Yes and no. Yes, she was a part of sinful humanity and therefore needed a Savior, and No, she could have rejected him by virtue of her free will.
From Genesis through Revelation we read the saga of people either accepting or rejecting God. Mary had the same choice but chose to accept him and thus be cleansed of her sin.
If Mary were sinless then she could have been our substitutionary Lamb of God. As it is, she, like us, was a sinner thus her response, “My Savior”.
People reject Jesus they don’t love Him or do not believe in His teachings. Mary definitely loved Him and obviously believed in His teachings. So why would she reject Him? I still do not see how the argument that he was her Savior as the quote refers to it concludes that she must have had sin. Please clarify.
It’s the kind of logic you get from people who look at the Bible (or history, or science, or whatever) as though it’s a riddle. It works like this:
Mary speaks of God as “my Savior”.
Therefore, she must have had a savior.
Therefore, she must have needed a savior.
Therefore, she must have been sinful.
All three of those steps are weak. The weakest is the first one; it only works if two things are true. First, Mary must know that the poem she’s improvising is going to be written down as Holy Scripture That Is Perfect And Infallible In Every Word; second, it must be the case that Mary, if she were sinless, would know it for certain.
Proving that Mary was a sinner seems to depend on assuming that she wasn’t human. It is an ancient heresy to deny the full humanity of Jesus; modern heresy takes it one step further.
To the 4 “weak” ideas noted above, our simple Jewish peasant girl named, Mary, would give a hearty, Amen!
Signing off… Shalom… be blessed… there is a redeemer.
Ps. lil_f, hope Mr. Kennedy helped clarify.
Quote: "In the gospel of Luke, chapter 1 verses 45 and 46, Mary says, "My soul magnifys the Lord and my spirit rejoices in God my Savior. "
Supposing I remember my classes right, the gospel of Luke was written by Luke or those who had learned from him. However, would those people have actually met Mary? and did she in fact say those words? Or did they just right down 2nd and 3rd hand stories? Course, that applies to almost the whole New Testament. I still believe it, but the quotes are not going to be word for word considering the fact that the first gospel was not written until somewhere between 20-60 years after Jesus’ death (I remember that it was a couple decades at the least). So the quotes won’t be word for word. What if Mary said another word instead of my Savior, but the author of the gospel didn’t remember it right?
The Evangelists–the folks who wrote the Gospels–weren’t trying to do history or modern biography but to proclaim the truth as they believed it, that Jesus, son of Mary of Nazareth, was also the son of God himself, and so (because this is the way genealogies used to work) able to be identified with him. That’s one of the reasons that it’s important in Luke and Matthew that Mary is a virgin–because that shows that only God could be the father. In a sense one can read that symbolically–that is, the point that the Evangelists are making is that Joseph isn’t the father: God is. (The other reason is that her virginity is a fulfillment of Old Testament prophecy–look at Isaiah.)
So it isn’t a question of whether the evangelist properly remembered what Mary said, or even actually whether Mary said it at all. The point is that the writer wants to make the point that Mary recognized Jesus as her savior.
The doctrine of sin was pretty undeveloped at that point, so her acknowledging that Jesus would save her doesn’t have a lot to do with sin as such in the Gospel–it has to do with accepting (as Paul had already spelled out in his letters before the Gospels were written) that one was saved from the death earned by Adam and Eve’s disobedience not by obeying the Jewish law but by accepting God’s unmerited grace. The idea of original sin comes about a lot later, and the idea of Mary’s sinlessness even later. When the evangelists wrote they wanted to make it clear that Jesus was the savior of all who believed, period.
It’s also true that the doctrine of the Incarnation insists that Jesus was not only God but also a human being–one with us through is mother. So Mary functions not only biologically but as the world and as humanity, the agent who made it possible for God to become a human being. The idea of her sinlessness is in part a sort of natural feeling that surely God would have chosen the purest–most sinless woman–possible to be his mother. Church fathers fought hard against the theology of it for many centuries; it was really the ordinary folks who eventually so believed in it that it was instituted as church doctrine. Not good theology, but awfully emotionally appealing. Who says that grassroots efforts don’t work?
George Mason said:
Proselytizing - oh boy, just what I wanted! :rolleyes:
The forum moderator notes that this Message Board is divided into several different Fora. George Mason, your post would be more appropriate in a different forum on this message board. From the home page:
On the I.C.: the official Dogma reads simply: “The most Blessed Virgin Mary was, from the first moment of her conception, by a singular grace and privilege of almighty God and by virtue of the merits of Jesus Christ, Saviour of the human race, preserved immune from all stain of original sin.”
Officially proclaimed “infallibly” by Pius IX in 1854
As close as I can understand the official Catechism explanation, it would seem to mean that God caused the saving grace of Jesus to travel back in time and hit Zygote Mary at the instant Joachim’s and Hannah’s chromosomes were pairing up. Remembering that RCC doctrine includes Original Sin, which you get just because your parents transmit it to you, AND that “life begins at conception”, then being immunized from inheriting O.S. at conception IS being “saved from sin” and thus Mary can talk of a “savior” even if or even because she has been personally sin-free throughout her existence.
However there is a simpler reason the Mary in the Gospel of Luke could talk of a “savior”-- notice the official Church statement calls Jesus “savior of the human race”. It matters not if she was individually sinless, she IS part of humanity, and it would be entirely in-character that she not exclude herself.
Not precisely. Time, like Space, is part of the created universe, and God exists outside of it.
Thank you Brother for this WONDERFUL news!
I’m so glad the Holy Spirit wanted me to come here, because this thread has served to further strengthen my belief that Christians, and Catholics especially, know no bounds when it comes to creative revision of history, scripture, and the facts in order to support their beliefs and agendas.
This was my primary reason for embracing Paganism. I’m so glad that the Holy Spirit has confirmed my decision!
i recently saw a childrens book in a christian gift shop. in the book, it showed a young Jesus in hs house with Mary and Joseph and they were surrounded by 3 other children, about two years in age difference from Jesus. the book failed to mention why the children were there…ive always been taught that Jesu was Mary’s only child.
i recently saw a childrens book in a christian gift shop. in the book, it showed a young Jesus in hs house with Mary and Joseph and they were surrounded by 3 other children, about two years in age difference from Jesus. the book failed to mention why the children were there…ive always been taught that Jesus was Mary’s only child.
Well, Protestants generally accept the notion that Jesus had brothers. (Though, if you’re only looking at an illustration, they could just as easily be neighborhood kids.)
since God planned that Mary be Mother of the Messiah, at her conception His Grace prevented her from the taint of Original Sin,
SOOOOO He saved her from being innately sinful, thus God is still her Savior.
Btw, I don’t believe Mary was immaculately conceived, but then again I don’t buy into a lot of Original Sin teaching either- at least not the Roman Catholic version (perhaps the Eastern Orthodox version tho).