Why is this not being taught in Church?

Well, If I'm taking lessons from you, it's no wonder. Ad hominem comments flow thick from you.

Yawn. More point and sputter.

"Highly favoured" does not mean "sinless"; far from it.

That verse does not say anything like, "The Holy Spirit does not indwell sinners."

You still haven't established where the Holy Spirit indwelt Mary prior to Jesus' birth (or any time prior to His resurrection).

I'm not interested in Catholic propaganda, so I have not bothered with that thread.

Repeating yourself is getting old. Produce the Scripture to support your assertions, or stop making them.

Yes. As I said, His temptation was a sham otherwise.

Luke 1:34-35
Then Mary said to the angel, "How can this be, since I do not know a man?" And the angel answered and said to her, "[The] Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Highest will overshadow you; therefore, also, that Holy One who is to be born will be called the Son of God.

This doesn't say anything about being indwelt by the Spirit. It says the Spirit came upon her.

Compare:

1 Samuel 11:6
Then the Spirit of God came upon Saul when he heard this news, and his anger was greatly aroused.

Was Saul sinless?

I see that a little differently.

He sent Saul a spirit of rebuke . Saul was angry because of the news.

He sent Mary a Spirit of blessing. Mary was blessed.

The Spirit of Christ that indwelt Mary. When the indwelling Spirit came upon her she was moved to both work, with God, working to both give her ears hear his will and she was empowered to finish the good pleasure of her father.

It would seem she came under the requirement found below.

2 Corinthians 4:7But we have this treasure in earthen vessels, that the excellency of the power may be of God, and not of us.

Not one example can be found in any post I've made in this community.

As I said, you cannot go even hours without producing sarcasm, ad hominem or idioms, in response to those you cannot converse with on a mature level. I would say it is largely ego that causes this. You're unable to admit you're wrong about this particular topic. the Ad Hom, is evidence of this. If you would only be open to learning something you'd go further in discussing Soteriology. However, you don't wish to do that and that is why you believe, insist, the Holy Spirit would indwell a woman dead in her sins so as to deliver through natural birth the son of man and of God, that Messiah prophecy is fulfilled and the world would be saved from Sin.
Redundant. God arrives through the womb of a woman dead in her sins, so as to save the world from that which makes them dead; sin. The contradiction in that analogy, your theology, is afforded in the obvious. God is born from a woman whom He didn't save from her sins before indwelling what His word says His Holy Spirit shall not; a sinner. And so as to save the world from its Sin through His grace and yet, withheld His grace from the woman He favored to be His mother on earth; Mary.

What then would "Favored" be in that kind of theology? Simply that of, God picked her to be mother of God's Holy Spirit as Emmanuel. Who contradicted in that choosing of her His own eternal word. That God indwells those dead in their sin.



Didn't say favored means sinless. You don't read the posts that inform you of what Favored actually means.

Of course it does. Prove your point then. That Holy Spirit God indwells those who are dead in their sins. Produce God's word, scripture, as proof of your point.

Now you are out of line. Now I know why you are so failed in scripture.
Thank you for that, as it explains quite a lot.

The one who studies the Bible, actually studies the Bible, knows like they know their own name the scripture found in the Book of Luke chapter 1:35. You however have just stated you do not. And phrasing your question as you did does not put the onus on me. It shows you aren't aware and that is why after I've repeatedly referred to what is contained in that scripture, erroneously presuming you knew it, you now try to invalidate my argument with that statement. When in truth you showed me, and all reading you, why you behave as you do in BDF. Red Herring.


Anti-Catholic bigotry , like all bigotry, is a sin. You'd learn something if you were more free of heart.

He has eyes but he does not see, mind but he does not read. Because it conflicts with the theology he boasts yet lacks.

Do you believe Jesus was God?

It isn't an argument. It is a debate and discussion surrounding the words of God. I would refer you to the Book of Timothy chapter 3 and particularly verse 16.
Can we agree Jesus wasn't God?
Can we agree God can be tempted into Sin?

I look forward to your perspective.

You realize they're telling you in their pov that Mary did not beget Emmanuel by the Holy Spirit. Which is of course untrue. The Book of Luke chapter 1
How else would Emmanuel be known also as the Son of God.

