Immaculate Conception - Why Did It Take 1,854 Years to Discover This Doctrine?

[Catholic Christian]

That is good but I would say there is much much more implicit evidence biblically than just that verse as my Paper shows. but that verse is a good one as the early church fathers also agreed.

Yes there is much more. One of my favorites is one I cannot remember, from the Old Testament, having to do with a gate that, once opened, no one else can enter. I studied it long ago, but now I can't remember it. Do you know which verse I'm talking about?

 

[Catholic Christian]

Which means "HIS CHURCH," not the Roman Catholic Church...

"HIS CHURCH" is 2000 years old and only the Catholic Church fits the job description.

Now, I believe this thread is about the Immaculate Conception

 

[Brennin]

"HIS CHURCH" is 2000 years old and only the Catholic Church fits the job description.

Now, I believe this thread is about the Immaculate Conception

Nah, the RCC is at most 1600 years old, which is well short of the mark.

 

[Albion]

(quote):

...When discussing the Immaculate Conception, an implicit reference may be found in the angel’s greeting to Mary. The angel Gabriel said, "Hail, full of grace, the Lord is with you" (Luke 1:28). The phrase "full of grace" is a translation of the Greek word kecharitomene. It therefore expresses a characteristic quality of Mary.

You are quoting from Roman Catholic teaching material which of course is giving you the official Roman Catholic interpretation. We already know that this is the RC interpretation.

But the important point is that this passage from Scripture DOES NOT teach or EVEN IMPLY the Immaculate Conception. If one is being straighforward, (s)he cannot deny that all we can say with certainty about it is that AT THAT POINT IN TIME, Mary was considered acceptable--sinless if you want--but not anything about her status at the moment of conception.

 

[Catholic Christian]

There is a bunch of scripture quotes on Marian doctrine at this site:
http://www.fisheaters.com/mary.html

 

[Catholic Christian]

Nah, the RCC is at most 1600 years old, which is well short of the mark.

Nah, Ignatius of Antioch called Christs Church "Catholic" in 107 A.D., my Irish counter-part

 

[Albion]

We were discussing evidence from the earliest church relating to the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception.

What you think of Sola Scriptura and what the BIBLE says about Mary is not the question.

Has anyone found any evidence from Tradition, since that is what the doctrine hangs on, dating from the Apostolic Church and teaching an Immaculate Conception?

 

[Catholic Christian]

...this passage from Scripture DOES NOT teach or EVEN IMPLY the Immaculate Conception....

...in your opinion

 

[Brennin]

[/B]

You are quoting from Roman Catholic teaching material which of course is giving you the official Roman Catholic interpretation. We already know that this is the RC interpretation.

But the important point is that this passage from Scripture DOES NOT teach or EVEN IMPLY the Immaculate Conception. If one is being straighforward, (s)he cannot deny that all we can say with certainty about it is that AT THAT POINT IN TIME, Mary was considered acceptable--sinless if you want--but not anything about her status at the moment of conception.

You are, of course, correct.

28. highly favoured--a word only once used elsewhere (Eph 1:6, "made accepted"): compare Lu 1:30, "Thou hast found favour with God." The mistake of the Vulgate's rendering, "full of grace," has been taken abundant advantage of by the [Roman] Church. As the mother of our Lord, she was the most "blessed among women" in external distinction; but let them listen to the Lord's own words. "Nay, rather blessed are they that hear the word of God and keep it." (See on Lu 11:27).

 

[Brennin]

Nah, Ignatius of Antioch called Christs Church "Catholic" in 107 A.D., my Irish counter-part

Well, there is Catholic and then there is Roman Catholic.

 

[Athanasias]

Yes there is much more. One of my favorites is one I cannot remember, from the Old Testament, having to do with a gate that, once opened, no one else can enter. I studied it long ago, but now I can't remember it. Do you know which verse I'm talking about?

