"This would be impossible if Mary were touched by any sin, since every sin diminishes grace. No other human is referred to in this manner in Scripture."
The fact that Mary had to receive God's grace is conclusive that she had sin, like all of Adam's children. And of course she is unique in Scripture--she is the mother of the Messiah, the Incarnation of the LORD Himself. No other human is referred to in this manner in Scripture. But this does not equate to making the leap of attributing to her blasphemous titles, sinless states apart from the atonement of Jesus Christ, and pagan goddess worship (sadly Rome is falling deeper and deeper into the cesspool of heresy).
"And Mary said: "My soul exalts the Lord, And my spirit has rejoiced in God *my Savior*. "For He has had regard for the humble state of His bondslave; For behold, from this time on all generations will count me blessed" (Luke 1:47, NASB, emphasis mine).
"For all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, being justified as a gift by His grace through the redemption which is in Christ Jesus; whom God displayed publicly as a propitiation in His blood through faith. This was to demonstrate His righteousness, because in the forbearance of God He passed over the sins previously committed; for the demonstration, I say, of His righteousness at the present time, so that He would be just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus. Where then is boasting? It is excluded. By what kind of law? Of works? No, but by a law of faith. For we maintain that a man is justified by faith apart from works of the Law" (Romans 3:23-28).
"But then ... to those who want to believe that a human being has God's authority to _add_ doctrine to Scripture ... that is just a minor detail."
"I assume you hold this opinion of Luther for adding the word "alone" to Romans 3:28".
"For we maintain that a man is justified by faith apart from works of the Law" (Romans 3:28, NASB).
We don't need Luther to add anything--Scripture is quite clear that justification in the salvic sense is based upon the finished work of Jesus Christ and His perfect atonement. The eternal Truth stands--the atonement of Jesus Christ is either sufficient (alone) or it is insufficient (plus works). Christians know that the Gospel of Jesus Christ is the power of God unto salvation--not the synergy of a finite god and his partial atonement with the contributions of corrupted men dead in their sins.
Grammatically, Romans 3:28 is quite clear and uncomplicated. Many (probably most) Romanists are completely ignorant of Scripture and the historic Christian faith as well, and have no clue whatsoever what the Reformers actually wrote and believed in a comprehensive context, but simply the bits and pieces tossed out to them by Robert Sungenis, et. al.
Rome denies the Gospel, and officially at the Council of Trent, repudiated it and placed its anathema upon the Gospel. In accordance with Scripture, God places His anathema upon anyone that would do such a thing. With all of her manifest corruptions, it was at Trent that Rome officially and boldly proclaimed itself as a non-christian religion. Deny the Gospel, you deny the historic Christian faith.
You con't... "...and his attempts to discard James, Esther and Revelation and the actions of others who choose to freely edit those parts of Sacred Scripture that did not fit their new doctrines and opinions."
It is Rome that rejects Scripture, and ironically, it is Rome that has invented new doctrines and opinions in order to keep their extra-Biblical, and indeed, blasphemous teachings.
Of the numerous examples, the "Assumption of Mary" is but one that comes to mind. This particular Roman Catholic dogma originated with Gnostic heretics, it became a Roman Catholic teaching in *Munificentissimus Deus* by pope Pius XII, in *1950*.
Can anyone cite the Scripture for this one please? More germane to the context of the present analysis, what is the *historical* context of this *new* cultic teaching of Romanism?
While the assumption of Mary was new in the sense of being a Roman Catholic dogma in 1950, it has its roots in the 5th and 6th centuries, *among heretics*, and so condemned officially as such by Pope.
The teaching originates with Gnostic and Collyridian traditions, and was condemned as heretical by Pope Gelasius and this condemnation was officially confirmed by Pope Hormisdas. You may hear some Romanists attempt to say that the Gelasius condemnation is not authentic, but the *New Catholic Encyclopedia* affirms his condemnation, as does Roman Catholic scholars Denzinger, Charles Hefele, and Jurgens.
Wherever and whenever Rome held supreme sway, ignorance of Scripture reigned (and reigns) supreme--and this ignorance typically extended into the secular realm, as well. When the evangelical Christian faith triumphed, literacy, justice, representative government, private property, freedom of the press, were the order of the day. The historic Protestant nations birthed the above--historic Romanist nations are the seat of oppression, heresy, and ignorance.
Where the spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty.
