Posted on 04/14/2011 9:21:51 AM PDT by marshmallow
Agreed. Mary needed a savior as much as anyone. Mary was a sweet young girl, a normal human being, in order for Jesus to be wholly God and wholly man. If she were anything else, as in “perfect”, Jesus could not have legally qualified to save mankind because He would not have been like us, been one of us. It’s a crucial part of the Plan of Salvation.
At the beginning of the New Testament, the very beginning, as in, Chapter One of the Gospel of Matthew, it’s obvious that she was a regular person, given the honor of carrying the Son of God Who was conceived of the Holy Spirit while she was still a virgin, but she then went on to have a normal marriage with Joseph:
Matthew 1
“18Now 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.
19Then Joseph her husband, being a just man, and not willing to make her a public example, was minded to put her away privily.
20But while he thought on these things, behold, the angel of the LORD appeared unto him in a dream, saying, Joseph, thou son of David, fear not to take unto thee Mary thy wife: for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Ghost.
21And she shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call his name JESUS: for he shall save his people from their sins.
22Now all this was done, that it might be fulfilled which was spoken of the Lord by the prophet, saying,
23Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God with us.
24Then Joseph being raised from sleep did as the angel of the Lord had bidden him, and took unto him his wife:
25And knew her not till she had brought forth her firstborn son: and he called his name JESUS.”
Emphasis
Matthew 1:25 And knew her not till she had brought forth her firstborn son: and he called his name JESUS.
Sadly true. Exposes it. Applying the word “blasphemy” to the treatment of a mere mortal shows whoever thinks it’s blasphemy has elevated that mere mortal to the status of God. Blasphemy in the mind of the idolizer only.
Once and only once in the history of mankind has there been a person conceived “immaculately”: THAT ONE TIME WAS WHEN THE LORD JESUS CHRIST WAS CONCEIVED.
Other than that, every human born was conceived non-immaculately. EVERY human being. Including Jesus’ mom.
Clement of Alexandria
“Now, O you, my children, our Instructor is like His Father God, whose son He is, sinless, blameless, and with a soul devoid of passion; God in the form of man, stainless, the minister of His Father’s will, the Word who is God, who is in the Father, who is at the Father’s right hand, and with the form of God is God. He is to us a spotless image; to Him we are to try with all our might to assimilate our souls. He is wholly free from human passions; wherefore also He alone is judge, because He alone is sinless. As far, however, as we can, let us try to sin as little as possible. For nothing is so urgent in the first place as deliverance from passions and disorders, and then the checking of our liability to fall into sins that have become habitual. It is best, therefore, not to sin at all in any way, which we assert to be the prerogative of God alone.” - The Instructor 1.2
Origen
“For in the connected series of statements which appears to apply as to one particular individual, the curse pronounced upon Adam is regarded as common to all (the members of the race), and what was spoken with reference to the woman is spoken of every woman without exception.” - Against Celsus 4.40
Cyril of Jerusalem
“This is the Holy Ghost, who came upon the Holy Virgin Mary; for since He who was conceived was Christ the Only-begotten, the power of the Highest overshadowed her, and the Holy Ghost came upon her, and sanctified her, that she might be able to receive Him, by whom all things were made. But I have no need of many words to teach thee that generation was without defilement or taint, for thou hast learned it.” - Catechetical Lectures 17.6
John Chrysostom
“For where parents cause no impediment or hindrance in things belonging to God, it is our bounden duty to give way to them, and there is great danger in not doing so; but when they require anything unseasonably, and cause hindrance in any spiritual matter, it is unsafe to obey. And therefore He answered thus in this place, and again elsewhere, ‘Who is My mother, and who are My brethren?’ (Matt. xii. 48), because they did not yet think rightly of Him; and she, because she had borne Him, claimed, according to the custom of other mothers, to direct Him in all things, when she ought to have reverenced and worshiped Him. This then was the reason why He answered as He did on that occassion....And so this was a reason why He rebuked her on that occasion, saying, ‘Woman, what have I to do with thee?’ [John 2:4] instructing her for the future not to do the like; because, though He was careful to honor His mother, yet He cared much for the salvation of her soul.” - Homilies on the Gospel According to St. John, Homily 21
Augustine
"It is therefore an observed and settled fact, that no man born of a man and a woman, that is, by means of their bodily union, is seen to be free from sin. Whosoever, indeed, is free from sin, is free also from a conception and birth of this kind. Moreover, when expounding the Gospel according to Luke, he says: It was no cohabitation with a husband which opened the secrets of the Virgin’s womb; rather was it the Holy Ghost which infused immaculate seed into her unviolated womb. For the Lord Jesus alone of those who are born of woman is holy, inasmuch as He experienced not the contact of earthly corruption, by reason of the novelty of His immaculate birth; nay, He repelled it by His heavenly majesty - A Treatise on the Grace of Christ, and on Original Sin
AMEN! AMEN! AMEN!
