There is no Quaternity

[Churchwork]

The adherents of the great harlot of religious Rome (RCC - Rev. 14.8; ch. 17) are convinced Mary was sinless like puff the magic dragon, and when you show them the mistakes Mary made to her son when he was a child or when at the wedding they will warp it endlessly to maintain their position.

That is why there is a heaven and a hell for eventually God cuts off this conversation. There is no Immaculate Conception. There is no Divine Maternity. There is no Quaternity or Quatrinity:the Quaternity Rosary is so called because it honors a four-person godhead: father and mother creators and god-the-son and holy daughter.

A protective verse is, "that which is born of the flesh is flesh" (John 3.6). Therefore, Mary was a sinner and born in the flesh and sin, capable of making mistakes. That is why when she erred Jesus had to correct her, "woman, what have I to do with thee? mine hour is not yet come" (John 2.4) as was the case elsewhere in the Scriptures when she erred. She was mistaken in both presumptuously overassuming the timing and her thinking she had something to do with Jesus. Such is lack of humility and obedience, and overt and inordinate self-interest as mothers may tend towards to their children. This part of the human condition needs to be overcome. Don't you make the same mistake!

The RCC is trying to take your eye off Christ to control you, but it is Satan that is trying to do so through this organization.

Her sin nature entered into her body of sin and permeated her whole being, both her soul, and even to her spirit. The flesh is sin of the body and self of the soul. Her mistakes, though not vile sins in this instance, were yet errors in her soul stemming from the influence of her sin nature.
It may prevent you from receiving the rewards of the kingdom, even new birth, blocking you from truly accepting John 3.16,18.

A Roman Catholic will say to you, God can't be born in Mary unless she was sinless, to which I reply, If God by His Spirit can indwell a believer who has his sin nature rearing its ugly head waring against his spirit, then so too can God put His seed into Mary to be born in the likeness of sinful flesh, even though she was born into sin. Only God can do this. Mary's parent's were born sinners, so was Mary.

When they say if Jesus were born in the flesh, then Jesus must be sinful also like Mary. To this, simply reply with, "For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh" (Rom. 8.3).

[stray bullet]

The adherents of the great harlot of religious Rome (RCC - Rev. 14.8; ch. 17) are convinced Mary was sinless like puff the magic dragon, and when you show them the mistakes Mary made to her son when he was a child or when at the wedding they will warp it endlessly to maintain their position.

According to the Catholic Church, God preserved Mary from original sin through the redemptive power of Christ's upcoming sacrifice. This is based on Scripture and Holy Tradition. When Mary gave birth to Christ, there is no scriptural and no historical record of any pain being associated with the birth- a sin of original sin. Furthermore, the angel told Mary that she was 'full of grace' which is an incompatible status with sinners. Finally, there is no record, either biblically or historically, of Mary committing a sin.


That is why there is a heaven and a hell for eventually God cuts off this conversation. There is no Immaculate Conception. There is no Divine Maternity. There is no Quaternity or Quatrinity:the Quaternity Rosary is so called because it honors a four-person godhead: father and mother creators and god-the-son and holy daughter.

The Immaculate Conception is really not crucial to any salvation doctrine. I'm not sure how one can draw the conclusion that one is condemned merely for holding the position that Mary was sinless, especially since there is no evidence of this and it was a position held in the early Church.


A protective verse is, "that which is born of the flesh is flesh" (John 3.6). Therefore, Mary was a sinner and born in the flesh and sin, capable of making mistakes.

That's a rather sharp conclusion and the verse really doesn't suggest it. Certainly, by Jesus being born of Mary, this statement would seemingly apply to Him as well, but we know it doesn't. By your own statement:
"Do you believe Jesus Christ is the Son of the living God, God in the flesh, was raised from the dead on the third day from Calvary at the cross; He died for you to atone for your sins, the sins of the world, and you died with Him on the cross?"
Of course, we know there are exceptions to this statement, which require other portions of scripture to understand.


That is why when she erred Jesus had to correct her, "woman, what have I to do with thee? mine hour is not yet come" (John 2.4) as was the case elsewhere in the Scriptures when she erred. She was mistaken in both presumptuously overassuming the timing and her thinking she had something to do with Jesus. Such is lack of humility and obedience, and overt and inordinate self-interest as mothers may tend towards to their children. This part of the human condition needs to be overcome. Don't you make the same mistake!

