[daniel1212]

	Well, i stopped after 237 posts were made in about 2 hours. I would not consider the posted subject to really be a matter of salvation, but behind it is the foundational issue of authority, that of the only objective source which is affirmed to be wholly inspired by God, (2Tim. 3:16) separated from the rest of tradition which class it is part of, versus an assuredly infallible magisterium (AIM), it being infallible whenever it speaks in accordance with its infallibly declared formula. Scripture has been employed here by Catholics, but their use of it cannot infer they see it as the means of ascertaining truth, as certainty can only come by implicit trust in the AIM, and by which a superior unity is claimed. That all being another debate, I went through and selected a representative sample from each side out of the many posts i saw, which i will try to place side by side with my brief comments. This also provides some idea of how different poster respond. Some simply reiterate the claims of their faith, or unsubstantiated views, or sometimes with a slew of links, while others provide some Scripture texts, and perhaps ancient testimony, with varying degrees of reasoning and responses, and some respond with indignation, immediately or after some of the preceding.
	Roman Catholic	Protestant	Comment
1	Luke 1:48 “Because He hath regarded the humility of His Handmaid; for behold from henceforth all generations shall call me blessed.” being full of grace allows no room for sin.	Mary herself offered a guilt offering to the priest. Christs line goes through Rahab The OT is all about CHRIST, not His mother..the ark was a type of CHRIST.	From what i see only Jn. 1:14 states that Jesus was “full [plērēs, which is used 17 times, all denoting “full”] of grace [charis=grace] The key phrase in Lk. 1:28 simply says “Hail [chairō=rejoice, greeting, etc.] grace [chairō, denoting to be graced, favored, enriched with grace as in Eph.1:6) Robertson’s states that, Vulgate gratiae plena “is right, if it means ‘full of grace which thou hast received’; wrong, if it means ‘full of grace which thou hast to bestow’” (Plummer). As for the underlying argument, see further below.
2	Mary was preserved from the stain of original sin by the merits of Jesus Christ. He saved her.	"All have sinned and fall short of the Glory of God"	It is true that “all” is not always inclusive, but many texts state that all men are sinners, and this the Holy Spirit is faithful to state more than once that Jesus did not sin. (Jn. 8:46; 2Cor. 5:21; 1Pt. 2:220
3	Mary was the Ark of the New Covenant -- carrying Christ within her womb. Of course, she was pure and sinless.	Using that logic, it would be logical to conclude that Mary's mother was sinless as well. We couldn't have the sinless "Ark of the Covenant" be carried in the womb of a sinful human, could we?	While the typology in this case might be permissible, though it is not mentioned (neither is Joseph in the O.T. as a type of Christ), the logic behind it limits God (below).
4	He needed a sinless vessel to bring the Savior	In Luke 2:47 Mary says “And my Spirit hath rejoiced in God my Saviour.”	The foundational logic necessitating a sinless vessel is not valid. If the God-breathed word of God came through sinners, then the word made flesh certainty can as well.
5	It is commonly understood that the Holy Spirit does not fill those who are still in a state of original sin. . If it is granted that John the Baptist was freed from original sin before birth, it does not follow that he was immaculate, as was the Blessed Virgin Mary. This is firstly because he may have been freed of original sin after his conception and before birth, whereas Mary was preserved from her conception from contracting original sin.	1 john 1:8-10 If we say we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, Actually the Catholic church itself teaches that only Jesus could keep the whole law perfectly..and THAT is a description of sinless:)	The idea that man is born guilty due to something he did not do is one i do not subscribe to. (2Ki. 14:5-6; 2Chr. 25:4; Jer. 31:29-30; Eze.18:20) Adam;s sin did lead to condemnation, that of his own and his progeny due to man having and yielding to his a sinful nature, (Gn. 4:7) and he also and suffers the temporal effects if Adam's sin, but the final judgment is based upon one's own works. (Rev. 20:12) And one can be filled with their Holy Spirit, which is an aspect of grace, and yet be a sinner. And as argued below, if John the Baptist was made free from sin before birth, then God could have done the same for all.
6	So God didn't have the power to absolve her as has been described in Catholic canons?	If God could have simply absolved Mary's sin, He could do it for everyone. Then there would have been no need for Jesus to die.	The first part of the Protestant is valid, but God forgave sins prior to Jesus death under the rubric of the final atonement.
7	Interesting logic, I guess this means Jesus sinned then right? For is he not part of “All”?	if Mary was indeed sinless, it would have been very logical to claim her as an exception here,	And consistent. (see #2),.
8	You should be concerned about YOUR salvation since you choose to disparage the Mother of Christ. She is much more active than a lot of other saints.	Making up stories about her being sinless, immaculately conceived, perpetually virgin, assumed and whatever else their fancy conjures up, and passing them off as truth does no one any favors,	Not thinking of any man of women beyond what is written is Scriptural. (1Cor. 4:6) The idea that the Bible supports prayers to the departed, or that Mary is capable of or needed to hear prayer is without warrant and is contrary to what is instructed and exampled in the Bible.
9	If Mary simple prodding of her son Jesus caused him to do something he originally did not intend to do and yet did it. That is Love for ones Mother and speaks wonders to have Mary petitioning Jesus for you	Mary's not the only woman who seems to have convince Jesus to do what he had not intended.	P response is valid, while the idea that we need a heavenly mother is a psychological and not a Biblical one. No insufficiency exists with Christ in terms of access or ability or compassion than would necessitate or advantage praying to heavenly intercessor.
10	Hey, if you find happiness by trashing the Mother of Our Lord and Savior, I won’t stand in the way.
11	The Catholic Church herself admits that much of Mariology lacks scriptural support. Fine.” Really I missed that update		Perhaps "The Catholic Encyclopedia states that there are “no direct or categorical and stringent proof of the dogma can be brought forward from Scripture.” is one that was meant. (Frederick G. Holweck, “The Doctrine of the Immaculate Conception,” The Catholic Encyclopedia (1910), vol. 7, p. 242 http://oce.catholic.com/index.php?title=Immaculate_Conception#II._THE_HOLY_SCRIPTURE
12	I do not intend to participate in yet another forum established for the sole purpose of giving you a platform for blaspheming the Blessed Virgin and Catholic baiting	Catholics are bashing God’s Word by their tradition of Mary and all their accolades the RCC bestows on her which are not in Scripture.
13	They have gone too far and I only appeal to God for mercy on their behalf for I will no longer be party to their sin.
14	The first time I've ever been this ticked off to leave. If I would have been in the same room with you, you'd be in the hospital, and I would be in jail.
15	I’ve got news for you. If you are a baptized Catholic you are still a Catholic even though you may not presently be a practicing one.		Serving two master would provide a false statistic on membership. “If someone lives an unrepentant sinful life and stops going to Mass, etc., this person is technically a de facto apostate, and is no longer really a member of the Catholic Church.”   But as often is the case, formally it is not that simple. http://www.davidmacd.com/catholic/how_to_stop_being_catholic.htm

