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

[emeraldisle]

So, what you are indeed saying is that the translation issue IS important, since the rendering has a direct impact on the interpretation of the passage.

(Of course, that said, Luke 1:28 is simply one of the more important Biblical references to the Immaculate Conception. Even if it did not exist, sufficient evidence still exists for belief in the Immaculate Conception, both in and out of the Bible.)

Also what about the following info re IC;

There is no Scriptural proof for the IC;

The Catholic Encyclopedia, under the heading, Proof from Scripture, states, “No direct or categorical and stringent proof of the dogma can be brought forward from Scripture.”

 

[Rolltide]

God gave us His Scriptures, period. I don’t have a problem with accepting the fact that God was able to move men with regards to what the full cannon of Scriptures were to be. God is sovereign over all, He is well able to give us His complete Word and He has.

Don’t try to put God in a box and don’t believe in a small God. Also what God has given us in His Word is all we need for teaching/instruction in the Christian life. I believe God didn’t make a mistake by not mentioning in His infallible Word that Mary is sinless. He didn’t mention this because the real truth is that Mary isn’t sinless according to Gods written infallible Word.

Let me ask this then. The Bible wasn’t codified until almost 400 AD, and the first version in a single language didn’t appear until St. Jerome’s Vulgate. How precisely did people know which scriptures were inspired up until that time? We’re talking about the first 20% of Christianity here, which is a huge stretch of time. MANY people rejected books like 2 Peter and Revelation. Some included the Didache, the Shepherd of Hermas, and the Epistle of Barnabas. The Gnostics even included heretical books like the Gospel of Thomas. Have you ever studied the Councils of Carthage, Hippo, and Rome, and the declaration that the Pope made as to the final canon? It was the teaching authority of the Catholic Church that CREATED the compilation and decided which scriptures were inspired, under the guidance of the Holy Spirit. Surely the tradition that governed its compilation still hold now…

 

[Rolltide]

Also what about the following info re IC;

There is no Scriptural proof for the IC;

The Catholic Encyclopedia, under the heading, Proof from Scripture, states, “No direct or categorical and stringent proof of the dogma can be brought forward from Scripture.”

First, even if there weren’t a single reference to it in the Bible, that’s still ok, because Catholics acknowledge that there is more to belief than the Bible, although it is an important infallible tool. Second, although it is not CATEGORICAL or DIRECT proof, it is VERY STRONG evidence nonetheless that is confirmed by what the early church believed.

 

[water]

Why didn’t God say in His Word that Mary is sinless?

Surely if Mary was sinless God would have made sure that this fact was recorded in His Word.

Where is in the Bible does it says everything has to be spelled out and said all out in the Bible? In fact, St. John said there isn’t.

 

[emeraldisle]

Btw, Emeraldisle, although you believe that the Vulgate is in error, what are your opinions as to how the original Greek should be translated?

As a professor of history at a private college in the South, I’d be happy to try and get some genuine experts on ancient and Biblical Greek to tell you what they think…

Im very happy with the genuine experts who God enable to translate the following verse;

And having come in, the angel said to her, “Rejoice, highly favored one, the Lord is with you; blessed are you among women!”
Luke 1:28

 

[bookgirl32]

Where is in the Bible does it says everything has to be spelled out and said all out in the Bible? In fact, St. John said there isn’t.

If we could just get Sola Scriptura settled, all these other topics would be immediately settled as well. Sigh

 

[emeraldisle]

Let me ask this then. The Bible wasn’t codified until almost 400 AD, and the first version in a single language didn’t appear until St. Jerome’s Vulgate. How precisely did people know which scriptures were inspired up until that time? We’re talking about the first 20% of Christianity here, which is a huge stretch of time. MANY people rejected books like 2 Peter and Revelation. Some included the Didache, the Shepherd of Hermas, and the Epistle of Barnabas. The Gnostics even included heretical books like the Gospel of Thomas. Have you ever studied the Councils of Carthage, Hippo, and Rome, and the declaration that the Pope made as to the final canon? It was the teaching authority of the Catholic Church that CREATED the compilation and decided which scriptures were inspired, under the guidance of the Holy Spirit. Surely the tradition that governed its compilation still hold now…

The issue for me is do I believe God is able to give us His infallible written Word, yes I do and He has. How God did this is up to God, He is sovereign!

Need to beware of humanism by the back door.

 

[bookgirl32]

The issue for me is do I believe God is able to give us His infallible written Word, yes I do and He has. How God did this is up to God, He is sovereign!

Need to beware of humanism by the back door.

Um, we’re not fighting with you on this one. Why do Protestants always think that when we say simply that we don’t believe scripture to be God’s ONLY revelation, that they think we’re denying that it is altogether?

 

[emeraldisle]

If we could just get Sola Scriptura settled, all these other topics would be immediately settled as well. Sigh

If we could keep the Christian faith and its teachings to what God said in His Word then I wouldn’t be asking you to show me where is says in the Bible that Mary was sinless.

