Mary and Luke 1:28

[Salty]

I found the following on the Syracuse.com forum:

DOES say Mary was without sin. The original 
Greek word "kecharitomene" by which the 
angel addressed her indicates that she was 
in a permanent state of fullness of grace, 
which one cannot be unless one is sinless. 
If you are to find the fullness of Christ's 
truths, you cannot merely take someone's 
English translation of the Bible and view 
it from 21st century eyes. You MUST go 
back to the original text, if possible, 
and view it with the eyes of the Apostles. 
The ONLY way to do this is to view it 
from the eyes of the only organization 
that has kept the original meanings of 
Christ's teachings for 2000 years, the 
CATHOLIC Church. NO other Christian 
organization has been around as long. 
And, the Catholic Church has never 
changed any of Christ's teachings. Not 
once, in its 2000 year history.

This is first time I have ever heard of a Bible reference about Mary being sinless.

So my fellow Bible Scholars - your thoughts on the "orginial" meaning.

 

[Palatka51]

I found the following on the Syracuse.com forum:

DOES say Mary was without sin. The original 
Greek word "kecharitomene" by which the 
angel addressed her indicates that she was 
in a permanent state of fullness of grace, 
which one cannot be unless one is sinless. 
If you are to find the fullness of Christ's 
truths, you cannot merely take someone's 
English translation of the Bible and view 
it from 21st century eyes. You MUST go 
back to the original text, if possible, 
and view it with the eyes of the Apostles. 
The ONLY way to do this is to view it 
from the eyes of the only organization 
that has kept the original meanings of 
Christ's teachings for 2000 years, the 
CATHOLIC Church. NO other Christian 
organization has been around as long. 
And, the Catholic Church has never 
changed any of Christ's teachings. Not 
once, in its 2000 year history.

This is first time I have ever heard of a Bible reference about Mary being sinless.

So my fellow Bible Scholars - your thoughts on the "orginial" meaning.

Yes, this would be very interesting.

 

[canadyjd]

The word "kexaritomena" is a passive verb in Luke 1:28. The action (grace, favor) is being done to her and is not coming from her.

The angel is telling Mary she has been shown favor by God. She will bear the Messiah.

There is absolute nothing in the passage about Mary's sin or lack thereof.

The entire comment is nothing but Catholic propaganda.

peace to youraying:

 

[North Carolina Tentmaker]

Well there is a lot more than one error in your quote SCB. The line of:

NO other Christian organization has been around as long.

is the first one. The Catholic church can date back to the 4th century, but the New Testament church has been around since Pentecost. Those Landmarkers we get on here from time to time would love to challenge you on that one.

How about the line

the Catholic Church has never changed any of Christ’s teaching. Not once, in its 2000 year history.

A lot of people here can take issue with you on that. How about salvation by grace alone? How about indulgences? How about baptism? How about confession? I think there are plenty of Christ’s teaching that has been perverted and changed over the history of the Catholic church.

But back to your original question and the Greek word “kecharitomene,” blue letter bible gave me this:

χαίρω chairō [thouthatart]highlyfavoured, g5487

I am guessing that what Syracuse calls kecharitomene is the same as Strong’s G5487, charitoō. This Greek word only occurs in one other verse, Eph 1:6 where it is translated accepted. Look at Eph 1:5-7:

Having predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to himself, according to the good pleasure of his will, To the praise of the glory of his grace, wherein he hath made us accepted in the beloved. In whom we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins, according to the riches of his grace;

Looking at this verse in context we can see that this word charitoo refers to our acceptance before God. It is linked with the idea of foreknowledge (or predestination for you Calvinists) and the idea of our redemption through the blood of Christ. In verse 7 it is clear that our sins are forgiven. The linking of charitoo to the forgiveness of our sins in Eph 1 seems to me to make it impossible to think that it referrs to a permenant state of sinlessness in Luke. If it implied sinlessness then what do we need to be forgiven of?

Now that is “Using the Bible to translate and interperit the Bible” which is I believe a valid approach. Since this word only occurs twice in scripture this may not be a strong argument for skeptics although it is plenty strong for me as a believer. The dictionary definition of charitoo is:

1) to make gpermanentinterpretraceful
a) charming, lovely, agreeable
2) to peruse with grace, compass with favour
3) to honour with blessings

I don’t see a lot of help here to be honest with you, but I don’t see anything to support the sinless argument either.

 

[Jerome]

NO other Christian organization has been around as long.

Whatever. From the Orthodox Church in America site:
"Jesus Christ is Mary's Savior, as well as ours, as testified in her own statement in St Luke -- the Magnificat -- where she says, "My soul magnifies the Lord, and my spirit rejoices in God my Savior." If Mary had been "sin-proofed," so to speak, from all eternity, the Orthodox would argue as to why she would need a Savior."

