What texts prove that Mary was a sinner?

[Fidelibus]

Thanks and well of course my obvious answer is yes,.. but it's not what was written it's how it was that made it sound like you were questioning their salvation.

Oh no..... I would never question some one else's salvation.

By they way, sorry about not getting back to you sooner, but I was gone camping for a few day's.
Now getting back to our discussion. I see that you answered yes to the questions I put forth to you. Yes you are seeking God in your life, and yes you agree with 'ByTheSpirit' when it say's in Rom.3:23 "for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God", and that when this passage say's 'ALL'.... that 'ALL' absolutely means 'ALL'..... Correct?

Okay, remember when I asked 'ByTheSpirit' and you... "are you seeking God in your life?" Remember when I did, I said I would explain later? Well, here is the later. The reason I asked you two that, is because in Romans 3:11, it says..."No one seeks for God." Now, if "all" in Romans verse 23 is an absolute as you've said yes too, then "no one" in Romans verse 11 has to also be an absolute.

So, as you can see, this brings up a dilemma. If "all" is an absolute in verse 23, and "no one" is an absolute, in verse 11, then those that say they are "seeking God" in their life can't be, because the Bible says "no one" seeks God. Yet, they claim they are seeking God in their life. Which means, they don't believe "no one" is an absolute. (do you?) So, if "no one" in verse 11 is not an absolute, then "all" in verse 23 is not necessarily an absolute either, would you not agree? Or could it be they are interpreting one verse one way, in order to fit their beliefs, but then they are interpreting another verse in a completely different way, in order to fit their beliefs?


Have a Blessed Day!

 

[Bob Carabbio]

This entire discussion is a special case of the Tradition argument. Some Protestants want to have only Scripture—okay. We say Scripture is (a hugely important) part of Tradition.

Further, some Protestants do believe and did believe that Mary was without sin.

Further, since Protestants do not have a single opinion on the matter...how can it be true that Protestants "relate properly" to "the Mary of the Bible"?

Simply because THE MAJORITY of us Non-Catholics understand that Mary was a completely normal Jewish Gal, selected by God for an important (and difficult) ministry, which she, and her future husband, carried out properly in the Bringing forth of God's only begotten SON, and rearing Him with proper Jewish religious training. Mary, and Joseph, AFTER Jesus' birth then married and went on to have a Natural family that Jesus grew up and manured among. It's OBVIOUS from scripture, and Mary and her family didn't HAVE A CLUE what Jesus was really all about, but apparently at least SOME of her family including herself became Born Again Christians After Jesus was Crucified as our SIN OFFERING.

 

[archer75]

Simply because THE MAJORITY of us Non-Catholics understand that Mary was a completely normal Jewish Gal, selected by God for an important (and difficult) ministry, which she, and her future husband, carried out properly in the Bringing forth of God's only begotten SON, and rearing Him with proper Jewish religious training. Mary, and Joseph, AFTER Jesus' birth then married and went on to have a Natural family that Jesus grew up and manured among. It's OBVIOUS from scripture, and Mary and her family didn't HAVE A CLUE what Jesus was really all about, but apparently at least SOME of her family including herself became Born Again Christians After Jesus was Crucified as our SIN OFFERING.

You didn't address what I said at all.

 

[Bob Carabbio]

Simply because THE MAJORITY of us Non-Catholics understand that Mary was a completely normal Jewish Gal, selected by God for an important (and difficult) ministry, which she, and her future husband, carried out properly in the Bringing forth of God's only begotten SON, and rearing Him with proper Jewish religious training. Mary, and Joseph, AFTER Jesus' birth then married and went on to have a Natural family that Jesus grew up and manured among. It's OBVIOUS from scripture, and Mary and her family didn't HAVE A CLUE what Jesus was really all about, but apparently at least SOME of her family including herself became Born Again Christians After Jesus was Crucified as our SIN OFFERING.

"Catholic tradition" (Roman and otherwise), since it's largely NON-Scriptural in nature

You didn't address what I said at all.

Sorry, but I did.

 

[thecolorsblend]

.