There was nothing unhumble, disobedient or self-interested in that passage. I see nothing sinful in what is stated by her. Perhaps you could quote specifics and we can discuss their nature?


The RCC is trying to take your eye off Christ to control you, but it is Satan that is trying to do so through this organization.

The Church believing Mary was not born sinless does not take anyone's eye off Christ. As Mary's salvation is entirely dependent on Christ, it only comes back to Jesus.


It may prevent you from receiving the rewards of the kingdom, even new birth, blocking you from truly accepting John 3.16,18.

There is no reason to believe that Mary, saved by Jesus Christ, was preserved from original sin, is a salvation-dependent belief.

[Churchwork]

According to the Catholic Church, God preserved Mary from original sin through the redemptive power of Christ's upcoming sacrifice. This is based on Scripture and Holy Tradition. When Mary gave birth to Christ, there is no scriptural and no historical record of any pain being associated with the birth- a sin of original sin. Furthermore, the angel told Mary that she was 'full of grace' which is an incompatible status with sinners. Finally, there is no record, either biblically or historically, of Mary committing a sin.
Mary is shown to have made mistakes in the Bible that stem from disobedience and sin, so the RCC is wrong that Mary was preserved from original sin since the Scriptures do not agree with this claim, though man's traditions very well may, but such traditions are certainly not holy. Christians can be full of grace. This is compatible with being saved. Some are carnal, some are spiritual. Morever, the purpose of the Bible is not to pick away at Mary's sins, so recording her sins through her years serves no purpose. Nonetheless, we know that no person has never not sinned, including Mary. Though her mistakes in the Bible should not be construed as directly being sin, they were disobedience and mistakes made through overassuming, not in harmony with God's will.


The Immaculate Conception is really not crucial to any salvation doctrine. I'm not sure how one can draw the conclusion that one is condemned merely for holding the position that Mary was sinless, especially since there is no evidence of this and it was a position held in the early Church.
The early church did not believe Mary was sinless, for the early church recording is the NT, and nothing indicates in the Scriptures she became sinless after the mistakes she made and preserved in the Word. Therefore, she is not a co-redeemer, but she was redeemed by the atonement.



That's a rather sharp conclusion and the verse really doesn't suggest it. Certainly, by Jesus being born of Mary, this statement would seemingly apply to Him as well, but we know it doesn't. By your own statement:
"Do you believe Jesus Christ is the Son of the living God, God in the flesh, was raised from the dead on the third day from Calvary at the cross; He died for you to atone for your sins, the sins of the world, and you died with Him on the cross?" Of course, we know there are exceptions to this statement, which require other portions of scripture to understand.

God said all flesh is born of the flesh. It is stated plainly, "that which is born of the flesh is flesh" (John 3.6). All flesh is corruptible and must die because of sin. God is the only exception in the flesh for we know God broke into creation to take on the likeness of flesh. There is no exception to the rule of the flesh except God when God breaks into creation. Mary is not a co-redeemer.


There was nothing unhumble, disobedient or self-interested in that passage. I see nothing sinful in what is stated by her. Perhaps you could quote specifics and we can discuss their nature?
Specifics were already given. Your conscience is not attuned to what was already said. That is why when she erred Jesus had to correct her, "woman, what have I to do with thee? mine hour is not yet come" (John 2.4) as was the case elsewhere in the Scriptures when she erred. She was mistaken in both presumptuously overassuming the timing and her thinking she had something to do with Jesus. Such is lack of humility and obedience, and overt and inordinate self-interest as mothers may tend towards to their children. This part of the human condition needs to be overcome. Don't you make the same mistake!

Jesus had to correct her. Who can deny this?

Does this mean all Roman Catholics are going to hell. Certainly not, but a great percentage are, more than most denominations given such a heretical teaching of the idolatry of a goddess, which is a false fruit that does not flow from Christ, and a symption of unsalvation.


