Guest shiloh357 Posted November 15, 2009 Share Posted November 15, 2009 Jesus took His flesh from Mary. Mary was a sinner. Therefore, the flesh that Jesus took was under the dominion of the devil. How is that possible? Jesus did not have an earthly father. Sin passes through the father, not through the mother. Jesus' flesh was sinless, but Mary had an earthly Father making her alleged immaculate conception impossible. Through the semen? So cloned embryos would be sinless? Nope. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smalcald Posted November 15, 2009 Group: Royal Member Followers: 0 Topic Count: 32 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 5,258 Content Per Day: 0.76 Reputation: 42 Days Won: 3 Joined: 06/16/2005 Status: Offline Birthday: 07/22/1960 Share Posted November 15, 2009 What's wrong with that? Why do you think that there is any need whatsoever for man to come up with something "better"? Oh no doubt we cannot come up with anything better. But there is a need for knowing what we DO believe ABOUT scripture, simply saying what we believe is all the Christian statements of faith are, that is it and they are based only on scripture. God appointed apostles for a reason, God told those apostles to appoint teachers and leaders and told Christians to follow those leaders for a reason. Now the Creeds have indeed proved themselves as great tools against heresy. Most heretics claim that they ONLY believe in scripture. For example the modern heretics who refuse to accept the Trinity for example claim that they only use the bible, how do we say, well no Christians don't believe that, we believe this. It is why Worthy has a statement of faith, which by the way is largely based on the Creeds. You put ten people in a room who have never read the bible with no instruction, no creeds no teaching by Christians; you will get ten different faiths. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Botz Posted November 16, 2009 Group: Royal Member Followers: 1 Topic Count: 76 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 4,492 Content Per Day: 0.61 Reputation: 191 Days Won: 18 Joined: 03/29/2004 Status: Offline Share Posted November 16, 2009 And on Mount Tabor He spoke only to the 11 Apostles. Why, then, do you take His words to apply to yourself? The kind of reasoning that says we may preach error on behalf of Him who is Truth itself, just boggles my mind. God commissioning men that will preach error is one of the most absurd things I have ever heard. You are totally mis-understanding what I have been trying to say...and putting words into my mouth that I have not said The teaching of the great commission Matt 28:16, is further endorsed throughout the ministry of Jesus and the teaching of the New Covenant...those who have truly been born again of the Spirit are witnesses to the fact that the L-rd lives and therefore we preach the Gospel...but no decree has gone out that we are infallible. The disciples who specifically went ahead into the villages Jesus was preparing to come to Lk 10:16, were told that they were the representatives and mouth-pieces of Jesus Himself when they said and did what He instructed them to say and do....In that sense what they said was infallible, but again they were not infallible people. I can quote biblical verses, and in that sense what I say is infallible, but I am just repeating the words of G-d, He owns them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leoxiii Posted November 16, 2009 Group: Senior Member Followers: 1 Topic Count: 6 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 512 Content Per Day: 0.10 Reputation: 0 Days Won: 0 Joined: 09/30/2009 Status: Offline Birthday: 01/25/1955 Author Share Posted November 16, 2009 But, how is it possible for the divine Nature of Jesus to be one in being with the human nature of Jesus when the human nature of Jesus was under the dominion of the devil? who told you He was under the devil? No one is under the dominion of the devil until they sin Jesus took His flesh from Mary. Mary was a sinner. Therefore, the flesh that Jesus took was under the dominion of the devil. How is that possible? JESUS didn't take HIS flesh from Mary, HE was formed in Mary's womb. Mary was a sinner (you got that right) "for all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of GOD" JESUS flesh was under HIS domination. Because HE was able. IF, in your logic, parents being sinners results in offspring whose flesh is dominated by Satan, than Mary's parents were sinless also? And their parents? and their parents? How far back do you have to go? Adam and Eve? (before the fall of course) It is the spirit that leads a person into sin through the flesh. We are all born with living flesh and dead spirits. Dead spirits are drawn to sin and the flesh follows. JESUS was born with a THE SPIRIT living in HIM. Thus HE had power from GOD to overcome HIS flesh. Galatians 4:4 But when the fulness of the time was come, God sent his Son, made of a woman, made under the law: Jesus was a descendant of David. Therefore, His flesh came through the line of David. Therefore, His flesh came from Mary, who was a descendant of David. Jesus is God. Therefore, the flesh that Jesus took could have at no time been under the influence of the devil. Therefore, the flesh that Jesus took from Mary must have been sinless flesh. That is why I do not believe Mary was a sinner. It was not necessary for Mary's parents to be free from sin. It was only necessary for Mary's flesh to be free from sin. God kept Her free from sin so that (1). the flesh He took from Her would have at no time been under the dominion of the devil, and (2). the womb that bore Him would have at no time been under the dominion of the devil, and (3). the breasts that nursed Him would have at no time been under the dominion of the devil. Consider