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

[mercygate]

So at what point did the protestants give up their strong Marian devotions/beliefs, and why?

The founders of their faiths certainly believed the Marian dogmas. When did this become a problem?

Martin Luther
“. . . she is full of grace, proclaimed to be entirely without sin. . . . God’s grace fills her with everything good and makes her devoid of all evil. . . . God is with her, meaning that all she did or left undone is divine and the action of God in her. Moreover, God guarded and protected her from all that might be hurtful to her.”

Ref: Luther’s Works, American edition, vol. 43, p. 40, ed. H. Lehmann, Fortress, 1968

John Calvin
Helvidius displayed excessive ignorance in concluding that Mary must have had many sons, because Christ’s ‘brothers’ are sometimes mentioned.

*{Harmony of Matthew, Mark & Luke, sec. 39 (Geneva, 1562), vol. 2 / From Calvin’s Commentaries, tr. William Pringle, Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1949, p.215; on Matthew 13:55} *

**John Wesley (Founder of Methodism) **
The Blessed Virgin Mary, who, as well after as when she brought him forth, continued a pure and unspotted virgin.

*{“Letter to a Roman Catholic” / In This Rock, Nov. 1990, p.25} *

Typical Catholic! Confusing the matter by stating the facts. Low blow, Enoch.

 

[jmcrae]

I’ve been reading along to see if someone else addressed this, and I see that no one has, yet, so although this was posted several pages ago, I’d like to address it here and now.

The Scriptures don’t flow from tradition or any oral teachings. They “flow” straight from the mind of God - they’re theopneustos (God-breathed, 2 Tim. 3:16). …] The truth of such a phenomenon would have to come straight from the mind of God, in other words, the theopneustos (God-breathed) Scriptures. But all we have is silence.

You seem to be assuming that the entire mind of God is contained in the Scriptures - that the Scriptures are, in fact, God Himself, and that nothing outside the Scriptures comes from or even could come from God.

Is this not a form of idolotry?

 

[Good_Fella]

Nothing Paul says suggests that the tradition the Thessalonians received from him is infallibly preserved anywhere except in scripture.

The point of Paul’s remarks are antithetical to your tradition, IMO. Paul does not encourage the Thessalonians to receive any tradition by second or third hand reports, or those confabulated out of whole cloth in the distant future, but, to receive only as infallible truth that which they heard in his presence, and from his own lips.

The fullness of the Gospel is apostolic tradition. This tradition includes oral preaching and the written word. By apostolic succession, the Catholic Church is in full possession of the historic Christian faith, deposited in Scripture and Tradition; purveyed by the apostolic teaching authority of the Magisterium.

Paul did not write down everything he orally taught or believed in. He may not have mentioned Mary’s personal sinlessness in any of his letters, but neither did he write about the virgin birth. Yet I’m sure he was aware of this traditional belief and shared it with the rest of the Christian community. Paul’s letters were addressed to particular communities with regard to specific faith issues that arose. His letters are occasional pastoral responses on his part and do not comprise a coherently articulated theology.

Paul never even wrote that Jesus has a divine nature; nor did he make explicitly clear that our Lord is to be identified with God in both substance and essence. This truth was made explicitly clear and defined as dogma by the Church in the fourth century with the Council of Nicea. Our doctrines have developed over time with the hierarchical college having succeeded the apostolic college. Meanwhile, neither the Church’s Christological dogmas nor her Marian dogmas conflict with Scripture despite its implicitness.

We should be aware that there are two essential kinds of teaching in the Church. These are ‘kerygma’ and dogma: the public teaching of the Church based on Scripture and a representation of the deeper meaning of biblical truth. The Bible itself is exoteric in nature in the sense that much ineffable truth is left undefined. The mysteries which are contained in Scripture are penetrated through the esoteric experiences of the Church. Without the esoteric and spiritual sense which forms Sacred Tradition the exoteric and literal sense left on its own would prevent the Church from apprehending what God has revealed to us in Sacred Scripture. It was the Catholic Church which served to reveal and make explicit in her dogmas that Jesus is a Divine Person (in the Trinity) with an assumed human nature and that His blessed Mother was immaculately conceived preserved free from original sin and personally sinless throughout her entire life.

Indeed, “Paul does not encourage the Thessalonians to receive any tradition by second or third hand reports or those confabulated out of whole cloth in the distant future.” I concur that the apostle, if he were alive today, would warn us against the false teachings of the (Edited) disciples of the 18th century Enlightenment (Reformed Protestants) who claim to be Christians but reject the teachings of the historic Christian faith.

