Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: CatoRenasci
"The question you don't seem to want to get to is whether the very docrine that the Church is infallible on matters of faith and morals is a doctrine introduced for the convenience of a corrupt hierarchy."

Con't... from #111:

Ten Reasons Why Christians And Catholics Do Not Agree by Dr. Robert A. Morey

2. The Immaculate Conception and Bodily Assumption of Mary

Catholic Position:

"By the grace of God Mary remained free of every personal sin her whole life long." p.124, # 493

"Mary is the most excellent fruit of redemption. From the first instant of her conception, she was totally preserved from the stain of original sin and she remained pure from all personal sin throughout her life." p.128, # 508

"Finally the Immaculate Virgin... was taken up body and soul into heavenly glory..." p.252,#966

Biblical Position:

"For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God.” Rom 3:23

"As it is written, there is none righteous, no not one.” Rom 3:10

"...the soul that sins it shall die.” Ezekiel 18:4

(Mary speaking): "... and my spirit rejoices in God my Savior.” Luke 1:47

Note- If Mary is without sin, she has no need for a savior.

Remarks:

The Vatican promotes the idea that Mary was immaculately conceived i.e., born without sin and because she was free from impurities she did not die, but ascended into heaven.

Yet the Bible clearly rejects this and declares that none have been born free from sin with the exception of Jesus Christ, the Lord. The Bible also states that the sinner must die and this includes Mary, making it impossible for her to ascend to heaven without dying.

Some Catholic apologists counter the idea that all are sinners by suggesting that there are certain exceptions to this, such as stillborn and aborted infants who have never sinned. This would make it possible for Catholics to assert that Mary also was an exception to this general rule.

Unfortunately for this argument, the Bible does not make any exception, apart from Christ, since infants themselves are included in the list:

“Behold I was brought forth in iniquity, and in sin my mother conceived me.” Ps. 51:5 N.K.J.V.

Although infants are conceived in sin, they are not held accountable for sin until they knowingly act in disobedience. The verse basically affirms that all are born with a sinful nature, making it natural for us to desire sin over righteousness. This is commonly referred to as the doctrine of original sin, that all inherit the first man’s sinful nature (c.f. Rom. 5:12) The Catholic church itself upholds the view that infants are conceived with a sinful nature, making it necessary for them to be baptized in order to be restored to purity. (See #9)

Another attempt to justify Mary’s sinlessness is the Catholic appeal to Luke 1:28 and 1:42:

“And the angel being come in, said unto her: Hail, Full of grace, the Lord is with thee: blessed art thou among woman... And she cried out with a loud voice, and said: Blessed art thou among woman, and blessed is the fruit of thy womb.” Doay-Rheims

The term “full of grace” is the Greek kecharitomene, from the root charitoo, meaning “favored one.” Hence, for Mary to be filled with grace would imply her sinlessness. Furthermore, the term “blessed,” eulogeo, is used of both Mary and Christ, “the fruit of thy womb.” This would again imply Mary’s sinlessness, since she is equated with Christ, her sinless son.

If these assertions are true, this would imply that Christians are sinless since they are also blessed, being filled with grace:

“to the praise of the glory of His grace, which He bestowed grace (favor, i.e., charitoo) upon us in the Beloved.” Eph. 1:6

“Then shall the king say to them that shall be on his right hand: Come, ye blessed (Gr. eulogeo) of my Father, possess you the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world.” Mt. 25:34 Doay-Rheims

These passages make it quite obvious that trying to find biblical support for Mary’s immaculate conception is clearly impossible.

To justify Mary’s bodily assumption, Catholics refer to Revelation 12:1-6 as implicitly alluding to the doctrine:

“Now a great sign appeared in heaven: a woman clothed with the sun, with the moon under her feet, and on her head a garland of twelve stars... And the dragon stood before the woman who was ready to give birth, to devour her Child as soon as it was born. She bore a male Child who was to rule all nations with a rod of iron. And her Child was caught up to God and His throne.”

It is obvious that the Child refers to Christ (c.f. Rev. 19:15; Ps. 2:9) This in effect would make Mary the woman who is clothed with heavenly splendor, supporting the Catholic doctrine.