 

[webdog]

The word "kexaritomena" is a passive verb in Luke 1:28. The action (grace, favor) is being done to her and is not coming from her.

The angel is telling Mary she has been shown favor by God. She will bear the Messiah.

There is absolute nothing in the passage about Mary's sin or lack thereof.

The entire comment is nothing but Catholic propaganda.

peace to youraying:

Amen! Also, it would be very strange for her to present two doves as a sacrifice if she were without sin.

 

[Jim1999]

Consider this reasoning. If Jesus is to be born naturally sin free, how is this posssible if Mary is not sin free herself with Jesus in her womb? An unborn fetus carries with it all the innate functions and attributes of the mother, and by seed, father. Yes, Mary was impregnated by the Holy Spirit,,,,absolute purity...then the human Mary is also involved...human qualities. How is a sinless state possible?

Even the Catholic churches admit that an infant is in grave danger of sin, and hence sprinkle as soon as possible after birth to rid it of original sin.

By the way, I am not endorsing the Catholic thinking. I am just postulating a thought, which must be considered.

Cheers,

Jim

 

[webdog]

Sin is passed through the father, as it was through Adam, per the order of creation.

 

[Jim1999]

So, Eve was without sin as are all women?

Cheers,

Jim

 

[Zenas]

This might be a more interesting thread if a moderator would move it to the "Other Christian Denominations" forum.

 

[Amy.G]

So, Eve was without sin as are all women?

Cheers,

Jim

Yes. Especially me. :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

 

[Jim1999]

Then, Amy, you must be in line after me..........Sinless purr-fection, pussy cat!

Cheers,

Jim

 

[webdog]

Yes. Especially me. :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

So...THAT'S why you have been casting the stones at me :laugh:

 

[webdog]

So, Eve was without sin as are all women?

Cheers,

Jim

No, but God said she was deceived. We died the moment Adam sinned because he sinned willfully. The OT sacrificial system had atonements for sin that was committed unwllfully.

 

[Jim1999]

It still doesn't explain how Mary could give birth to anyone without sin,,,,,,unless she was declared immaculate.

Sin passed to all men (creation-adamic).

Cheers,

Jim

 

[webdog]

It still doesn't explain how Mary could give birth to anyone without sin,,,,,,unless she was declared immaculate.

Sin passed to all men (creation-adamic).

Cheers,

Jim

It passed to all men through him...not her. Since Christ was 100% human, it also doesn't make sense that someone without sin could die physically in a fallen body designed to do so, yet Christ did.

 

[Jim1999]

sin passed to all creation, not just a man..Yes, We are told about Adam, the man's, situation, but all sin is passed through adam, the creation. Adam did not always mean Adam, the man. He was named later. In Genesis Adam also referrred to all creation. Check out your Hebrew.

Secondly, you are suggesting that women do not inherit sin because Adam sinned and so all men are sinners.

Was Jesus, the baby, enclosed in a special sac and fed mysteriously outside of Mary's body? When does human life receive a soul or spirit? Is it after or upon birth? At what point is a fetus responsible for sin and where did that sin come from?

Cheers,

Jim

Cheers,

Jim

 

[Carolina Baptist]

Consider this reasoning. If Jesus is to be born naturally sin free, how is this posssible if Mary is not sin free herself with Jesus in her womb? An unborn fetus carries with it all the innate functions and attributes of the mother, and by seed, father. Yes, Mary was impregnated by the Holy Spirit,,,,absolute purity...then the human Mary is also involved...human qualities. How is a sinless state possible?

Even the Catholic churches admit that an infant is in grave danger of sin, and hence sprinkle as soon as possible after birth to rid it of original sin.

By the way, I am not endorsing the Catholic thinking. I am just postulating a thought, which must be considered.

Cheers,

Jim

There is a problem with the logic of this.
If Mary had to be free of sin in order to give birth to a sinless Savior, then for her to be free of sin her mother and father also had to be sinless. This problem would exist with each generation all they way back to Adam and Eve. Only intervention by God could solve this problem, which He did by sending Jesus (not Mary) as the sinless savior.

 

[Jim1999]

How?

Cheers,

Jim

 

[bapmom]

It's not that women did not inherit sin - it's that the blood comes from the father. Jesus' blood did not come from Mary, it never mingled with Mary's. There was no need for any special sac, as no baby in the womb ever shares it's mother's blood.

The Bible seems to indicate that sin is passed down through the father - there is evidence to say that the blood is how that happens.

To comment more on what the Catholic statement proposed - in order to believe that Jesus HAD to have had a sinless mother in order for Him to be sinless, we also must wonder how Mary could have been sinless. This doctrine of the Catholic church, if carried to it's logical conclusion, would have to propose an entire line of sinless women starting with Eve and ending with Mary. How else could Mary be sinless unless her own mother were sinless? And so on and so on?