is a blessing (Luke 1:56)

OT -
The Ark is captured (1 Sam 4:11) and brought to a foreign land and later returns (1 Sam 6:13)
NT -
Mary (the new Ark) is exiled to a foreign land (Egypt) and later returns (Matt. 2:14)

OT -
On the Day of the Dedication of the Temple which Solomon built, there were 120 priests present (2 Chron. 5:11). The Ark of the covenant was carried into the Temple (2 Chron. 5:7) and fire came down from Heaven to consume the burnt offering (2 Chron. 7:7).
NT - On the Day of Pentecost, there were 120 disciples of Jesus present in the Upper Room (Acts 1:15). Mary, the Mother of Jesus and the Ark of the NEW Covenant was also present while the Holy Spirit came down as tongues of fire (Acts 2:3).

In the Book of Revelation, we see the New Ark of the Covenant in Heaven being spoken of at the very end of Chapter 11, verse 19: Then God's temple in heaven was opened, and the ark of his covenant could be seen in the temple. There were flashes of lightning, rumblings, and peals of thunder, an earthquake, and a violent hailstorm.

The very next verse is in Chapter 12 (Rev 12:1): A great sign appeared in the sky, a woman clothed with the sun, with the moon under her feet, and on her head a crown of twelve stars.

Verse 2
says: She was with child and wailed aloud in pain as she labored to give birth.

We know that this child is Jesus because in verse 4, we read: She gave birth to a son, a male child, destined to rule all the nations with an iron rod.

There is simply no getting around the fact that the Woman here in Revelation 12 is Mary.

Finally, this “Woman” (Mary) is the ONLY being in ALL of Revelation who is described as having a full body – from head to toe - indicating that Mary resided in Heaven bodily.

Finally - The Greek word is Kecharitomene that Luke used in his Gospel (v.1:28), which is the perfect passive participle, indicates a completed action with a permanent result. Thus it translates, “completely, perfectly, enduringly endowed with grace.” Kecharitomene is not a mere description here. It is used as a title – a name.
The Angel didn’t say, “Hail Mary, full of grace.” He said, Hail, Kecharitomene.”
Mary is the ONLY person in ALL of Scripture to be given this title.

Was Mary “perfect”? No – just sinless.
You're being baited. I suggest you not open the floodgates of diabolical 18th century anti-Mary nonsense that even the reformers never taught. Gnostic dualism teaches that nothing on this earth can be holy, not the Ark and not a mere human, especially a woman. To them, everything of this world is evil; the flesh is evil. Too evil to ascend, so He couldn't have been human. John and Paul warn us about such people, who tried to infiltrate the community with Incarnation denials. Marriage was frowned on because the flesh was evil and a step down from being an ""Enlightened One". Most anti-Mary Christians fall for the Nestorian heresy but would never admit it. Before one goes bashing Mariology with Mariolatry in would be wise to find out exactly Who or What they are bashing. Anti-Mary Christians make every effort to leave Jesus/Trinity out of the discussion. It's a trap that doesn't always work.

Since my reports have gone ignored, I'll just go along with the the flow. It's like a hockey game.
 
Last edited:

BreadOfLife

Well-Known Member
Jan 2, 2017
20,915
3,368
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
You have not remotely proved anything part from your ignorance of Scripture and your ability to avoid what Holy Writ teaches. Nothing here proves your claims. The woman here is the elect of God - the bride of Christ. Where does it say Mary ascended up into bodily? Where is your Scripture. Nowhere! It was a delusion invented by Pope Pius XII defined it in 1950.
WRONG.
It was defined in 1854 by Pius XI.


Total nonsense. The RCC has deceived you. Only Jesus was sinless. All of Adam's race were born in sin and shapen in iniquity. Where is your Scripture to support your claims? She needed a Savior like the rest of us. That is why she acknowledged in Luke 1:46: "My soul doth magnify the Lord, And my spirit hath rejoiced in God my Saviour."

This is another lie invented by the RCC invented by the Council of Trent, held between 1545 and 1563. There is no Scripture to support this nonsense.
Where is the Scripture to support my claims??
Go back and READ the post. I have you nothing BUT Scripture.

It’s interesting how quickly you deemed my post to be “Total Nonsense” – yet you couldn’t actually refute a SINGLE sentence. A thousand objections do not equal a SINGLE refutation.

And for the record – NOBODY is claiming that Mary DIDN’NT need a Savior – she absolutely DID.
The difference is that she was saved PRIOR to her birth.

Let me know when you’re ready to actually refute anything I’ve posted . . .
 

