only Mary, in this case, immaculately concepted. 'Immaculate Conception'

Jesus' grandmother (Mother St Anne!!! very famous cathedral in Bukit Mertajam with the relics and bones of her remains from Jerusalem even) is not free from Original Sin, at that time, and yes, like you said, It is God's own seed. Jesus can be an exception too because He didn't came through the seed of Joseph. But to carry Jesus, free from sin, God's own seed must go into a PERFECT vessel, right?



to delve into why Tertullian said so, let us look at

Lk 21:25-28
Jesus said to his disciples:
"There will be signs in the sun, the moon, and the stars,
and on earth nations will be in dismay,
perplexed by the roaring of the sea and the waves.
People will die of fright
in anticipation of what is coming upon the world,
for the powers of the heavens will be shaken.
And then they will see the Son of Man
coming in a cloud with power and great glory.
But when these signs begin to happen,
stand erect and raise your heads
because your redemption is at hand.

*Notice the orderliness in Universe gets reversed. in Genesis, Sun, earth, light of day and of dark, Adam and Eve creation. Now, nations uprising cause all the other subsequent events*

The Israelites regarded their Temple as a miniature replica or microcosm of the world; it was an architectural model of the universe fashioned by God. Conversely, the universe itself was a macrotemple, where God also dwells with His people. With the dawning of the New Covenant, God had to clear away the central symbol of the Old Covenant, the Temple. The Church is God’s new and spiritual Temple, built with the living stones of Christian believers (Mt. 16:18, Eph 2:20-22; 1 Pet 2:4-5)

But imbedded in Christ’s words are spiritual truths that point forward to His Second Coming in glory and the end of the visible world.

So how to make the Word incarnate?

and notice how God gives salvation to Mankind by reversing all these orders from OT to NT

its deep, its beautiful, and it definitely has essence. at least to me

well bro, take a good sleep tonight, try not worry too much. Not trying to convince you , but just to help you understand from another angle? I am poor when it comes to choice of words

This post has been edited by Jedi: Dec 5 2012, 01:33 AM

that post itself has subsequent explanation which I quoted.

That's because Jesus is both Man and God at the same time. If Jesus was only Man, then what you proposed would be true.
As it is, it is not.

Personal sin and inherited sin are both sins. Whether you commit willingly or unconsciously it still comes from the root of inheritance.

And There is a problem with your explanation of babies. If they are indeed born pure and without sin, they would have no compulsion to sin when as they grow. As you said it, Original sin is not something we do; it is something we’ve inherited.

Jude 24-25 is applicable after Jesus resurrection not before.

the Mother of God

even though she is not divine, like the divine DIVINE Triune God:

A woman is a man’s mother either if she carried him in her womb or if she was the woman contributing half of his genetic matter or both.
Mary was the mother of Jesus in both of these senses; because she not only carried Jesus in her womb but also supplied all of the genetic matter for his human body, since it was through her—not Joseph—that Jesus "was descended from David according to the flesh" (Rom. 1:3).

Since Mary is Jesus’ mother, it must be concluded that she is also the Mother of God: If Mary is the mother of Jesus, and if Jesus is God, then Mary is the Mother of God.
There is no way out of this logical syllogism, the valid form of which has been recognized by classical logicians since before the time of Christ.

Although Mary is the Mother of God, she is not his mother in the sense that she is older than God or the source of her Son’s divinity, for she is neither.
Rather, we say that she is the Mother of God in the sense that she carried in her womb a divine person—Jesus Christ, God "in the flesh" (2 John 7, cf. John 1:14)—and in the sense that she contributed the genetic matter to the human form God took in Jesus Christ.

To avoid this conclusion, Fundamentalists often assert that Mary did not carry God in her womb, but only carried Christ’s human nature.
This assertion reinvents a heresy from the fifth century known as Nestorianism, which runs aground on the fact that a mother does not merely carry the human nature of her child in her womb.
Rather, she carries the person of her child. Women do not give birth to human natures; they give birth to persons. Mary thus carried and gave birth to the person of Jesus Christ, and the person she gave birth to was God.

The Nestorian claim that Mary did not give birth to the unified person of Jesus Christ attempts to separate Christ’s human nature from his divine nature, creating two separate and distinctpersons—one divine and one human—united in a loose affiliation.
It is therefore a Christological heresy, which even the Protestant Reformers recognized. Both Martin Luther and John Calvin insisted on Mary’s divine maternity.
In fact, it even appears that Nestorius himself may not have believed the heresy named after him. Further, the "Nestorian" church has now signed a joint declaration on Christology with the Catholic Church and recognizes Mary’s divine maternity, just as other Christians do.

Since denying that Mary is God’s mother implies doubt about Jesus’ divinity, it is clear why Christians (until recent times) have been unanimous in proclaiming Mary as Mother of God.

The Church Fathers, of course, agreed, and the following passages witness to their lively recognition of the sacred truth and great gift of divine maternity that was bestowed upon Mary, the humble handmaid of the Lord.



anyway, I think thats enough? Because bro, like I said, we will find out when we enter Heaven.

