Was Mother Mary Sinless and thus disobeys Romans 3:23

[BeyondET]

need?

maybe not... probably not

but he chose a woman with one...

and im sure there was purpose

Did Mary have only one egg? No of coarse not.

man from the dirt, woman from a rib of the man, surely God can do what God can do.

 

[ForthAngel]

Did Mary have only one egg? No of coarse not.

man from the dirt, woman from a rib of the man, surely God can do what God can do.

Then there is this:

Matthew 3:9
9 And do not presume to say to yourselves, ‘We have Abraham as our father,’ for I tell you, God is able from these stones to raise up children for Abraham.

 

[tourist]

Stubborn, unwilling even to read?

I prefer a short pithy post.

 

[NayborBear]

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.

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.

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. 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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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;

Amen

I didn't read your post either, but will inject, that, in order for God's servants, the prophets, in the O.T. to come unto pass, Mary and Jospeh's getting together were "orchestrated", to come to be, when, it came to be, as to keep the bloodline, of the Holy Priesthood, in Mary, and the King bloodline in Joseph, although, Joseph had NO part, save by his being of the king line, to be!

 

[BeyondET]

Then there is this:

Matthew 3:9
9 And do not presume to say to yourselves, ‘We have Abraham as our father,’ for I tell you, God is able from these stones to raise up children for Abraham.

What do you think John the Bapist was telling the Pharisees and Sadducees when he said those words?

 

[ForthAngel]

What do you think John the Bapist was telling the Pharisees and Sadducees when he said those words?

Never really thought about it much til now honestly. Context shows that John is ushering in the Christ and speaking of a coming judgment and salvation. A separation of the wheat and chaff. He was warning the Pharisees to repent in preparation. I assume they felt no need because of their own self-righteousness and they make a claim based on their lineage. Jesus has a similar encounter with some Jews in John 8:

31 So Jesus said to the Jews who had believed him, “If you abide in my word, you are truly my disciples, 32 and you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free.” 33 They answered him, “We are offspring of Abraham and have never been enslaved to anyone. How is it that you say, ‘You will become free’?”

34 Jesus answered them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, everyone who practices sin is a slave to sin. 35 The slave does not remain in the house forever; the son remains forever. 36 So if the Son sets you free, you will be free indeed. 37 I know that you are offspring of Abraham; yet you seek to kill me because my word finds no place in you. 38 I speak of what I have seen with my Father, and you do what you have heard from your father.”

The interesting part about this is that Jesus isn't saying they are doing what they have heard from Abraham, but their father Satan. The passage continues:

39 They answered him, “Abraham is our father.” Jesus said to them, “If you were Abraham's children, you would be doing the works Abraham did, 40 but now you seek to kill me, a man who has told you the truth that I heard from God. This is not what Abraham did. 41 You are doing the works your father did.” They said to him, “We were not born of sexual immorality. We have one Father—even God.” 42 Jesus said to them, “If God were your Father, you would love me, for I came from God and I am here. I came not of my own accord, but he sent me. 43 Why do you not understand what I say? It is because you cannot bear to hear my word. 44 You are of your father the devil, and your will is to do your father's desires. He was a murderer from the beginning, and does not stand in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks out of his own character, for he is a liar and the father of lies. 45 But because I tell the truth, you do not believe me. 46 Which one of you convicts me of sin? If I tell the truth, why do you not believe me? 47 Whoever is of God hears the words of God. The reason why you do not hear them is that you are not of God.”

I do believe John was being serious, however, when he said "God is able of these stones to raise up children for Abraham."

Entirely possible that God could do it. I don't think taking that literally was the point of the passage, however, but it is an interesting statement in regards to what you said earlier.

 

[notuptome]

I wonder if God needs a human egg inside a womb to produce another human in flesh?

need?

maybe not... probably not

but he chose a woman with one...

and im sure there was purpose

Pure speculation as the bible gives no specific information on the subject. Limited knowledge of those of that time focused on genealogy not biology. Mary was of the lineage of David and the Messiah was according prophecy to be a descendent of David King of Israel.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

 

[BeyondET]

Well we first can throw out the window that these two people were Mary's parents,

Joachim was the husband of Saint Anne and the father of Mary, the mother of Jesus, according to the Catholic, Orthodox, and Anglican traditions.

 

[BeyondET]

Pure speculation as the bible gives no specific information on the subject. Limited knowledge of those of that time focused on genealogy not biology. Mary was of the lineage of David and the Messiah was according prophecy to be a descendent of David King of Israel.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

That in interesting, does the bible mention Mary's lineage?

