The false doctrine of the Immaculate Conception

[RCommando]

Christ gave His authority to the apostles (not the bible, not every believer) ----> They passed this authority down through the ages to other bishops (there is a whole list from Peter on... this is historical fact)-----> this authority resides in the bishops of the Holy Catholic Church to this day------> They (by Christ's Authority) have bound the faithful to believe in the Dogma of the Immaculate Conception... which has been taught and believed from the earliest age of Christendom. That is why you are obligated to believe it.

 

[Walpole]

Christ gave His authority to the apostles (not the bible, not every believer) ----> They passed this authority down through the ages to other bishops (there is a whole list from Peter on... this is historical fact)-----> this authority resides in the bishops of the Holy Catholic Church to this day------> They (by Christ's Authority) have bound the faithful to believe in the Dogma of the Immaculate Conception... which has been taught and believed from the earliest age of Christendom. That is why you are obligated to believe it.

Bingo!

Christianity 101...

 

[MarysSon]

You have every right to believe in the Immaculate Conception. However, if you want Protestants to accept that belief you’re going to have to do one of two things: 1) Convince us that Catholic tradition is authoritative in these matters. Or 2) Show us an explicit scripture reference stating that she was cleansed from the stain of original sin at conception instead of at birth or at the Annunciation, if at all. Asking for a verse that specifically denies the Immaculate Conception happened is asking us to prove a negative and is unlikely to convince anyone of anything. I personally can’t rule out the possibility that the IC is true, but I also don’t see myself under any obligation to believe it.

Fair enough.

Paul places Sacred Tradition on par with Scripture:
2 Thess 2:15
"Stand firm and hold fast to the Traditions you were taught, whether by an ORAL STATEMENT or by a letter from us."

Of course, this does not include minor traditions (small "t"), such as a saint's feast day, or a practice such as ashes on the forehead on Ash Wednesday. Now, Paul does NOT say that everything will eventually be written down. He makes a differentiation between the oral and the written and gives them EQUAL parity.
There is NO expiration date on 2 Thess. 2:15.

As for Mary's Immaculate Conception being shown in Scripture - I already gave a comprehensive study in post #10.
I included the Angel's greeting in Luke 1:28 and showed the comparison between the OT type that was the Ark of the Covenant with the NT fulfillment of Mary, the Ark of the NEW Covenant.

Please read that post and get back to me.

 

[Yeshua1]

Chapter and Verse, please . . .

ALL died in Adam, except for Jesus due to Virgin Birth!

 

[MarysSon]

ALL died in Adam, except for Jesus due to Virgin Birth!

"ALL" died spiritually - or physically?
Also - I asked you for the Scriptural reference.

Chapter and Verse, please . . .

 

[Yeshua1]

"ALL" died spiritually - or physically?
Also - I asked you for the Scriptural reference.

Chapter and Verse, please . . .

Both!

 

[MarysSon]

Both!

Okay - first of all Enoch and Elijah didn't die.
They were assumed by God.

Secondly - you have failed for a THIRD time to give me the SCRIPTURAL evidence for your claim.
Chapter and Verse, please . . .

 

[Jfar]

Christ gave His authority to the apostles (not the bible, not every believer) ----> They passed this authority down through the ages to other bishops (there is a whole list from Peter on... this is historical fact)-----> this authority resides in the bishops of the Holy Catholic Church to this day------> They (by Christ's Authority) have bound the faithful to believe in the Dogma of the Immaculate Conception... which has been taught and believed from the earliest age of Christendom. That is why you are obligated to believe it.

No Sir. I’m under no obligation to believe it. As you’re a Catholic, I think it’s great that you believe and defend the Church’s teachings. I however am not Catholic and do not accept certain Marian Dogmas, among other things.

 

[Jfar]

Fair enough.

Paul places Sacred Tradition on par with Scripture:
2 Thess 2:15
"Stand firm and hold fast to the Traditions you were taught, whether by an ORAL STATEMENT or by a letter from us."

Of course, this does not include minor traditions (small "t"), such as a saint's feast day, or a practice such as ashes on the forehead on Ash Wednesday. Now, Paul does NOT say that everything will eventually be written down. He makes a differentiation between the oral and the written and gives them EQUAL parity.
There is NO expiration date on 2 Thess. 2:15.

As for Mary's Immaculate Conception being shown in Scripture - I already gave a comprehensive study in post #10.
I included the Angel's greeting in Luke 1:28 and showed the comparison between the OT type that was the Ark of the Covenant with the NT fulfillment of Mary, the Ark of the NEW Covenant.

Please read that post and get back to me.

I read you post before composing mine. I’ve also read similar material on CAF, among other sources (I’m not claiming to be an expert or anything like that). You make what I think are some very good points and I don’t see any reason why I should try to change your mind. My view on scripture though is that major theological beliefs, especially those that are asserted as being necessary for salvation, should be more clearly seen in scripture. As for traditions, every church I’ve attended has some form of small “t” traditions related to things like the frequency of communion, etc.

 

[Walpole]

I read you post before composing mine. I’ve also read similar material on CAF, among other sources (I’m not claiming to be an expert or anything like that). You make what I think are some very good points and I don’t see any reason why I should try to change your mind. My view on scripture though is that major theological beliefs, especially those that are asserted as being necessary for salvation, should be more clearly seen in scripture. As for traditions, every church I’ve attended has some form of small “t” traditions related to things like the frequency of communion, etc.

Can you post the verse from Scripture which states that major theological beliefs should be explicitly found in Scripture?

