 |
I tried to Google this and couldn't find the answer. I recently learned that Catholics believe Mary was divine after she became pregnant with the Lord Jesus by the power of the Holy Spirit. My question is this... do Catholics believe that once the Pope is appointed to that position HE becomes divine? If this is a stupid question then I apologize. I really am curious because I was reading an article where he is called The Holy Father. Not being raise catholic, I was stunned by that title.
May I humbly suggest you read:-
CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA: The Pope
I will read it. I did scan it... not sure it gives me the direct answer I was looking for. Thanks though
Please do not be stunned!
In all countries the key is the symbol of authority. Thus, Christ's words are a promise that He will confer on Peter supreme power to govern the Church. Peter is to be His vicegerent, to rule in His place.
What do you mean by "divine" They believe in what the bible says that she is blessed above all women.
The church does not teach that she has any saving powers, and the pope is not "divine" and is not infalliable in his everyday life.
Where are you "hearing" or learning about Catholics
[snip]Quote:
Originally Posted by Fr_Chuck
I hope it's not too far from the topic, but if I may quasi-deflect for a moment, I'm interested to know: what exactly does your church mean by "blessed" in this context?
Mary is NOT divine, period. This is the teaching of the Catholic Church.Quote:
Originally Posted by classyT
The Pope is NOT divine, period. This is the teaching of the Catholic Church.
Beware of what you read from other than the Bible and the Catechism of the Catholic Church.
Anything else may or may not be correct.
If you have questions about what the Catholic church REALLY teaches, refer to the Catechism: See the 2nd, 3rd and 4th links here: Catholic Truths: Ecumenical Apolgetics. Links
Fr_Chuck,Quote:
Originally Posted by Fr_Chuck
I guess I thought I read it on this site. Maybe divine is the wrong word.. but what I meant was that she became sinless.. or unable to sin after she became pregnant. Did I get that wrong? I don't know, it is what I thought I read. So then Catholics believe that both the Pope and Mary could/can sin?
When referring to the Virgin Mary as 'blessed' the saying looks to the 'actual graces' conferred by God, i.e. being made immaculate. Calling her blessed indicates the sanctification bestowed on her; “Hail, full of grace, the Lord is with you: blessed are you among women.” (Luke 1:28)Quote:
Originally Posted by dwashbur
JoeT
Do you know what the basis of that translation/interpretation is? And Fr. Chuck and others, do you agree?Quote:
Originally Posted by JoeT777
Mary did not sin. This is an issue of tradition: A belief that we Catholics have.Quote:
Originally Posted by classyT
As for the Pope: Yes he does sin. He would be the first to admit it.
Check out the instances of the word used in the Bible:Quote:
Originally Posted by dwashbur
Blessed (338 Occurrences)
"Favored" is the meaning when referring to other than God.
And compare those uses to that which was used about Mary.
The version I used is the one authorized by the Council of Trent, the Latin Vulgate. The English translation is 16th century (I think – maybe 17th century) Douay-Rheims Bible. Along with the DR version, the Latin and Greek can be found at the following site: NEW ADVENT BIBLE: Luke 1.Quote:
Originally Posted by dwashbur
JoeT
For the sake of argument, we can use almost any version: to compare the greek (Koine) word that was used about Mary with the other uses of the word when the reference is to a person (as opposed to uses of the word about God).
Unfortunately, that list doesn't make any distinction among the different Greek terms that are rendered by "blessed." There are actually three: the most common one just means "happy." Another means "well spoken-of," basically having a good reputation. This one is actually used in reference to God several times by Paul. And the one used of Mary in Luke 1:28 means "giving favor to." in Ephesians 1:6, Paul uses the same term to describe how God has "favored" all of us. So I don't see how you can get any special "favor" given to Mary out of this word; it sure doesn't have anything to do with being immaculate or sinless, because if it did, it would describe all of us.Quote:
Originally Posted by RickJ
All we can do (since the Koine is no longer used) is compare the uses. "Favored", as I suggested, is not so different than the definitions (given by current fold for that old language) that you gave, is it?Quote:
Originally Posted by dwashbur
The bottom line: Mary is NOT divine. She clearly (according to the Biblical texts) has a "special" status (otherwise St. Gabriel would have picked someone else) but beyond that, it up to debate.
We Catholics (which is who the question was asked of) have our own opinion and that is what we have given here to answer the question that was directed to us.