Theologically, Roman Catholicism is simply the heresy so soundly refuted and rejected by God the Holy Spirit through the apostle Paul in the book of Galatians; the similarities between the two heresies are striking; please note that item number one is a vital and important *truth* of the Christian faith--the caveat is to beware the logical fallacy of composition and not conclude that because they hold to good doctrine in one area that the entire edifice is still not corrupted:
Galatian Judaizers:
1. Belief in Jesus as Messiah and Son of God
2. Circumcision
3. Become a Jew
4. Sacrificial System
5. Priests
6. High Priests
7. Altars
8. Feast Days
9. Laver of Water
10. Dietary Regulations
11. Candles
12. Incense
13. Shew Bread
14. Keep the Ten Commandments
15. Tradition of the Elders
Modern Roman Catholicism:
1. Belief in Jesus as Messiah and Son of God
2. Baptism
3. Become a Roman Catholic
4. Sacrificial System
5. Priests
6. High Priests
7. Altars
8. Feast Days
9. Font of Holy Water
10. Dietary Regulations (only recently changed--another "new doctrine" of the Romanist system)
11. Candles
12. Incense
13. The Eucharist Wafer
14. Keep the Ten Commandments
15. Traditions of the "Church Fathers" (which in many, many instances do not support Romanism but go against it).
Nothing "*new*" about the doctrine. There was nothing new about the doctrine of the Trinity when the Catholic Church officially defined it in 325, nor when the Catholic Church determined the canon of the New Testament in 393 and 397. The Catholic Church simply codified a belief that always existed in the Church as expressed in the writings of the early Church. Cite to me where in Scripture the words "incarnate" and "Trinity" appear?
The fact that Mary had to receive God's grace is conclusive that she had sin, like all of Adam's children.
While we are freed from original sin at our baptism, the Blessed Virgin Mary was preserved from original sin at her conception. Jesus is the Savior in both cases. Mary's salvation from sin was more perfect. You conveniently forget that both Adam and Eve never sinned before the fall, Jesus never sinned and babies have not sinned. St. Paul points out the universal aspect of sin extending to both Jews and Gentiles. There are exceptions that fall outside of St. Paul's condemnation and the Blessed Virgin Mary is one of them.
This particular Roman Catholic dogma originated with Gnostic heretics, it became a Roman Catholic teaching in *Munificentissimus Deus* by pope Pius XII, in *1950*.
The doctrine was published and formally defined in 1950 by Pope Pius XII but had it's defining genesis as an official doctrine in 1849. Enlighten yourself by reading St. Gregory of Tours "Eight Books of Miracles" and St. John Damascene "Second Homily on the Dormition of Mary". Also refer to the writings of St. Justin Martyr, St. Irenaeus, St. Ephraim and St. Ambrose. Elijah and Enoch were assumed into heaven, why is it so diffiuclt to comprehend that the Blessed Virgin Mary, the Mother of God would not also be assumed into heaven? The Immaculate Conception and the Assumption belong to the deposit of faith and are implicitly taught through Old Testament typology and explicitly by the Church Fathers. Where does Scripture mention the death of Joseph or Mary?
We don't need Luther to add anything
Then why do you use an abridged Protestant Bible edited by Luther and the Reformers and not a Catholic Bible? Luther and the other Reformers had no valid authority to edit the Vulgate to their liking. Again you need to quote an accurate text: Romans 3:28 "For we account a man to be justified by faith, without the works of the law." Douay Rheims. Luther's editing also rejects Christ's instructions in Matthew 19:17 to keep the commandments.
It is Rome that rejects Scripture, and ironically, it is Rome that has invented new doctrines and opinions in order to keep their extra-Biblical, and indeed, blasphemous teachings.
A totally false and blasphemous statement on your part. Luther and the Reformers rejected the Septuagint opting instead for the Hebrew canon. The Councils of Hippo, 393 A.D. and Carthage, 397 A.D., approved the Alexandrian canon for the Old Testament, over 1100 years prior to Luther's editing. Luther contradicts his own actions in his "Commentary on St. John" Chapter 16: "We are obliged to yield many things to the Papists - that they possess the Word of God which we received from them, otherwise we should have known nothing at all about it." By choosing a Protestant Bible you follow the non-Christian Jews at Jamina. Were it not for the Catholic Church, Protestants wouldn't have a Bible. Luther and the Reformers rejected Scripture by thumbing their noses at Apocalypse 22:19: "And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from these things that are written in this book." Douay Rheims. Quite simply, your text and thus your argument is irrefutably flawed.
The fundamental failure of Sola Scriptura is that it goes against the Bible and in fact the doctrine is not found in Scripture but instead is plainly rejected by Scripture; refer to 2 Thessalonians 2:14, 1 Corinthians 11:2, 1 Peter 1:25 and John 21:25. Indeed the Protestant doctrine is a fabrication and thus a heresy; Quod non est biblicum, non est theologicum.
The Reformation could more accurately be called, "The Restoration".
The most accurate description would be "The Big Lie That Begot 25,000 Denominations".