Matthew Poole's Commentary
The Holy Ghost (who is also called here the power of the Highest) shall come upon thee; it is a phrase which signifieth a special and peculiar influence of the Holy Spirit: thus we read of the prophets, that the Spirit of the Lord came upon them, 2 Chronicles 20:14, &c., which argued a special influence of the Holy Spirit on them, efficacious, so as it put them upon a present prophesying. There is a common influence of God upon the forming of all children in the womb, Job 10:8 Psalm 139:15. But this phrase denotes an extraordinary special influence of the Spirit, changing the order and course of nature, and giving a power to the blood of the virgin by him sanctified, to coagulate alone to the forming of the body of a child: this is more mysteriously yet expressed, by the term overshadow thee, which I take to be a modest phrase, signifying only a supply of man’s act, by a Divine creating power, in a most miraculous manner.

Therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God, as Adam was called the son of God, Luke 3:38, God (by his creating power) supplying as to him the place of father and mother, and to Christ supplying the place of the father, though not of the mother, for (saith the angel) he shall be

born of thee. But yet that mass of flesh shall be a holy thing, because, though born of thee, and flesh of thy flesh, yet of thy flesh first sanctified, by the Holy Ghost coming upon and overshadowing of thee. He shalt be called so, not that he was not so by eternal generation, (of which the angel here speaks not), but the Word, the eternal Son of God, which was in the beginning, being thus made flesh, and personally united to thy flesh, the whole person shall be called

the Son of God.


This is why Christians stand on the word of God. And why God tells us, His word's use in this world. 16 All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for instruction, for conviction, for correction, and for training in righteousness, 17so that the man of God may be complete, fully equipped for every good work

I am not Catholic. I ask that you do not further slander me with your false allegation.

Mary carried the body

Click to expand...

Scripture to support your claim please.

mary was just as saved as king David and abraham and all the OT saints, yet her sin were not yet paid for. That would not occur for another 33 years.

Click to expand...

Do you believe Emmanuel/Jesus was God?

Yes, big difference between the Son of God, our High priest, Christ(the anointing Holy Spirit of God) continually without beginning and end.. and the son of God remember not being what we will be. when we shed these bodies of death (men) then the word "sons of God" will have met its purpose.

1 John 3:1 Behold, what manner of love the Father hath bestowed upon us, that we should be called the sons of God: therefore the world knoweth us not, because it knew him not.Beloved, now are we the sons of God, and it doth not yet appear what we shall be: but we know that, when he shall appear, we shall be like him; for we shall see him as he is.

We know each other after the flesh as sons of men. Jesus as a Son of man pertaining to his corrupted flesh and blood was given the honor of "Son of man" .Capitalizing Son to distinguish him from us. . . "sons of men"

Exactly Right

Jesus as the Son of man seen, or Jesus as the Son of God, not seen ?

I would offer. It would appear no power is reckoned after what the eyes see "the temporal". His birth did not supply the unseen power of the gospel giving him strength to rise . That power came from the unseen source.. the one source of faith . In that way no such thing as the holiness of flesh

Romans 1:3-5 King James Version (KJV)Concerning his Son Jesus Christ our Lord, which was made of the seed of David according to the flesh; And declared to be the Son of God with power, according to the spirit of holiness, by the resurrection from the dead: By whom we have received grace and apostleship, for obedience to the faith among all nations, for his name:

never said you were, so practice what you preach, (false accusation)

ok, I will agree with you, Jesus entered the baby when the Hs and the seed united to become an egg. And lived within her until the body was born.

actually, the Bible states when a child is born God breathes life into that child.thatnis when the child is given a soul, the difference is, Jesus himself entered the child

he was God/man. fully human and fully God, the second adam

but you responded to my comment on Mary,

jesus would not die for marys sin for another 33 years. So her sin could be passed over, but the payment was not yet made, she was like david and abraham and moses.

the Spirit didn't always move Saul to anger. same Spirit, same coming over him. what emotional paradigm a spirit moves a person to doesn't define the spirit.

He didn't send Mary 'a spirit of blessing' -- THE Holy Spirit came over her. exactly the same spirit that moved the prophets and others; the same one that teaches us the things of Christ. not different spirits specializing in different feelings. One Spirit, alive.

the point is that coming over a person is not the same as dwelling in someone. on vs. in

Do you forget what you write? "It’s obvious you are not learned in certain areas, especially when it comes to the humanity of Christ, and your catholized belief af a sinless Mary is out there. "


There is no mention of what would otherwise be a normal human procreative method per Jesus conception. The Holy Spirit covered Mary.
Remember the Book of Matthew chapter 1:18This is how the birth of Jesus Christ came about: His mother Mary was pledged in marriage to Joseph, but before they came together, she was found to be with Child through the Holy Spirit.

he was God/man. fully human and fully God, the second adam

Click to expand...

