Hi Shamariel,
My comments are in blue.
My comments are in blue.
Here is my own argument that she was sinless using evidence
To answer the first part of your defense, I must say the bible says very little about Mother Mary for it is not by her we are saved, nor is her own blessed dependence by which matters in our faith as Christians. For this is not a debate about divinity, for Christ alone is Divine. This is just a lesser debate about the blessed Mother Mary of which we have only a few passages to look at. Therefore we must use theology in the process of determination by using other scriptures to fulfill and speak of this matter, for granted the exact verse stating she was sinless is not existing. Yet this does not mean there is no evidence in my own argument, for there is a process that can be shown and that you have the right to defend against my own theology of this, the subject at hand, which of course has nothing to do with the fact that Jesus Christ is the Only God.
But Rather, it is important to note that there is no direct scripture that states Jesus Christ is Fully Man and also Fully God in a direct declaration of a single verse, of which both are able to be conceived by the multiple verses which show so many declarations of Christ as both fully man and fully God. Therefore their is still evidence that Jesus Christ is fully man and fully God, though we can use the biblical scriptures to decipher with ease that Christ is both.
Indeed the reality is that Christ is both fully man and fully God comes into evidence in my own argument of this very case! For we all know that to make Christ more God than man is Gnostic. Nor can we take Christ as more human than God and thus follow a false Jesus and disobey even the making of the canon of the new testament, which is another subject thesis in itself.
So thus in the immaculate conception, I am stating in my own argument, that it is the Holy Spirit which overshadowed Mother Mary which was the Divinity of God. And because Mother Mary is fully human, I argue that this is where Christ gained his full humanity.
Yet to say that she was sinful and had a flesh nature would say that, yea even through her own blood would have thus made the infant Jesus in a contamination of sin upon his flesh, of which Mother Mary was Fully woman and that Christ gained his full humanity from her. For to say that she had any divinity would take away from Christ's Humanity, and thus make him more as divine, of which stated is Gnostic entirely.
Yet in this to take away from Christ's own Divinity to make him more man than God is to say Mother Mary could not be A full human. Yet to determine that it is not the flesh nature that makes us human, for God created both Male and female in his image, even as Adam was a man created in the image of God before his expulsion from Eden is to actually declare the opposite of this; for he was human only because of his Dependence upon God. For in his choice to disobey his own full dependence on God, he became as we are all born with a flesh nature, by which we are called animals and brute beasts of carnal pleasure until we see the Light of God, the holy Lord Jesus Christ.
For Death came through one man and the curse is well noted, for we know that Christ had overcome with his victory upon saying where death is thy sting? Yet it is also important that Eve had forth a curse for being deceived in which, her desire would be for her husband and he shall rule over you, and also that her pain of childbirth would increase and her child shall crush the head of the serpent, of which is the devil and Satan.
To thus, overcome the curse of Eve of which her desire shall be for her husband, which is in all women, would there not be a woman who would not have desired to be over her husband upon conception, even to allow him to rule over her? Even to say that in Childbearing her child would crush the head of the serpent? IF then this woman did exist, let us say in hypothesis that this would be the Mother Mary, for the Madonna became as with child, and that child was fully man from her own blood, and fully God from the Holy Spirit which overshadowed her. For I can see no other woman that could have been that to be this second eve except this blessed Virgin Mother Mary.
There is no second Eve. There's no mention of a 2nd Eve, no scripture to support this. You're allowing your imagination to take over here.
Yet then, to say in Hypothesis that this was so, can we test other scripture and evidence to see if this be so, or is there lack of evidence to support an argument to this hypothesis, for this we now must see.
To say then, that the second eve was fully human, yet with no divinity is easy, for even eve was not divine, but submitted unto God in Complete Dependence. IF then your argument means that complete dependence on God means that one has no choice, I will ask why then did Adam Choose to eat of the tree, though he was dependent on God fully. I argue that the devil, Satan in temptation offered a different path to God thus bringing deceit into Eve’s existence for the first time in her life in the Garden of Eden, of which her own choice was to eat and deceive her husband who ate full knowing.
