Posted on 12/16/2014 2:30:50 PM PST by NYer
In Part 1 we saw that Mary is the woman from Genesis 3:15 and Revelation 12 who is at enmity with the devil. In Part 2, we saw that Mary is the Ark of the New Covenant. Now I would like to examine the salutation of Gabriel, which I think provides some of the strongest evidence for the Immaculate Conception and the sinlessness of Mary.
With this section, I am attempting to synthesize information taken from the following articles:
Now, let’s turn to the Angel Gabriel’s salutation to Mary:
And he came to her and said, “Hail, full of grace, the Lord is with you!” (Luke 1:28 [RSV-CE])
The Greek word that is being translated as “full of grace” here is κεχαριτωμένη (transliterated: kecharitōmene), the perfect passive participle of χαριτόω (transliterated: charitoō), which denotes grace. Some versions translate kecharitōmene as “hail, thou that art highly favored,” but that doesn’t really capture the full meaning of what the angel Gabriel is saying here.
For one, to translate charitoō as “favor” instead of “grace” is really to give a bare minimum translation of the word. Ultimately, kecharitōmene is derived from the word χάρις (transliterated: charis): charis –> charitoō –> kecharitōmene. The KJV translates charis as “grace” over 83% of the time. The KJV NT Greek Lexicon defines charitoō as “to make graceful, to peruse with grace” as its primary meaning. When the favor is divine favor, “grace” is the better translation.
Various well-respected and scholarly reference works confirm this understanding. For example:
You get the idea. Now that we know that charitoō is better understood in this instance as “grace” and not simply “favor,” we must now consider what the perfect passive participle would mean.
The website NTGreek.org, which provides instruction on the Koine Greek of the Gospels, tells us (here) in the section “Grammatical Voice of Verbs” that the passive voice indicates that the subject of the sentence is being acted upon (instead of performing the action, which is the active voice). Further down on this same page, in the section on “Verb Tenses” we learn that the perfect tense indicates that this action was completed in the past, with results that continue into the present and are in full effect. The action is the giving of grace. So, kecharitōmene, the perfect passive participle of charitoō, would literally mean, “you who were and continue to be full of and completed in grace.” Blass and DeBrummer’s Greek Grammar of the New Testament says [emphasis mine]: “It is permissible, on Greek grammatical and linguistic grounds, to paraphrase kecharitōmene as completely, perfectly, enduringly endowed with grace.” This supports Mark Bonocore, who says (here) that kecharitōmene literally means “perfectly graced” or “completed in grace.”
This is the single instance in all of Scripture where the verb charitoō is used in this way. There is a completeness here with a permanent result. There is a fullness and a perfection to the grace that Mary has received. She wasn’t given grace like we are given grace. She was filled with grace, completed in grace, perfected in grace, and this fullness of grace persisted, it continued up to and through the present.
Put aside your presuppositions for a moment and just look at the evidence. This is amazing what has happened here! Note that sin and grace are opposed (Romans 5:20-21), and grace saves us from sin (Ephesians 2:5,8). Where there is fullness of grace, there is no room for sin. That’s why we claim that Luke 1:28 points to the sinlessness of Mary.
Something else that is interesting about this word kecharitōmene is that it is in the vocative case. NTGreek.org tells us (here) that the vocative is “the case of direct address. It is used when one person is speaking to another, calling out or saying their name, or generally addressing them.” In other words, Gabriel is literally calls Mary “full of grace” as if that were her name.
This is important because in the Bible, a person’s name often points to an essential element of that person’s nature, or the person’s defining characteristic. Jacob’s name was changed to “Israel” because he wrestled with God. Abram was called “Abraham” because he was to be the father of many nations. Now the angel has called Mary by a different name: kecharitōmene. No one in the Bible is so defined by the grace he or she has received that this state of grace becomes that person’s name. Yet, so it is with Mary. More and more I think that, as we dig deeper into the meaning of kecharitōmene, we find that Mary is a uniquely graced individual.
In Part 4, I will discuss what it means that Mary is “blessed among women,” which will conclude my presentation of the scriptural evidence in defense of the Immaculate Conception. With the remaining parts, I will respond to the common objections raised against this teaching.
Part 4 will be posted shortly, ping!
Part 3 = Triune God, Right?
“In Part 1 we saw that Mary is the woman from Genesis 3:15 and Revelation 12 who is at enmity with the devil. In Part 2, we saw that Mary is the Ark of the New Covenant.”
Well, no we did not see it. This was some of the worst examination of the Word of God I’ve ever seen. It was an idea in search of cobbled together support.
That a catholic would believe it indicates how little they understand Scripture.
best
Can you be more specific and post your disagreement with citations from scripture. Part 3 above, delves into Koine Greek with sources. How do you respond to those?
Whooops! That word "full" is no where contained within the meaning of that word. the verb tenses only say that the grace given was fully complete and was done in the past and is still completed. That does NOT mean she was completely "full" of grace. Only that the grace she was given was completed. If the Holy Spirit would have wanted to indicate that she was "full of grace" He would have done it like He did in the case of Jesus and Stephen by using the Greek word plérés as He did for Stephen.
Acts 6:8 Now Stephen, a man full (plérés of God's grace and power, performed great wonders and signs among the people.
The Holy Spirit clearly did not indicate that Mary was "full of grace" as He did Stephen. Mary was simply given grace all we all are and it was completed and continues just as it does for all believers.
If the Catholic Church wants to assign sinlessness to Mary for being "full of grace" (which is in error) then surely they must also assign sinlessness to Stephen as well.
As is the case most often with the Catholic Church and it's followers.
NYer,
Actually, on your previous threads, the points in each article were addressed and invalidated. I am noting that this occurred on your latest thread, since you are starting this from scratch.
We have also responded fully to the faulty analysis of Greek in the Luke passage already.
I realize this does not stop faulty articles from being posted again and again. It is the nature of the internet.
What stands out is the lack of understanding of hermeneutics and language displayed by those who are posting these types of articles and those who then stop by to compliment the OP on what a great article it is. I can only imagine it sounds authentic to them. I can understand this on the surface, if they are uninformed, if they have never made the personal effort to learn, if they are uninformed, etc.
For this reason, I urge you and others to take God’s admonition seriously:
“Study to show yourself approved...” Apostle Paul
“Love God with all your mind...” Jesus Christ
Go deeper. These commands fall on all who claim the name of Christ. Don’t accept the shoddy stuff that circulates as truth, but is eisogesis or worse.
Best.
You posted a rebuttal; that does not constitute an invalidation. If these threads do not interest you, then skip them. I pinged a Catholic list.
“You posted a rebuttal; that does not constitute an invalidation.”
Oh, it clearly was rebutted and invalidated. It was demonstrated that the passages did not and could not mean what was claimed.
I realize that in matters of religion, people believe for non-rational reasons. Christians are commanded to study and love God with all their mind.
“If these threads do not interest you, then skip them. I pinged a Catholic list. “
Open thread. Also an opportunity to encourage you to post higher quality articles worthy of discussion.
Christ is obviously the sole implied exception in this passage of Scripture.
It's simply ludicrous to imagine the sinlessness of any other human being, including the sinner named Mary, who was the blessed (not sinless) mother of Jesus Christ.
Why Catholics feel compelled to cling to such unnecessary and unscriptural Goddess mythology is truly inexplicable.
Attempting to "explain" this absurd notion to us ignorant Protestants is the epitome of grasping at straws...
“Why Catholics feel compelled to cling to such unnecessary and unscriptural Goddess mythology is truly inexplicable.”
By making Mary into a demigod - higher than all humans, but not completely God - she is approachable, she can intercede because they cannot. She can bend the Son of God to her will, so it gives an inside power.
It is a desire for true spirituality and connection to God that is absent in the teachings. The human heart craves a relationship with God. When absent, all options for spirituality are pursued. Idols, charms, amulets, demigods.
Please note that there are many dear catholics who have come to saving faith, to His glory. May all people come to Him for eternal life.
It’s interesting how, on the one hand, Protestantism is based on people reading and interpreting Scripture directly for themselves. Their protest against Catholicism was that Catholic clergy were reading and interpreting Scripture and telling people what to believe.
And yet, notice how the protestants here have their own rigid interpretation and are telling people what to believe.
Building the favor of God, into it meaning, sinless, is absolute speculation. And it’s done simply to try and prop up a vain tradition of men.
Mary performed the task set before her marvelously, by giving birth to the Christ-child, raising him to adulthood, and THEN following HIM faithfully. He, in turn, washed her sins away.
ping
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.