Mary as New Eve

[Lizbeth]

Infallibility does not mean that the CC has everything perfectly stated.
It means that the POPE is infallible but only in certain circumstances.
Pope Francis proved this.
He TRIED to pass some changes to the Catholic doctrine.
It was not very successful because some priests (many) and some bishops would not adhere to those changes.
He was NOT speaking ex-cathedra.
Making a recommendation is one thing,
changing doctrine is another.
But this is complicated enough for a Catholic, I hesitate to speak about it with a Protestant.

That's what happens when religious men are beguiled, like the serpent beguiled Eve, away from the simplicity of Christ..........it produces a lot of complications and confusion....aka Babel....Mystery Babylon. (And I gather that the Pharisees and religious leaders of Jesus' day were doing much the same thing with regard to the Law.)

 

[GodsGrace]

Again, the IC, which, in part, rests upon the foundation of Mary as the New Eve, is a doctrine declared ex-cathedra.

Yes. It is Catholic dogma.
Declared in, I think 1850.
§The assumption, I think in 1954.

 

[GracePeace]

Yes. It is Catholic dogma.
Declared in, I think 1850.
§The ascension, I think in 1954.

Yes, and it is based on an error--Mary as New Eve.

 

[GodsGrace]

That's what happens when religious men are beguiled, like the serpent beguiled Eve, away from the simplicity of Christ..........it produces a lot of complications and confusion....aka Babel....Mystery Babylon. (And I gather that the Pharisees and religious leaders of Jesus' day were doing much the same thing with regard to the Law.)

I do believe some of Catholic dogma goes beyond what the bible teaches.
I think that church is paying the consequences now..although I see a drop in, let's call it church attendance, in all denominations.

 

[GodsGrace]

Yes, and it is based on an error--Mary as New Eve.

LOL
OK GracePeace

This could be.
I don't have a firm position.
I do believe, I think I've said this,
that the dogmas are based on early writings.
Some did compare Mary to Eve, so I guess you're focusing in on those.

But what are you saying then?
What if it's NOT an error!
Then the CC would be right?

See what I mean...I think this belief of yours could be damaging to your own position.

 

[GracePeace]

LOL
OK GracePeace

This could be.
I don't have a firm position.
I do believe, I think I've said this,
that the dogmas are based on early writings.
Some did compare Mary to Eve, so I guess you're focusing in on those.

But what are you saying then?
What if it's NOT an error!
Then the CC would be right?

See what I mean...I think this belief of yours could be damaging to your own position.

No, if they were right, I would be Catholic, but the doctrine of Mary as the New Eve is an error.
I'm not saying they're not a valid Church--I believe people know God because He is merciful (Jer 31:34), not because they have perfect doctrine. I'm not saying they don't know God. I believe Calvinists know God, too, but I disagree with them, too.

 

[GodsGrace]

No, if they were right, I would be Catholic, but the doctrine of Mary as the New Eve is an error.
I'm not saying they're not a valid Church--I believe people know God because He is merciful (Jer 31:34), not because they have perfect doctrine. I'm not saying they don't know God. I believe Calvinists know God, too, but I disagree with them, too.

I agree with all you've said above.
It's a person's relationship to Jesus and his obedience to Jesus that will save that person...
not what church he goes to - what denomination - or which doctrine he got wrong.

I'd say that the Reformed/Calvinist theology is the worst of all because it changes the very nature of God...
but I agree with you there too. If someone has been taught Calvinist teachings on scripture and they believe them to be correct but they love God, obey our Lord, and live for God, I believe God will be merciful.

 

[Marymog]

No, if they were right, I would be Catholic, but the doctrine of Mary as the New Eve is an error.
I'm not saying they're not a valid Church--I believe people know God because He is merciful (Jer 31:34), not because they have perfect doctrine. I'm not saying they don't know God. I believe Calvinists know God, too, but I disagree with them, too.

Hey GracePeace,

If the CC didn't hold the doctrine of Mary as the New Eve, would you become Catholic? Or are there other doctrines/dogmas of the CC that you think are in error?

Mary

 

[GracePeace]

Hey GracePeace,

If the CC didn't hold the doctrine of Mary as the New Eve, would you become Catholic? Or are there other doctrines/dogmas of the CC that you think are in error?

Mary

That I know of, I cannot accept the Marian dogmas.
I already reject "faith alone".
I already know you all know God--just like the Calvinists, the Orthodox, the Lutherans, etc.
But everyone demands that you adhere to all or nothing, so I haven't joined any of them.

Also, for me, the buck stops with Scripture, not with tradition--not that all tradition is bad, but if I thought a tradition went against Scripture, I couldn't adhere to it. Jesus lived to fulfill Scripture, fought the devil based on Scripture, and Paul always taught, "as it is written", so that is how I judge my own thinking.

