The Case for the Sinless Ever-Virgin Mary.

[Pearl]

Jesus was born without the stain of original sin and did not actively commit sins.

Yes, I thought that's what I said.

 

[Soulx3]

Yes, I thought that's what I said.

It's good you agree then.

 

[Soulx3]

Psalm 5:4 says God and sin can't dwell together. John 1:14 says God in the form of Jesus became incarnate and dwelt with sinners -- clearly an exception to the Psalm's statement. You are the one who suggested that an otherwise universal statement (like "all have sinned") can admit of exceptions:

But you are unwilling to apply that same logic to Psalm 5:4, even though John 1:14 creates an exception for Jesus. As you once said, "except Jesus, so why not Mary as well." If Jesus could dwell with sinners despite Psalm 5:4, he could dwell in the womb of a sinner despite Psalm 5:4.

I'll close by reiterating that I don't know if Mary was born sinless or not, although I'm strongly leaning toward NOT. All I'm saying in this post (because you asked the question) is that Psalm 5:4 is a fairly weak argument for your position (thanks to John 1:14). Your better argument is the logical one, not the Scriptural one. It isn't convincing to me, but I thank you for putting it out there. Please develop it further if you like.

Now, if you don't mind, I'm going to bow out of this discussion. Going over the same ground again and again is getting tedious.

In verse 1 Pet. 2:22, it doesn't say, "only Christ committed no sin," but rather, "Christ ... Who committed no sin." Jesus, God Incarnate, fully divine and fully human, experienced temptations of evil, and through His will in cooperation with God the Father's help, He did not commit 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.

Regarding Ps. 5:4 and Jn. 1:14, again, there's a difference between God Incarnate taking form inside a sinful human and living among sinful humans. Consider that Mary Magdalene, a sinful human, lived among God Incarnate, but she couldn't even touch Him after His resurrection yet because of her impurity from sins (Jn. 20:17).

Following that alleged "fairly weak" argument, I asked you to explain how your belief that God Incarnate taking form inside a sinful humans is the same as living among sinful humans, and your reply was to bow out of our discussion without giving that explanation.

 

[RedFan]

I asked you to explain how your belief that God Incarnate taking form inside a sinful humans is the same as living among sinful humans, and your reply was to bow out of our discussion without giving that explanation.

We're plowing the same ground again. That's why I am bowing out.

The only sameness that matters to this argument is that taking form inside a womb and living among sinful humans both count as "dwelling" -- the first because YOU SAID SO in pointing to Psalm 5:4 as your reason Mary must be sinless, the second because John 1:14 says so. If Jesus can "dwell" in one instance with sinners, he can do so in both instances. It's that simple.

I really have nothing more to add here. Let's just move on, shall we? We don't have to agree.

 

[quietthinker]

The Case for the Sinless Ever-Virgin Mary.​

...definitely virgin on the ridiculous!

 

[Soulx3]

The only sameness that matters to this argument is that taking form inside a womb and living among sinful humans both count as "dwelling" -- the first because YOU SAID SO in pointing to Psalm 5:4 as your reason Mary must be sinless, the second because John 1:14 says so. If Jesus can "dwell" in one instance with sinners, he can do so in both instances. It's that simple.

Regarding Ps. 5:4 and Jn. 1:14, again, there's a difference between God Incarnate taking form inside a sinful human and living among sinful humans. Consider that Mary Magdalene, a sinful human, lived among God Incarnate, but she couldn't even touch Him after His resurrection yet because of her impurity from sins (Jn. 20:17).

Explain how your belief that God Incarnate taking form inside a sinful humans is the same as living among sinful humans.

 

[RedFan]

Regarding Ps. 5:4 and Jn. 1:14, again, there's a difference between God Incarnate taking form inside a sinful human and living among sinful humans. Consider that Mary Magdalene, a sinful human, lived among God Incarnate, but she couldn't even touch Him after His resurrection yet because of her impurity from sins (Jn. 20:17).

Explain how your belief that God Incarnate taking form inside a sinful humans is the same as living among sinful humans.

I just did. It's the "same" insofar as it is "dwelling" in both instances. That's the only sameness relevant to whether Psalm 5:4 is or is not supportive of Mary's sinlessness. Can we stop now, please?

 

[Soulx3]

It's the "same" insofar as it is "dwelling" in both instances.

Regarding Ps. 5:4 and Jn. 1:14, again, there's a difference between God Incarnate taking form inside a sinful human and living among sinful humans. Consider that Mary Magdalene, a sinful human, lived among God Incarnate, but she couldn't even touch Him after His resurrection yet because of her impurity from sins (Jn. 20:17). Therefore, how could God take form inside a sinful human? The belief that God did do that isn't in line with Ps. 5:4 and Jn. 20:17.