If that were an actual rule, we would have to throw away the two core tenets of the Christian religion. There is no verse in Scripture which explicitly defines the dogma of the Trinity as defined at the Council of Nicea. Likewise, there is no verse in Scripture which explicitly defines the dogma of the hypostatic union of Christ as formulated by Pope Leo the Great and the Council of Chalcedon. These dogmas form the basis for the Christian religion and were explained and defined by the Church. Like the Church's Marian dogmas, they can be found implicitly in the Scriptures and developed over time, across several centuries.

From my experience, when Protestants attack the Church's Marian dogmas, it almost always leads them into to Trinitarian and Christological errors.

 

[MarysSon]

I read you post before composing mine. I’ve also read similar material on CAF, among other sources (I’m not claiming to be an expert or anything like that). You make what I think are some very good points and I don’t see any reason why I should try to change your mind. My view on scripture though is that major theological beliefs, especially those that are asserted as being necessary for salvation, should be more clearly seen in scripture. As for traditions, every church I’ve attended has some form of small “t” traditions related to things like the frequency of communion, etc.

Yes, I already addressed that "small t" traditions are not the same as Sacred or Apostolic Tradition which is on par with Scripture, per 2 Thess. 2:15.

As for what should be more "clearly seen" in Scripture - I don't know how much clearer the type and fulfillment of the Ark and Mary can be - nor can I see how Scripture can be ANY clearer on Mary's title of "Kecharitomene" (Luke 1:28). She is the ONLY person in ALL of Scripture who is given this title.

At this point, it seems that one would have to exercise a great deal of denial to ignore the facts that are so clearly laid out in Scripture.
I DO appreciate your charitable tone . . .

 

[Zenas]

The woman in Revelation is nation of Israel!

And you know this how?

 

[Jfar]

Yes, I already addressed that "small t" traditions are not the same as Sacred or Apostolic Tradition which is on par with Scripture, per 2 Thess. 2:15.

As for what should be more "clearly seen" in Scripture - I don't know how much clearer the type and fulfillment of the Ark and Mary can be - nor can I see how Scripture can be ANY clearer on Mary's title of "Kecharitomene" (Luke 1:28). She is the ONLY person in ALL of Scripture who is given this title.

At this point, it seems that one would have to exercise a great deal of denial to ignore the facts that are so clearly laid out in Scripture.
I DO appreciate your charitable tone . . .

I also appreciate your charitable tone. I’m going to bow out and let you declare victory if that’s what you want to do. In reality, I don’t see any advantage to getting into a 30 comment “give me the verse and chapter” kind of conversation at this time (in fairness, you haven’t done that to me). I’ve been in many of those kinds of conversations and have found that even when verses are presented people usually continue to disagree, just as we do about the IC. You think it’s clearly laid out in scripture, I don’t. I guess we could debate the meaning of clearly for an hour, but what good would that do? In the end, I view Catholics as Christians and see no reason to try to convert them. In my first comment I was merely stating what I think would be necessary to convince non-Catholics on the issues being discussed because that’s basically what it would take to convince me. Nice talking to you.

 

[MarysSon]

I also appreciate your charitable tone. I’m going to bow out and let you declare victory if that’s what you want to do. In reality, I don’t see any advantage to getting into a 30 comment “give me the verse and chapter” kind of conversation at this time (in fairness, you haven’t done that to me). I’ve been in many of those kinds of conversations and have found that even when verses are presented people usually continue to disagree, just as we do about the IC. You think it’s clearly laid out in scripture, I don’t. I guess we could debate the meaning of clearly for an hour, but what good would that do? In the end, I view Catholics as Christians and see no reason to try to convert them. In my first comment I was merely stating what I think would be necessary to convince non-Catholics on the issues being discussed because that’s basically what it would take to convince me. Nice talking to you.

Fair enough.

Just to be clear, though - my "Chapter and Verse" demand was to @Yeshua1 for making Scriptural claims without presenting the actual Scripture verses.

 

[Alcott]

How blessed was Mary?

While Jesus was saying these things, one of the women in the crowd raised her voice and said to Him, “Blessed is the womb that bore You and the breasts at which You nursed.” But He said, “On the contrary, blessed are those who hear the word of God and observe it” [Luke 11:27-28].

That shows quite clearly that this wanting to venerate the woman and her body, its various states and functions, is something way behind--at the least-- hearing the word of God and carrying it out.

 

[Adonia]

How blessed was Mary?

Pretty blessed as she herself exclaimed that all generations will refer to her that way. She has her place in the biblical narrative and surely Jesus did indeed honor her and his father as all of us are commanded to do concerning our parents. It's part of hearing the word of God and carrying it out.

 

[Yeshua1]

Okay - first of all Enoch and Elijah didn't die.
They were assumed by God.

Secondly - you have failed for a THIRD time to give me the SCRIPTURAL evidence for your claim.
Chapter and Verse, please . . .

Jesus was ONLY person ever conceived by the Holy Ghost!

 

[MarysSon]

Jesus was ONLY person ever conceived by the Holy Ghost!

And where does it say that NOBODY else was ever born without sin?
Don't start moving the goal posts because you stuck your foot in your mouth.

Chapter and Verse, please . . .

 

[MarysSon]

How blessed was Mary?

While Jesus was saying these things, one of the women in the crowd raised her voice and said to Him, “Blessed is the womb that bore You and the breasts at which You nursed.” But He said, “On the contrary, blessed are those who hear the word of God and observe it” [Luke 11:27-28].

That shows quite clearly that this wanting to venerate the woman and her body, its various states and functions, is something way behind--at the least-- hearing the word of God and carrying it out.

Jesus answered the woman by giving her the example of a person who heard the Word of God and observed it.

That was His mother Mary in a nutshell.

 

[Alcott]

Jesus answered the woman by giving her the example of a person who heard the Word of God and observed it.

That was His mother Mary in a nutshell.

And he put it in the plural; there are others who have done so.