IF then a second eve was made it was made to be submitted fully unto God, even in full dependence as a woman should submit without having desire to be over him at all, less the woman be not a second eve.
Thus the word blessed must come to a woman who would be MOST blessed among all women, because she was made to be the second eve in this hypothesis of which we are in examination.
Yet it is in full dependence on God that Adam and Eve were born without the stain of sin. Yet then, because we have all sinned for being born in sin we are not fully dependent on God as was Adam and Eve in the garden before their fall; yea even though God desires full dependence of which what man who lived on earth can say he has ever reached? No man can say, for the matter is we are born of sin.
You speak in circles and it's difficult to follow your reasoning. But you're not using any scripture support for anything your saying. There is no 2nd Eve. To even imply that is a figment of your own imagination.
Anyone can come up with all kinds of scenarios, but without biblical support, which you don't have, your hypothesis must be rejected.
Yet to take the scripture for all have sinned and fall short the Glory of God is to assume rightly that all who are born with a flesh nature have sinned, just by being born.
Yet it is easy for God to make a second eve, which is both fully human and fully dependent to bear his son so that no stain of sin would be found upon his flesh, lest he be a lamb with blemish.
The seed of Jesus was from God when the Holy Spirit moved upon her and God miraculously created life within her womb. That seed was divine. Not human. There is no blemish not because of Mary, but because the seed came from God Himself.
For if she was created without a flesh nature as a second eve, then she is excluded from the context of the scripture of Romans 3:23 for Mother Mary was not Deprived of God, for the Glory of God was with her as was even said by the angel who said the Lord is with thee, of which is noted Gabriel by name. IF then the Glory of God is deprived for all have sinned, how can a woman know the glory of God, even to see that in her was the Christ unless she be excluded in Romans 3:23 for it was written that all have sinned and are deprived the Glory of God. So thus, The Mother of the King is exempt.
Your imagination is running wild. Again, no scriptural support for any of this. She falls into the same category as we do. She was a fleshly, carnal woman who sinned. God is not a man that He should lie. Mary had to bring sin offerings to the temple. Just the fact that she had a child she had to bring offerings for her uncleanness. You're misquoting Romans 3:23. We're not deprived of God's glory, we fall short of God's glory. In other words we don't measure up to His holiness, His righteousness. We sin, we fall short, we're not perfect like He is.
Yet then to believe that God had a special calling upon her for her dependence upon him as the second eve, thus knowing no flesh nature; for we must continue this argument to full completion, is also to say that she was sinless by choice and to be as God’s handmaiden. So thus she could not desire anything other than what God demanded and upon hearing the meaning of it, she would immediately submit. Thus Christ’s full humanity is a stainless, spotless lamb of man, and fully God for the Holy spirit had overshadowed her.
Again, she's not the second Eve. And you can't find any human being that can claim they haven't sinned. I'm sorry but Mary is just like you and me. She sinned and needed a Savior like we all do.
To know Man’s touch would combine her with a sinful man, for all who were born in the depravity and the two would become one. Thus after Christ was conceived she remained a virgin, for it is never Christ’s will for anyone to know sin and thus Joseph could not have touched her, lest she know sin and that is against the will of God, and further to say that the womb that bore his own son should not be defiled. For in full dependence she would have submitted unto this very statement of not being defiled, else she not be the second eve in the first place.
Do you even read God's word? Mary had other children. I could go and look up the verses, but you would probably reject them since you're not using scripture here to prove your hypothesis.
Is it Mother Mary as an individual that is blessed for her full dependence on Jesus? To which Jesus replied, Rather blessed are those who learn dependence, for those are his mothers and brothers and sisters.
Well I guess I'll get one of the verses about Mary's other children since you're misquoting this verse.
Matthew 12:46-50
While He was still speaking to the crowds, behold, His mother and brothers were standing outside, seeking to speak to Him. Someone said to Him, “Behold, Your mother and Your brothers are standing outside seeking to speak to You.” But Jesus answered the one who was telling Him and said, “Who is My mother and who are My brothers?” And stretching out His hand toward His disciples, He said, “Behold My mother and My brothers! For whoever does the will of My Father who is in heaven, he is My brother and sister and mother.”