[Cronos]

"the ark was a type of CHRIST. " -->

I'm not sure if you said this (I guess not), but I'll still ask you -- why would anyone say that the Ark was a type of Christ?

The ARk contained the covenant, the ark itself was not the covenant, in contrast Jesus WAS the covenant

Also, Jesus was not a container, not a man or man-thing containing God, but was completely God and completely man.

There is no similarity between Christ and the ark (the container itself) -- at least I don't see that, what do you think?

[Quix]

THANKS!
FANTASTICALLY EXCELLENT:
.
.
To: RnMomof7

	Well, i stopped after 237 posts were made in about 2 hours. I would not consider the posted subject to really be a matter of salvation, but behind it is the foundational issue of authority, that of the only objective source which is affirmed to be wholly inspired by God, (2Tim. 3:16) separated from the rest of tradition which class it is part of, versus an assuredly infallible magisterium (AIM), it being infallible whenever it speaks in accordance with its infallibly declared formula. Scripture has been employed here by Catholics, but their use of it cannot infer they see it as the means of ascertaining truth, as certainty can only come by implicit trust in the AIM, and by which a superior unity is claimed. That all being another debate, I went through and selected a representative sample from each side out of the many posts i saw, which i will try to place side by side with my brief comments. This also provides some idea of how different poster respond. Some simply reiterate the claims of their faith, or unsubstantiated views, or sometimes with a slew of links, while others provide some Scripture texts, and perhaps ancient testimony, with varying degrees of reasoning and responses, and some respond with indignation, immediately or after some of the preceding.
	Roman Catholic	Protestant	Comment
1	Luke 1:48 “Because He hath regarded the humility of His Handmaid; for behold from henceforth all generations shall call me blessed.” being full of grace allows no room for sin.	Mary herself offered a guilt offering to the priest. Christs line goes through Rahab The OT is all about CHRIST, not His mother..the ark was a type of CHRIST.	From what i see only Jn. 1:14 states that Jesus was “full [plērēs, which is used 17 times, all denoting “full”] of grace [charis=grace] The key phrase in Lk. 1:28 simply says “Hail [chairō=rejoice, greeting, etc.] grace [chairō, denoting to be graced, favored, enriched with grace as in Eph.1:6) Robertson’s states that, Vulgate gratiae plena “is right, if it means ‘full of grace which thou hast received’; wrong, if it means ‘full of grace which thou hast to bestow’” (Plummer). As for the underlying argument, see further below.
2	Mary was preserved from the stain of original sin by the merits of Jesus Christ. He saved her.	"All have sinned and fall short of the Glory of God"	It is true that “all” is not always inclusive, but many texts state that all men are sinners, and this the Holy Spirit is faithful to state more than once that Jesus did not sin. (Jn. 8:46; 2Cor. 5:21; 1Pt. 2:220
3	Mary was the Ark of the New Covenant -- carrying Christ within her womb. Of course, she was pure and sinless.	Using that logic, it would be logical to conclude that Mary's mother was sinless as well. We couldn't have the sinless "Ark of the Covenant" be carried in the womb of a sinful human, could we?	While the typology in this case might be permissible, though it is not mentioned (neither is Joseph in the O.T. as a type of Christ), the logic behind it limits God (below).
4	He needed a sinless vessel to bring the Savior	In Luke 2:47 Mary says “And my Spirit hath rejoiced in God my Saviour.”	The foundational logic necessitating a sinless vessel is not valid. If the God-breathed word of God came through sinners, then the word made flesh certainty can as well.