The problem isn't the word "favored," it's what you read into the meaning of "favored."Quote:
Originally Posted by RickJ
I agree she's not divine. But the question then becomes what that "special status" is. If we look at the actual biblical text, the status seems to be based on her lineage as much as anything else. But after Jesus' birth and growth to adulthood, there doesn't seem to be anything special about her. And there was no need for her to be immaculate in order to give birth to Jesus.Quote:
The bottom line: Mary is NOT divine. She clearly (according to the Biblical texts) has a "special" status (otherwise St. Gabriel would have picked someone else) but beyond that, it up to debate.
Agreed, and we do agree that she's not, nor was she ever, "divine." Chosen, unbelievable privileged, definitely. But still human.Quote:
We Catholics (which is who the question was asked of) have our own opinion and that is what we have given here to answer the question that was directed to us.
There are some problems with the DR version. In this case, "full of grace" is misleading and is actually based on the Latin rather than on the original Greek text, which just says "favored."Quote:
Originally Posted by JoeT777
I noticed another problem in an earlier thread on this topic, where you quoted Romans 5:14:
“But death reigned from Adam unto Moses, even over them also who have not sinned, after the similitude of the transgression of Adam, who is a figure of him who was to come.” Who are those that "have not sinned"?
There is no justification at all for putting the comma after "sinned," because the sentence clearly says, even in the Latin text, "those who did not sin after the manner of Adam," i.e. those who didn't commit the same sin that Adam did. I'm not sure who put that comma there or why, but it's wrong.
So there are some big problems with the translation you're using. "I'm not judging, I'm just saying..." :D
No problem with me. I don't intend to argue Greek translation. I don't know enough to make it worth my while. Besides, my faith is built on the Magisterium of the Church which includes both the Traditions of the Apostles and Holy Scripture, not a book.Quote:
Originally Posted by dwashbur
Nevertheless, I suppose you could argue that 'full of grace' (κεχαριτωμένη [translieteration: kecharitomene])in Luke 1:28 could be translated 'full of favor' or 'highly favored.' It's certainly the argument that the infamous Catholic hater James White uses. He says that Mary is only full of God's favor. (frankly, I don't see much difference.) I'm told that the error is that the apparent use of the word infers a title since it follows a greeting, 'hail,' Thus, as Catholic Tradition teaches that 'kecharitomene' is a proper title for her, i.e. 'full of grace' and it would be just as right to call her the 'most favored' or 'full of favor'.
However, putting this with 'the Lord is with you' adds a bit of scale (more weight) doesn't it. Being full of the boss's favor is one thing, you might get a small raise, and you might get to take his tee on Friday and Monday; but when you are FULL OF GOD's FAVOR, now think of the number of times you can tee off. We aren't finished though, Mary is 'blessed among women;' so three special honors given to very few in the bible.
The reason we say Mary is full of Grace isn't so much because of the way we translate the Scripture, it's has more to do with what filled her belly, A LIVING GRACE. Thus, Mary was figuratively and literally 'full of grace.' St. Ambrose wrote:
But of what creature can it be said that it fills all things, as is written of the Holy Spirit: I will pour My Spirit upon all flesh. Joel 2:28 This cannot be said of an Angel. Lastly, Gabriel himself, when sent to Mary, said: Hail, full of grace, Luke 1:28 plainly declaring the grace of the Spirit which was in her, because the Holy Spirit had come upon her, and she was about to have her womb full of grace with the heavenly Word. St. Ambrose, On the Holy Spirit, Bk I, 85
You probably know that the Vulgate version was essentially the work of St. Jerome in the 4th century. You might say this translation has been around since people actually spoke ancient Greek. Thus, 'full of grace' has been the accepted Latin translation. St. Jerome taught Mary's perpetual virginity and her immaculate soul. (Cf. CHURCH FATHERS: The Perpetual Virginity of Mary (Jerome))
JoeT
I DO believe the Bible. That's why I posted what I did.Quote:
Originally Posted by Donna Mae II
The question is for Catholics (Read the question). Users should stick to threads that they believe they can help in, not go to areas where they cannot help - to negatively rate people in areas that they are not familiar with.
How'd you like it if people went into threads that you answer in - and rate you negatively just because they do not believe in your opinion?
