Another thought about Mary's sinlessness

[Windmill]

Here’s a thought: will this forum develop to the point that all possible lines of discussion have been exahusted? So much so, that we resort to merely channeling repeated questions to older threads.

Will discussion degenerate into mere small talk?

As to Mary’s sinlessness, I would say that Mary as a type and fulfillment of Eve would have to be sinless. Eve was created without original sin. She fell from grace and disgraced herself.

If Mary was created in original sin, then she would be inferior to Eve.

 

[TNT]

tuopaolo:

I think it would be more truthful (as in accurate) to say that original sin was excluded at her conception since “vanquished” seems to me to imply that it was there and then was removed … but I’m not an English teacher

Exclude is a good substitute. However:
Vanquish: Def.

1. 
   *]To win a victory over, as in battle.
   *]To render totally ineffective by decisive defeat:
   
   Mary was by her nature, deserving of OS by her common involvemnet in human birth. It was intercepted and entry defeated or vanquished by God
   
   Excluded could also have a sense of never being a consideraton, such as the Christ where it was certainly excluded since His Mother did not have it to pass on. St Anne had it to pass on.
   She was normally to be considered to be born in OS. That is the whole prot. premise. …she deserved it…she therefore got it.
   
   Minor semantics.

 

[TNT]

Windmill:

Here’s a thought: will this forum develop to the point that all possible lines of discussion have been exahusted? So much so, that we resort to merely channeling repeated questions to older threads.
.
If Mary was created in original sin, then she would be inferior to Eve.

But then if a new arrival, they would get to see my post on this very thread !

Besides, newbies arrive all day long, and as you say, posts get old and therefore buried in archives or at least hard to find.

Unfortunately, we see the past, newbies see the present.

And then there’s OUDAVE who needs a doctrinal “word shower” every day using the same “soap and water”. Such is the life of a restorationist.

 

[tuopaolo]

I guess it would be excluded from the perspective of Mary as an individual person (so excluded versus removed) and vanquished from the perspective of a victory won by God and the human race in Mary as you explained well in your post.

 

[masterjedi747]

I really don’t want to drag the thread too far off topic, but…I’m confused.

tuopaolo:

Person is not the same thing as soul.

I could have sworn that they were. Could you explain the difference for me?

tuopaolo:

Angels are persons but they do not have souls.

Ummm…yes they do. That’s all that they are – pure rational souls.
Human beings both body and rational soul. Animals are body without rational soul.
Three completely different creatures, three completely different levels of existence.

tuopaolo:

And the Father and Holy Spirit also do not have souls.

Why not? Certainly God does not have a created soul, but…I’m really confused now.

 

[tuopaolo]

masterjedi747:

I really don’t want to drag the thread too far off topic, but…I’m confused.
I could have sworn that they were. Could you explain the difference for me?

A rational soul is something that a human person bears but it is not identical with the person himself. I wish I could explain it more but I’m sorry I don’t know enough to help you Probably there are some articles at newadvent.org which would shed light on it.

Ummm…yes they do. That’s all that they are – pure rational souls.

They are pure spirits, just as God is pure spirit, but they do not have souls.

 

[Mickey]

Mary was full of Grace–no room for sin.

 

[masterjedi747]

tuopaolo:

They are pure spirits, but they do not have souls.

So then what the heck is the difference between a spirit and a soul?
Aren’t they just two different names for the exact same thing? runs off to go do some research

 

[tuopaolo]

masterjedi747:

So then what the heck is the difference between a spirit and a soul?
Aren’t they just two different names for the exact same thing? runs off to go do some research

I honestly don’t know! But my impression is that part of the difference is that a soul in-forms a body whereas a pure spirit does not.

 

[Huiou_Theou]

Wow, I don’t know what to talk about first!
There is sooo much in this thread!

Nothing, gets me ticked off more than when somebody insults my mother!

I’ll start at the newest and go backward.

Soul, that which allows a body to move. The principle of life in a body.

Plants have souls, dogs have souls, humans have souls.
(Don’t ream me, this is Greek thinking from 2500+ years ago.)

Spirit, that which lives on after death in a human being.
Plants, dogs, and venus fly traps have mortal souls.

