Why didn't Mary oppose the sin offering after birth?

[EndTimes]

I think this is an unhealthy understanding of what Jesus did. I don’t think he “pushed limits.” He explained & taught a deeper truth.

Agreed and more.
Jesus fulfilled the Mosaic Law…
His Teachings bring Perfection to what was…
Now in the New Covenant - Salvation finally comes through FAITH…
Whereby, That Opens the Door to the Spirit of God.

 

[Elizabeth3]

His logic is that it was called a sin under the old testament laws (like many things we no longer consider sins). And since Mary was under those laws at the time she gave birth, she sinned. I can’t find any evidence to refute that logic since the passage itself says a “sin offering” for “her atonement”.

Here’s a link to Baker’s Evangelical Dictionary of Biblical Theology (so not a Catholic source that he can say it’s only a Catholic interpretation).

“Other specific situations that occurred throughout the year would also require a sin offering (e.g., the cleansing of the woman after childbirth, Lev 12:6-8 ; the cleansing of irregular unclean discharges, Leviticus 15:15 Leviticus 15:30 ; in our age the term “sin offering” could be construed to mean that this offering focused on the problem of moral and social sin. In the Old Testament such sins were included as part of the purpose for sin offerings, but the sin offering could also be brought for physical impurities that had nothing to do with moral failure ).”

Offerings and Sacrifices - Bible Meaning & Definition - Baker's Dictionary

Learn what Offerings and Sacrifices means and it's Biblical definition including verses and verse references on the topic of Offerings and Sacrifices using Bakers Evangelical Dictionary of Biblical Theology Online.

www.biblestudytools.com

Another source (just a basic encyclopedia entry) also explains this

" Ritual impurity arises from physical substances and states associated with procreation and death, not in themselves sinful. Ritual impurities are in general permitted (if not unavoidable or obligatory) and in this they can be distinguished from moral impurities, which arise from prohibited acts. Both types of impurity are denoted by Hebrew terms of defilement (forms of tame) but context and associated terms indicate that different kinds of impurity are intended."

“Many scholars have noted that the physical substances and states labeled impure, and thus deemed to be anathema to God, are associated with death and procreation. The God of the Hebrew Bible does not die and does not have sexual relations. These are characteristic of humans. To be eligible to approach the sanctuary, God’s residence among the Israelites, humans must separate from that which makes them least God-like: death and procreation. The ritual purity laws requiring separation from sources of impurity are thus essential to the frequent priestly exhortation to be like God ( imitatio dei ) and to strive for holiness.”

https://www.encyclopedia.com/religi...anscripts-and-maps/purity-and-impurity-ritual

 

[Opal0427]

Thank you.
Yes, the two passages seem almost identical. Leviticus 12:6-8 and 15:28-30. I think this comparison validates that this wasn’t related to personal sin, since menstration is obviously involuntary.

This, along with all the answers here, closes the question for me - including that God himself ordered people to be fruitful and multiply and that having children has been shown a blessing throughout the old testament and even a form of sanctification in the New Testament for women.

Thank you everyone for your help!

 

[Justin_Mary]

Thinking, if Catholicism itself says truth can’t directly contradict scripture, but also teaches Mary is sinless… Then, he would need some evidence that the scripture i Leviticus isn’t blantantly saying that under Jewish law, Mary sinned simply by giving birth.

My personal opinion, proof texting the bible with Protestants & non-believers is futile. The understanding of scripture is tied directly to our tradition, scripture is born out of our tradition.

But your friend is equating “sin offering” with sin & it’s obviously not in this application as pointed out by others & the women’s monthly “sin offering.”

I bet it’s a translation issue. Aramaic to Greek to English.

He agrees we aren’t tied to that law anymore, but from His understanding, that freedom didn’t start until Jesus’s ministry or Pentacost.

He needs to read more St Paul

This is a serious logical argument I think to a non-Catholic interested in Catholicism. It makes Catholicism seem self-refuting to him. I can’t just say “because we said so”.

Why is your friend interested in Catholicism?

Is it truth? Is it authority? Is it Eucharist?

Understanding Marian dogma (to me) is a small thing compared to those three. Truth, authority, Eucharist will clear up any misunderstanding.

 

[Mary888]

This seems out of character and not neccisarily a trait of humility.

May I know what reasons do you base both assesments on? Do you know her character because you’ve met her? Do you know what is perfect humility because you’ve experienced it?
Virgin Mary was a devout Jewish woman, well actually girl. She was not looking to challenge anything, she has been criticised enough by modern women for being too soft and too meek and not the type of role model they desired (some say that model would Esther but I think Esther too is too obedient for today’s standards of a strong woman).
Virgin Mary was obbeying the rules of her religion. She was also a teen. She did not want her Son, Whom she knew Who He was to be in conflict with His own Temple.
Her pleading guilty for sin she did not commit - isn’t this also a bit like when her Son does not defend Himself in front of wrong accusations?

 

[EndTimes]

[Why didn’t Mary oppose the sin offering after birth?]

Mary’s the epitome of Faith and Obedience…

Ergo, that’s nothing to concern oneself with

_