A careful examination of Scripture soundly refutes this unfortunately unsound exegesis, establishing the woman’s identity as Israel:

“Then he (Joseph) dreamed still another dream and told it to his brothers, and said, ‘Look, I have dreamed another dream. And this time, the sun, the moon, and the eleven stars bowed down to me.’

“So he told it to his father and his brothers; and his father rebuked him and said to him, ‘What is this dream that you have dreamed? Shall your mother and I and your brothers indeed come to bow down to the earth before you?’” Gen. 37:9-10 N.K.J.V.

(Note - The reason why Joseph saw eleven stars instead of twelve, is due to the fact that he himself was the twelfth.)

“As a woman with child is in pain and cries out in her pangs, when she draws near to the time of her delivery’

“so have we (i.e., Israel), been in your sight, O LORD. We have been with child, we have been in pain, we have, as it were, brought forth wind...” Is. 26:17-18a N.K.J.V. (c.f. Hosea 2:1-23)

The final evidence establishing the woman’s identity as Israel comes from Revelation 12:6:

“Then the woman fled into the wilderness, where she has a place prepared by God, that they should feed her there one thousand two hundred and sixty days.”

Contrast this with the Lord’s own words to his Jewish followers:

“Therefore when you see the ’ abomination of desolation,’ spoken of by Daniel the prophet, standing in the holy place (whoever reads, let him understand), then let those in Judea flee to the mountains.” Mt. 24:15-16 N.K.J.V.

Hence, Mary at no time ever ran to the wilderness fleeing from the Devil (symbolized here by the Dragon), and yet this is precisely what shall happen to the Jews during Antichrist’s seven year tribulational reign.

(Note - Some see this passage as referring to the arrival of the Roman Army, which besieged Jerusalem, destroying the Temple in A.D. 70; leading Jewish Christian believers to flee to the small town of Pella, near the Sea of Galilee.)

Furthermore, the New Catholic Encyclopedia (1967, vol. VII, pp. 378-381) admits that the origin of this belief finds no Scriptural support:

“...the Immaculate Conception is not taught explicitly in Scripture... The earliest Church Fathers regarded Mary as holy but not as absolutely sinless... It is impossible to give a precise date when the belief was held as a matter of Faith, but by the 8th or 9th century it seems to have been generally admitted... [In 1854 Pope Pius IX defined the dogma] ‘which holds that the most Blessed Virgin Mary was preserved from all stain of original sin in the first instant of her conception.’”

According to church historian J.N.D. Kelly, church Fathers such as Ireneaus, Tertullian, and Origen all felt that Mary had sinned and had even doubted Christ. (Early Christian Doctrines, p.493)

Even Catholic scholar Ludwig Ott admits, “Neither Greek nor Latin Fathers explicitly teach the Immaculate Conception of Mary.” (Ott, Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma, 1960, p.201)

A list of just some of the many who opposed the Immaculate Conception include: Augustine, Chrysostom, Eusebius, Ambrose, Anselm, Thomas Aquinas, Bonaventure, Cardinal Cajetan and Popes Gregory the Great and Innocent III.

Ott also indicates, “The idea of the bodily assumption of Mary is first expressed in transitus-narratives of the fifth-sixth centuries. Even though these are apocryphal they bear witness to the Faith of the generation in which they were written despite their legendary clothing.” (Ibid., pp.209-210)

Yet, Ott conveniently forgets to mention to his readers that these narratives were deemed heretical by the church of the day and anathematized by Gelasius, the very bishop of Rome!

Finally, not all Catholic theologians believed that Mary ascended without dying, but that she “suffered a temporal death,” much like other mortals. (Ibid., p.207)

In fact, the idea of Mary ascending to heaven without dying was not made an official doctrine of the Catholic Faith until 1950 by Pope Pius XII, nearly twenty centuries after Christ!

Reason #3 The Perpetual Virgin - Con't .. to next post.

112 posted on 05/17/2002 2:29:53 PM PDT by Matchett-PI
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 96 | View Replies ]


To: Matchett-PI
There are quite a number of theological differences between Catholics and Protestants. But we should try to remember that there is by far much more in common than not.
133 posted on 05/17/2002 5:08:54 PM PDT by yendu bwam
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 112 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson