Immaculate Conception of Mary

[Mannyfit75]

That is an entire argument based on sentiment and not on any biblical basis whatsoever.

God can miraculously keep Mary free from Sin, but cannot keep Jesus free from sin???

The Catholic interpret the Bible in typology. Of course you know what that is.

In the typology the New Testament is hidden in the Old Testament. In the NT, the OT is revealed.

In the OT, we have the Word of God carried in the Ark. The Word of God then was the written stone tablets stored in the Ark. In Ark is highly honored by the Jewish people. It is made of casawood (spelling) and painted in pure gold.

As you know, no one can touch the Ark, and only one priest goes to the Holy of Holies.

In the NT, Mary is a type of Ark because she carried the Living Word of God in her womb, Jesus, the New Covenant.

There are also parallels between the Mary and the Ark.

Consider these citations:

1 Chron. 13:9-10 - this is another account of Uzzah and the Ark. For God to dwell within Mary the Ark, Mary had to be conceived without sin. For Protestants to argue otherwise would be to say that God would let the finger of Satan touch His Son made flesh. This is incomprehensible.

1 Chron. 15 and 16 - these verses show the awesome reverence the Jews had for the Ark - veneration, vestments, songs, harps, lyres, cymbals, trumpets.

Luke 1:39 / 2 Sam. 6:2 - Luke’s conspicuous comparison’s between Mary and the Ark described by Samuel underscores the reality of Mary as the undefiled and immaculate Ark of the New Covenant. In these verses, Mary (the Ark) arose and went / David arose and went to the Ark. There is a clear parallel between the Ark of the Old and the Ark of the New Covenant.

Luke 1:41 / 2 Sam. 6:16 - John the Baptist / King David leap for joy before Mary / Ark. So should we leap for joy before Mary the immaculate Ark of the Word made flesh.

Luke 1:43 / 2 Sam. 6:9 - How can the Mother / Ark of the Lord come to me? It is a holy privilege. Our Mother wants to come to us and lead us to Jesus.

Luke 1:56 / 2 Sam. 6:11 and 1 Chron. 13:14 - Mary / the Ark remained in the house for about three months.

Rev 11:19 - at this point in history, the Ark of the Old Covenant was not seen for six centuries (see 2 Macc. 2:7), and now it is finally seen in heaven. The Jewish people would have been absolutely amazed at this. However, John immediately passes over this fact and describes the “woman” clothed with the sun in Rev. 12:1. John is emphasizing that Mary is the Ark of the New Covenant and who, like the Old ark, is now worthy of veneration and praise. Also remember that Rev. 11:19 and Rev. 12:1 are tied together because there was no chapter and verse at the time these texts were written.

Rev 12:1 - the “woman” that John is describing is Mary, the Ark of the New Covenant, with the moon under her feet, and on her head a crown of twelve stars. Just as the moon reflects the light of the sun, so Mary, with the moon under her feet, reflects the glory of the Sun of Justice, Jesus Christ.

Rev. 12:17 - this verse tells us that Mary’s offspring are those who keep God’s commandments and bear testimony to Jesus. This demonstrates, as Catholics have always believed, that Mary is the Mother of all Christians.

((continue))

Source: scripturecatholic.com/blessed_virgin_mary.html

 

[Mannyfit75]

These verses are no mere coincidence. The writers of the NT were aware of the connection of Mary and the Ark, which is centered on Jesus Christ.

Her purity is that God desire a human female to be the Mother of His Only Begotten Son, Jesus Christ.

How many times have you told yourself, that you are not worthy to he the servant of Jesus because of living a imperfect life? Mary’s immaculate conception is part of this divine revelation. The Revelation of Jesus Christ. Jesus was indeed pure, and perfect because He is God, the Word Made flesh.

Second, Jesus’ flesh, blood, and bones are from Mary’s own flesh. I have mention this earlier. The idea, that God would allow the Mother of His Son, to be a sinful would make herself worthily.

Scripture itself show that Mary remain obedient to God’s will. She said, “Be it Done Unto Me, according to your Word.” She said, “I am the Handmaid of the Lord.” Mary also said, “My soul magnifies the Greatness of the Lord.”

Second, the Immaculate Conception is bases in Gabriel’s greeting in Luke 1:28. He address Mary, as Hail, Full of Grace."

This word comes from the Greek word, “kecharitomene.” She has been perfected in grace by God. “Full of grace” is only used to describe one other person .

a strict translation of kecharitomene is “thou who hast been graced.” She is as she was from the beginning, Full of Grace. THe Woman concieved without sin.

This is very Biblial. Not Anti-Biblical

 

[kaycee]

The Catholic interpret the Bible in typology. Of course you know what that is.

Yes, its a way to make the bible say whatever you want it to say.

Typology run amuck. I can easily make the apostle Paul the first pope using typology.

 

[Todd_Easton]

Again, more illogical conclusions. Mary was created utterly sinless? Where does that come from? Apparently it must be tradition, cause is sure aint biblical.

The Bible says that Mary was a virgin. (Luke 1:27)
Not only does the Bible says that Mary was full of grace for an indeterminate time before the angel’s visit but it says that Full of Grace is the name by which the holy angels address her. (Luke 1:28)
The Bible says that Mary had found favor with God an indeterminate time before the angel’s visit. (Luke 1:30)
The Bible says that Mary was the handmaid of the Lord. (Luke 1:38)

The logical conclusion, based on the Bible, is that Mary was a very holy person from an indeterminate time before the angel’s visit; she was not a sinner.

Only a short leap of faith is required to accept that Mary was, by the grace of God, holy from the moment of her conception.

 

[kaycee]

These verses are no mere coincidence. The writers of the NT were aware of the connection of Mary and the Ark, which is centered on Jesus Christ.

I have never seen mention of it in the NT. Are you sure?

Her purity is that God desire a human female to be the Mother of His Only Begotten Son, Jesus Christ.

God told you this somewhere?

Second, Jesus’ flesh, blood, and bones are from Mary’s own flesh. I have mention this earlier. The idea, that God would allow the Mother of His Son, to be a sinful would make herself worthily.

She was highly favored that does not mean sinnless. God made Mary sinnless by a miracle, but could not do that for Jesus???

Second, the Immaculate Conception is bases in Gabriel’s greeting in Luke 1:28. He address Mary, as Hail, Full of Grace."

Yes, that’s where the theory comes from, the vast majority of bibles translate it as “highly favored”.

This word comes from the Greek word, “kecharitomene.” She has been perfected in grace by God. “Full of grace” is only used to describe one other person.

This certainly does not mean **perfected **in grace.

a strict translation of kecharitomene is “thou who hast been graced.” She is as she was from the beginning, Full of Grace. THe Woman concieved without sin.

The definition of the single greek word “KEXARITOMENA” means “highly favored”. It does not mean “full of grace” which is “plaras karitos” (plaras = full and karitos = Grace in Greek).The phrase "Hail full of grace"or "Ave gratia plena"can be found in Luke1:28 of the Latin Vulgate(by St.Jerome 4th century).

Unfortunately, Jeromes questionable translation allowed some very bad theology.

 

[Randy_Carson]

They died because they were told not to touch it. God struck them down, not the Ark. The Ark struck no one dead.

Again, more illogical conclusions. Mary was created utterly sinless? Where does that come from? Apparently it must be tradition, cause is sure aint biblical.

Fitting? The apostles, especially Peter were totally against the Idea of Christ dying on a cross. They did not think it was fitting! The Lord said “get thee behind me Satan”

Theology based upon what we think is fitting is not from God and certainly not binding upon the person.

