Mary did not have sin

[Nicea325]

What???

What? More like WHAT…Jesus being conceived by a SINNER???

 

[c_martyr]

And where does scripture teach everything must be taught explicitly? Did Jesus explicitly define the Trinity?

That God is triune in nature is a biblical teaching, that can be systematically deduced from Scripture alone. The sinlessness of Mary cannot. The Scriptures neither state, nor imply that any other person save Christ alone was without sin.

Moreover, your doctrine of Mary’s sinlessness has its own problems within Catholic theology itself. In fact, it contradicts your understanding of Revelation 12, where the woman clothed with the sun is supposed to be Mary . . .

 

[Dokimas]

I did not say it or declare it…did I? Read early church history. And why would God need a sinner to conceive His perfect Son?

You said, “God is perfect,so why is it so difficult to comprehend God’s vessel (Mary the new ark) needed to be perfect as well.”

I suppose you equate perfect to sinless. You said God needed Mary to be perfect. So, yes, you said God needed her to be sinless.

 

[AmateurPianist]

Contradictory? To you it might be.

Well in sentence 1 you are upbraiding Dokimas for a statement as to what God needs to do or not do. And then in sentence 2 you are turning around and making a statement as to what God needs to do. So you are doing in sentence 2 the same thing that you are bashing Dokimas for in sentence 1.

It is just that this struck me as very ironic and in a way humorous.

Anyway, I have said my piece.

 

[c_martyr]

God had a SINNER conceive PERFECTION? Is it me or is that belief ABSURD and contradictory?

It may seem absurd when you capitalize the words “sinner” and “perfection.”

But if you put the emphasis upon the sovereignty of God, then the absurdity vanishes, and God’s glory shines forth as One who alone can bring a clean thing out of an unclean thing.

It is the SOVEREIGN GOD HIMSELF who brought forth perfection from a sinner.

Now, upon a closer examination of your logic, it is you who actually proves to be self-contradictory in your beliefs. You ask the unanswerable question, “God had a sinner conceive perfection?” as if you don’t believe that He ever would.

But then let me ask you this, were Mary’s parents sinless?

 

[Dokimas]

It may seem absurd when you capitalize the words “sinner” and “perfection.”

But if you put the emphasis upon the sovereignty of God, then the absurdity vanishes, and God’s glory shines forth as One who alone can bring a clean thing out of an unclean thing.

It is the SOVEREIGN GOD HIMSELF who brought forth perfection from a sinner.

Now, upon a closer examination of your logic, it is you who actually proves to be self-contradictory in your beliefs. You ask the unanswerable question, “God had a sinner conceive perfection?” as if you don’t believe that He ever would.

But then let me ask you this, were Mary’s parents sinless?

The height of God’s love to become one of us through one of us.

 

[AmateurPianist]

Contradictory? To you it might be. Now want to see what really is contradictory:

God = PERFECT
Jesus = PERFECT

Yet God had a SINNER conceive PERFECTION?

Is it me or is that belief ABSURD and contradictory?

It is just you. God being God can do whatever pleases Him. He does not need to ask us whether what He is doing makes sense to us.

 

[Nicea325]

You said, “God is perfect,so why is it so difficult to comprehend God’s vessel (Mary the new ark) needed to be perfect as well.”

I suppose you equate perfect to sinless. You said God needed Mary to be perfect. So, yes, you said God needed her to be sinless.

Nope! I am simply telling you what the early church believed,so stop with the merry-go-around argument. The belief Mary had orginal sin is a novel belief,whether you care to admit it or not.

 

[Nicea325]

It is just you. God being God can do whatever pleases Him. He does not need to ask us whether what He is doing makes sense to us.

Exactly! You just proved my entire point about Mary…thank you.

 

[Nicea325]

It may seem absurd when you capitalize the words “sinner” and “perfection.”

But if you put the emphasis upon the sovereignty of God, then the absurdity vanishes, and God’s glory shines forth as One who alone can bring a clean thing out of an unclean thing.

