Immaculate Conception of Mary.

If you are sincerely interested please take time to read all of my post.

I thought I would start thid thread so as I can explain this Catholic Doctrine a little more fuller.

Luke 1:26-28 (RSV Catholic edition: "Hail, full of grace"; non-Catholic RSV: "O favoured one")

The Greek word for "full of grace" or "highly favoured" is kecharitomene: perfect passive participle of charitoo, which means "endowed with grace." Charis (the greek word for grace) is translatedin the KJV, as "grace" 129 times out of about 150 appearances. This passage teaches the sinlessness of Mary - itself the root assumption of the developed doctrine of the Immaculate Conception. With additional cross-referencing of a lot of Scriptural material concerning grace, the striking "Catholic" conclusion becomes a lot clearer than it is at first glance. For St. Paul, grace (charis)is the antithesis and overcomer of sin:

Romans 5:17, 20-21, Romans 6:14, 2 Corinthians1:12, 2 Corinthians 12:9, 2 Timothy 1:9.

We are saved, of course, by grace, and grace alone:

Acts 15:11, Romans 3:24, Ephesians 2:5, Ephesians 2:8-9, Titus 2:11, Titus 3:7.

The implications of all this for Luke 1:28 and the Immaculate Conception of Mary now start to become all the more apparent. From this we learn 2 things are biblically certain: Grace saves, and grace gives us the power to be holy and righteous without sin.

Therefore, for a person to be full of grace is to be both saved and exceptionally, completely holy. The Bible also teaches that people can have different levels of grace (Acts 4:33; Rom. 5:20; 6:1; Eph. 4:7; James 4:6; 1 Pet. 5:5; 2 Pet. 1:2; 3:1. And Mary as we know from Luke 1:28 was "FULL of grace". Thus we can restate the above 2 propositions with Mary in mind as follows:

1. To be full of grace which saves is to be surely saved.
2. To be full of grace which gives us the power to be holy and righteous and without sin is to be fully without sin, ny that same grace.

Or, we could make the following deductive argument, with premises (the first 2 statements) derived directly from scripture:

* The Bible teaches that we are saved by God's grace.
* The Bible teaches that we need God's grace to live a holy life, above sin.
* Therefore Mary is saved.
* To be "FULL of" God's grace is also to be so holy that one is sinless.
* Therefore, Mary is holy and sinless.

I will make another post to explain further the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception.

 

Thanks for your take on it, Sean. I believe Mary got knocked up out of wedlock and then when Jesus revealed that to His handlers, they decided an Immaculate Conception story would be a better sale to build His reputation, what with sexual mores being what they were at the time.

It is interesting to view these topics from different perspectives, however, so thanks for yours.

 

Per your discussion, then:

1) Mary was born sinless (Immaculate Conception)
2) Mary lived a sinless life (being full of grace)
3) Mary was bodily resurrected (Assumption)

ergo, Mary didnt need a savior, was equivalent to a female 'Jesus, and so Jesus wasnt her Savior....?!

Sacrilege!!! [again, 'sincerely' wrong is still wrong]

 

That sniley face in my last post is an error.

Any way back to the Immacualte Conception.
Luke 1:35.
The Greek word for overshadow is episkiasei, which describes a bright, glorious cloud. It is used in reference to the cloud of transfiguration of Jesus (Matt. 17:5; Mark 9:7; Luke 9:34) and also has a connection to the shekinah glory of God in the OT (Exod. 24:15-16; 40:34-38; 1 Kings 8:10). Mary is, therefore, in effect, the new new temple and holy of holies, where God was present in a special fashion. In fact, scripture draws many parallels between Mary, the "ark of the new covenant" and theark of the old covenant:
Exodus 40:24-35, The Greek Septuagint translation uses the same word, episkiasei, in this passage. 1 Kings 8:6-11

More direct parallels occur as well:

2 Samuel 6:9, Luke 1:43, 2 Samuel 6:15, Luke 1:42, 2 Samuel 6:14, 16, 1 Chronicles 15:29, Luke 1:44, 2 Samuel 6:10-11, Luke 1:39, 56.

