The Funeral Of Joseph

Hi Neal,

You wrote, "You fail to recognize a differnce between Mary and Jesus. Jesus is God, Mary is not."

I fully recognize the difference between Jesus and Mary.

Another problem, are you willing to say that there were many Jews who were sinless, because there were many who adhered to the law.

No. I am saying that observing the Mosaic ceremonial law does not indicate that the observer has committed sin. If this were true, then Jesus is a sinner. That is the crux of my argument, and it still stands in relation to why Mary submitted to the childbirth purification ritual.

In Genesis 3:15, we find the promise of redemption. Biblical scholars call this passage the protoevangelium or protoGospel (in English, "the first Gospel") because it promises the redeemer directly after Adam and Eve commit the mystery of iniquity:

"I will put enmity between you and the woman,
and between your seed and her seed;
he shall bruise your head,
and you shall bruise his heel."

John presents Mary as the woman of the protoevangelium in his Gospel. This is why John refers to Mary in his Gospel as "woman" and never as "Mary".

Now, enmity means "complete separation" or "completely at odds with". This is the Scriptural foundation for the Dogma of the Immaculate Conception of Mary. As Cardinal Ratzinger has said, Dogma is nothing more than the Church's authoritative interpretation of Sacred Scripture.

God bless,

Carson

[ January 20, 2003, 11:58 PM: Message edited by: Carson Weber ]

 

Hello Carson,

Since you reworded something I said earlier, I'm going to suggest a rewording of the above quote:

As Cardinal Ratzinger should have said, Dogma is nothing more then the Church's presumed authoritative and likely flawed interpretation which is not based upon Sacred Scripture.


This is meant as a joke and not to be taken as an attack upon the Cardinal or you (Carson). I was just trying to lighten the mood in here a bit.

[ January 21, 2003, 02:37 AM: Message edited by: BibleboyII ]

 

Yes Carson, I am familiar with all of this, I just had Hebrew, OT, and Evangelism last semester. But there is no way you can take this and turn it into Mary being a sinless, perpetual virgin who is the queen of heaven. Say anything fancy that you want and quote who ever you want, but that is just plain, old eisegesis. You HAVE to read that into the Bible, not out of it.

Neal

[ January 21, 2003, 04:02 AM: Message edited by: neal4christ ]

 

Hi Neal,

You wrote, "there is no way you can take this and turn it into Mary being a sinless"

I can't? If Mary is "the woman" and if "the woman" is in complete opposition (eb'ah) with Satan (the nahash), then what should our conclusion be? That Mary wasn't completely opposed to Satan but was united to him with the stain of sin?

perpetual virgin

As Eve was virgin and brought sin into the world through her husband Adam, so Mary was virgin and brought life into the world through her son Jesus (ever wondered why the only two individuals named at Cana in John 2 are Mary and Jesus, the New Eve and the New Adam?), and Mary, who triumphed over the serpent, remained a virgin. This has been the timeless teaching and belief of the Church. Even the Protestant Reformers held to it!

who is the queen of heaven.

I responded to this at the bottom of page 3 in this thread. Check it out:

http://www.baptistboard.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=28;t=001328;p=3

God bless,

Carson

 

Or try this. Hostility, hatred. It does not mean complete separation. We currently have hostility with Satan. Does that mean that we do not sin anymore?

I am not getting into that one again! There is even less evidence and more eisegesis involved!

Thank-you Carson. But I was not asking you a question, I was making a statement.

Neal

[ January 21, 2003, 04:07 PM: Message edited by: neal4christ ]