What texts prove that Mary was a sinner?

thecolorsblend · Sep 8, 2020

bbbbbbb said:
If the universal sinfulness of humanity is a matter of idle theological speculation then one, I suppose, must develop some clever means of eliminating these troubling passages.

This objection is as curious as it is ironic, inasmuch as deleting troublesome texts from the canon is more of a Protestant thing.

Daniel Marsh · Sep 10, 2020

cheevyontherivr said:
Ah, so 'no one' doesn't really mean 'no one' but no one in a certain situation.

One takes all Scripture, not just one verse to form a doctrine. As I pointed out, the Father draws people to Christ. They don't come until he draws them. So, pray for God to draw others.

Now, tell me your answers here: questions for our friend cheevyontherivr

Daniel Marsh · Sep 10, 2020

Fidelibus said:
Hmm.... So are you saying he is/was infallible? Sure sounds like it. And how did he get this authority?

Are you infallible? How do you get your authority?

He got his authority by study of Greek, History of Doctrine, etc., The same way a Doctor gets their authority in their speciality. The fact, that Catholic Greek Scholars agree with him as peer review....

Where does it say that in these passages? Or are you "basically" just giving us your personal and fallible interpretation of what 'you' think these passages mean?

John 6:44
No man can come to me, except the Father, who hath sent me, draw him

Simple English.

Have a Blessed day, or evening!

You too.

Daniel Marsh · Sep 10, 2020

Fidelibus said:
Got a bit of a problem here DM, the verse in Romans 3:11 does not say, "No one who is an unbeliever seeks God." It says, "No one seeks God." Are you now telling me that "no one" does not actually mean no one? That "no one" is not an absolute? Or are you trying to add your own words and personal interpretation to this verse? Sure seems like it.

Have a Blessed Day!

Now, tell me your answers here: questions for our friend cheevyontherivr

Daniel Marsh · Sep 10, 2020

Fidelibus said:
You caught that too. Well, will just have to see how DM responds to my latest post.

Peace be with you!

Please answer the questions in this thread too, thanks
Now, tell me your answers here: questions for our friend cheevyontherivr

Daniel Marsh · Sep 10, 2020

chevyontheriver said:
It took me a while to see how 'all' and 'no one' were generalities. I was initially skeptical and the whole Mary thing took me a long time. Be patient. The Catholic position makes sense if understood properly. But it all has to fit together first.

Please explain it all properly. thanks daniel

Daniel Marsh · Sep 10, 2020

thecolorsblend said:
This objection is as curious as it is ironic, inasmuch as deleting troublesome texts from the canon is more of a Protestant thing.

That's a great dig on Luther.

SaintCody777 · Sep 10, 2020

thecolorsblend said:
This objection is as curious as it is ironic, inasmuch as deleting troublesome texts from the canon is more of a Protestant thing.

Mark 3:20-21 20 Then Jesus entered a house, and again a crowd gathered, so that he and his disciples were not even able to eat. 21 When his family heard about this, they went to take charge of him, for they (Mary, the mother of Jesus, and Joseph) said, “He is out of his mind.”

Romans 3:23 23 for all (including Mary, the mother of God) have sinned and fall short of the glory of God

Pavel Mosko · Sep 10, 2020

chevyontheriver said:
Of course you don't. It would upset a large apple cart in your theology if you interpreted Luke 1:28 as something beyond 'favored'. I think the word 'kecharitōmenē' demands a more expansive meaning. That is not a 'hint' but to me it is clear and Biblical. She was so graced that there was no room for sin in her life. And it was fitting to have that sort of mother to raise the Son of Man. She was not blessed merely for being a biological mother. She was blessed before she became a biological mother according to the text.

There's really a sacramental aspect to Mary as far as the incarnation goes. Unfortunately this is one of those big meta topics / paradigms that people are not going to get unless they really want to.... But the whole Jewish concept of Holiness comes into play. Holy things by definition are set aside exclusively for worship or God's use, in contrast to ordinary things of the World that you are free to use as you please.

HOLINESS - JewishEncyclopedia.com

Pavel Mosko · Sep 10, 2020

chevyontheriver said:
Our Orthodox friends didn't do the theological working out of original sin, so they are against it. They would be against the Trinity if it wasn't something they did most of the theological work on. They're just like that. On lots of things. For the most part they are not universalists though. And without daring to say so, they pretty much agree with Catholics about Mary. Though they would have to deny it.