 

[quietthinker]

Jesus was born of the lineage of Adam.....and Adam after the fall. He was tempted in all ways as we are. (Hebrews 4:15) ....and let's not discount his human sexual urges.

A temptation is no temptation if it is not relevant. For example, I can't tempt my letter box, yet Jesus was tempted....to do what? serve himself ie, look after No.1 Where did the inclination to serve No.1 come from if not his lineage to Adam.

Mary was infected with the same disposition. She concluded temporarily with Jesus brothers that he had lost his mind. In other words, he had lost his sanity. (Mark 3:21)...(what an accusation!) To think otherwise is to spin off into a fantasy.

Jesus however had higher aspirations and resisted ....even to the point of sweating great drops of blood (Luke 22:44)......and who of any of us mortals has gotten anywhere near close to that?

 

[Pearl]

It's good you agree then.

Any Christian would agree with that. It's at the heart of our faith; that Jesus, who was without sin, took our sins upon himself and died to save us from the consequences of sin which is spiritual death. In him we have eternal - spiritual - life.

 

[RedFan]

Regarding Ps. 5:4 and Jn. 1:14, again, there's a difference between God Incarnate taking form inside a sinful human and living among sinful humans.

Sure. There are lots of differences between the two. And one sameness that sinks your use of the Psalm to demonstrate Mary's sinlessness: BOTH COUNT AS "DWELLING."

Consider that Mary Magdalene, a sinful human, lived among God Incarnate, but she couldn't even touch Him after His resurrection yet because of her impurity from sins (Jn. 20:17).

Consider that just ten verses later He invited Thomas, a sinful human, to touch Him (John 20:27). And anyway, neither His gestation nor His 30+ years of dwelling among sinful men were post-resurrection events. For 30+ years he touched other humans, all of them sinful, and let them touch him.

Therefore, how could God take form inside a sinful human? The belief that God did do that isn't in line with Ps. 5:4 and Jn. 20:17.

You use "therefore" as if one follows logically from the other! But as I have already demonstrated, Mary Magdalene's encounter with the post-resurrection Jesus tells us nothing about the Immaculate Conception's validity.

We really do need to stop this debate over whether Psalm 5:4 is a proof text for Mary's sinlessness. Do you need to have the last word? OK, if that's the way you are wired, go ahead and reply and have the last word. I won't respond.

 

[Athanasius377]

There is no such designation given to Mary in the Bible…..not even an allusion to such a title.

The term “orthodox” is interesting when determining the truth of any statement or institution.
We have a very good example of how “orthodoxy” can change with the intervention of time and a presentation of something that people are convinced is no longer true…replaced by something “better”……that is the medical establishment and it’s multi-billion dollar drug industry.

What used to be “orthodox” medicine was replaced by patented drug therapy, in a carefully orchestrated take over of the accepted medical practice of using compounds made from natural substances to the creation of medicines manufactured using synthetic copies of these natural substances.

Because it is illegal to patent a plant, a few wealthy families put their money to good use in formulating a way to gain customers for life by demonizing the natural remedies as “snake oil” medicine, ( which no doubt some of them were and still are) and began infiltrating the medical establishments with a new approach to “medicine”….in the form of unnatural drugs, which always have a myriad of “side effects”…..the symptoms of which were dealt with by prescribing more drugs to deal with this unwanted problem.

A side effect, which is treated as a ‘natural’ result of the drug itself, is actually the body’s rejection of the substance administered. Giving more drugs to deal with the inevitable side effects of putting synthetic substances into an already sick body can be disastrous. But the entire medical system is now based on these drug therapies….the first thing a doctor will do now is prescribe drugs for everything…...or recommend unnecessary surgery, all of which are designed for profit, not cures.

Was the abandonment of natural medicine in favor of the new ‘scientific’ approach better for the patient?
Not really, but it sure was good for big pharma’s bottom line…..and no one seems to know how well these drugs worked in curing anyone, when that was not in the business model. Big pharma is about symptom control and creating drug customers for life. The elderly are particularly targeted and it is not unusual to see them taking multiple drug therapies for the natural consequences of aging.

