Featured Different interpretations based on different interpretations.... lol

That’s right, two opposing truths cannot both be true.

We can’t call Jesus sinless, if we hold that Jesus was conceived in sin of a sinful mother.

Either Mary was sinless and she conceived Jesus of sinless flesh.

Or Mary was a sinner and she conceived Jesus in sin, and Jesus was a sinner.

 

Jesus could not have sinful flesh, that flesh had to be offered as unblemished sacrifice for mankind.

Mary conceived Jesus of her sinless flesh, Jesus took flesh of her flesh. So if her flesh was blemished by sin, His flesh would also be blemished by sin.

So it’s obvious that Mary was sinless and Jesus could be conceived sinless and unblemished by sinful flesh.

 

They think Mary was “preserved from sin” though she was born of two sinful parents and hundreds of sinful ancestors.

But they don’t believe the Lord Jesus was “preserved from sin” UNLESS His mother (one parent) was sinless before His conception.

Illogical, not Scriptural, made up mess of men.

If Mary can be preserved from sin, though born of two sinful parents, then the Lord Jesus can also be preserved from sin though being born of one sinful parent, with His spirit coming from Almighty God.

The sin nature does not come from the mother, but from the father, and His father did not come from Adam, which is where the sin nature originated.

 

“Behold, I was brought forth in iniquity, and in sin did my mother conceive me. 5 For I was born a sinner— yes, from the moment my mother conceived me. “

Mary was made a sinless sanctuary, so that Jesus would dwell among us. Jesus “ God with us “.

“And let them make me a sanctuary; that I may dwell among them.”

“ The Almighty has done great things for me “.

 

Cathode you have convinced yourself or rather the RCC has convinced you through their private interpretation that the scriptures are wrong.

The question you have to answer is; When did God stop being God? Secondly when did mary stop being human?

The vessel does not determine the valve of the contents. Mary was the sinful vessel that contained the sinless God. Scripture tells us mary was a sinner in need of a savior.

Luk 1:47 And my spirit has rejoiced in God my Savior.

Mary speaks of God as "my Savior".
Mary said Christ was her personal savior she did not say "a savior" or "the savior" Mary did not consider herself to be sinless so why should you?

You have zero scripture that supports your view. It is just conjecture, private interpretation on your part.

You make bold statements "Jesus could not have sinful flesh" "Mary conceived Jesus of her sinless flesh"
You are saying that a human did something they can not do, be sinless and saying that God can not do what He did, be sinless.

The only authority that we have is the Word of God, the bible.

If what you believe contradicts the Word of God then you need to rethink what you believe.

 

Cathode give us the clear scripture that says Mary was made sinless. What you have done is prove that she was a sinner,

You are reading into scripture what is not there and denying what is in scripture.

When the Holy Spirit dwells in me or you did that make either of us Holy / sinless. By you logic it should.

I mean how can the sinless Holy Spirit live in a sinful human?

You need Mary to be sinless as that is one of the dogma's of the RCC that you must believe .

 

Mary was saved from sin in the first place. That’s how God saved her.

The Almighty did great things for her.

Preserved Mary from all sin to carry out her unique mission, to conceive sinless Lord Jesus.

 

It is absolutely amazing how rc's just make stuff up to support their un-biblical/heretical teachings/doctrines.

 

She was human, but God created her sinless, and preserved her from sin.

“ The Almighty has done great things for me “

Would creating Mary sinless be considered a “Great “ thing done for her by The Almighty. It meets the criteria of “ great thing “.

Fact is you try to glean christianity by text alone and Christianity isn’t confined to text alone. Without the Spoken Word of God you can never fully understand the Written Word of God, or it’s depths, or it’s beauty.

It is not given for you to understand these things.

 

I did, but you didn’t understand it. It is not given for you to understand it.

 

No, your rc denomination's self claimed ancient "apostolic understanding of Scripture" is completely alien to what God's Word actually says. It is your denomination's traditions that are filtered through the private interpretations of Scripture (and non-scripture) in the last 1434 years. Becoming more and more unbiblical and apostate as the years went on.

 

Really? It is more like, without God we would have no Bible. There. I fixed it for the arrogant man.

