Romans 3:23 vs Immaculate Conception

  • Thread starter Thread starter dailymass
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
D

dailymass

Guest
I need some help reconciling Romans 3:23 “all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God” and the Immaculate Conception.

Mary was conceived without original sin - how does that jive with “all have sinned”?

This is a standard Fundamentalist Bible verse - I need some help defending the faith.

God Bless you during the Christmas Octave!
 
Mary being the Ark of the New Covenant, she was saved before committing sin. Imagine you were walking down the street and did not see the manhole opened and someone yelled STOP ! You were saved from that hole without ever falling in. Maybe corny and not quite complete but hopefully we will see more posts. 🙂
 
dailymass said:
I need some help reconciling Romans 3:23 “all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God” and the Immaculate Conception.

Mary was conceived without original sin - how does that jive with “all have sinned”?

This is a standard Fundamentalist Bible verse - I need some help defending the faith.

God Bless you during the Christmas Octave!
Click to expand...
You won’t be able to reconcile it. It can’t be done. Scripture tells us “All” have sinned and it doesn’t exclude Mary.

In addition, Mary called Jesus her “Saviour.”

You have to go to the writings of the church leaders hundreds of years later to find where the belief that Mary was conceived without sin, in order to believe this.

You certainly won’t find it in Scripture—because it isn’t true!
 
Old_Scholar said:
You won’t be able to reconcile it. It can’t be done. Scripture tells us “All” have sinned and it doesn’t exclude Mary.

In addition, Mary called Jesus her “Saviour.”

You have to go to the writings of the church leaders hundreds of years later to find where the belief that Mary was conceived without sin, in order to believe this.

You certainly won’t find it in Scripture—because it isn’t true!
Click to expand...
Our understanding of scripture grows with study. Just because some subjects may be better understood after periods of time doesnt mean they were not there to begin with. Taking single verses from the bible without looking at complete texts and asking "what does this mean to me " can be a dangerous approach. There are many good Catholic teachers who understand the Immaculate Conception better than I can explain. I would suggest you look up their writings for example…Scott Hahn. They can also help you with the wrong teaching you are accustomed to about Sola Scriptura.
Have a great day and keep learning.
 
dailymass said:
I need some help reconciling Romans 3:23 “all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God” and the Immaculate Conception.

Mary was conceived without original sin - how does that jive with “all have sinned”?

This is a standard Fundamentalist Bible verse - I need some help defending the faith.

God Bless you during the Christmas Octave!
Click to expand...
This article (and others found through a search of THIS ROCK magazine linked above) addresses your question:

catholic.com/thisrock/2001/0102sbs.asp
  1. How can you reconcile Mary’s sinlessness with Paul’s statement that all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God?
Click to expand...
Though Paul is making a generalization of all humanity, Protestants and Catholics alike would agree that there are exceptions. For example, a child below the age of reason is not capable of committing actual sin. By definition he can’t sin, since sinning requires the ability to reason and the ability to intend to sin. This is indicated by Paul later in the epistle to the Romans when he speaks of the time when Jacob and Esau were unborn babies as a time when they “had done nothing either good or bad” (Rom. 9:11).
Click to expand...
Jesus is another significant exception to the rule, having been exempt from actual and original sin (Heb. 4:15). If Paul’s statement in Romans 3 includes an exception for the new Adam (Jesus), one may argue that an exception for the new Eve (Mary) can also be made.
Click to expand...
 
Interesting question.

Theoretically, there is a line between an Immaculate Mary and Immaculate Conception.

Possibility 1: You can have an Immaculate (sinless) Mary, which then implies to an Immaculate Conception.
Or
Possibility 2: an Immaculate Conception which Immaculates Mary.

Possibility 2 would concur with those scripture passages ( Mary needs a saviour )

If you base it on those scriptures, it may be possible to affirm the second possibility:
That Mary may have been born with original sin, but with God’s grace was made immaculate.

