Could Mary have sinned?

[Mannyfit75]

Not so. You are claiming that she was sinless. You have a problem in that the Scriptures don’t teach it. You bear the burden of proof not me.

Nor does Scripture taught that she sinned. Fortunately for me, I do not adhere to Sola Scriptura like you do. I adhere only the Sacred Scripture, Sacred Tradition, and Magisterium Authority to interpret our beliefs.

Another assertion that cannot be supported.

Since you cannot support it then you might as well call** Jesus a liar** because he promised that he will lead his Church to all truth. This include beliefs in what the Church has taught for 2,000 yrs. I believe this to be TRUTH because Jesus promise to his Church and he gave His Church the authority to BIND and LOOSE.

Since when did Jesus give you the authority to bind and loose? Where you there when Jesus handed the keys of the kingdom to Peter? Where you there when he gave the apostles to bind in loose? No. You are not the successor of the Apostles, nor you have authority.

The Catholic Church has the authority! YOU DO NOT! You did not form the Council to resolve the issue. It was the Catholic Church who resolve the issue of circumcision in the Council of Jerusalem in the Book of Acts, and other Councils. That is why I believe Mary never sinned because the CHURCH DECLARE IT.

YOU HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THAT, YOU HAVE A PROBLEM WITH JESUS CHRIST. YOU WILL BE HELD ACCOUNTIBLE ON YOUR DEATH BED FOR YOUR DISBELIEF and WOE TO YOU IF YOU SPEND 2,000 years in Purgatory!

 

[Mannyfit75]

It is interesting that you compare Mary to the Ark of the Covenant. Because if so… she likewise will become irrelevant!

There are parallel passages to show that she is the New Ark of the Covenant.

God loved his people and wanted to be close to them. He chose to do so in a very special way. The Catechism of the Catholic Church says, “The prayer of the people of God flourished in the shadow of the dwelling place of God’s presence on earth, the ark of the covenant and the temple, under the guidance of their shepherds, especially King David, and of the prophets” (CCC 2594). God instructed Moses to build a tabernacle surrounded by heavy curtains (cf. Ex. 25–27). Within the tabernacle he was to place an ark made of acacia wood covered with gold inside and out. Within the Ark of the Covenant was placed a golden jar holding the manna, Aaron’s rod that budded, and the stone tablets of the covenant (cf. Heb. 9:4).

When the ark was completed, the glory cloud of the Lord (the Shekinah Glory) covered the tent of meeting, and the glory of the Lord filled the tabernacle (Ex. 40:34–35; Num. 9:18, 22). The verb for “to cover” or “to overshadow” and the metaphor of a cloud are used in the Bible to represent the presence and glory of God. The Catechism explains:

In the theophanies of the Old Testament, the cloud, now obscure, now luminous, reveals the living and saving God, while veiling the transcendence of his glory—with Moses on Mount Sinai, at the tent of meeting, and during the wandering in the desert, and with Solomon at the dedication of the temple. In the Holy Spirit, Christ fulfills these figures. The Spirit comes upon the Virgin Mary and “overshadows” her, so that she might conceive and give birth to Jesus. On the mountain of Transfiguration, the Spirit in the “cloud came and overshadowed” Jesus, Moses and Elijah, Peter, James and John, and “a voice came out of the cloud, saying, ‘This is my Son, my Chosen; listen to him!’” Finally, the cloud took Jesus out of the sight of the disciples on the day of his Ascension and will reveal him as Son of man in glory on the day of his final coming. The glory of the Lord “overshadowed” the ark and filled the tabernacle (CCC 697).

 

[Mannyfit75]

It’s easy to miss the parallel between the Holy Spirit overshadowing the ark and the Holy Spirit overshadowing Mary, between the Ark of the Old Covenant as the dwelling place of God and Mary as the new dwelling place of God.

God was very specific about every exact detail of the ark (Ex. 25–30). It was a place where God himself would dwell (Ex. 25:8). God wanted his words—inscribed on stone—housed in a perfect container covered with pure gold within and without. How much more would he want his Word—Jesus—to have a perfect dwelling place! If the only begotten Son were to take up residence in the womb of a human girl, would he not make her flawless?

