Mother mary without sin?

[Eliana]

1a. Verb Tense and Hebrew Grammar
Isaiah 9:6 uses past tense verbs to describe the birth of the child (“for unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given”), while the rest of the prophecy speaks of future events (“the government will be upon his shoulders,” “he will be called”). This use of the prophetic perfect is common in Hebrew literature, where future events are described as already completed to emphasize their certainty. The mix of past and future tenses in this verse suggests that the prophet Isaiah is referring to an event that has not yet fully come to pass.

1b. Messianic Context
Isaiah 9:6-7 speaks of a ruler whose reign will be eternal, sitting on the throne of David, and characterized by "justice" and "peace" with no end. Historically, there is no immediate parallel for this type of rule, which implies that Isaiah is referring to a future messianic ruler. In the context of Hebrew scriptures, the Messiah is seen as someone who will bring final redemption to Israel, establishing an everlasting kingdom of God. This future expectation was not realized during Isaiah’s time or under subsequent kings like Hezekiah, who is sometimes suggested as a partial fulfillment of the prophecy.

1c. Historical and Eschatological Argument
While traditional interpretations link parts of this passage to King Hezekiah, the fact that the prophecy speaks of an endless reign of peace and justice suggests an eschatological vision. Such an eternal kingdom transcends the immediate context and points to a future time beyond Israel's ordinary history. Many other prophecies in Isaiah similarly depict a future messianic era, reinforcing the idea that Isaiah 9:6 describes events beyond the prophet's contemporary period.

Therefore, based on the use of verb tenses, the messianic context, and the eschatological nature of the prophecy, Isaiah 9:6 can be understood as a prediction of future events, pointing to the establishment of an eternal and righteous kingdom.

2a. Titles Given to the Child
Isaiah 9:6 assigns remarkable titles to the child: “Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.” These titles, especially "Mighty God" and "Everlasting Father," suggest divine and eternal attributes that do not apply to any historical ruler of Israel, including Hezekiah. While Hezekiah was a good king, he is not described with such attributes anywhere else in the Bible.

2b. Eternal and Peaceful Reign
Isaiah 9:7 mentions that the child’s government will bring “endless peace” and that “the throne of David will be established forever.” Hezekiah’s reign was limited in time and did not bring a kingdom of perpetual peace as described in this passage. After his death, the kingdom of Judah continued to face conflict and oppression, which does not align with the idea of an eternal, peaceful reign.

2c. Mismatch with Historical Context
Although some scholars try to associate Hezekiah with the child mentioned, the timeline does not clearly support this. Isaiah prophesied during the reign of Ahaz, Hezekiah’s father, and the events described do not line up with the birth and reign of Hezekiah in the way that Isaiah 9:6’s messianic expectations suggest. Furthermore, the context of Isaiah 9 speaks of future redemption, which was not fully realized in Hezekiah’s lifetime, especially concerning an everlasting kingdom of justice and peace.

2d. Use of Eschatological Language
The language in Isaiah 9 goes beyond immediate historical fulfillment. Words like “forever” and “without end” indicate a reign that extends far beyond Hezekiah’s rule. The timeless nature of the reign described points to a future fulfillment rather than something achieved during Hezekiah’s era, whose reign was notable but far from eternal.


3a. Consistent Use of ʿAlmah in Genesis 24:43
In Genesis 24:43, ʿAlmah refers to Rebekah, who is clearly identified as a young, unmarried woman and a virgin. The Greek Septuagint translates ʿAlmah as "παρθένος" (parthenos), meaning "virgin." This sets a precedent for translating ʿAlmah as "virgin" in other contexts, including Isaiah 7:14. The translators’ choice to use parthenos in Genesis, part of the Torah, shows a deliberate and careful interpretation of the term.

3b. The Septuagint’s Rigor in Translating the Torah
The translation of the Torah into Greek, as part of the Septuagint, was notably rigorous, especially compared to the translation of the rest of the Tanakh. Tradition holds that rabbinic scholars approached this task with great care, ensuring theological and linguistic precision. Since ʿAlmah was translated as parthenos in Genesis 24:43, it suggests that the translators understood ʿAlmah to mean "virgin" in other contexts like Isaiah 7:14.

