Baptists and Mary

[kramerbaby]

Why do Baptists believe that mary was not sinless? I was talking witha Baptist friend of minew last night and we got talking about Mary. How do I explain to her that Mary WAS sinless, and where it says so in the Bible? Thanks for your help!

 

[Scott_Waddell]

It might depend on the Baptist, but basically they think that since it is not explicitly spelled out in Scripture, it’s not true (or that there is not enough data to authoritatively rule on it.) Also, they might point to the passage that says “all have sinned.” (don’t have chapter and verse on hand). The problem is that “all” does not always mean “all without exception”. For instance there is a passage that says “all have died.” but there are exceptions Elijah and Enoch.

As far as it not being explicit in Scripture, that gets into bigger territory. Namely, if he is going to use explicitness as a rule, it is going to murder his own posistion on things like Sola Scriptura (certainly not explicit, and I would argue not even implied in Scripture) and which books even belong in Scripture in the first place.

Start by digesting Marian teachings on Catholic Answers and perhaps this Dave Armstrong primer: ic.net/~erasmus/RAZ153.HTM

But always remember that 99.98% of the time, a non-Catholic’s beef with Mary is not about Mary at all, but about the authority of the Catholic Church. If you can’t agree about that a discussion about Mary is only going to go so far.

Scott

 

[Catholic4aReasn]

kramerbaby:

Why do Baptists believe that mary was not sinless? I was talking witha Baptist friend of minew last night and we got talking about Mary. How do I explain to her that Mary WAS sinless, and where it says so in the Bible? Thanks for your help!

Hi!

Baptists don’t understand that Mary’s sinlessness is not about Mary but about God’s grace. That’s one reason they think we believe that Mary is divine, because only God can be sinless. They don’t understand that Mary is sinless because God protected her from sin, not because of anything that Mary did.

In Christ,
Nancy

 

[Catholic2003]

Scott Waddell:

Also, they might point to the passage that says “all have sinned.” (don’t have chapter and verse on hand).

Romans 3:23.

 

[bbas_64]

Scott Waddell:

It might depend on the Baptist, but basically they think that since it is not explicitly spelled out in Scripture, it’s not true (or that there is not enough data to authoritatively rule on it.) Also, they might point to the passage that says “all have sinned.” (don’t have chapter and verse on hand). The problem is that “all” does not always mean “all without exception”. For instance there is a passage that says “all have died.” but there are exceptions Elijah and Enoch.

As far as it not being explicit in Scripture, that gets into bigger territory. Namely, if he is going to use explicitness as a rule, it is going to murder his own posistion on things like Sola Scriptura (certainly not explicit, and I would argue not even implied in Scripture) and which books even belong in Scripture in the first place.

Start by digesting Marian teachings on Catholic Answers and perhaps this Dave Armstrong primer: ic.net/~erasmus/RAZ153.HTM

But always remember that 99.98% of the time, a non-Catholic’s beef with Mary is not about Mary at all, but about the authority of the Catholic Church. If you can’t agree about that a discussion about Mary is only going to go so far.

Scott

Good Day, Scott

Rom 3:21 But now the righteousness of God has been manifested apart from the law, although the Law and the Prophets bear witness to it–

Rom 3:22 the righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ for all who believe. For there is no distinction:

Rom 3:23 for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God,

Rom 3:24 and are justified by his grace as a gift, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus,

Rom 3:25 whom God put forward as a propitiation by his blood, to be received by faith. This was to show God’s righteousness, because in his divine forbearance he had passed over former sins.

I am interested in your “all have died” passage.

Peace to u,

Bill

 

[Psalm45_9]

Isn’t Jesus part of the “All” too? How about the Holy Angels of God?So then of course, “all” can not mean everyone.

 

[MichaelTDoyle]

The “All” in this sense could refer to the general judgement. We, as humanity, are all and all have sinned as a group, so this passage may not be applicable to a specific person like Enoch or Mary.

I’d be interested in seeing some more exegesis on this passage.

 

[YAQUBOS]

Peace be with you!

"And Mary said:
“My soul exalts the Lord,
And my spirit has rejoiced in God my Savior.” ( Luke 1:46-47 )

What did God save Mary from?

