“... Yet (sic) catholics continue to do (sic) do and have even built one of their dogmas on a verse that cannot be defended!
You can’t make it up....oh wait...they did in 1854.
I understand why roman catholicism would not be willing to admit the error. If it did, it would collapse the papacy and the rcc as so much has been vested in Mary.”
Not. So . Fast .
You are nearly hanging your whole case on an aside by a Catholic commenter on one passage in Genesis.
You are so desperate to defeat the doctrine on Mary you’ll grab onto anything, even specious argument.
So the use of the word “she” cannot definitively be defended. Nor can it definitively be defeated.
The verse definitely doesn’t disallow the possibility that the Church’s claims re. Mary are valid, does it?!
Besides, there is substantial evidence in other places in scripture and other historical events to support why the holy Pope and Church authorities have deemed fit to declare the doctrine.
You need to read what the Church prior to 1958 wrote on the topic, as they are far more competent to discuss this much further than I, a layman.
When Protestants are in their sinful rebellion, they need to repent and believe and their eyes will be opened to see what I have tried and merely scratched the surface on.
The verse definitely doesn’t disallow the possibility that the Church’s claims re. Mary are valid, does it?!
If it cannot be defended it is defeated.
Again, the Douay Rheims is the only translation rendering Gen 3:15 in this manner.
You are so desperate to defeat the doctrine on Mary you’ll grab onto anything, even specious argument.
See my following post on this regarding the ECFs on Mary from three of catholicism's ECFs.
Shall we believe YOU...
or...
Roman catholicism's own "most comprehensive resource on Catholic teaching, history, and information ever gathered in all of human history" admits Gen 3:15 as translated in the Vulgate cannot be defended.