3c. Cultural Implication of ʿAlmah in Hebrew Society
Although ʿAlmah literally means "young woman," it often implied a young, marriageable woman who, in the cultural context of ancient Israel, would be presumed to be a virgin. In ancient Hebrew society, an ʿAlmah who was unmarried was expected to be a virgin, reinforcing the appropriateness of translating the term as parthenos in Greek.

3d. Septuagint’s Testimony in Isaiah 7:14
The Septuagint translates Isaiah 7:14 using parthenos, supporting the interpretation of ʿAlmah as "virgin," at least in the prophetic context. This Greek translation, completed centuries before later theological debates, reflects a well-considered rendering of the term.

Almah doesn't mean virgin, it means young woman of marriageable age, and if you think every young woman back then was a virgin I suggest taking a history class. Besides that there is an instance where almah is used for a young woman who isn't a virgin in I believe proverbs. Betulah means virgin, and is used at least 50 times in the Tanakh denoting as such, where almah is used hardly at all.

The Septuagint wasn't even translated from a Jewish bible, it was translated from a Christian one and under duress to boot. It's considered to be inaccurate by most scholars.

 

[GoodAttention]

...and the word "pedophile" means child (pedo)+friendly love (phile) if translated literally. If I were to say "I think GoodAttention is a pedophile" I guarantee you'd be screaming at the mods to remove the post and ban me. If I were to respond "What man? The meaning of the word if broken down just means someone who has a friendly love for children, what's wrong with that?" I can also guarantee you nor the mods would accept that response and I'd be banned, deservedly so.

You can think what you want but if you want to make an argument start with some sort of evidence or observation.

Calling me a pedophile puts egg on your face, not mine.

You're not smart and you're not impressing anyone an iota with your semantics, "literal translations" or word play. You did not teach in a synagogue because you don't know squat about Judaism as demonstrated by your misapplication of Jewish terms, and basic ignorance of Jewish theology.

Nothing I have said or could say will ever take away from Judaism or the Hebrew language.

In fact, your scripture tells us we had one language at one time which was then “confused”, so what are you objecting to specifically?

As demonstrated by others far better in the language then I, you do not speak Hebrew let alone ancient Hebrew. Perhaps you should stay in your lane and stop pretending to be more knowledgeable than you actually are.

I am not attempting to “own” or “better” Hebrew or Judaism.

To see my language in yours is more than mesmerising, and I’m only here to share that, not take away from what exists.

 

[GoodAttention]

A coincidence which is not worth mentioning.

Time will tell.

 

[Eliana]

You can think what you want but if you want to make an argument start with some sort of evidence or observation.

Calling me a pedophile puts egg on your face, not mine.

My mistake, I took you seriously. Either you don't read what people are posting or you just like hearing yourself talk.

I'm not calling you a pedophile and my post makes it very clear as such. I used it as an example of how appealing to entomological origins of words is ridiculous in relation to what the words actually mean. Perhaps add reading comprehension in your to-do list.

Nothing I have said or could say will ever take away from Judaism or the Hebrew language.

In fact, your scripture tells us we had one language at one time which was then “confused”, so what are you objecting to specifically?



I am not attempting to “own” or “better” Hebrew or Judaism.

To see my language in yours is more than mesmerising, and I’m only here to share that, not take away from what exists.

Nothing I said in my response was anything like what you're asserting, hence my belief you don't bother to read what people write or don't care and just like talking.

 

[GoodAttention]

A coincidence which is not worth mentioning.

The opposite of almah is elem yes?

ஏல்​

ēl n. ஏல்-. 1. [M. ēl.] Suitability,appropriateness,

ஏம்​

em n. ஏமம் 1. Pleasure, delight;

 

[GoodAttention]

My mistake, I took you seriously. Either you don't read what people are posting or you just like hearing yourself talk.

I'm not calling you a pedophile and my post makes it very clear as such. I used it as an example of how appealing to entomological origins of words is ridiculous in relation to what the words actually mean. Perhaps add reading comprehension in your to-do list.

I understand Hebrew words have meanings in Hebrew, but when some words or names are spoken or sounded out, I hear my language.

I’m sharing the meanings of the words I hear. I will admit I came in too hot with tikkun olam, but the picture those words gave me was intense.

I shouldn’t have said “This is the Jewish meaning” so I apologize for that.