 

[chevyontheriver]

Nope, they appear to have bought into the "Sinless Mary" lie also. They havent developed their "Mary thing" to anywhere the degree of foolishness that the Roman Catholics have, though. ONLY Protestants relate properly to the Mary of the Bible.

You made me laugh.

When Catholics and Orthodox share a position, and oddly that happens from time to time, it's probably because that position is from original Christianity. Not exceptionally smart to automatically call such a position a 'lie' or 'foolishness'.

You say "ONLY Protestants relate properly to the Mary of the Bible" as if you all agree. But THAT'S not true. You can't even agree on whether Mary was the mother of God or not.

Anyhow, you made me laugh. Thanks for that.

 

[April_Rose]

Oh no..... I would never question some one else's salvation.

By they way, sorry about not getting back to you sooner, but I was gone camping for a few day's.
Now getting back to our discussion. I see that you answered yes to the questions I put forth to you. Yes you are seeking God in your life, and yes you agree with 'ByTheSpirit' when it say's in Rom.3:23 "for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God", and that when this passage say's 'ALL'.... that 'ALL' absolutely means 'ALL'..... Correct?

Okay, remember when I asked 'ByTheSpirit' and you... "are you seeking God in your life?" Remember when I did, I said I would explain later? Well, here is the later. The reason I asked you two that, is because in Romans 3:11, it says..."No one seeks for God." Now, if "all" in Romans verse 23 is an absolute as you've said yes too, then "no one" in Romans verse 11 has to also be an absolute.

So, as you can see, this brings up a dilemma. If "all" is an absolute in verse 23, and "no one" is an absolute, in verse 11, then those that say they are "seeking God" in their life can't be, because the Bible says "no one" seeks God. Yet, they claim they are seeking God in their life. Which means, they don't believe "no one" is an absolute. (do you?) So, if "no one" in verse 11 is not an absolute, then "all" in verse 23 is not necessarily an absolute either, would you not agree? Or could it be they are interpreting one verse one way, in order to fit their beliefs, but then they are interpreting another verse in a completely different way, in order to fit their beliefs?


Have a Blessed Day!

I'm sorry, but I have special needs and I didn't understand a word of that.

 

[Fidelibus]

I'm sorry, but I have special needs and I didn't understand a word of that.

Okay..... Not sure how I could have made it any simpler. Maybe you could try reading it again, or have a friend try to explain it to you. Or better yet, maybe one of the other posters on this thread like Daniel Marsh or Bob Carabbio could try explaining it to you, or maybe even answering it.


Have Blessed Day

 

[April_Rose]

Okay..... Not sure how I could have made it any simpler. Maybe you could try reading it again, or have a friend try to explain it to you. Or better yet, maybe one of the other posters on this thread like Daniel Marsh or Bob Carabbio could try explaining it to you, or maybe even answering it.


Have Blessed Day

Okay thanks, you too,.. and hopefully they will.

 

[Bob Carabbio]

You made me laugh.

When Catholics and Orthodox share a position, and oddly that happens from time to time, it's probably because that position is from original Christianity. Not exceptionally smart to automatically call such a position a 'lie' or 'foolishness'.

You say "ONLY Protestants relate properly to the Mary of the Bible" as if you all agree. But THAT'S not true. You can't even agree on whether Mary was the mother of God or not.

Anyhow, you made me laugh. Thanks for that.

"Mother of God" is a silly, but understandable "Spin" the the Catholic Denominations tie on Mary for their own agenda (making her into something that she's NOT). WE all agree that Mary was Jesus' mom, and that the Circumstances of Jesus' birth were miraculous. WE also agree that since Jesus was the incarnation of "THE WORD" (who was with God, and who WAS God) that the "title" has an understandable "Religious rationalization" associated with it.

However GOd doesn't HAVE a "mother" Mary is The Mother of JESUS. ANd that's the end of the story. SHe gave birth, raised Him, and when Jesus entered His ministry, she thought he'd lost his mind, and went out with her family to drag Him out of the public view. None of them had a CLUE what Jesus was all about. His OWN half brothers didn't think HE was anything special!!!