The Church believing Mary was not born sinless does not take anyone's eye off Christ. As Mary's salvation is entirely dependent on Christ, it only comes back to Jesus.
If you say Mary was not born sinless then you are saying she was born into sin and that all who are born into sin do sin. So you would be agreeing with me Mary was a sinner and the RCC is wrong in claiming Mary was sinless.

It takes the eye off Christ since it places Mary on equal position with Jesus in both being sinless. Satan applies this confusion. The truth of this mistaken assumption is Mary sinned and made mistakes. The latter flows from the former in disobedience to God, however hardened or miniscule the sin and selfishness seem. There is the noble and ignoble, the base and the high. All are equally inappropriate towards God if they do not flow as living water from the the Holy Spirit. Worshipping God with the good self is also wrong.


There is no reason to believe that Mary, saved by Jesus Christ, was preserved from original sin, is a salvation-dependent belief.
I agree. Mary was not preserved from original sin, and thus, those who believe that she was, though may not absolutely guarantee their unsalvation, but certainly in general terms would indicate a greater percentage per capita of Roman Catholics would be unsaved than would be the case in other denominations. That seems to be a fair statement, since most other denominations do not have this goddess idolatry of a sinless goddess.

[stray bullet]

Mary is shown to have made mistakes in the Bible that stem from disobedience and sin, so the RCC is wrong that Mary was preserved from original sin since the Scriptures do not agree with this claim, though man's traditions very well may, but such traditions are certainly not holy.

I'm not talking about man's traditions, but Holy Tradtion, apostolic teaching. The bible does not suggest Mary ever sinned.


Christians can be full of grace. This is compatible with being saved. Some are carnal, some are spiritual. Morever, the purpose of the Bible is not to pick away at Mary's sins, so recording her sins through her years serves no purpose. Nonetheless, we know that no person has never not sinned, including Mary. Though her mistakes in the Bible should not be construed as directly being sin, they were disobedience and mistakes made through overassuming, not in harmony with God's will.

Sin takes away grace, which is the problem of being 'full of grace'. If you would like to cite examples of Mary 'sinning', go for it.


The early church did not believe Mary was sinless, for the early church recording is the NT, and nothing indicates in the Scriptures she became sinless after the mistakes she made and preserved in the Word. Therefore, she is not a co-redeemer, but she was redeemed by the atonement.

We both agree she was redeemed by the atonement, your understanding of co-redeemer is wrong. "The mistakes she made"- I see no mistakes. Thus, the early Church and the NT do not express she was a sinner.


God said all flesh is born of the flesh. It is stated plainly, "that which is born of the flesh is flesh" (John 3.6). All flesh is corruptible and must die because of sin. God is the only exception in the flesh for we know God broke into creation to take on the likeness of flesh. There is no exception to the rule of the flesh except God when God breaks into creation. Mary is not a co-redeemer.

Co-redeemer- wrong understanding, again. You are taking verses which we know have exceptions and trying to apply them generally.


Specifics were already given. Your conscience is not attuned to what was already said. That is why when she erred Jesus had to correct her, "woman, what have I to do with thee? mine hour is not yet come" (John 2.4) as was the case elsewhere in the Scriptures when she erred. She was mistaken in both presumptuously overassuming the timing and her thinking she had something to do with Jesus. Such is lack of humility and obedience, and overt and inordinate self-interest as mothers may tend towards to their children. This part of the human condition needs to be overcome. Don't you make the same mistake!

That has nothing to do with not being humble or being disobedient. As far as not knowing, even Jesus did not know everything. Your argument is that not knowing and stating so is 'disobedient' and sinful.


Jesus had to correct her. Who can deny this?

"John 2:1 And the third day there was a marriage in Cana of Galilee; and the mother of Jesus was there:
John 2:2 And both Jesus was called, and his disciples, to the marriage.
John 2:3 And when they wanted wine, the mother of Jesus saith unto him, They have no wine.
John 2:4 Jesus saith unto her, Woman, what have I to do with thee? mine hour is not yet come.
John 2:5 His mother saith unto the servants, Whatsoever he saith unto you, do [it]."

You are exaggerating Jesus' words. She is hardly being unhumble or disobedient. "They have no wine". You are adding words and seeing an attitude clearly not there. What you are doing is creating an attitude to his words, then making judgments about Mary from that attitude.


