Apologetics for the Masses #324 - The Sinlessness of Mary (cont'd)
Topic
A debate with Mr. Steve Fitz, anti-Catholic, on: The Sinlessness of Mary (Part 2)
Unsubscribe/Subscribe
If you did not sign up for this newsletter and you would like to be removed from our distribution list, just click on this link: http://www.biblechristiansociety.com/newsletter/unsubscribe, then enter the email address that this newsletter comes to and click "Unsubscribe." If this newsletter was forwarded to you by a friend, and you would like to be added to our distribution list, all you have to do is go to: http://www.biblechristiansociety.com/newsletter and put your email address in the box at the top of the page. Either way, it will take you about 10 seconds.
General Comments
Hey folks,
1) For all of you in the North Alabama area, I will be speaking at St. Paul's parish in Athens, Alabama, on Wednesday, May 30th, at 6:30 PM. I will speak first on Marriage - my talk on "Marriage and the Eucharist: The Two Shall Become One" - and I will also be doing a "mini" talk on the "Anointing of the Sick."
2) For all of you guys who are anywhere close to Hays, Kansas, I will be speaking at the Diocese of Salina Men's Conference there on August 11th, along with Archbishop Chaput. For more information and/or to register: http://salinadiocese.org/quick-links-stories/3655-2018-men-s-conference Would love to meet any of you who live in the general vicinity...
3) The reason I was a week late getting this newsletter out is that we had an unexpected death in my wife's family. Her brother-in-law died of a heart attack while working at his business last week. He leaves behind a wife who was not just financially, but also physically, dependent on him. She has a number of physical issues and is not capable of doing a lot on her own. So, I would ask for your prayers for the repose of Greg's soul, and for God's grace and consolation for Patsy and her family in this very difficult time.
Introduction
Okay, this week I'm continuing my debate with anti-Catholic Steve Fitz on the Sinlessness of Mary. Last week I posted his opening round comments, and you guys had the assignment of thinking about how you would respond. This week I will post my response, with added commentary.
So, I'll post his opening round comments again, in their entirety, and then I'll re-post them with my comments interspersed amongst his. See if you were thinking the same things that I was...
Challenge/Response/Strategy
A DEBATE ON THE SINLESSNESS OF MARY.
The Affirmative: John Martignoni (Catholic)
The Negative: Steve Fitz (non-Catholic)
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, Savior of the human race, preserved immune from all stain of original sin. And, by the grace of God, Mary remained free of every personal sin her whole life long.
Steve Fitz - Response
John, why was Jesus uniquely qualified to die on the cross for sin. Why was Jesus uniquely qualified where no other person could have paid for sin including Mary? Since the animal sacrifices of the Old Testament were a foreshadow to Christ's sacrifice, It might be a good idea to look at the requirements of the animal sacrifices.
Leviticus 4:32 states "“‘If someone brings a lamb as their sin offering, they are to bring a female without defect.
Leviticus 22:21 states "When anyone brings from the herd or flock a fellowship offering to the Lord to fulfill a special vow or as a freewill offering, it must be without defect or blemish to be acceptable.
This same phrase used in regard to animal sacrifice is found in Exodus 12:5, Exodus 29:1, Leviticus 1:3, Leviticus 1:10, Leviticus 3:1, Leviticus 4:3, Leviticus 4:28, Leviticus 4:32, Leviticus, Leviticus 5:15. I could go on but I won't.
How does this phrase relate to Jesus and his unique qualification to die on the cross? 1 Peter 1:18-19 states " For you know that it was not with perishable things such as silver or gold that you were redeemed from the empty way of life handed down to you from your ancestors, but with the precious blood of Christ, a lamb without blemish or defect." So Jesus is described as "a lamb without blemish or defect" meaning of course He is without sin. The New Testament in several places teach that Jesus was without sin.
1 Peter 2:22 says in regard to Jesus "Who committed no sin nor was any deceit found in His mouth". 2 Corinthians 5:21 "He made Him who knew no sin to be sin on our behalf so that we might become the righteousness of God in Him" So the Bible is clear Jesus was without sin!
What about Mary? If Mary was sinless as the Catholic Church teaches, there would be like there is for Jesus, bible verses that would teach that Mary was sinless. But guess what? There not.
Catholics claim that the when the angel says to Mary "Hail Mary full of grace" in Luke 1:28, he was acknowledging the fact that Mary was sinless. However I have two comments on this. First, the Greek New Testament never calls Mary "Full of Grace".Only Jesus in John 1:14 and Stephen in ACTS 6:8 is called that. Secondly, what does grace mean? It means "unmerited favor" not sinless. So John give me a list of bible verses that teaches that Mary was sinless.