THX THX.
WELL DONE, AS ALWAYS . . .
Of course, folks who pick and choose what bits of history to put in their rubberized history text . . . and what bits of Scripture to put in their rubberized ‘bibles’ . . . and what DAFFYNITIONS to put in their DAFFYNITIONARIES . . .
are not likely to be the least bit interested or moved by THE TRUTH.
...
...
...
...
...
...
crickets chirping
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
hope you aren’t holding your breath for any respectable response from marshmallow or the other rOMANcATHOLICS (lower case deliberate). ...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
Real history probably matters somewhat.
Fantasized history a la the Vatican Cult is a farce and insult to intelligent folk far and wide.
INDEED.
None are so blind as those who WILL NOT see.
Sigh.
oh, post 52, oh, you said
I want the interpretations of those whom Jesus actually commissioned; the Apostles and their successors. That’s what’s important to me. That’s why I’m providing you with the opinion of the Church Fathers.
Ignore them at your peril.
oh, post 365, oh, ???do you still say:
I want the interpretations of those whom Jesus actually commissioned; the Apostles and their successors. That’s what’s important to me. That’s why I’m providing you with the opinion of the Church Fathers.
Ignore them at your peril.
Just because we reject sola scriptura (which is not, by the way, in the bible) doesn't mean we reject the bible. Not by any means.
My oh my, thats just awful.
Claim substantiation, please.
We’ve given that a lot of times and it’s just weasel worded out of or more often, side stepped and totally ignored.
Conservative Gramma just did so again with Marshmellow’s thread about purportedly sinless Mary a la the early fathers thread . . .
None of the Proddys are expecting anything remotely close to a reasonable response.
Okay then. I’ll just file that under unsubstantiated claim.
CHRIST HIMSELF--CREATOR GOD HIMSELF
SAID
"IT IS WRITTEN"
There's CHRIST HIMSELF!
CREATOR GOD IN THE FLESH HIMSELF
making a repeated very SHARPLY INSISTENT POINT--to satan, the pharisees--to all:
The point OF AUTHORITY,
THE SOURCE OF AUTHORITY
CREATOR GOD HIMSELF POINTED TO WAS:
So, y'all are BRAZENLY, BLASPHEMOUSLY, HAUGHTILY INSISTING
THAT
Creator God Himself
WAS WRONG!
It might be somewhat logical to argue that CREATOR GOD HIMSELF IN THE FLESH WAS A HIGHER AUTHORITY THAN "IT IS WRITTEN."
YET, THE RECORD indicates that CREATOR GOD HIMSELF deferred repeatedly to:
IT IS WRITTEN!
YET, the RCC INSISTS BOTH ARE WRONG.
THAT the very sort of !!!!TRADITIONS!!!!
That Creator God Himself most fiercely condemned
are more or at least equally authoritative than
the IT IS WRITTEN that CREATOR GOD DEFERRED TO AS THE HIGHER AUTHORITY.
THEN!
Y'all expect Proddys to pretend that's
No deal.
IT IS WRITTEN!
YET, the RCC INSISTS BOTH ARE WRONG.
THAT the very sort of !!!!TRADITIONS!!!!
That Creator God Himself most fiercely condemned
are more or at least equally authoritative than
the IT IS WRITTEN that CREATOR GOD DEFERRED TO AS THE HIGHER AUTHORITY.
THEN!
Y'all expect Proddys to pretend that's
No deal.
.
.
.
Actually, I'm not. Much of Catholic teaching is taken from the Bible. And all Catholic teachings are biblically justifiable. I don't know what people have told you, but I wholeheartedly suggest you read up on Catholic teachings for yourself. The truth is there for those willing to open their eyes and see it.
Well quix, I don't know what time it is where you're at, but here at my computer its nearing 12:30 in the a.m. I'll just bid you good night, or good day, or whatever it is at your locale.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.