Was Mary ever dead in sins?

[Henning]

2 Corinthians 5:14 “For the love of Christ impels us, once we have come to the conviction that one died for all; therefore, all have died.”

Mary was part of the ‘all’ that Jesus died for, therefore she was part of the ‘all’ that ‘have died’.

"all have died "…dead in what respect ?

Eph 2:1 “You were dead in your transgressions and sins.”
Eph 2:5 “Even when we were dead in our transgressions…”
Col 2:13 “And even when you were dead in transgressions …”

Therefore Mary was part of the ‘all’ that was dead in their transgressions and sins. But Mary is supposed to be sinless. Where’d I go wrong in this line of thought ?

 

[Todd_Easton]

2 Corinthians 5:14 “For the love of Christ impels us, once we have come to the conviction that one died for all; therefore, all have died.”

Mary was part of the ‘all’ that Jesus died for, therefore she was part of the ‘all’ that ‘have died’.

"all have died "…dead in what respect ?

In this place, when St. Paul says, “all have died,” he seems to mean, “all have died to sin, been freed from sin, and reconciled to God.” See Romans 6:3-11.

Eph 2:1 “You were dead in your transgressions and sins.”
Eph 2:5 “Even when we were dead in our transgressions…”
Col 2:13 “And even when you were dead in transgressions …”

These verses are concerned with personal sins. You have assumed that the words “you” and “we” are applicable to all humanity, without exception. This is a false assumption. For instance, young children who have not reached the age of reason and some mentally disabled persons who do not have the use of reason are incapable of committing personal sins. Mary also did not commit personal sin.

Therefore Mary was part of the ‘all’ that was dead in their transgressions and sins. But Mary is supposed to be sinless. Where’d I go wrong in this line of thought ?

Mary was not part of those that were dead in their transgressions and sins but she was, from the very moment of her conception, part of the ‘all’ who were dead to sin, freed from sin and reconciled to God by the death of Christ.

 

[Henning]

In this place, when St. Paul says, “all have died,” he seems to mean, “all have died to sin, been freed from sin, and reconciled to God.” See Romans 6:3-11.

But have all died to sin? What about that part of humanity (eg satanists) who are alive to sin. I don’t think anybody teaches that all, including unbelievers, have been freed from sin and reconciled to God.

And if all are dead to sin as in Rom 6:11,
“Consequently, you too must think of yourselves as (being) dead to sin and living for God in Christ Jesus.”

Wouldn’t that mean that all are to think of themselves living for God in Christ Jesus (can probably count the satanists out on that one). It seems as if it’s got to be ‘dead in sin’…no?

 

[Todd_Easton]

But have all died to sin? What about that part of humanity (eg satanists) who are alive to sin. I don’t think anybody teaches that all, including unbelievers, have been freed from sin and reconciled to God.

And if all are dead to sin as in Rom 6:11,
“Consequently, you too must think of yourselves as (being) dead to sin and living for God in Christ Jesus.”

Wouldn’t that mean that all are to think of themselves living for God in Christ Jesus (can probably count the satanists out on that one). It seems as if it’s got to be ‘dead in sin’…no?

In Romans 6:7, St. Paul says, “… he who has died is freed from sin.” So, when St. Paul says, “one died for all; therefore, all have died,” he means that ‘Christ died for all; therefore, all have been freed from sin (and reconciled to God), potentially.’ The fact that some, like the satanists you mention, do not choose to actually participate in this reconciliation won by the death of Christ, by uniting themselves with Christ through baptism, does not diminish its universal character.

Your interpretation that ‘Christ died for all; therefore all are still dead in their sins and transgressions’ is hardly good news.

 

[Henning]

Your interpretation that ‘Christ died for all; therefore all are still dead in their sins and transgressions’ is hardly good news.

Analogy to the way I read “one died for all; therefore, all have died”: ‘I wrote this post therefore I turned on my computer’. Which would mean in time that I turned on the computer to begin with and then wrote the post, or “all had died/were dead in sin to begin with then Christ died for all”

The all who Christ died for has to be the same set of all that were dead in sins before Christ died for them since they’re in the same verse. So that if Mary was part of the all that Christ died for therefore Mary and everyone else was dead in sin to begin with. Only thing is, this is not what the CC teaches, that’s why I’m a bit confused. Didn’t Mary have sins before she was conceived that Christ paid for? Thanks for your help BTW.

 

[LilyM]

Analogy to the way I read “one died for all; therefore, all have died”: ‘I wrote this post therefore I turned on my computer’. Which would mean in time that I turned on the computer to begin with and then wrote the post, or “all had died/were dead in sin to begin with then Christ died for all”

It’s not the definition of ‘therefore’ that is important - it’s the definition of ALL, whether it means ‘literally, without any exception whatsoever’, or whether it is more general.

Sometimes ‘all’ is used in the Bible in a more general sense that clearly allows for plenty of exceptions. ‘All Judea and all the region beyond the Jordan’, for example, turned out to hear John the Baptist preach in Matt 3:5. Not only that, the same ‘all’ were baptised by him.

Surely you don’t think that LITERALLY all of the hundreds of thousands of inhabitants of those regions did these things. Surely you must allow that there were at least some sick people who stayed at home, some workers who couldn’t take the time off, some mothers who couldn’t travel far enough to hear him, having young children.