However, Mary in her own right was blessed in that she was an Anti-eve that in
her thoughts and actions, she loved the Lord above all (she was obedient); along with her received grace,
She possibly merited grace that made her proper to bear the son of God. This also concurs with the idea
of being anti-eve, because eve was born without original sin, but her actions begat sin and death.
Mary, the anti-eve would have been born with original sin, but begat He who destroys sin and death.

Possibility 1 is scary for a lot of people, because it makes Mary more than human. Indeed she is special,
but to be born without original sin… is a scary affirmation to make.

Possibility 2 is more understandable and is a display of grace and humility.

( if I remember correctly, Possibility 1 is the Catholic view )

As for me, my biggest issue is with the Assumption (that Mary was taken up to heaven). It is true
that her tomb was never known. There is no Old Testament comparison to that other than the fact that the
Ark of the Covenant disappeared too (but was it sent to heaven too?).

Well, I like Mary but sometimes it scares me on how much power she is attributed:

( Immaculate Mary hymn)
Immaculate Mary, your praises we sing
You reign now in splendor with Jesus, our King.

Ave, Ave, Ave Maria
Ave, Ave Maria

In heaven the blessed, your glory proclaim
on earth we your children invoke your sweet name.

…

The first line of the song is like gasoline for Anti-Catholic thought. It could be interpreted as worship.

I could understand that she is very important and should be revered as so, or to be likened to the mother
of Solomon (sitting at his right) at the throne, but sometimes, it can be too much…

Sorry if I offend people by examining this, but I want to be fair in judgement.
 
Old_Scholar said:
You won’t be able to reconcile it. It can’t be done. Scripture tells us “All” have sinned and it doesn’t exclude Mary.

In addition, Mary called Jesus her “Saviour.”

You have to go to the writings of the church leaders hundreds of years later to find where the belief that Mary was conceived without sin, in order to believe this.

You certainly won’t find it in Scripture—because it isn’t true!
Click to expand...
You won’t be able to reconcile it. It can’t be done. Scripture tells us “All” have sinned and it doesn’t exclude Mary.

THEN ACCORDING TO THAT RIGID LITERAL DEFINITION, DID JESUS SIN TOO? HE IS AFTER ALL ONE OF THE “ALL” THAT WAS BORN MAN, RIGHT?

In addition, Mary called Jesus her “Saviour.”

ACTUALLY, JESUS HADN’T BEEN SACRIFICED YET. HE WASN’T ANYBODY’S SAVIOUR UNTIL THE SACRIFICE (HIS DEATH ON THE CROSS) WAS COMPLETE.

FOR MARY TO CALL HERSELF “SAVED”, SHE COULD ONLY BE REFERRING TO THE ONLY ONE WHO COULD SAVE ANYBODY AT THAT TIME…GOD.

NO WHERE IN SCRIPTURE DOES MARY SAY THAT JESUS SAVED HER…IT SHE SAYS THAT GOD SAVED HER AS GOD WAS THE ONLY ONE AT THE TIME THAT COULD FREE ANYBODY FROM SIN WHEN THAT PARTICULAR STATEMENT WAS MADE. REMEMBER, THE STATEMENT WAS MADE IN A PRESENT TENSE.

You have to go to the writings of the church leaders hundreds of years later to find where the belief that Mary was conceived without sin, in order to believe this.

You certainly won’t find it in Scripture—because it isn’t true!

JUST LIKE YOU’D HAVE TO GO TO THE CHURCH FATHERS FOR THE DOCTRINES OF SALVATION, RAPTURE, THE TRINITY…OTHER THINGS NOT FOUND IN SCRIPTURE, BUT REVEALED BY THE CHURCH.
 
Paul was writing to people who probably did not care much about Mariology. Thus, he didn’t take the time to note the exception.

But of course, that doesn’t prove anything; there’s other ways to prove Mary’s sinlessness. I’m just noting why the confusion exists.
 
Another thing, Mary was praised by Gabriel as being found in favor with God…if she had any sin and could not be reconciled to Him without His Son’s sacrifice, how could she have favor with Him?

She couldn’t be “full of grace” and have sin simultaneously. It’s impossible. Two objects and/or definitions cannot occupy the same space.