”Orthodox“ Christianity was hijacked in a similar manner by a corrupt church system that developed after the death of the apostles……Jesus warned that “weeds” of counterfeit Christianity would be sown by “the devil”, “while men were sleeping”…..so there was to be a period when fake man-made doctrines would be developed and accepted over time, during a period of spiritual drowsiness…..it happened gradually, just as the medical system was overtaken gradually……genuine Christianity was overtaken, and all the foundational doctrines of Christendom are based on man made beliefs, borrowed from paganism, not based on scriptural truth, which was put aside in order to accommodate the lies that have been introduced and promoted by the church for centuries.

There is not a single passage of scripture that says that.
Look up “hypostasis” in Strongs Concordance and see how it is translated in the 5 places that it occurs….
”confidence” X 2….”assurance” X 2…and “nature” only once….

Strongs Concordance

….who determines what words are used in translation? How easy is it to allow bias to influence the choice of words? Can you trust them? I am like the Beroeans when it comes to Bible study…I check out everything to make sure that what I believe is accurate and in harmony with the rest of scripture.

Jesus had to be 100% human in order to die and pay the ransom for mankind. The God and Father of Jesus Christ is immortal, so he could not pay the price of redemption because God’s perfect justice requires like for like……”an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth, a life for a life”…..all Jesus needed to be as “sinless”…..he did not need to be “God incarnate” to rescue Adam’s children. Atonement is “at-one-ment”…..the immortal God is not “one” or equal with his own creation. An immortal cannot pay for the sins of a mortal.

Talking of weird hybrids……where will I find God or Jesus saying anything about being part of a three headed God? That is an entirely Catholic doctrine, which along with the doctrine of an immortal soul, and the torture of wicked souls in a fiery hell, were not dismissed by Protestantism, in their defection from the RCC and breaking the shackles of a tyrannical religious system that had held its members captive and in fear for centuries. They are part of the same system of lies introduced by the Roman Catholic church, because they did not divorce themselves completely from her doctrines. The foundation remained the same……whatever you build on a faulty foundation will ultimately collapse when the storm comes…..and it is coming.

There was nothing like any of those doctrines in the Jewish faith, until that was corrupted by men with their own ideas, which they taught as truth. (Matt 15:7-9) Jesus came to tell them the real truth and they didn’t like it one bit. History has simply repeated because humans have a short memory.

Mary’s relation to Jesus is clearly stated in the Bible…..she was “the mother of Jesus”……what people have been led to believe about the nature of Jesus however, is not scriptural. He never once said he was God, and Mary’s role in producing the Messiah was foretold by Isaiah.
Mother goddess worship was adopted by the Roman church like a lot of other acquisitions.

All false worship has the three main doctrines that promote the devil’s lies….
1) That God is not “one” but “three” separate gods, somehow mysteriously rolled into one entity…..nowhere will we find this idea in God’s word.
2) That humans don’t really die, but have an immortal soul that lives on somewhere….that was the devil’s first lie…”you surely will not die”.
3) That God tortures the wicked forever in a fiery hell.…portraying him as a mean spirited fiend who enjoys seeing others in pain with no chance of repentance or forgiveness….the very opposite of God’s forgiving nature.

God transferred the life force of his most precious son, by placing a living embryo into the womb of this chosen Jewish virgin, so that his son would be born human in every way.….he would be the exact equivalent of Adam at his creation….sinless. And being 100% human he was also free willed, which the devil knew….and it was the reason why he tried to tempt him three times in the wilderness after his baptism to undermine his resolve to carry out his mission. It didn’t work, proving that Adam could also have remained faithful under test.

Imagine if the first humans had never given in to Satan’s temptations and lies….? Where would we be now?

So in other words you are one of the types, that shall I say, grow, roll and smoke their own theology? Good to know. I'll just put you on ignore. Cheers!

 

[quietthinker]

So in other words you are one of the types, that shall I say, grow, roll and smoke their own theology? Good to know. I'll just put you on ignore. Cheers!

oooopps, come on come on, why out home grown theologians? unless you think you're in a better position by having someone else's theology? Isn't it better to have some fun with each other? Some are rock hard, some mushy as mud, some good enough to be politicians, some lost in the end of the digestive tract who don't care for finding their way out, some pliable, some people pleasers....it goes on. Me, I'm flawless, I have a permanent halo of bright lights and haven't been beaten in a race in fifty years....tomorrow I'll be younger than yesterday with both thumbs up. Hoping you can learn to handle brown ducks, brown dogs and those pesky brown snakes!

 

[Pearl]

Welcome to the forum @Athanasius377 . i see you are already joining in. See you around.

 

[Taken]

We read, "all have sinned," except Jesus, so why not Mary as well, the One Who conceived God Incarnate?

Conception IS the ACT of a MALE SEED fertilizing an EGG of a FEMALE.