Original Sin does make some things easier theologically speaking but it also creates problems to. Because of Augustine's position on unbaptized babies going straight to hell etc. and people realizing there were potential problems with that, e.g. some people and babies never got a chance for that being raised in non-Christian lands etc., you get into the definition of all kinds of other things like "baptism of desire" , Limbo and so on.

Personally I'm sticking to ancestral Sin and mystery, but I tend to slip into Original Sin type language when talking about things mechanistically at times due to my cradle Lutheran background coming through like a dialectal accent.

Fidelibus · Sep 10, 2020

Daniel Marsh said:
Are you infallible?

No

How do you get your authority?

Please elaborate

He got his authority by study of Greek, History of Doctrine, etc.,

Like I've asked you so many times before, does that make him infallible? Yes or no?

The same way a Doctor gets their authority in their speciality.

Does that make them infallible too? Yes or no?

The fact, that Catholic Greek Scholars agree with him as peer review....

Does that make him infallible? Yes or no?

Have a Blessed Day!

Fidelibus · Sep 10, 2020

Daniel Marsh said:
Now, tell me your answers here: questions for our friend cheevyontherivr

What?? Where did this come from? Let's try and stick with the topic at hand, okay? So let's reiterate. Back on post # 325 you said:

Verse 9 appears to be absolute

Verse 12 appears to be absolute

Verse 19 appears to be absolute

Verse 22-23 appears to be absolute

And I responded on post #330;
"So when you say "appears", and for sake of discussion, I will take that as you do believe the word "all" in these verses to be an absolute. Meaning, "all" absolutely means all!

Remember DM when I asked you on post #313...."Do you seek God?" A question you did not address. Well, you probably wondered why I asked such a question. The reason I asked you (and other Protestants) this question is because in Romans 3:11 it says that "no one" seeks for God. Well, you didn't answer, but every other Protestant I asked if they are seeking God in their lives, the answer was a firm and absolute "Yes!"

But, Rom 3:11 says, "No!" "No one seeks for God!" So DM, if you believe "all" in Rom 3:23 (and the other verses you quoted) is/are an absolute, then do you also believe "no one" in Rom 3:11 to be an absolute as well?. The way I see it, every Protestant who says Rom 3:23 means everyone, without exception, has sinned, cannot be seeking God in his or her life because Rom 3:11, according to his or her methodology of interpreting Scripture, says that absolutely no one is seeking God.

So, through my Catholic eyes, either the Protestant is not seeking God in his or her life, or the Bible is lying...at least, according to the Protestant interpretation. Or, could be another possibility? The only other possibility, is that the words, "no one," are not being used in an absolute sense. And, if they are not being used in an absolute sense, then it can be argued that the word "all" in 3:23, is also not being used in an absolute sense. Which would shoot a hole in the Protestant argument about Mary. So what do you think?"

And then you responded on post#334:

No seeking God refers to unbelievers, not to Christians.

Where I responded on post# 338:

"Got a bit of a problem here DM, the verse in Romans 3:11 does not say, "No one who is an unbeliever seeks God." It says, "No one seeks God." Are you now telling me that "no one" does not actually mean no one? That "no one" is not an absolute? Or are you trying to add your own words and personal interpretation to this verse? Sure seems like it."

Which catches us up to your post #344:

Now, tell me your answers here: questions for our friend cheevyontherivr

And post #335 where you said:

Please answer the questions in this thread too, thanks

Now, tell me your answers here: questions for our friend cheevyontherivr

That has absolutely nothing to do with the topic at hand, much less addressing my post #338!

For the life of me, I can only surmise the only reason you would want to derail your very own thread this way is to avoid addressing my post. Please prove me to be incorrect!

Have a Blessed Day!

Fidelibus · Sep 11, 2020

SaintCody777 said:
Romans 3:23 23 for all (including Mary, the mother of God) have sinned and fall short of the glory of God

Every Bible I have ever read, the words...... "including Mary, the mother of God" are not included in Romans 3:23. What version of the bible did you get this from, or are you just adding your own words to Scripture?

I will say though, it is nice to see that you agree Mary "is" the Mother of God!

Have a Blessed Day!

SaintCody777 · Sep 11, 2020

Fidelibus said:
Every Bible I have ever read, the words...... "including Mary, the mother of God" are not included in Romans 3:23. What version of the bible did you get this from, or are you just adding your own words to Scripture?