Nancy

Well-Known Member
Apr 30, 2018
16,761
25,324
113
Buffalo, Ny
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Just a verbal warning as posts on here have been reported as being off topic, and denominational bashing, which is against the rules.
Please keep to the OP's original topic.
Thanks!
 

WPM

Well-Known Member
May 10, 2022
5,399
2,199
113
USA
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
WRONG.
It was defined in 1854 by Pius XI.



Where is the Scripture to support my claims??
Go back and READ the post. I have you nothing BUT Scripture.

It’s interesting how quickly you deemed my post to be “Total Nonsense” – yet you couldn’t actually refute a SINGLE sentence. A thousand objections do not equal a SINGLE refutation.

And for the record – NOBODY is claiming that Mary DIDN’NT need a Savior – she absolutely DID.
The difference is that she was saved PRIOR to her birth.

Let me know when you’re ready to actually refute anything I’ve posted . . .

You presented nothing of biblical worth to support these 2 issues. You know it. You attempted to twist Scripture on 1 issue. You had nothing for the other. This is classic Romanism. Where is your biblical justification?

Mary was born with Adam's sinful blood in her.

Solomon acknowledged in 1 Kings 8:46 confirms: “for there is no man that sinneth not.”

Psalm 14:3 declares, speaking of man, there is none that doeth good, no, not one.”

Can you see it here? We are born spiritually dead. We are born facing the wrong direction. That’s why we need to turn around. Man is born totally depraved. He is born in sin and iniquity.

The Psalmist outlines man’s grim state: “Behold, I was shapen in iniquity; and in sin did my mother conceive me” (Psalm 51:5).

The Bible teaches that unsaved man is not able to save himself, nor to initiate it, nor to help it along, nor even to desire it.

Psalm 58:3-4 says, “The wicked are estranged from the womb: they go astray as soon as they be born, speaking lies. Their poison is like the poison of a serpent: they are like the deaf adder that stoppeth her ear.”

Ecclesiastes 7:20 says, “For there is not a just man upon earth, that doeth good, and sinneth not.”

Why would a sinless person need a Savior? Hello! They would not. Jesus died for sinners not sinless people.

Romans 3:10-12 says, "There is none righteous, no, not one: There is none that understandeth, there is none that seeketh after God. They are all gone out of the way, they are together become unprofitable; there is none that doeth good, no, not one."

Romans 3:23 testifies, “For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God.”

Romans 5:12 says, "Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned."

1 Corinthians 15:22 says, For as in Adam all die.”
 
  • Love
Reactions: amigo de christo

WPM

Well-Known Member
May 10, 2022
5,399
2,199
113
USA
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
WRONG.
It was defined in 1854 by Pius XI.



Where is the Scripture to support my claims??
Go back and READ the post. I have you nothing BUT Scripture.

It’s interesting how quickly you deemed my post to be “Total Nonsense” – yet you couldn’t actually refute a SINGLE sentence. A thousand objections do not equal a SINGLE refutation.

And for the record – NOBODY is claiming that Mary DIDN’NT need a Savior – she absolutely DID.
The difference is that she was saved PRIOR to her birth.

Let me know when you’re ready to actually refute anything I’ve posted . . .

APOSTOLIC CONSTITUTION OF
POPE PIUS XII

MUNIFICENTISSIMUS DEUS


DEFINING THE DOGMA OF THE ASSUMPTION

November 1, 1950
 
  • Like
Reactions: amigo de christo

BreadOfLife

Well-Known Member
Jan 2, 2017
20,915
3,368
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
You presented nothing of biblical worth to support these 2 issues. You know it. You attempted to twist Scripture on 1 issue. You had nothing for the other. This is classic Romanism. Where is your biblical justification?

Mary was born with Adam's sinful blood in her.

Solomon acknowledged in 1 Kings 8:46 confirms: “for there is no man that sinneth not.”

Psalm 14:3 declares, speaking of man, there is none that doeth good, no, not one.”

Can you see it here? We are born spiritually dead. We are born facing the wrong direction. That’s why we need to turn around. Man is born totally depraved. He is born in sin and iniquity.

The Psalmist outlines man’s grim state: “Behold, I was shapen in iniquity; and in sin did my mother conceive me” (Psalm 51:5).

The Bible teaches that unsaved man is not able to save himself, nor to initiate it, nor to help it along, nor even to desire it.

Psalm 58:3-4 says, “The wicked are estranged from the womb: they go astray as soon as they be born, speaking lies. Their poison is like the poison of a serpent: they are like the deaf adder that stoppeth her ear.”

Ecclesiastes 7:20 says, “For there is not a just man upon earth, that doeth good, and sinneth not.”

Why would a sinless person need a Savior? Hello! They would not. Jesus died for sinners not sinless people.