The high priest was only permitted to enter the holy of holies once a year, on the Day of Atonement (Num 29:
We know the ark of the covenant killed people who touched even just to steady it. We know it killed people to look inside of it.

Thus, Mary, as the ark of the new covenant, Theotokos ("bearer of God") - the one who had the sublime honour of carrying God incarnate in her womb- had to be exceptionally holy to do so. This is indicated by both Luke 1:28, understood in its fullimplications, and the ark parallels noted above.

Mary's sinless is strongly indicated, and this is the premise of her Immaculate Conception, meaning that God miraculously preserved her free from the stain of Original Sin, from the moment of her conception. It wa a free act of grace, obviously having nothing to do with Mary's will, other than she made the decision to comply with the God's grace and stay from sin. Hence, "full of grace" and all its implications.

It is not as if being without sin is completely unimaginable. Adam and Eve were originally created without sin. The angels also were, and the ones who did not rebel have never sinned. There will eventually be no sin in heaven, when all things are redeemed. Prophets were exceptionally holy, and some (like Jeremiah and John the Baptist) were even sanctified from the womb.

Jeremiah 1:5, Sirach 49:7, Luke 1:15.

 

Any Catholic will tell you though Mary was free from sin she also needed to be saved. Mary was given sufficent grace from God, but she had to comply with the grace that was given to her.

 

I'd be afraid of losing my personality. No sin in Heaven... all humans are sinners... so what would I be if I didn't sin? Seems like I wouldn't be myself. I only have an inclination to save MY personality and have it survive for all eternity. Whatever this sinless version of me is, I have no desire to see it arise and am apathetic to its longevity. It's not me. Whatever makes me unique might be lost in this "sinlessness" that is forced upon us in Heaven. So I hope I don't go.

 

Saved from What?!! She was w/o sin!

The whole thing doesnt make sense, as Jesus was called the Savior of the World, of all mankind....FAILED reasoning & doctrine..

But SM, you are so 'steeped' in dogma that you cant see the folly of your belief system. As were the religious ppl of Christ's time (the priestly Jews) who were the 'finger on the trigger of the Roman gun' who killed Jesus...'religious ppl' are still "killing" the importance of Jesus as the only Savior even TODAY!!

How very, very sad..........Again, twisting & distortion, with verbal gymnastics to 'cover' a false doctrine!

 

As I prepare to convert to Catholicism this is the hardest subject to wrap my head around as a soon to be former protestant.

 

There is no Immaculate Conception. Its just another myth, in a sea of myths, that is the bible.

No mammal has EVER given birth via Immaculate Conception, A.K.A. Parthenogenesis.

Parthenogenesis

Notice, it does not say mammals.

Another myth busted by science and evidence.

 

Mary was given the grace that saved her. She did not give it to herself. So she was still saved by God.
I bet you never even read the passages I listed.
You get your authority from a book the Church gave you. You say it is not infallible and open to error so how can you look to it.
I say the Bible contains the truth because it was given to us through the authority and wisdom of the Church, it was inspired by the Holy Spirit. It is infallible just are the doctrines of the Church. However Protestants tampered with the Bible and take whatever meaning they like from it.
If the Protestant way of thinking is not failed reasoning then I don't know what is.
If you have a Bible in front of you read the passages, if you have read them and still cannot see reasoning in the doctrine then I am sorry there is not much more else I can say about the Immaculate Conception.

 

Sean Michael, how many more years til you get your degree? Or do you have one?

 

But again, Mary is a distraction to "Saved by grace thru the faith in Jesus Christ and HIS work on the cross." She was not honored anymore following the virgin birth and other than being a Jewish mother of the time (ref: "these are my mothers, brothers, etc....those who do the will of the Father"). She is a distraction to the Gospel of Jesus Christ!! In fact, she is higher than Jesus as being "the Mother of God" where He was merely her Son...and, BTW, there is nothing talking about 'gender' in heaven following the resurrection (as the woman married to 7 bros, "whose wife will she be?") since reproduction will not occur---it is an earthly means of reproduction, and no gender in the spirit. All are called 'sons of God'--no 'daughters of God!!'

