Is The Immaculate Conception Really Biblical? w/ William Albrecht & Fr. Christiaan Kappas 

A born again can have grace.

Yes and no! We are continually provided grace through the sacraments to help us though our lifelong process of sanctifcation, and once we're finally resting in Heaven we're finally be in full unmitigated union with God with no worldly obstructions. So...not quite in the way that Mary was/is! She is FULL of grace; we are merely provided some grace to keep us afloat in this world of sin.

@@UnremarkableMarx Grace, yes, but 'full of grace'?

@@sandstorm7768 the same Greek words for "full of grace" is utilized by Paul in speaking of the congregation of Ephesus. What hermeneutical basis do you have to not say that Paul was speaking of an entire people being immaculately concieved?

@@HisLivingStone241And some translations describe "the brothers and sisters of Jesus" as literal blood-siblings while other translations use words meaning "from another womb." Not to mention people call friends their siblings/cousins all the time as a sign of affection despite having no true relation (especially in Jewish culture). Semantics are often fruitless when debating Scripture, because anyone can make it mean anything with Sola Scriptura. (This is why I've been liking the more stable traditions of the Catholic Church of as late.) What I do know is that Angel Gabriel praised Mary, God favored Mary enough to choose her give birth to His Holy Son (not some random woman, and certainly no one promiscuous), the Early Church fathers frankly adored Mary, and even Martin Luther himself maintained the view that Mary was eternally virgin, even through her marriage with Joseph, which I find quite sweet. This all seems to suggest Mary was of especially high moral status in the eyes of past Christendom. It makes sense that God would not want to taint His Holy Son with a sinful womb, hence the Immaculate Conception. It does not make Mary into a goddess or deity--as she said herself, "my soul magnifies the Lord and my spirit rejoices in God my savior!"--it simply means God chose her to be a very special lady for a very special purpose. There are two ways to save someone: redemption and prevention. She was simply prevented from Original Sin, and thus is picture of what we will be like in Heaven--full 100% obedience to God. "I am your handmaiden. Let it be done to me according to your will."

Wouldn't that be the idea of Original Sin? Sin inherited vs sin we personally committed (personal sin, which is referred to in this video).

@@bruhmoment-yc5zg Mary also had inherited sin and needed a Saviour. Immaculate birth is a Catholic nonsense.

The Catholic view is that God personally took away Mary's inherited sin when she was conceived, thus she needed grace of God, her savior. When it comes to where in the Bible this is said, it leads to a different discussion about Sola Scriptura vs Scripture, Tradition, Magisterium.@@gsnipernew3.070

​@bruhmoment-yc5zg even Mary needed Saviour and who was her Saviour is Jesus Christ in Luke 1.46-47

That is because the bible is man-made and in parts, so they never got together to brainstorm the books.

Amen. God bless you.

Let's have an analogy, like a vial where a specimen for analysis is to be placed it is required to be sterile to maintain the purity of the specimen, otherwise it will be contaminated. Same can be said of Mary, a human vessel whom the human side of Christ were conceived, meaning Christ, fully Divine, gets His full humanity from Mary. Hence, Mary has to be pure and not contaminated with sin to carry and give the only Begotten Son His humanity. And to think that sin separates us from God, it will be contradictory to God to embrace the sin of a woman whom the Son of Man is to be born from while at the same time is the reason for man's downfall; the sin of pride and rebellion that casted out lucifer from being an angel of God; and last but not the least the price that Christ has to pay on the cross offering His very own life for our salvation. That being said, Christ sacrifice on the cross, and Him not bounded by time, has merited salvation to Mary being His Mother preventing her from inheriting sin before she was even conceived. Isn't everything was made through the Word and everything belongs to Him? Wouldn't Christ prefer His Mother to be pure and full of grace? That is why when Catholics are accused of honoring Mary more than God Himself, I'd say Catholics honoring her, combined from generation to generation, is not even a drop in the bucket in the way God choose Mary as the Vessel of Honor to be the Mother of Christ our Lord and Saviour. No one can top this honor Mary received from God. Lastly, come to think of it, the view you are expressing that Mary remains tainted with sin in conceiving Jesus is more related to Nestorianism than any thing Christian. Just my 2 cents.

Blah blah blah

I’m not sure that you understand what The Immaculate Conception means..