“you shall call His name Jesus, for He will save His people from their sins.” ( Matthew 1:21 )

“To give to His people the knowledge of salvation
By the forgiveness of their sins” ( Luke 1:77 )

In Love,
Yaqubos†

 

[MichaelTDoyle]

catholic.com/library/Immaculate_Conception_and_Assum.asp

Fundamentalists’ chief reason for objecting to the Immaculate Conception and Mary’s consequent sinlessness is that we are told that “all have sinned” (Rom. 3:23). Besides, they say, Mary said her “spirit rejoices in God my Savior” (Luke 1:47), and only a sinner needs a Savior.

Let’s take the second citation first. Mary, too, required a Savior. Like all other descendants of Adam, she was subject to the necessity of contracting original sin. But by a special intervention of God, undertaken at the instant she was conceived, she was preserved from the stain of original sin and its consequences. She was therefore redeemed by the grace of Christ, but in a special way—by anticipation.

 

[MichaelTDoyle]

More from that link. Looks like my comment is on the mark with this site

But what about Romans 3:23, “all have sinned”? Have all people committed actual sins? Consider a child below the age of reason. By definition he can’t sin, since sinning requires the ability to reason and the ability to intend to sin. This is indicated by Paul later in the letter to the Romans when he speaks of the time when Jacob and Esau were unborn babies as a time when they “had done nothing either good or bad” (Rom. 9:11).

We also know of another very prominent exception to the rule: Jesus (Heb. 4:15). So if Paul’s statement in Romans 3 includes an exception for the New Adam (Jesus), one may argue that an exception for the New Eve (Mary) can also be made.

Paul’s comment seems to have one of two meanings. It might be that it refers not to absolutely everyone, but just to the mass of mankind (which means young children and other special cases, like Jesus and Mary, would be excluded without having to be singled out). If not that, then it would mean that everyone, without exception, is subject to original sin, which is true for a young child, for the unborn, even for Mary—but she, though due to be subject to it, was preserved by God from it and its stain.

 

[ahimsaman72]

kramerbaby:

Why do Baptists believe that mary was not sinless? I was talking witha Baptist friend of minew last night and we got talking about Mary. How do I explain to her that Mary WAS sinless, and where it says so in the Bible? Thanks for your help!

kramerbaby, after 32 years of being a Southern Baptist, I had no idea that Catholics believed she was sinless. I didn’t know it from the Bible, because it’s not there. So, when I heard this, I was quite surprised.

To most Baptists (and other evangelicals) it would seem that to say Mary is sinless is to equate her with Jesus, who was sinless, thereby making her divine. x=sinless, y=sinless, therefore x=y

Someone posted about Elijah and Enoch, but these men were not sinless. They were righteous, but not sinless, so they cannot be compared to Mary.

I know you primarily addressed this to other catholics, but I thought I would share my story with you also.

 

[YAQUBOS]

Peace be with you!

MichaelTDoyle:

The “All” in this sense could refer to the general judgement. We, as humanity, are all and all have sinned as a group, so this passage may not be applicable to a specific person like Enoch or Mary.

I’d be interested in seeing some more exegesis on this passage.

You’d better BELIEVE like a child what the Spirit says through the apostle:

"What then? Are we better than they? Not at all; for we have already charged that both Jews and Greeks are all under sin;
as it is written,
"THERE IS **NONE ** RIGHTEOUS, NOT EVEN ONE;

   THERE IS **NONE ** WHO UNDERSTANDS,
      THERE IS NONE WHO SEEKS FOR GOD; 

   ALL HAVE TURNED ASIDE, TOGETHER THEY HAVE BECOME USELESS;
      THERE IS **NONE ** WHO DOES GOOD,
      THERE IS **NOT EVEN ONE**." 

   "THEIR THROAT IS AN OPEN GRAVE,
      WITH THEIR TONGUES THEY KEEP DECEIVING,"
      "THE POISON OF ASPS IS UNDER THEIR LIPS"; 

   "WHOSE MOUTH IS FULL OF CURSING AND BITTERNESS"; 

   "THEIR FEET ARE SWIFT TO SHED BLOOD, 

   DESTRUCTION AND MISERY ARE IN THEIR PATHS, 

   AND THE PATH OF PEACE THEY HAVE NOT KNOWN." 

   "THERE IS NO FEAR OF GOD BEFORE THEIR EYES."