Nothing I said in my response was anything like what you're asserting, hence my belief you don't bother to read what people write or don't care and just like talking.

I took a moment to do so.

 

[Betho_br]

Almah doesn't mean virgin, it means young woman of marriageable age, and if you think every young woman back then was a virgin I suggest taking a history class. Besides that there is an instance where almah is used for a young woman who isn't a virgin in I believe proverbs. Betulah means virgin, and is used at least 50 times in the Tanakh denoting as such, where almah is used hardly at all.

The Septuagint wasn't even translated from a Jewish bible, it was translated from a Christian one and under duress to boot. It's considered to be inaccurate by most scholars.

In Genesis 24, which narrates the marriage of Isaac and Rebekah, two Hebrew words appear: "betulah" in verse 16 and "almah" in verse 43. It is noteworthy that between these verses, Isaac and Rebekah have not yet met, indicating Rebekah remains a virgin. The pivotal moment occurs in verse 22: "After the camels had finished drinking, the man took out a gold nose ring weighing a beka and two gold bracelets weighing ten shekels." Here, Abraham's servant seals Rebekah, signifying her betrothal and commitment to her future husband.

Thus, the Bible itself reveals that both "betulah" and "almah" denote virginity, yet "almah" specifically refers to a young woman who is betrothed, such that any relationship prior to marriage would be considered adulterous. This understanding enriches and perfects Isaiah's prophecy, affirming that the Messiah would come from a virgin who is also betrothed, akin to Rebekah.

Septuagint interpreters correctly interpreted and translated "almah" in Genesis 24:43 by parthenos (virgin).

 

[John D. Brey]

The Septuagint wasn't even translated from a Jewish bible, it was translated from a Christian one and under duress to boot. It's considered to be inaccurate by most scholars.

It seems doubtful at best that there was a Christian bible hundreds of years before the birth of Jesus of Nazareth? Which is to say that the Septuagint translated "almah" (עלמה), at Isaiah 7:14, "virgin," hundreds of years before Jesus was ostensibly born of a virgin.




John

 

[GoodAttention]

In Genesis 24, which narrates the marriage of Isaac and Rebekah, two Hebrew words appear: "betulah" in verse 16 and "almah" in verse 43. It is noteworthy that between these verses, Isaac and Rebekah have not yet met, indicating Rebekah remains a virgin. The pivotal moment occurs in verse 22: "After the camels had finished drinking, the man took out a gold nose ring weighing a beka and two gold bracelets weighing ten shekels." Here, Abraham's servant seals Rebekah, signifying her betrothal and commitment to her future husband.

Thus, the Bible itself reveals that both "betulah" and "almah" denote virginity, yet "almah" specifically refers to a young woman who is betrothed, such that any relationship prior to marriage would be considered adulterous. This understanding enriches and perfects Isaiah's prophecy, affirming that the Messiah would come from a virgin who is also betrothed, akin to Rebekah.

Septuagint interpreters correctly interpreted and translated "almah" in Genesis 24:43 by parthenos (virgin).

I gave “betulah” a good go.

பேது​

pētu n. U. bēda. Secrecy; secretinquiry; இரகசியம். (W.)

இல​

ila n. prob. ஏலா Always in the voc.case; used in ancient times in addressing awoman in a familiar manner;

Would sound out as Be thu ila, but keeping with the secrecy like almah, the feminine aspect is “hidden” in the word almost like a pun.

 

[Eliana]

It seems doubtful at best that there was a Christian bible hundreds of years before the birth of Jesus of Nazareth? Which is to say that the Septuagint translated "almah" (עלמה), at Isaiah 7:14, "virgin," hundreds of years before Jesus was ostensibly born of a virgin.




John

My bad. The source used was a secondary one from the library of Alexandria. I failed to check the date and for some reason associated Alexandra and "Catholic". Everything else I said remains.

 

[Betho_br]

ECCLESIASTES 18:17 REFUTES THE IMMACULATE CONCEPTION OF MARY?

REFUTATION AND RESPONSE:

In the Bible, not only is Mary called "kecharitomene," but it is also used in Sirach (Ecclesiasticus) 18:17. So, is Mary not that special?