No, I won't "retaliate" by giving you negative ratings (even though I'm sure I could find something that you've said that I disagree with). That would not be the Christian thing to do ;)
I tried to give you a balancer but apparently I'm overbalanced or something... while I don't believe Mary was sinless, that was a definite abuse of the rating system. Thank you for being more gracious than she was.Quote:
Originally Posted by RickJ
Thank you. I respect your opinion about Mary: it is a difficult thing to imagine/grasp. Regardless (and this is for all Christians), Catholics believe in Salvation by Grace through Faith (but be sure to see what James 2:14 says ;) See #2 here) .Quote:
Originally Posted by dwashbur
... so we don't have to sweat the other stuff :)
I am sorry, I guess I don't quite understand the rating system yet. I will give you an agree, because yes you are right, I am not Catholic. Hopefully the 'agree' will help.
My problem is that since this is a Christian forum I would think I wouldn't have to get permission to comment on something that is leading others to believe is in the Bible, when it is not.
God never said that Mary was without sin, that comment was about Christ only. As far as the pope--Jesus said, "Do not call anyone on earth 'father,' for you have one Father, and He is in heaven." (Matthew 23:9)
Other people; who don't know the Bible; are on this site searching for help in understanding our Lord. I believe they should hear both sides since there are a lot of "so-called facts" being tossed out to them, and I believe I have as much right as anyone, to tell them what God has to say about these subjects. My proofs will only come from the Bible, because that is the truth and no other book is needed.
Hope this doesn't offend anyone, but my responsibility is to God and the lost. Christians are told to go into the world and teach the word.
I'm trying.
Donna,
I agree with you. And when I was a newbie I gave out reddies because I didn't know any better. But I quickly learned People got ticked OFF! I am really careful not to give them in the Christian forum because so many people believe differently from me. Do I think there are many ways to believe and many paths to God ? NO. I don't. I think there is one way to heaven and a proper way to rightly divide the word of truth. I doubt I have it all right but I'm not near as bad off as some on this site. Ha ha ( teasing)
Anyway, I agreed with what you said. :)
I was just curious about what Catholics believe about the Pope.
I tried to give you an agree comment, but it won't let me.
Donna,
If you were trying to give Rick J a greenie, you have to rate different people before you can rate HIM again. Understand?
Back to the subject of Mary.
If I remember back to Catholic High School, we were taught by the Irish Christian Brothers that the subject of Mary was a constant thorn in the side of the early church. I do not believe that Divinity was the issue. The issue was the "Virginity" and "Sinless" tags that had been appended to her name.
I believe that the Council of Trent settled the debate by stating her virginity and her sinless status. Part of the statement was formed because of "Sinless" state of life prior to her committing to the Angel of God.
"... If we are to conclude, that God chose Mary apart from all other women to bare and rear His child.." "...Then we must conclude that Mary was sinless and had been set apart from all others at her birth."
Now we are going back almost 46 years to my high school days but the reason this is still memorable to me is the debate or classroom warfare that followed over predestination.
I'm intriqued so I toddle off and do some research.
Hi Don,Quote:
Originally Posted by donf
I think the question that several people, myself included, would have to ask is, how did it happen? If we conclude that Mary had to be sinless in order to bear the sinless Son of God, didn't her mother have to be sinless in order to bear the sinless mother of the Son of God, and her grandmother, and so on and so on and so on? I know someone else asked this question, but I haven't actually seen an answer. If your research turns up an answer to this, I'd be excited to see it.
Romans 5:12 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:Quote:
Originally Posted by dwashbur
Romans 3:23 For all have sinned and come short of the glory of God.
I don't know how anyone gets around that three little word ALL.
to quote a familiar source...
"and the beat goes on"
Please, throwing scripture at me is pointless.
For us Catholics it is far simpler. It is a Dogma of our faith. And we know that Faith tells to believe without understanding.
You point to the literal familial line of Mary and state if Mary was sinless, then her mother have been and so her grandmother. I say, why? I say God can do whatever He/She wants to. How can I put God's wishes and plans in a bottle and say God you must do things my way in order for me to understand your ways.
Do you believe in the Father - Son - Holy Spirit as one entity. Three in one. Explain that to me, please without bringing faith to the table.
I believe in the Bible and in Bible Scholarship. However, I do not believe that Gods begins and ends within the covers of the bible. There is 2000 years of history since the bible we have to learn from.
We as Catholics are called upon to believe and have faith in both the Bible and the Churches Magisterimum (Teachings).
