Sinless Mary

[JoeyWarren]

Hopefully you have a Catholic lexicon on this verse that says otherwise. Then we can look at the differences

**I have the Roman Catholic Church and it’s Apologists and it’s Early Church Fathers to serve as a lexicon. **

---

What do you have?

---

**And mostly I have studied the ancient Greek for 5 years running. **

---

**Studing Greek under the tutelage of an Atheist. I have found an Atheist will be more truthful in the translation of Conjugated Greek words since they don’t have an axe to grind. **

 

[justasking4]

PerryJ;4180645]
Originally Posted by justasking4
Would you agree that even though we don’t know the nature of the “overshadowing by the HS” we do know that no human male sperm of any man was required?

PerryJ;
For one that supposedly believes in Sola Scriptura you believe in a lot of stuff not in the Bible.

This is true. There are many many things the Scriptures don’t address specifically. I wish they did but they don’t.

Now you know exactly how Christ was begotten?

Only that Mary was overshadowed by the HS which resulted in the conception of the Lord Jesus.

 

[justasking4]

JoeyWarren;4180682
justasking4
Hopefully you have a Catholic lexicon on this verse that says otherwise. Then we can look at the differences
JoeyWarren
I have the Roman Catholic Church and it’s Apologists and it’s Early Church Fathers to serve as a lexicon.

The church fathers are not the same as a Greek lexicon. 2 different things.

What do you have?

There are a lot of excellent Greek lexicons and related sources on the Protestant side that are excellent in helping to understand the Scriptures.

And mostly I have studied the ancient Greek for 5 years running

Studing Greek under the tutelage of an Atheist. I have found an Atheist will be more truthful in the translation of Conjugated Greek words since they don’t have an axe to grind.

Do you think your leaders would have a problem with you being under the tutelage of an Atheist?

Can you read the NT in Greek?

 

[JoeyWarren]

The church fathers are not the same as a Greek lexicon. 2 different things.

Not so. Who better to use a source then those that wrote in the Ancient Greek and had a better understanding of the Early Church than a Protestant Crack Pot?

There are a lot of excellent Greek lexicons and related sources on the Protestant side that are excellent in helping to understand the Scriptures.

I have most, and they are tainted by presuppositions and mythconceptions. The Scholarly integrity is lost because of preconcieved notions and ideas.

Do you think your leaders would have a problem with you being under the tutelage of an Atheist?

Why would they? Would your leaders object to you studying Greek from an unbiased Atheist?

Can you read the NT in Greek?

** Half way there. The conjugations of the Ancient Greek make English Conjugations look like childsplay. Which is why I reject any notion that Jesus in his daily walk and talk with his chosen conversed in Greek. **

---

**It’s just like the Mexicans here. When together they talk in Spanish. Why would a Mexican converse daily with his cohorts in English? It’s a matter of plain simple logic and reasoning. **

---

---

---

 

[justasking4]

JoeyWarren;4181071]**

There are a lot of excellent Greek lexicons and related sources on the Protestant side that are excellent in helping to understand the Scriptures.
I have most, and they are tainted by presuppositions and mythconceptions. The Scholarly integrity is lost because of preconcieved notions and ideas.
JoeyWarren**
Would you happen to have any names of Protestant scholars who have lost their Scholarly integrity because of preconcieved notions and ideas?

Are you saying that in your research you have not found any Catholic scholars who have done any Greek word studies on the NT?

Quote:
Do you think your leaders would have a problem with you being under the tutelage of an Atheist?
Why would they?

There is a danger of picking up the atheist’ beliefs if you are not careful.

Would your leaders object to you studying Greek from an unbiased Atheist?

No one is unbiased and Christians just as Catholic teachers can also teach Greek if they are qualified to do so.
What do you think the Atheist view is of what you believe is? Why doesn’t he-she believe in God? Have you spoken with him-her about this?
Do you think his-her eternal soul is at risk if they persist in their unbelief?

 

[JoeyWarren]

Would you happen to have any names of Protestant scholars who have lost their Scholarly integrity because of preconcieved notions and ideas?

**The problem is that I can’t name any that have retained they Scholarly integrity. **

 

[JoeyWarren]

Are you saying that in your research you have not found any Catholic scholars who have done any Greek word studies on the NT?

**Those are few and far between for those that have a done an exhaustive study and published it. Greek Biblical Lexicons lie within the realm of Protestantism in which a million or so denominations have arisen each with an axe to grind. **

 

[JoeyWarren]

There is a danger of picking up the atheist’ beliefs if you are not careful.