Yes I do know what verse your talking about(Ezekiel 44:1-12).St Jerome used this verse to prove the perpetual virginity of Mary but not the Immaculate Conception that I am aware of.

 

[Athanasias]

You are, of course, correct.

28. highly favoured--a word only once used elsewhere (Eph 1:6, "made accepted"): compare Lu 1:30, "Thou hast found favour with God." The mistake of the Vulgate's rendering, "full of grace," has been taken abundant advantage of by the [Roman] Church. As the mother of our Lord, she was the most "blessed among women" in external distinction; but let them listen to the Lord's own words. "Nay, rather blessed are they that hear the word of God and keep it." (See on Lu 11:27).

You are incorrect. Here is what a new testament professor if biblical Greek has to say about eph 1:6.


"The reason why the verb in Ephesians 1:6 does not imply sinless perfection, whereas the form of the same verb in Luke 1:28 does so imply, is this: The two verb forms use different stems. Every Greek verb has up to nine distinct stems, each expressing a different modality of the verb's lexical meanings.(FH. W. Smyth, Greek Grammar (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1968), 108-109.) Ephesians 1:6 has the first aorist active indicative form, echaritosen, "he graced, bestowed grace." This form, based on an aorist stem, expresses momentary action,(Blass and DeBrunner, Greek Grammar of the New Testament (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1961), 166. ) action simply brought to pass.(Smyth, sec. 1852:c:1.) It cannot express or imply any fullness of bestowing because "the aorist tense . . . does not show . . . completion with permanent result."(Ibid., sec. 1852:c, note.)

It's Greek to CRI

Luke 1:28 has the perfect passive participle, kecharitomene. The perfect stem of a Greek verb denotes the "continuance of a completed action";(Blass and DeBrunner, 175.) "completed action with permanent result is denoted by the perfect stem."(Smyth, sec. 1852:b.) On morphological grounds, therefore, it is correct to paraphrase kecharitomene as "completely, perfectly, enduringly endowed with grace." This becomes clearer when we examine other New Testament examples of verbs in the perfect tenseThe next three examples are taken from Blass and DeBrunner, 175-176.)

1. "He has defiled this sacred place" (Acts 21:28)--their entrance in the past produced defilement as a lasting effect.

2. "The son of the slave woman was born according to the flesh" (Gal. 4:23)--the perfect with reference to an Old Testament event can mean it retains its exemplary effect.

3. "Have I not seen Jesus our Lord?" 1 Cor. 9:1, Acts 22:15)--that Paul has seen the Lord is what establishes him permanently as an apostle.

Other examples I found:

1. "God spoke to Moses" (John 9:29)--the Pharisees hold that the Mosaic Law still and always holds.

2. "It is finished" (John 19:30)--the work of redemption culminating in the passion and death of Christ is complete and forever enduring .

3 "He rose on the third day" (1 Cor. 15:4)--unlike Lazarus who was raised from the dead but must die again, Christ rose to everlasting life.

4. "All things have been created through him and for him" (Col. 1:16)--all creation continually exists, upheld by God (this is the teaching of God's universal providence and also the refutation of deism).

Here are examples, like kechari-tomene, of perfect participles in the New Testament:

1. "To the praise of his glorious grace, which he bestowed on us in his beloved"(Eph. 1:6)--Christ is perfectly, completely, endlessly loved by his Father.

2. "Blessed is the fruit of your womb" (Luke 1:42)--Christ is perfectly and endlessly blessed by God.

Because Luke 1:28 uses the perfect participle kecharitomene to describe Mary, CRI is wrong to say there is nothing in this verse to establish the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception. One word of one Bible verse does not prove the doctrine, but kecharitomene proves the harmony of the doctrine with Scripture."

Taken from tract: http://www.catholic.com/thisrock/1992/9209fea2.asp

 

[Brennin]

You are incorrect. Here is what a new testament professor if biblical Greek has to say about eph 1:6.