Kaycee-

Would you agree that you believe sola scriptura is fitting? The Bible itself says nothing like this…

Would you agree that you believe sola fide is fitting? The Bible itself says nothing like this…

Would you agree that you believe that public revelation ended with the death of the last Apostle? The Bible itself says nothing like this…

Would you agree that you believe that the canon of the New Testament is closed? The Bible itself says nothing like this…

Would you agree that you believe that their will be no more Apostles? The Bible itself says nothing like this…

Hope this helps. :tiphat:

 

[kaycee]

Kaycee-

Would you agree that you believe sola scriptura is fitting? The Bible itself says nothing like this…

Would you agree that you believe sola fide is fitting? The Bible itself says nothing like this…

Would you agree that you believe that public revelation ended with the death of the last Apostle? The Bible itself says nothing like this…

Would you agree that you believe that the canon of the New Testament is closed? The Bible itself says nothing like this…

Would you agree that you believe that their will be no more Apostles? The Bible itself says nothing like this…

Hope this helps. :tiphat:

I take it the fact that KEXARITOMENA" means “highly favored” and not “full of grace” is somehow your cue to change the subject and start 5 more rabbit trails.

gotta go.

 

[Mannyfit75]

kaycee,

It’s kecharitomene. It means full of grace. Even in St. Jerome Latin Vulgate the Translation of kecharitomene is “gratia plena” which means full of grace. That was written in 382 A.D…

Full of grace has a deeper meaning than highly favored one.

Don’t tell me Jerome got it all wrong when he translated the Latin Vulgate.

 

[Mannyfit75]

The variant of charitoo here is echaritosen. While Kecharitomene is, according to everything I’ve read, a perfect passive participle, echaritosen is an indicative active aorist; so, while Kecharitomene indicates, according to www.ao.net/~fmoeller/zchxxxi.htm (talking about perfect passive participles in a different context and a different verse; brackets indicate where I am inserting “graced” for the word in the relevant text),

“The ‘perfect’ action of the participle is considered to have been completed before the time of the speaker. How long before is not a consideration but the Greek verbal idea is that the action has already been completed. Time is still secondary but perfected action must imply the past in relationship to the speaker. The person using the word is confessing that the one referred to has already been [graced].”

The Greek perfect tense denotes the present state resultant upon a past action (J. Gresham Machen, New Testament Greek for Beginners, p. 187). biblequestions.org/archives/BQAR264.htm

The perfect tense in Greek is a past tense with a special meaning: it is used to refer to a past action which has effects felt in the present. pcea.asn.au/WPG/Christ_Crucified.htm

The word “saved” is translated from the Greek word sesosmenoi, which is a perfect passive participle. It means that this salvation took place at some point in the past and is continuing on in the present. newsletters.cephasministry.com/bible2-11.98.html

Perfect passive participle, so things in a state of having been already forbidden.
innvista.com/culture/religion/bible/compare/

So, here’s what some modern, English-speaking scholars tell us “Kecharitomene” denotes, based purely on the definition of the word and its grammatical usage:

" ‘Highly favoured’ (kecharitomene). Perfect passive participle of charitoo and means endowed with grace (charis), enriched with grace as in Ephesians. 1:6, . . . The Vulgate gratiae plena [full of grace] "is right, if it means ‘full of grace which thou hast received’; wrong, if it means ‘full of grace which thou hast to bestow’ " (A.T. Robertson, Word Pictures in the New Testament, p. 14)

“It is permissible, on Greek grammatical and linguistic grounds, to paraphrase kecharitomene as completely, perfectly, enduringly endowed with grace.” (Blass and DeBrunner, Greek Grammar of the New Testament).

However, Luke 1:28 uses a special conjugated form of “charitoo.” It uses “kecharitomene,” while Ephesians 1:6 uses “echaritosen,” which is a different form of the verb “charitoo.” Echaritosen means “he graced” (bestowed grace). Echaritosen signifies a momentary action, an action brought to pass. (Blass and DeBrunner, Greek Grammar of the New Testament, p.166). Whereas, Kecharitomene, the perfect passive participle, shows a completeness with a permanent result. Kecharitomene denotes continuance of a completed action (H. W. Smyth, Greek Grammar [Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1968], p. 108-109, sec 1852:b; also Blass and DeBrunner, p.175).

bringyou.to/apologetics/a116.htm

 

