That's interesting, because that is one of Jesus' final commands - to Baptize... If baptism is for the remission of sins, and we die before our sins are remitted, where is our final resting place?
I am unaware of the scriptures that point to the "fittingness" of Mary being sinless.
The Church Fathers wrote about Mary being the New Eve, making the connection between Mary and Eve. I have already explained this. Eve, Adam, Jesus ... and Mary were all born without sin. God untied the knot of disobedience with the New Adam and Eve.
Paul tells us specifically that He was without sin. Paul knows that includes thoughts.
The only way Paul would know anything about that is through oral tradition given to him from the Apostles. In the same way, the tradition tells us that Mary, too, was sinless.
Paul makes no corresponding statement about Mary of any kind.
Apparently, Mary wasn't a problem that other communities asked Paul to clarify.
Sometimes you won't take "YES" for an answer. :) Please re-read my post. I said that I do NOT think Mary sinned at Cana.
Hmm. Well, here is your post. You tell me what you are trying to say...
#6690, FK wrote:
One example of Mary's sin that I have heard of was at the wedding in Cana. Frankly, I'd be willing to let that one slide. Objectively, I honestly don't see enough evidence. However, and since I'm thinking of it at this moment, :) is it a sin to disbelieve when one has no excuse?
How would YOU read that if you were me? That Mary sinned? No?
Regards
That's interesting, because that is one of Jesus' final commands - to Baptize... If baptism is for the remission of sins, and we die before our sins are remitted, where is our final resting place?
You're right about the command of Jesus, so there is a "rush" after one becomes a believer. I was speaking in the context of infant baptism. ... I do not agree that baptism is for the remission of sins. Baptism, in part, commemorates that occurrence. So, Baptism is a command of Jesus and all believers should be baptized, but our final resting place is in no way directed by whether that one command is followed.
The Church Fathers wrote about Mary being the New Eve, making the connection between Mary and Eve. I have already explained this.
Yes, you have, but I had asked because you said that scriptures support this, and I didn't know where that was in the scriptures.
The only way Paul would know anything about that [Jesus being sinless] is through oral tradition given to him from the Apostles.
I don't know if that would be the only way. Paul says that he received the Gospel directly from Christ, not from any man, so with that kind of access, it is entirely possible that he received this revelation also directly from Christ.
Apparently, Mary wasn't a problem that other communities asked Paul to clarify.
So everyone was SURE that Mary never sinned, but not everyone was sure about Jesus, such that Paul had to mention it??? Does that make sense?
[On FK's 6690] How would YOU read that if you were me? That Mary sinned? No?
I said that I had heard of the example of Cana being used to show that Mary sinned. I said that I could let that "slide" for lack of evidence. Then, in an open and general sense I asked if it was a sin to disbelieve. You know that Protestants do not distinguish between venial and mortal sin, so to us sin is sin. Therefore, there is no sliding in terms of sin. I was letting slide the idea that Cana was an example of Mary's sin. I meant that there was not enough evidence in my mind that Mary sinned at Cana.