5	It is commonly understood that the Holy Spirit does not fill those who are still in a state of original sin. . If it is granted that John the Baptist was freed from original sin before birth, it does not follow that he was immaculate, as was the Blessed Virgin Mary. This is firstly because he may have been freed of original sin after his conception and before birth, whereas Mary was preserved from her conception from contracting original sin.	1 john 1:8-10 If we say we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, Actually the Catholic church itself teaches that only Jesus could keep the whole law perfectly..and THAT is a description of sinless:)	The idea that man is born guilty due to something he did not do is one i do not subscribe to. (2Ki. 14:5-6; 2Chr. 25:4; Jer. 31:29-30; Eze.18:20) Adam;s sin did lead to condemnation, that of his own and his progeny due to man having and yielding to his a sinful nature, (Gn. 4:7) and he also and suffers the temporal effects if Adam's sin, but the final judgment is based upon one's own works. (Rev. 20:12) And one can be filled with their Holy Spirit, which is an aspect of grace, and yet be a sinner. And as argued below, if John the Baptist was made free from sin before birth, then God could have done the same for all.
6	So God didn't have the power to absolve her as has been described in Catholic canons?	If God could have simply absolved Mary's sin, He could do it for everyone. Then there would have been no need for Jesus to die.	The first part of the Protestant is valid, but God forgave sins prior to Jesus death under the rubric of the final atonement.
7	Interesting logic, I guess this means Jesus sinned then right? For is he not part of “All”?	if Mary was indeed sinless, it would have been very logical to claim her as an exception here,	And consistent. (see #2),.
8	You should be concerned about YOUR salvation since you choose to disparage the Mother of Christ. She is much more active than a lot of other saints.	Making up stories about her being sinless, immaculately conceived, perpetually virgin, assumed and whatever else their fancy conjures up, and passing them off as truth does no one any favors,	Not thinking of any man of women beyond what is written is Scriptural. (1Cor. 4:6) The idea that the Bible supports prayers to the departed, or that Mary is capable of or needed to hear prayer is without warrant and is contrary to what is instructed and exampled in the Bible.
9	If Mary simple prodding of her son Jesus caused him to do something he originally did not intend to do and yet did it. That is Love for ones Mother and speaks wonders to have Mary petitioning Jesus for you	Mary's not the only woman who seems to have convince Jesus to do what he had not intended.	P response is valid, while the idea that we need a heavenly mother is a psychological and not a Biblical one. No insufficiency exists with Christ in terms of access or ability or compassion than would necessitate or advantage praying to heavenly intercessor.
10	Hey, if you find happiness by trashing the Mother of Our Lord and Savior, I won’t stand in the way.
11	The Catholic Church herself admits that much of Mariology lacks scriptural support. Fine.” Really I missed that update		Perhaps "The Catholic Encyclopedia states that there are “no direct or categorical and stringent proof of the dogma can be brought forward from Scripture.” is one that was meant. (Frederick G. Holweck, “The Doctrine of the Immaculate Conception,” The Catholic Encyclopedia (1910), vol. 7, p. 242 http://oce.catholic.com/index.php?title=Immaculate_Conception#II._THE_HOLY_SCRIPTURE
12	I do not intend to participate in yet another forum established for the sole purpose of giving you a platform for blaspheming the Blessed Virgin and Catholic baiting	Catholics are bashing God’s Word by their tradition of Mary and all their accolades the RCC bestows on her which are not in Scripture.
13	They have gone too far and I only appeal to God for mercy on their behalf for I will no longer be party to their sin.
14	The first time I've ever been this ticked off to leave. If I would have been in the same room with you, you'd be in the hospital, and I would be in jail.
15	I’ve got news for you. If you are a baptized Catholic you are still a Catholic even though you may not presently be a practicing one.		Serving two master would provide a false statistic on membership. “If someone lives an unrepentant sinful life and stops going to Mass, etc., this person is technically a de facto apostate, and is no longer really a member of the Catholic Church.”   But as often is the case, formally it is not that simple. http://www.davidmacd.com/catholic/how_to_stop_being_catholic.htm