[JoeyWarren]

direct address

When Gabriel appears to Mary, the first words he says to her are “Chaire, kecharitomene!” [Caire, kecaritomene!]. Chaire (which means both “rejoice” and “hail”) is the salutation, like the word “hello” in “hello, Cathy!” The word that follows, kecharitomene, is the direct address. In the previous example, the name “Cathy” is the direct address. A direct address is usually a name or title (or pronoun taking the place of a name or title) which represents the identity of the person being spoken to. Gabriel identifies Mary with a single term: not the name “Mary,” but the word kecharitomene.
Here, a common translation problem occurs. Gabriel only uses one word to refer to Mary, but most English translations do not. One particularly bad translation renders kecharitomene as “highly favored daughter.” Kecharitomene is extended from one word to three. The direct address in the translation is “daughter,” a word which does not appear in the Greek at all (as will be shown below). “Daughter” is then modified with a relevant word. This doesn’t really do kecharitomene justice. The same is true of translations which make the direct address “you” or “one” and modify it with adjectives or appositive phrases.

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.

 

[Greg27]

While Mary in many ways was the ‘second eve’ who obeyed God’s will in bearing the Word, she is not like Christ in an extremely important way; while holy from birth, Mary does not like Christ have the fusion of the divine and human natures as one in her own being; she is just human. No matter how much grace she had, she is not divine as Jesus was. I think the problem many Protestants have is the dogmas about Mary seem to attribute to her divine attributes and functions which belong to Christ and the Godhead alone, but looked at reasonably from the economy of salvation, Mary was specially graced by God to have the original state of holiness lost by Adam and Eve, but never and in no way did she, like Christ, become the perfect fusion of divine and human in order to redeem fallen humanity and raise it back up to glory. Mary is the exemplar of holiness in the female portion of humanity, but she is in no way the incarnate Word. I think this is what Catholic tradition recognises; Mary is full of grace and holiness (and therefore appropriate to look at as an exemplar of female holiness and also a focus of prayer which she then raises to God) but in no way is she God or a part of the divine nature, even in glory, as Christ is by nature of being one of the persons of the Trinity.

 

[Mannyfit75]

Yes, its a way to make the bible say whatever you want it to say.

Typology run amuck. I can easily make the apostle Paul the first pope using typology.

How charitable of you to make a remark. It seem to me that you do wish to understand the Catholic interpretation. This forum, my friend is a Catholic Forum.

To say, run amuck is rather insulting.

The Catholic Church use of typology to interpret is just one. Second, the Catechism states,

110 In order to discover the sacred authors’ intention, the reader must take into account the conditions of their time, and culture, the literary genres in use at that time, and the modes of feelings, speaking, and narrating then current. "For the fact is the truth is differently presented and expressed in various types of historical writings, in prophetical and poetical texts, and in other forms of literary expression.

111 But since Sacred Scripture is inspired, there another and no less important principle of correct interpretation without which Scripture would remain a dead letter. "Sacred Scripture must be read and interpret in the light of the **same Spirit **by whom it was written.

I could go on how one should interpret Scripture. If you look at 110 a reader must take into account the conditions of their time and culture.

Well, when the Gospel of Luke was written one must take into account the time, first Century and culture, in this case, the mind of a Jewish Christian. The Jewish culture venerate the Ark, and since Mary is the New Ark of the New Covenant (Jesus), she too is worthy of veneration. The reason why we believe she is Immaculate is that she was to bring forth the Jesus, the sinless redeemer. In order to prepare for this, God created Mary free of sin and she had no tendency to sin.

The Book of Revelation 11:19 we read:

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.

Then it continues on Revelation 12:1

1 And a great sign appeared in heaven: A woman clothed with the sun, and the moon under her feet, and on her head a crown of twelve stars:

In the original context of the Book of Revelation, there were no break in Chapter or verses. It was continuous. A Christian Jew would see that Ark as Mary. This is why many of the ECF acknowledge is sinless.

I hope this helps

 

[clmowry]

Which is precisly why Sola Scriptura is bunk.

Chuck

Yes, its a way to make the bible say whatever you want it to say.

Typology run amuck. I can easily make the apostle Paul the first pope using typology.

