T
Tom317
Guest
I find it amusing that the OP was asking about how people can believe that all have sinned and yet several of us are trying to defend the fact that Mary never sinned… 
- Status
J
JoeyWarren
Guest
Romans 3:23: “…all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God.” {NRSV}I find it amusing that the OP was asking about how people can believe that all have sinned and yet several of us are trying to defend the fact that Mary never sinned…
I’m still looking for a good answer on the “for all have sinned” question in regards to Mary. The “all doesn’t always mean all” answer is not satisfactory since I am sure there are references where all does mean all!
I don’t follow. If the word “all” (pas in Greek) can indeed have different meanings (as it does in English), then it can have different meanings! It matters not if it means literally “every single one” in some places, if it can mean something less than “absolutely every” elsewhere in Scripture. As soon as this is admitted, then the Catholic exception for Mary cannot be said to be linguistically or exegetically impossible, any more than adelphos (“brother”) meaning “sibling” in one place rules out a meaning of “cousin” or other non-sibling somewhere else.
We find examples of a non-literal intent elsewhere in Romans. In verse 1:29 the KJV reads, “being filled with all unrighteousness…,” whereas NRSV adopts the more particular, specific meaning, “…every kind of wickedness…” As another example in the same book, Paul writes that “all Israel will be saved,” (11:26), but we know that many will not be saved. And in 15:14, Paul describes members of the Roman church as “…filled with all knowledge…” (cf. 1 Cor 1:5 in KJV), which clearly cannot be taken literally. Examples could be multiplied indefinitely, and are as accessible as the nearest Strong’s Concordance.
The “exception” answer is not satisfactory either considering Adam and Eve were before there was original sin and Jesus was God!!
And Mary was freed from original sin! Again, I don’t see how this is compelling at all. All you’ve shown is that there are exceptions indeed. Granted, Jesus is of course unique, but if He proves an exception to the rule here, is it utterly inconceivable that Mary could as well? Sure, Adam and Eve sinned, but they are used as examples of immaculate human beings however short-lived it was in their case! I agree that this verse could be regarded as a “difficulty,” but I don’t think it is insurmountable. What would be irrefutable would be a verse that read something like: “absolutely every human being who ever lived no exceptions - has sinned…” This would include Jesus since He is a human as we are - just that He is also God (a Divine Person), and Mary. But Romans 3:23 doesn’t entail that logical conundrum.
One could also say that Mary was included in the “all” in the sense that she certainly would have been subject to original sin like all the rest of us but for God’s special preventive act of grace - a “preemptive strike,” so to speak. This is why she can rightly say that God was her Savior too (Lk 1:47). I don’t think that is stretching it, considering that Hebrew idiom was not at all “scientific,” “philosophical” nor excessively particularistic as to literal meanings, as English in our culture seems to be today. I myself - in my admittedly relative ignorance of technical exegesis - think that this “exception / original sin / Hebrew idiom” explanation is the most plausible. It allows one to take “all” here in its most straightforward, common sense meaning, but with the proviso that Mary was spared from inevitable sin by means of a direct, extraordinary intervention of God, and it is also in line with the thought of Luke 1:47, as interpreted by Catholic theology, in light of its acceptance of the Immaculate Conception.
conintued…
J
JoeyWarren
Guest
…continued
That said, I go now to linguistic reference works. Kittel’s Theological Dictionary of the New Testament (Abridged Ed.) states:
Pas can have different meanings according to its different uses . . . in many verses, pas is used in the NT simply to denote a great number, e.g., “all Jerusalem” in Mt 2:3 and “all the sick” in 4:24. {pp.796-7}
See also Mt 3:5, 21:10, 27:25, Mk 2:13, 9:15, etc., etc., esp. in KJV.
Likewise, Thayer’s Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament gives “of every kind” as a possible meaning in some contexts {p.491, word #3956}. And Vine’s Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words tells us it can mean “every kind or variety.” {v.1, p.46, under “All”}.
Nevertheless, I am inclined to go with the “exception” interpretation I described above. My point here is simply to illustrate that pas doesn’t necessarily have to mean "no exceptions, so that Mary’s sinlessness is not a logical impossibility based on the meaning of pas alone.
We see Jewish idiom and hyperbole in passages of similar meaning. Jesus says:
No one is good but God alone. {Lk 18:19; cf. Mt 19:17}
Yet He also said:
The good person brings good things out of a good treasure… {Mt 12:35; cf. 5:45, 7:17-20, 22:10}
Furthermore, in each instance in Matthew and Luke above of the English “good” the Greek word is the same: agatho.