This question came up before, you must have missed it last month when I wrote:Quote:
Originally Posted by dwashbur
For the Catholic the question has been settled by a pronouncement:
"We declare, pronounce, and define that the doctrine which holds that the most Blessed Virgin Mary, in the first instance of her conception, by a singular grace and privilege granted by Almighty God, in view of the merits of Jesus Christ, the Savior of the human race, was preserved free from all stain of original sin, is a doctrine revealed by God and therefore to be believed firmly and constantly by all the faithful." Pope Pius IX, Ineffabilis Deus, 1854
This is one of only two such pronouncements made with the authority of the ‘Key to heaven’. This is significant to Catholics.
As a matter of faith, Catholics hold that Mary was born Immaculate. She cannot be perceived as a ‘mere’ woman. It would be a misconception to regard Mary as insignificant in the formation of our faith in Christ. The Roman Catholic Church’s declaration of the Immaculate Conception isn’t made lightly. An obvious misconception is that Catholics claim that a sinless Christ HAD to be borne by a sinless woman. It isn’t that Christ HAD to be borne of a sinless woman but that he WAS borne of a sinless woman. This is foretold by prophesy and becomes an identifiable mark of who Christ is, i.e. the Son of God. God preserves Mary from original sin so that Divine Justice will prevail. “I will put enmities between you and the woman, and your seed and her seed: she shall crush your head, and you shall lie in wait for her heel.” (Gen 3:15 DRV). In His infinite mercy God overthrows the damnable serpent through the Blessed Virgin. Those who would eviscerate the Blessed Virgin Mary would instead stain and subjugate Mary to Satan. The Catholic faith holds Blessed Virgin singularly preserved, that is exempt from ALL stain of sin original sin or private (actual) sin through God’s grace.
Paul tells us why this is; “For as by the disobedience of one man [the original sin of Adam], many were made sinners” (Rom 5:19), consequently any man born has this original sin. Christ being man and God was the perfect sacrifice. "Behold the Lamb of God. Behold him who takes away the sin of the world" (John 1:29), the Paschal Lamb, the perfect sacrifice. These are two seeming diametrically opposed absolutes; one that all men are born with original sin, the stain of sin, the other that Christ was perfect without sin. But Christ is both man and God perfect on both accounts. As a result, there can only be one solution to this apparent dichotomy, Christ was born of a women whose original sin had been removed; this is what is meant when we say that Mary is preserved from original sin. Furthermore, He would be born of a woman that hadn’t known sin because of His residence within her womb. St. Jerome ventures still further;
…that Joseph himself on account of Mary was a virgin, so that from a virgin wedlock a virgin son was born. For if as a holy man he does not come under the imputation of fornication, and it is nowhere written that he had another wife, but was the guardian of Mary whom he was supposed to have to wife rather than her husband, the conclusion is that he who was thought worthy to be called father of the Lord, remained a virgin. St. Jerome, The Perpetual Virginity of Mary
Actually, whether Joseph was virgin is really immaterial here. However what is material is the verse, Jeremiah 31:22 “How long wilt thou be dissolute in deliciousness, O wandering daughter? For the Lord hath created a new thing upon the earth: A WOMAN SHALL COMPASS A MAN.” In this verse we see God’s mystical solution; rightly we conclude that Mary was Immaculate, protected from knowing the sins of Adam, protected from knowing the sins of men (or woman). But, how does one COMPASS Christ the man without ENCOMPASSING the God that is Christ? At the moment Christ was conceived God was infused; at that moment Mary’s womb must be spiritually clean; as clean as any ritually cleaned Tabernacle of Moses. Remember, Christ first ministry was the Hebrew and thus must be identifiable by the Jew – a Jew would not recognize a God that didn’t live in a ritually purified Tabernacle.
It’s important that Christ be perceived as ‘infused,’ as opposed to conjoin or thought of as an injection of God into man. Thus we hold the Blessed Virgin Mary’s womb as the dwelling place of God, a Holy of Holies, the Ark of the Covenant. This Tabernacle would (and must) remain pure even after the Ark has been removed, thus did the Virgin Mary remain celibate in her life. This is because, she is literally full of grace, full of God; would we, (or could we), expect less. Would the Jewish Nation accept a Paschal Lamb any less than spotless, less flawless?