That's actually what is called a "Demigod", in religious circles. Part human, part divine. Jesus was not fully, as we understand the term human as pertains to sin nature. Jesus was however fully God. And yes, the second Adam.

but you responded to my comment on Mary,

Click to expand...

Mary's sins were forgiven her by God's favor, before His Holy Spirit covered her and knitted Emmanuel together in her womb. When Mary referred to God her savior in the Book of Luke chapter 1, it was in present tense. God my Savior. If Mary would not be forgiven her sins for another 33 years, present tense would not be appropriate given God was Emmanuel/Jesus when He favored Mary to bear Him into the world as our beloved Christ.

There are also those teachings, Denominations, that teach that Jesus was not divine. He was merely a man favored by God to do God's work. Anabaptist's, Mormons, Christian Scientists, JW's, Christadelphians, teach this. This is also why they believe Jesus was a man who could be tempted by Satan and fall into sin, but chose not to.

However, Jesus was sinless, therefore He could not sin, ever. We know this because when Jesus was fully God.
The Devil did not at first know for certain if Emmanuel/Jesus was the prophesied Messiah of Israel when he first tempted Him in the The Book of Matthew chapter 4:3 And the tempter came and said to him, “If you are the Son of God, command these stones to become loaves of bread.” desert.

However, in the Book of Matthew chapter 8, we read that the Demons knew Jesus was the Son of God, God Himself.
28 And when he came to the other side, to the country of the Gadarenes,[e] two demon-possessed[f] men met him, coming out of the tombs, so fierce that no one could pass that way. 29 And behold, they cried out, “What have you to do with us, O Son of God? Have you come here to torment us before the time?”



Son = υἱός (hyios)
Strong: G5207

of = ὁ (ho)
Strong: G3588, G5120


God =θεός (theos)
Strong: G2316


Other proofs in scripture:
The Book of Mark chapter 1:24 *Referring to Christ there as , Jesus of Nazareth
The Book of Mark chapter 5:7 *Referring to Christ there as, Jesus Son of the Most High God

As pertains to the Devil/Adversary of God, Satan, still questioning if Jesus were the Son of God, still tempting Jesus to do his will:
The Book of Luke chapter 4:3 *Satan saying, if you are the Son of God.... , while later in the chapter (verse 41) the Demons come out and proclaim Jesus is the Son of God.
The Book of Luke chapter 8:28 *the Demon begging Jesus, whom he acknowledged as the Son of the Most High God,

Satan did not know Jesus was Messiah. Jesus divinity was kept secret from the unbelievers and Demons and even Satan, which is why Joseph was wed to Mary before she started to show, so as to make it appear they were lawfully married before she became pregnant. An unwed woman was subject to the penalty of the law for getting pregnant.

Jesus divine person was revealed when He was Baptized by John and God's Holy Spirit then said to all gathered and announced the fact that Jesus was the Son of God. The Book of Matthew chapter 3

you really hate being called out don’t you? Saying you believe in a Catholic is Ed doctrine is not saying you are catholic. I said you believe in one of their doctrines

let’s see if you can show some humility and admit you were wrong and are infact bearing false witness yourself


yet you still have not proven Jesus entered the body at conception.

do you have any proof? Or just continue with conjecture

adam was fully human at creation, he had no sin nature like Jesus he was born perfect with no sin or nature to sin

as the same

jesus was able to sin as was Adam was. Adam failed where Jesus did not

once again, if Jesus was totally unable to sinl his sacrifice is null and void.

I think Matthew 1:18 explains it quite well. Mary was carrying the Christ child. She was with child. The child is a living person.

Matthew 1:18 Now the birth of Jesus Christ was on this wise: When as his mother Mary was espoused to Joseph, before they came together, she was found with child of the Holy Ghost.

Isaiah 9:6 For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.

The child that was born is the same child that was in Mary’s womb.

John the baptist had declared Him. even from His birth, the angels and the magi had - and Simeon, explicitly, too.

so did Satan not know Christ is the Messiah or did he just not understand who the Messiah is?

here too:

Whats the matter with these people, are they missing pages out of there bible.

By the way I love your Avatar, it just kills me