I will say though, it is nice to see that you agree Mary "is" the Mother of God!

Have a Blessed Day!

Mary is not excluded from whom within all have sinned.

Daniel Marsh · Sep 11, 2020

Pavel Mosko said:
Original Sin does make some things easier theologically speaking but it also creates problems to. Because of Augustine's position on unbaptized babies going straight to hell etc. and people realizing there were potential problems with that, e.g. some people and babies never got a chance for that being raised in non-Christian lands etc., you get into the definition of all kinds of other things like "baptism of desire" , Limbo and so on.

Personally I'm sticking to ancestral Sin and mystery, but I tend to slip into Original Sin type language when talking about things mechanistically at times due to my cradle Lutheran background coming through like a dialectal accent.

Please explain ancestral Sin and mystery, thanks daniel.

Daniel Marsh · Sep 11, 2020

Fidelibus said:
What?? Where did this come from? Let's try and stick with the topic at hand, okay? So let's reiterate. Back on post # 325 you said:

And I responded on post #330;
"So when you say "appears", and for sake of discussion, I will take that as you do believe the word "all" in these verses to be an absolute. Meaning, "all" absolutely means all!

Remember DM when I asked you on post #313...."Do you seek God?" A question you did not address. Well, you probably wondered why I asked such a question. The reason I asked you (and other Protestants) this question is because in Romans 3:11 it says that "no one" seeks for God. Well, you didn't answer, but every other Protestant I asked if they are seeking God in their lives, the answer was a firm and absolute "Yes!"

But, Rom 3:11 says, "No!" "No one seeks for God!" So DM, if you believe "all" in Rom 3:23 (and the other verses you quoted) is/are an absolute, then do you also believe "no one" in Rom 3:11 to be an absolute as well?. The way I see it, every Protestant who says Rom 3:23 means everyone, without exception, has sinned, cannot be seeking God in his or her life because Rom 3:11, according to his or her methodology of interpreting Scripture, says that absolutely no one is seeking God.

So, through my Catholic eyes, either the Protestant is not seeking God in his or her life, or the Bible is lying...at least, according to the Protestant interpretation. Or, could be another possibility? The only other possibility, is that the words, "no one," are not being used in an absolute sense. And, if they are not being used in an absolute sense, then it can be argued that the word "all" in 3:23, is also not being used in an absolute sense. Which would shoot a hole in the Protestant argument about Mary. So what do you think?"

And then you responded on post#334:

Where I responded on post# 338:

"Got a bit of a problem here DM, the verse in Romans 3:11 does not say, "No one who is an unbeliever seeks God." It says, "No one seeks God." Are you now telling me that "no one" does not actually mean no one? That "no one" is not an absolute? Or are you trying to add your own words and personal interpretation to this verse? Sure seems like it."

Which catches us up to your post #344:

And post #335 where you said:

That has absolutely nothing to do with the topic at hand, much less addressing my post #338!

For the life of me, I can only surmise the only reason you would want to derail your very own thread this way is to avoid addressing my post. Please prove me to be incorrect!

Have a Blessed Day!

Answer to each of these is Yes, as I am sure your answer is Yes, too.

Do you seek to do what is right?
Do you seek to do God's will?
Do you seek to understand Scriptures?
Do you pray to God daily?
Have you seek to look unto the Author and Finisher of your faith?
Do you do good unto others?
Do you respect God?
Do you believe in Christ?
Do you know about Theosis II Peter 1 "divine nature"
Do you seek to grow in the virtues of II Peter 1?
Are you useful to your family or others?

Daniel Marsh · Sep 11, 2020

SaintCody777 said:
Mary is not excluded from whom within all have sinned.

Is Jesus excluded?

Pavel Mosko · Sep 11, 2020

Daniel Marsh said:
Please explain ancestral Sin and mystery, thanks daniel.

Sure. I'm still trying to get a grasp on Ancestral Sin being raised with Original Sin. But Ancestral Sin is the conception of Sin in Christianity that existed before Saint Augustine. From the Orthodox Wiki.