The Tabernacle contained an outer court and inner court. See Ex 25-31 and Ex 39-40. Moses “commissioned” Beseleel, called by God to be the architect of the tabernacle and its furnishings; he was the son of Uri and the grandson of Hur along with Ooliab to build the tabernacle. In viewing the Tabernacle we move from outside inward we to a structure surrounded by a wall. Only one gate faces the east, a narrow gate; prefiguring Christ’s warning, “narrow is the gate of righteousness.” The gate opens into the outer court in which we find the sacrificial altar and the bronze laver. On this altar is where the perfect Lamb is sacrificed.
The inner court has a antechamber containing the Menorah, the Altar of Incense, the Table of Shewbread (otherwise known as The Proposition Loaves), behind the veil was the Holy of Holies. In this most Holy place was the Ark of the Covenant.
God resided in a place made holy by his commands. Therefore, Moses was ordered to keep the Tabernacle spiritually and ritually clean. The Ark of the Testimony (Exodus 25:16, 22; 26:33, etc.), the Ark of the Testament (Exodus 30:26), the Ark of the Covenant of the Lord (Numbers 10:33; Deuteronomy 10:8, etc.), the Ark of the Covenant (Joshua 3:6, etc.), the Ark of God (1 Samuel 3:3, etc.), the Ark of the Lord (1 Samuel 4:6, etc.) was the Incarnate Word of God; all of which resided in the womb of Mary in the Person of Jesus. Judaism or Catholicism certainly wouldn’t suggest that God reside in an unholy place.
The Tabernacle was the birthplace of the Jewish religion. Mary was a living Tabernacle and the birthplace of our Catholic faith as well. Christ said “Do not think that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets. I am not come to destroy, but to fulfill.” He came to live, with perfection, to consummate the Old Covenant and to establish the New Covenant. But Matthew doesn’t stop quoting Christ with simply “filling”, “For amen I say unto you, till heaven and earth pass, one jot, or one tittle shall not pass of the law, till all be fulfilled.” And too, we shouldn’t forget that with Christ’s birth, another wondrous birth occurs; the birth of God’s Kingdom on earth.
Where did the Holy Spirit put the New Covenant word? Christ, the New Covenant, was placed in the Ark of the New Covenant, the womb of Mary. (Cf. Luke 1, Rev 11:19, Rev 12:1) God was infused into man to become Christ. At the very moment of conception, within the womb of Mary, Christ, became man and God. Christ was one person with two natures, one of God, the other of man. Thus after the proper time, Christ was born of Mary as foretold by the angel; “Behold thou shalt conceive in thy womb and shalt bring forth a son: and thou shalt call his name Jesus. He shall be great and shall be called the Son of the Most High. And the Lord God shall give unto him the throne of David his father: and he shall reign in the house of Jacob for ever. And of his kingdom there shall be no end.” (Luke 1: 31-33) Eventually, He passes through the veil; it’s not rent, but He passes like light passes through a window. Christ now becomes the Menorah (light) of the world, whose Word fell on the Altar of Incense to rise pleasingly to God, whose light fell on the loaves of proposition (The Twelve Apostles). These loaves were consumed by the high Priests who were said to receive Divine knowledge. As you probably know, a Divine Hope is born out of knowledge giving the expectation of obtaining the Vision of the Divine. This is Christ’s birth, the Divine Hope.
And just as the Jewish Kingdom of faith was born in the Ark of the Covenant, so was the Church of Jesus Christ (the Catholic Church) infused in a human Ark, an ark like Noah’s carrying the future of man across the waters of death, i.e. sin, within the womb of Mary. The Blessed Virgin Mary carries the spotless sacrificial lamb across the waters of death in sin to a landfall - our salvation. And when He hung on the Cross, he gave up the ghost with a loud cry; and it was then “the veil of the temple was rent in two, from the top to the bottom.” His death was the beginning; it was then that the veil was rent with the birth of the newly commissioned Church, built on Peter’s commission to minister our salvation. Christ is truly present in any sense you want to consider; being a continuation of sacrifice of both the Old Testament and the New, body, soul and Divinity contained within Holy Eucharist. The Holy Spirit conceived the Church of Jesus Christ. In Matthew 16 we see sacrificial exposure of the bread (Apostles) to the Face of God.