The Virgin Mary is the living shrine of the Word of God, the Ark of the New and Eternal Covenant. In fact, St. Luke’s account of the annunciation of the angel to Mary nicely incorporates the images of the tent of meeting with God in Sinai and of the temple of Zion. Just as the cloud covered the people of God marching in the desert (cf. Num. 10:34; Deut. 33:12; Ps. 91:4) and just as the same cloud, as a sign of the divine mystery present in the midst of Israel, hovered over the Ark of the Covenant (cf. Ex. 40:35), so now the shadow of the Most High envelops and penetrates the tabernacle of the New Covenant that is the womb of Mary (cf. Luke 1:35) (Pontifical Council for the Pastoral Care of Migrants and Itinerant People, The Shrine: Memory, Presence and Prophecy of the Living God).

Luke weaves additional parallels into the story of Mary—types that could be overlooked if one is unfamiliar with the Old Testament. After Moses died, Joshua led the Israelites across the Jordan River into the Promised Land. Joshua established the Ark of the Covenant in Shiloh, where it stayed for more than 200 years. One day the Israelites were losing a battle with the Philistines, so they snatched the ark and rushed it to the front lines. The Philistines captured the ark, but it caused them great problems, so they sent it back to Israel (1 Sam. 5:1–6:12).

David went out to retrieve the ark (1 Sam 6:1–2). After a man named Uzzah was struck dead when he touched the ark, David was afraid and said, “How can the ark of the Lord come to me?” He left the ark in the hill country of Judea for three months. We are also told that David danced and leapt in front of the ark and everyone shouted for joy. The house of Obed-edom, which had housed the ark, was blessed, and then David took the ark to Jerusalem (2 Sam. 6:9–14).

Compare David and the ark to Luke’s account of the Visitation:
In those days Mary arose and went with haste into the hill country, to a city of Judah, and she entered the house of Zechariah and greeted Elizabeth. And when Elizabeth heard the greeting of Mary, the babe leaped in her womb; and Elizabeth was filled with the Holy Spirit and she exclaimed with a loud cry, “Blessed are you among women, and blessed is the fruit of your womb! And why is this granted me, that the mother of my Lord should come to me? For behold, when the voice of your greeting came to my ears, the babe in my womb leaped for joy. And blessed is she who believed that there would be a fulfillment of what was spoken to her from the Lord” (Luke 1:39–45).
Mary arose and went to the hill country of Judea. I have been to both Ein Kerem (where Elizabeth lived) and Abu Ghosh (where the ark resided), and they are only a short walk apart. Mary and the ark were both on a journey to the same hill country of Judea.

When David saw the ark he rejoiced and said, “How can the ark of the Lord come to me?” Elizabeth uses almost the same words: “Why is this granted me, that the mother of my Lord should come to me?” Luke is telling us something—drawing our minds back to the Old Testament, showing us a parallel.

When David approached the ark he shouted out and danced and leapt in front of the ark. He was wearing an ephod, the clothing of a priest. When Mary, the Ark of the New Covenant, approached Elizabeth, John the Baptist leapt in his mother’s womb—and John was from the priestly line of Aaron. Both leapt and danced in the presence of the ark. The Ark of the Old Covenant remained in the house of Obed-edom for three months, and Mary remained in the house of Elizabeth for three months. The place that housed the ark for three months was blessed, and in the short paragraph in Luke, Elizabeth uses the word blessed three times. Her home was certainly blessed by the presence of the ark and the Lord within.

When the Old Testament ark arrived—as when Mary arrived—they were both greeted with shouts of joy. The word for the cry of Elizabeth’s greeting is a rare Greek word used in connection with Old Testament liturgical ceremonies that were centered around the ark and worship (cf. Word Biblical Commentary, 67). This word would flip on the light switch for any knowledgeable Jew.

The ark returns to its home and ends up in Jerusalem, where God’s presence and glory is revealed in the temple (2 Sam. 6:12; 1 Kgs. 8:9–11). Mary returns home and eventually ends up in Jerusalem, where she presents God incarnate in the temple (Luke 1:56; 2:21–22).

 

[Mannyfit75]

It seems clear that Luke has used typology to reveal something about the place of Mary in salvation history. In the Ark of the Old Covenant, God came to his people with a spiritual presence, but in Mary, the Ark of the New Covenant, God comes to dwell with his people not only spiritually but physically, in the womb of a specially prepared Jewish girl.

