If mary never sinned, why does she call God savior in Luke 1:47 (And my spirit has rejoiced in God my Savior- [NASB])?
If Mary was preserved from original sin, how is it you think she was not saved?
If a person is walking along and falls into a deep hole and a man throws a rope down the hole and pulls that person out -he has saved that person. If another person is walking along and the same man warns the person of the hole and the person avoids falling into the hole is the man not also the second person’s savior as well?
We were saved by Jesus after we “fell into the hole”, Mary was saved before she could “fall into the hole” she still needed a Savior in order for her to not “fall into the hole”.
My word, you’re right! that salvific act must have been temporal only and could niether apply backwards nor forwards! How silly i am to have believed that Jesus death for once and **for all time **could ever mean in the past, present and future. Well, i’m off to be an atheist now since a God who doesn’t have the power to transcend time and save whomever He chooses is less preferable…
We don’t claim that Mary saved herself, or that she was able to enter heaven without God’s action. We simply claim (or rather, we simply accept and pass on the revelation given by God) that God made her perfect, without sin, at the moment of her conception.
BTW, don’t babies who die without any personal sin also need a savior?
Catholics agree that Mary needed a savior.
Mary’s immaculate conception doesn’t mean that Mary “didn’t need a savior.” On the contrary, immaculate conception means that Mary was saved by Jesus in a special way: in advance. Notice that Luke 1:47 shows Mary saying that Jesus already is her savior.
then why does romans 3:23, and other verses like this say ALL have sinned and fall short. Jesus didn’t, but he was part God. Mary, was 100 human.
It doesn’t say “all but Jesus have sinned”. It says “all have sinned”.
But ignoring the case of Jesus, what sin has an aborted baby committed? Remember, the scripture says “all have sinned”. That is active, personal sin, not simply having a “sin nature” or being affected by original sin. So what sin has a baby committed?
Obviously Mary wasn’t a sinner, my friend, and I guess your question is a smart challenge to better reflect upon the theme.
In addition to the remarks that people did, I would suggest a, say, “psychological” one.
Could Mary, handsome and humble, say something as:
“and my spirit exults in God, Who saved the mankind and, sure, Me too, even though in a sense of preventing Me by every sin thanks to the grace of my Immaculate Conception”…?
May Mary be benevolent towards my childish confidence :o
Jesus was not part God. He was fully God and fully Human. Do you believe Luke 1:37, “For with God nothing is impossible.” When God made Adam and Eve, he made them sinless. Why is it hard to believe that Mary was born sinless? Remember, we are freed(cleansed) of original sin at our baptism, while Mary was presevered from it at her conception. But, in both cases, it is Jesus who is the Savior. Mary had every opportunity to sin in her life time, but she was more faithfull and understood what God had planned. That is what a faithfull Catholic and/or Protestant Christian should be like. Obiedient.
First off, Jesus is 100% God and 100% man. It’s called the hypostatic union - he wasn’t partly God. God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit all existed throughout eternity. Jesus became incarnate in the Blessed Virgin and became man, thus we have the hypostatic union.
Mary, the mother of God (because Jesus is fully God and fully man), was preserved free from the stain of original sin at her immaculate conception when she was in her mother St. Anne’s womb. Not once anywhere in Scripture does it point to any of Mary’s supposed “sins”… and Protestants are supposed to be Sola Scriptura so they should accept that Mary was sinless throughout her life. Mary carried GOD HIMSELF in her womb for 9 months. She was the Ark of the New Covenant, and the New Eve. God created Adam and Eve sinless, and He gave the same grace to the mother of His only begotten Son. Mary is a role model for us as Christians, she is something we humans can achieve, and she achieved it with God so we must emulate her lead since she was the first.
your understanding of what is called the Incarnation is flawed. Jesus was not part anything, He was FULL God and FULL man (in all things except sin, as His august Mother).
Read the entire third chapter of Romans. Paul is saying that all peoples — both Jew and gentile — bear the burden of sin. He isn’t making a categorical claim about each individual human being. Scripture specifically tells us that NOT all individual people have personally sinned. Consider Luke 1:6, discussing Zechariah and Elizabeth: “And they were both righteous before God, walking in all the commandments and ordinances of the Lord blamelessly.”
In context, Mary’s use of the word “savior” in Luke 1:47 does not refer to salvation from sin—sin is not mentioned in Mary’s canticle—but to salvation from Israel’s temporal enemies: “the proud” (51), “the mighty”(52), and “the rich” (53).
Mary had just been told that the male child conceived in her womb would be given the throne of David and he would rule over the house of Jacob forever. (Luke 1:32-33) In other words, Mary had just been told that her son was the long-awaited Jewish Messiah. At that time, it is very likely that Mary, like the rest of the Jews, expected the Messiah to bring temporal “salvation from our enemies and from the hands of all our foes” (71).
why does it seem that for every levy that a good percentage of protestants make about how catholics “don’t read the bible” one can easily point out multiple instances that show that a good percentage of protestants read only about 30 verses of the bible and then ignore all the meaning which is actually carried by the CONTEXT of what they SHOULD be reading…?
Ah, no he would only be a savior for the first one who fell into the hole. For the second one, he would merely be only a “watchman” Eze 3, 33 and thus not a savior. Nice try though.
Was not also Enoch made without sin? Hebrews 11:5
Who would be more grateful, the one who was saved after falling or the one who was saved from falling? I argue it would be the latter.
None, a baby is born without sin. Romans 5:12 speaks of “active aroist” sin, that is each and every person activily sinning. Read Gen 3, Romans 8 we are simply born into an enviroment of sin behaviors. A baby does not sin, it is just silly to say otherwise.
Sin is a deliberate disobedence of God’s laws. Babies do not truly obey, nor disobey — they eat, sleep, and poop.
Therefore, I tell you, her many sins have been forgiven—for she loved much. But he who has been forgiven little loves little."
Too bad Jesus himself contradicts you. The one who has been forgiven much will be more grateful than the one who has been forgiven ah, NOTHING.
Fact, is one can not be forgiven for something they have NOT done. If one has not sinned at all, then there is NOTHING to forgive.
The very fact that Mary has a saviour proves beyond doubt she has done something sinful to be forgiven of. People who do not sin, do NOT have a savior.
Enoch walked with God; then he was no more, because God took him away.
By faith Enoch was taken from this life, so that he did not experience death; he could not be found, because God had taken him away. For before he was taken, he was commended as one who pleased God.
Enoch does not refer to God as his savior because as far as we can see Enoch never Actively sinned. Enoch was pleasing to God, so God raptured him to heaven with himself.