Therefore we can only conclude that Mary is Ever Virgin and immaculate. Any less immaculate and Christ could not be considered a spotless, sinless, the Paschal Lamb. As in the time of Moses, whenever the Tabernacle was moved, the site became holy, and remained spiritually and ritually clean. As when Christ was born, so too was Mary. Mary being literally full of Grace, we hold that this Tabernacle could never be desecrated.
Mary had to be sinless for the Messiah to be born of her. More important still, failing to recognize the Blessed Virgin Mary as immaculate, as Ever Virgin, as the Mother of God wounds the Creed in which we profess One God, with three Persons, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. To say that Mary was born with sin means that the ‘Perfect Sacrificial Lamb’ resided in filth and thus having contact with sin couldn’t be ‘perfect’ preventing every Jew of the day from seeing Christ as God – in fact it would make Christ a false god. To dismiss Mary’s virginity is to say that God came from the seed of man – and in order to be the God He is, would require for Christ to be ‘created’. It would be necessary for God to ‘make’ Christ. How can the uncreated be created? To dismiss that Mary was Ever Virgin is to say that one can be in physical contact with a Living Grace Personified and still turn away – once again making God back into man. Either way, renouncing Mary’s immaculate nature places Christ (an ‘un-created’ God), on the same plane as a ‘created’, man, a contradiction most Catholics are unwilling to make.
JoeT
Don,Quote:
Originally Posted by donf
Well scripture is all I have to throw at you. ( wasn't really throwing it at you though :) )
Yes I believe that God is one God in three persons. I believe it because the Bible teaches it. I believe God, I believe his written word.
One thing the Bible says that God cannot do is lie. He would not tell us in His word that all have sinned if He didn't mean it. He isn't the author of confusion.
Having said that, when I asked the question I was sincere in wanting the answer. It wasn't my intend to throw scripture at anyone as if I KNOW it all. I wanted the Catholic belief and I got it. :)
But isn't that what your church does when they insist that Mary had to be sinless in order to give birth to Jesus? We've already read thatQuote:
Originally Posted by donf
"... If we are to conclude, that God chose Mary apart from all other women to bare and rear His child.." "...Then we must conclude that Mary was sinless and had been set apart from all others at her birth."
So the whole idea is built on somebody's notion of logic, something that has to be in order for X to happen. But that's not the case, as you just admitted. If God can do whatever he wants to, then none of it is necessary.
Three points to make.Quote:
Originally Posted by classyT
1. The above verse is clearly talking about "men", Mary is a "woman" so this verse does not have to apply to her!
2. Jesus was fully "man" as much as he was fully "God", therefore doesn't the above verse apply to him also?
3.
Heb 11:5 KJV
By faith Enoch was translated that he should not see death;
But the verse states "so death passed upon all men." How do you reconcile this contradiction?
ClassyT,
Mary is not considered to be divine nor is the pope
Mary is the most blessed among women by God, according to the bible.
The pope is the holy father of The Church on earth appointed as such by Jesus as his vicar, or prime minister here.
The most holy of holy persons is God that does not mean that others can not be holy such as the holy saints and angels. Being blessed with god's grace is to be placed in a holy state of being.
It is believed that when a person is sinless that person is then holy, such as a newly baptized person.
Falling into sin wipes that away.
Peace and kindness,
Fred
I'm only going to comment on one of them because it falls within my area of expertise.Quote:
Originally Posted by elscarta
Sorry, but Greek didn't work that way. The expression "all men" meant "all people." That's clear from the rest of the verse which says "all sinned." 3:23 also makes this clear because it likewise doesn't include the word "men."Quote:
1. The above verse is clearly talking about "men", Mary is a "woman" so this verse does not have to apply to her!
Nice try, though.
The death that passed upon all men is obviously spiritual death. Not every man will physically die. I believe in the rapture... whether it is pretrib, midtrib or posttrib... those believers won't die either.Quote:
Originally Posted by elscarta
My point was ALL have sinned and come short of the glory of God. Which puts Mary in the mix of that three little word.
Incidentally and this is a personal thought... God didn't need to use someone sinless in order to have his son born into the world. Jesus was fully human and fully God. Pretty COOL all the way around if you ask me.
Another thought... God won't ever go outside of his written word to accomplish his purposes. He doesn't need to. He IS GOD and he can do anything but He can't lie. Therefore Mary was born just like all of us were born, with a sin nature. You can't beat the odds... sinful natures begats sinful natures. Having said that, the Lord saw something mighty special about her and what a privilege she had. Pretty awesome!