The following ‘kerygma’ of the One Apostolic Catholic Church was not put down in writing in the far too distant future and is based on Scripture:

“He was the ark formed of incorruptible wood. For by this is signified that His tabernacle (the Blessed Virgin Mary) was exempt from putridity and corruption.”
Hyppolytus, ‘Orations Inillud, Dominus pascit me’ (A.D. 235)

And Elizabeth, filled with the Holy Spirit, cried out, “Most blessed are you among women, and blessed is the fruit of your womb.”
{Luke 1, 42}

Pax vobiscum
Good Fella

 

[sandusky]

Good Fella:

Paul did not write down everything he orally taught or believed in. He may not have mentioned Mary’s personal sinlessness in any of his letters, but neither did he write about the virgin birth. Yet I’m sure he was aware of this traditional belief and shared it with the rest of the Christian community.

The disparity of opinions throughout church history concerning this doctrine indicate that Paul didn’t do a very good job of passing on that oral tradition; wouldn’t you agree?

I would expect complete agreement on it, if the church is as infallible as you claim it is.

Paul never even wrote that Jesus has a divine nature; nor did he make explicitly clear that our Lord is to be identified with God in both substance and essence.

**Genesis 1:1

In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.

Colossians 1:16

For by Him [Jesus] all things were created, both in the heavens and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities—all things have been created through Him and for Him.

Colossians 2:9

For in Him [Jesus] all the fullness of Deity dwells in bodily form

Hebrews 1:3

And He [Jesus] is the radiance of His glory and the exact representation of His nature…**With the exception of Genesis, I believe that your church instructs that Paul wrote those two epistles; isn’t that correct?

IMO, the rest of your post is YO, and you’re entitled to it.

 

[Enoch]

Typical Catholic! Confusing the matter by stating the facts. Low blow, Enoch.

Indeed. Never let the truth get in the way of your feelings. This makes about 20 questions I’ve asked on this thread of which I will never find a response. Let’s face it many are just going to accept whatever seems to best conform to THEM. A.KA. the ancient protestant tradition of “church shopping”

 

[jmcrae]

The disparity of opinions throughout church history concerning this doctrine indicate that Paul didn’t do a very good job of passing on that oral tradition; wouldn’t you agree?

I would expect complete agreement on it, if the church is as infallible as you claim it is.

Genesis 1:1

In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.

Colossians 1:16

For by Him [Jesus] all things were created, both in the heavens and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities—all things have been created through Him and for Him.

Colossians 2:9

For in Him [Jesus] all the fullness of Deity dwells in bodily form

Hebrews 1:3

And He [Jesus] is the radiance of His glory and the exact representation of His nature…With the exception of Genesis, I believe that your church instructs that Paul wrote those two epistles; isn’t that correct?

IMO, the rest of your post is YO, and you’re entitled to it.

Of course, this is a Catholic interpretation of these verses - there is nothing explicitly said, here. How do you “know” that St. Paul meant to evoke Genesis? (The same way we “know” that Jesus was also evoking Genesis when referring to His mother by the name “Woman,” the name given to Eve in Genesis.)

 

[emeraldisle]

I’m especially interested in an answer to the last one because I don’t see any Biblical support whatsoever for emeraldisle’s criterea (that is, that something has to be spelled out in the Bible in order for it to be worthy of belief).

After all, what am I to think of his (her?) refusal to answer these questions, even though they’ve been asked more than once?

I’m especially interested in the fact that God clearly says in His written Word that all of humanity is sinful, which includes Mary, you and me and then the Catholic Church says that tradition teaches that Mary is sinless.

I believe what God says in His written Word that Mary because she was a human being was a sinner like all the rest of humanity.

This issue is about whether people believe what God says as apposed to what tradition says.

As for the Trinity issue well its a red herring re this discussion. However God clearly tells us in His written Word that the Trinity is a true fact. The following are the Lord Jesus’ words;

*But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in My name, He will teach you all things, and bring to your remembrance all things that **I **said to you. John 14:26
*

.

 

[jmcrae]

I’m especially interested in the fact that God clearly says in His written Word that all of humanity is sinful, which includes Mary, you and me and then the Catholic Church says that tradition teaches that Mary is sinless.