No one said baby is pure. we humans are inclined to sin, be it baby or adult because of Adam and Eve. so Neg, cannot be applied to babies sins. They have not committed, whereas humans unknowingly commit sins (Venial Sin) and knowingly (Mortal Sin) Mary has to be free from Original Sin in order to carry the Word Incarnate. End of.

Exceptions of Romans 3: as I mentioned, can be referred to Mary too.
But if you insist everything is only about Christ Christ Christ, so be it.

The Bible is deep, beautiful and full of meaning and essence, Christ is the centre figure, love as a whole book, and marriage to God in mind. But to me bro, I do not want to dispute, I like it better when I look at whole, including the wine and branches within Christ, all minor details.

no more bro, Bec I pray you, theological discussions ..

have a good rest!

But the fact remains that the Bible have never mentioned Mary as the mother of God.

The words are not there.

And most of the writing from RCC is always based on this word.

"it must be concluded"

Well who concludes it?

aiyo bro, do you even read your own writings or not, or you just copy and paste?

First you say like this and your previous post is different.

Well I don't agree on this part, there is a reason for Jesus coming through genealogies of sinners even Mary.

Perhaps later when you're awake, if you wish I can explain it.

Just remind me. Gd Night.

This post has been edited by unknown warrior: Dec 5 2012, 01:58 AM

for why we have things not only biblical things, but keh liao (add spices) - Tradition and Magisterium, refer to this:
http://whycatholicsdothat.com/sola-scriptura-tradition/

For the Church, Its based on this:

In Matthew 16:19 Jesus gives this authority over his Church to Peter: "Whatever you bind on Earth shall be bound in heaven; and whatever you loose on Earth shall be loosed in heaven."

In Matthew 18:18, he gives the power to all the apostles: "Amen, I say to you, whatever you bind on Earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on Earth shall be loosed in heaven."

I also must remind you that the Church cannot change its doctrines no matter how badly some theologians may want it to or how loudly they claim it can. The doctrines of the Catholic Church are the deposit of faith revealed by Jesus Christ, taught by the apostles, and handed down in their entirety by the apostles to their successors. Since revealed truth cannot change, and since the deposit of faith is comprised of revealed truth, expressed in Scripture and Sacred Tradition, the deposit of faith cannot change.

in RCC, every priest has the authority of Christ to "loose" (absolve) penitents from their sins through the sacrament of confession in the name of Christ (Jn 20:21-22, 2 Cor 5:18-20). The priest also has the obligation, in rare cases when he sees no evidence of contrition or an unwillingness on the part of the penitent to stop committing sin, to "bind" someone in their sins by refusing to grant him absolution until he evinces genuine contrition.

This teaching is based on the promise Christ gave to His Church in John 16:13 that the Holy Spirit would “guide you to all truth.”
This singling out of Peter to bestow on him an authority which is later to be given to all the apostles shows Peter's preeminence within the apostolic college. What the apostles as a whole possessed as leaders of the Church, Peter possessed as an individual.
The New Testament also says that The Church is the pillar and bulwark of Truth, not scripture alone (1Timothy 3:15).
Paul says to hold fast to the Traditions he taught, either in writing or by word of mouth (2 Thessalonians 2:15)

the Pope’s primary mission is one of service to the people of God, to uphold the oneness of Christ’s Church.
It does not mean that the Pope is perfect. It also does not mean that the Pope knows everything.
Instead, “infallibility” only applies when the Pope speaks about solemn, official teachings on faith and morals.



in this, can comes many attacks from other ppl. But to me really, I see a beautiful thing:

Apostles Creed jointly created by the Apostles under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, with each of the twelve contributing one of the articles, was already current at that time.

The earlier text evolved from simpler texts based on Matthew 28:19

When we say weekly in Mass: I believe in one Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church for the Creed Profession of Faith

It means, we believe in Universal Church. Catholic means Universal.

Therefore throughout the world, everyday, every mass, everywhere, the RCC have the same readings , gospels, but sermons are by priests themselves to comment on the readings. In it I find universalism, uniformity, and it does not break. Thats me.

Doesnt matter la. We are all God's Children. You said so.

This post has been edited by Jedi: Dec 5 2012, 02:20 AM

Bec u dont seem to get my earlier post on this part, I did some cut and paste over.
But what I want to say is akin the baby situation to Mary in context of exception from Romans 3 as it deals with personal sin.

and that part on Romans 3 FYI: is answered by a RCC-turned baptist-back to RCC theologian.

ok, u can present your part no prob, I have to understand why things are always such from your point of view

huh? That's not answering my question in the first part.

geez anyway, to comment on this post of yours Both Matthew 16 and 18 are not only for priests but applies to any Christians.

This authorities of binding can be both, even for spiritual warfare.

I need to comment about this about only priest are allowed to comment on interpretation.

That is never true. Any Child of God who's open to the Holy Spirit can receive revelations of the Bible.

Contradiction.

Jesus Christ is the central focus no one else.

The Gospel is about Jesus Christ, no one else.

The Bible is really about God.

Not Mary, not the saints.

What did Paul say?