 

[Keikiolu]

…{snip}…

Well, you see, this really gets to the crux of things, i.e., your approach to the Catholic Faith. While it is important that you come to an understanding of what it is the Church believes and practices, religious assent is more than coming to an agreement after one has crossed all the I’s and dotted all the T’s to one’s own satisfaction with what is asserted for our belief by the Church. Religious assent is part of faith. By that I mean, the gift of Faith allows one to make that assent because the mind has recognized by grace the authority of the revealer. So the judgment that gives one confidence in the witness or revealer moves one (by the will) to accept with the mind, i.e., assent to, whatever the revealer proposes for assent.

Now since this Revealer is Christ in and through His Church, then any difficulties will be far lessened re a particular doctrine if one accepts the authority of the Church to so teach because she is acting with Christ’s authority. Once one can “see” this authority all else will fall in place, or at least the mind will be at peace while seeking greater understanding through study and prayer. (To approach Faith elsewise is to remain essentially Protestant even if one enters into the Catholic Church.)

…{snip}…

Thank you so very much, mahalo nui loa, for this beautiful statement.

It says wonderfully what I can’t seem to say coherently, or with many too many words,… and is truly inspiring, for me at least, as a great summary of “why I’m Catholic”.

Thanks again. Aloha nui 'oe.

Mahalo ke Akua…!
E pili mau na pomaikai ia oe. Aloha nui.

 

[justasking4]

Hi all!

I am not yet a Catholic, but I do have this one nagging question for which I hope I might find some help. I still cannot get my head around the necessity for the doctrine of Mary being conceived without sin.

Let me encourage you to study the Scriptures. It is clear that all have sinned. Romans 3:23. This would include her. Mary herself acknowledges her need of a Savior in Luke 2:47. Also the idea that because she was “full of grace or Hail, favored one” which the angel salutes her with in Luke 1:28 does not mean she was without sin her entire life. Look up what these words mean in a greek lexicon and you will find it doesn’t mean this.

 

[JoeyWarren]

Let me encourage you to study the Scriptures. It is clear that all have sinned. Romans 3:23. This would include her. Mary herself acknowledges her need of a Savior in Luke 2:47. Also the idea that because she was “full of grace or Hail, favored one” which the angel salutes her with in Luke 1:28 does not mean she was without sin her entire life. Look up what these words mean in a greek lexicon and you will find it doesn’t mean this.

Here is an adequate study of scripture:
direct address

When Gabriel appears to Mary, the first words he says to her are “Chaire, kecharitomene!” [Caire, kecaritomene!]. Chaire (which means both “rejoice” and “hail”) is the salutation, like the word “hello” in “hello, Cathy!” The word that follows, kecharitomene, is the direct address. In the previous example, the name “Cathy” is the direct address. A direct address is usually a name or title (or pronoun taking the place of a name or title) which represents the identity of the person being spoken to. Gabriel identifies Mary with a single term: not the name “Mary,” but the word kecharitomene.
Here, a common translation problem occurs. Gabriel only uses one word to refer to Mary, but most English translations do not. One particularly bad translation renders kecharitomene as “highly favored daughter.” Kecharitomene is extended from one word to three. The direct address in the translation is “daughter,” a word which does not appear in the Greek at all (as will be shown below). “Daughter” is then modified with a relevant word. This doesn’t really do kecharitomene justice. The same is true of translations which make the direct address “you” or “one” and modify it with adjectives or appositive phrases.

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.

 

[JoeyWarren]

Let me encourage you to study the Scriptures. It is clear that all have sinned. Romans 3:23. This would include her. No it does not. If it did it would include Jesus as well. The word for all is pas which is not “all without exception” or “absolutely all”. The Paul had used the Greek word “Hapas” instead, then your interpretation would be correct but that would include the Human nature of Christ as well. “Hapas” is the only one of the words used in the Greek that has a definition of “all without exception” or “absolutely all”

Mary herself acknowledges her need of a Savior in Luke 2:47.

No, she did not acknowledge she NEEDED a savior. She acknowledged that she was ALREADY saved and she acknowledged who her SAVIOR is, that being GOD.

Also the idea that because she was “full of grace or Hail, favored one” which the angel salutes her with in Luke 1:28 does not mean she was without sin her entire life.