REFUTATION:

FIRST:

The word "kecharitomeno" is used in Ecclesiasticus 18:17 LXX as an adjective (the phrase is "Andri kecharitomeno"). However, in Luke 1:27, "kecharitomene" stands out as a substitute for Mary’s proper name.

SECOND:

In biblical thought, a name expresses the essence of a person, so Mary is kecharitomene—full of grace—in her very essence. This cannot be said about the abstract "kecharitomeno" in Ecclesiasticus 18:17 LXX.

The LXX in Ecclesiasticus 18:17 ("andri kecharitomeno") uses the exact morphology as Luke 1:28 in the dative case but only in the sense of an adjective ("a man full of grace"). Other derivatives from the LXX appear in 2 Maccabees 3:33 (the deponent verb "kecharistai," meaning "to grant, give, treat with grace, forgive"); and in 4 Maccabees 5:08 (the same declarative form as in 2 Maccabees 3:33, but in a perfect participle form, "kecharismenē").

THIRD:

The only distinctive feature of Luke 1:28's usage of "kecharitomene" is that it is a title following the salutation "Jaire" (Hail), which are grammatically different expressions.

On the other hand, most translations of incomplete and adulterated Protestant Bibles carry this word as "kecharitomeno" (grace) in Ecclesiasticus 18:17. But when applied to Mary as "kecharitomene," they change it to "highly favored" or "full of favor" instead of "full of grace."

But in Ecclesiastes 18:17, where the word appears in the same form ("kecharitomene"), it is used in proverbial or wisdom literature.

According to standard hermeneutical principles, this is not the type of biblical literature upon which doctrines or systematic theology (or even precise word meanings) should be built. The reason is that proverbial expressions allow for many exceptions.

If you say, for example, "Happy people smile," it may be true most of the time, but not always.

CORRECT?

Proverbial language is thus too imprecise to be used in determining exact theological propositions. The meaning depends on the context, as any lexicon will quickly demonstrate.

FOURTH:

This is why you cannot make a doctrine from Ecclesiastes 18:17.

Grammatically, it’s easy to explain: one thing is to say you blushed. Another is to say that some guy can go into a job interview. So, note that the same word is used differently: as a surname and as an adjective. You can be called Dolores or have "dolores" (pains); the difference is that in the first instance, it designates the person—it is a name. In the second instance, it is an adjective describing the state you are in, with pains, possibly a temporary state, but your name is forever.

Finally, the word "charito" in Greek comes from the Hebrew word "hen," which means grace, charm, kindness, or gracious favor.

This is important because, in Hebrew, the word "hen" is used in both a spiritual and physical sense, referring to human qualities (to refer to a person’s charm, goodness, etc.):

As a loving deer and a graceful doe, may her breasts satisfy you always, and may you ever be intoxicated with her love. – Proverbs 5:19

and:

All because of the wanton lust of a prostitute, alluring, the mistress of sorceries, who enslaved nations by her prostitution and peoples by her witchcraft. – Nahum 3:4

TO SUM UP:

These texts use the Hebrew word "hen" for gracious and beautiful. Now, "hen" is also used in the sense of divine benevolence, divine favor, divine grace, by certain people who occupy an important position in Scripture, like Noah:

But Noah found favor (hen) in the eyes of the Lord. – Genesis 6:8.

Thus, we cannot compare Noah’s "finding favor" in the eyes of God to his being beautiful or gracious in Proverbs or Nahum; these are two entirely different things, but in both, the same word "hen" is used.

Similarly, with "kecharitomene," the same thing happens in Ecclesiasticus 18:17 and Luke 1:28. In the first instance, it is used as an adjective to describe how that person was, a quality of that person.

But in the second instance, in Luke 1:27, it is used as a pronoun, a new name, with all that entails.