 

[chevyontheriver]

"Mother of God" is a silly, but understandable "Spin" the the Catholic Denominations tie on Mary for their own agenda (making her into something that she's NOT). WE all agree that Mary was Jesus' mom, and that the Circumstances of Jesus' birth were miraculous. WE also agree that since Jesus was the incarnation of "THE WORD" (who was with God, and who WAS God) that the "title" has an understandable "Religious rationalization" associated with it.

However GOd doesn't HAVE a "mother" Mary is The Mother of JESUS. ANd that's the end of the story. SHe gave birth, raised Him, and when Jesus entered His ministry, she thought he'd lost his mind, and went out with her family to drag Him out of the public view. None of them had a CLUE what Jesus was all about. His OWN half brothers didn't think HE was anything special!!!

Thanks. Your post just confirmed that when you said "ONLY Protestants relate properly to the Mary of the Bible" it was the beginning of an exposition of how Protestant understanding of the Mary of the Bible would be a 'celebration of diversity'. So which is it? Do Protestants have the inside track on the Mary of the Bible, or is it just certain Protestants like those in your chosen denomination? The ones who deny Mary is the mother of God just because the Catholics and the Orthodox stand on that as a christological doctrine of the faith.

You see if Mary is the mother of Jesus AND Mary is not the mother of God THEN Jesus is not God. But you seem to have said "Jesus was the incarnation of "THE WORD" (who was with God, and who WAS God)" so I can say you are not making sense in the overall picture. Oh well. You did give me another laugh. Thanks again.

By the way, when Lutherans use the term 'mother of God' what Catholic agenda are they fulfilling?

 

[OzSpen]

Huh?

Our generation has gone off the deep end. Jesus Himself told her that He had to be about His Father's business. I know you HAVE TO make Mary a sinner, but child abuse? How far do you have to go to manufacture a sin of hers?

chevy,

Are you saying the Jesus' mother was not a sinner?

I'm finding that a hard one to believe. This is Mary's song: 'And Mary said: "My soul glorifies the Lord and my spirit rejoices in God my Saviour"' (Luke 1:46-47 NIV).

This magnificent psalm was spoken when Mary was carrying the Christ child. She 'rejoices in God my Saviour'. She was not rejoicing in 'a' Saviour but 'the Saviour'. No sinless person needs my Saviour.

I cannot find anything in the Bible to confirm Mary was sinless.

Oz

 

[prodromos]

No sinless person needs my Saviour.

Every descendant of Adam needs salvation from death.

 

[chevyontheriver]

chevy,

Are you saying the Jesus' mother was not a sinner?

Yes. Exactly.

I'm finding that a hard one to believe. This is Mary's song: 'And Mary said: "My soul glorifies the Lord and my spirit rejoices in God my Saviour"' (Luke 1:46-47 NIV).

I know that verse well. It's part of Vespers, the evening prayer of the Liturgy of the Hours. I am not at all a stranger to that verse. I accept it as absolutely true.

This magnificent psalm was spoken when Mary was carrying the Christ child. She 'rejoices in God my Saviour'. She was not rejoicing in 'a' Saviour but 'the Saviour'. No sinless person needs my Saviour.

I agree that she spoke of 'my' savior, and that she needed a savior. I fully agree. I consider the application of that salvation to have been at the beginning of her life, before she fell and sinned, and not after she fell and sinned. Still saved, but saved from falling or ever sinning. It's as if you are required to detour around a sinkhole that other motorists have driven into. They need to be rescued from the sinkhole to be saved. You were saved from ever falling into the sinkhole. It may be less dramatic, but you too were saved from that sinkhole and you were saved by the same emergency services that pulled those others out of the hole. Mary was a sinless person who would have ended up just like the rest of us sinners but for her savior working in her life.

I cannot find anything in the Bible to confirm Mary was sinless.

I think for that you have to look to the same Song of Mary for some hints. There it says "all generations shall call me blessed" and "He that is mighty hath done great things to me". This isn't proof, but it is an indicator that there is something very special about Mary. She is not a run of the mill mother of a Jewish boy. But those are just hints. I look several verses earlier, to the annunciation, starting in verse 26.