Look up what these words mean in a greek lexicon and you will find it doesn’t mean this.
We have. The Greek Lexicon uses only the ROOT of the actual word used. Strong’s numbers are misleading. He intends you to believe that the actual Greek word used is charito. See the above post on the treatment of the word that is found in the Greek.

 

[Good_Fella]

“We declare, pronounce, and define that the doctrine which holds that the most
Blessed Virgin Mary, at the first instant of her conception, was preserved immune
from all stain of sin, by a singular grace and privilege of the omnipotent God, in
view of the merits of Jesus Christ.” {‘Ineffibalis Deus’}

“I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your offspring and hers;
He will strike at your head, while you strike at his heel.” {Genesis 3:15}

The Catholic doctrine of the Immaculate Conception is supported by this first biblical
prophecy about Mary the Mother of God. According to this passage, the offspring
of the woman is Jesus; so the woman is Mary. The offspring of Satan is sin. Catholic
theologians point out that if the enmity between Mary and Satan were not the same as
the enmity between Jesus and sin they would not have been included in the same
sentence. The word enmity appears just once and it is applied to both situations. If there
is a complete enmity between Jesus and sin there must be a complete enmity between
Mary and Satan. If Mary were to sin she would be cooperating with the devil, and so there
would be no complete enmity between them.

The Gospel of Luke 1:28 records the angel Gabriel’s greeting to Mary: “Hail full of grace.”
It is very important to note that the angel refrains from addressing Mary by her given name.
He identifies her by her spiritual condition: the perpetual state of sanctifying grace. This
state can only be initially restored to us by the Sacrament of Baptism. Yet Mary was
an unbaptised Jew at the time of her Annunciation. She could not have been in a state of
sanctifying grace when the angel greeted her unless God had already preserved her from
original sin.

Like Adam and Eve before the Fall, Mary was created in a state of sanctifying grace;
for she was predestined by Almighty God to be the new Eve. In order for Mary to undo
the disobedience of the first Eve by her obedience to the will of God, she had to share
in Eve’s original state of innocence. Mary would not have been in a position to undo the
Fall if she herself were in the fallen state of being deprived of sanctifying grace and
alienated from God as a disinherited daughter. She was created to prove her faithfulness
to her Creator pending the Incarnation of his divine Son. Without her “Fiat” at the time of
the Annunciation, Mary’s disobedience would have meant a permanent Fall of man.
For without her obedience to the will of God, Jesus would not have come into the world
to save us and lead us back to Paradise. There was no excuse for Eve to succumb to
temptation and disobey God, and there would be no excuse for Mary to refuse God unless
she were not already in a state of sanctifying grace and complete innocence when the angel
Gabriel greeted her. The new Eve was just like her Son, the new Adam, in his human nature

• free from original sin- to undo what Satan had wrought in the garden of Eden.

 

[down_under]

Yes, its a way to make the bible say whatever you want it to say.

Typology run amuck. I can easily make the apostle Paul the first pope using typology.

no you can’t you just don’t have any real argument aganist it.

 

[down_under]

I have never seen mention of it in the NT. Are you sure?

God told you this somewhere?

She was highly favored that does not mean sinnless. God made Mary sinnless by a miracle, but could not do that for Jesus???

Yes, that’s where the theory comes from, the vast majority of bibles translate it as “highly favored”.

This certainly does not mean **perfected **in grace.
The definition of the single greek word “KEXARITOMENA” means “highly favored”. It does not mean “full of grace” which is “plaras karitos” (plaras = full and karitos = Grace in Greek).The phrase "Hail full of grace"or "Ave gratia plena"can be found in Luke1:28 of the Latin Vulgate(by St.Jerome 4th century).

Unfortunately, Jeromes questionable translation allowed some very bad theology.

talk about a boast. you mean to say I am suspose to take your word over st. Jeromes. You who come so much later who’s mind and colture are so very different from the fathers. I’m suspose to believe you over someone so much closer to the actual apostles. someone who lived in there colture who understood the jewishness of the faith. This is a rather large boast sir. Check yourself. You have already proven you dont even understand typology something the fathers lived and breathed. dont mind me if I dont just take you word over st jeromes. ST. JEROME spent his whole life studing languages and the bible. can you say this? I would have to say no.