So what is the biblical evidence that Mary was a sinner? The same verses that can be used to prove that I'm a sinner proves that Mary was a sinner also.
First, Romans 3:23 states "For all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God" The only exemption of one being sinless is God himself. In fact Jesus said in Mark 10:18 ""No one is good--except God alone." If indeed Mary was sinless, she would be Good
Secondly, in Luke 1:47, Mary said "and my spirit rejoices in God my Savior". The definition of the word Savior in Christianity is God or Jesus Christ as the redeemer of sin and saver of souls. John, 1 Peter 3:18, Romans 4:25, and Romans 5:8 teaches that Jesus died for sinners not sinless people. In fact the Gospel is the fact that Jesus died for sinners. 1 Corinthians 15:2-4 states "By this gospel you are saved, if you hold firmly to the word I preached to you. Otherwise, you have believed in vain. For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received, that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, and that He was buried, and that He was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures". Im not going to tell you John what you believe but I am going to tell you what the Catholic Church believes. They believe that although Mary was sinless, Jesus died for her. Which is not true and no need for Mary to have a Savior if she was sinless.
Third according to Luke 2:21-24, Mary went to the Temple with two doves or two young pigeons. One for the Burnt Offering and the other for the Sin Offering. I will go into this more in detail in my next post."
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Steve Fitz
John, why was Jesus uniquely qualified to die on the cross for sin. Why was Jesus uniquely qualified where no other person could have paid for sin including Mary? Since the animal sacrifices of the Old Testament were a foreshadow to Christ's sacrifice, It might be a good idea to look at the requirements of the animal sacrifices.
Leviticus 4:32 states "“‘If someone brings a lamb as their sin offering, they are to bring a female without defect.
Leviticus 22:21 states "When anyone brings from the herd or flock a fellowship offering to the Lord to fulfill a special vow or as a freewill offering, it must be without defect or blemish to be acceptable.
This same phrase used in regard to animal sacrifice is found in Exodus 12:5, Exodus 29:1, Leviticus 1:3, Leviticus 1:10, Leviticus 3:1, Leviticus 4:3, Leviticus 4:28, Leviticus 4:32, Leviticus, Leviticus 5:15. I could go on but I won't.
How does this phrase relate to Jesus and his unique qualification to die on the cross? 1 Peter 1:18-19 states " For you know that it was not with perishable things such as silver or gold that you were redeemed from the empty way of life handed down to you from your ancestors, but with the precious blood of Christ, a lamb without blemish or defect." So Jesus is described as "a lamb without blemish or defect" meaning of course He is without sin. The New Testament in several places teach that Jesus was without sin.
1 Peter 2:22 says in regard to Jesus "Who committed no sin nor was any deceit found in His mouth". 2 Corinthians 5:21 "He made Him who knew no sin to be sin on our behalf so that we might become the righteousness of God in Him" So the Bible is clear Jesus was without sin!
What about Mary? If Mary was sinless as the Catholic Church teaches, there would be like there is for Jesus, bible verses that would teach that Mary was sinless. But guess what? There not.
John Martignoni
First, Mr. Fitz, I want to make a general point: Is it fair to say that everything you have said here, outside of quoting Scripture, are the words of a fallible man who has no authority whatsoever outside of that which you have vested in yourself? I ask that because you rest a crucial point of yours, not on the Word of God, but on your fallible, non-authoritative opinion - the Word of Steve, as it were. When you state: “If Mary was sinless...there would be...bible verses that teach that Mary was sinless,” will you agree that is nothing more than your fallible opinion? And, would you further agree that when I disagree with your fallible opinion, as I do, that you have no authority, outside of your fallible opinion, to declare me wrong?
Okay, on to your question: “Why was Jesus uniquely qualified to die on the cross for sin?” Your answer - because He was sinless - is right, but doesn’t go nearly deep enough. Basically, I have no problem with your use of the passages from Exodus and Leviticus regarding the sacrifice of an unblemished lamb. Yes, I agree. Particularly with the example of the Passover lamb (Exodus 12:5) - a male lamb, unblemished, whose bones will not be broken, and whose blood will be spilled so that Israel may escape slavery. (By the way, you may not be aware that the Israelites were ordered to eat the flesh of the lamb that was sacrificed. Catholics do that!)
Now, why did I say your point doesn’t go nearly deep enough? Because you seem to not be aware that His sinlessness wasn’t the only reason He was qualified to die on the cross for sin. The main reason was, and is, that He is God!