The Old Testament tells us that one item was placed inside the Ark of the Old Covenant while in the Sinai wilderness: God told Moses to put the stone tablets with the Ten Commandments inside the ark (Deut. 10:3–5). Hebrews 9:4 informs us that two additional items were placed in the Ark: “a golden urn holding the manna, and Aaron’s rod that budded.” Notice the amazing parallels: In the ark was the law of God inscribed in stone; in Mary’s womb was the Word of God in flesh. In the ark was the urn of manna, the bread from heaven that kept God’s people alive in the wilderness; in Mary’s womb is the Bread of Life come down from heaven that brings eternal life. In the ark was the rod of Aaron, the proof of true priesthood; in Mary’s womb is the true priest. In the third century, St. Gregory the Wonder Worker said that Mary is truly an ark—“gold within and gold without, and she has received in her womb all the treasures of the sanctuary.”

While the apostle John was exiled on the island of Patmos, he wrote something that would have shocked any first-century Jew. The ark of the Old Covenant had been lost for centuries—no one had seen it for about 600 years. But in Revelation 11:19, John makes a surprising announcement: “Then God’s temple in heaven was opened, and the ark of his covenant was seen within his temple.”

At this point chapter 11 ends and chapter 12 begins. But the Bible was not written with chapter divisions—they were added in the twelfth century. When John penned these words, there was no division between chapters 11 and 12; it was a continuing narrative.

What did John say immediately after seeing the Ark of the Covenant in heaven? “And a great portent appeared in heaven, a woman clothed with the sun, with the moon under her feet, and on her head a crown of twelve stars; she was with child” (Rev. 12:1–2). The woman is Mary, the Ark of the Covenant, revealed by God to John. She was seen bearing the child who would rule the world with a rod of iron (Rev. 12:5). Mary was seen as the ark and as a queen.

But does this passage really refer to Mary? Some say the woman represents Israel or the Church, and certainly she does. John’s use of rich symbolism is well known, but it is obvious from the Bible itself that the woman is Mary. The Bible begins with a real man (Adam), a real woman (Eve), and a real serpent (the devil)—and it also ends with a real man (Jesus, the Last Adam [1 Cor. 15:45]), a real woman (Mary, the New Eve [Rev. 11:19–12:2]), and a real serpent (the devil of old). All of this was foretold in Genesis 3:15.

 

[Mannyfit75]

John Henry Cardinal Newman wrote about this passage in Revelation:
What I would maintain is this, that the Holy Apostle would not have spoken of the Church under this particular image unless there had existed a Blessed Virgin Mary, who was exalted on high and the object of veneration to all the faithful. No one doubts that the “man-child” spoken of is an allusion to our Lord; why then is not “the Woman” an allusion to his mother?
Later in the same chapter we read that the devil went out to persecute the woman’s other offspring—Christians—which certainly seems to indicate that Mary is somehow the mother of the Church (Rev. 12:17).

Even if someone rejects Catholic teaching regarding Mary, he cannot deny that Catholics have scriptural foundations for it. And it is a teaching that has been taught by Christians from ancient times. Here are a few representative quotations from the early Church—some written well before the New Testament books were officially compiled into the final New Testament canon:

Athanasius of Alexandria (c. 296–373) was the main defender of the deity of Christ against the second-century heretics. He wrote: “O noble Virgin, truly you are greater than any other greatness. For who is your equal in greatness, O dwelling place of God the Word? To whom among all creatures shall I compare you, O Virgin? You are greater than them all O [Ark of the] Covenant, clothed with purity instead of gold! You are the ark in which is found the golden vessel containing the true manna, that is, the flesh in which divinity resides” (Homily of the Papyrus of Turin).

Gregory the Wonder Worker (c. 213–c. 270) wrote: “Let us chant the melody that has been taught us by the inspired harp of David, and say, ‘Arise, O Lord, into thy rest; thou, and the ark of thy sanctuary.’ For the Holy Virgin is in truth an ark, wrought with gold both within and without, that has received the whole treasury of the sanctuary” (Homily on the Annunciation to the Holy Virgin Mary).

The Catechism of the Catholic Church echoes the words from the earliest centuries: “Mary, in whom the Lord himself has just made his dwelling, is the daughter of Zion in person, the Ark of the Covenant, the place where the glory of the Lord dwells. She is ‘the dwelling of God . . . with men’” (CCC 2676).

