Posted on 09/04/2008 3:24:18 PM PDT by annalex
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. The grace given to Mary is at once permanent and of a unique kind. Kecharitomene is a perfect passive participle of charitoo, meaning "to fill or endow with grace." Since this term is in the perfect tense, it indicates that Mary was graced in the past but with continuing effects in the present. So, the grace Mary enjoyed was not a result of the angel’s visit. In fact, Catholics hold, it extended over the whole of her life, from conception onward. She was in a state of sanctifying grace from the first moment of her existence.
Does the full of grace mean that she did not need salvation?
so the bible is a liar? Isa and Paul are liars? It's says that all not some but all and Isa says that we are not righteous no not one.
The infancy gospel is usually attributed to St. James, but may be of later origin. What makes you think it is made up?
The Bible is inspired inerrant scripture. For that reason it is important to read it carefully and understand it in context. If you do, you will agree that the context of Romans 3 makes it clear it is a generalization and not a prooftext of Mary’s sinfullness. Likewise with Isaiah, — the Bible makes many references to righteous people. Noah, for example, is described as “perfect in every way”.
"All have sinned " only means that all are subject to original sin. Mary was spared from original sin by God, not herself. The popular analogy is God let us fall in the mud puddle, and cleaned us up afterward through baptism. In Mary's case, God did not let her enter the mud puddle. Consider, too, Rom. 3:23 - "all have sinned" also refers only to those able to commit sin. This is not everyone. For example, infants, the retarded, and the senile cannot sin. In Rom. 3:23, finally, "all have sinned," but Jesus must be an exception to this rule. This means that Mary can be an exception as well. Note that the Greek word for all is "pantes."
Mary, too, required a Savior. Like all other descendants of Adam, she was subject to the necessity of contracting original sin. But by a special intervention of God, undertaken at the instant she was conceived, she was preserved from the stain of original sin and its consequences. She was therefore redeemed by the grace of Christ, but in a special way—by anticipation.
Consider an analogy: Suppose a man falls into a deep pit, and someone reaches down to pull him out. The man has been "saved" from the pit. Now imagine a woman walking along, and she too is about to topple into the pit, but at the very moment that she is to fall in, someone holds her back and prevents her. She too has been saved from the pit, but in an even better way: She was not simply taken out of the pit, she was prevented from getting stained by the mud in the first place. This is the illustration Christians have used for a thousand years to explain how Mary was saved by Christ. By receiving Christ’s grace at her conception, she had his grace applied to her before she was able to become mired in original sin and its stain.
I am off line until morning. Look forward to our discussion.
To which you are wrong on all three accounts.
Wise and gracious of you to make this clear up front. Otherwise, people might start making comparisons to the Angel Moroni ...
Please respond to the suggestion, also from Romans 3, that no one seeks God and all are blaspheming murderers. Selective prooftexting is disrespect for the Holy Scripture; avoid it.
all right we are all sinners without the Holy Spirit to bring convictions and repentance we would all go to hell. Is that plain enough?
Does Romans 3 mean that Mary is also a blaspheming murderer not seeking God? You are getting tiresome.
Yes
Good luck with that.
How about Noah?
It’s too bad that affirming the Scriptural truth that Christ is our only redeemer and only mediator and only intercessor is seen as “an occasion of sin.” Somehow this is viewed as detracting from Mary when it is simply giving Christ His due.
Well, this is a caucus, and those of us who hold the perspective you enunciate are guests, here. We are constrained by good manners to refrain from denouncing a parallel apparatus of salvation and revelation. We I go to visit my Muslim friends, I realize that mocking (Mo + "Gabriel") would be a great way to end the conversation, plus any hope of winning them to the true Revelation and Salvation we enjoy in Jesus Christ. Same with my Mormon friends -- deriding (Joe + "Moroni") would touch something deeply personal to them, triggering a visceral response that shuts off an ear for my testimony to the sufficiency of Christ.
Our challenge, as communicators of the Gospel, is to avoid the cheap shots and facile denunciations of the Gospa. Satan, after all, is "a liar and the father of lies," whose power rests upon our willingness to be deceived. The integrity of a kindly witness to the One who called Himself "the way, the truth, and the life" has its own power to draw all men unto the One who was lifted up, and away from cherished illusions.
Let's try to avoid trip-wires that end conversations.
Dear guitarplayer1953 ... by your own interpretation, you would have to include Jesus in that statement. This is the problem that arises when one practices Sola Scriptura, which is not in Scripture. Is private interpretation of the Bible condoned in the Bible Itself? No, it is not (2 Peter 1:20). Was individual interpretation of Scripture practiced by the early Christians or the Jews? Again, "NO" (Acts 8:29-35). Can there be more than one interpretation of the Bible? No. The word "truth" is used several times in the New Testament. However, the plural version of the word "truth" never appears in Scripture. Therefore, there can only be one Truth.
Is the Bible the sole "teaching from God?" No. The Bible Itself states that there are "oral" teachings and traditions that are to be carried on to the present-day (2 Thessalonians 2:15; 1 Corinthians 11:2; 2 Timothy 2:2; Romans 10:17; 1 Peter 1:24-25). These teachings are what the Catholic Church considers "Sacred Apostolic Tradition." This type of "Tradition" never changes because it was passed down by the Apostles themselves.
You understand that co-redemptrix is Latin when translated means the woman with the Redeemer, don’t you?
You understand what the word incarnate means?
You understand the difference between a Divine nature and a human nature?
You understand the following passage from Scripture?
"And whence is this to me, that the mother of my Lord should come to me?" Luke 1:43
Incorrect:
"Behold thou shalt conceive in thy womb, and shalt bring forth a son; and thou shalt call His name Jesus." Luke 1:31
Bumping this older thread for the revelation of turth!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.