26 In the sixth month the angel Gabriel was sent from God to a city of Galilee named Nazareth, 27 to a virgin betrothed to a man whose name was Joseph, of the house of David; and the virgin's name was Mary. 28 And he came to her and said, "Hail, full of grace, * the Lord is with you!" * 29 But she was greatly troubled at the saying, and considered in her mind what sort of greeting this might be. 30* And the angel said to her, "Do not be afraid, Mary, for you have found favor with God. 31* And behold, you will conceive in your womb and bear a son, and you shall call his name Jesus. 32 He will be great, and will be called the Son of the Most High; and the Lord God will give to him the throne of his father David, 33* and he will reign over the house of Jacob for ever; and of his kingdom there will be no end." 34* And Mary said to the angel, "How shall this be, since I have no husband?" 35* And the angel said to her, "The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you; therefore the child to be born * will be called holy, the Son of God. 36 And behold, your kinswoman Elizabeth in her old age has also conceived a son; and this is the sixth month with her who was called barren. 37* For with God nothing will be impossible." 38 And Mary said, "Behold, I am the handmaid of the Lord; let it be to me according to your word." And the angel departed from her.

It is the 'full of grace' that indicates to me a fullness of grace that has no room at all for the emptiness of sin. The angel Gabriel comes to her as a messenger, but here a mighty archangel refers to her as graced. Ordinarily it would be the other way around. But Mary isn't ordinary. It wasn't an ordinary greeting either. The angel said she was completely, perfectly, enduringly endowed with grace. One can downplay the meaning of the word 'kecharitōmenē' but I think it should be read otherwise than as a mere favor. It's the import of this one word that tells me Mary was sinless. It was so interpreted by St. Thomas Aquinas, who held that Mary never sinned, but was saved at least from right after the moment of her conception.

Here is an article that explains that interesting word 'kecharitōmenē': What Do We Mean By Full of Grace?.

Matt Slick, on the contrary, does a clever contrarian view by back translating 'full of grace' = 'gratia plena' to 'plaras karitos' and then equating Mary with Stephen. And then never translating 'kecharitōmenē', which is the real word in question. See that one here: Mary, Full of Grace, and Luke 1:28 | CARM.org

Anyhow, that is the Biblical source for my thinking that Mary was sinless. And to no surprise it is hotly contested by many modern Protestants, who need to figure out how to make the Bible say what they want it to say, and in doing so minimize Mary, who they seldom would affirm as blessed although all generations will do so.

Oz

Good to hear from you.

 

[Fidelibus]

WE all agree that Mary was Jesus' mom, and that the Circumstances of Jesus' birth were miraculous. WE also agree that since Jesus was the incarnation of "THE WORD" (who was with God, and who WAS God) that the "title" has an understandable "Religious rationalization" associated with it.

However GOd doesn't HAVE a "mother" Mary is The Mother of JESUS. ANd that's the end of the story.

If Mary only bore the flesh of Jesus, then where was the Divinity? When did Jesus become both fully human and fully Divine?


Have a Blessed Day!

 

[Bob Carabbio]

If Mary only bore the flesh of Jesus, then where was the Divinity? When did Jesus become both fully human and fully Divine?

The MIRACLE of Jesus was that: as a "NORMAL HUMAN" subject to being tempted as WE ARE (James 1:14) - Jesus NEVER let the temptation (that we fall to regularly) CONCEIVE, and become sinful actions. Obviously Jesus had some "extra horsepower" in that regard that the rest of us DON"T HAVE. The simple fact is that JESUS had to accept who He was (God's only begotten SON) by FAITH - just as WE have to acdcept oput PERFECTION IN HIM as Christians by Faith. Just think how utterly ridiculous it would be if Jesus was "almighty God hiding in a "Man suit" pretending to be human" for satan to say: "IF THOU BE THE SON OF GOD" - or that satan would give him the Authority over all Jesus saw - when he already HAD IT!!!

Jesus on earth was ALWAYS Fully Human, and in him dwelled the fullness of the Godhead bodily. DOn't understand??? Nobody else does either really. But there will come a time when we will KNOW - even as we are known.