Does this mean all Roman Catholics are going to hell. Certainly not, but a great percentage are, more than most denominations given such a heretical teaching of the idolatry of a goddess, which is a false fruit that does not flow from Christ, and a symption of unsalvation.

Believing Mary was not sinless, because of Jesus' death and resurrection is not 'idolatry of a goddess'. The idea that such a belief is salvation dependent makes non sense. Finally, God is the only judge of mankind.


If you say Mary was not born sinless then you are saying she was born into sin and that all who are born into sin do sin. So you would be agreeing with me Mary was a sinner and the RCC is wrong in claiming Mary was sinless.

I disagree with you- Mary was born without original sin. The Catholic Church is right on the issue.


It takes the eye off Christ since it places Mary on equal position with Jesus in both being sinless.

It does not place Mary equal with Jesus.
Jesus is God, the second person of the Godhead. God is divine, Mary is mortal. Mary is the child of man, Jesus is the Son of God. Jesus was born without sin. Mary was born without original sin only because of the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. That is not 'equal'



I agree. Mary was not preserved from original sin, and thus, those who believe that she was, though may not absolutely guarantee their unsalvation, but certainly in general terms would indicate a greater percentage per capita of Roman Catholics would be unsaved than would be the case in other denominations. That seems to be a fair statement, since most other denominations do not have this goddess idolatry of a sinless goddess.

Catholics do not have a goddess idolatry, so your threats of condemnation are non-applicable. Again, neither are you God and not the judge of a human soul.

[Churchwork]

I'm not talking about man's traditions, but Holy Tradtion, apostolic teaching. The bible does not suggest Mary ever sinned.
Holy Tradition is holy, so what you are talking about is man's traditions, not that which is holy or apostolic for the NT does not agree with your beliefs, that is the Bible. The Bible indicates Mary being born into sin thus sinned since no sinner has never not sinned, and through the couple of mistakes she made of not being in harmony with God's will is deemed as disobedience. The fall of Adam and Even were due to disobedience to God.

Your responses are getting dull and amount to self-declarations so it is time to ban you since you have nothing to offer in your goddess idolatry. Mary had to fulfill Jewish law for her uncleanliness in giving birth, even though the birth was to the Son of God.


Sin takes away grace, which is the problem of being 'full of grace'. If you would like to cite examples of Mary 'sinning', go for it.
I believe I have already mentioned her disobedience to God where at the wedding she asked Jesus something that was out of place for her to ask, placing worldly affairs before the mission of Jesus Christ. Having to repeat myself, is showing your obstinacy and belligerence. It is your conscience that can't sense Jesus' correcting words towards Mary. If she was not wrong, then why did Jesus have to correct her?


We both agree she was redeemed by the atonement, your understanding of co-redeemer is wrong. "The mistakes she made"- I see no mistakes. Thus, the early Church and the NT do not express she was a sinner.
You can't see the mistake that Jesus corrected because your are possessed by the demon of Roman Catholicism of needing a goddess for idolatry just as pagan nations do. Your understanding of co-redeemer is wrong since Mary did in fact sin and man is not a co-redeemer, for though man must choose the cross, man does not redeem, only God saves. The early church and the NT concur Mary was a sinner as all men are for all men are born into sin. It is true.


Co-redeemer- wrong understanding, again. You are taking verses which we know have exceptions and trying to apply them generally.
These verses do not have exceptions. Only Jesus was in the likeness of flesh. All flesh sins, but not the likeness of. You are possessed by idolatry of a sinless human being, which is a false belief so God can't redeem you for you do not accept His plain Word as you are in fact trying to be redeemed by a sinner.


That has nothing to do with not being humble or being disobedient. As far as not knowing, even Jesus did not know everything. Your argument is that not knowing and stating so is 'disobedient' and sinful.
I do not argue with you, but tell you the truth.

This is boring, since you are just repeating yourself. What can I do but ban you since you will never repent? Your conscience is not the same as my brothers and sisters in Christ. God does not know you. I do not know you. We do not know you.

The issue is not to know everything, but not to overassume that which you don't know and falling out of harmony with God's will, and so Jesus had to correct Mary, "woman, what have I to do with thee? mine hour is not yet come" (John 2.4), for her lack of humility and her disobedience and self-interest.