Humans however have spiritual souls (immortal).

Hence, angels are spirits but not souls, (they have no body).
Sometimes spirit and soul are used interchangably (just to be confusing right?)

New subject=new post.

 

[Huiou_Theou]

TNT, I like your post, but its a little vague,

Jesus came to touch sinners and the like, so he wasn’t scared of indirect contamination or anything.

Tell me, do I understand you right if I add a little precision:

Jesus needed Sinless flesh in order to save us. e.g. The sacrifice Jesus needed to be of sinless flesh. (The flesh that now saves us).

God wanted Jesus to be a human being united to God. Which meant he would draw ALL his flesh from his mother because his father was not a creature. ( God is Spirit ).

So I assume Jesus drew his masculinity from a divine miracle, which could not transmit sin, and his flesh from his mother which could. (That part is mysterious.)

So, his mother could not have sinful flesh or Jesus himself would require being saved from his mother’s sin.

His mother, however is different. Her flesh does is not directly sacrificed, but only indirectly (through Jeusus). So she could be saved and it would not affect the quality of Jesus’ sacrifice.

Hence, God chose to break the chain of original sin at his mother rather than himself. So mary was saved from ever being a sinner (so that her flesh would be pure) so that Jesus himself would have a body prepared for him.

Did I misunderstand you?

 

[Huiou_Theou]

Della, I don’t know how you get ignored.

You mention that Paul’s thesis is that all nations sin:
e.g. Rom 3:9 (all KJV quotes for fun!)

9 What then? are we better than they? No, in no wise: for we have before proved both Jews and Gentiles, that they are all under sin;

So it is all nations which are under consideration, then St. Paul clearly states that “scripture says”, so go look it up – he is QUOTING something :banghead: .

In none of the passages related to Romans 3, are all men sinners.
There is always a group of the wicked and group of the Just.

Let me repeat that.

There is always a group of the wicked and a group of the Just in the passages referenced by Paul in Romans 3.

In the first few sentences of PS (13)14 or (52)53 God is with the Just.
The persecuted Just are those like —>Jesus and Mary<—

Most of the psalms favor the Hebrews as being Just, but condem various nations around the Hebrews throughout history as being wicked.

The wicked nations are the ones being condemned. Paul says that those who believe there is no God are totally wicked and corrupt.

This is not enough, however, to drive home his point. So he also quotes Isaiah where the guilt of Israel is exposed too.

Paul does not waste time talking about the Just man because he is only trying to prove that all nations have guilt. NOT that every man individually is guilty.

1The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God.
They are corrupt, they have done abominable works,
there is none that doeth good.
2The LORD looked down from heaven upon the children of men, to see if there were any that did understand, and seek God.
3They are all gone aside, they are all together become filthy: there is none that doeth good, no, not one.
4Have all the workers of iniquity no knowledge? who eat up my people as they eat bread, and call not upon the LORD.

Notice, the psalm’s subject is the ‘fool’ who does not believe in God. These are the children of men, like unto cain’s descendents – not the children of God like seth.
The psalm does not end with condemnation of all who do not believe in the God of Israel (eg. Gentiles), but praises another group of people:

5 There were they in great fear: for God is in the generation of the righteous.
6 Ye have shamed the counsel of the poor, because the LORD is his refuge.
7 Oh that the salvation of Israel were come out of Zion! when the LORD bringeth back the captivity of his people, Jacob shall rejoice, and Israel shall be glad.

Therefore, Paul has proved that all nations sin, but not that all men sin.

Thanks Della. (itsjustdave1988 does a good job too, but it’s long).

 

[masterjedi747]

Huiou Theou:

Soul, that which allows a body to move. The principle of life in a body.
Plants have souls, dogs have souls, humans have souls.

Spirit, that which lives on after death in a human being.
Plants, dogs, and venus fly traps have mortal souls.

Humans however have spiritual souls (immortal).

Hence, angels are spirits but not souls, (they have no body).
Sometimes spirit and soul are used interchangably (just to be confusing right?)

Hmmm…interesting. I think that actually made sense!!! Thank you, Huiou Theou!!!