Posted on 09/21/2004 7:43:13 AM PDT by Tantumergo
Does that mean you believe children and the retarded get a "free pass"?
If so, it's just a matter of semantics, isn't it? You don't believe children to be "guilty" of anything that would keep them fromt he kingdom, and neither do we. We say they have not actual sins and you say they do, but God doesn't really count them as such.
Seems the same at the end of the day to me.
SD
"***This is not sin - this is ignorance born of the finite human condition.***
"... For whatever does not proceed from faith is sin." "
You and I are are both ignorant about what Jesus was doing on 17th Nisan A.D. 25. It doesn't thereby constitute a sin on our behalf.
Mary's worrying where Jesus was and what had happened to him cannot possibly be sinful.
***"free pass"?***
Everyone who believes in Jesus gets a "free pass"
Rom 3
"There is no difference, for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, and are "justified freely" by his grace through the redemption that came by Christ Jesus."
***If so, it's just a matter of semantics, isn't it? You don't believe children to be "guilty" of anything that would keep them fromt he kingdom***
No, I do believe that children are born in a state of sinfulness that would render them unable to live with a holy God eternally - BUT FOR THE GRACE OF GOD.
***but God doesn't really count them as such.***
God counted their sinfulness not against them, but against Christ who payed the price of their "free pass" so to speak.
"All this is from God, who through Christ reconciled us to himself and gave us the ministry of reconciliation; that is, in Christ God was reconciling the world to himself, not counting their trespasses against them" - 2 Cor 5
***Seems the same at the end of the day to me.***
You say they have no sin. I say that the Bible says they have sin (Ps 51) and it is forgiven for Christ's sake. God does this for them because they don't posess the faculties to do it themselves.
I think we have a radically different idea of what sin is. I have never understood this before when talking with Catholics.
Yes. 2/3's of it. The Hebrew Scriptures.
I don't know if being immortal is a "deficiency." Not knowing sin, and not having propensity to sin, Eve's holiness before disobeying was not an effort of any proportion; it was not any of her doing. Mary's holiness, by contrast, considering her mortality and human nature with propensity to sin but choosing not to, is a monumental achievement. There is simply no comparison. Comparing Mary to Eve dimnishes Theotokos.
Where does it say that Alpheus and Mary were the parents of James the less, Joseph and Jude?
Please point this out to me unless it just a tradition.
JH :)
Yes, because she was cleansed of all sin (for the second time -- first being at Annunciation), at her death.
We would agree with this but say that it was due to grace that she was able to choose not to sin
Isn't that true for all who receive Grace?
Not sure what you mean. Which argument? That "brothers" mean also cousins, or that in certain cultures to this date the same is true, and always has been?
***Mary's worrying where Jesus was and what had happened to him cannot possibly be sinful.***
I agree with you in that, if it is sin, it is no great sin. It is a sin born of love. But look more closely at the passage...
"Every year His parents traveled to Jerusalem for the Passover Festival. When He was 12 years old, they went up according to the custom of the festival. After those days were over, as they were returning, the boy Jesus stayed behind in Jerusalem, but His parents did not know it. Assuming He was in the traveling party, they went a day's journey. Then they began looking for Him among their relatives and friends. When they did not find Him, they returned to Jerusalem to search for Him. After three days, they found Him in the temple complex sitting among the teachers, listening to them and asking them questions. And all those who heard Him were astounded at His understanding and His answers. When His parents saw Him, they were astonished, and His mother said to Him, "Son, why have You treated us like this? Your father and I have been anxiously searching for You." "Why were you searching for Me?" He asked them. "Didn't you know that I must be involved in my Father's interests?" But they did not understand what He said to them. Then He went down with them and came to Nazareth, and was obedient to them. His mother kept all these things in her heart. And Jesus increased in wisdom and stature, and in favor with God and with people."
Don't you hear in his words a gentle rebuke of their obtuseness in requiring him to explain this? "Once here, did you think I should so quickly leave? Let ordinary worshippers be content to keep the feast and be gone; but is this all you have learned of me?"
What He says they should have known, He must have given them ground to know. She tells Him of the sorrow with which his "father" and she had sought him. He speaks of no Father but One, saying, in effect, My Father has not been seeking me; I have been with Him all this time.
(I have taken portions of this from the JFB Commentary)
What are the odds that the scripture means cousins over the literal reading of brethern?
JH :)
"Paul calls the teachings of Jesus as recorded by Luke and Matthew "Scripture". Not suprising in light of the fact that Peter considered Paul's writings "Scripture". (2 Pet 3:16)"
I don't disagree with you that some of the written accounts had already achieved the status of scripture by the time Paul and Peter were writing their epistles - say 55-65 A.D.
All I question is whether this would have been the case when Timothy was an infant, which could have been prior to Jesus' public ministry commencing.
Thanks for the reference though, because this is very useful for countering the claim of some that the Gospels were written a long time after the epistles! ;)
"Don't you hear in his words a gentle rebuke of their obtuseness in requiring him to explain this?"
I'll admit that that would be one possible interpretation, depending on tone, body language etc. etc. which unfortunately we don't have available.
I think, however, that a rebuke of his parents by a 12 year old would be tantamount to a sin on behalf of the child. Remember that according to the law and custom, a 12 year old was still very much tied to his mother's apron strings and he would normally only be about his father's business when he had attained the age of 13.
I only know that believing in the God preserved Word will always keep one out of trouble. When we begin taking the ideas of men ahead of God's Word we potentially fall under the same condemnation as the Scribes and Pharisees.
Matt 15:6-9
...Thus have ye made the commandment of God of none effect by your tradition.
7 Ye hypocrites, well did Esaias prophesy of you, saying,
8 This people draweth nigh unto me with their mouth, and honoureth me with their lips; but their heart is far from me.
9 But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.
Elevating a woman to sinless status is unbiblical.
Rom 3:23
23 For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God;
24 Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus:
According to the Bible, this applies to Mary!
P.S. Mary was indeed blessed above all woman to be chosen as the mother of Jesus. We should all honor her faith in God because she responded positively to His call. Praise God that she, being of the line of David, retained her virginity and thus could be used to usher into the world her savior Jesus Christ.
So is it your conclusion from this, that it's only the Old Testament scripture that are profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness?
JH :)
Oh gosh - you are only up to post #10!
I suggest you read through the rest and you will find that all your points have been subsequently discussed (not that you will necessarily agree with the responses!)
Sorry, but I am losing my stamina and no doubt someone else will jump in if you have further points to make.
God bless. ;)
"So is it your conclusion from this, that it's only the Old Testament scripture that are profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness?"
No. ;)
Thank you for your respectful response. I will read through the subsequent posts to get up to speed.
Also,
Matt 19:16-17
16 And, behold, one came and said unto him, Good Master, what good thing shall I do, that I may have eternal life?
17 And he said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God: but if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments.
Mary was alive when Jesus made this clear statement. Jesus Christ is God in flesh.
Tell you what, you continue with your church and your traditions, and I will continue with the Bible. See you in Paradise... maybe :>)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.