Mary was a good person and had a sinful nature like all of us.

[BobRyan]

So are you saying that Mary was not immaculate when she conceived Jesus? Then how could Jesus be holy and without sin?

Catholic doctrine teaches that Mary's mother was not sinless yet gave birth to a sinless child - Mary. In other words they start off admitting that whole line of reasoning they are using for Mary being sinless is out the window - since they already conceded that a sinful human mother gives birth to a sinless human just like the Bible says about Christ's birth - only they claim they need to do it with Mary. How is that even logical?

 

[BobRyan]

BobRyan said:

wouldn't it be great to have an actual Bible text for something like that? (Immaculate Conception of Mary by her mother))
Think of how much easier it would be to provide evidence for such a suggestion - if the Bible actually said it.
I think you would agree - that getting support for that from the actual Bible would be very useful.

So is God not allowed to interfere at all with man?

The Bible says He did it all the time - but that would be the "Bible saying it" not us making it up. Agreed?

That's not what the tale of the parting of the red sea demonstrates for us. If God had not stepped in I think that all of them would have been the subjects of genocide.

True - but we did not just make up the story of the Exodus - it comes from scripture itself.
You and I would both agree that "the Exodus is not a teaching found in scripture" - is a very difficult argument for anyone to make in real life.

So how big was the thing where...and the word became flesh and dwelt among us? A Saviour will be born! That's an even bigger thing if you ask me.

It is - but that is God doing something and telling us about it.
Scripture does not say "Mary's mother gave birth to Mary - a sinless being, via the immaculate conception of Mary by her mother" or any such thing. I think you might agree.

The adamic nature is the sin nature, right? ok then,

Yes and "all have sinned" Rom 3:23
More than that "there is NONE righteous NO NOT ONE" Rom 3:9

9 What then? Are we better than they? Not at all; for we have already charged that both Jews and Greeks are all under sin; 10 as it is written:
“There is no righteous person, not even one;
11 There is no one who understands,
There is no one who seeks out God;
12 They have all turned aside, together they have become corrupt;
There is no one who does good,
There is not even one.”
13 “Their throat is an open grave,
With their tongues they keep deceiving,”
“The venom of asps is under their lips”;
14 “Their mouth is full of cursing and bitterness”;
15 “Their feet are swift to shed blood,
16 Destruction and misery are in their paths,
17 And they have not known the way of peace.”
18 “There is no fear of God before their eyes.”

19 Now we know that whatever the Law says, it speaks to those who are under the Law, so that every mouth may be closed and all the world may become accountable to God;

No wonder Mary refers to Him as "God my Savior"

2nd Corinthians 5:21
21 For he hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him.../KJV

When we are born of woman on earth we receive the adamic nature (sin nature) at that time.

agreed.

That would make Mary a bad tree. A bad tree can not bring forth good fruit.

agreed.

But the Gospel is real "If anyone is in Christ he/she is a NEW CREATION" 2 Cor 5

That is our only hope.

I think if you believe all of the bible then God would have had to do something to purify Mary

No doubt we all become new creations as the result of the Gospel - but that is not what the Catholic church is talking about when it speaks of the "immaculate conception of Mary by her mother" or their views of "Mary - sinless like Christ" etc.

for...He has not known sin! Jesus did not receive the adamic nature from Mary.

Agreed.

But that fact does not ALSO mean that Mary TOO must not have received a sinful nature from HER Mother.

 

[BobRyan]

such as which books should be in the Bible?

Another topic you wish to explore? Do a thread on Luke 24 "All of scripture" - the teaching known to Luke's readers -- sans the RCC

 

[BobRyan]

So are you saying that Jesus was born with the sin nature?

No I am saying HE was born without sin.

And even the Catholic church argues for sinless beings born from a mother with a sinful nature when they claim MARY is the one born as a sinless being -- so WE are not the ones supposing something -- scripture actually says JESUS was born without sin. No text says Mary was.

I don't know if Mary was born sinless or not.

Do you know if the BIBLE says "There is NONE righteous NO NOT ONE" Rom 3?

Can a bad tree bear good fruit?

Scripture says no.

But scripture allows any/all sinners to be born-again "a NEW Creation" 2 Cor 5. However even the Catholic Church admits this is NOT the argument they are making about Mary being sinless.

I think you seriously misunderstood my posts. I think we're dealing with some biblical principles here.
Mankind is born into the sin nature.
The sin nature was not passed on to Jesus

So how could Mary give birth to Jesus as sinless if she had the sin nature?

You could say God did a miracle so that is the case with the birth of Jesus. Or in the Catholic case they argue that same idea only for the birth of Mary as a sinless being -- no text for that one.

 

[BobRyan]

Divide said:
So are you saying that Mary was not immaculate when she conceived Jesus? Then how could Jesus be holy and without sin?

I think that was answered long ago...

Ambrose
"He was man in the flesh, according to His human nature, that He might be recognized, but in power was above man, that He might not be recognized, so He has our flesh, but has not the failings of this flesh. For He was not begotten, as is every man, by intercourse between male and female, but born of the Holy Spirit and of the Virgin; He received a stainless body, which not only no sins polluted, but which neither the generation nor the conception had been stained by any admixture of defilement. For we men are all born under sin, and our very origin is in evil, as we read in the words of David: 'For lo, I was conceived in wickedness, and in sin did my mother bring me forth.'" (On Repentance, 1:3:12-13)

Since the Bible also stated it as a virgin birth - we actually don't need Ambrose for that answer.
No text claims Mary was born of a virgin. OR that she was sinless or that she did not need the gospel , did not need the Savior.