 

The Christians analyzed scripoture to depths quite unnecessary in what turns out to be a very simple rationale for us today, in this Age when so much knowledge abounds and men are able run to and fro in quest of answers.

Simply put, the Grace of God is that he created the Ideal of Truth which naturally follows from the father of Reality as it inceasntly unfolds from moment to moment.
In the beginning, Truth was with the Father, the creator of Reality from moment to moment.
And for us, who conceive Truth a a spirit of intelect, Trut is the father, the creator who unfolds the next frame of Reality for us.

Truth is our savior in a world within which we think in order to cope and exist.
Truth is the way we must cope with life.

For us, Truth is the image of this God who unfolds from one moment to the next.

 

I cannot see if I have degree or not makes any difference. It is completely of topic and nothing to do with the discussion. Someone without a degree has as valid opinion as someone who does.

 

I believe that Joseph was his father and that christians made up the story later to make him sound more divine. They have done it several times. Many of the saints are given credit for things they never did, such as Saint Patrick ridding Ireland of snakes. The church has a group of preists get together and think of things to credit to each saint that would make them seem to be above normal humans.

 

That would be a possibility.
It is also strange that Mary never mentioned the circumstances of her pre-marital pregnancy until after the crucifiion and resurrection.

We know this because otherwise Jewish Law would not have permitted a bastard to enter the Temple, which Jesus had been doing.

This supports my hypothesis that Mary and Joseph were silent about the pregnancy until the end.
When Jesus resurrected,, she was certain that what the angel had told was true.
It was by an Act-of-God that some genetic mutation in the womb had advanced evolution another step forward.
Jesus was born not ModernHomo sapiens, but Homoiousian sapiens.
And God, in that sense, was the father of a new creature on earth, our Lord.

 

It is true that traditions were invented and created over the last 2000years, but the Gospel was written down by witnesses/apostles alost immediately, in 54AD.
Those men pesonally knew Mary and it makes sense that it was to them, sympathic followers and lovers of Jesus personally that she would reveal her long kept secret.

Mary must have seriously believed she mothered a strange and different kind of being than any man she knew about.

 

Mary does not distract from God. Mary amplifies the glory of God as do all the saints. Mary is the mother of God, to deny this then you deny the divinity of Jesus. Jesus gave Mary to us to be our mother also, and are we not told to honour thy father and mother. It is even prophesised in the Bible Mary says she will be called blessed throughout the ages. Protestants are excluding themselves from this prophecy. We also know from the Bible Mary was held in high esteem, when people say things who am I do deserve to be in the presence of the mother of my saviour. We are also told when Mary presented Jesus in the temple, that she would also suffer "and thy own soul a sword shall pierce, that, out of many hearts, thought maybe revealed".

 

Ref: BOLD text...how very sad for those who have bought that line of false rationalization (even if being 'well intentioned!')

Again (for the 3rd time): "Sincerely wrong is STILL wrong."

It's obvious, SM, that you are sincere in your false beliefs and dogma of men; but you have been 'cooked' and 'steeped' in Catholic doctrine (probably, most of your life) and are like the frog in water with the heat being slowly turned up, and ends up boiling to death---no man can help you, if you enjoy 'religiosity' and all that goes with it...you will have to awaken yourself when you become a 'truth seeker' of the Gospel of Jesus Christ, and not the Roman Catholic Catechism'...

A sighted person arguing 'vision' with one who has been blinded, is but a waste of time..

 

So what are you saying we should not examine Scripture just take a glance over it and take from it what each individual pleases?.

I do agree however God is constantly revealing Himself to us, what was hidden from us before is later revealed to us.