The early Christians taught the same thing that the Catholic Church teaches today about Mary, including her being the Ark of the New Covenant.

 

[Jzyehoshua]

But you still haven’t answered my main point, Manny. Since the Ark of the Covenant is specifically said to not be a part of everyday life in God’s coming Kingdom, do you think Mary will be likewise unnecessary?

 

[Rbt_Southwell]

It is interesting that you compare Mary to the Ark of the Covenant. Because if so… she likewise will become irrelevant!

Jeremiah 3:16 And it shall come to pass, when ye be multiplied and increased in the land, in those days, saith the LORD, they shall say no more, The ark of the covenant of the LORD: neither shall it come to mind: neither shall they remember it; neither shall they visit it; neither shall that be done any more

 

[Mannyfit75]

But you still haven’t answered my main point, Manny. Since the Ark of the Covenant is specifically said to not be a part of everyday life in God’s coming Kingdom, do you think Mary will be likewise unnecessary?

The Ark of the Covenant does have a part if you read Revelation 11:19. It reads, 19 And the temple of God was opened in heaven: and the **ark of his testament **was seen in his temple, and there were lightnings, and voices, and an earthquake, and great hail. (Douay Rheims Bible)

This Ark is Mary. Mary gave birth to Jesus Christ who established a New Covenant. Remember at the Last Supper, Jesus said, "And they all drank of it. 24 And he said to them: This is my blood of the new testament, which shall be shed for many. (Douay Rheims Bible Mark 14: 24).

Mary in the course of her life, died, was raised from the dead, and assumed body and soul into heaven by her soul. Since her son, did not deemed his mother to remain on earth and be subject to decay.

That is why we see a woman in Revelation 12:1-5, and that woman is Mary, and she appeared in heaven.

Mary is necessary. If it wasn’t for her, there would be no Jesus to redeem us all. Mary consented and the Word became flesh and dwell amongst us.

 

[Church_Militant]

But logically it follows that if a person has never sinned, than they have no need of a Saviour for their sins.

Except for one large hole in that theology. Original sin. Do we not inherit that by way of being born descendants of Adam and Eve?

St. Paul said we do. Romans 5:12

 

[Jzyehoshua]

The Ark is not irrelevant, it is not to be remembered nor visited. Why?

 

[Church_Militant]

Furthermore, Jesus came to be a Saviour through “forgiveness of sins”, not making them never sin in the first place.

Acts 5:31

Acts 13:38

Acts 26:18
Nowhere does it say Jesus saves through making a person not sin from birth. Rather, God’s pattern all through the Bible is forgiveness of sins through mercy, which implies the sins have already been committed.

Jesus is a Saviour through the forgiveness of sins, not by making them never occur in the 1st place.

Really? then Matthew 6 must be wrong…13 And lead us not into temptation. But deliver us from evil. Amen.

 

[justasking4]

Mannyfit75;3324527]

Originally Posted by justasking4
Not so. You are claiming that she was sinless. You have a problem in that the Scriptures don’t teach it. You bear the burden of proof not me.

Mannyfit75
Nor does Scripture taught that she sinned. Fortunately for me, I do not adhere to Sola Scriptura like you do. I adhere only the Sacred Scripture, Sacred Tradition, and Magisterium Authority to interpret our beliefs.

Actually I have the advantage over those who use sources of authority beyond the Scriptures. Remember, only the Scriptures are inspired-inerrant Word of God. Not Sacred Tradition nor the Magisterium. The challenge you have by adhering to these “extra sources” is to try to keep them in harmony with the Scriptures. That cannot be done since it has already been demonstrated that there are contradictions between the Scriptures and Sacred Tradition and Magisterium.

Quote:justasking4
Another assertion that cannot be supported.

Mannyfit75

Since you cannot support it then you might as well call Jesus a liar because he promised that he will lead his Church to all truth. This include beliefs in what the Church has taught for 2,000 yrs. I believe this to be TRUTH because Jesus promise to his Church and he gave His Church the authority to BIND and LOOSE.

Since when did Jesus give you the authority to bind and loose? Where you there when Jesus handed the keys of the kingdom to Peter? Where you there when he gave the apostles to bind in loose? No. You are not the successor of the Apostles, nor you have authority.

