Romans 3 does not have the universality you ascribe to it, regardless of Noah: it is a quote from the Psalms (Jo Kus may be so kind as to remind us which), and the same Psalm goes on to speak of righteousness. There are more people than Noah similarly described. I simply show you that there is no sin in the Noah's episode by any objective measure. You can imagine something that is not in the scripture regarding Jesus as well and make him sinful by the same method. The only natural reading of the Noah's episode was that he drank because people need liquids and don't want dysentery, and that tired people get drunk and fall asleep without expecting it.
I am not sure at all that the Bible details at least one sin for all of God's servants.
This is neither here or there; Genesis 6:9 describes Noah as "a just and perfect man in his generations, he walked with God". Same situation as with Jesus as far as this particular issue is concerned; both are described as without sin, and both are not depicted ever sinning.
What tells you the comparison line is drawn based on whether one has familiarity with Jesus?
Because the Centurion stands apart on that basis only: the rest ask for hands-on healing, as they would a doctor; the centurion clearly has faith in the suparnaturality of Jesus' ability, not having met Him and not having witnessed Cana, walking on water, etc.
If it is the same grace that is available to any of us, and if Mary is the only one to have ever accepted it ... Her knowledge was based on Sola Scriptura
No, she is not the only one, but her task is unique. We accept the same ontological grace she did though. Was she going by the Hebrew Scripture? This is not how St. Luke tells it. It is a pious belief that she recognized Isaiah's prophecy in the Anunciation, but the scripture only tells us that she believed because the angel told her of the will of God.
and yet she still stands alone in the grace she accepted?
No, she doesn't; she is in that sense like any other saint.
I disagree. The concept of sinlessness is only ever applied to Jesus, not Noah or Job or Mary or anyone else. The language is different.
FK: "What tells you the comparison line is drawn based on whether one has familiarity with Jesus?"
Because the Centurion stands apart on that basis only: the rest ask for hands-on healing, as they would a doctor; the centurion clearly has faith in the suparnaturality of Jesus' ability, not having met Him and not having witnessed Cana, walking on water, etc.
But these have NOTHING to do with each other. The centurion also had faith perhaps being left-handed, or tall, or fat, or dyslexic, or being literate. All are equally worthless distinctions that Jesus ALSO doesn't make. It makes NO DIFFERENCE to "in all of Israel". This is an amazing absence of logic to me. :)