Pryor to Mary’s marriage to Joseph, Mary’s EGG was NOT “fertilized” by ANY SEED….
* NOT a human man’s SEED.
* NOT Gods SEED.

John 1:
[1] In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

John 1:
[13] Which were born,not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.

John 1:
[13] Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.

The WILL of the flesh, of blood, of man…Impregnates a female, VIA intercourse, VIA his seed entering the females womb, THEN traveling UPWARD in the females Fallopian tube, THEN Contacting with the females EGG in her OVEM and fertilizing her EGG…THEN the fertilized EGG descends downward to the Females WOMB and such fertilized EGG becomes encapsulated IN a Placenta which attaches to a Wall of her WOMB….and THAT female……IS THEN CALLED….”CONCEIVED”…which means “PREGNANT”.

Mary became CONCEIVED…ie Pregnant IN Her Womb….
BY the Power of Gods SEED coming forth OUT from God, and SENT TO HER WOMB…NOT Mary’s SEED!

Jesus “IS” the Word of God.
Christ “IS” the Seed of God.

God’s SEED does not require, IS not “fertilized” By Gods Created manKIND.

Mary was naturally from a mans corrupt seed, naturally born IN SIN, same as every created human kind of being.

Mary, LIKE other human beings, in ancient and modern history, and to this day…AGREED TO SERVE God in the capacity God set before her…and she DID SO, as DID other ancient, modern and present day humans DO.

Pretending, Teaching, False Circumstances and Narratives ABOUT Mary is DISPARAGING and DISHONORABLE to her memory.

Glory to God,
Taken

 

[Soulx3]

Pretending, Teaching, False Circumstances and Narratives ABOUT Mary is DISPARAGING and DISHONORABLE to her memory.

That's why I'm speaking the truth to those who are currently teaching and believing falsehoods about Mary in the hope they'll accept it.

 

[Pearl]

That's why I'm speaking the truth to those who are currently teaching and believing falsehoods about Mary in the hope they'll accept it.

People who believe the stuff you are 'currently teaching' are being deceived. Only Jesus was sinless and to say otherwise is to diminish His uniqueness which is at the very heart of the Christian gospel. Jesus not Mary is the only one who should get the accolades and glory attached to being born without sin.

But I suspect you are a Catholic, or some other Mary cult and will never ever acknowledge that Jesus is more important than his mother because his is the only claim to sinlessness.

 

[Taken]

That's why I'm speaking the truth to those who are currently teaching and believing falsehoods about Mary in the hope they'll accept it.

Just verifying…Mary’s egg was NOT fertilized. What was SENT to Mary’s womb…
Was the SEED OF God,

It is NOT true, Jesus was HUMAN. Humans come forth out of the DUST of the Earth. Jesus came forth OUT from God.

Jesus APPEARED in the “LIKENESS AS” a man in a BODY God “prepared” for WHEN He was to come INTO the World, to be ABLE to be SEEN of “human” men.

Angelic Spirits and God who IS Spirit…HAVE the power and ability to “APPEAR” in the Likeness “AS” a man. In the last days Satan himself shall APPEAR “AS” a man.

In these days, men have the ability to APPEAR as a woman, and women have the ability to APPEAR as a man….yet men ARE men and women ARE women regardless of what they are called or whom they FOOL by their APPEARANCE…AND God IS SPIRIT.

Glory to God,
Taken

 

[Soulx3]

Just verifying…Mary’s egg was NOT fertilized. What was SENT to Mary’s womb…
Was the SEED OF God,

It is NOT true, Jesus was HUMAN. Humans come forth out of the DUST of the Earth. Jesus came forth OUT from God.

Jesus APPEARED in the “LIKENESS AS” a man in a BODY God “prepared” for WHEN He was to come INTO the World, to be ABLE to be SEEN of “human” men.

Angelic Spirits and God who IS Spirit…HAVE the power and ability to “APPEAR” in the Likeness “AS” a man. In the last days Satan himself shall APPEAR “AS” a man.

In these days, men have the ability to APPEAR as a woman, and women have the ability to APPEAR as a man….yet men ARE men and women ARE women regardless of what they are called or whom they FOOL by their APPEARANCE…AND God IS SPIRIT.

Glory to God,
Taken

Mary conceived God Incarnate, fully human and fully divine, by the Holy Spirit.

 

[Soulx3]

People who believe the stuff you are 'currently teaching' are being deceived

False.

Only Jesus was sinless...

Nowhere is that stated in Scripture, and since your standard is something must be stated in the Bible in order to be true, then you should stop stating that as fact.