Mary Sinless?

[Athanasias]

Hey I did a formal debate on this subject and answered many of the objections that are raised:

See here: http://christianforums.com/showthread.php?t=7274365

Enjoy!

In Jesus through Mary,
Athanasias

WWMD-What would Mary do?(See Lk 1:38)

 

[calluna]

I'm sure if you had asked that nicely they'd have given you an answer.

You would have agreed with it, then?

I agree.

Then we agree that the table has no point of comparison of OT figures with Mary. The whole case for Mary is completely sham. The extraordinary thing is that people are taken in by it.

 

[larry_boy_44]

You would have agreed with it, then?

Probably not... But you never know, maybe there's a solid case for it...

Then we agree that the table has no point of comparison of OT figures with Mary. The whole case for Mary is completely sham. The extraordinary thing is that people are taken in by it.

I agree that, from what I know, there is no good reason to assume Mary was sinless, and absolutely no reason to dictate that you must believe it to be saved or to make it doctrinal...

But, yet, let's let them answer the questions. Like I said before, responding the way you did earlier in the thread just gives them an out to not answer, they can hide behind the tone of your answers and ignore the actual issues you bring up...

 

[calluna]

let's let them answer the questions.

Yes, let's.



What proven similarity is there between Eve and Mary, other than gender?

 

[dinomight]

I knew this would be a controversial topic, but I appreciate the answers. Mr. Stain, I'm glad you shared that quote from Justin Martyr, because that just so happens to be who I'm currently reading about in a book entitled The Four Witnesses. Athanasia, I look forward to reading the debate you posted the link to; I've bookmarked it for when I have a bit more time to sit down and read through it.

Also, there were a couple mentions of Martin Luther, and I just thought I'd add that I've been very surprised by some of the things I've read about him in just the last couple of days. Obviously, I have to look at Internet sources with a certain skepticism accounting for biases and such, but, even so, I found many interesting quotes. It seems that Luther became quite angry later in life and actually wrote a very anti-Semitic book. I also read that he had an illustrator friend of his do some etchings to be placed in the Bible for the illiterate to learn from; one of these depicted the Pope, wearing the 3 tiered crown, as the Antichrist. In other words, by placing it in the Bible, people could have been easily led to think that the Bible actually specifically indicated that the Pope would be the Antichrist.

Sorry for getting off track from my own question about how it would be possible for Mary to be sinless, but I think it does relate in the sense that we have to look at history to see where and why our views diverged.

 

[MrPolo]

So Mary was married to Jesus?

No. Typology does not mean an identical mirror. And for our OP, I will explain if it helps:

Jesus is the type of Adam:

Romans 5:14, 19 Yet death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over those whose sins were not like the transgression of Adam, who was a type of the One who was to come....by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, so by one man's obedience many will be made righteous.​

You see Jesus is a type insofar as Adam was a key man who's level of obedience affected mankind's relationship with God. It does not mean that Jesus must be an identical reflection of all aspects of Adam---that he be married like Adam, have kids like Adam, etc... Certainly, a skeptic would not argue with Paul and say something like, "Oh, so then Jesus must have had kids too, huh. If he's a type of Adam...this is blasphemy!" No, that is not typology.

So too, Mary does not need to be the sacramentally married spouse of Adam's ante-type, Jesus. She reflects the woman's reversal of obedience, the reversal of Eve's disobedience (as all NT types are the glorified version of their OT parallels), as Scripture suggests and the early Church recognized through Tradition. We must submit to what God reveals on the matter.

dinomight, if you are reading up on church fathers on this matter, here is a good little summary, along with a chart of parallels between the two.

In his debate, Athanasias, as I now recall, summarized the matter concisely in this manner:

Mary in the New Testament is also a fulfillment of certain types namely Eve and the Ark of the Covenant. In Genesis Eve is described as a "Women" who disobeyed God. Genesis describes one woman (Eve) and one man (Adam) who are created initially immaculate. The woman and man are approached by one angel (who is fallen, the Devil) and they choose freely to disobey God and eat one food from one tree that would cause death for a whole race. In Luke's gospel the same is seen but only in reversed and redemptive way. In Luke one woman (Mary) is visited by one angel (who is holy, Gabriel) and this one woman freely chooses to obey and accept God's plan for her, unlike Eve. This one women would give birth to one man Jesus Christ who would die for all on a tree and give the world one food to eat that would give life to the whole human race (Holy Communion Jn 6:54-58).
​

 

[larry_boy_44]

Mary in the New Testament is also a fulfillment of certain types namely Eve and the Ark of the Covenant. In Genesis Eve is described as a "Women" who disobeyed God. Genesis describes one woman (Eve) and one man (Adam) who are created initially immaculate. The woman and man are approached by one angel (who is fallen, the Devil) and they choose freely to disobey God and eat one food from one tree that would cause death for a whole race. In Luke's gospel the same is seen but only in reversed and redemptive way. In Luke one woman (Mary) is visited by one angel (who is holy, Gabriel) and this one woman freely chooses to obey and accept God's plan for her, unlike Eve. This one women would give birth to one man Jesus Christ who would die for all on a tree and give the world one food to eat that would give life to the whole human race (Holy Communion Jn 6:54-58).