"The reason why the verb in Ephesians 1:6 does not imply sinless perfection, whereas the form of the same verb in Luke 1:28 does so imply, is this: The two verb forms use different stems. Every Greek verb has up to nine distinct stems, each expressing a different modality of the verb's lexical meanings.(FH. W. Smyth, Greek Grammar (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1968), 108-109.) Ephesians 1:6 has the first aorist active indicative form, echaritosen, "he graced, bestowed grace." This form, based on an aorist stem, expresses momentary action,(Blass and DeBrunner, Greek Grammar of the New Testament (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1961), 166. ) action simply brought to pass.(Smyth, sec. 1852:c:1.) It cannot express or imply any fullness of bestowing because "the aorist tense . . . does not show . . . completion with permanent result."(Ibid., sec. 1852:c, note.)

It's Greek to CRI

Luke 1:28 has the perfect passive participle, kecharitomene. The perfect stem of a Greek verb denotes the "continuance of a completed action";(Blass and DeBrunner, 175.) "completed action with permanent result is denoted by the perfect stem."(Smyth, sec. 1852:b.) On morphological grounds, therefore, it is correct to paraphrase kecharitomene as "completely, perfectly, enduringly endowed with grace." This becomes clearer when we examine other New Testament examples of verbs in the perfect tenseThe next three examples are taken from Blass and DeBrunner, 175-176.)

1. "He has defiled this sacred place" (Acts 21:28)--their entrance in the past produced defilement as a lasting effect.

2. "The son of the slave woman was born according to the flesh" (Gal. 4:23)--the perfect with reference to an Old Testament event can mean it retains its exemplary effect.

3. "Have I not seen Jesus our Lord?" 1 Cor. 9:1, Acts 22:15)--that Paul has seen the Lord is what establishes him permanently as an apostle.

Other examples I found:

1. "God spoke to Moses" (John 9:29)--the Pharisees hold that the Mosaic Law still and always holds.

2. "It is finished" (John 19:30)--the work of redemption culminating in the passion and death of Christ is complete and forever enduring .

3 "He rose on the third day" (1 Cor. 15:4)--unlike Lazarus who was raised from the dead but must die again, Christ rose to everlasting life.

4. "All things have been created through him and for him" (Col. 1:16)--all creation continually exists, upheld by God (this is the teaching of God's universal providence and also the refutation of deism).

Here are examples, like kechari-tomene, of perfect participles in the New Testament:

1. "To the praise of his glorious grace, which he bestowed on us in his beloved"(Eph. 1:6)--Christ is perfectly, completely, endlessly loved by his Father.

2. "Blessed is the fruit of your womb" (Luke 1:42)--Christ is perfectly and endlessly blessed by God.

Because Luke 1:28 uses the perfect participle kecharitomene to describe Mary, CRI is wrong to say there is nothing in this verse to establish the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception. One word of one Bible verse does not prove the doctrine, but kecharitomene proves the harmony of the doctrine with Scripture."

Taken from tract: http://www.catholic.com/thisrock/1992/9209fea2.asp

No, I am correct. Or, rather, the scholars I cited are correct. I assure you, they were much more learned than your weak Marian apologist. I think the RC apologia website you lifted this from is exploiting the differences between Classical or Attic Greek and Hellenistic or Koine Greek.

 

[Brennin]

...

2) Regarding perfect and pluperfect tense forms in Koine, I don't think one can lay down a hard and fast rule regarding what they must mean in every context. Sometimes the perfect or pluperfect really do seem to be emphasizing stative aspect in the present or in the past: ESTE SESWMENOI ("You are in a state of salvation"); EGEGRAPTO ("It was in writing"--"It was a document." On the other hand these forms may on occasion have the same sense as aorists: EGEGRAPTO = EGRAFH ("It had been written"--in a context where the verb indicates completion prior to some given point in the past); ESTE SESWMENOI = ESWQHTE much like a Latin SALVATI ESTIS or French Pass ind fini:"You got saved." One has to make a judgment based on context as to which sense better fits in this instance.