It is the SOVEREIGN GOD HIMSELF who brought forth perfection from a sinner.

Now, upon a closer examination of your logic, it is you who actually proves to be self-contradictory in your beliefs. You ask the unanswerable question, “God had a sinner conceive perfection?” as if you don’t believe that He ever would.

But then let me ask you this, were Mary’s parents sinless?

LOL Contradictory in my beliefs? Hate to rain on your parade,but your belief is novel to the ancient church. Take the time to read church history and acknowledge how contradictory your position is to ancient Christianity.

Nice try about Mary’s parents. The RCC does not teach Mary’s parents were sinless. And? Please stick to the issue,Mary,not her parents.

 

[AmateurPianist]

Exactly! You just proved my entire point about Mary…thank you.

Wait a minute. You were the one claiming that Jesus being conceived by somebody who had sinned at least once in her life made absolutely no sense.

You just can’t say one thing one minute and then the next minute contradict yourself. Try to be consistent at least from one sentence to the next please.

 

[Nicea325]

That God is triune in nature is a biblical teaching, that can be systematically deduced from Scripture alone. The sinlessness of Mary cannot. The Scriptures neither state, nor imply that any other person save Christ alone was without sin.

Moreover, your doctrine of Mary’s sinlessness has its own problems within Catholic theology itself. In fact, it contradicts your understanding of Revelation 12, where the woman clothed with the sun is supposed to be Mary . . .

Yes deduced IMPLICITLY,not explicitly. Take a jab at history and tell me what was happening in the 4th century? The Arian heresy…hhhhmm? And who gave us the deep theological explanation of the three distinct persons of the Trinity? The Church,not the Bible. Sorry,no way around it.

 

[Nicea325]

Wait a minute. You were the one claiming that Jesus being conceived by somebody who had sinned at least once in her life made absolutely no sense.

You just can’t say one thing one minute and then the next minute contradict yourself. Try to be consistent at least from one sentence to the next please.

I beg your pardon? When and where did I say Jesus was conceived by someone who sinned at least once?

 

[AmateurPianist]

I beg your pardon? When and where did I say Jesus was conceived by someone who sinned at least once?

'No you didn’t say that.

You said something to the effect that it makes no sense for a perfect God to be conceived by somebody who had sinned at least once in her lifetime.

You then turned around and agreed with me that God is God and can do whatever He wants. He does not need to ask our permission as to whether what He is doing makes sense to us.

 

[Michael_Facist]

'No you didn’t say that.

You said something to the effect that it makes no sense for a perfect God to be conceived by somebody who had sinned at least once in her lifetime.

You then turned around and agreed with me that God is God and can do whatever He wants. He does not need to ask our permission as to whether what He is doing makes sense to us.

Careful how you speak. This is a CATHOLIC forum that serves the catholic agenda. Whether or not you believe their agenda to be a pack of lies is something that has to be managed with some tact otherwise they will BAN you (on the pretext of a lack of 'charity) for exposing the loopholes in their falsified claims.

Just like you can be shut out for pointing out the fact that islam’s founder, muhammad(pbuh) was a pedophile for having sex with a 9 year old biologically underaged girl. You can also be shut out for pointing out that Mary was a sinner that needed God’s redemption and who called herself a humble servant of God
**
It all boils down to people wanting to create their OWN religion with supporters eager to support their delusion. Something that God does not have a part in.**

 

[Dokimas]

Nope! I am simply telling you what the early church believed,so stop with the merry-go-around argument. The belief Mary had orginal sin is a novel belief,whether you care to admit it or not.

Not going around; just holding you to what you said whether you care to admit it or not.

 

[Dokimas]

Exactly! You just proved my entire point about Mary…thank you.

And AP makes my point. Funny how that works.

 

[Dokimas]

Nice try about Mary’s parents. The RCC does not teach Mary’s parents were sinless. And? Please stick to the issue,Mary,not her parents.