The term Original Sin (or first sin) is used among all Christian churches to define the doctrine surrounding Romans 5:12-21 and 1 Corinthians 15:22, in which Adam is identified as the man through whom death came into the world. How this is interpreted is believed by many Orthodox to be a fundamental difference between the Eastern Orthodox Church and the Western Churches. In contrast, modern Roman Catholic theologians would claim that the basic anthropology is actually almost identical, and that the difference is only in the explanation of what happened in the Fall. In the Orthodox Church the term ancestral sin (Gr. προπατορικό αμάρτημα) is preferred and is used to define the doctrine of man's "inclination towards sin, a heritage from the sin of our progenitors" and that this is removed through baptism. St. Gregory Palamas taught that man's image was tarnished, disfigured, as a consequence of Adam's disobedience.

Discussion
In the Book of Genesis, Chapter 3, Adam and Eve committed a sin, the original sin. The Eastern Orthodox Church teaches that no one is guilty for the actual sin they committed but rather everyone inherits the consequences of this act; the foremost of this is physical death in this world. This is the reason why the original fathers of the Church over the centuries have preferred the term ancestral sin. The consequences and penalties of this ancestral act are transferred by means of natural heredity to the entire human race. Since every human is a descendant of Adam then 'no one is free from the implications of this sin' (which is human death) and that the only way to be freed from this is through baptism. While mortality is certainly a result of the Fall, along with this also what is termed "concupiscence" in the writings of St Augustine of Hippo -- this is the "evil impulse" of Judaism, and in Orthodoxy, we might say this is our "disordered passion." It isn't only that we are born in death, or in a state of distance from God, but also that we are born with disordered passion within us. Orthodoxy would not describe the human state as one of "total depravity."

Orthodox Christians have usually understood Roman Catholicism as professing St. Augustine's teaching that everyone bears not only the consequence, but also the guilt, of Adam's sin. This teaching appears to have been confirmed by multiple councils, the first of them being the Council of Orange in 529. This difference between the two Churches in their understanding of the original sin was one of the doctrinal reasons underlying the Catholic Church's declaration of its dogma of the Immaculate Conception in the 19th century, a dogma that is rejected by the Orthodox Church. However, contemporary Roman Catholic teaching is best explicated in the Catechism of the Catholic Church, which includes this sentence: ""original sin does not have the character of a personal fault in any of Adam's descendants. It is a deprivation of original holiness and justice, but human nature has not been totally corrupted" (§405).

Original sin - OrthodoxWiki

There is a kind of juridical aspect of the West that comes in part from Roman Culture, (while some of it seems like it is a direct take on saint Paul, Judaism and the law). But the Romans were a very legal culture, and tended to want everything defined etc. and you get that into sin, the after life etc. e.g. Mortal Sin vs. Venial etc. Saint Augustine was more emphatic than most on why babies should be baptized. Augustine in one of his works was very emphatic that unbaptized babies go to hell. While the rest of Christianity supported infant baptism based on history and the understanding of the Judeo-Christian tradition that a person's spiritual life began at an early age with their families etc. e.g. circumcision, learning the mitzoh, that their were babies, toddlers etc. in some of those baptized families that you read about in Acts and the Epistles etc. but they tended to believe the fate of unbaptized babies, the pagan folks who never had a chance to hear the Gospel, or the Old Covenant but died etc. was a mystery, not something really defined (other than a passage by saint Paul speculating people will be judged by their conscience), but ultimately up to God as far as deciding "the rules" of how things are carried out. But since God is good, merciful, and far more intelligent than we are we can trust him to work out the details of how things like this are resolved, rather than think we have to have all the answers etc.

Daniel Marsh · Sep 11, 2020

Is there more detailed sources and thanks.

Pavel Mosko · Sep 11, 2020

Daniel Marsh said:
Is there more detailed sources and thanks.

if you click on the link and scroll to the bottom there are sources and suggested reading links. Personally, I recommend Bishop Kallistos Ware books articles. He has one article listed in the forementioned section but His book "The Orthodox Way" is quite good in general at understanding not only the EO way of thinking, but Nicene Era Christianity etc.

You can read for free here.
https://azbyka.ru/otechnik/books/original/18403/18403-The-orthodox-way

What texts prove that Mary was a sinner?

If God is your Father, who is your Mother?

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

The young, curious Berean

Arch-Dude of the Apostolic

Arch-Dude of the Apostolic

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

The young, curious Berean

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Arch-Dude of the Apostolic

Well-Known Member

Arch-Dude of the Apostolic

Similar threads