 

[Magenta]

That in interesting, does the bible mention Mary's lineage?

Yes, it does Here is a page on it:

The Genealogy of Jesus Through Mary

 

[Magenta]

Did Mary have only one egg? No of coarse not.
man from the dirt, woman from a rib of the man, surely God can do what God can do.

She had only one womb, though And it was one ovum that developed into our Savior

 

[BeyondET]

She had only one womb, though And it was one ovum that developed into our Savior

Where is your scripture to support the theory that God used a ovum? A Human Egg?

 

[dcontroversal]

No.........only one was sinless and he BECAME SIN FOR US........his name is Jesus

 

[Magenta]

Where is your scripture to support the theory that God used a ovum? A Human Egg?

LOL. Really??? How could Jesus be of Mary's line if He had not?
Where would His human side have come from?

 

[jaybird88]

Was Mother Mary Sinless and thus disobeys Romans 3:23

did Jesus disobey Rom 3 23?

 

[maxwel]

This is a gateway doctrine. It opens the door to co-redeemer doctrines. It opens the door to co-intercessor doctrines. It opens the door to assumption doctrines, Mary did not die but was assumed into heaven.

God used Mary as a vessel through which a body was prepared for the incarnation of Christ the Messiah. A great honor and desired by every young Hebrew virgin even to this day.

Mary was blessed of God and an example of Gods goodness.

Mary had other children and having seen her Savior died, was buried, and will one day be glorified together with her Messiah.

The Roman catholic church has long promoted this unbiblical doctrine. It serves to draw souls away from the truth that Jesus is the only way to be saved.

No man comes to the Father but by Me.

Joh 14:6 Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

That made me laugh really hard.

It' a GATEWAY DOCTRINE.

One minute you're sitting at home thinking how Mary was sinless, and before you know it, POW...
you're waking up under a bridge on a pile of heroin needles, and your shoes are missing.

 

[Johnny_B]

i started at the top

and scrolled to the bottom

looking for a verse

but i found none...


i didnt read your post

but unless you use the word of God to refute the word of God

i will not believe you

may God bless you with the truth

mary did sin as the bible says

Proverbs 3:5-6

5 Trust in the Lord with all thine heart; and lean not unto thine own understanding.

6 In all thy ways acknowledge him, and he shall direct thy paths.

Romans 3:23

23 For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God;


Romans 3:4

4 God forbid: yea, let God be true, but every man a liar; as it is written, That thou mightest be justified in thy sayings, and mightest overcome when thou art judged.

​I did the same thing no Scripture no read.

 

[willybob]

That in interesting, does the bible mention Mary's lineage?

Yes, Luke chapter three, the names were always listed under the husband in the temple records, her supposed husband was Joseph..Mary was one of 5 daughters of Heli. Heli had no sons, Joseph was Jesus step father, this linage was proof that Jesus was Son of man...Its amazing that it was written by a gentile, named Luke, inspired by God....Jesus was the 72nd seed from Adam...HE had 3 lineages, Mathew 1 was His kingship linage through His step father Joseph, John 1, Jesus was the Son of God, and Luke 3 He was the Son of man,

 

[willybob]

Wow, just coming to learn how NOT Scriptural your beliefs are! The flesh is enmity to God, and yes, we are born of the flesh in/after Adam and are enemies of God until we are born again of the Holy Spirit of God. Mary was born the same way. Jesus did not have an earthly father.

Believe what you want, you never prove any of your fables with text, just fleshly emotional pictures of Roman Catholic hearts, cupcakes, and other pagan pictures...

 

[willybob]

Yes, the seed of Abraham was the promised blessing to the whole world and has nothing to do with Jesus having an earthly father, for Jesus is the seed that was spoken of, for he came to be a blessing to the whole world by becoming sin for us and paying the penalty of sin which is death. Sin entered the world by one man and man's seed (seed being used in the usual sense there) had no play in the conception of Jesus, for He was sired via the overshadowing of Mary by the Holy Spirit of God. Otherwise Jesus would have just been a man, and we know He was not, or is that what you are trying to say? Mary had both an earthly mother and father. JESUS DID NOT.

I didn't say Jesus had an earthly father, He had an earthly step father, Abrahams seed came through Mary's linage, study the text instead of making a fool of yourself for a change..it can all be verified in Luke 3...