Sin and God’s grace cannot occupy Mary. She was either a born sinner or she was (as was the Ark of the originial covenant) free of all blemish.

Unless you’re implying that God would allow His Son to pass through a sinful womb.

Besides, Jesus put it best when He said that nothing good can come out of anything that is bad. If He is good, where He came from had to be good as well.

Remember, Jesus told us to judge a tree by it’s fruit, right? A good tree produces a good fruit, a rotten tree produces a rotten fruit and cannot produce a good fruit.

Which is Jesus to you?
A good fruit or a rotten fruit?

Luke 1:42
“…Blessed art thou among women,
and blessed is the fruit of thy womb.”
 
dailymass said:
I need some help reconciling Romans 3:23 “all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God” and the Immaculate Conception.

Mary was conceived without original sin - how does that jive with “all have sinned”?

This is a standard Fundamentalist Bible verse - I need some help defending the faith.

God Bless you during the Christmas Octave!
Click to expand...
Scripture proves that NOT every human being has sinned. Luke Chapter One says of Zechariah and Elizabeth (John the Baptist’s parents) “And they were both righteous before God, walking in all the commandments and ordinances of the Lord, blamelessly,” Luke 1:6.

Obviously, then, not “all” have sinned in the sense of every individual human being. Romans is stating that all, meaning all people, both Jew and gentile, have sinned. Not each individual person.
 
As defined by the Holy Catholic Church, Mary, through a singular privelege, was kept free from the stain of sin. Mary DID need to be saved, as she is only human; however, God, in His infinite mercy, gave her the gift of salvation at the time of her conception. Through perfect and full grace, Mary chose never to sin during her life.

By the way, for those “non-Catholics” who tout how they only follow Sacred Scripture, why aren’t you following LK 1:48, where Mary proclaims through the power of the Holy Spirit, “behold, from henceforth all generations shall call me blessed.”? Are you calling Mary blessed?
 
Old_Scholar said:
In addition, Mary called Jesus her “Saviour.”
Click to expand...
Yes, exactly, Jesus had already saved Mary from the moment of her conception.

Catholics don’t think that Mary “didn’t need a savior.” Just the opposite – we believe Jesus saved Mary in a special way, from the moment of conception. If any has ever had reason to call Jesus “Savior,” it is Mary, precisely BECAUSE Jesus saved her at the moment of her conception.
 
According to rigid literal interpretation of Romans 3:23, it must include Adam and Eve who must have been created with sin. We know this is not true. The senile, the mentally handicapped,must be “all” well. This is absurd.

There are other instances where “all” does not mean “every single one.”

1 Cor. 15:22 - in Adam all (“pantes”) have died, and in Christ all (“pantes”) shall live. This proves that “all” does not mean “every single one.” This is because not all have died (such as Enoch and Elijah who were taken up to heaven), and not all will go to heaven (because Jesus said so).

Rom. 5:12 - Paul says that death spread to all (Greek “pantes”) men. Again, this proves that “all” does not mean “every single one” because death did not spread to all men (as we have seen with Enoch and Elijah).

Rom. 5:19 - here Paul says “many (not all) were made sinners.” Paul uses “polloi,” not “pantes.” Is Paul contradicting what he said in Rom. 3:23? Of course not. Paul means that all are subject to original sin, but not all reject God.

Rom. 3:10-11 - Protestants also use this verse to prove that all human beings are sinful and thus Mary must be sinful. But see Psalm 14 which is the basis of the verse.

Psalm 14 - this psalm does not teach that all humans are sinful. It only teaches that, among the wicked, all are sinful. The righteous continue to seek God.

Psalm 53:1-3 - “there is none that does good” expressly refers to those who have fallen away. Those who remain faithful do good, and Jesus calls such faithful people “good.”

Luke 1:47 - Mary calls God her Savior. Some Protestants use this to denigrate Mary. Why? Of course God is Mary’s Savior! She was freed from original sin in the womb (unlike us who are freed from sin outside of the womb), but needed a Savior as much as the rest of humanity. It’s wrong to place restrictions on God’s ability to apply the grace of the cross backwards in time, and by special intervention made Mary free from original sin from the moment she was conceived. That is why Mary calls God her savior, so it’s not a problem for Catholics, we don’t limit God.