476 posted on Monday, December 06, 2010 1:38:33 AM by daniel1212 ( ("Repent ye therefore, and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out," Acts 3:19))

	Well, i stopped after 237 posts were made in about 2 hours. I would not consider the posted subject to really be a matter of salvation, but behind it is the foundational issue of authority, that of the only objective source which is affirmed to be wholly inspired by God, (2Tim. 3:16) separated from the rest of tradition which class it is part of, versus an assuredly infallible magisterium (AIM), it being infallible whenever it speaks in accordance with its infallibly declared formula. Scripture has been employed here by Catholics, but their use of it cannot infer they see it as the means of ascertaining truth, as certainty can only come by implicit trust in the AIM, and by which a superior unity is claimed. That all being another debate, I went through and selected a representative sample from each side out of the many posts i saw, which i will try to place side by side with my brief comments. This also provides some idea of how different poster respond. Some simply reiterate the claims of their faith, or unsubstantiated views, or sometimes with a slew of links, while others provide some Scripture texts, and perhaps ancient testimony, with varying degrees of reasoning and responses, and some respond with indignation, immediately or after some of the preceding.
	Roman Catholic	Protestant	Comment
1	Luke 1:48 “Because He hath regarded the humility of His Handmaid; for behold from henceforth all generations shall call me blessed.” being full of grace allows no room for sin.	Mary herself offered a guilt offering to the priest. Christs line goes through Rahab The OT is all about CHRIST, not His mother..the ark was a type of CHRIST.	From what i see only Jn. 1:14 states that Jesus was “full [plērēs, which is used 17 times, all denoting “full”] of grace [charis=grace] The key phrase in Lk. 1:28 simply says “Hail [chairō=rejoice, greeting, etc.] grace [chairō, denoting to be graced, favored, enriched with grace as in Eph.1:6) Robertson’s states that, Vulgate gratiae plena “is right, if it means ‘full of grace which thou hast received’; wrong, if it means ‘full of grace which thou hast to bestow’” (Plummer). As for the underlying argument, see further below.
2	Mary was preserved from the stain of original sin by the merits of Jesus Christ. He saved her.	"All have sinned and fall short of the Glory of God"	It is true that “all” is not always inclusive, but many texts state that all men are sinners, and this the Holy Spirit is faithful to state more than once that Jesus did not sin. (Jn. 8:46; 2Cor. 5:21; 1Pt. 2:220
3	Mary was the Ark of the New Covenant -- carrying Christ within her womb. Of course, she was pure and sinless.	Using that logic, it would be logical to conclude that Mary's mother was sinless as well. We couldn't have the sinless "Ark of the Covenant" be carried in the womb of a sinful human, could we?	While the typology in this case might be permissible, though it is not mentioned (neither is Joseph in the O.T. as a type of Christ), the logic behind it limits God (below).
4	He needed a sinless vessel to bring the Savior	In Luke 2:47 Mary says “And my Spirit hath rejoiced in God my Saviour.”	The foundational logic necessitating a sinless vessel is not valid. If the God-breathed word of God came through sinners, then the word made flesh certainty can as well.
5	It is commonly understood that the Holy Spirit does not fill those who are still in a state of original sin. . If it is granted that John the Baptist was freed from original sin before birth, it does not follow that he was immaculate, as was the Blessed Virgin Mary. This is firstly because he may have been freed of original sin after his conception and before birth, whereas Mary was preserved from her conception from contracting original sin.	1 john 1:8-10 If we say we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, Actually the Catholic church itself teaches that only Jesus could keep the whole law