I don’t need any authority but the Scriptures. The Scriptures are enough to examine doctrines and practices and to see if they truly line up with the Scriptures. All Christians have the responsibility to hold their teachers accountable to the Word of God. I don’t see much of this in catholics that I know here.

Mannyfit75
The Catholic Church has the authority! YOU DO NOT! You did not form the Council to resolve the issue. It was the Catholic Church who resolve the issue of circumcision in the Council of Jerusalem in the Book of Acts, and other Councils.

That is why I believe Mary never sinned because the CHURCH DECLARE IT.

justasking4
Have you studied the Scriptures as the Bereans did in Acts when they searched the Scriptures to see if the teachings of Paul lined up with the Scriptures?

Mannyfit75
YOU HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THAT, YOU HAVE A PROBLEM WITH JESUS CHRIST.

My problem is not with Christ but with teachers in the church that teach things they should not. It is they who will be held accountable for these doctrines.

Mannyfit75
YOU WILL BE HELD ACCOUNTIBLE ON YOUR DEATH BED FOR YOUR DISBELIEF and WOE TO YOU IF YOU SPEND 2,000 in Purgatory

Your warning doesn’t carry much weight. Are you aware of the prayer and promise of PRAYER OF ST. GERTRUDE, THE GREAT?

A PRAYER WHICH WOULD RELEASE 1000 SOULS FROM PURGATORY EACH TIME IT IS PRAYED.

Our Lord told St. Gertrude, The Great, that the following prayer would release 1000 souls from Purgatory each time it is said. The prayer was later extended to include living sinners as well. The Approval and Recommendation below does NOT include this extension.
“ETERNAL FATHER, I OFFER THEE THE MOST PRECIOUS BLOOD OF THY DIVINE SON, JESUS, IN UNION WITH THE MASSES SAID THROUGHOUT THE WORLD TODAY, FOR ALL THE HOLY SOULS IN PURGATORY, FOR SINNERS EVERYWHERE, FOR SINNERS IN THE UNIVERSAL CHURCH, THOSE IN MY OWN HOME AND WITHIN MY FAMILY. AMEN.”

! It seems to me that purgatory should pretty much be empty by now don’t you think if catholics prayed this everyday? If I die, would you pray this for me?

 

[justasking4]

Originally Posted by Jzyehoshua
But logically it follows that if a person has never sinned, than they have no need of a Saviour for their sins.

Church Militant
Except for one large hole in that theology. Original sin. Do we not inherit that by way of being born descendants of Adam and Eve?

St. Paul said we do. Romans 5:12

Are you saying Mary had original sin at one time?

 

[Mannyfit75]

However, in what way is it that you think Mary contains the covenant of God?

Who do you think was inside Mary’s womb for 9 months? God, or just a average human being?

When Mary consented, she became the living tabernacle of the Word of God, who was living in her womb.

Furthermore, if the new covenant is a part of Mary, do you know what that means?

It’s all about Jesus Christ. Jesus spend his first 9 months on earth inside Mary. During his days as an infant, Mary comforted him, breast feed him, read psalms, and cradle him.

Since Jesus is said to be the Mediator of the new covenant, that would mean Jesus is the Mediator of Mary, not the other way around!

Of course Jesus is the mediator. We are only trying to point to you that, Ark is Mary and the Covenant is Jesus. Jesus established a New Covenant, where he would offer his Body and Blood as a sacrifice to the Father so our sins can be forgiven.

Boy, you are really one confused person because you are talking about mediators and this has nothing to do with Mary’s sinlessness.

 

[Jzyehoshua]

Really? then Matthew 6 must be wrong…13 And lead us not into temptation. But deliver us from evil. Amen.

That still doesn’t say what you want it to, that deliverance from evil comes apart from repenting of our sins and asking for forgiveness. In fact, if you look at the rest of the prayer surrounding it, it implies that the condition is forgiving others so God will forgive us, implying again that salvation is through forgiveness of sins as I said:

Matthew 6:12 And forgive us our debts, as we forgive our debtors.
13 And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil: For thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory, for ever. Amen.
14 For if ye forgive men their trespasses, your heavenly Father will also forgive you:
15 But if ye forgive not men their trespasses, neither will your Father forgive your trespasses.