 

Yep, the mormons also 'claim' they have 'apostolic authority' so they can claim their unbiblical/heretical teaching also don't need to be found in God's Word.

 

You keep saying these things but you have not provided any clear scripture to support your view. You expect me to believe what a group of men tell you the bible means rather than trust what the bible actually says.

I took the time to look at the four Marian dogma. and what becomes clear is that they all come from private interpretation not the bible.

You say don't trust the Word of God trust the word of fallible self serving men. We have the spoken word of God in written form.
2Ti 3:16 All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness,
2Ti 3:17 that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work.

Notice what it does not say, and listen to the private interpretations of man that contradict the written word.

You say "Without the Spoken Word of God you can never fully understand the Written Word of God, or it’s depths, or it’s beauty." Really? Do you not think the Holy Spirit wants us to understand His word? He has to have failed men translate it for us.

But the obvious question: Who determines what the spoken word of God is or means, your RCC? Based on what authority does the RCC think they can alter the Word of God?

 

It is working great for me. God used His Word alone to free me of the lies/false teachings/doctrines of the rc denomination. Praise God!

 

Well since you have not provided any scripture in support of your view I have to conclude that your theology is false and man-made.

What do I not understand about these words? Luk 1:47 And my spirit has rejoiced in God my Savior.

Mary speaks of God as "my Savior".
Mary said Christ was her personal savior she did not say "a savior" or "the savior" Mary did not consider herself to be sinless so why should you?

Are you using a different dictionary or is this text a written code?

The JW's and Mormons both think they understand the text that is hidden from the rest of the people. You are starting to sound like them.

The more you try to defend your un-biblical view the more desperate you become in your comments.

You just need to trust the Word of God. Mary said she was a sinner so why can you not accept that as truth?

Cults are known for pulling various texts out of context to support their errant views. That seems to be the road you are going down.

 

Cathode from your posts it is obvious that you will not accept the Word of God as written. You even go so far as to tell me I do not know how to read or understand clear English. You do not want truth you need compliance. Your faith is not based on the written word but on what the RCC has told you.

By your own words you have placed you salvation in the hands of the RCC and their Marian dogma's

"If you convince me that Mary was a sinner, and Jesus was conceived of her sinful flesh, then it’s over.

I would abandon Christianity altogether.

See I would follow through to the end conclusion of your position. If Jesus was conceived of sinful flesh, then He would be a sinner, then all Christianity is false, and my Bible would go straight into the garbage."

So you do not need the bible just the RCC church to tell you what to believe. So you might as well throw out your bible as you do not believe it is the Word of God.

 

But Jesus wasn't conceived of sinful flesh. No she did not 'conceived' by human means. No flesh touched her for her to conceive. She was a virgin. Even Mary wondered how could this be. Well let's read how God was able to do that. It is miraculous!

Luke1:30-35
30The angel said to her, “Do not be afraid, Mary; for you have found favor with God. 31And behold, you will conceive in your womb and bear a son, and you shall name Him Jesus. 32He will be great and will be called the Son of the Most High; and the Lord God will give Him the throne of His father David; 33and He will reign over the house of Jacob forever, and His kingdom will have no end.” 34Mary said to the angel, “How can this be, since I am a virgin?” 35The angel answered and said to her, “The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you; and for that reason the holy Child shall be called the Son of God. 36

So you see, no need for the false Mary (sinless) of the rc denomination. She 'conceived' by being 'overshadowed' the power of God, the Holy Spirit, the Most High and for THAT REASON Jesus was holy and was called the Son of God!

Isn't that awesome! Jesus being God (sinless) had NOTHING to do with Mary. It was, and always was God.

So you have no excuse now to believe the false teaching of your denomination about sinless Mary and the 'immaculate conception' and all that nonsense.
You can no longer be 'stuck' on 'you will conceive'. If you just would have read further, God Himself explained and you could have gotten past it a long tome ago.

So now you can believe GOD, not your rc denomination's fallible men who call God a liar, so that when God wrote Romans 3:23 - 'for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God' , that also included Mary!

 

He was a Baptist Pastor, God rest him.

 

So your saying that Jesus wasn’t of Mary’s flesh and blood?