2 Cor 5:18-19, “All this is from God, Who through Christ reconciled us to Himself...that is, God was in Christ reconciling the world to Himself...”
When we finite human beings sin, we sin against an infinitely good God. The demands of justice preclude that any finite being, even one who is sinless, could pay the price for the sins mankind has committed against infinite goodness. God was "in Christ!" That is why His sacrifice can redeem all of mankind. Not simply because He was sinless.
The reason Christ was sinless is because He is God. The reason Mary was sinless is because God saved her, a human being, from sin. Therefore, Mary, even though she was sinless, would not have been able to pay the price to cover the sins of mankind, since she is a finite being. She isn't God! So, on this point, your argument is moot.
Comments
As long-time readers of this newsletter know, I have said numerous times that the number one issue in any discussion between Catholic and Protestant is...authority! Whether you're talking about Mary, the Pope, Purgatory, the Eucharist, prayer to the saints, etc. - it all comes back to...authority. Who has the right, the authority, to decide what is and is not authentic Christian doctrine on all of these issues? Does each individual person, interpreting the Bible for themselves, by their own private authority, have the right to decide what is or is not authentic Christian doctrine? Or, did Jesus leave us a church that has the authority to decide such matters?
So, that is the first thing I want to establish in this "debate" - that the only authority Steve Fitz has, is the authority that he has granted to himself, and that that authority is not binding on anyone, particularly Catholics, and that I do not recognize his private authority as binding nor do I grant him any authority over me. I also want to make it very plain, from the outset, that everything he says in this debate - outside of quoting Scripture - is his fallible opinion.
You need to do the same in any discussion, dialogue, debate, argument, etc. that you have with any non-Catholic Christian. Make it clear to them, and try to get them to admit - right from the beginning - that they have no binding authority over you and that their words, other than when they quote Scripture, are nothing more than the words of a fallible man, giving his non-authoritative fallible opinion, as to what this or that verse of the Bible means. This is a crucial point to make and you need to make it every time and you need to make it over and over and over again. I am making it here at the beginning of the debate because I plan on coming back to it time and time again to drive that point home.
Now, what Mr. Fitz is trying to do with his comments in this section, is to say that if Mary was sinless, then the Bible would have said so. He is also trying to claim that if she was sinless, then she could have died on the Cross to redeem mankind from its sins and there would be nothing special about Jesus. But that is a specious argument. First of all, to say that the Bible being silent about something means it didn't happen, or that it isn't worthy of belief by Christians, is a bad argument. That's what is known as an argument from silence. Arguments of that type are very weak - do not fall for them. If you accept the premise that if it's not in the Bible then it didn't happen, then you can make an argument that Jesus never went to the bathroom. After all, the Bible never says that He did, so that must mean He never did. Bad logic. Bad argumentation technique. Common technique used by folks like Mr. Fitz.
So, to conclude that Mary was not sinless because the Bible nowhere states, "Mary was sinless," is a very poor argument and rests solely and completely on Mr. Fitz's personal, non-authoritative, fallible opinion. That's why it is so important to establish the authority issue right from the beginning.
The other part of his argument is, essentially, that if Mary was sinless, she could have died on the Cross in Jesus' stead and she could have redeemed all of humanity; therefore, Jesus' sacrifice is not unique and He did not have to become man and die for us. This is where he goes badly wrong. He is completely ignorant of the fact that the reason Jesus, and Jesus alone, had to die on the Cross for us is because He is not just a man, but also God. No human being - even a sinless one - could pay the price for the sins of all of mankind. Every human person, even a sinless one, is finite. The sins mankind - beginning with Adam and Eve - has committed are against an infinite God Who is infinitely good. So, only an infinite being could pay the necessary price. Mr. Fitz's theology is exceedingly shallow on this point.
Steve Fitz
Catholics claim that the when the angel says to Mary "Hail Mary full of grace" in Luke 1:28, he was acknowledging the fact that Mary was sinless. However I have two comments on this. First, the Greek New Testament never calls Mary "Full of Grace".Only Jesus in John 1:14 and Stephen in ACTS 6:8 is called that. Secondly, what does grace mean? It means "unmerited favor" not sinless. So John give me a list of bible verses that teaches that Mary was sinless.
John Martignoni
Your comment regarding grace: “What does grace mean? It means ‘unmerited favor’ not sinless.” Really?! You missed the point - and badly - of why Catholics believe Luke 1:28 points to Mary being sinless. It isn’t because we think the word, “grace,” means “sinless.” We know that grace doesn’t mean “sinless.” You must not be doing a whole lot of research on Catholic belief to make that mistake. I hope you will do better in the future. It’s because Mary is said to be “full” of grace. Filled with grace. The cup is full of grace, so there is no room for sin. That’s why we believe that verse is evidence of Mary’s sinlessness. Not because we think "grace" = "sinless". Mistake on your part.