 

Is this your argument?. Tell me do you believe Mary to be the mother of God or not?.
You are the one who is blinded, you are the one who makes doctrine to suit yourself and your own personal interpretation of things. You are the one who has to wake up because you cannot see the truth becauise in your pride you believe yourselof to be more enlightened than the Church Christ established.
The Bible which you claim as your sole authority. Speaks of authority and of the Church, the Bible warns of self interpretation of Holy Scripture, the Bible warns of disunity in Christianity. The Catholic Church is the Church established by Christ, He claimed he would be with it for all ages. Therefore he is still with the Church he founded, some of the other Protestant churches may have sanctifiying grace and are open to salvation, but they are still in error, and some are just in complete error.

 

I'm still in the "fiction" camp for the lot of these characers, myself. Mary is Virgo, Joseph is Boötes, King Herod is Serpens Caput, Jesus is of course the Sun..

Incidentally, the nativity is repeated in slightly wilder terms in Revelation, which I find positively fascinating:

Revelation 12
New International Version (NIV)
The Woman and the Dragon

12:1 A great sign appeared in heaven: a woman clothed with the sun, with the moon under her feet and a crown of twelve stars on her head. 2 She was pregnant and cried out in pain as she was about to give birth. 3 Then another sign appeared in heaven: an enormous red dragon with seven heads and ten horns and seven crowns on its heads. 4 Its tail swept a third of the stars out of the sky and flung them to the earth. The dragon stood in front of the woman who was about to give birth, so that it might devour her child the moment he was born. 5 She gave birth to a son, a male child, who “will rule all the nations with an iron scepter.”[a] And her child was snatched up to God and to his throne. 6 The woman fled into the wilderness to a place prepared for her by God, where she might be taken care of for 1,260 days.

My spine tingles when I read this, it's such a powerful image. Still, it is a recounting of the nativity, with the "dragon" now more literally represented, instead of being represented by the character of King Herod. Both, however, were quite terrible. From the nativity account of Matthew:

Matthew 2
New International Version (NIV)

The Magi Visit the Messiah

2:1 After Jesus was born in Bethlehem in Judea, during the time of King Herod, Magi[a] from the east came to Jerusalem 2 and asked, “Where is the one who has been born king of the Jews? We saw his star when it rose and have come to worship him.”

3 When King Herod heard this he was disturbed, and all Jerusalem with him. 4 When he had called together all the people’s chief priests and teachers of the law, he asked them where the Messiah was to be born. 5 “In Bethlehem in Judea,” they replied, “for this is what the prophet has written:

6 “‘But you, Bethlehem, in the land of Judah,
are by no means least among the rulers of Judah;
for out of you will come a ruler
who will shepherd my people Israel.’”
7 Then Herod called the Magi secretly and found out from them the exact time the star had appeared. 8 He sent them to Bethlehem and said, “Go and search carefully for the child. As soon as you find him, report to me, so that I too may go and worship him.”

9 After they had heard the king, they went on their way, and the star they had seen when it rose went ahead of them until it stopped over the place where the child was. 10 When they saw the star, they were overjoyed. 11 On coming to the house, they saw the child with his mother Mary, and they bowed down and worshiped him. Then they opened their treasures and presented him with gifts of gold, frankincense and myrrh. 12 And having been warned in a dream not to go back to Herod, they returned to their country by another route.

The Escape to Egypt

13 When they had gone, an angel of the Lord appeared to Joseph in a dream. “Get up,” he said, “take the child and his mother and escape to Egypt. Stay there until I tell you, for Herod is going to search for the child to kill him.”

14 So he got up, took the child and his mother during the night and left for Egypt, 15 where he stayed until the death of Herod. And so was fulfilled what the Lord had said through the prophet: “Out of Egypt I called my son.”[c]

16 When Herod realized that he had been outwitted by the Magi, he was furious, and he gave orders to kill all the boys in Bethlehem and its vicinity who were two years old and under, in accordance with the time he had learned from the Magi.

Just compare the above with the bit from Revelation! It all makes for a really cool story, but a story is all it is.


^ There they all are in the sky together. There is more to be found about this fascinating subject here: http://www.usbible.com/astrology/star_of_bethlehem.htm
and in other sections of that site.