 

[bookgirl32]

If we could keep the Christian faith and its teachings to what God said in His Word then I wouldn’t be asking you to show me where is says in the Bible that Mary was sinless.

I’d like to ask you to show me, in God’s written word, where it says that God’s written word is His *only *revelation .

 

[Rolltide]

Emeraldisle, let me pose another question.

Let’s say I’m living around 275 AD, somewhere in the Roman empire. By what method am I going to learn about Christianity? My congregation, like others in the region, has access to the four gospels, although many in my area are familiar with Gnostic texts, even reading them at their services. I am highly familiar with the Didache, which amounts to an early form of Catechism, written around 80 AD, while some of the Apostles were still alive. I hold in reverence the letters of Clement and Ignatius of Antioch, and their stories of the Church are read alongside some of the Letters of Paul at services (not all of his letters have made it to my area). Revelation is rejected by my congregation, as is the Epistle of James.

Let’s say later on I move to a different part of the empire. In my new congregation, the Gospel of Thomas stands alongside the other gospels, as well as the Gospel of Philip. The Didache and Letters of Ignatius are not used, but Revelation is held in high regard. Most of Paul’s writings are completely absent. I’m confused about the message I’m receiving about the absence of a “Trinity”. In this congregation, Jesus is the adopted Son of God. There is no Holy Spirit at all. Fortunately, a local bishop has traveled to the region to preach about the errors taking place in this congregation. He informs the locals of the traditions that have been passed down to him from the apostles. He shows how other congregations have not followed them in their error, and urges them to change.

Now, since the Holy Scriptures are all I need, am I receiving sufficient instruction from them in Christianity, or do also need to learn directly from the traditions of my congregation and priests and bishops who are only a couple of generations removed from the Apostles?

 

[emeraldisle]

I’d like to ask you to show me, in God’s written word, where it says that God’s written word is His *only *revelation .

Sounds like a question that could be asked by a JW or a LDS.

Are you questioning the sufficiency of Gods written Word to teach us all we need to know for the Christian life?

Did God fail to give us all we need for the Christian life in His infallible written Word?

 

[emeraldisle]

Emeraldisle, let me pose another question.

Let’s say I’m living around 275 AD, somewhere in the Roman empire. By what method am I going to learn about Christianity? My congregation, like others in the region, has access to the four gospels, although many in my area are familiar with Gnostic texts, even reading them at their services. I am highly familiar with the Didache, which amounts to an early form of Catechism, written around 80 AD, while some of the Apostles were still alive. I hold in reverence the letters of Clement and Ignatius of Antioch, and their stories of the Church are read alongside some of the Letters of Paul at services (not all of his letters have made it to my area). Revelation is rejected by my congregation, as is the Epistle of James.

Let’s say later on I move to a different part of the empire. In my new congregation, the Gospel of Thomas stands alongside the other gospels, as well as the Gospel of Philip. The Didache and Letters of Ignatius are not used, but Revelation is held in high regard. Most of Paul’s writings are completely absent. I’m confused about the message I’m receiving about the absence of a “Trinity”. In this congregation, Jesus is the adopted Son of God. There is no Holy Spirit at all. Fortunately, a local bishop has traveled to the region to preach about the errors taking place in this congregation. He informs the locals of the traditions that have been passed down to him from the apostles. He shows how other congregations have not followed them in their error, and urges them to change.

Now, since the Holy Scriptures are all I need, am I receiving sufficient instruction from them in Christianity, or do also need to learn directly from the traditions of my congregation and priests and bishops who are only a couple of generations removed from the Apostles?

You write well, give yourself a pat on the back

Did God struggle to make known His teachings and to expose false teaching? Was the Holy Spirit sent by the Father to teach the new Believers the “Truth”? Has God failed to give us His complete infallible written Word?

This is why Im asking for Biblical evidence for the teaching that Mary was sinless and Gods written Word is proving this teaching to be false.

 

[VociMike]

Sounds like a question that could be asked by a JW or a LDS.

One could ask a similar question about the existence of “God’s complete written word” of Muslims, Jews or LDS. Does that mean that “God’s complete written word” does not exist? Just because some people are in error does not mean all people are in error.

Are you questioning the sufficiency of Gods written Word to teach us all we need to know for the Christian life?

If God’s written word leads one to His Church, then no. Otherwise, then yes. It does no good to talk about what scripture teaches when what it teaches and what you learn are two different things. Scripture teaches the real, substantial presence of Christ in the Eucharist, but since you do not learn that from scripture, what is the point? If you do not learn what scripture teaches, the teachings of scripture are in vain for you.