ClassyT,
Two of the Greek words which translate as "ALL" are
"holos"
Strong's G3650 - holos means
1) all, whole, completely
And
"pas"
Strong's G3956 - pas means
1) individually
a) each, every, any, all, the whole, everyone, all things, everything
2) collectively
a) some of all types
Romans 3:23 and Romans 5:12 use the word "pas" whose meaning certainly has room for exceptions, after all, as I said in my previous post, Jesus was fully man and yet he is an exception to "all men" in Romans 5:12.
Also here is another place in the Bible where "ALL" is used and yet there are exceptions.
Genesis 6:17 And, behold, I, even I, do bring a flood of waters upon the earth, to destroy all flesh, wherein is the breath of life, from under heaven; and every thing that is in the earth shall die.
Yet Noah, his family and all animals in the ark survived and were not destroyed!
Here is a quote that I found while searching for the meaning of the word "All" in the Bible:
www.blueletterbible.org
"... 'The whole world is gone after him.' Did all the world go after Christ? 'Then went all Judea, and were baptized of him in Jordan.' Was all Judea, or all Jerusalem baptized in Jordan? 'Ye are of God, little children', and 'the whole world lieth in the wicked one.' Does 'the whole world' there mean everybody? If so, how was it, then, that there were some who were 'of God?' The words 'whole' and 'all' are used in some seven or eight senses in Scripture; and it is very rarely that 'all' means all persons, taken individually. The words are generally used to signify that Christ has redeemed some of all sorts—some Jews, some Gentiles, some rich, some poor, and has not restricted his redemption to either Jew or Gentile." (Charles H. Spurgeon, Particular Redemption, A Sermon, 28 Feb 1858).
ClassyT,
does all of the above help "get around that three letter word ALL"?
Spiritual death doesn't work either as spiritual death means separated from God but Genesis 5:24 states that "Enoch walked with God" so he wasn't spiritually dead!Quote:
Originally Posted by classyT
Also you haven't addressed my second point! Jesus was fully man and therefore part of the ALL that is referred to in the verse and yet you don't include Him in the ALL.
You keep trying to use this, and it's lame. Most Christians agree that Jesus was also "fully God" so it would seem obvious that someone with such a nature would be something different from the "all" mentioned in Romans 3:23. Give it up.Quote:
Originally Posted by elscarta
Yes, they survived. And that exception is given explicitly in the rest of the chapter and those that follow. We don't have anything remotely like that in Romans. You're grasping at straws, and you're not catching them.Quote:
Also here is another place in the Bible where "ALL" is used and yet there are exceptions.
Genesis 6:17 And, behold, I, even I, do bring a flood of waters upon the earth, to destroy all flesh, wherein is the breath of life, from under heaven; and every thing that is in the earth shall die.
Yet Noah, his family and all animals in the ark survived and were not destroyed!
You really need to take a course in Bible interpretation from someplace reputable, because this is, pardon me, ridiculous. As for the first one, ever hear of hyperbole? It's a good idea to notice WHO made the statement, and WHY. As for "the whole world" in your second "example," yes, it means everyone. Why are some "of God?" Because they've been redeemed.Quote:
Here is a quote that I found while searching for the meaning of the word "All" in the Bible:
www.blueletterbible.org
"... 'The whole world is gone after him.' Did all the world go after Christ? 'Then went all Judea, and were baptized of him in Jordan.' Was all Judea, or all Jerusalem baptized in Jordan? 'Ye are of God, little children', and 'the whole world lieth in the wicked one.' Does 'the whole world' there mean everybody? If so, how was it, then, that there were some who were 'of God?' The words 'whole' and 'all' are used in some seven or eight senses in Scripture; and it is very rarely that 'all' means all persons, taken individually. The words are generally used to signify that Christ has redeemed some of all sorts—some Jews, some Gentiles, some rich, some poor, and has not restricted his redemption to either Jew or Gentile." (Charles H. Spurgeon, Particular Redemption, A Sermon, 28 Feb 1858).
ClassyT,
does all of the above help "get around that three letter word ALL"?
You also need to depend a LOT less on Strong's, because it's so badly outdated it's virtually useless for definitions etc. The only reason so many sites and such continue to use it is because it's public domain and they don't have to pay royalties for it.
The Bible makes it clear when and where "all" means "every single one," and the Romans passages are in that category. Get used to it.
| All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:22 AM. |