Because she is Woman, the mother of all the living, as Jesus calls her on many different occasions.

This issue is about whether people believe what God says as apposed to what tradition says.

The Holy Tradition is what comes from God. The Bible comes from the Holy Tradition.

As for the Trinity issue well its a red herring re this discussion. However God clearly tells us in His written Word that the Trinity is a true fact. The following are the Lord Jesus’ words;

But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in My name, He will teach you all things, and bring to your remembrance all things that **I **said to you. John 14:26

This is the source of the Holy Tradition, which has produced, among other things, the Bible, the Mass, the Sacrament of Reconciliation, the Rosary, and the Liturgy of the Hours.

 

[Pixie_Dust]

But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in My name, He will teach you all things, and bring to your remembrance all things that **I **said to you. John 14:26

.

I think I asked this earlier in this thread but it might have gotten buried. How does the Holy Spirit bring to your remembrance all the things that Jesus said to His Apostles? How can you remember Jesus saying something when you weren’t there to hear it the first time?

 

[JoeyWarren]

EmeraldIsle said: I’m especially interested in the fact that God clearly says in His written Word that all of humanity is sinful, which includes Mary, you and me and then the Catholic Church says that tradition teaches that Mary is sinless.

No God does not say that. It is by your limited education (ignorance) that you proclaim this. We have provided you with the Greek Word that St Luke used.

Kecharitomene. It’s interpretation is “Full of Grace” Sin cannot possibly exist when Grace is present in Full Measure.

And we also have given you the “ALL” argument as well.

You just repeat the same thing over and over like a broken record and never engage into the issue of “All” and “Kecharitomene”

 

[bookgirl32]

As for the Trinity issue well its a red herring re this discussion. However God clearly tells us in His written Word that the Trinity is a true fact. The following are the Lord Jesus’ words;

But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in My name, He will teach you all things, and bring to your remembrance all things that **I **said to you. John 14:26

That quote mentions the 3 persons of the Trinity, nowhere does it say “The Father, Son, and HS are three persons in one God,” which is the actual definition of the doctrine of the Trinity. I know you believe this, and you should. Our point is that you believe this because someone handed down an interpretation to you.

Still waiting on the whole Bible saying that it is the only source of inspired revelation too, by the way. Please don’t get frustrated with me, I’m only using your criteria to make the point.

 

[sandusky]

jmcrae:

Of course, this is a Catholic interpretation of these verses - there is nothing explicitly said, here.

That is my private interpretation.

jmcrae:

How do you “know” that St. Paul meant to evoke Genesis?

I don’t; I put the verses together all by myself for the sole purpose of showing Good Fella that his statement is in error.

jmcrae:

Because she is Woman, the mother of all the living, as Jesus calls her on many different occasions.

Please cite the “many different” chapters and verses where Jesus calls Mary those things.

 

[sandusky]

That quote mentions the 3 persons of the Trinity, nowhere does it say “The Father, Son, and HS are three persons in one God,” which is the actual definition of the doctrine of the Trinity.

From where, do you believe, did those who defined the Trinity gather the information used to formulate the definition of the Trinity?

 

[ChrisWRIT]

I’m especially interested in the fact that God clearly says in His written Word that all of humanity is sinful, which includes Mary, you and me and then the Catholic Church says that tradition teaches that Mary is sinless.

I’m not sure which post it was on, but I know someone noted that Adam & Eve were created without sin. Are you claiming that they were not human?

In claiming that the Bible “clearly says…that all of humanity is sinful”, are you saying that it is wrong when it states that there have been righteous humans - some that have been “blameless before the Lord”? Like Noah & Job, or Zecharaih & Elizabeth?

Truth cannot contradict truth, & the Bible is truth.

What do all of those passages do to the claim that the Bible supposedly says “all of humanity is sinful”?

I believe what God says in His written Word that Mary because she was a human being was a sinner like all the rest of humanity.

This issue is about whether people believe what God says as apposed to what tradition says.

The way you attempt to paint the issue is that Sacred Scripture & Sacred Tradition are contradictory, which they are not.

The crux of the matter is the Protestant claim of the asserted formal sufficiency of scripture. (The material sufficiency of scripture is not debated.)

Given the thousands of different and conflicting interpretations of the same Bible by so many people who claim to abide by “sola scriptura”, not to mention their common failure to cite what the Catholic Church actually teaches, I find all of these objectors to have poor credibility (at best), in their claims to have truly been “led by the Holy Spirit.”