Philippians 3:7-11

But whatever was to my profit I now consider loss for the sake of Christ. What is more, I consider everything a loss compared to the surpassing greatness of knowing Christ Jesus my Lord, for whose sake I have lost all things. I consider them rubbish, that I may gain Christ and be found in him, not having a righteousness of my own that comes from the law, but that which is through faith in Christ—the righteousness that comes from God and is by faith. I want to know Christ and the power of his resurrection and the fellowship of sharing in his sufferings, becoming like him in his death, and so, somehow, to attain to the resurrection from the dead.

I mentioned it, the early Church Founders concluded it, the Councils , and now, the Doctrine of Congregation of Faith lead by Cardinal *I dont know who* of one of the ministry in Vatican.
What they conclude, however cannot change the Scripture which is the truth, only to bring us deeper to the Truth.

Depositum fidei - deposition of faith that is to be preserved.

Revelation of God is perfect and complete with the gospels and Jesus Christ. The private revelations received by visionaries cannot improve on Gospels and no one is obliged to believe in them. But since Holy Spirit leads us deeper to the truth, they can help us understand the gospel better.

For RCCs, Their authenticity however, is to be tested by the church. Uniformity. unlike Jehovah or Mormons, Oh today is this, oh tomorrow is that.


where got? Babies are not to be applied personal sin, but Original sin. I did not get it wrong.

True, you said it yourself. that lost all and gain Christ and be found in him - THIS
Its just we are seeing diamonds at different angles, to me I consider the body of Christ, which is the Church, which includes u me bros n sis alike, constituting His body, including saints, angels. I do not see anything wrong in it. I just like to classify and subclassify a general thing. All minor details

i.e if u say this person has diabetes, to me I would want to know Diabetes type? 1?2? Diabetes stage? Compensation?Subcompensation?Decompensation? With complications? if yes, what?

okok, no more. tired

Yes we all are. Regardless of denominations, we all are because of Jesus.

But I find RCC doctrines are a bit different in a sense, wrong teachings can cause people to be confuse.

For example in Matthew 18

You mentioned priest are the one who's able to forgive sin on behalf of Christ and you mention about binding and losing.

But the passage in Matthew 18:15-18

never indicated about Priest forgiving sinners.

It talks about a Christians who has done wrong to another Christian brethren. It's talking about disputes. And The scripture never specifically mentions only Priest.

Even in John 20:21-22, 2 Corinthians 5:18-20

I don't know why RCC takes that as to indicate only Priests can absolve penitents from their sins.

See what I mean?

This post has been edited by unknown warrior: Dec 5 2012, 11:21 AM

Well that's the problem then. Like I said, the Scripture have no such words.

The Bible have never specifically mentioned Mary as the mother of God.

The words are not there.

I mean you cannot dispute that.

And to say Mary refers to the Ark of The Covenant?

I see no relevance in any way to Mary.

you don't see the problem here?

Angels are not part of the body of Christ bro.

Why do I get this feeling you're trying to differentiate between saints and born again believers as different?

Anyway, I don't see the relevance with the Body of Christ and the Main focus as what Paul said, I want to know Christ....

That scripture is to hint to you, the Gospel is really about Christ, no one else. Paul did not say I want to know Christ, Mary and all the great divine apostles.

Heck Paul rebuked some of the apostles for hypocrisy.

This is just the problem with Man. Yeah I mean sure the Bible mentions about Mary.

Don't forget, the Bible also mention about Satan. God's words have never ask anyone to worship him but to resist Him and you know what?

There are Satanic Church in existence.

There will be problem when anyone points to something that isn't there in the first place.

We get diverted. That is my only concern.

---

Added on December 5, 2012, 3:28 amAnyhoo, when u see this in the morning, I have nothing against you jedi.

all in all, I enjoy discussing this with you.



This post has been edited by unknown warrior: Dec 5 2012, 03:28 AM

About the church authority:
Protestants grant to individuals the authority to decided...what is true and what isn't, while denying it to the Church. This makes no sense. If Protestantism discounts the Church's binding authority because the Church is made of fallible, sinful men, then they have to discount every individual's interpretation, since each person is a fallible sinner, too


Please, forget that! No prob bro! It is because of history, that we became apart within Christ . Sola Scriptura...as much hate and as much

Supposed if Jesus returned to earth today, which church would He go to? RCC?, of course, replies the Catholic. No, a Protestant church, argues the Protestant.
I think he would begin as He did 2,000 years ago in a Jewish synagogue.

Done as it is.

Catholicism and Protestantism do not essentially define our identity, as Christ does.

If I should die and find out that Christ is not my Savior, I could not be me, I could not exist in such a world.

Christ is essential to my very self: “For me to live is Christ.” The Church is like my family: very close to me, loyal to the death.—but not my essence.

Saint Paul did not say: “For me to live is Catholicism.” He did not say: “I live, nevertheless not I but Protestantism lives in me.”

The only absolute certainty we have is Christ. The unity we already have in Christ includes doctrinal unity, for if we accept the teacher we also accept all his teachings, at least through Scripture.

None of the Catholic Church’s interpretations of or additions to Scripture is as important as the scriptural agreements between Protestants and Catholics.