 

[Marymog]

Also, for me, the buck stops with Scripture, not with tradition--not that all tradition is bad, but if I thought a tradition went against Scripture, I couldn't adhere to it. Jesus lived to fulfill Scripture, fought the devil based on Scripture, and Paul always taught, "as it is written", so that is how I judge my own thinking.

Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle.

So you hold to the traditions that YOU agree with?

Mary

 

[Marymog]

That I know of, I cannot accept the Marian dogmas.
I already reject "faith alone".
I already know you all know God--just like the Calvinists, the Orthodox, the Lutherans, etc.
But everyone demands that you adhere to all or nothing, so I haven't joined any of them.

Also, for me, the buck stops with Scripture, not with tradition--not that all tradition is bad, but if I thought a tradition went against Scripture, I couldn't adhere to it. Jesus lived to fulfill Scripture, fought the devil based on Scripture, and Paul always taught, "as it is written", so that is how I judge my own thinking.

Thanks.

It sounds to me that YOU are the decider of true biblical dogma. Interesting.

Mary

 

[GracePeace]

Thanks.

It sounds to me that YOU are the decider of true biblical dogma. Interesting.

Mary

Yeah, I'm not putting my soul in anyone else's hands. What kind of foolishness would that be?

 

[GracePeace]

Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle.

So you hold to the traditions that YOU agree with?

Mary

Correct. I already detected errors in traditions you hold to. Why on earth would I take anything you all would say wholesale, unthinkingly? Makes no sense.

 

[nedsk]

Correct. I already detected errors in traditions you hold to. Why on earth would I take anything you all would say wholesale, unthinkingly? Makes no sense.

So you have no problem with traditions then, you just prefer your traditions to other peoples traditions. So you speak infallibly about scripture.

 

[Marymog]

Correct. I already detected errors in traditions you hold to. Why on earth would I take anything you all would say wholesale, unthinkingly? Makes no sense.

HI GracePeace,

It makes even less sense that YOU can detect errors in Christian traditions that others hold. Where in Scripture does it say that YOU, or any individual Christian, were given that infallible authority?

Why on earth would I take anything you would say wholesale, unthinkingly? Makes no sense.

 

[Marymog]

Yeah, I'm not putting my soul in anyone else's hands. What kind of foolishness would that be?

Hello GP,

You wouldn't be a fool. You would be obeying Scripture:

Obey those who rule over you, and be submissive, for they watch out for your souls, as those who must give account. Let them do so with joy and not with grief, for that would be unprofitable for you.

Therefore take heed to yourselves and to all the flock, among which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers, to shepherd the church of God which He purchased with His own blood.

I presume you want to obey what is written in Scripture?

Curious Mary

 

[GracePeace]

HI GracePeace,

It makes even less sense that YOU can detect errors in Christian traditions that others hold. Where in Scripture does it say that YOU, or any individual Christian, were given that infallible authority?

Why on earth would I take anything you would say wholesale, unthinkingly? Makes no sense.

Your Church system will pass away before Christ returns. It is already being proven erroneous.

If you don't want to use your critical thinking skills in this area of life, I guess that's how you live in the rest of your life--uncritically, unthinkingly. That's your call. I can't do it.

 

[GracePeace]

Hello GP,

You wouldn't be a fool. You would be obeying Scripture:

Obey those who rule over you, and be submissive, for they watch out for your souls, as those who must give account. Let them do so with joy and not with grief, for that would be unprofitable for you.

Therefore take heed to yourselves and to all the flock, among which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers, to shepherd the church of God which He purchased with His own blood.

I presume you want to obey what is written in Scripture?

Curious Mary

Yep, I would've been happy to have submitted to an overseer back then--before the impurities crept in--but, today, we have the additional task of actually arriving at a correct understanding.

 

[Marymog]

Yep, I would've been happy to have submitted to an overseer back then--before the impurities crept in--but, today, we have the additional task of actually arriving at a correct understanding.

You would have submitted to the overseers of The Church 2,000 years ago because the overseers (Church leaders) didn't allow impurities to creep in. So help me out here.....According to your research, when did this creeping in of impurities start and The Church leaders started getting it wrong?

Curious Mary

 

[GracePeace]

You would have submitted to the overseers of The Church 2,000 years ago because the overseers (Church leaders) didn't allow impurities to creep in. So help me out here.....According to your research, when did this creeping in of impurities start and The Church leaders started getting it wrong?

Curious Mary

You've already been made privy to one--Irenaeus erred when he falsely taught his baseless nonsense about Mary. He's been debunked. The thing with an "infallible" Church is one error brings the entire edifice down. There are many more. Your false understanding of Romans 2--that the "Gentiles" who keep the Law are unbelievers, and not that it refers to believing Gentiles--is what has led to the nonsense of saying Muslims worship the same God as Christians, and Hindus have "recourse" to God, and which was the basis for Francis bringing the pachamama idol to commit idolatry with it in the Vatican. I don't really need to raise other issues, because a single issue you're wrong about, when you claim you're wrong about nothing, throws the entirety of the structure into doubt.