Is this a contradiction? Of course not. Jesus is merely drawing a contrast between our righteousness and God’s, but He doesn’t deny that we can be “good” in a lesser sense.
We observe the same dynamic in the Psalms:
The Lord looks down from heaven on humankind to see if there are any who are wise, who seek after God. They have all gone astray, they are all alike perverse; there is no one who does good [Hebrew, tob] no not one. {Ps 14:2-3; cf. 53:1-3 / Paul cites these in Rom 3:10-12}
Yet in the immediately preceding Psalm, David proclaims I trusted in your steadfast love… {13:5}, which certainly is “seeking” after God! And in the very next he refers to those who walk blamelessly, and do what is right… {15:2}. Even two verses later he writes that …God is with the company of the righteous. (!!!) So obviously his lament in 14:2-3 is an indignant hyperbole and not intended as a literal utterance. Such remarks are common to Jewish poetic idiom. The anonymous psalmist in 112:5 refers to a good man (Heb. tob), as does the book of Proverbs repeatedly (11:23, 12:2, 13:22, 14:14,19), using the same word, tob, which appears in Ps 14:2-3. And references to righteous men are innumerable (e.g., Job 17:9, 22:19, Ps 5:12, 32:11, 34:15, 37:16,32, Mt 9:13, 13:17, 25:37,46, Rom 5:19, Heb 11:4, Jas 5;16, 1 pet 3:12, 4:18, etc., etc.).
But us Catholics agree with Protestants on the universality of sin, with just the one lone exception of Mary among created human beings. That’s not too incredible or implausible or unthinkable to imagine God doing, is it? To make sure that one solitary created person was kept from sin? And that because she was the Theotokos, the God-bearer? Newman said that it is far less difficult to hold that Mary was freed from original and actual sin than it is to accept the proposition that all men are subject to original sin. The real mystery is why God would allow the latter to happen, not that He willed to restore His Son’s earthly mother to a state which - but for original sin - would have characterized every one of us.
=================================================================
One might also note 1 Corinthians 15:22: “As in Adam all die, so in Christ all will be made alive” {NIV}. As far as physical death is concerned (the context of 1 Cor 15), not “all” people have died (e.g., Enoch: Gen 5:24; cf. Heb 11:5, Elijah: 2 Kings 2:11). Likewise, “all” will not be made spiritually alive by Christ, as some will choose to suffer eternal spiritual death in hell.
That said, I go now to linguistic reference works. Kittel’s Theological Dictionary of the New Testament (Abridged Ed.) states:
Pas can have different meanings according to its different uses . . . in many verses, pas is used in the NT simply to denote a great number, e.g., “all Jerusalem” in Mt 2:3 and “all the sick” in 4:24. {pp.796-7}
See also Mt 3:5, 21:10, 27:25, Mk 2:13, 9:15, etc., etc., esp. in KJV.
Likewise, Thayer’s Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament gives “of every kind” as a possible meaning in some contexts {p.491, word #3956}. And Vine’s Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words tells us it can mean “every kind or variety.” {v.1, p.46, under “All”}.
Nevertheless, I am inclined to go with the “exception” interpretation I described above. My point here is simply to illustrate that pas doesn’t necessarily have to mean "no exceptions, so that Mary’s sinlessness is not a logical impossibility based on the meaning of pas alone.
We see Jewish idiom and hyperbole in passages of similar meaning. Jesus says:
No one is good but God alone. {Lk 18:19; cf. Mt 19:17}
Yet He also said:
The good person brings good things out of a good treasure… {Mt 12:35; cf. 5:45, 7:17-20, 22:10}
Furthermore, in each instance in Matthew and Luke above of the English “good” the Greek word is the same: agatho.
Is this a contradiction? Of course not. Jesus is merely drawing a contrast between our righteousness and God’s, but He doesn’t deny that we can be “good” in a lesser sense.
We observe the same dynamic in the Psalms:
The Lord looks down from heaven on humankind to see if there are any who are wise, who seek after God. They have all gone astray, they are all alike perverse; there is no one who does good [Hebrew, tob] no not one. {Ps 14:2-3; cf. 53:1-3 / Paul cites these in Rom 3:10-12}
Yet in the immediately preceding Psalm, David proclaims I trusted in your steadfast love… {13:5}, which certainly is “seeking” after God! And in the very next he refers to those who walk blamelessly, and do what is right… {15:2}. Even two verses later he writes that …God is with the company of the righteous. (!!!) So obviously his lament in 14:2-3 is an indignant hyperbole and not intended as a literal utterance. Such remarks are common to Jewish poetic idiom. The anonymous psalmist in 112:5 refers to a good man (Heb. tob), as does the book of Proverbs repeatedly (11:23, 12:2, 13:22, 14:14,19), using the same word, tob, which appears in Ps 14:2-3. And references to righteous men are innumerable (e.g., Job 17:9, 22:19, Ps 5:12, 32:11, 34:15, 37:16,32, Mt 9:13, 13:17, 25:37,46, Rom 5:19, Heb 11:4, Jas 5;16, 1 pet 3:12, 4:18, etc., etc.).