Comments
As I pointed out in my comments, he completely missed the fact as to why Catholics believe the phrase, "Hail, full of grace," is evidence of Mary's sinlessness. He focused on the word "grace" rather than on the word "full." And he thinks we believe grace = sinless. Again, a pretty ignorant argument. No Catholic thinks the word "grace" = "sinless." He needs to do a bit more homework on Catholics.
Now, something in his comments that I did not reply to this time around, was his point about the "Greek New Testament" never calling Mary "full of grace." I was planning to come back in the next round of comments to address this particular argument. But I wanted to first focus on how horribly off the mark he was with his comment about how Catholics think "grace" = "sinless." I wanted to see if he would admit his mistake. What do you think the odds of that happening are?
Anyway, I will tell you here exactly how I would address his comment about the "Greek New Testament" and "full of grace." Here's the thing with the Greek in this verse (Luke 1:28) - it uses a word that is used once, and only once, in the entire Bible - "kecharitomene". In fact, I believe its use here in Luke is the only time it is used in all of Greek literature. So, that can make coming up with an accurate English translation a little bit difficult. But, here is an analysis of the word from the EWTN website that I would give Mr. Fitz:
chaire kecharitomene
“chaire” - Means "hail” or “rejoice”
"charis" – The root word of ke-chari-to-mene, means “grace”
"charitoo" – Greek verb ending in omicron omega (“oo”) means to put the person or thing into the state indicated by the root. The root being "charis" or “grace,” "charitoo" means “to put into a state of "grace.”
"ke" – Greek perfect tense prefix indicates a perfected, completed present state as a result of past action. Thus, a perfected, completed present state of "charis," or “grace,” as a result of past action.
"mene" – Greek passive participle suffix indicates action performed on subject by another. Thus, a perfected, completed present state of "charis," or “grace,” as a result of the past action of another. As the speaker is the angel Gabriel, the "other" is God.
Therefore, "chaire kecharitomene" means: “Hail, who has been perfectly and completely graced by God.” The common Catholic rendering, "full of grace," while good, may actually fall short!
So, for Mr. Fitz to say that the Greek New Testament never refers to Mary as "full of grace," when the root word of "kecharitomene" means "grace," and the rest of the word indicates she is perfectly and completely put into a state of grace, is either a bit disingenuous, or is, again, simply ignorant.
Steve Fitz
So what is the biblical evidence that Mary was a sinner? The same verses that can be used to prove that I'm a sinner proves that Mary was a sinner also.
First, Romans 3:23 states "For all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God" The only exemption of one being sinless is God himself. In fact Jesus said in Mark 10:18 ""No one is good--except God alone." If indeed Mary was sinless, she would be Good
Secondly, in Luke 1:47, Mary said "and my spirit rejoices in God my Savior". The definition of the word Savior in Christianity is God or Jesus Christ as the redeemer of sin and saver of souls. John, 1 Peter 3:18, Romans 4:25, and Romans 5:8 teaches that Jesus died for sinners not sinless people. In fact the Gospel is the fact that Jesus died for sinners. 1 Corinthians 15:2-4 states "By this gospel you are saved, if you hold firmly to the word I preached to you. Otherwise, you have believed in vain. For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received, that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, and that He was buried, and that He was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures". Im not going to tell you John what you believe but I am going to tell you what the Catholic Church believes. They believe that although Mary was sinless, Jesus died for her. Which is not true and no need for Mary to have a Savior if she was sinless.
Third according to Luke 2:21-24, Mary went to the Temple with two doves or two young pigeons. One for the Burnt Offering and the other for the Sin Offering. I will go into this more in detail in my next post."
John Martignoni
Your biblical “evidence” that Mary was a sinner.
A. Romans 3:23, “For ALL have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God.” And, you stated, “The only exemption of one being sinless is God Himself.” So, you believe the word “ALL” means absolutely every person with a human nature, except for Jesus. What about babies? Have they sinned? What about the mentally handicapped? Have they sinned? What about Elizabeth and Zechariah? In Luke 1:6, the Word of God states that Elizabeth and Zechariah were both “righteous” before God, “walking in ALL the commandments and ordinances of the Lord blameless.” Does "ALL" mean "ALL"? Or do you contend that they, in fact, did not walk in ALL the commandments and ordinances of the Lord blameless?