Now we know that whatever the Law says, it speaks to those who are under the Law, so that **every mouth ** may be closed and all the world may become accountable to God;
because by the works of the Law no flesh will be justified in His sight; for through the Law comes the knowledge of sin." ( Romans 3:9-20 )

And against all those “NONE”, there is ONLY ONE human about whom it is written:

“WHO COMMITTED NO SIN, NOR WAS ANY DECEIT FOUND IN HIS MOUTH” ( 1 Peter 2:22 )

In Love,
Yaqubos†

 

[MariaG]

I copied this from the link from Scott. I personally, a revert from a fundamental background, find the teachings and comparrisons to the Ark quite compelling.
originally posted by Scott Waddell
Start by digesting Marian teachings on Catholic Answers and perhaps this Dave Armstrong primer:

Luke 1:35 “And the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God.”

This verse explicitly establishes a link between Mary as bearer of the New Covenant and the Ark of the Old Covenant. The Gk. word for “overshadow” (“episkiasei”) was used of the bright cloud at the Transfiguration of Jesus Christ (Mt 17:5; Lk 9:34) and is reminiscent of the Shekinah of the OT, which represented God’s Presence (Ex 24:15-16; 40:34-8; 1 Ki 8:4-11). Mary became like the Holy of Holies in the Temple, where God dwelt. God gave extremely detailed instructions on constructing the ark, since it was to contain His Law (Ex 25-30 and 35-40). Mary had to be that much more holy, since she was to carry the Word of God in the flesh (Job 14:4). Further parallelism between Mary and the Ark is indicated in comparing Lk 1:43 with 2 Sam 6:9, Lk 1:44 with 2 Sam 6:14-16, and Lk 1:39-45,56 with 2 Sam 6:10-12.

Mary had to be sinless in order to be in such close proximity to God Himself. The whole Bible teaches this (e.g., Ex 3:5; Deut 23:14). God’s Presence imparts and requires holiness (1 Cor 3:13-17; 1 Jn 3:3-9). The Jewish high priest entered the Holy of Holies (where the Ark and God’s Special Presence were) only once a year, under threat of death if God’s instructions were violated (Lev 16:2-4,13). The Ark itself was so holy that only a few were allowed to touch it (Num 4:15; 2 Sam 6:2-7). Thus, Mary, due to her ineffable physical and spiritual relationship with God the Son, the Holy Spirit (as “Spouse”), and God the Father (as “Daughter of Zion”), necessarily had to be granted the grace of sinlessness from conception, just as we all will be cleansed utterly in order to be present with God in heaven (Rev 21:27). Seen in this light, the Immaculate Conception, though still technically a deduction from the Bible, is a very biblical doctrine indeed.

God Bless,
Maria

 

[YAQUBOS]

Peace!

[Let’s take the second citation first. Mary, too, required a Savior. Like all other descendants of Adam, she was subject to the necessity of contracting original sin. But by a special intervention of God, undertaken at the instant she was conceived, she was preserved from the stain of original sin and its consequences. She was therefore redeemed by the grace of Christ, but in a special way—by anticipation.](Let’s take the second citation first. Mary, too, required a Savior. Like all other descendants of Adam, she was subject to the necessity of contracting original sin. But by a special intervention of God, undertaken at the instant she was conceived, she was preserved from the stain of original sin and its consequences. She was therefore redeemed by the grace of Christ, but in a special way—by anticipation.)

Oh! How beautiful PHILOSOPHY. But not Christian Doctrine… Because God doesn’t say this.

In addition, did you ever think why Jesus had to be born of a Virgin?

In Love,
Yaqubos†

 

[MariaG]

YAQUBOS,
I have a question for you. Do you see no link between the Ark of the Covenant that carried the word of God and Mary who carried the Word?

God Bless,
Maria

 

[YAQUBOS]

Peace be with you!

MariaG:

YAQUBOS,
I have a question for you. Do you see no link between the Ark of the Covenant that carried the word of God and Mary who carried the Word?

God Bless,
Maria

It is very dangerous to conclude things without having a strong biblical support. Let me just ask you a question that will help you understand what I mean.

“Jesus answered them, “Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up.”” ( John 2:19 )

Was the Ark of Covenant in the Temple, or the Temple in the Ark?

In Love,
Yaqubos†

 

[mrS4ntA]

YAQUBOS:

Peace be with you!