the implications if we say that God took sinful flesh upon Himself, or that the womb which bore Him, and the mother's milk that nursed Him, were ever under the dominion of the devil. That is why I do not believe Mary was a sinner. When the angel salutes Mary, he calls Her "kecheritomene," that is, "full of grace" or "perfected by grace." That is all the Biblical proof needed to prove something that must be so according to the majesty and dignity of God. The majesty and dignity of God demands that a sinless Woman supply, incubate, and nurture the flesh of His only-Begotten Son. That is why I do not believe Mary was a sinner. If no one had ever taught me such a dogma, I am sure I would have reasoned it out on my own. The majesty and dignity of God demands it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leoxiii Posted November 16, 2009 Group: Senior Member Followers: 1 Topic Count: 6 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 512 Content Per Day: 0.10 Reputation: 0 Days Won: 0 Joined: 09/30/2009 Status: Offline Birthday: 01/25/1955 Author Share Posted November 16, 2009 The disciples who specifically went ahead into the villages Jesus was preparing to come to Lk 10:16, were told that they were the representatives and mouth-pieces of Jesus Himself when they said and did what He instructed them to say and do....In that sense what they said was infallible, but again they were not infallible people. What about when a person interprets the words of Scripture? Do you really think that Jesus left His Church with no way to know if the words of Scripture were being interpreted properly or not? Do you really think that Jesus founded a Church in which contradictory teachings could not be resolved? Listen to the words of Jesus: Matthew 18:17 And if he will not hear them: tell the church. And if he will not hear the church, let him be to thee as the heathen and publican. Does He really mean that we can search around until we find a church that does not treat us as a heathen or a publican? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leoxiii Posted November 16, 2009 Group: Senior Member Followers: 1 Topic Count: 6 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 512 Content Per Day: 0.10 Reputation: 0 Days Won: 0 Joined: 09/30/2009 Status: Offline Birthday: 01/25/1955 Author Share Posted November 16, 2009 Do you really think that Jesus founded a Church in which contradictory teachings could not be resolved? But what about “The Great Schism” – who do we side with the Pope or the Ecumenical Patriarch of Constantinople? How about neither. Please just answer the question. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nebula Posted November 16, 2009 Group: Royal Member Followers: 10 Topic Count: 5,823 Topics Per Day: 0.75 Content Count: 45,870 Content Per Day: 5.93 Reputation: 1,897 Days Won: 83 Joined: 03/22/2003 Status: Offline Birthday: 11/19/1970 Share Posted November 16, 2009 Jesus is God. Therefore, the flesh that Jesus took could have at no time been under the influence of the devil. Therefore, the flesh that Jesus took from Mary must have been sinless flesh. That is why I do not believe Mary was a sinner. It was not necessary for Mary's parents to be free from sin. It was only necessary for Mary's flesh to be free from sin. It makes no sense to me whatsoever that Mary did not have to have sinless parents in order to be untouched by the dominion of the devil, yet Jesus had to have a sinless mother in order to be untouched by the dominion of the devil. God kept Her free from sin so that (1). the flesh He took from Her would have at no time been under the dominion of the devil, and (2). the womb that bore Him would have at no time been under the dominion of the devil, and (3). the breasts that nursed Him would have at no time been under the dominion of the devil. Wow, it's so nice to know that Jesus is so powerless against sin that He had to be born of a virtual goddess in order to be spotless. Nice. Consider the implications if we say that God took sinful flesh upon Himself, or that the womb which bore Him, and the mother's milk that nursed Him, were ever under the dominion of the devil. What are you talking about? 2 Corinthians 5:21 - He made Him who knew no sin to be sin on our behalf, so that we might become the righteousness of God in Him. Romans 8:3 - For what the Law could not do, weak as it was through the flesh, God did: sending His own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh and as an offering for sin, He condemned sin in the flesh, That is why I do not believe Mary was a sinner. When the angel salutes Mary, he calls Her "kecheritomene," that is, "full of grace" or "perfected by grace." First of all, I doubt Gabriel greeted her in Latin. Second, aren't we all "perfected by grace"? Third - what do you make of Jesus' response here: Luke 11:27-28 While Jesus was saying these things, one of the women in the crowd raised her voice and said to Him, "Blessed is the womb that bore You and the breasts at which You nursed." But He said, "On the contrary , blessed are those who hear the word of God and observe it." