Why doesn't the Bible say that Mary was sinless?

  • Thread starter Thread starter emeraldisle
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I’m still waiting for an answer, Lily.

Will you list all of the ECFs who were personally taught by the apostles, and provide specific sources stating which ECF(s) was taught by which apostle(s), please?
Ignatius of Antioch & Polycarp-
Clement of Rome seems to have known several of the apostle.

Linus seems to have known the apostles, but was martyred before he wrote anything.

Barnabas

Oh…and the Didache. Acknowledged as authentic Christian teachings from the ECFs.

Enjoy…
 
All of these things are not necessary for Andrew to be sinless. Maybe God made it possible for him to be born without sin but never told anyone. Or since he was evenutally going to be a disciiple-apostle of Christ he was born without sin. Or God kept him from sinning so that he could be an apostle.
Do you think this is really possible? Or just trying to make a point?
 
All of these things are not necessary for Andrew to be sinless. Maybe God made it possible for him to be born without sin but never told anyone. Or since he was evenutally going to be a disciiple-apostle of Christ he was born without sin. Or God kept him from sinning so that he could be an apostle.
Maybe. All things are possible with God, but, I think that there would be something substantiating this within the past 2,000 years.

Is emeraldisle going to come back to show me Mary, Mother of God, is human or is he not?
 
19 Now we know that whatever the law says, it says to those who are under the law, that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God. 20 Therefore by the deeds of the law no flesh will be justified in His sight, for by the law is the knowledge of sin. 21 But now the righteousness of God apart from the law is revealed, being witnessed by the Law and the Prophets, 22 even the righteousness of God, through faith in Jesus Christ, to all and on all who believe. For there is no difference; 23 for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God,
Rom 3:19-23

.
You are misapplying scripture. Truth can not contradict itself. But all of the following verses would contradict your assertion so by elementary theological logic your interpretation must be wrong by the preponderance of scripture that contradicts the context you attempt to misapply. Sola Scriptura again proves to be the best weapon to use against itself.

Rom. 3:23 - Some Protestants use this verse “all have sinned” in an attempt to prove that Mary was also with sin. But "all have sinned " only means that all are subject to original sin. Mary was spared from original sin by God, not herself. The popular analogy is God let us fall in the mud puddle, and cleaned us up afterward through baptism. In Mary’s case, God did not let her enter the mud puddle.

Rom. 3:23 - “all have sinned” also refers only to those able to commit sin. This is not everyone. For example, infants, the retarded, and the senile cannot sin.

Rom. 3:23 - finally, “all have sinned,” but Jesus must be an exception to this rule. This means that Mary can be an exception as well. Note that the Greek word for all is “pantes.”

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 (“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 18:19 - Jesus says, “No one is good but God alone.” But then in Matt. 12:35, Jesus also says “The good man out of his good treasure…” So Jesus says no one is good but God, and then calls another person good.

Rom. 9:11 - God distinguished between Jacob and Esau in the womb, before they sinned. Mary was also distinguished from the rest of humanity in the womb by being spared by God from original sin.

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.

Luke 1:48 - Mary calls herself lowly. But any creature is lowly compared to God. For example, in Matt. 11:29, even Jesus says He is lowly in heart. Lowliness is a sign of humility, which is the greatest virtue of holiness, because it allows us to empty ourselves and receive the grace of God to change our sinful lives.

More here: Misunderstanding about Romans 3:23 (“All have sinned”)

James
 
However Gods written Word does not tell us that Mary was sinless. I believe what God says in His written Word!
Once again, I’m confused by the logic that you are using.
  1. God’s written word (The Bible) tells us that Jesus was sinless
  2. You belive what God says in his written Word! [sic]
… where does it say in God’s written word that MARY had sin?😊

My contention is that it DOESN’T say that Mary had sin any more than it DOES say that Mary was sinless. (Yes, all are of sin, but Mary was full of grace. Which came first? Oh, yeah: Mary was full of grace)

You want to think that Mary had sin.

