Was Mary sinless?
- Thread starter TonyChanYT
- Start date
-
Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.
You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Zachariah.
Member
The words "Pure", "Virgin" and "Sinless" are used interchangeably and all mean the same thing in a biblical context.
It is in every case a reference to a pure heart.
Yes, Mary was sinless as she conceived Jesus through the act of compassion. Compassion being the primary nature of the Holy Spirit.
When you make love to your partner, are you doing it in a passionate, self gratifying way. Or do you embody the Holy Spirt and make love in a compassionate way.
When you conceive your own child, how will you do it?
One is sinfull and the other sinless.
Whatever you do, just don't get caught up in all the dogma. When understood correctly, these things will comply with both logical and intuitive capacities. Logic being the key word here.
It is in every case a reference to a pure heart.
Yes, Mary was sinless as she conceived Jesus through the act of compassion. Compassion being the primary nature of the Holy Spirit.
When you make love to your partner, are you doing it in a passionate, self gratifying way. Or do you embody the Holy Spirt and make love in a compassionate way.
When you conceive your own child, how will you do it?
One is sinfull and the other sinless.
Whatever you do, just don't get caught up in all the dogma. When understood correctly, these things will comply with both logical and intuitive capacities. Logic being the key word here.
Last edited:
Randy Kluth
Well-Known Member
Yes, all are sinners. All are descended from Adam and Eve, except for Jesus, who was conceived by the Holy Spirit.
Another quote is this:
Luke 1.46 And Mary said: “My soul glorifies the Lord 47 and my spirit rejoices in God my Savior..
This is a regular mantra King David expressed, "God my Savior." Mary was reflecting the worship of her ancestor, David, who acknowledged his sin and his love for God, his Redeemer from sin.
If Mary needed a "Savior," then she was a Sinner. To render sinless a human who was descended from Adam and Even is to call God a liar or to deify a human being other than Jesus. Very bad doctrine!
Bob Estey
Well-Known Member
Everybody has sinned, except Jesus.
To those who currently don't agree that Jesus's Mother did not inherit original sin nor actively sin, consider that God is the Most Holy and Pure One, and He says that the virtues of holiness and purity are to be respected in Him and achieved within ourselves with His help, as well as that those pure in heart will see Him (Matt. 5:8), and to be pure in heart means to not be impure in thought, word, and deed. For these reasons and others, why would God (Purity) enter and Incarnate Himself and take form within One Who is not completely Pure?
God Ab Aeterno would've Thought of creating the soul that was to be the soul of the Mother of God Incarnate. Therefore, do you believe that God was capable or incapable of preserving Her soul from becoming subject to the law of the first parents (inheriting original sin), thus remaining an immaculate soul capable of possessing the fullness of His Grace, and then infused it into the embryo at the moment of Her conception? Do you believe that those factors, coupled with Mary being conceived by and born of two Just human parents and having a natural good will, could've or couldn't have resulted in Her being without sin and thus a worthy dwelling place for God Incarnate, the Son of God, the Messiah, the Savior, the most Holy and Perfect One, to take form in and live a divinely Holy life with in Spirit and Body on earth and in Heaven?
God Ab Aeterno would've Thought of creating the soul that was to be the soul of the Mother of God Incarnate. Therefore, do you believe that God was capable or incapable of preserving Her soul from becoming subject to the law of the first parents (inheriting original sin), thus remaining an immaculate soul capable of possessing the fullness of His Grace, and then infused it into the embryo at the moment of Her conception? Do you believe that those factors, coupled with Mary being conceived by and born of two Just human parents and having a natural good will, could've or couldn't have resulted in Her being without sin and thus a worthy dwelling place for God Incarnate, the Son of God, the Messiah, the Savior, the most Holy and Perfect One, to take form in and live a divinely Holy life with in Spirit and Body on earth and in Heaven?
Last edited:
He condescended to live with fallen man. He also touched lepers, and ate with sinners.
The simple fact is that while some seem to feel Jesus could not incarnate unless He first created a "second Eve", but that is not Biblical. What is Biblical is that all have sinned, and all need a savior, except Jesus Himself. There are many places in the Bible that tell us this in no uncertain terms.
Much love!
That's because He had to, but why did God, the Most Holy and Pure One, Incarnate Himself and take form within One Who is not completely Pure, when He didn't have to?
Last edited:
What is your issue with this? The Bible plainly states that all have sinned and fallen short of God's glory. When Adam fell, Humanity fell. Jesus is a second Adam, and this the Bible teaches. Mary was not "second Eve" as some claim. Scripture does not teach that.
Because He had to? Do you think Jesus was doing something He didn't want to do? I don't think so!
You ask, "would He do such and such" about a question that is clearly answered in the Bible.
Much love!
In 1 Pet. 2:22, it doesn't say, "only Christ committed no sin," but rather, "Christ ... Who committed no sin." Jesus was God Incarnate, but also fully human, susceptible to the temptations of evil, and through His will, in cooperation with God the Father's help, He didn't commit sins. He was a human exception to the "all have sinned," including children who've died without having committed sins. For these reasons, Rom. 3:23 isn't proof that Jesus's Mother sinned, nor that She can't also be an exception. Would you say that you don't believe God could've preserved the soul of the Mother of God from becoming subject to the law of the first parents (inheriting original sin)?
Last edited:
Moot point.
All have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God.
Solomon knew the same thing. Its all over the Bible.