 

[maryj]

IMO you are missing the point of this passage of Scripture because it speaks of the then to come Messiah who would crush satan. How anyone can try to interpret that Mary is sinless from this passage is beyond me.​

Again I ask, do you know what the deffinition of “enmity” is?
. Yes this passage speaks of the coming Messiah. What you are missing is the first line in this verse:
Gen 3:15
I will put enmity between you (the serpent) and the woman(who is this woman?) and between your offspring and hers(Jesus).
Well if the offspring of the woman is the Messiah, seems as though the woman must be Mary.
So here we have the Lord God telling the serpent that He will put Enmity between satan and the woman who bears the Messiah.
God puts enmity between her and satan in the same manner and measure, as there is enmity between Christ and the seed of the serpent. Are christ and satan in complete opposition to one another? Christ is sinless, satan is sin…the woman is in complete opposition to satan.
So no, I am not missing the point of this passage, there are two points, not one.
The woman whose offspring will defeat the seed of the serpent, is in complete opposition to the serpent.
Mary was ever to be in that exalted state of soul which the serpent had destroyed in man. ONLY the continual union of mary with Grace could explain the enmity between her and satan.

 

[mlchance]

Don’t try to put God in a box and don’t believe in a small God.

The Church doesn’t put God in a box. Protestants often do, though. For example, you seem to not think God could have revealed divine truth outside of Scripture. You also limit God to what you think you can interpret from Scripture. Part of these limitations you put on God lead you to deny the truth that the Blessed Virgin was preserved by God from sin.

With all due respect to you, your comments are just your opinion and not a fact. IMO the following translation of Luke 1:28 as a correct one and I believe the latin vulgate translation by Jerome to be in error.

You’re more proficient in the original languages of the Bible than Jerome? Color me skeptical. Even if you’re right, Luke wasn’t written in Latin. It was written in Greek, and the Greek word translated as “highly favored” means “fully, perfectly filled with grace.” That isn’t a matter of translation or interpretation. It is a fact of Greek grammar.

IMO you are missing the point of this passage of Scripture because it speaks of the then to come Messiah who would crush satan. How anyone can try to interpret that Mary is sinless from this passage is beyond me.

And just because something is beyond you doesn’t mean it’s false.

– Mark L. Chance.

 

[Philthy]

God gave us His Scriptures, period.

False. God gave us the 10 Commandments. You have no *Scriptural *basis to accept ANY of the NT writings as Scripture. And before you attempt to justify Pauls writings as Scripture by Peter’s authority, I’ll point out that based on Scripture alone we have no basis to accept Peter’s testimony. Where does the OT predict the coming of a NT of Scripture? Where in a single Gospel does Christ speak - or even hint - of his disciples writing new Scripture? To paraphrase you, “Something so important as the fact that new Scripture was forthcoming would have been clearly spelled out in Scripture.” But it isnt spelled out at all.

I don’t have a problem with accepting the fact that God was able to move men with regards to what the full cannon of Scriptures were to be. God is sovereign over all, He is well able to give us His complete Word and He has.

You dont have a problem with it? Oh I think you have a very big problem with it. So big that you dont even want to fully come to grips with it. But perhaps Im wrong. Why dont you tell us EXACTLY WHEN AND EXACTLY HOW God “moved men with regards to the full canon” and finish by telling us what the canon is. Then we will be able to see whether there is “a problem” or not.

 

[Philthy]

Again I ask, do you know what the deffinition of “enmity” is?
. Yes this passage speaks of the coming Messiah. What you are missing is the first line in this verse:
Gen 3:15
I will put enmity between you (the serpent) and the woman(who is this woman?) and between your offspring and hers(Jesus).
Well if the offspring of the woman is the Messiah, seems as though the woman must be Mary.
So here we have the Lord God telling the serpent that He will put Enmity between satan and the woman who bears the Messiah.
God puts enmity between her and satan in the same manner and measure, as there is enmity between Christ and the seed of the serpent. Are christ and satan in complete opposition to one another? Christ is sinless, satan is sin…the woman is in complete opposition to satan.
So no, I am not missing the point of this passage, there are two points, not one.
The woman whose offspring will defeat the seed of the serpent, is in complete opposition to the serpent.
Mary was ever to be in that exalted state of soul which the serpent had destroyed in man. ONLY the continual union of mary with Grace could explain the enmity between her and satan.

Thanks…

 

[Goth_Catholic]

Im very happy with the genuine experts who God enable to translate the following verse;

And having come in, the angel said to her, “Rejoice, highly favored one, the Lord is with you; blessed are you among women!”
Luke 1:28

Honestly, did you read my post at all? “Rejoice”, especially, is NOT part of Luke 1:28, which invalidates the translation already, nevermind the fact that your so called “genuine experts” ethier cannot read Greek correctly or cannot find a better way to express it in English (If it were the latter I could understand, English lacks the abilty to translate much of the Greek language, however this is not the case here).

 

[bookgirl32]

Sounds like a question that could be asked by a JW or a LDS.

Nope, sounds like a Roman Catholic question

Are you questioning the sufficiency of Gods written Word to teach us all we need to know for the Christian life?

Nope, I’m believing in God’s written word, and God’s word passed down orally, and the Church He set up in order to interpret and protect it all. Didn’t I just ask this question like three posts ago:

Why do Protestants always think that when we say simply that we don’t believe scripture to be God’s ONLY revelation, that they think we’re denying that it is altogether?

Did God fail to give us all we need for the Christian life in His infallible written Word?

Nope, He never planned to give us all we need for the Christian life in ONLY His infallible written word.