Notice that Jesus isn't saying dependance upon. It's whoever obeys God.
And Jesus is downplaying His mother and His brothers. What's more important is the spiritual family rather than the natural family. No one was to be exalted as more holy just because in the natural they were His mother or His brothers. It's being born of the Spirit that counts. That's where true family is found.
So thus, about the actual ascension of Mother Mary, if she had no flesh nature to be prepared for the blessed King Jesus Christ, fully man and fully God, she would not have ever been even made a grave, for without flesh nature there is no physical grave, and without the stain of sin she could not die, so thus either she is still on earth somewhere, fully submitted or she ascended into heaven. There is more evidence in assuming the latter.
This is all conjecture. There's no scriptural support for any of this. She died like we all do. It is appointed unto man that all die and then comes judgement. Mary died just like everyone else did. Even Jesus died. Mary is holier than He?
Just accept the scriptures as truth. Jesus was the only sinless person without spot or blemish. He became our sacrificial lamb that takes away the sin of the world. He had to take away Mary's sin as well.
If then, we know God can do all things, yea all things of righteousness, we cannot become indignant and say God would not have used this method as was believed by the early church of Mother Mary, but instead learn to grow, unless you have a more valid argument of which I will listen.
The early church did not believe this. It wasn't a dogma until 431. That's almost 400 years without this belief.
In conclusion, let us remember that Mother Mary is not divine, Fully human, yet fully dependent and let us also remember that it is her son the Christ that is our God and lay this smaller matter to rest and remember and preach only Christ and him crucified.
In love is all of these words of encouragement, blessings and peace in the name of Jesus Christ our Lord;
I hate to be bluntly honest, but these are not words of encouragement, blessings nor peace. It's all lies. I'd like to encourage you to go and read your bible and don't accept any teaching or doctrine that's not clearly written in God's word.
What you've written here is a doctrine of demons. And it's blasphemy. Sorry again to be so forthright, but you need to hear this because you're following man's wisdom and not at all following God nor His word.
Amen
To answer the first part of your defense, I must say the bible says very little about Mother Mary for it is not by her we are saved, nor is her own blessed dependence by which matters in our faith as Christians. For this is not a debate about divinity, for Christ alone is Divine. This is just a lesser debate about the blessed Mother Mary of which we have only a few passages to look at. Therefore we must use theology in the process of determination by using other scriptures to fulfill and speak of this matter, for granted the exact verse stating she was sinless is not existing. Yet this does not mean there is no evidence in my own argument, for there is a process that can be shown and that you have the right to defend against my own theology of this, the subject at hand, which of course has nothing to do with the fact that Jesus Christ is the Only God.
But Rather, it is important to note that there is no direct scripture that states Jesus Christ is Fully Man and also Fully God in a direct declaration of a single verse, of which both are able to be conceived by the multiple verses which show so many declarations of Christ as both fully man and fully God. Therefore their is still evidence that Jesus Christ is fully man and fully God, though we can use the biblical scriptures to decipher with ease that Christ is both.
Indeed the reality is that Christ is both fully man and fully God comes into evidence in my own argument of this very case! For we all know that to make Christ more God than man is Gnostic. Nor can we take Christ as more human than God and thus follow a false Jesus and disobey even the making of the canon of the new testament, which is another subject thesis in itself.
So thus in the immaculate conception, I am stating in my own argument, that it is the Holy Spirit which overshadowed Mother Mary which was the Divinity of God. And because Mother Mary is fully human, I argue that this is where Christ gained his full humanity.
Yet to say that she was sinful and had a flesh nature would say that, yea even through her own blood would have thus made the infant Jesus in a contamination of sin upon his flesh, of which Mother Mary was Fully woman and that Christ gained his full humanity from her. For to say that she had any divinity would take away from Christ's Humanity, and thus make him more as divine, of which stated is Gnostic entirely.