Only for the weak of mind. My mind is far more superior then the average Joe. Be mindful that I also was an Atheist at a point in time in my life. The weak get preyed upon by the likes of Oral Roberts, Jimmy Swaggert, Jim Bakker, Jim Jones, David Koresh, Benny Hinn, Ernest Angsley, Joel Osteen, etc, etc, etc…you get my point?

 

[JoeyWarren]

No one is unbiased and Christians just as Catholic teachers can also teach Greek if they are qualified to do so.

**No one is completely unbiased, that much is true. **

A Catholic Professor of course will have a Catholic Slant.

A Protestant Professor of course will have a Protestant Slant.

An Atheist Professor of will have a non-Christian Slant.

**That is more acceptable when one want’s to study Ancient Koine Greek. **

---

**Each new word I present to the Professor will render a more truthful translation. **

---

**All 3 may be qualified to teach Greek, that is true. But being qualified does not neccessary mean you will teach it correctly. **

---

**Political Science is a good example of this as well. A Democrat teachings will be different from a Republicans to the point that one wonders what are the qualifications to teach Political Science. **

---

Last Point: On the Whole, an Atheist Professor’s translation of Greek to English is more on par with Catholicism then with Protestantism.

---

I **found this most evident in the two words that use the root Charito in they conjugations which render Kecharitomene and Encharitosen. **

---

**And more so in the use of the words Pas, Hapas, and Holos which are all used to render the english word “ALL” **

---

**There is a specific reason each Bilbical author chose to use a different word for all. **

---

**PAS means “generally all” but not each and every single person. At least this much Strong and his cohorts got right. **

---

HAPAS (a conjugation of Pas) means “All without Exception”.

---

**HOLOS means “on the whole” which is a lesser all then PAS. **

---

**Saint Paul never uses the word HAPAS in all those verses that uses “ALL” that You and other Protestants tend to use to try and prove that Mary sinned. **

---

It’s in the Greek JustAsking4.

---

My Motto: If it aint the Greek, It aint the Bible.

 

[JoeyWarren]

Why doesn’t he-she believe in God? Have you spoken with him-her about this?

**Because at face value the Bible is nothing but a book of mythology to a person that has never experienced Church. Most Atheists can’t get past Genesis with all of it’s Hocus Pocus Bunk. **

---

**And for those Atheists that get past Genesis, they can’t reconcile the conflicting issue that Modern Christians portray God as loving yet in his OT he exhibits less than Godly traits. God is vengeful. God is angry. God sends his higher creations to do his Killing. **

---

Atheists can’t reconcile a Loving God that allows a 40 year old man to rape a 4 year old Girl.

---

**And for those Athiests that can get past the OT, the NT God is a contradiction of the OT God. **

---

And for those that can get to Revelations: They can’t reconcile a Loving God that will kill 3/4 of the worlds population.

---

**God can not be proven to exist. It takes a blind leap of conviction to believe in an Invisible God that has yet to make his appearance known. **
**
They can’t believe in God that people worship when these same people makes millions and millions on Rapture/Tributation scare tactics.

**The Salem Witch Trials presents another obstacle. Christians created tests that were a no-win scenario for the accused of being a witch. **

**Pedophile Catholic Priests and Pedophile Protestant Pastors present another obstacle. **

**There are a multitude of reasons why Atheists don’t believe in a higher power. ****

---

**Yes I have spoken with them about this. You can lead a horse to water, but you can’t make it drink it. **

---

Have you talked with an Atheist about his destiny of Hell?

---

---

---

---

---

---

 

[JoeyWarren]

Do you think his-her eternal soul is at risk if they persist in their unbelief?

If you are so concerned about the eternal soul of an Atheist, then why are you here at Catholic Answers trying to prove Catholics are wrong , when what you should be doing in your spare time is trying to convincing Atheists of their own folly elsewhere?

---

Examine your own Conscience for once instead of ours.

 

[guanophore]

How do supporters of the sinless of Mary deal with Romans 5:12 which says the following:
Therefore, just as through one man sin entered into the world, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men, because all sinned—

Where in Scripture does it say this does not apply to Mary specifically?

This passage is about Original sin, not personal sin.

Original sin is what Jesus saved Mary from.

 

[guanophore]

The problem with using parrallels like this is that they still fail to demonstrate that it was fitting for her to be without sin. For example no writer of the NT ever says she was without sin because she was the mother of Christ. They don’t even hint at such a thing.

They don’t fail us, ja4. I think there is something wrong with your “fitting” meter.

We read the NT differently, that is why we see it, and you don’t.

. She inherited the sin of Adam through her parents.

No

Nothing to refute. Mary did not need to be sinless to be carry Christ in her womb.