You do realize that problem with that, right?

Eve & Adam started sinless and ended sinful...

If you are going to reverse it, they have to start sinful and create sinless, meaning Mary had to have had sin in order to be the "reversed and redemptive way"...

 

[Light hearted]

I also am perplexed, where in the Bible does it say Mary was sinless?

It was once explained to me that Mary became pregnant by the Holy Spirit due to the fact that man's seed would carry with it the desire to sin, just as it says... all have sinned. Since Mary was birthed by mortal man seed she also is a sinner.

Why, I ask, why do some churches try to put man up with God, Jesus and the Holy Spirit. We are the filthy sinners Jesus came to save, yet someone keeps putting man (woman) up on top. Is is not enough to worship the one true God?

I read more comparisons than I care to count. The comparison of Mary being pure, just as the gold of the Ark. I gotta figure the tools used thousands of years ago were not all that sanitary. I can only assume that when tools were used to create the designs and in the shaping of the gold left small specs of dust, iron, or dirt, microscopically imbedded into the gold. They also had to heat the gold to a liguid to shape it. I assume the tools used to remove the gold from the oven may have left some microscopic pieces of forgien material imbedded into the gold also.

My point...... It only takes a microscopic spec to make something impure, it would only take a spec of action or thought for Mary to sin during her years before giving birth to Jesus.

I don't mean to pick on anyones analogies. It just irritates me to have people worship human beings. There is only one God, you shall only worship one God.

 

[calluna]

the reversal of Eve's disobedience

But you have to prove that Mary was obedient. The Bible never says that she was obedient. The Bible never says a good word about Mary, never says that she had faith, never says that she worked hard for the church, unless she is the Mary in Romans 16:6, which is unlikely. Now she's the Mary that Christians get their role model from.

 

[MrStain]

I knew this would be a controversial topic, but I appreciate the answers. Mr. Stain, I'm glad you shared that quote from Justin Martyr, because that just so happens to be who I'm currently reading about in a book entitled The Four Witnesses. Athanasia, I look forward to reading the debate you posted the link to; I've bookmarked it for when I have a bit more time to sit down and read through it.

Also, there were a couple mentions of Martin Luther, and I just thought I'd add that I've been very surprised by some of the things I've read about him in just the last couple of days. Obviously, I have to look at Internet sources with a certain skepticism accounting for biases and such, but, even so, I found many interesting quotes. It seems that Luther became quite angry later in life and actually wrote a very anti-Semitic book. I also read that he had an illustrator friend of his do some etchings to be placed in the Bible for the illiterate to learn from; one of these depicted the Pope, wearing the 3 tiered crown, as the Antichrist. In other words, by placing it in the Bible, people could have been easily led to think that the Bible actually specifically indicated that the Pope would be the Antichrist.

Sorry for getting off track from my own question about how it would be possible for Mary to be sinless, but I think it does relate in the sense that we have to look at history to see where and why our views diverged.

Cool. I just finished reading that book last week. The author did a great job of providing a historical/cultural perspective to the writings of those four early witnesses for Christ.

Yes, from what I can tell Luther's bitterness did seem to increase later on in life. I believe he pretty much resorted to calling everybody a heretic toward the end of his life. How dare anyone disagree with his authorative interpretations of Scripture! ahh.. the irony.

Thanks for your thoughtful posts & questions. May the Peace of Christ remain with you.

 

[MrStain]

I also am perplexed, where in the Bible does it say Mary was sinless?

It was once explained to me that Mary became pregnant by the Holy Spirit due to the fact that man's seed would carry with it the desire to sin, just as it says... all have sinned. Since Mary was birthed by mortal man seed she also is a sinner.

Why, I ask, why do some churches try to put man up with God, Jesus and the Holy Spirit. We are the filthy sinners Jesus came to save, yet someone keeps putting man (woman) up on top. Is is not enough to worship the one true God?

I read more comparisons than I care to count. The comparison of Mary being pure, just as the gold of the Ark. I gotta figure the tools used thousands of years ago were not all that sanitary. I can only assume that when tools were used to create the designs and in the shaping of the gold left small specs of dust, iron, or dirt, microscopically imbedded into the gold. They also had to heat the gold to a liguid to shape it. I assume the tools used to remove the gold from the oven may have left some microscopic pieces of forgien material imbedded into the gold also.

My point...... It only takes a microscopic spec to make something impure, it would only take a spec of action or thought for Mary to sin during her years before giving birth to Jesus.

I don't mean to pick on anyones analogies. It just irritates me to have people worship human beings. There is only one God, you shall only worship one God.