...

Carl W. Conrad
Department of Classics, Washington University
One Brookings Drive, St. Louis, MO, USA 63130

...

http://www.ibiblio.org/bgreek/test-archives/html4/1997-05/18928.html

 

[Athanasias]

No, I am correct. Or, rather, the scholars I cited are correct. I assure you, they were much more learned than your weak Marian apologist. I think the RC apologia website you lifted this from is exploiting the differences between Classical or Attic Greek and Hellenistic or Koine Greek.

The Scholar i cited was not a Marian apologist. He was a New testamant Koine Greek Professor who taught at the university levels. Fr Mateo did well in explaining in depth why Lk 1:28 does imply the immaculate conception and why Eph 1:6 does not. just because you do not agree with it means nothing to the Church. He used the koine Greek language(which is his specialty and he teaches) to show this. He also backed this up by listing standard Protestant and secular Koine Greek Lexicons which demonstrated his point. I see your going to make this out to be a My Greek bible Scholar can beat yours up kinda thing. Then we are to go nowhere. Catholic have plenty of reasons from the Greek language itself as proven by Koine Greek and biblical scholars to believe this verse does imply the IC and mean full of Grace. The Fathers of the Church who knew Greek also seem to back up the Catholic interpretation of this point.

Now stop being a sore looser.

 

[Brennin]

The Scholar i cited was not a Marian apologist. He was a New testamant Koine Greek Professor who taught at the university levels. Fr Mateo did well in explaining in depth why Lk 1:28 does imply the immaculate conception and why Eph 1:6 does not. just because you do not agree with it means nothing to the Church. He used the koine Greek language(which is his specialty and he teaches) to show this. He also backed this up by listing standard Protestant and secular Koine Greek Lexicons which demonstrated his point. I see your going to make this out to be a My Greek bible Scholar can beat yours up kinda thing. Then we are to go nowhere. Catholic have plenty of reasons from the Greek language itself as proven by Koine Greek and biblical scholars to believe this verse does imply the IC and mean full of Grace. The Fathers of the Church who knew Greek also seem to back up the Catholic interpretation of this point.

Now stop being a sore looser.

The author of the article you cited most certainly is a Marian apologist; if he teaches Koine then he should know that in the transition from Attic to Koine there was a "gradual loss of semantic distinctiveness between the aorist and the perfect."

There is no justification in the Bible for your false Marian beliefs, sorry.

 

[SpiritualAntiseptic]

Nah, the RCC is at most 1600 years old, which is well short of the mark.

It began at Pentecost actually and the Vatican was established by Peter before he was martyred. But if you want to tell me your story of what happened 1600 years ago that made the Catholic Church, I would love to hear it- to find it amusing and prove you wrong.

 

[SpiritualAntiseptic]

Well, there is Catholic and then there is Roman Catholic.

They mean the same thing.

Unless you are one of those protestants that disregards the defintion of Catholic since it was created and instead, subscribes to a new definition created by protestants so they could leave the Church without violating the Nicene Creed.

"We believe in the Catholic Church, but by "Catholic" we don't really mean that one..."

 

[Brennin]

They mean the same thing.

Unless you are one of those protestants that disregards the defintion of Catholic since it was created and instead, subscribes to a new definition created by protestants so they could leave the Church without violating the Nicene Creed.

"We believe in the Catholic Church, but by "Catholic" we don't really mean that one..."

I do not affirm the Nicene Creed, and theologians were referring to the Catholic Church long before the rise of the papacy.

 

[Catholic Christian]

Yes I do know what verse your talking about(Ezekiel 44:1-12).St Jerome used this verse to prove the perpetual virginity of Mary but not the Immaculate Conception that I am aware of.

Oh, yes, you're right. I'm posting in too many threads at once. LOL!