 

[Mannyfit75]

That still doesn’t say what you want it to, that deliverance from evil comes apart from repenting of our sins and asking for forgiveness. In fact, if you look at the rest of the prayer surrounding it, it implies that the condition is forgiving others so God will forgive us, implying again that salvation is through forgiveness of sins as I said:

Matthew 6:12 And forgive us our debts, as we forgive our debtors.
13 And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil: For thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory, for ever. Amen.
14 For if ye forgive men their trespasses, your heavenly Father will also forgive you:
15 But if ye forgive not men their trespasses, neither will your Father forgive your trespasses.

You know the verse,

For thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory, for ever. Amen. is not found in the original translation of Matthew’s Gospel.

Here is some information. The Protestant Bible added it. Wikipedia states:

• "For thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory, for ever and ever. Amen "*

The doxology of the prayer is not contained in Luke’s version, nor is it present in the earliest manuscripts of Matthew. The first known use of the doxology, in a less lengthy form (“for yours is the power and the glory forever”),[8] as a **conclusion for the Lord’s Prayer **(in a version slightly different from that of Matthew) is in the Didache, 8:2. There are at least ten different versions of the doxology in early manuscripts of Matthew before it seems to have standardised.

Jewish prayers at the time had doxological endings. The doxology may have been originally appended to the Lord’s Prayer for use during congregational worship. If so, it could be based on 1 Chronicles 29:11. Most scholars do not consider it part of the original text of Matthew, and modern translations do not include it, mentioning it only in footnotes. Latin Rite Roman Catholics do not use it when reciting the Lord’s Prayer, but it has been included as an independent item, not as part of the Lord’s Prayer, in the 1970 revision of the Mass. It is attached to the Lord’s Prayer in Eastern Christianity (including Byzantine Rite Eastern Catholic Churches) and Protestantism. A minority, generally fundamentalists, posit that the doxology was so important that early manuscripts of Matthew neglected it due to its obviousness,[9] though several other quite obvious things are mentioned in the Gospels.

Lord's Prayer - Wikipedia

 

[Jzyehoshua]

Who do you think was inside Mary’s womb for 9 months? God, or just a average human being?

When Mary consented, she became the living tabernacle of the Word of God, who was living in her womb.

Who do you think is inside the bodies of every Christian believer? Jesus said He, His Father, and the Holy Spirit would come into all who believe on Him to make their dwellingplace with that person.

The indwelling of God hardly means a person is sinless. Saul himself, the persecutor of David, was led by the Holy Spirit and called a prophet.

 

[Church_Militant]

There is not one shred of evidence from the scriptures for this assertion.

Really? Note the past tense Mary used in her Magnificat.
Luke 1:46 And Mary said: My soul doth magnify the Lord. 47 And my spirit hath rejoiced in God my Saviour. 48 Because he hath regarded the humility of his handmaid; for behold from henceforth all generations shall call me blessed. 49 Because he that is mighty, hath done great things to me; and holy is his name. 50 And his mercy is from generation unto generations, to them that fear him. 51 He hath showed might in his arm: he hath scattered the proud in the conceit of their heart. 52 He hath put down the mighty from their seat, and hath exalted the humble. 53 He hath filled the hungry with good things; and the rich he hath sent empty away. 54 He hath received Israel his servant, being mindful of his mercy: 55 As he spoke to our fathers, to Abraham and to his seed for ever.

That greeting though does not mean she never sinned though.

I don’t see how you can rationally say that. Are you trying to tell me that there is no way that it could mean that, because if so I have to disagree with you.

 

[justasking4]

Church Militant;3324593]

Originally Posted by Jzyehoshua
Furthermore, Jesus came to be a Saviour through “forgiveness of sins”, not making them never sin in the first place.

Acts 5:31

Acts 13:38

Acts 26:18
Nowhere does it say Jesus saves through making a person not sin from birth. Rather, God’s pattern all through the Bible is forgiveness of sins through mercy, which implies the sins have already been committed.

Jesus is a Saviour through the forgiveness of sins, not by making them never occur in the 1st place.

Church Militant
Really? then Matthew 6 must be wrong…13 And lead us not into temptation. But deliver us from evil. Amen.

What does this have to do with “Jesus is a Saviour through the forgiveness of sins, not by making them never occur in the 1st place”?

 

[Jzyehoshua]

And also, please don’t tell me it was different for Mary than Christians just because Jesus was physically inside her rather than spiritually. As Jesus Himself said, it’s the spirit that brings life, the flesh profits nothing.