 

[Betho_br]

This first article is a return to a very old discussion and is being as didactic, impartial and complete in references as possible, on the interpretation of the greeting word χαῖρε, of the hapax legómenon κεχαριτωμένη “kecharitoméne”, that is, of the verbal aspect of this rare conjugation, of the Aktionsart and also of the construction “μετὰ σοῦ” in the verse of Luke 1:28. We will consider as a background, the Pauline theology described in the Roman letter as the initial source in relation to the tabernacle in flesh (John 1:14), called Jesus. If she is being included within the scope of the word “all” in the following verses: “For all have sinned” Rom 3:23 and “Therefore, just as through one man sin entered the world, and death through sin, and thus death spread to all men, because all have sinned” Rom 5:12. However, we already know that not all died according to the Scriptures, for example, Enoch and Elijah, in addition, we also know that the word “all” in Greek Grammar allows for exclusions (John 1:17), therefore, would the flesh and blood part of Jesus have the sin that is in men born of women? From the birth of Jesus from the Spirit, the Holy One, we are left to study His relationship with Mary in the cited verse. καὶ εἰσελθὼν πρὸς αὐτὴν εἶπεν• χαῖρε, κεχαριτωμένη, ὁ κύριος μετὰ καὶ G2532: CONJ AND εἰσελθὼν G1525: V-2AAP-NSM having entered πρὸς G4314: PREP for αὐτὴν G846: P-ASF to her εἶπεν• G3004: V-2AAI-3S said χαῖ ρε, G5463: V-PAM-2S Ave, κεχαριτωμένη G5487: V-RPP-NSF has been completely graced, ὁ G3588: T-NSM o κύριος G2962: N-NSM Lord μετὰ G3326: PREP with σου G4771: P-2GS of thee. Luke 1:18

And he went in unto her, and said, Hail, thou that art most highly favoured, the Eternal is with thee. Luke 1:18

The construction “μετὰ σοῦ” appears in:

Gen. 6:18, 20, Gen. 8:16f, Gen. 17:4, Gen. 20:16, Gen. 21:22f, Gen. 24:8, 40, Gen. 26:3, 24, 28, Gen. 28:15, Gen. 30:15, Gen. 31:3, 13, 38, Gen. 33:15, Gen. 39:17, Gen. 46:4, Exod. 3:12, Exod. 18:18f, Exod. 19:24, Exod. 33:3, Exod. 34:3, Lev. 10:9, 14f, Lev. 25:25, 35f, Num. 5:19, Num. 11:16f, Num. 16:10, Num. 18:2, 7, 11, 19, Deut. 2:7, Deut. 14:27, 29, Deut. 20:1, Deut. 22:2, Deut. 23:17, Deut. 31:8, 23, Jos. 1:5, 9, 17, Joseph. 2:19, Joseph. 3:7, Joseph. 8:1, Jude. 1:3, 24, Jude. 4:9, Jude. 6:12, 16, Jude. 7:2, 4, Jude. 9:32, Jda. 12:1, Judges. 1:3, 24, Judg. 4:9, Judges. 6:12, 16, Judges. 7:2, 4, Judg. 9:32, Judges. 12:1, Ruth 1:10, 1 Sam. 10:7, 1 Sam. 14:7, 1 Sam. 15:26, 1 Sam. 17:37, 1 Sam. 20:13, 1 Sam. 21:2, 1 Sam. 26:6, 1 Sam. 27:5, 1 Sam. 28:19, 1 Sam. 29:10, 2 Sam. 3:12, 21, 2 Sam. 7:3, 9, 2 Sam. 9:7, 2 Sam. 13:20, 26, 2 Sam. 14:17, 19, 2 Sam. 15:20, 35, 2 Sam. 16:21, 2 Sam. 19:8, 1 Rs. 2:8, 35, 1 Rs. 3:6, 1 Rs. 11:11, 38, 1 Rs. 13:8, 16, 2 Rs. 5:26, 2 Rs. 14:10, 2 Rs. 19:9, 1 Chr. 17:2, 8, 1 Chr. 22:11, 15f, 1 Chr. 28:20f, 2 Chr. 16:9, 2 Chr. 18:3, 2 Chr. 25:7, 19, 1 Es. 8:91, Ezr. 7:13, Ezr. 10:4, Jdt. 11:6, 16, Jdt. 12:3, Tob. 2:14, Tob. 4:15, Tob. 5:5f, 9, Tob. 6:18, Tbs. 2:14, Tbs. 5:3, 9, Tbs. 6:18, Tbs. 9:2, Tbs. 12:1, 1 Ma. 12:45, Ps. 72:23, Ps. 109:3, Ps. 138:18, Prov. 6:22, Prov. 23:11, Cant. 6:1, John 11:5, John 40:28, Ecclesiastes. 9:9, Sir. 12:15, Os. 4:5, Zech. 8:23, Isa. 41:10, Isa. 43:2, 5, Isa. 57:8, Isa. 58:11, Isa. 62:5, Jer. 1:8, 17, 19, Jer. 15:20, Jer. 19:10, Jer. 26:28, Ezek. 3:10, Eze. 16:8, 34, 60, 62, Ezek. 23:25, Ezek. 38:6f, 9, 15, Eze. 39:4, Ezek. 44:5, Sut. 1:21, Matt. 18:16, Luke. 1:28, Luke. 22:33, Joa. 3:26, Joa. 9:37, Acts 18:10, Acts 27:24.

