>>The question of original sin is the key query. The answer to the question is a matter of theological debate.<<
383 posts and we get to the crux (and the debatable fact)! Excellent, MortMan.
The underlying argument has a lot to do with Catholic theology. In the same way that a “right to privacy” was derived from the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, so has Mary’s ex-pos-factos clearance of Original Sin been established through hundreds of years of detailed theological scholarship.
This is frustrating to many, since they ask “well then why have Original Sin at all? God can clear from any and all!” But I think that sidesteps the point of Jesus’ arrival. He brought not only the removal of Original Sin but the New Law — we are judged on our acts and thoughts. Only Jesus could carry that most important message and His death was the only way that could be solidifies in the soul of Man.
I am not a super-deep scholar, but have spent a not-inconsiderable time working through and researching these issues.
And I still have to admit my Aramaic is rusty.
From my understanding, Mary was not charged with original sine because God new that Christ needed a mother. (According to Roman Catholic doctrine.)
If Mary had carried the guilt of “original sin”, then Christ would not have been sinless. If Christ carried original sin as a stain on his soul, he could never have been the perfect sacrifice that atoned for all of our sins.
Other christian faiths have often failed to provide a reasoned explanation of how Christ could be sinless when born of a human mother.
Does my pedestrian expression of the crux of the matter suffice? LOL
BTW - I’m an engineering-biased protestant (or “prostetant: as my original dogtag said) with a (Roman) Catholic wife and kids. LOL