But us Catholics agree with Protestants on the universality of sin, with just the one lone exception of Mary among created human beings. That’s not too incredible or implausible or unthinkable to imagine God doing, is it? To make sure that one solitary created person was kept from sin? And that because she was the Theotokos, the God-bearer? Newman said that it is far less difficult to hold that Mary was freed from original and actual sin than it is to accept the proposition that all men are subject to original sin. The real mystery is why God would allow the latter to happen, not that He willed to restore His Son’s earthly mother to a state which - but for original sin - would have characterized every one of us.
=================================================================
One might also note 1 Corinthians 15:22: “As in Adam all die, so in Christ all will be made alive” {NIV}. As far as physical death is concerned (the context of 1 Cor 15), not “all” people have died (e.g., Enoch: Gen 5:24; cf. Heb 11:5, Elijah: 2 Kings 2:11). Likewise, “all” will not be made spiritually alive by Christ, as some will choose to suffer eternal spiritual death in hell.
J
JoeyWarren
Guest
well that is the primary verse they use to disprove Mary’s sinlessness. So it becomes inevitable.I find it amusing that the OP was asking about how people can believe that all have sinned and yet several of us are trying to defend the fact that Mary never sinned…
T
Tom317
Guest
JoeyWarren,
I respectfully submit that you are making waaay too much of this topic. We can wrestle for days about Mary, or John, or Adam and Eve, or original sin, or personal sin…yet in the end the Bible is intended to be used to help us attain Heaven…that is its purpose. Using the Bible as such, I think we can cut to the chase much more quickly by simply understanding the human race is in a fallen state and that each person must realize that we sin and that we need a savior. We are constrained by our fallen nature, God is not and He can certainly make exceptions to the constraints He allows us to live under (i.e. Mary is sinfree). Taking that to heart it simply means that we to know we sin and that we mist have a Savior because of our sin.
I respectfully submit that you are making waaay too much of this topic. We can wrestle for days about Mary, or John, or Adam and Eve, or original sin, or personal sin…yet in the end the Bible is intended to be used to help us attain Heaven…that is its purpose. Using the Bible as such, I think we can cut to the chase much more quickly by simply understanding the human race is in a fallen state and that each person must realize that we sin and that we need a savior. We are constrained by our fallen nature, God is not and He can certainly make exceptions to the constraints He allows us to live under (i.e. Mary is sinfree). Taking that to heart it simply means that we to know we sin and that we mist have a Savior because of our sin.
T
Tom317
Guest
JoeyWarren
Sorry, that last message was intended for rr1213.
Sorry, that last message was intended for rr1213.
J
JoeyWarren
Guest
your forgiven
B
Blue_Serenity
Guest
How do you know that’s what “full of grace” means?
R
ricko
Guest
No. A baby has not committed any sin. Neither have the angels in heaven (save for Satan), nor Mary, Jesus (in his human nature), Adam and Eve (until the fall), the insane have not sinned.
The statement “All have sinned and fallen…” should be taken in the same context as statements like “EVERYBODY knows that!” Of course when we say “everybody” we really don’t mean every single person.
A
ALLFORHIM
Guest
Hi,
Yes I agree. There is no teaching on this in the bible. It is only my belief. I am a woman with children so of course I could never think otherwise. This thread is probably a waste of an argument because there really isnt any evidence on either side of the issue. This subject is something only God knows.
J
JoeyWarren
Guest
The Greek means is written thus for Luke 1:28
καὶ εἰσελθὼν πρὸς αὐτὴν εἶπεν, Χαῖρε, κεχαριτωμένη, ὁ κύριος μετὰ σοῦ.
The word in red is Kecharitomene.
The traditional translation, “full of grace,” is better than the one found in many recent versions of the New Testament, which give something along the lines of “highly favored daughter.” Mary was indeed a highly favored daughter of God, but the Greek implies more than that (and it never mentions the word for “daughter”).