Much love!
Again, in 1 Pet. 2:22, it doesn't say "only Christ committed no sin," but rather, "Christ ... Who committed no sin." Jesus was God Incarnate, but also fully human, susceptible to the temptations of evil, and through His will, in cooperation with God the Father's help, He didn't commit sins. He was a human exception to the "all have sinned," including children who've died without having committed sins. For these reasons, Rom. 3:23 isn't proof that Jesus's Mother sinned, nor that She can't also be an exception. Do you agree that our God, Who "with all things are possible" (Matt. 19:26), was capable of preserving the soul of the Mother of God from becoming subject to the law of the first parents (inheriting original sin)?
Last edited:
Romans 3:23 KJV
For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God;
Romans 5:12 KJV
Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned:
Romans 5:18 KJV
Therefore as by the offence of one judgment came upon all men to condemnation; even so by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life.
Romans 3:9-10 KJV
9) What then? are we better than they? No, in no wise: for we have before proved both Jews and Gentiles, that they are all under sin;
10) As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one:
Do you need to see more?
Much love!
Refer to the dictionary for the definitions of "sophistry." Then, perhaps going forward you'll know when to properly apply it in discussion. Any other excuse to avoid answering the question in post #12?
Sophistry, it sounds good, but it's not.
What question do you want an answer to? Whether God is able to create a new being untainted by Adam's sin from which to birth Jesus? Yes, of course He could. Could God have caused Jesus to be born from a walrus? Yes, of course He could. But He didn't.
Rather than concocting superficially plausible but fallacious arguments, I recommend you believe what the Bible actually tells us about these things.
Much love!
Attachments
I see you still don't understand what the word "sophistry" means. Well, there's nothing I can do about that.
Do you agree that our God, Who "with all things are possible" (Matt. 19:26), was capable of preserving the soul of the Mother of God from becoming subject to the law of the first parents (inheriting original sin)?
Last edited:
Augustin56
Well-Known Member
Part 1. Not a few Protestants are surprised to discover that the Catholic Church actually agrees that Mary was “saved.” Indeed, even if she was conceived immaculate, Mary still needed a savior! However, Mary was “saved” from sin in a most sublime manner. She was given the grace to be “saved” completely from sin so she never committed even the slightest transgression. The problem here is that Protestants tend to emphasize God’s “salvation” almost exclusively to the forgiveness of sins actually committed. However, Sacred Scripture indicates that salvation can also refer to man being protected from sinning before the fact.
Now to him who is able to keep you from falling and to present you without blemish before the presence of his glory with rejoicing, to the only God, our Savior through Jesus Christ our Lord, be glory, majesty, dominion, and authority, before all time and now and for ever (Jude 24-25).
The great Franciscan theologian, Duns Scotus, explained ca. 600 years ago that falling into sin could be likened to a man approaching unaware a massive twenty-foot-deep ditch. If he falls into the ditch, he will need someone to lower a rope and save him. But if someone were to warn him of the danger ahead, resulting in him not falling into the ditch at all, the man would have been saved from falling in the first place. Analogously, Mary was saved from sin by receiving the grace to be preserved from it. But she was still saved.
But what about “all have sinned,” and “if any man says he has no sin he is a liar and the truth is not in him?” Wouldn’t “all” and “any man” include Mary? On the surface, this sounds reasonable. But this way of thinking carried to its logical conclusion would list Jesus Christ in the company of sinners as well. No Christian would dare say that! Yet no Christian can deny the plain texts of Scripture declaring Christ’s full humanity, either. Thus, if one is going to take 1 John 1:8 in a strict literal sense, then “any man” would apply to Jesus as well!
The truth is—and all Christians agree—Jesus Christ was an exception to Romans 3:23 and 1 John 1:8. And the Bible tells us he was in Hebrews 4:15: “Christ was tempted in all points even as we are and yet he was without sin.” The real question now is, are there any other exceptions to this rule? Yes, there are. In fact, there are millions of them.
First of all, we need to recall that both of these texts—Romans 3:23 and 1 John 1:8—are dealing with personal rather than original sin. Romans 5:12 will deal with original sin. And there are two exceptions to that general biblical norm as well. But for now, we will simply deal with Romans 3:23 and 1 John 1:8. 1 John 1:8 obviously refers to personal sin because in the very next verse, St. John tells us, “If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins.” We do not confess original sin; we confess personal sins.
The context of Romans 3:23 makes clear that it too refers to personal sin:
None is righteous, no, not one; no one understands, no one seeks for God. All have turned aside, together they have gone wrong; no one does good, not even one. Their throat is an open grave. They use their tongues to deceive. The venom of asps is under their lips. Their mouth is full of curses and bitterness (Romans 3:10-14).
Original sin is not something we do; it is something we’ve inherited. Romans 3 deals with personal sin because it speaks of sins committed by the sinner. With this in mind, consider this: has a baby in the womb or a child of two ever committed a personal sin? No, he hasn’t (see Rom. 9:11)! Or how about the mentally challenged who do not have the use of their intellects and wills? These cannot sin because in order to sin, a person has to know that the act he is about to perform is sinful while freely engaging his will in carrying it out. Without the proper faculties to enable them to sin, children before the age of accountability and anyone who does not have the use of his intellect and will cannot sin. Right there you have millions of exceptions to Romans 3:23 and 1 John 1:8.
Similar threads