Actutally, this is a very relevant point. You are correct, that she did not need to be sinless to carry Christ in her womb. You have actually hit upon one of the main generative forces for the development of this doctrine. One of the early heresies was that Mary just “carried Christ in her womb”, and that he was not fully human. This heresy denied the Apostolic teaching that Jesus was born of a woman - flesh of her flesh. As the Church fought this heresy it was clear that Jesus could not take any human flesh tainted by sin.

 

[Roy5]

MATTHEW 19:17

 I realize that there are several translations of this verse, but they all suggest that there is only one who is good, and that is God.

 Doesn't that suggest that all except Christ are sinners, including Mary?

 

[justasking4]

MATTHEW 19:17

 I realize that there are several translations of this verse, but they all suggest that there is only one who is good, and that is God.

 Doesn't that suggest that all except Christ are sinners, including Mary?

Excellent point.

 

[justasking4]

If you are so concerned about the eternal soul of an Atheist, then why are you here at Catholic Answers trying to prove Catholics are wrong , when what you should be doing in your spare time is trying to convincing Atheists of their own folly elsewhere?

---

Examine your own Conscience for once instead of ours.

i’ve made a lot friends and most of the catholics i know here are downright passionate about what they believe. Some are almost nice… View attachment 4088 and thats why i like to discuss with them.

As for the atheists i can’t think of any to talk to right now.

 

[Good_Fella]

MATTHEW 19:17

 I realize that there are several translations of this verse, but they all suggest that there is only one who is good, and that is God.

 Doesn't that suggest that all except Christ are sinners, including Mary?

Jesus is redirecting the term “good” from himself as the Son of Man to God as being the source of all goodness. Both Jesus and Mary received their goodness or state of sinlessness by the grace of God. Mary’s soul was sanctified by God’s grace the moment God fashioned it at her conception. Jesus was sanctified by his substantial grace of union with the Father upon the incarnation. Meanwhile Mary heard the word of God and kept it (Lk 11:28). She refrained from committing personal sins by fully cooperating with God’s actual helping grace throughout her life.

“Chaire kecharitomene.”
Luke 1, 28

PAX

 

[PerryJ]

MATTHEW 19:17

 I realize that there are several translations of this verse, but they all suggest that there is only one who is good, and that is God.

 Doesn't that suggest that all except Christ are sinners, including Mary?

Later in Matthew same chapter it is stated Jesus looked at them and said, “For human beings this is impossible, but for God all things are possible.”

Doesn’t this seem to say God could do it if he wanted to?

This also misses the point. Mary was proactively saved from original sin. Christ is still the one that is good.

Everyone kept saying that Catholics worship Mary and are wrong etc. I haven’t seen one serious challenge to my post. If we are so wrong would somone put a post together that challenges the point. If we are so far away from the Bible it should be easy. The evidence for Mary being sinless is so far much stronger for then against.

 

[justasking4]

PerryJ;4183013]Later in Matthew same chapter it is stated Jesus looked at them and said, “For human beings this is impossible, but for God all things are possible.”

Doesn’t this seem to say God could do it if he wanted to?

If you want to say this then you are going to have show that He did do it for Mary.

This also misses the point. Mary was proactively saved from original sin. Christ is still the one that is good.

Where do the Scriptures say Mary was “proactively saved” from original sin?

Everyone kept saying that Catholics worship Mary and are wrong etc. I haven’t seen one serious challenge to my post. If we are so wrong would somone put a post together that challenges the point. If we are so far away from the Bible it should be easy.

How would you define worship? What are elements of worship?

The evidence for Mary being sinless is so far much stronger for then against.

I don’t know how you can say this? Here is the evidence that she was a sinner like all of us:

1. born of human parents who were sinners and inherits their nature
2. Luke 1:47-- acknowledges God as her Savior. She recognizes herself as a sinner and need of a Savior.
3. Romans 3:23, 5:12-- all have sinned
4. Romans 6:23-- wages of sin is death and Mary died

 

[PerryJ]

If you want to say this then you are going to have show that He did do it for Mary.

Where do the Scriptures say Mary was “proactively saved” from original sin?

How would you define worship? What are elements of worship?

I don’t know how you can say this? Here is the evidence that she was a sinner like all of us:

1. born of human parents who were sinners and inherits their nature
2. Luke 1:47-- acknowledges God as her Savior. She recognizes herself as a sinner and need of a Savior.
3. Romans 3:23, 5:12-- all have sinned
4. Romans 6:23-- wages of sin is death and Mary died

The first three have already been refuted. Restating them as if they haven’t won’t work.

Show me proof that Mary died. Since you believe in SS do it via the Bible.