The grace given to Mary is at once permanent and of a unique kind. Kecharitomene is a perfect passive participle of charitoo, meaning “to fill or endow with grace.” Since this term is in the perfect tense, it indicates that Mary was graced in the past but with continuing effects in the present. So, the grace Mary enjoyed was not a result of the angel’s visit.
In fact, Catholics hold, it extended over the whole of her life, from conception onward. She was in a state of sanctifying grace from the first moment of her existence.
For a good piece on this word go here:
bringyou.to/apologetics/a116.htm
R
rtconstant
Guest
Joey,
Thanks for some great posts and for being intellectually honest throughout.
Thanks for some great posts and for being intellectually honest throughout.
J
JoeyWarren
Guest
J
JoeyWarren
Guest
My pleasure and God’s!
T
Tom317
Guest
We know this from John 1:14:
- And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, full of grace and truth; we have beheld his glory, glory as of the only Son from the Father. *
B
Blue_Serenity
Guest
I know they do. But why?
J
JoeyWarren
Guest
B
Blue_Serenity
Guest
He says that the translation means “are graced” and he claims it means past tense.
But, it can also mean present tense, as just “in this moment”.
It’s not a very good argument to prove that Mary was sinless her ENTIRE life.
J
JoeyWarren
Guest
Break it down Bob!
Kecharitomene
Ke Charito Mene
caritow
The root word is charitoo [caritow], which means “to grace, favor.” On this much, it seems, all agree. All the common English translations of the word therefore, regardless of whether the translators are Catholic or Protestant, use some form of “grace” or “favor” in them.
ke
The prefix on charitoo is ke, signifying that the word is in the perfect tense. This indicates a present state which is the result of a completed past action. The action which brought about the state in which Mary is, in other words, was completed before Gabriel’s greeting. Gabriel is viewing the finished results.
This tense seems difficult to render in English, especially with one word, as Gabriel uses. The translator does not only want to indicate that the past action is complete, but also that there is a continuing state as a result. Allowing for more than one word, an example of the tense in English might be “you are certified to teach.” “Are” indicates a present state, “certified” shows that the state is the result of a completed past action.
mene
The suffix on charitoo, mene, makes this a passive participle. “Passive” means that the action is performed on the subject, in this case Mary, by another agent. The verb is “grace” and the implied subject is Mary. The passive usage means that “someone graced Mary,” rather than “Mary graced.” Most theologians would probably accept the assumption that the implied “someone” is God. “Participle,” in this case, means that the word has properties of both a verb and a noun. This makes sense in light of what has already been said about direct address. A direct address is a noun or pronoun, but “to grace” is a verb. Kecharitomene has verb and noun properties.
Click Here
Kecharitomene
Ke Charito Mene
caritow
The root word is charitoo [caritow], which means “to grace, favor.” On this much, it seems, all agree. All the common English translations of the word therefore, regardless of whether the translators are Catholic or Protestant, use some form of “grace” or “favor” in them.
ke
The prefix on charitoo is ke, signifying that the word is in the perfect tense. This indicates a present state which is the result of a completed past action. The action which brought about the state in which Mary is, in other words, was completed before Gabriel’s greeting. Gabriel is viewing the finished results.
This tense seems difficult to render in English, especially with one word, as Gabriel uses. The translator does not only want to indicate that the past action is complete, but also that there is a continuing state as a result. Allowing for more than one word, an example of the tense in English might be “you are certified to teach.” “Are” indicates a present state, “certified” shows that the state is the result of a completed past action.
mene
The suffix on charitoo, mene, makes this a passive participle. “Passive” means that the action is performed on the subject, in this case Mary, by another agent. The verb is “grace” and the implied subject is Mary. The passive usage means that “someone graced Mary,” rather than “Mary graced.” Most theologians would probably accept the assumption that the implied “someone” is God. “Participle,” in this case, means that the word has properties of both a verb and a noun. This makes sense in light of what has already been said about direct address. A direct address is a noun or pronoun, but “to grace” is a verb. Kecharitomene has verb and noun properties.
Click Here
J
JoeyWarren
Guest
Actually it’s a she. MY BAD!
ke
The prefix on charitoo is ke, signifying that the word is in the perfect tense. This indicates a present state which is the result of a completed past action. The action which brought about the state in which Mary is, in other words, was completed before Gabriel’s greeting. Gabriel is viewing the finished results.
This tense seems difficult to render in English, especially with one word, as Gabriel uses. The translator does not only want to indicate that the past action is complete, but also that there is a continuing state as a result. Allowing for more than one word, an example of the tense in English might be “you are certified to teach.” “Are” indicates a present state, “certified” shows that the state is the result of a completed past action.
- Status