[ealgeone]

"Kecharitomene" is applied to Mary, "pleres charitos" to Jesus and, "pleres pisteos" to Stephen. (I just looked that up in the Greek Interlinear NT online. Right. And "pleres pisteos" can better be translated "full of faith, or "full of belief.")

Did Keating's work on this, or whoever's you copied, indicate the words used to describe Stephen are not verbs??

You will note in the passage regarding Stephen he was able, through God's blessing, to perform wonders and signs. Mary was unable to do so.

When there was no wine at the wedding she had to ask Jesus for help.

You've already been shown the Catholic Encyclopedia says there is "No direct or categorical and stringent proof of the dogma can be brought forward from Scripture."

Why do you persist in posting this misleading, false information when you've been corrected previously??

[aMorePerfectUnion]

“Why do you persist in posting this misleading, false information when you’ve been corrected previously?? “

A belief in emotion and not Scripture.

Pagan-sourced and gymnastics used to read the idea back into scripture.

In short, wishogesis.

[Mrs. Don-o]

Mary bore in her womb the Second Person of the Trinity, through Whom and for Whom the Universe was created --- Who took flesh from her flesh, and became Man. Is that not a sign and a wonder?

In fact, the greatest one of all?

[boatbums]

Why do you persist in posting this misleading, false information when you've been corrected previously??

I think we can accurately say that there are SEVERAL RCs here who do the same. How many times have we factually corrected the false claims "Luther threw out books of the Bible" or "Luther added to and changed the Bible" or "Catholics wrote and gave us the Bible", etc.? But, rather than dispute the factual record if it is not believed, the argument is saved up for the NEXT time it can be trotted out. I think there really is no other reason than it's intentional, knowingly false and used in the hopes some unsuspecting schmo swallows it.