"John 2:1 And the third day there was a marriage in Cana of Galilee; and the mother of Jesus was there:
John 2:2 And both Jesus was called, and his disciples, to the marriage.
John 2:3 And when they wanted wine, the mother of Jesus saith unto him, They have no wine.
John 2:4 Jesus saith unto her, Woman, what have I to do with thee? mine hour is not yet come.
John 2:5 His mother saith unto the servants, Whatsoever he saith unto you, do ."


You are exaggerating Jesus' words. She is hardly being unhumble or disobedient. "They have no wine". You are adding words and seeing an attitude clearly not there. What you are doing is creating an attitude to his words, then making judgments about Mary from that attitude.
You undermine Jesus' words and the willingness of Mary's quick repentance and willingness to be corrected from her error. Whenever Jesus corrects, you should be humbled. She is being hard and unhumble and disobedient for that is why Jesus corrected her. You are seeing an attitude that is not there in Jesus for these are stern correcting words of Jesus. You are deny these loving Words of Christ because you like to include a sinless goddess in your faith of a quaternity or co-redemptrix, but Mary was born into sin, sinned, and did not die on the crosss for your sins.

She erred so Jesus had to correct her, [I]"woman, what have I to do with thee? mine hour is not yet come" (John 2.4)

Very simple.


Believing Mary was not sinless, because of Jesus' death and resurrection is not 'idolatry of a goddess'. The idea that such a belief is salvation dependent makes non sense. Finally, God is the only judge of mankind.
You don't believe Mary was not sinless. You believe Mary was sinless. Why would accepting the truth of God's Word that Mary was not sinless be cause to make her a goddess? On the contrary, she is a born sinner just like you and I, so she is no goddess.

Also, Jesus' death and resurrection was for the atonement of all sinners indicating all sinners are not sinless. This does not allow for RCC goddess idolatry that you partake in and controlled by. Your conscience is seared refusing the correcting words of Jesus Christ.


I disagree with you- Mary was born without original sin. The Catholic Church is right on the issue.
I believe you are so adamant in your position that you are not born-again. You will never repent and you are going to hell. Mary was born into sin, she did sin and was disobedient and did make mistakes. She was out of God's will several times in the Scriptures. Many in the Scriptures are mentioned without there specific sin, but does not mean they did not sin. A person has a long life which sins millions of times. Mary sinned at least once and definitely more than that. The Catholic Church is considered the great harlot, the woman who sits on the beast that makes drunk the nations with the wine of the wrath of her fornications (Rev. 14.8). My best assessment so far is that the RCC charismatics want to get more involved in the Pentecostal 3rd wave movement of false tongues to enhance delusions. She is the Jezebel of the Thyatira church period.

http://www3.telus.net/trbrooks/Revelation_17.htm
http://www3.telus.net/trbrooks/7churches.htm



It does not place Mary equal with Jesus. Jesus is God, the second person of the Godhead. God is divine, Mary is mortal. Mary is the child of man, Jesus is the Son of God. Jesus was born without sin. Mary was born without original sin only because of the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. That is not 'equal'
Only Jesus is sinless so in terms of sinlessness, saying Mary is sinless is the same footing of Jesus. Satan is the author of confusion. God was born without original sin. Mary was born with original sin. The reason for the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ is because Mary was born into original sin and did sin. That definitely is not equal.


Catholics do not have a goddess idolatry, so your threats of condemnation are non-applicable. Again, neither are you God and not the judge of a human soul.
Catholics have a goddess idolatry of a sinless being other than Jesus. I do not threaten you with condemnation but tell you the truth because you are so hardened in your stance you condemn yourself. I never said I was God, so why accuse; but God has revealed to me by the Holy Spirit, by the judgment of God, that you are hellbound. This is true. I do not know if you can receive Christ into your life (to replace the facsimile you have now), but I pray one day you will, which will occur when you drop the idolatry and believe in Jesus Christ. You can't worship two things at once. That is that.

Hearing you repeat your self-declaration of a goddess idolatry does not serve any purpose, so you are banned, as you can not repent. Don't be a stray bullet off course.