After all, the Holy Spirit is the “Spirit of Truth” (see below), not the “Spirit of Multiple-Personality-Disorder.”

As for the Trinity issue well its a red herring re this discussion. However God clearly tells us in His written Word that the Trinity is a true fact. The following are the Lord Jesus’ words;

But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in My name, He will teach you all things, and bring to your remembrance all things that **I **said to you. John 14:26

And I note that John 14:26 doesn’t say:

"But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in My name, He will teach you all things, & bring to your remembrance all things that I said to you, getting you to write it all down so you won’t mess it up later."

Even Luther didn’t dispute the infallibility of the apostles, but the concept of apostolic succession, which is supported by Scripture. Among the Biblical support for apostolic succession is just a few verses earlier than your quote from John 14, when Jesus says that the Holy Spirit will be them FOREVER, and that He would not leave them as orphans.

John 14:16-18
"And I will ask the Father, and he will give you another Counselor to be with you forever— the Spirit of truth. The world cannot accept him, because it neither sees him nor knows him. But you know him, for he lives with you and will be in you. I will not leave you as orphans; I will come to you."

I note that Jesus was talking to the apostles, not everyone, so it is quite a leap to infer that He must have meant that the Holy Spirit would protect everyone from error, but would not protect the Church.

God bless,

Chris

 

[mercygate]

As for the Trinity issue well its a red herring re this discussion. However God clearly tells us in His written Word that the Trinity is a true fact. The following are the Lord Jesus’ words;

But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in My name, He will teach you all things, and bring to your remembrance all things that **I **said to you. John 14:26

.

About three posts into this thread, if I recall correctly, we had the delineation of the word “all”, I believe.

Who was in the room when Jesus spoke those words in Jn 14? ONLY the eleven. To whom did he speak the words of the Great Commission in Mt. 28? Only the eleven. The promise of being guided into all the truth is given TO THE ELEVEN. The responsibility of teaching is given TO THE ELEVEN. Insofar as we make up ideas that are incompatible with Apostolic teaching (y’know: those ELEVEN guys and their successors), we are not being guided by the Holy Spirit and certainly not “into all the truth.”

If the doctrine of the Holy Trinity were “clearly” a “true fact”, it would not have required two ecumenical councils to nail down the details, now would it?

 

[jmcrae]

Please cite the “many different” chapters and verses where Jesus calls Mary those things.

Okay so there’s only two. Even so.

John 2:4
Jesus saith unto her, Woman, what have I to do with thee? mine hour is not yet come.

John 19:26
When Jesus therefore saw his mother, and the disciple standing by, whom he loved, he saith unto his mother, Woman, behold thy son!

 

[bookgirl32]

The disparity of opinions throughout church history concerning this doctrine indicate that Paul didn’t do a very good job of passing on that oral tradition; wouldn’t you agree?

I would expect complete agreement on it, if the church is as infallible as you claim it is.

Yet we both agree on the infallibility of scripture, and there is FAR more disparity of opinion on how a lot of scripture is to be interpreted between all Christians than between a Catholic doctrine within the Church. If disparity of opinion makes something untrue, and complete agreement makes something true, then you just pretty much shot down Biblical infallibility.

 

[mercygate]

From where, do you believe, did those who defined the Trinity gather the information used to formulate the definition of the Trinity?

From the consistent teaching of the Apostolic Church. Scripture ALONE does not give you the teaching that the Holy Spirit is co-eternal, co-equal, and consubstantial with the Father. We THINK it’s all laid out in Scripture because we are so convicted of the truth of it; but JWs and others completely disagree. And they use the Bible alone as their source.

 

[bookgirl32]

I also have a question on what I see is an extreme over-dependence (in some) protestants on Paul. There are many things in the interpretation of Paul that could be seen to contradict the teachings of Jesus, yet I don’t think they do, and others would not claim to believe it. But it seems that Jesus’ words are always “filtered” through interpretations of Paul in order to fit these intepretations, instead of the words of Jesus taking precedence, and Paul’s words being read in light of these.

 

[JoeyWarren]

Yet we both agree on the infallibility of scripture, and there is FAR more disparity of opinion on how a lot of scripture is to be interpreted between all Christians than between a Catholic doctrine within the Church. If disparity of opinion makes something untrue, and complete agreement makes something true, then you just pretty much shot down Biblical infallibility.

You go girl!!