You are asking fair questions, Light Hearted. I have to head off to work in a few minutes, but I just wanted to respond quickly to a few points of your post.

First, don't forget that God created us. He is the potter and could create & mold us as He sees fit to accomplish the salvation of the world. Lastly, I don't think anyone would disagree with you that there is only one God and only He is worshipped as such. That is orthodoxy and I've yet to run across a Christian sect that worships human beings.

ETA: Where in the Bible is the inspired table of contents listing the books of the New Testament?

 

[MrStain]

But you have to prove that Mary was obedient. The Bible never says that she was obedient. The Bible never says a good word about Mary, never says that she had faith, never says that she worked hard for the church, unless she is the Mary in Romans 16:6, which is unlikely. Now she's the Mary that Christians get their role model from.

I'm really curious. What Bible are you reading? I'm wondering if you are a follower of some sort of Marcion wannabe with a mutiliated set of Gospel texts.

 

[MrPolo]

f you are going to reverse it, they have to start sinful and create sinless, meaning Mary had to have had sin in order to be the "reversed and redemptive way"...

I discussed the degree to which typology is an exact "mirror" in my previous post. It isn't a mirror, it's a type, revealed to us by God. The early Church certainly saw Mary as a type of Eve. They saw the Scriptural message.

As to your "where in the Bible question" see post 3.

 

[calluna]

But you have to prove that Mary was obedient. The Bible never says that she was obedient. The Bible never says a good word about Mary, never says that she had faith, never says that she worked hard for the church, unless she is the Mary in Romans 16:6, which is unlikely. Now she's the Mary that Christians get their role model from.

Is there not one Catholic, out of all the millions, who can show that Mary was obedient?

 

[Kat8765]

I think this show Mary's obedience.

Mary said, Behold, I am the handmaid of the Lord. May it be done to me according to your word. Luke 1:38

also

When the wine ran short, the mother of Jesus said to him, "They have no wine" and Jesus said to her, "Woman, how does your concern affect me? My hour has not yet come." His mother said to the servers,"Do whatever he tells you." Jn 2:3-5

 

[calluna]

I think this show Mary's obedience.

Mary said, Behold, I am the handmaid of the Lord. May it be done to me according to your word. Luke 1:38

Think so, or hope so? There are three legitimate interpretations of Mary's statement that do not indicate her obedience. Think about it.

also

One thing at a time.

 

[larry_boy_44]

I discussed the degree to which typology is an exact "mirror" in my previous post. It isn't a mirror, it's a type, revealed to us by God. The early Church certainly saw Mary as a type of Eve. They saw the Scriptural message.

As to your "where in the Bible question" see post 3.

Yeah, I get that... But you said they reversed a process, and that's different...

And you have still ignored my "all have sinned" question...

and the "what about Mary's parents?" question...

 

[MrPolo]

And you have still ignored my "all have sinned" question...

and the "what about Mary's parents?" question...

I already addressed "all" in my first post here, I think it was, regarding infants, or the severely retarded, even John the Baptist. You can find a plethora of articles or commentaries from Catholics and Protestants alike about the Greek word for "all" not necessarily having a fundamentalist exhaustive meaning of "every single one" in lots of Scripture passages. Plus, if you absolutize "all have sinned" then you'd have to throw in Jesus who was human and we know He didn't.

God has not offered any such revelation that Mary's parents were conceived without sin. Just Mary who was the one who bore the Incarnate Word.

 

[Kat8765]

Think so, or hope so? There are three legitimate interpretations of Mary's statement that do not indicate her obedience. Think about it.

One thing at a time.

I really don't know how you can interpret these passages into anything else than what they clearly say. Obviously, Mary didn't run away from Gabriel or say no, she clearly left her life in the hands of the Lord. And, what was wrong with the second one?

 

[larry_boy_44]

I already addressed "all" in my first post here, I think it was, regarding infants, or the severely retarded, even John the Baptist. You can find a plethora of articles or commentaries from Catholics and Protestants alike about the Greek word for "all" not necessarily having a fundamentalist exhaustive meaning of "every single one" in lots of Scripture passages. Plus, if you absolutize "all have sinned" then you'd have to throw in Jesus who was human and we know He didn't.

Jesus was God. The full verse says "All have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God"... Jesus was God, so He didn't falls hort of the glory of God since He is God.

All those others are not God, thus they did fall short. Being human is falling short.

Either Mary and John the Baptist sinned, or the Bible is wrong. You can't have it both ways.

God has not offered any such revelation that Mary's parents were conceived without sin. Just Mary who was the one who bore the Incarnate Word.

But the logic used to say that Mary had to be sinless applies to Mary herself, too.

How did Mary get away from original sin if her parents were sinful? Isn't that why Mary is "sinless" and had a child as a virgin? So Jesus wouldn't have original sin?

If that's true, then how did Mary get around that and still be sinless???

The whole argument for Mary being sinless negates itself if you consider Mary's parents, because the same arguments made about Mary have to be made of them, too...