Strong's Dictionary defines μετὰ with the number G03326, meta, a primary preposition (often used adverbially); TDNT - 7:766,1102; prep 1) with, after, behind

Strong's Dictionary defines σοῦ with the number G04675, am, genitive case of 4771; pron 1) your

The understanding of “μετὰ σοῦ” is evident in John 3:26, when the disciples of John the Baptist saw it:

And they came to John, and said unto him, Rabbi, he that was with thee beyond Jordan, to whom thou bareest witness, behold, he baptizeth, and all men come to him. John answered and said, A man can receive nothing, except it be given him from heaven. Ye yourselves bear me witness, that I said, I am not the Christ, but that I am sent before him. He that hath the bride is the bridegroom: but the friend of the bridegroom, which standeth and heareth him, rejoiceth greatly because of the bridegroom's voice. So then this my joy is full. He must increase, but I must decrease. He that cometh from above is above all; he that is of the earth is of the earth, and speaketh of the earth: he that cometh from heaven is above all. (John 3:2631 KJV)

In context, the usual understanding of “μετὰ σοῦ” as “being behind and alongside”, as a spontaneous, covenantal follower, is evident.

Let us look at the case of Luke 22:33 KJV

And he said to him, Lord, I am ready to go with you both to prison and to death.

Which means “going along spontaneously”, that is, association.

The term Κεχαριτωμένη is in the participle mood, perfect tense, passive voice (Vocative, being between commas in the Greek text edited by Nestle-Aland, Novum Testamentum Graece, 28th Revised Edition, edited by Barbara and Kurt Aland, Johannes Karavidopoulos, Carlo M. Martini, and Bruce M. Metzger in cooperation with the Institute for New Testament Textual Research, Münster/Westphalia, © 2012 Deutsche, feminine and second person singular) of χαριτόω, according to the declension classification in The Analytical Greek New Testament (Barbara Friberg – Timothy Friberg), from Edições Vida Nova, Page 172.

The Strong's Dictionary defines the verb χαριτόω with the number G05487, charitoo of 5485; TDNT - 9:372,1298; v 1) to make gracious 1a) charming, lovely, pleasant 2) to favor greatly, show great generosity 3) to honor with blessings.

Now the term χάρις "Charis" - means "grace", qualified in the Strong's Dictionary under number G05485, charis of 5463; TDNT - 9:372,1298; n f 1) grace 1a) that which gives joy, delight, pleasure, sweetness, charm, amiability: grace of speech 2) good will, kind kindness, favor 2a) of the merciful goodness by which God, exercising his holy influence over souls, turns them to Christ, guards, strengthens, causes them to grow in Christian faith, knowledge, affection, and awakens them to the exercise of Christian virtues 3) that which is due to grace 3a) the spiritual condition of one governed by the power of divine grace 3b) sign or proof of grace, benefit 3b1) gift of grace 3b2) privilege, bounty 4) gratitude, (for privileges, services, favors), reward, prize

The term χαριτόω "Charitoo" – Is a Greek verb ending in “-όω”, omega omicron "-oo", this means that it puts the person or thing into the state indicated by the verbal root. One characteristic of Greek verbs ending in –όω, according to the Revised Greek Grammar by Herbert Weir Smyth and Editor Gordon M. Messing, for Classical Greek therefore with reservations, is that they are usually factitive, that is, causative; that is, they signify actions that have a changing effect on the person or thing that the subject affects. The root being "charis" or "grace", "charitoo" means to put in a state of "grace", it becomes "gracious".

So χαριτόω, as explained earlier, is a verb that incorporates the root χάρις (the "grace", the undeserved kindness/undeserved favor), meaning to effect a change by means of "grace", or simply to "grace".