And of those who DID hear John, you must allow that there were maybe babies who weren’t baptised. You must allow that there were at least some who heard but didn’t believe and thus weren’t baptised. Just as some who heard Jesus Himself didn’t believe, He being an even greater prophet than any other, including John.

By no definition of the term can we honestly say that ALL people, without exception, have died to sin. As has been pointed out, there are many that are still very much alive to sin and haven’t died to it.

 

[Truthstalker]

2 Corinthians 5:14 “For the love of Christ impels us, once we have come to the conviction that one died for all; therefore, all have died.”

Mary was part of the ‘all’ that Jesus died for, therefore she was part of the ‘all’ that ‘have died’.

"all have died "…dead in what respect ?

Eph 2:1 “You were dead in your transgressions and sins.”
Eph 2:5 “Even when we were dead in our transgressions…”
Col 2:13 “And even when you were dead in transgressions …”

Therefore Mary was part of the ‘all’ that was dead in their transgressions and sins. But Mary is supposed to be sinless. Where’d I go wrong in this line of thought ?

“Putting on my Catholic/Evangelical thinking cap”

You didn’t go wrong, you didn’t go far enough. All of creation, which included Mary, required redemption regardless of whether it had sinned, whether we are talking about immaculate virgins, thieves, gerbils or rocks. The first has no sin, the second sin, the latter two are without sin, one because it is below the level of moral culpability, the last because it cannot sin. Nonetheless we see that all of creation is considered, by God, as in need of a savior. “All” of creation, together, one lump sum, is condemned together.

Add one Savior. Some he may save by preventing from ever sinning, as with immaculate virgins, as a class, others after they have done the dirty deed, as with thieves. Rocks will get burned up with unquenchable fire when there is a new heaven and a new earth. That leaves us to wonder about the fate of gerbils, an unfathomable mystery.

 

[Ruthie]

Henning, you have pulled that verse out of context. (It’s so very hard not to do that! Especially if you’re an ex-Protestant, like me!) Paul explains himself further on:

For the love of Christ controls us, because we are convinced that one has died for all; therefore all have died. And he died for all, that those who live might live no longer for themselves but for him who for their sake died and was raised. From now on, therefore, we regard no one from a human point of view; even though we once regarded Christ from a human point of view, we regard him thus no longer. Therefore, if any one is in Christ, he is a new creation; the old has passed away, behold, the new has come. 2 Cor 5:14-17 (RSV)

It’s another of Paul’s plays on words. Jesus died for us - and was resurrected. Thus, our old self has died, and we now live for Him. We have died with the Crucifixion, and are now resurrected, made new.

Because we still have our old selves with us, thanks to Original Sin, we still fall, and rise again through repentance and the Sacrament of Reconciliation.

Mary was “made new” at the time of her conception. Through God’s grace, because of His plan, she did not have to wait for the Crucifixion to be “made new.” She was free of Original Sin, so she didn’t have to fall and rise again, over and over, like the rest of us.

I like to think that that is why we read so little about her in the Bible - because she had *perfect *humility.

I wish I did!

Ruthie

 

[nablaise]

When Adam and Eve died because of their sins, all died with him even though they were not born yet. But since these childreen were not born yet, there is a possibility however from the almighty power of God to save them before they are conceived. And this is what happened to Marry because of her special role as Mother of new Adam. Being new Eve, it was fitting that she be conceived immaculate as the first Eve…

God bless

 

[Henning]

It’s not the definition of ‘therefore’ that is important - it’s the definition of ALL, whether it means ‘literally, without any exception whatsoever’, or whether it is more general.

Sometimes ‘all’ is used in the Bible in a more general sense that clearly allows for plenty of exceptions. ‘All Judea and all the region beyond the Jordan’, for example, turned out to hear John the Baptist preach in Matt 3:5. Not only that, the same ‘all’ were baptised by him.

Surely you don’t think that LITERALLY all of the hundreds of thousands of inhabitants of those regions did these things. Surely you must allow that there were at least some sick people who stayed at home, some workers who couldn’t take the time off, some mothers who couldn’t travel far enough to hear him, having young children.

And of those who DID hear John, you must allow that there were maybe babies who weren’t baptised. You must allow that there were at least some who heard but didn’t believe and thus weren’t baptised. Just as some who heard Jesus Himself didn’t believe, He being an even greater prophet than any other, including John.

I agree with this, but…
in the context of “if one died for all, then all were dead”, if the first all comprises all humanity (does CC teach Christ died for all humanity or some kind of limited atonement?) then the second one should equally be all humanity. Why would the first all be extended to all humanity while the second all gets limited?

By no definition of the term can we honestly say that ALL people, without exception, have died to sin. As has been pointed out, there are many that are still very much alive to sin and haven’t died to it.

I agree not all have died to sin, but the verse seems to say to me all were dead in sin. So that someone that is dead in sin has not yet died to sin.

 

[Henning]

That leaves us to wonder about the fate of gerbils, an unfathomable mystery.

Aah…they’re like the sparrows…the Father will take care of them

 

[Todd_Easton]

Analogy to the way I read “one died for all; therefore, all have died”: ‘I wrote this post therefore I turned on my computer’. Which would mean in time that I turned on the computer to begin with and then wrote the post, or “all had died/were dead in sin to begin with then Christ died for all”

Looking at other English translations might help us to understand 2 Cor 5:14 better.

Young’s Literal Translation:
that if one for all died, then the whole died,

Modern King James Version:
that if One died for all, then all died