You still haven’t posted what difference it makes, why you want Mary to have sinned, or what sin(s) you want Mary to have committed.:mad:

Either you want to have a discussion, or you want to spit into a fan. I’m actually enjoying showing the lack of premise in your ‘arguments’, because your repeated attempts to attack the Mother of my God further support WHY the Lord is my God, and how important it is that we worship Him in every way possible.
 
All of these things are not necessary for Andrew to be sinless. Maybe God made it possible for him to be born without sin but never told anyone. Or since he was evenutally going to be a disciiple-apostle of Christ he was born without sin. Or God kept him from sinning so that he could be an apostle.
On second thoughts we ARE given a personal sin of Andrew’s in scripture - he ran away at Jesus’ arrest. That rules out all the apostles except John, but arguably John’s mistaken worship of the angel in Revelation was a sin, so you can’t exonerate any of the Apostles really.

Now I never said these things were necessary for Mary to be sinless.

But taken altogether, along with things such as

a) the commandment to ‘honour thy mother and father’
b) the position of the mother of the King in ancient Israel along with its assertions that Jesus was a King of the line of David

one can reasonably (if not with absolute certainty) conclude that Mary would’ve received every honour that it was within Christ’s power to bestow upon her.

Since his capabilities included the authority to cleanse her of Original Sin at the earliest possible moment of her life, and to preserve her throughout life from all sin, one can also reasonably if not certainly conclude that He did these things for her.
 
40.png
CentralFLJames:
the word “all” in Rom 3:23 in Greek is pantes. It is the same word used in 1 Cor 15:22 where Paul says “all” have died. But we know that Enoch and Elijah did not die; they were assumed into heaven. This means that when Paul says “all” (pantes), he does not mean every single one. In fact, Paul says in Rom 5:19 that “many” were made sinners. This means that when Paul says “all” in regard to sinners, he really means “many.”
Forgive me, James, but you’re way off-base here.

God told Adam in the garden that in the day that he ate of the fruit, he would surely die.

And yet, Adam didn’t die when ate of the fruit—at least, not physically.

The death spoken of by both God, and Paul, is “spiritual death.”

Not that the spirit is without life, but that it is dead in sin to things of God (cf Eph 2:1, 5; Col 2:13).

God graciously forebears the wages of sin, which is physical death, for some men, and in the case of Enoch, and Elijah, He didn’t pay the wage that they had earned.

Nevertheless, eventually, Adam did die physically:**Genesis 5:5

So all the days that Adam lived were nine hundred and thirty years,
and he died.**With respect to Rom 5:19, Paul is more than likely using “many” for the sake of parallelism in the passage.

From Rom 3 forward, Paul makes no bones about the fact that all of have sinned.

Additionally, pas (not pantes), is context driven, and its meaning is either, “all without exception,” or “all without distinction.” A careful reading of the preceding chapters, as well sections of the OT, makes it clear that Paul employs both meanings; namely, all men, without distinction, sin (cf Rom 3:9, 23).
 
I didn’t ask for an “off the top of my head” answer; I asked for specifics, and sources.

You are unwilling to do that; that’s fine.

I have no idea what you’re talking; you’re not addressing anything specific.
Matthew 14:1-12, Mark 6:14-29, Luke 9:7-9 and tradition requires you first dance like Salome before you get a shot at the head on a silver platter. 😛

Not up to the dance or the perspiration of your own homework?

James
 
I’m addressing the fact that you appear to think, based on your request for lists of those whom the Apostles taught directly, that only they, or primarily they, are worthy of belief and that they alone, or primarily they, successfully preserved Apostolic teaching.
That’s not why I asked for a list; often others have made that claim, and when asked for a list, list ECFs who were too old to have been taught the apostles; I was just curious who you would list.
 
Matthew 14:1-12, Mark 6:14-29, Luke 9:7-9 and tradition requires you first dance like Salome before you get a shot at the head on a silver platter. 😛

Not up to the dance or the perspiration of your own homework?

James
Already done. 🙂
 
The issue does not seem to be Mary’s sinlessness, but whether Scripture or Scripture and Sacred Tradition is the authoritative.
In Acts 15, there was a doctrinal problem and so a Council of the Church was called (sounding familian).
The Church founded by Christ did NOT depend on a proof text to decide the issue they depended on the holy Spirit and what seemed best to the leaders (bishops) of the Church.
 