The "Immaculate Conception" refers to "Mary's" birth. She was born without original sin. See Genesis 9:15 "I will put eminity between you and the woman, and between your offspring and hers" et al.

@@johnsteila6049I think what the original commenter meant was that Jesus didn’t need to be conceived in Mary’s womb, and that His human body formed because God willed it. He wasn’t created through sex, so He wasn’t marred by original sin. Therefore, it wasn’t necessary for his mother to be sinless

@@labradortea7873 I understand that. It’s a subject that has been debated for centuries before even Protestantism came into existence.

You are just naive on how babies are made, or just making ZHIT up to fit your gullible mind.

Who cares what a character in a book says, according to the man-made book, Luke NEVER met Jesus nor her alleged mother.

But Paul makes an exception for infants because you say so? The Bible never mentions an "age of reason", that's completely extra-Biblical

@@declansutherland8526 "All have sinned" implies deliberate actions.

@@Justas399 The Bible never says “it’s only a sin if it’s deliberate action!”, so again, that’s extra-Biblical philosophy.

@@declansutherland8526 Ok. The Bible does say "all" in Romans 3:23. That included Mary. Mary is no exception because it never says she never sinned.

@@Justas399 and it includes children, yes? Otherwise “all” has exceptions and you have grounds to automatically assume Mary is sinful.

Hey I’m from Titusville!

because the only reason she is without sin is BECAUSE God saved her. Through the merits and grace of Jesus Christ.

​@erravi where is that in the Bible that Mary was sinless? Romans 3.23 23for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, 2 corinthians 5.21 God made him who had no sin to be sin for us, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God. 1peter 1.19 but with the precious blood of Christ, a lamb without blemish or defect.

ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-b-nAJb93q24.htmlsi=SzFQvXnlF_Hmu4vf

Two ways to be saved from a pit. 1. First pull out the person who falls into the pit. 2. Second, prevent the person from falling in the first place. Mary's situation was the second. God protected her from original sin by the sacrifice of Jesus which exceeds time, affecting both past and future

Why she was made sinless? Gen. 3:15 says there will enmity between the woman and the serpent. If the serpent is the devil while the woman is Mary (because her seed crushed the head of the serpent), then if she commit even just one sin, she cannot be in enmity with the devil as Scripture says "he who sins is of the devil" (1 John 3:8).

@@justfromcatholic How does the fact they have enmity between each other have to imply she is sinless? That’s a rather arbitrary assertion. Enmity is defined as a deep seated hatred or mutual hostility. How does that mean she has to have no sin to hate him? It is written to hate evil. We all have should have enmity with Satan. Also taking 1 John and applying it to Genesis? Well I guess Adam and Eve are also the devil? As well as every person. Jesus Christ was made flesh. Made human. So why would he come from someone who is not human? It would not be human to be sinless, that’s what made Jesus unique to man whilst he was man.

@@ChopinIsMyBestFriend Why can'I apply 1 John to Genesis? The verse says whoever sins is of the devil, NOT becoming devil. Where you got the idea being sinless is being non-human? She is sinless by grace of God, neither by her own will nor power.

@@justfromcatholic Where does it say in the bible she is sinless? You say it’s because you can’t have enmity with the devil and have any sin, I say that doesn’t make any sense. It would be inhuman to be sinless. It would imply she is not descendant from Adam and Eve. Go ahead and back up with scripture that Mary is not subject to ancestral sin.

@@justfromcatholic “If we claim to be without sin, we deceive ourselves and the truth is not in us. If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just and will forgive us our sins and purify us from all unrighteousness. If we claim we have not sinned, we make him out to be a liar and his word is not in us.” 1 John 8-10 Would you like to apply that Mary or are you just cherry picking? In context 1 John 2 tells us why he’s writing. “My dear children, I write this to you so that you will not sin. But if anybody does sin, we have an advocate with the Father-Jesus Christ, the Righteous One. He is the atoning sacrifice for our sins, and not only for ours but also for the sins of the whole world.” Be weird to apply this book to Mary if she’s sinless. Lets continue, I see you don’t care about context because you may have wanted to expand on the verse you mentioned. “Dear children, do not let anyone lead you astray. The one who does what is right is righteous, just as he is righteous. The one who does what is sinful is of the devil, because the devil has been sinning from the beginning. The reason the Son of God appeared was to destroy the devil’s work. 9 No one who is born of God will continue to sin, because God’s seed remains in them; they cannot go on sinning, because they have been born of God. This is how we know who the children of God are and who the children of the devil are: Anyone who does not do what is right is not God’s child, nor is anyone who does not love their brother and sister.” I guarantee she didn’t sin another day of her life. But before that? You just cannot tell me she’s not affected by ancestral sin using scripture.