Maybe that’s the point CM is making: Jesus is the issue NOT His parents. Jesus needed to be without sin, not His parent.

 

[Dokimas]

I beg your pardon? When and where did I say Jesus was conceived by someone who sinned at least once?

Reread AP’s post. You misread it.

 

[LionHeart777]

2 early witnesses to Mary as the ark of the New Covenant:

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).

(catholic.com/thisrock/2005/0510fea5.asp) (accessed 6/ 19/ 10)

Note: this article by Steve Ray seems to make the Biblical case as well.

Also relevent IMO is the teaching on Mary as the New Eve; remember Eve was sinless before the fall.

Consider the words of a very early witness to this teaching:

1. In accordance with this design, Mary the Virgin is found obedient, saying, ‘Behold the handmaid of the Lord; be it unto me according to your word.’ Luke 1:38 But Eve was disobedient; for she did not obey when as yet she was a virgin. And even as she, having indeed a husband, Adam, but being nevertheless as yet a virgin (for in Paradise ‘they were both naked, and were not ashamed,’ Genesis 2:25 inasmuch as they, having been created a short time previously, had no understanding of the procreation of children: for it was necessary that they should first come to adult age, and then multiply from that time onward), having become disobedient, was made the cause of death, both to herself and to the entire human race; so also did Mary, having a man betrothed [to her], and being nevertheless a virgin, by yielding obedience, become the cause of salvation, both to herself and the whole human race. And on this account does the law term a woman betrothed to a man, the wife of him who had betrothed her, although she was as yet a virgin; thus indicating the back-reference from Mary to Eve, because what is joined together could not otherwise be put asunder than by inversion of the process by which these bonds of union had arisen; so that the former ties be cancelled by the latter, that the latter may set the former again at liberty. And it has, in fact, happened that the first compact looses from the second tie, but that the second tie takes the position of the first which has been cancelled. For this reason did the Lord declare that the first should in truth be last, and the last first. Matthew 19:30, Matthew 20:16 And the prophet, too, indicates the same, saying, ‘instead of fathers, children have been born unto you.’ For the Lord, having been born ‘the First-begotten of the dead,’ Revelation 1:5 and receiving into His bosom the ancient fathers, has regenerated them into the life of God, He having been made Himself the beginning of those that live, as Adam became the beginning of those who die. 1 Corinthians 15:20-22 Wherefore also Luke, commencing the genealogy with the Lord, carried it back to Adam, indicating that it was He who regenerated them into the Gospel of life, and not they Him. And thus also it was that the knot of Eve’s disobedience was loosed by the obedience of Mary. For what the virgin Eve had bound fast through unbelief, this did the virgin Mary set free through faith.

(St. Irenaeus, Against Heresies, Book III, Ch. 22) (newadvent.org/fathers/0103322.htm) (accessed 6/ 19/ 10)

The teaching that Mary did not sin is found in the churches who can trace their lineage back to the Apostles themselves; in the East and in the West.

No offense to the Protestant brothers/sisters, but I will stick w/ the teaching of the Apostolic churches (mos especially the see of St. Peter) which can be witnessed in the writings almost from the beginning (remember too; there is a Scriptural argument which would be “from the beginning” of the NT Church.)

The Protestant brothers/sisters seem to offer, at least in this thread,

a) their interpretation of the mentioned Scripture in Romans “all have sinned”

b) their own speculations:

“It is the SOVEREIGN GOD HIMSELF who brought forth perfection from a sinner.”

Can you prove this to be so?

“Jesus is the issue NOT His parents. Jesus needed to be without sin, not His parent.” (emphasis mine.)

I guess I would come at that from a different angle and say that Jesus and sin are incompatible, in that if Jesus (God) were to sin, He would cease to be Jesus (God) and that is not possible. Jesus being with sin is an impossibility. Regarding the second part of the sentence, how can one be sure? I might tend to agree that it was not an absolute necessity (I would argue that this was God’s plan), but how can I be sure His mother didn’t need to be sinless? It’s just speculation on our part.