That’s not why I asked for a list; often others have made that claim, and when asked for a list, list ECFs who were too old to have been taught the apostles; I was just curious who you would list.
Aah, ok - humble apologies then :tiphat:

Pious legend (for clarity’s sake I won’t call it tradition 🙂 ) is that Ignatius was the child Christ drew to him when he said ‘whoever welcomes one of these little children in my name welcomes me’.
 
Aah, ok - humble apologies then :tiphat:

Pious legend (for clarity’s sake I won’t call it tradition 🙂 ) is that Ignatius was the child Christ drew to him when he said ‘whoever welcomes one of these little children in my name welcomes me’.
:tiphat:
 
Forgive me, James, but you’re way off-base here.

God told Adam in the garden that in the day that he ate of the fruit, he would surely die.

And yet, Adam didn’t die when ate of the fruit—at least, not physically.

The death spoken of by both God, and Paul, is “spiritual death.”

Not that the spirit is without life, but that it is dead in sin to things of God (cf Eph 2:1, 5; Col 2:13).

God graciously forebears the wages of sin, which is physical death, for some men, and in the case of Enoch, and Elijah, He didn’t pay the wage that they had earned.

Nevertheless, eventually, Adam did die physically:Genesis 5:5

So all the days that Adam lived were nine hundred and thirty years,
and he died.With respect to Rom 5:19, Paul is more than likely using “many” for the sake of parallelism in the passage.

From Rom 3 forward, Paul makes no bones about the fact that all of have sinned.

Additionally, pas (not pantes), is context driven, and its meaning is either, “all without exception,” or “all without distinction.” A careful reading of the preceding chapters, as well sections of the OT, makes it clear that Paul employs both meanings; namely, all men, without distinction, sin (cf Rom 3:9, 23).
My dear Sandusky - you do not understand scripture nor theology as much as you think you do.

Jesus was a man - a very special man who was also divine.

“My God my God why have you forsaken me”, the opening phrase to Psalm 22 was uttered by Jesus on the Cross to define death. Separation from God is death.

This makes your interpretation Dead On Arrival since it condemns Adam to Hell and makes God’s mission too late to redeem all of humanity and make good on the promise that ALL are called to salvation. It also makes Jesus a sinner and utterly forsaken by God for ALL time; not to mention destroys the unity of the Trinity which is impossible.

James
 
Where does it say Mary was sinless?

.
It has been pointed out to you before.

If Mary was a sinful woman, she would not be full of grace, and it would not say that generations to come would call her blessed.

When we sin, we are not in the state of grace.
 
40.png
CentralFLJames:
My dear Sandusky - you do not understand scripture nor theology as much as you think you do.

Jesus was a man - a very special man who was also divine.

“My God my God why have you forsaken me”, the opening phrase to Psalm 22 was uttered by Jesus on the Cross to define death. Separation from God is death.

This makes your interpretation Dead On Arrival since it condemns Adam to Hell and makes God’s mission too late to redeem all of humanity and make good on the promise that ALL are called to salvation. It also makes Jesus a sinner and utterly forsaken by God for ALL time; not to mention destroys the unity of the Trinity which is impossible.
Sorry, James; I’m not tracking with you on this.

I’m uncertain what your statements have to do with the quote from me that you’ve referenced.

You’ll have to explain more, please.
 
All of these things are not necessary for Andrew to be sinless. Maybe God made it possible for him to be born without sin but never told anyone. Or since he was evenutally going to be a disciiple-apostle of Christ he was born without sin. Or God kept him from sinning so that he could be an apostle.
Maybe so, but it matters to Catholics that all these other things are true about Mary. So, what if God did keep him from sinning (which is not what the Catholic Church teaches about Mary) for the sake of discussion. Why would such a belief be so bothersome? You seem to be really hung up on the Marian doctrines, and it is very odd. If you reject them, how is it that you cannot go your way in peace? Why does the fact that others believe them unsettle you so much? Have you considered the possible source of your angst?
 
I want to know how someone whose soul is blackened by sin, can magnify the lord…
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top