We don't believe in Sola Scriptura. That's a manmade heresey from the 16th century. The Church given Authority to tell you what the biblical canon is, the Church that takes a word Trinity, and explicitly teaches it in the Creed and declared it Doctrine doesn't need to explicitly prove anything. Sola Scriptura is in the Bible? Where? Justification by faith alone? Where? Don't say Roman's. That's only one aspect. That same writer said to " Work out your own salvation with fear and trembling " That Church given the authority mentioned can declare somthing not totally clear. Like canon, Trinity, Hypostatic Union. Where is that, The two natures of Christ and the word " fully" in The Bible? Our Bible. It's a Church document.

I'm catholic, I agree

@@jeniosk1097you cannot be Catholic and deny the Blessed Mother her due.

@@_Gondor44_ I'm saying that the immaculate conception isn't in the Bible, not that it isn't true necessarily.

@@jeniosk1097 Oh, well of course. The Bible isn’t everything.

If you read the entire chapter of Genesis 3, the "woman" is clearly Eve. Exegetically, it would not make sense to suddenly switch the "woman" in v.15 to Mary, and then immediately back to Eve again in v.16. The conversation between God and Adam, Eve, & the serpent if He was switching back & forth. In fact, Eve understood that God was referring to her, not some future "woman" thousands of years later, because in Genesis 4:1, Eve states: "I have gotten a manchild, the LORD." The words "with the help of" is not in the Hebrew, but added by the translators. Eve understood not only that God was referring to her, but that her own offspring "might" have been the "seed" (literally, offspring of descendant) God was referring to. When Cain did not pan out, in Genesis 4:25, when she gives birth to Seth, Eve states: "God has appointed me another offspring (again, literally, seed, offspring, or descendant) in place of Abel." So, the "woman" in Genesis 3:15 is Eve, not Mary.

@@BornAgainRN How do you understand the woman's seed who will crush the head of the serpent? Does her seed refer to Christ? If yes, then the woman is His mother. If no, which one of Eve's seed who crushed the serpent's head?

@@justfromcatholic Women have eggs, not seeds.

@@BornAgainRN Eve could not have sinned by eating the fruit because the eating of the fruit is what gave her knowledge of good and evil.

@@kevinkelly2162 The Hebrew noun is זֶרַע and is applied to both males like Noah (Gen. 9:9), Abraham (Gen. 12:7 etc.) and females in Gen. 3:15 and to Hagar (Gen. 16:10). It means descendant. Nice try!

Total depravity isn't biblical

This is commonly cited verses to support faith-alone justification. Based on those verses because we can never be righteous, then the only solution is having external righteousness of Christ imputed on you. It does not make righteous per se but it only makes you counted as righteous while remaining unrighteous at the same time. Unfortunately you ignore other verses in Scripture that testify the existence of righteous persons. Noah, Daniel, Job (Ezekiel 14:14), Joseph (Matthew 1:19), Elizabeth and Zechariah (Luke 1:6), Abel (Hebrews 11:4) and even Lot (2 Peter 2:7) were righteous persons. The existence of righteous persons, without naming them is shown in Psalms 5:12, 34:15, Matthew 5:45, 1 Peter 3:12 and many other verses. Scripture clearly says "through Christ we ARE MADE righteous" (Rom. 5:19). Those names became righteous not from their own effort but from grace through Christ and that is what Catholics believe.

Implying that Christ, who is *fully human* and fully God, is not righteous?

Hail Mary FULL of grace.

This is in reference to Psalms 14:2, where King David addresses the unbeliever. St. Paul is addressing the same.

Well, this is a clear example of making stuff up.