Romans 3:10-12 says, "There is none righteous, no, not one: There is none that understandeth, there is none that seeketh after God. They are all gone out of the way, they are together become unprofitable; there is none that doeth good, no, not one."

Romans 3:23 testifies, “For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God.”

Romans 5:12 says, "Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned."

1 Corinthians 15:22 says, For as in Adam all die.”
Thank you for illustrating your Scriptural ignorance.

Romans 3
is NOT a reference to Mary, but a DIRECT reference to Psalm 41, which says:
Psalm 14:1
The fool says in his heart,
“There is no God.”
They are corrupt, their deeds are vile;


Jesus was a man. Is HE also part of the “ALL” who have sinned in Romans 3?? Does it say He is NOT??
Matt. 2:3
tells us that when Jesus was born, Herod was troubled – and ALL of Jerusalem with him.

Do you honestly believe that EVEREY SINGLE person in Jerusalem was upset? every infant?
OR
– is it that you simply DON’T understand the inclusive language that is sometimes used uin Scripture?

As for your ridiculous question as to why a sinless person would need a Savior -
It’s only BECAUSE she had a Savior that Mary was without sin. She was saved from EVER HAVING sinned.

She is Kecharitomene – and the ONLY Kecharitomene in ALL of Scripture.
You haven’t addressed a SINGLE S
criptural point I’ve made . . .
 

BreadOfLife

Well-Known Member
Jan 2, 2017
20,915
3,368
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
APOSTOLIC CONSTITUTION OF
POPE PIUS XII

MUNIFICENTISSIMUS DEUS


DEFINING THE DOGMA OF THE ASSUMPTION

November 1, 1950

I. THE DOCTRINE

In the Constitution “Ineffabilis Deus” of December 8, 1854, Pius IX pronounced and defined that the Blessed Virgin Mary “in the first instant of her conception, by a singular privilege and grace granted by God, in view of the merits of Jesus Christ, the Savior of the human race, was preserved exempt from all stain of original sin” (Denzinger, “Enchiridion”, 10th ed.,

Immaculate Conception



The Immaculate Conception is the belief that the Virgin Mary was free of original sin from the moment of her conception.[1] It is one of the four Marian dogmas of the Catholic Church.[2] Debated by medieval theologians, it was not defined as a dogma until 1854,[3] by Pope Pius IX in the papal bull Ineffabilis Deus.


 

WPM

Well-Known Member
May 10, 2022
5,399
2,199
113
USA
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Thank you for illustrating your Scriptural ignorance.

Romans 3
is NOT a reference to Mary, but a DIRECT reference to Psalm 41, which says:
Psalm 14:1
The fool says in his heart,
“There is no God.”
They are corrupt, their deeds are vile;


Jesus was a man. Is HE also part of the “ALL” who have sinned in Romans 3?? Does it say He is NOT??
Matt. 2:3
tells us that when Jesus was born, Herod was troubled – and ALL of Jerusalem with him.

Do you honestly believe that EVEREY SINGLE person in Jerusalem was upset? every infant?
OR
– is it that you simply DON’T understand the inclusive language that is sometimes used uin Scripture?

As for your ridiculous question as to why a sinless person would need a Savior -
It’s only BECAUSE she had a Savior that Mary was without sin. She was saved from EVER HAVING sinned.

She is Kecharitomene – and the ONLY Kecharitomene in ALL of Scripture.
You haven’t addressed a SINGLE S
criptural point I’ve made . . .

As usual, you are fighting with the Book. Your greatest enemy when it comes to Catholic doctrine is the Bible. It exposes theological error. Mary was a sinner. To think other is blasphemy. Only God is sinless.
 

WPM

Well-Known Member
May 10, 2022
5,399
2,199
113
USA
Faith
Christian
Country
United States

I. THE DOCTRINE

In the Constitution “Ineffabilis Deus” of December 8, 1854, Pius IX pronounced and defined that the Blessed Virgin Mary “in the first instant of her conception, by a singular privilege and grace granted by God, in view of the merits of Jesus Christ, the Savior of the human race, was preserved exempt from all stain of original sin” (Denzinger, “Enchiridion”, 10th ed.,

Immaculate Conception



The Immaculate Conception is the belief that the Virgin Mary was free of original sin from the moment of her conception.[1] It is one of the four Marian dogmas of the Catholic Church.[2] Debated by medieval theologians, it was not defined as a dogma until 1854,[3] by Pope Pius IX in the papal bull Ineffabilis Deus.



Who cares when? It is contrary to Scripture. No Pope can override Scripture.
 
  • Like
Reactions: amigo de christo