 

[Bob Carabbio]

You see if Mary is the mother of Jesus AND Mary is not the mother of God THEN Jesus is not God.

Yup, that's the ridiculous human reasoning the Catholics always spout about the "Title". But God (being eternal) doesn't HAVE a Mother - but His only begotten SON DID. Catholics have apparently adopted the blasphemy of "Diana/Artimis" into their religious system - PROBABLY to make it more palatable to the heathen they were trying to "Sell" their religion to, and re-purposed the REAL Mary into their own phony Goddess. And then ROME (as the first protestants when they tossed the Orthodox under the bus) continued to develop their "Mary thing" into the usurping MONSTER she's become in 2020.

WHEN they make "her/it" a Co-redemptorix (as they're working towards), that'll be the END of Roman Catholicism as a "Christian" religious system, and their BLASPHEMY will be complete.

 

[chevyontheriver]

The MIRACLE of Jesus was that: as a "NORMAL HUMAN" subject to being tempted as WE ARE (James 1:14) - Jesus NEVER let the temptation (that we fall to regularly) CONCEIVE, and become sinful actions. Obviously Jesus had some "extra horsepower" in that regard that the rest of us DON"T HAVE. The simple fact is that JESUS had to accept who He was (God's only begotten SON) by FAITH - just as WE have to acdcept oput PERFECTION IN HIM as Christians by Faith. Just think how utterly ridiculous it would be if Jesus was "almighty God hiding in a "Man suit" pretending to be human" for satan to say: "IF THOU BE THE SON OF GOD" - or that satan would give him the Authority over all Jesus saw - when he already HAD IT!!!

Jesus on earth was ALWAYS Fully Human, and in him dwelled the fullness of the Godhead bodily. DOn't understand??? Nobody else does either really. But there will come a time when we will KNOW - even as we are known.

It's hard to tell what you really mean here, so I'll just ask you how you think what you wrote corresponds or does not correspond to the Nicene Creed.

 

[chevyontheriver]

Yup, that's the ridiculous human reasoning the Catholics always spout about the "Title". But God (being eternal) doesn't HAVE a Mother - but His only begotten SON DID. Catholics have apparently adopted the blasphemy of "Diana/Artimis" into their religious system - PROBABLY to make it more palatable to the heathen they were trying to "Sell" their religion to, and re-purposed the REAL Mary into their own phony Goddess. And then ROME (as the first protestants when they tossed the Orthodox under the bus) continued to develop their "Mary thing" into the usurping MONSTER she's become in 2020.

WHEN they make "her/it" a Co-redemptorix (as they're working towards), that'll be the END of Roman Catholicism as a "Christian" religious system, and their BLASPHEMY will be complete.

I was humored by your earlier responses but I'm thinking now you really do have an animus that is best not to feed.

 

[Daniel Marsh]

Okay..... Not sure how I could have made it any simpler. Maybe you could try reading it again, or have a friend try to explain it to you. Or better yet, maybe one of the other posters on this thread like Daniel Marsh or Bob Carabbio could try explaining it to you, or maybe even answering it.


Have Blessed Day

Historically even the Protestant Reformers believed Mary was the Mother of God.
THE PROTESTANT REFORMERS ON MARY

Others object to the title because they think the title has been exagerated.

Fact is Jesus was fully human and fully God
Mary gave birth to Jesus
Jesus was in her womb
Thus she is the Mother of God too.

Galatians 4
English Standard Version
Sons and Heirs
4 I mean that the heir, as long as he is a child, is no different from a slave,[a] though he is the owner of everything, 2 but he is under guardians and managers until the date set by his father. 3 In the same way we also, when we were children, were enslaved to the elementary principles of the world. 4 But when the fullness of time had come, God sent forth his Son, born of woman, born under the law, 5 to redeem those who were under the law, so that we might receive adoption as sons. 6 And because you are sons, God has sent the Spirit of his Son into our hearts, crying, “Abba! Father!” 7 So you are no longer a slave, but a son, and if a son, then an heir through God.