1st Search. Is the greatest effect of the “grace” given to the Virgin Mary in Luke 1:28 the removal of sin?

Houaiss Dictionary - factitive: adjective. Heading: linguistics. used to describe a verb that involves the idea of doing or causing; causative (e.g., putting someone to sleep is a verb us. in a factive manner) Etymology adjective Heading: linguistics. used to describe a verb that involves the idea of doing or causing; causative (e.g., putting someone to sleep is a verb us. in a factive manner)

The term χαριτόω is qualified in the Strong's Dictionary under number G05487, charitoo, of 5485; TDNT - 9:372,1298; v 1) to make gracious 1a) charming, lovely, pleasant 2) to favor greatly, to show great generosity 3) to honor with blessings

The Greek prefix κε "Ke" indicates that the verb is in the participle mode, a nominal form that fulfills the functions of verb and adjective and can be used adverbially, agreeing with the noun or pronoun in gender, number and case; in the perfect tense, past indefinite, explained below:

See Index of Works Consulted wrote: "The perfect tense is the most important exegetically of all the Greek tenses." Moulton, Prolegomena, 140. The perfect is used less than the present, aorist, future, or imperfect; when used, however, it is usually a deliberate choice on the part of the writer. Definition: The perfect tense describes a completed event in the past (speaking of the perfect indicative here) that has existing results in the present time (i.e., relative to the time of the speaker). Or, as Zerwick puts it: "the perfect tense is not used to indicate a past action, but the present state and result of the past action." Zerwick, Biblical Greek, 96 The BDF suggests that the perfect "combines in itself, as it were, the present and aorist denoting continuation of the completed action . . ." BDF, 175 (§340). Chamberlain goes further when he suggests that it is sometimes used to "describe an action that has permanent results." Chamberlain, Exegetical Grammar, 72 (italics mine). The implication of what “the perfect implies is that the event has occurred and still has significant results.” This goes beyond grammar and is therefore liable to be misinterpreted. Even more dangerous is the notion found in commentaries that the perfect denotes a permanent or eternal result. Such a statement is akin to saying that the aorist tense means “once-for-all.” Implications of this kind are drawn from ungrammatical considerations. One must be careful not to syntactically theologize only when it is convenient. 1

A special feature of the perfect, whether of the first or second, is the prefix, also called by grammarians “reduplication” and “augmentation.” In our case, the prefix κε for the verb χαριτόω. 2; 3;4;5;6.

2nd Research. Does the above grammatical context occur with other similar verbs?

The term Κεχαριτωμένη is used in Luke 1:18 to designate the Virgin Mary as “the recipient of divine “grace”” (Fitzmyer, 1:345; cf. Nolland, 1:50; BDAG, 1081), without reference to her personal dignity (Marshall, 65): “To show kindness to someone, in this case the Virgin Mary, with the implication of graciousness on the part of the one, in this case God, showing such kindness” (LN 88.66).

3rd Research. There are other similar constructions in the Greek text that help to translate the verse of Luke 1:28

Works Consulted 1 - Grammar of Greek, an Exegetical Syntax of the New Testament by Daniel B. Wallace, Editora Batista Regular do Brasil. Pg. 573-575. 2 - Antônio Renato Gusso - Instrumental Grammar of Greek, Vida Nova, Pg 161;163. 3 - Noções do Grego Bíblico : Gramática Fundamental, Lourenço Stelio Rega, Johannes Bergmann 4 — São Paulo : Vida Nova, 2004, Pg 250, 5 - A Greek Grammar of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature , Blass, F., Debrunner, A., & Funk, R. W. (1961). University of Chicago Press, Pg 175-177, §§ 340-342. 6 Luke - A Handbook on the Greek Text, by Martin M. Culy, Mikeal C. Parsons, and Joshua J. Stigall, Pg 28.

 

[Betho_br]

The Greek suffix μένη "méne" makes the word a passive participle. Passive means that the action is on the Subject, in our case the Virgin Mary, by another person, God, since the speaker is the angel Gabriel. God is the author of her state of “charis” (“grace”), because only He can effect a change in someone through “grace”. The verb used “kecharitoméne” indicates that the Virgin Mary is the recipient of a fullness of “grace” and that it was given to her in a complete way in an indefinite past. The perfect tense does not indicate that there was a filling of “grace”. “Grace” is not a substance or liquid, “full of grace” is a bad translation. The event was continuous in what refers to the effects that were underway in the Virgin Mary, before the angel Gabriel appeared, just as God prepared the Garden of Eden for Adam, the Virgin Mary was prepared for the New Adam, Jesus, the Anointed One. Compendium of Catholic Apologetics, by José Miguel Arráiz Roberti, Pg. 496.