Even the "Escape to Egypt" is in the Revelation account!

 

No, of course i am not saying that we need not search the scriptures in order to find support for things we come to learn about what the bible is saying.

My point was that we need avoid a rigid acceptance to the conclusions of men like us who did likewise.
Those men centuries ago searhed the scripture and attempted to reason out what it was reporting to us.
They did not have our hind sight advantage nor increased knowledg to do a good a job as we can now.

I am saying try to more easily dismiss the traditional understanduings, the creeds, the rote mantras that hav become institutionized and culturally made politically correct.
Give modern reflection the much desterved advantage of replacing the old wine, and see the forrest by peering around these trees nthat bolck our understanding.

 

Jesus always referred to Himself as "Son of Man." The term Son of man appears many times in all four gospels, e.g. 30 times in Matthew.

Mary was the mother of the 'son of man,' the humanity of Jesus---NOT the Mother of God!! And Mary never referred to herself as the 'Mother of God" nor the "Queen of Heaven." She was blessed amongst women to bear the humanity of the savior, His 'human part' being of her egg..but God the Father by His Holy Spirit was the divine sperm to produce Jesus the Christ!

 

Interesting.

The Old testament used the literary vehicle of earlier mesopotanian myths to refute them, while gardnering their long standing audience for the purpose of advancing Genesis.
Genesis quite quickly demonstartes that it is concerned with Realit, here, on Earth as we see a genealogy unfold into a Table of Nations.
All the previious creation myths transported people to realms in fantasy heavens and concerned with interactions between Gods.

Then in the New Testament, the writings do lend themselves to astrological discussions which were the wisdom of the highly educated in that day.
But, in the end, the intent was to crush that previous wisdom and thoroughly replace its paganistic roots, destroy its connection with the 12 major deities of every Pantheon inthe world, and make Jesus the only name in Heaven for 1000 years:





Rev. 6:12 And I beheld, (in the days of Theodocius, who established the Holy Roman, Catholic, Apostolic Church), when he, (the Lamb of the tribe of Judah, the off-spring of the root of David;[Rev 5:5]), had opened the sixth seal (of scripture), and, lo, there was a great (sociological) earthquaqe (of institutionalized religious change); and the Sun (Signs of Astrology) became (as) black as (the) sackcloth of (a nun's) hair, and the moon became as blood (of Christ, to determine the very day of the Christian Passover).

Rev. 6:13 And the stars' (i.e.; the twelve constellations of Sun Signs) of heaven fell (from popular grace) unto the earth, even as a fig tree casteth her untimely figs, (ruined), when she is (destructively) shaken of a mighty wind.

Rev. 6:14 And (Astrology) departed (from popular practice) as a scroll when it is rolled together; and every (Pagan religion and secret society) were moved out of their places.

Rev. 6:15 And (1) the kings of the earth, (POLITICIANS), and (2) the great men, (STATESMEN), and (3) the rich men, (ECONOMIC BARONS), and (4) the chief captains, (PRIESTHOODS), and (5) the mighty men, (MILITARY LEADERS), and (6) every bondman, (CRAFTSMAN), and (7) every free man, (PEASANT), hid themselves in the dens and in the rocks (of the pagan temples);

Rev. 6:16 And said to the mountains (of the previous social institutions) and rocks (of cultural norms), Fall on us, (help!), and hide us from the face (of Papal judgment) of Universal Catholicism), him that sitteth on the throne (Theodocius, who established Christian Rome) and from the (words of) wrath of the lamb, (the Word of the New Testament):

Rev. 6:17 For the great day of his wrath, (the one thousand year reign predicted), is come; and who, (what other God or religion), shall be able to stand (during these Dark Ages)?

Note, Catholic Encyclopedia:
With the overthrow of the old Roman Empire and the victory of
Christianity, astrology lost its importance in the centers of Christian civilization in the West. The last known astrologer of the old world was Johannes Laurentius (sometimes called Lydus) of Philadelphia in Lydia, who lived A.D. 490-565.