You've made a valid point there, fwdude.
Jesus was and is Mary's Savior, as she said. Yet ever before she conceived Him in her womb, she was "full of grace" (as God's angelic ambassador called her, Kecharitomene) --- "she who has already been fully graced". Gabriel described her as full of grace, not full of sin.
What can we reasonably conclude from this apparent paradox? It's that God's co-eternal Son, the Second Person of the Trinity, had a way to save Mary before Her took His flesh from her, and before she even came into existence.
"He who is holy has done great things for me!"
It would have to have been when she received her human nature, as every one of us does, at conception. Because her human nature --- which she shared with her Son --- was a pure and perfect human nature, like that of primordial Adam and primordial Eve in Eden, not yet ruined by sin. Jesus is perfect in His Hiumanity as well as in His divibity.
Rgus Mary had to be uniquely pure in her human nature: as the Angel Gabriel said, "Kecharitomene."
Well it just seems to me, that if we hypothetically embrace a model of this kind, then if, with the author, we take umbrage over a recognition that the cross work of Christ was to physically appear in Mary’s earthly future, however spiritually it might have reached back — well, it seems mighty petty to me.
It sounds like trying to defend the holy with the flesh. It isn’t necessary and in fact it is sadly presumptuous.
.
>> Yet ever before she conceived Him in her womb, she was “full of grace” <<
.
Full of grace in the spiritual sense can only mean “full of the forgiveness of her past sins.
Grace is the forgiveness of past sins.
Why do you persist in reproducing this when I’ve shown you too many tomes to count your translation is incorrect?
Are we to suppose that included that she knew that she had been "immaculately conceived", and was herself (and quite unlike everyone else!) entirely without what can be referred to as "sin nature"?
That fallen nature, although affecting flesh (flesh and blood itself, narrowly considered) is not of flesh itself in origin, but instead is of spirit.
Yet, to say what she is attributed to having spontaneously, joyously exclaimed (said more in full than what is italicized above), she would have had to have known of her own [alleged] immaculate conception when she recognized God as her savior --- provided she was not as most anyone else-- born under the curse of Adam, and knowing that instead.
Note too that among the Hebrews that fallen nature was not said to come from Eve, but from Adam.
Going by Hebrew religious understanding;
Remove earthly father from the equation -- problem solved. No inherited "sin nature".
Who was Jesus's own earthly sire? Oh wait! There wasn't one. Problem solved.
That King of the Jews --- what a guy, huh? None other can be compared to him, Immanuel, God with us.
Matthew 1:24-25 (NASB)
And Joseph awoke from his sleep and did as the angel of the Lord commanded him, and took Mary as his wife, but kept her a virgin until she gave birth to a Son; and he called His name Jesus.
Matthew 2:13-15 (NASB)
Now when they had gone, behold, an angel of the Lord appeared to Joseph in a dream and said, "Get up! Take the Child and His mother and flee to Egypt, and remain there until I tell you; for Herod is going to search for the Child to destroy Him."
So Joseph got up and took the Child and His mother while it was still night, and left for Egypt.
He remained there until the death of Herod. This was to fulfill what had been spoken by the Lord through the prophet: "OUT OF EGYPT I CALLED MY SON."
Note that the Greek word for until is the same in all passages.
Grace and Peace,
K51