“Mary a sinner” is a new concept, foriegn even to the reformers. It blasphemes the Incarnation because it means that God and sin can co-exist. It leads to Christological heresies and it is a doctrine of demons.

quotes taken from scripturecatholic.com/blessed_virgin_mary.html#the_bvm-IX
 
dailymass said:
As defined by the Holy Catholic Church, Mary, through a singular privelege, was kept free from the stain of sin. Mary DID need to be saved, as she is only human; however, God, in His infinite mercy, gave her the gift of salvation at the time of her conception. Through perfect and full grace, Mary chose never to sin during her life.

By the way, for those “non-Catholics” who tout how they only follow Sacred Scripture, why aren’t you following LK 1:48, where Mary proclaims through the power of the Holy Spirit, “behold, from henceforth all generations shall call me blessed.”? Are you calling Mary blessed?
Click to expand...
Supposedly, God forms us in the womb
(or the act of the quickening when we are born).

Since God formed Mary and Mary was predestined to bear Christ, wouldn’t He have formed her without sin?

Why would He form her “with” sin to then undo the sin?

I’d say that He formed her perfect…even more so than Eve who was created from Adam, even more so than Adam. She was God’s most perfect creation…a perfect human being, obedient in every sense…incapable of sinning because she was made as those who are in Heaven are now; in perfect communion with the Creator.

Just my two cents.

Besides, again, if you were going to send your kid to school during an ice storm and had a choice between the safest school bus around and a motocycle, what would you choose?

The school bus of course.

So if would choose the best option to send your kid to school, how perfect would the vessel that God uses be to send His Son to school?

He would pick the absolute best manner of transportation.

On top of allllllll of that, every cell of DNA that Jesus had came from Mary (no man contributed anything to the formation of Jesus).

If her material (skin, flesh, hair, blood, etc…)
was in anyway corrupt,so would Jesus’ body be.

I love asking Sola Scripturist Anti-Marian Purityians this:

Show the scriptures that say that Mary sinned, that she had children, that she wasn’t conceived immaculately.

According to them, if it “aint’” in the Bible, it can’t be believed.
So, since those instances I just mentioned are “not” in scripture, they cannot be espoused as factual.

They are for all intensive purposes, mere theories. Conjecture.

Mary was as pure as the driven snow on a Convent’s roof!

:getholy:
 
dailymass said:
I need some help reconciling Romans 3:23 “all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God” and the Immaculate Conception.

Mary was conceived without original sin - how does that jive with “all have sinned”?

This is a standard Fundamentalist Bible verse - I need some help defending the faith.
Click to expand...
Just ask what sin a stillborn baby committed.
 
Old_Scholar said:
You won’t be able to reconcile it. It can’t be done. Scripture tells us “All” have sinned and it doesn’t exclude Mary.
Click to expand...
Then you should be able to tell us what sin a stillborn baby has committed.
 
VociMike said:
Then you should be able to tell us what sin a stillborn baby has committed.
Click to expand...
That’s when all the “exceptions” start coming out;

“Oh, God wouldn’t condemn a child to death!”

Oh this, oh that!

BUT!

God wouldn’t make sure that she who brought His Son into existance would be pure?

See, it’s ok for God to make exceptions when they want to believe it, but heaven forbid that they could believe that God would make an exception for His Son’s sake.

Again, would one send their kid to school in a filthy school bus or in a clean school bus if they had a choice?
 
By the way, if all have sinned and couldn’t be saved until Jesus death,hence, all that died remained dead, how then could Moses be seen with Jesus alive during the Transfiguration of Christ “beforre” Jesus could make the sacrifice that would raise the Saints in Matthew 27?

Moses is someone who was a sinner, yes, yet he is seen with someone who was known to have been assumpted to heaven…Elijah.

(When they try to say that Moses wasn’t in heaven, but Elijah was, that’s an open door for the whole Purgatory scene! LOL!)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top