Mary's sinlessness & Luke 2:24

[Oren]

I think that’s the verse, its either that or 2:22. Its where Mary offers up the sin offering after having Jesus. Someone, I think a Messianic Jew, or maybe just a Jew, said that that’s proof that Mary sinned, and was not sinless. How could I refute that? Whats the answer to that?

 

[Br.Rich_SFO]

Oren:

I think that’s the verse, its either that or 2:22. Its where Mary offers up the sin offering after having Jesus. Someone, I think a Messianic Jew, or maybe just a Jew, said that that’s proof that Mary sinned, and was not sinless. How could I refute that? Whats the answer to that?

In verse 21 we also see that Christ was circumcised for the remission of sins according to the law on the eighth day. I ask what sins did Christ have? “According to the Law” it must be remembered that Joseph, Mary and Jesus were of Jewish lineage and Jewish custom. It was expected that they would observe Jewish law and custom. This was a simple formalism. The priest takes the child and offers Him to God, not knowing that it is in fact God Incarnate he is holding! Could Mary have said I have no need to offer sacrifice? Of course she could have, but no one would have understood.

 

[Joe_Kelley]

See Matthew 17:24-27

When they came to Capernaum, the collectors of the temple tax approached Peter and said, “Doesn’t your teacher pay the temple tax?”

“Yes,” he said. When he came into the house, before he had time to speak, Jesus asked him, “What is your opinion, Simon? From whom do the kings of the earth take tolls or census tax? From their subjects or from foreigners?”
When he said, “From foreigners,” Jesus said to him, “Then the subjects are exempt. But that we may not offend them, go to the sea, drop in a hook, and take the first fish that comes up. Open its mouth and you will find a coin worth twice the temple tax. Give that to them for me and for you.”

Note that Jesus followed the Laws of Judaism in many instances, not from necessity, buts so as not to offend.

 

[Didi]

The same might also be said about Jesus’ being baptized. He certainly didn’t need to be baptized, but did so in order that we might obey and follow Him in everything. I think I read once that Jesus was not baptized in order for Him to become holy, but so that by his immersion in the water, the water itself would become holy!

 

[Juxtaposer]

Br. Rich SFO:

In verse 21 we also see that Christ was circumcised for the remission of sins according to the law on the eighth day. I ask what sins did Christ have?

I’m pretty sure the Jews didn’t believe that circumcision removed sin. It was just the sign of being in God’s covenant family. I could be wrong. Please direct me to a source that says otherwise.

 

[Br.Rich_SFO]

Juxtaposer:

I’m pretty sure the Jews didn’t believe that circumcision removed sin. It was just the sign of being in God’s covenant family. I could be wrong. Please direct me to a source that says otherwise.

I don’t have time right now to look but I believe that the Catechism draws Circumcision and Baptism together in the respective covenants. The Church and Scripture draw many parallels between Baptism and Circumcision. For instance St. Paul in Colossians 2:10-13 draws parallels between circumcision and Baptism. We see this in other Old Testament passages like Jeremias 4:4 and Genesis 17:9-14 as a sign of the covenant with God, as Baptism is now. But you could also use the Baptism of John as an example. Jesus did not need a Baptism of Repentance, He had nothing to Repent. But yet submitted Himself before all. Searching the Scriptures we find that Jesus and Mary lived “under the Law” as Jews.