Amen. That’s the point

Yea it dies matter because the church of catholicism is not Christ's church. Christ church has that power through scripture and scripture is sent by our Lord so we read the Bible and say this is what happened and that is what it is. Catholics have taken this and said oh and also we say this and that and make this rule and that rule and because we say we have the power it is so. No. Wrong. Catholicism is a warped view of Christianity and they believe things that are not anywhere close to being biblical in any way. Any time you look to man for the correct ideas about faith you fall short. Look to Jesus and it says in the Bible that in the beginning there was God and the word and the word was God so we read the Bible and what the Bible says is what we believe it's that simple. No making up of rules about priests being able to forgive your sin or vread turning into Jesus flesh or being able to do works to forgive your sin no wrong its all man made rules that aren't supported in God's word. No other book matters. I don't care what men wrote outside of the inspired word of God. Catholic cannon is a bunch of nonsense made up by old crazy men who wanted ultimate power over people and used this man made religion to do it. The real church is Christ's church that Paul speaks of and that Peter is head of and Peter would be flipping out today if he saw what catholics had turned his work into with all their unbiblical teachings and man made rules about forgiveness of sins through someone other than Jesus and their belief in the pope not being able to be wrong like come on you don't have to be a genius to realize this isn't in scripture.

@@jimdaily5808 The Church was born before The Bible. Even Peter teaches us that The Church only has authority to interpret Scripture.

Of course it doesn't matter if the Bible teaches it, then goes on to use the Bible to prove it 😑

It's you again why don't you go on the show and debate them??

@BornAgainRN well said Steve

Haha born again at it again! 🤣 good to see you lurking around!!!

@@Catholic101A. Because I refuse to debate Albrecht who personally insults and degrades people who disagree with him. And it’s not just me he does this with but a lot of other protestants. Him and I were supposed to debate on the cannon in 2019, but he kept backing out of it and we never ended up debating. I would be more than happy to debate Christian Kappas, but not Albrecht. Not only is he unreliable to commit to debates, such as myself and Anthony Rogers, but I won’t debate him because of his attitude. Albrecht has a very nasty habit of attacking people instead of their arguments. By the way, since Matt Fradd keeps the comments section open, this means it’s perfectly fine to write comments that aren’t in agreement with Albrecht and Kappas. At least I provide argumentation for why I don’t agree with them. I don’t just say “oh it’s them again.” That’s called interaction and dialogue which is perfectly acceptable.

@@gustavovilla45 at least I make an effort to critique an argument I don’t agree with, and not just laugh at them. Again, the comment section is open, which means people should expect a dissenting view. The quality and content of the argument is more important than if the person posting agrees with you.

Heresy

@@MyNameIsClorox nope

@@Wgaither1 THEY LOVE THEIR LIES....

I'm confused. It sounds like you're describing original sin.

That’s original sin buddy. Lol

@@TCallier no, it isn’t. Original sin is your inherited guilt. You are guilty of the sin of Adam. Very different. Original sin is an invention of St. Augustine and not formally adopted by the RCC until the council of Trent. The thing is, most Catholics reject what original sin really teaches. It’s heresy.

@@MyNameIsClorox ^

@@TCallier Concerning the original-or “first”-sin, that commited by Adam and Eve, the truth is, while everyone bears the consequences of the first sin, the foremost of which is physical death, only Adam and Eve are guilty of that sin.

According to who? Who has an authentic interpretation of Scripture? If no-one, why should I care what you say?

Check out "Mary's Sinlessness: a Biblical Documentary" by VaticanCatholic.

@@declansutherland8526 I don’t care if you care what I say. Couldn’t care less. I care what the Bible says. I understand you lean on others to interpret it for you. On this issue, the “others” weren’t even in agreement. Monks arguing with monks. Even some of the Pope’s theologians disagreed. Archbishop of Paris argued it could not be derived from scripture or tradition. The Pope decided. And naturally a few years later Mary appears to declare herself the Immaculate Conception….hmmm. Interesting. One would think that would happen first. Anyhow, we have scripture, from God. I’ll stick with that while others dig around to come up with false teachings

@@MyNameIsClorox I’ll check out holy scripture by God

@@rickdockery9620 You literally lean on my Church to tell you what the New Testament canon is. If you trust them so much for that, why don’t you trust them for other things, I wonder?

You mean actual true Christian doctrines..please leave you false 500 year Christianity for the church Christ established ( the fullness of the faith ) Wrong side of history you believe the church was corrupt for 1500 years when Christ clearly says he’s (one) church will always stand A biblical documentary on the mother of god sinless ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-ZTVyptxPQ04.html

Huge stretch. I’m generally trying to understand the catholic theology but it flabbergast me every time. Also this video are really bad…