Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: Repent and Believe
As some words have been corrected in the Vulgate since the Council of Trent by Pope Sixtus V. and others, by Pope Clement VIII. so, if, upon stricter search, it be found that it, and not she, is the true reading, we shall not hesitate to admit the correction: but we must wait in the mean time respectfully, till our superiors determine. (Haydock)

It should be noted that of all the major translations, only the Douay-Rheims translates Gen 3:15 as "...she shall crush thy head, and thou shalt lie in wait for her heel."

The catholic encyclopedia online, which bills itself as the most comprehensive resource on Catholic teaching, history, and information ever gathered in all of human history, has this to say about Gen 3:15 in relation to the immaculate conception.

No direct or categorical and stringent proof of the dogma can be brought forward from Scripture. But the first scriptural passage which contains the promise of the redemption, mentions also the Mother of the Redeemer. The sentence against the first parents was accompanied by the Earliest Gospel ( Proto-evangelium ), which put enmity between the serpent and the woman : "and I will put enmity between thee and the woman and her seed; she (he) shall crush thy head and thou shalt lie in wait for her (his) heel" ( Genesis 3:15 ). The translation "she" of the Vulgate is interpretative; it originated after the fourth century, and cannot be defended critically.

http://www.catholic.org/encyclopedia/view.php?id=6056

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.

Yet catholics continue to do 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.

143 posted on 01/06/2017 5:26:26 PM PST by ealgeone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 130 | View Replies ]


To: ealgeone

“... 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.


147 posted on 01/06/2017 7:13:53 PM PST by Repent and Believe (The Son of Man, when He cometh, shall He find, think you, faith on earth? Jesus Christ (Luke 18:8))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 143 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


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