Yet in this to take away from Christ's own Divinity to make him more man than God is to say Mother Mary could not be A full human. Yet to determine that it is not the flesh nature that makes us human, for God created both Male and female in his image, even as Adam was a man created in the image of God before his expulsion from Eden is to actually declare the opposite of this; for he was human only because of his Dependence upon God. For in his choice to disobey his own full dependence on God, he became as we are all born with a flesh nature, by which we are called animals and brute beasts of carnal pleasure until we see the Light of God, the holy Lord Jesus Christ.
For Death came through one man and the curse is well noted, for we know that Christ had overcome with his victory upon saying where death is thy sting? Yet it is also important that Eve had forth a curse for being deceived in which, her desire would be for her husband and he shall rule over you, and also that her pain of childbirth would increase and her child shall crush the head of the serpent, of which is the devil and Satan.
To thus, overcome the curse of Eve of which her desire shall be for her husband, which is in all women, would there not be a woman who would not have desired to be over her husband upon conception, even to allow him to rule over her? Even to say that in Childbearing her child would crush the head of the serpent? IF then this woman did exist, let us say in hypothesis that this would be the Mother Mary, for the Madonna became as with child, and that child was fully man from her own blood, and fully God from the Holy Spirit which overshadowed her. For I can see no other woman that could have been that to be this second eve except this blessed Virgin Mother Mary.
There is no second Eve. There's no mention of a 2nd Eve, no scripture to support this. You're allowing your imagination to take over here.
Yet then, to say in Hypothesis that this was so, can we test other scripture and evidence to see if this be so, or is there lack of evidence to support an argument to this hypothesis, for this we now must see.
To say then, that the second eve was fully human, yet with no divinity is easy, for even eve was not divine, but submitted unto God in Complete Dependence. IF then your argument means that complete dependence on God means that one has no choice, I will ask why then did Adam Choose to eat of the tree, though he was dependent on God fully. I argue that the devil, Satan in temptation offered a different path to God thus bringing deceit into Eve’s existence for the first time in her life in the Garden of Eden, of which her own choice was to eat and deceive her husband who ate full knowing.
IF then a second eve was made it was made to be submitted fully unto God, even in full dependence as a woman should submit without having desire to be over him at all, less the woman be not a second eve.
Thus the word blessed must come to a woman who would be MOST blessed among all women, because she was made to be the second eve in this hypothesis of which we are in examination.
Yet it is in full dependence on God that Adam and Eve were born without the stain of sin. Yet then, because we have all sinned for being born in sin we are not fully dependent on God as was Adam and Eve in the garden before their fall; yea even though God desires full dependence of which what man who lived on earth can say he has ever reached? No man can say, for the matter is we are born of sin.
You speak in circles and it's difficult to follow your reasoning. But you're not using any scripture support for anything your saying. There is no 2nd Eve. To even imply that is a figment of your own imagination.
Anyone can come up with all kinds of scenarios, but without biblical support, which you don't have, your hypothesis must be rejected.
Yet to take the scripture for all have sinned and fall short the Glory of God is to assume rightly that all who are born with a flesh nature have sinned, just by being born.
Yet it is easy for God to make a second eve, which is both fully human and fully dependent to bear his son so that no stain of sin would be found upon his flesh, lest he be a lamb with blemish.
The seed of Jesus was from God when the Holy Spirit moved upon her and God miraculously created life within her womb. That seed was divine. Not human. There is no blemish not because of Mary, but because the seed came from God Himself.
For if she was created without a flesh nature as a second eve, then she is excluded from the context of the scripture of Romans 3:23 for Mother Mary was not Deprived of God, for the Glory of God was with her as was even said by the angel who said the Lord is with thee, of which is noted Gabriel by name. IF then the Glory of God is deprived for all have sinned, how can a woman know the glory of God, even to see that in her was the Christ unless she be excluded in Romans 3:23 for it was written that all have sinned and are deprived the Glory of God. So thus, The Mother of the King is exempt.
Your imagination is running wild. Again, no scriptural support for any of this. She falls into the same category as we do. She was a fleshly, carnal woman who sinned. God is not a man that He should lie. Mary had to bring sin offerings to the temple. Just the fact that she had a child she had to bring offerings for her uncleanness. You're misquoting Romans 3:23. We're not deprived of God's glory, we fall short of God's glory. In other words we don't measure up to His holiness, His righteousness. We sin, we fall short, we're not perfect like He is.