B. Question: Are you, Steve Fitz, seeking God in your life? Yes or no?
C. You point to Mark 10:18 to prove your point that if Mary was sinless she would be called “good,” because God alone is “good.” First of all, an argument from silence is not much of an argument. Secondly, for your point to hold, that would mean that no one else in the New Testament should be called “good,” because that would mean they were indeed without sin. Well, what about Matt 12:35 that mentions a “good” man bringing forth good things from the good treasure of his heart? And the servants in Matt 22:10 who gathered both bad and “good” people for the wedding feast? And the two servants who the Master calls “good” and faithful in Matthew 25? What about Barnabbas who was described as a “good” man in Acts 11:24? And there are many other examples I could point to. Do you contend that all of those people are sinless because they are called “good”? So, it doesn’t necessarily follow that Mary is not sinless because she isn’t referred to as being “good.” So, your example is without merit. By the way, can you point to the Scripture passage that says, "Mary was a sinner?"
D. “Luke 1:47, Mary said 'and my spirit rejoices in God my Savior.' The definition of the word Savior in Christianity is God or Jesus Christ as the redeemer of sin and saver of souls...I’m not going to tell you John what you believe but I am going to tell you what the Catholic Church believes. They believe that although Mary was sinless, Jesus died for her. Which is not true and no need for Mary to have a Savior if she was sinless.”
I also believe that Jesus died for Mary and that she was "saved" by His death. Now, you contend that since Jesus is Mary’s Savior, that definitively means Mary sinned - “No need for Mary to have a Savior if she was sinless.” Once again, I feel it my duty to point out that you are giving your fallible opinion here - the word of Steve as opposed to the Word of God. Secondly, may I ask if it is possible to save someone from something before they succumb to it? For example, have you ever been an alcoholic? If you answer, “No,” would you agree that Jesus saved you from alcoholism? Did you have need of Jesus to save you from alcoholism? How about from drug addiction?
If a person falls into a deep hole and gets hurt, and someone pulls them out...that person saved them - after the fact. However, if that person is stopped from before they actually fall in the hole, then the person that stopped them from falling in...also saved them - before the fact. Just so Jesus saved Mary from sin - before the fact, before she ever sinned.
E. I will gladly await your arguments regarding the third scriptural reason which you began to mention but did not finish.
Comments
His comment: "The same verses that can be used to prove that I'm a sinner proves that Mary was a sinner also," is not a quote from the Bible, is it? In other words, it is his fallible, non-authoritative, personal opinion. The Word of Steve as opposed to the Word of God. I will point that out pretty much everytime he makes these grand sweeping assumptions. Not a single one of those verses "prove" that Mary was a sinner. They don't even come close.
I asked him several questions in points A, B, C, and D. These are set up questions for showing that the logic behind his interpretations of the Scripture passages he uses is faulty. If you can demonstrate that the logic behind his interpretations are faulty, then it casts his interpretations in doubt. I will delve into why I asked what I did in the next newsletter, so stay tuned...
Closing Comments
Okay, so how'd you do in your responses to Steve Fitz's comments? I had a few folks send me some of the responses they came up with, and they were, for the most part, on target. The one thing I would caution against, though, is trying to do too much all at once. When you have a conversation/debate with someone on issues such as this, don't try to body slam them in one shot with tons of verbiage and dozens of Scripture passages and so on. "Hulk smash," is not necessarily a good strategy. I'm not saying it shouldn't ever be used...sometimes it is absolutely what is needed. But don't start off there. Try to guide them as much as anything else. That's why I ask questions all the time. I try to plant seeds using questions that make them think about what they believe, and why they believe it. Questions that take them down paths they haven't even considered traveling before.
I hope all of you have a very safe and happy Memorial Day weekend. Please remember to pray for the souls of those who died while serving our country.
Donations
The Bible Christian Society is a non-profit organization that relies solely on your support to bring the truths of the Catholic Faith to tens of thousands of people throughout the U.S. and all around the world each year. If you would like to help us do what we do, you can donate online at: http://www.biblechristiansociety.com/donations, or send a check to: Bible Christian Society, PO Box 424, Pleasant Grove, AL 35127. Anything you can do is greatly appreciated!
Unsubscribe/Subscribe
If you did not sign up for this newsletter and you would like to be removed from our distribution list, just click on this link: http://www.biblechristiansociety.com/newsletter/unsubscribe, then enter the email address that this newsletter comes to and click "Unsubscribe." If this newsletter was forwarded to you by a friend, and you would like to be added to our distribution list, all you have to do is go to http://www.biblechristiansociety.com/newsletter and put your email address in the box at the top of the page. Either way, it will take you about 10 seconds.