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leoxiii Posted November 16, 2009 Group: Senior Member Followers: 1 Topic Count: 6 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 512 Content Per Day: 0.10 Reputation: 0 Days Won: 0 Joined: 09/30/2009 Status: Offline Birthday: 01/25/1955 Author Share Posted November 16, 2009 Jesus is God. Therefore, the flesh that Jesus took could have at no time been under the influence of the devil. Therefore, the flesh that Jesus took from Mary must have been sinless flesh. That is why I do not believe Mary was a sinner. It was not necessary for Mary's parents to be free from sin. It was only necessary for Mary's flesh to be free from sin. It makes no sense to me whatsoever that Mary did not have to have sinless parents in order to be untouched by the dominion of the devil, yet Jesus had to have a sinless mother in order to be untouched by the dominion of the devil. It makes sense in that all of the ova in a woman are brought into existence while she is still in the womb. Therefore, in order for the ovum in Mary's womb which God would use to form His Son to be untouched by sin, it had to be kept free from sin whilst Mary was in the womb. God kept Her free from sin so that (1). the flesh He took from Her would have at no time been under the dominion of the devil, and (2). the womb that bore Him would have at no time been under the dominion of the devil, and (3). the breasts that nursed Him would have at no time been under the dominion of the devil. Wow, it's so nice to know that Jesus is so powerless against sin that He had to be born of a virtual goddess in order to be spotless. Nice. Was not Eve created sinless? Yes. Was Eve a virtual goddess? No. Therefore, your conclusion is without warrant. Consider the implications if we say that God took sinful flesh upon Himself, or that the womb which bore Him, and the mother's milk that nursed Him, were ever under the dominion of the devil. What are you talking about? 2 Corinthians 5:21 - He made Him who knew no sin to be sin on our behalf, so that we might become the righteousness of God in Him. Romans 8:3 - For what the Law could not do, weak as it was through the flesh, God did: sending His own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh and as an offering for sin, He condemned sin in the flesh, And in another place, Scripture says that Jesus was like us in every way "except sin". All of those Scriptures point to the human nature of Jesus never having been touched by sin. That is why I do not believe Mary was a sinner. When the angel salutes Mary, he calls Her "kecheritomene," that is, "full of grace" or "perfected by grace." First of all, I doubt Gabriel greeted her in Latin. Second, aren't we all "perfected by grace"? "Kecheritomene" is Koine Greek. In Latin the phrase is "Gratia plene". In English it is "Full of grace." All of the Elect will eventually be perfected by grace. (Note: That does not mean they will become virtual gods and goddesses.) The greeting of the angel is a word using the perfect tense indicating that Mary has always, for every moment of Her existence, been perfected by grace. Third - what do you make of Jesus' response here: Luke 11:27-28 While Jesus was saying these things, one of the women in the crowd raised her voice and said to Him, "Blessed is the womb that bore You and the breasts at which You nursed." But He said, "On the contrary , blessed are those who hear the word of God and observe it." Luke 11:27 And it came to pass, as he spoke these things, a certain woman from the crowd, lifting up her voice, said to him: Blessed is the womb that bore thee, and the paps that gave thee suck. 28 But he said: Yea rather, blessed are they who hear the word of God, and keep it. Luke 1:38 And Mary said: Behold the handmaid of the Lord; be it done to me according to thy word. Jesus is saying that Mary's fiat; Her unhesitating agreement to carry out the word of God and bear the Word of God, is the example we should all follow. He is not denying that Mary is truly blessed among women. Luke 1:41 ... And Elizabeth was filled with the Holy Ghost: 42 And she cried out with a loud voice, and said: Blessed art thou among women Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smalcald Posted November 16, 2009 Group: Royal Member Followers: 0 Topic Count: 32 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 5,258 Content Per Day: 0.76 Reputation: 42 Days Won: 3 Joined: 06/16/2005 Status: Offline Birthday: 07/22/1960 Share Posted November 16, 2009 I think the Virgin Mary is indeed an example for all Christians to follow. As is St. Paul and St. Peter. It just seems insane though to go back in this infinite regress of sinful flesh and non-sinful flesh and DNA. Simply put there is no biblical support for the lifetime virginity of Mary, her ascension or her being totally without sin. But she is indeed blessed among all women, how could she not be. I am sure the rest of her family would agree including her husband and her other children, who are all confirmed to have existed in scripture. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leoxiii Posted November 16, 2009 Group: Senior Member Followers: 1 Topic Count: 6 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 512 Content Per Day: 0.10 Reputation: 0 Days Won: 0 Joined: 09/30/2009 Status: Offline Birthday: 01/25/1955 Author Share Posted November 16, 2009 1). I think the Virgin Mary is indeed an example for all Christians to follow. As is St. Paul and St. Peter. 2). It just seems insane though to go back in this infinite regress of sinful flesh and non-sinful flesh and DNA. 3). Simply put there is no biblical support for the lifetime virginity of Mary, her ascension or her being totally without sin. But she is indeed blessed among all women, how could she not be. I am sure the rest of her family would agree including her husband and her other children, who are all confirmed to have existed in scripture. 3). The greatest Scripture scholar the world has ever seen, Saint Jerome, disagrees with you. His Scriptural proof for the perpetual virginity of Mary is irrefutable. Read his letter "Against Helvidius". 2). It is not insane to say that the human nature of Jesus could have never at any time been under the dominion of the devil. For if it was, then He could not have been the perfect Lamb of God. 1). And yet there are some things about Saints Peter and Paul that we should not emulate. But there is nothing about Mary that we should not emulate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts