Posted on 05/10/2013 11:03:04 AM PDT by cleghornboy
In their latest work of anti-Catholic theology-fiction, Tom Horn and Cris Putnam, who were recently featured on Sid Roth's program 'Its Supernatural," attack Saint Jerome's translation of the Greek kecharitomene because the great scripture scholar, who was highly proficient in both Latin and Greek, used the Latin circumlocution gratia plena - "full of grace." (Luke 1: 28).
These two confused souls write, "Official Roman literature states, 'In consequence of a Special Privilege of Grace from God, Mary was free from every personal sin during her whole life.' The only ostensibly scriptural argument given for this is from the Latin Vulgate rendering of Luke 1: 28 when the Angel addresses her, 'Hail, full of grace!' Farfetched as it seems, this is the basis ffrom which they argue, 'since personal moral defects are irreconcilable with fullness of grace' then she must be sinless...we..argue that the phrase 'full of grace' is an erroneous Latin rendering that is even corrected in the NAB to read simply 'favored one.' The Vulgate's distorted translation was the entire basis for the mistaken notion that sinless grace defined Mary's entire life. Exegetically, it is also quite clear in the context of the passage that it is only a reference to her state at that moment when the Angel spoke." (Petrus Romanus, pp. 324-325).
And Cris Putnam is touted by this book as a "respected theologian and apologist." Really? Did he take his degree from an institution which advertises on the inside cover of a matchbook? Luke 1:28 uses the perfect passive participle, kecharitomene. The perfect stem of a Greek word denotes "continuance of a completed action" (Blass and DeBrunner, Greek Grammar of the New Testament, 175); and "completed action with permanent result is denoted by the perfect stem" (Smyth, sec. 1852:b.).
(Excerpt) Read more at lasalettejourney.blogspot.com ...
Who cares?
I seriously question the motivation af anyone who would post articles such as this one, under the guise of "criticizing" it. It doesn't pass the pervert smell test.
What a transparent way to give the GLBT publicity and a huge audience?
Back to your hole, deviant.
And your point is? All have sinned, and fall short. Jesus’ divinity inheres in His identity, His role and status as one of the three persons of the Trinity, the Triune Godhead. And this is true on its own merit, neither diminished nor enhanced by the behavior of any mortal being.
The snide tone of the article reminds me of how liberals write about global warming critics - don’t deal with the issue just belittle and attack the person stating their opinion. No one knows if Mary sinned or not except God. Catholic teaching may indeed be right as a lot of great theologions gave this matter a lot of thought ... or they could be incorrect. What difference does it make? :-). There are many items like this that will always be up for respectful debate. I just don’t like the tone of the piece.
She recognized her sinful condition, even though many today deny what she herself said.
She was irretrievably lost, as are we all, BUT for the gift of God.
So do I. Mary wasn't Christ. Thus, Mary wasn't perfect. Thus, Mary sinned just like all other human beings (except Jesus Christ) have...
Don’t you have any comment to make about the article you posted, Cleghorn?
But Mary was selected by God to be the mother of Jesus Christ.
Mary was immaculately conceived. The immaculate conception has nothing to do with Jesus and everything to do with the purity of Mary.
Her parents, St. Anne and St. Joachim were favored by God as they were to be the parents of Mary.
As far as Tom Horn is concerned I thought he was an indian fighter who was hanged for murder in 1903.
Disagree. Mary was a vessel.
Was she favored? Yes. But I would ague that she was special because she was chosen - not chosen because she was special.
Going back through the lineage of Christ, you find adulterers (David) & prostitutes (Rahab).
To his own glory God chooses & uses who he will - despite deep character flaws.
As for Mary - was she rare? Probably. Was she unique in terms of her purity? Probably not.
Just mho...
As a traditional Roman Catholic I believe what I posted.
Mary, the mother of Christ, was a sinner. ALL have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God. The ONLY exception is Jesus Christ. Period.
No further discussion with you. Period!
No more extra-Biblical dogma. Period.
Cris Putnam is touted by this book as a "respected theologian and apologist."
Uhhh, no. I've never heard either man's name attached to anything remotely trustworthy.
Indeed. For it was Christ who kept her free from sin at her Immaculate conception.
There's no hint in Scripture that she was conceived otherwise. These are merely ideas from church fathers who, though they did much good, were fallible.
Meanwhile, the Bible states that ALL have sinned. It does not exclude anyone save Christ who was deity.
Mary was conceived just like every other human that has ever lived, with the sin nature passed to her through her father.
She too needed a savior, and when she was told that she would conceive and bear a son, He would not be born with that sin nature because God is His father, therefore the sin nature was not passed to Him, because Joseph was not his natural father, therefore the sin nature was not in Him.
“Mary said she needed a Savior.”
We all receive the gift of God’s grace if we repent through Jesus, but Mary is certainly blessed among women.
Lk 1:46 “And Mary said: My soul does magnify the Lord. And my spirit has rejoiced in God my Savior. Because he has regarded the humility of his handmaid: for behold from henceforth all generations shall call me blessed.”
Lk 1:26-38 “And in the sixth month, the angel Gabriel was sent from God into a city of Galilee, called Nazareth, to a virgin espoused to a man whose name was Joseph, of the house of David: and the virgin’s name was Mary. And the angel being come in, said unto her: Hail, full of grace, the Lord is with you: blessed are you among women. Who having heard, was troubled at his saying and thought with herself what manner of salutation this should be. And the angel said to her: Fear not, Mary, for you have found grace with God. Behold you shall conceive in your womb and shall bring forth a son: and you shall 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.”
I seem to remember a passage in Revelation where St. Paul describes a woman in heaven clothed in the sun and wearing a crown that we traditionally interpret as Mary, but really don’t know for sure.
“Mary was conceived just like every other human that has ever lived, with the sin nature passed to her through her father.............”
Mary was conceived naturallly, which is true. But the “Immaculate Conception” is not a physical thing. It is a spiritual favor granted to her by her Creator who selected her to be the Mother of his Son, Jesus.
Now, is it logical that God, the Almighty Father, would select a woman as a vessel for the Incarnation who was tainted with sin, and under the influence of Satan?
Since Jesus is the new Adam, then Mary is the new Eve. Selected by God, and conceived without the stain of sin, through no power of her or her parents, but by the grace of God.
Honoring Mary is merely recognizing her as the Mother of Jesus, the Savior. Also, we must NEVER FORGET that at the foot of the cross was the Mother of Jesus and a few other women named Mary, plus the Apostle John. Everyone else abandoned Jesus in his hour of darkness.
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.