Yet then to believe that God had a special calling upon her for her dependence upon him as the second eve, thus knowing no flesh nature; for we must continue this argument to full completion, is also to say that she was sinless by choice and to be as God’s handmaiden. So thus she could not desire anything other than what God demanded and upon hearing the meaning of it, she would immediately submit. Thus Christ’s full humanity is a stainless, spotless lamb of man, and fully God for the Holy spirit had overshadowed her.
Again, she's not the second Eve. And you can't find any human being that can claim they haven't sinned. I'm sorry but Mary is just like you and me. She sinned and needed a Savior like we all do.
To know Man’s touch would combine her with a sinful man, for all who were born in the depravity and the two would become one. Thus after Christ was conceived she remained a virgin, for it is never Christ’s will for anyone to know sin and thus Joseph could not have touched her, lest she know sin and that is against the will of God, and further to say that the womb that bore his own son should not be defiled. For in full dependence she would have submitted unto this very statement of not being defiled, else she not be the second eve in the first place.
Do you even read God's word? Mary had other children. I could go and look up the verses, but you would probably reject them since you're not using scripture here to prove your hypothesis.
Is it Mother Mary as an individual that is blessed for her full dependence on Jesus? To which Jesus replied, Rather blessed are those who learn dependence, for those are his mothers and brothers and sisters.
Well I guess I'll get one of the verses about Mary's other children since you're misquoting this verse.
Matthew 12:46-50
While He was still speaking to the crowds, behold, His mother and brothers were standing outside, seeking to speak to Him. Someone said to Him, “Behold, Your mother and Your brothers are standing outside seeking to speak to You.” But Jesus answered the one who was telling Him and said, “Who is My mother and who are My brothers?” And stretching out His hand toward His disciples, He said, “Behold My mother and My brothers! For whoever does the will of My Father who is in heaven, he is My brother and sister and mother.”
Notice that Jesus isn't saying dependance upon. It's whoever obeys God.
And Jesus is downplaying His mother and His brothers. What's more important is the spiritual family rather than the natural family. No one was to be exalted as more holy just because in the natural they were His mother or His brothers. It's being born of the Spirit that counts. That's where true family is found.
So thus, about the actual ascension of Mother Mary, if she had no flesh nature to be prepared for the blessed King Jesus Christ, fully man and fully God, she would not have ever been even made a grave, for without flesh nature there is no physical grave, and without the stain of sin she could not die, so thus either she is still on earth somewhere, fully submitted or she ascended into heaven. There is more evidence in assuming the latter.
This is all conjecture. There's no scriptural support for any of this. She died like we all do. It is appointed unto man that all die and then comes judgement. Mary died just like everyone else did. Even Jesus died. Mary is holier than He?
Just accept the scriptures as truth. Jesus was the only sinless person without spot or blemish. He became our sacrificial lamb that takes away the sin of the world. He had to take away Mary's sin as well.
If then, we know God can do all things, yea all things of righteousness, we cannot become indignant and say God would not have used this method as was believed by the early church of Mother Mary, but instead learn to grow, unless you have a more valid argument of which I will listen.
The early church did not believe this. It wasn't a dogma until 431. That's almost 400 years without this belief.
In conclusion, let us remember that Mother Mary is not divine, Fully human, yet fully dependent and let us also remember that it is her son the Christ that is our God and lay this smaller matter to rest and remember and preach only Christ and him crucified.
In love is all of these words of encouragement, blessings and peace in the name of Jesus Christ our Lord;
I hate to be bluntly honest, but these are not words of encouragement, blessings nor peace. It's all lies. I'd like to encourage you to go and read your bible and don't accept any teaching or doctrine that's not clearly written in God's word.
What you've written here is a doctrine of demons. And it's blasphemy. Sorry again to be so forthright, but you need to hear this because you're following man's wisdom and not at all following God nor His word.
Amen
