-
Rome's dogma of Christ's mom as a "new Eve" is a man-made Catholic
fantasy not found in the New Testament. In order for Christ's mom to be
considered a true Eve, she and Jesus would have to be the parents of an
entirely different human race distinctly separate from the race that God
created with Adam and Eve.
The in-house Catholic concept of Christ's mom being a "new Eve" and Jesus
being a "new Adam" implies the vilest sort of relationship: that of a mother
mating with her own son and bearing his children.
Though born-again Christians are a new race of human being, they are not
Mary's children: no, they are God's.
†. John 1:12-13 . . But as many as accepted him, to them he gave the right
to become children of God, even to those who rely upon his name; who were
born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of
God.
†. John 3:5-6 . . Jesus answered; I tell you the truth, no one can enter the
kingdom of God unless he is born of water and The Spirit. Flesh gives birth
to flesh, but The Spirit gives birth to spirit.
The second births about which John wrote, and about which Christ spoke,
are the result of creative acts of God.
†. 2Cor 5:17 . . If any man be in Christ, he is a new creature
†. Gal 6:15 . . For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision availeth anything, nor
un-circumcision, but a new creature.
Catholicism's "new Eve" is extrapolated from its own faulty logic; e.g. since
Mary is the mother of God, and God makes men new creatures via a second
birth performed by God, then to Catholicism, Mary is, in effect, the mother
of all born-again Christians.
However, God has neither a wife nor a mother: from the vanishing point in
the past, to the vanishing point in the future, God always was, He always is,
and He always will be because the Bible's God is an eternal life. Though Mary
was Christ's mother, nobody has ever been God's mother. Jesus was a flesh
and blood human being; while God is, and always has been, spirit rather
than flesh. (John 4:24)
NOTE: Catholicism has difficulty discerning between the Word of John 1:1
and the flesh that the Word became as per John 1:14. Though Christ's
mother could give birth to the flesh that the Word became, she could not
possibly have given birth to the Word; which, according to John 1:1-3 and
1John 1:1-2, preceded Mary's existence by an innumerable number of years.
Catholicism's theory of a new Eve is premised upon three gross errors.
1• Sin came into the world via Eve.
It didn't. The Holy Bible clearly, and without ambiguity, lays responsibility for
the entry of sin into the world squarely upon Adam (Gen 2:16-17, Rom
5:12, Rom 5:14-19). Eve instigated their sin, but her own act didn't do the
trick. It wasn't until Adam's eating that anything serious happened. (Gen
3:6-7)
2• Mary's submission to the Angel's announcement implies she was given a
choice. (Luke 1:38)
The Angel's announcement sought neither consent nor decision. It simply
informed Mary quite clearly, and without ambiguity, prior to her voluntary
submission, that the Holy Spirit was going to make her pregnant with a child
who would become the ultimate Israeli monarch. (Luke 1:31-35)
3• Mary was a special creation.
Catholicism's in-house teaching that Mary was a special creation isn't found
in The Holy Bible. There is absolutely nothing in the sacred record indicating
that she wasn't an ordinary Jewish girl produced by two ordinary Jewish
parents.
If perchance Mary had been a special creation, then Jesus himself would
have been the offspring of a special creation, and in no way biologically
related to either David, Abraham, nor Adam; and thus totally disqualified
from inheriting David's throne and/or redeeming the sins of his fellow man;
primarily because he wouldn't have any fellow men. However, the Bible
clearly, and without ambiguity, says David was Christ's biological kin (Luke
1:32, Acts 13:22-23, Rom 1:3) therefore Jesus' mother couldn't possibly
have been a special creation.
Q: If the Bible contains no information clearly stating that Jesus' mother was
a special creation; then why does the Church insist such a thing?
A: Allowing Christ to biologically descend from Adam would mean that Christ
shares the consequences of Adam's disobedience.
"Sin entered the world through one person, and through sin, death, and thus
death came unto all, inasmuch as all sinned." (Rom 5:12)
"all sinned" is grammatically past tense; which means that when Adam
sinned, his posterity sinned too; viz: everybody descending from Adam
became collateral damage; so to speak, including Christ. Don't ask me how
that's fair: I just know it's a reality.
Q: How can you be so confident that Christ was collateral damage just like
everybody else?
A: Easy. Two of the consequences of Adam's disobedience were mortality
(Gen 3:17-19) and loss of access to the tree of life (Gen 3:22-24). Had
Christ been immortal, and/or had access to the tree of life, the Romans
would have had like zero success trying to execute him on the cross.
The Bible says that Christ came into the world in the likeness of, not
innocent flesh, but of sinful flesh (Rom 8:3). In other words; he came into
the world as Adam's biological posterity; which means Christ really and truly
is humanity's fellow man; and if Rome can't cope with it; well; that's just too
bad.
===================================