perfectly..and THAT is a description of sinless:)	The idea that man is born guilty due to something he did not do is one i do not subscribe to. (2Ki. 14:5-6; 2Chr. 25:4; Jer. 31:29-30; Eze.18:20) Adam;s sin did lead to condemnation, that of his own and his progeny due to man having and yielding to his a sinful nature, (Gn. 4:7) and he also and suffers the temporal effects if Adam's sin, but the final judgment is based upon one's own works. (Rev. 20:12) And one can be filled with their Holy Spirit, which is an aspect of grace, and yet be a sinner. And as argued below, if John the Baptist was made free from sin before birth, then God could have done the same for all.
6	So God didn't have the power to absolve her as has been described in Catholic canons?	If God could have simply absolved Mary's sin, He could do it for everyone. Then there would have been no need for Jesus to die.	The first part of the Protestant is valid, but God forgave sins prior to Jesus death under the rubric of the final atonement.
7	Interesting logic, I guess this means Jesus sinned then right? For is he not part of “All”?	if Mary was indeed sinless, it would have been very logical to claim her as an exception here,	And consistent. (see #2),.
8	You should be concerned about YOUR salvation since you choose to disparage the Mother of Christ. She is much more active than a lot of other saints.	Making up stories about her being sinless, immaculately conceived, perpetually virgin, assumed and whatever else their fancy conjures up, and passing them off as truth does no one any favors,	Not thinking of any man of women beyond what is written is Scriptural. (1Cor. 4:6) The idea that the Bible supports prayers to the departed, or that Mary is capable of or needed to hear prayer is without warrant and is contrary to what is instructed and exampled in the Bible.
9	If Mary simple prodding of her son Jesus caused him to do something he originally did not intend to do and yet did it. That is Love for ones Mother and speaks wonders to have Mary petitioning Jesus for you	Mary's not the only woman who seems to have convince Jesus to do what he had not intended.	P response is valid, while the idea that we need a heavenly mother is a psychological and not a Biblical one. No insufficiency exists with Christ in terms of access or ability or compassion than would necessitate or advantage praying to heavenly intercessor.
10	Hey, if you find happiness by trashing the Mother of Our Lord and Savior, I won’t stand in the way.
11	The Catholic Church herself admits that much of Mariology lacks scriptural support. Fine.” Really I missed that update		Perhaps "The Catholic Encyclopedia states that there are “no direct or categorical and stringent proof of the dogma can be brought forward from Scripture.” is one that was meant. (Frederick G. Holweck, “The Doctrine of the Immaculate Conception,” The Catholic Encyclopedia (1910), vol. 7, p. 242 http://oce.catholic.com/index.php?title=Immaculate_Conception#II._THE_HOLY_SCRIPTURE
12	I do not intend to participate in yet another forum established for the sole purpose of giving you a platform for blaspheming the Blessed Virgin and Catholic baiting	Catholics are bashing God’s Word by their tradition of Mary and all their accolades the RCC bestows on her which are not in Scripture.
13	They have gone too far and I only appeal to God for mercy on their behalf for I will no longer be party to their sin.
14	The first time I've ever been this ticked off to leave. If I would have been in the same room with you, you'd be in the hospital, and I would be in jail.
15	I’ve got news for you. If you are a baptized Catholic you are still a Catholic even though you may not presently be a practicing one.		Serving two master would provide a false statistic on membership. “If someone lives an unrepentant sinful life and stops going to Mass, etc., this person is technically a de facto apostate, and is no longer really a member of the Catholic Church.”   But as often is the case, formally it is not that simple. http://www.davidmacd.com/catholic/how_to_stop_being_catholic.htm