 

[BobRyan]

The New Testament came from Sacred Tradition, not the other way around. If you read Revelation, the Ark of the Covenant if first seen and the very next sight is of Mary, the Ark of the New Covenant.

I think we both know that not one NT text calls Mary "The ark of the covenant"

 

[BobRyan]

The process of the Catholic Church choosing the 73 books of the Bible spanned centuries

Luke 23 says that the term "in ALL the Scriptures" was known to Luke's readers long before that.
Acts 17:11 the non-Christians in Berea "studied the scriptures daily to SEE IF those things were so" that were taught to them by Paul

The idea that nobody knew what scripture was until centuries after the Apostles were alive - does not pass the test of scripture.

I think we both know they did know what the "scriptures" (what we call the OT) were just as Josephus writes in the first century that scripture had not changed for 400 years.

 

[Valletta]

Do you know if the BIBLE says "There is NONE righteous NO NOT ONE" Rom 3?

It does. And the Bible speaks of a number of righteous people. Do you know if the Bible says that Jesus said “My God, my God, why hast thou abandoned me?"

 

[Valletta]

The idea that nobody knew what scripture was until centuries after the Apostles were alive - does not pass the test of scripture.

Yet many believe it took 1400 or so years to figure out what was Holy Scripture and what was not.

 

[Valletta]

I think we both know that not one NT text calls Mary "The ark of the covenant"

I think we both know that not one NT text calls God the "Holy Trinity."

 

[NotUrAvgGuy]

This whole notion that a "bad tree can't produce good fruit" is flawed when applied to Mary birthing Jesus. The implication is that since Jesus never sinned He could not have come from a "bad tree." Therefore, Mary must have been without sin and thus immaculately conceived. However...

While scholars still debate what a "sin nature" is and how we get it, to me the most logical answer is that a "sin nature" is a spiritual flaw we are born with. We are born with a nature that causes us to sin. We can't, without help, choose to always obey or even to obey at all. We are by nature opposed to God. When we are born again, God gives us a new nature and takes away that spiritual flaw that causes us to continually sin. We now have the ability to choose. We still sin but we can now choose to obey and through the process of sanctification, do gradually sin less and less. I personally don't think our sin nature is something genetic that gets passed from parents to children. It is a spiritual affliction due to our damaged natures. Jesus did not get that damaged nature. While he had a flawed human mother, He was also divine in His spiritual nature. His flesh was truly human. His fleshly nature came from his mother. His spiritual nature came from His Father and thus was without that spiritual flaw.

Mary was a believer. She had already received a new nature (as well all do when we are born again) that corrects that flaw. As Luther put it, our will is no longer in bondage to sin. It can still sin, but it's not in bondage to sin. Mary did not have to be sinless for Jesus to be sinless. He did not inherit His spiritual nature from her.

Trees are just trees. They are not a mixture of spirit and flesh. A tree is just flesh (by analogy). So if a tree is flawed, it won't bear good fruit. Mary's flesh was flawed as was Jesus'. He could still get sick, get injured, get tired, get hungry, etc. Mary's spiritual nature was flawed. She could still sin. She needed a savior. Jesus' was not because He did not get His spiritual nature from Mary. Mary could be flawed spiritually without that preventing Jesus from being sinless. He did not get her sin nature. At the moment of conception, God joins our spirit to our flesh and they become one. When we die, our spirit leaves our body and can be in heaven while our body is in the grave or cremated. One day, in heaven, we will get a new body. At conception, our spirit comes from God not from the egg or the sperm. We don't get our spirit from our earthly parents. Part of the curse of the fall is that the spirit we receive is predisposed to sin. Jesus is the lone exception. He was not given that flawed spirit. That was a sovereign act of God. He was still fully human in the flesh and thus could die for our sins.

 

[Valletta]

This whole notion that a "bad tree can't produce good fruit" is flawed when applied to Mary birthing Jesus. The implication is that since Jesus never sinned He could not have come from a "bad tree." Therefore, Mary must have been without sin and thus immaculately conceived.

Your flawed assumption has already been refuted, you are circling back. Earlier in this thread, in response (#382 ) to your claim that is was not "necessary," I stated:

"God could have done things anyway He so chose, so really nothing was "necessary" for God, that in no way does not mean it didn't happen. Your speculation is man-made and nowhere is it found in the Bible."

 

[NotUrAvgGuy]

Your flawed assumption has already been refuted, you are circling back. Earlier in this thread, in response (#382 ) to your claim that is was not "necessary," I stated:

"God could have done things anyway He so chose, so really nothing was "necessary" for God, that in no way does not mean it didn't happen. Your speculation is man-made and nowhere is it found in the Bible."

Many times Catholics have argued that is was necessary for Mary to be sinleess to bear the Messiah and for Him to be without original sin.

My speculation is based on the Bible. We are told all have sinned. That includes Mary. Nowhere does the Bible say she was an exception. Your argument is that it coukd have happened. That doesn't mean it did.

 

[Valletta]

Many times Catholics have argued that is was necessary for Mary to be sinleess to bear the Messiah and for Him to be without original sin.

My speculation is based on the Bible. We are told all have sinned. That includes Mary. Nowhere does the Bible say she was an exception. Your argument is that it coukd have happened. That doesn't mean it did.

Catholics believe that God is all powerful and can do anything and everything. Thus God is not required to do anything. That being said, a deep understanding of God's plan brings one to the conclusion that Mary was without sin. A Catholic understanding of sin also brings a Catholic to the conclusion that a newborn has not sinned nor has Jesus sinned. An understanding of the Bible also shows that there are righteous people, and thus when we read a statement about righteousness we take it in the proper context.