It is very dangerous to conclude things without having a strong biblical support. Let me just ask you a question that will help you understand what I mean.

“Jesus answered them, “Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up.”” ( John 2:19 )

Was the Ark of Covenant in the Temple, or the Temple in the Ark?
In Love,
Yaqubos†

The “temple” Jesus was referring to there is His body – which they murdered but was raised in three days. I see no releveance here to the topic of Mary’s sinlessness.

And of course the Ark of the Covenant was in the Holy of Holies in the Temple (or was it already missing during Jesus’ time?) anyway… completely beside the point.

The point is that the Ark points to/prefigure the God-bearer Mary.

In Christus via Maria,
S4ntA.

 

[mercygate]

mrS4ntA:

The “temple” Jesus was referring to there is His body – which they murdered but was raised in three days. I see no releveance here to the topic of Mary’s sinlessness.

And of course the Ark of the Covenant was in the Holy of Holies in the Temple (or was it already missing during Jesus’ time?) anyway… completely beside the point.

The point is that the Ark points to/prefigure the God-bearer Mary.

In Christus via Maria,
S4ntA.

The Ark was never in the second temple. But even a fundamentalist can relate to the poetic type-images of Mary as the Ark of the Covenant and as the burning bush.

 

[MichaelTDoyle]

YAQUBOS:

Peace be with you!

You’d better BELIEVE like a child what the Spirit says through the apostle:

"What then? Are we better than they? Not at all; for we have already charged that both Jews and Greeks are all under sin;
as it is written,
"THERE IS **NONE ** RIGHTEOUS, NOT EVEN ONE;

   THERE IS **NONE ** WHO UNDERSTANDS,
      THERE IS NONE WHO SEEKS FOR GOD; 

   ALL HAVE TURNED ASIDE, TOGETHER THEY HAVE BECOME USELESS;
      THERE IS **NONE ** WHO DOES GOOD,
      THERE IS **NOT EVEN ONE**." 

   "THEIR THROAT IS AN OPEN GRAVE,
      WITH THEIR TONGUES THEY KEEP DECEIVING,"
      "THE POISON OF ASPS IS UNDER THEIR LIPS"; 

   "WHOSE MOUTH IS FULL OF CURSING AND BITTERNESS"; 

   "THEIR FEET ARE SWIFT TO SHED BLOOD, 

   DESTRUCTION AND MISERY ARE IN THEIR PATHS, 

   AND THE PATH OF PEACE THEY HAVE NOT KNOWN." 

   "THERE IS NO FEAR OF GOD BEFORE THEIR EYES."

Now we know that whatever the Law says, it speaks to those who are under the Law, so that **every mouth ** may be closed and all the world may become accountable to God;
because by the works of the Law no flesh will be justified in His sight; for through the Law comes the knowledge of sin." ( Romans 3:9-20 )

And against all those “NONE”, there is ONLY ONE human about whom it is written:

“WHO COMMITTED NO SIN, NOR WAS ANY DECEIT FOUND IN HIS MOUTH” ( 1 Peter 2:22 )

In Love,
Yaqubos†

Again, these quotes are a pretty good reference to original sin when used in correlation to “All” You sorta prove my point. The Apostle is not implying that we have to sin, as that would deny free will. We all do share in original sin, save Christ and Mary who was saved by anticipation. (I’m not sure of John the Baptist? I read somewhere that in the womb he leapt for Joy and that was a kind of acceptance–dunno)

I think your exegesis is really wrong on that passage. After all many people do seek God, so your overly literal interpretation is a bit harsh. God imparts the initial Grace and we cannot through adherence to laws be saved. I think that is probably closer to the meaning. Also the new Covenant of Love wholly fulfills and transcends the old covenant, because no one is justified through Law but only through ther salvific work of Christ.

Peace to you.

ps. stop scaring me with your fonts

 

[MichaelTDoyle]

YAQUBOS:

Peace!

Oh! How beautiful PHILOSOPHY. But not Christian Doctrine… Because God doesn’t say this.

In Love,
Yaqubos†

It’s doctrine, not philosophy. And obvious doctrine at that to any who believe Jesus is Lord. Why do you think God is limited by the Bible? Your existence is not in the bible, but without God you wouldn’t exist.

Remember, the Church that proclaims Mary’s sinlessness also put together your bible. You accept the latter on faith, why not the former?