4th Research: Does the suffix μένη “méne” indicate that it will always be this way?

3) The term χαῖρε is qualified in the Strong's Dictionary under number G05463, chairo, primary verb; TDNT - 9:359,1298; v 1) to rejoice, be glad 2) to be extremely glad 3) to be well, to be successful 4) in greetings, greeting! 5) at the beginning of letters: to greet, salute. This verb χαῖρε is also used in Matt. 26:49; Matt. 27:29; Mark 15:18 and John 19:3. In all the imperative cases cited, it refers to a greeting given to a superior, even if ironic. The corresponding word in the Clementine Latin Vulgate is “Ave,” in the sense of a greeting given to a superior. Note the addition “Ave Rabbi” in Matthew 14:45 and compare with the non-imperative case of “salutem” in Acts 23:26, that is, greetings, not excluding authority, in the case of a subordinate greeting an imperial authority. If the angel said “Ave” to Mary, an argument can be made that she is in some way superior to the angel Gabriel.

5th Research: Does the argument match the text in Vetus Latina?


1) Kneeling before a king was not a reprehensible problem.

2) If Jesus is King of the Jews, Mary is automatically Queen Mother, as was common in titles of nobility.

3) If Jesus is the Only Begotten god (elohim), Mary is the mother of the Only Begotten god (elohim).

This cannot be denied. The adjective "great" does not satisfy the theology in the Roman letter in the sense that Jesus was not born a sinner.

1) When Abigail saw David, she hurried and got off her donkey, and fell on her face before David, and bowed herself to the ground. And she fell at his feet, and said, “Oh, my lord, the transgression is mine; let your servant speak in your ears, and hear the words of your servant.” 1 Samuel 25:23-24

From 1a) Kneeling before a king was not a reprehensible problem.

2) Saying: Where is he who has been born King of the Jews? Matthew 2:2-3

From 2a) If Jesus is King of the Jews, Mary is automatically Queen-mother of the Jews, it was common in titles of nobility, furthermore, it is understood that the Virgin Mary is the representative of Joseph in the Davidic lineage, because she is one flesh with him, otherwise the lineage would not be complete, hence, CO-author.

3) And the Logos tabernacled in the flesh and dwelt among us, and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only Son from the Father, full of grace and truth. John 1:14 – No one has ever seen God, but the only God, who is at the Father's side, has made him known. John 1:18 (Critical text, with reservations, the Vulgate text states “son”, different from the testimony of the critical text, which is essential for the Doctrine of Unity, being easily understandable the title of The Mother of God, which is said to be supported according to the Orthodox Catholic Catechism (Please do not confuse with the Roman Catholic Church) from the Latin “Deípara” or in Greek “Teótoco” by the exegesis of the texts of Deuteronomy 6:4; Matthew 2:2-3, Mark 12:29 and 26:29; Luke 1:43.

From 3a) If Jesus is the Only Begotten God, Mary is the mother of the Only Begotten God.

4) The term χαῖρε is qualified in the Strong's Dictionary under number G05463, chairo, primary verb; TDNT – 9:359,1298; v 1) to rejoice, be glad 2) to be exceedingly glad 3) to be well, to be successful 4) in greetings, salutation! 5) at the beginning of letters: to salute, to greet. This verb χαῖρε is also used in Matt. 26:49; Matt. 27:29; Mark 15:18 and John 19:3. In all the imperative cases cited, it refers to a greeting given to a superior, even if ironically. The corresponding word in the Old Latin Vulgate (not to be confused with another later Vulgate) is “Ave”, in the sense of a greeting given to a superior. Note the addition “Ave Rabbi” in Matthew 14:45 in others and compare with the non-imperative case of in Acts 23:26 for “salutem”, that is, greetings, not excluding authority, in the case of a subordinate greeting an imperial authority.

4a) If the angel said, “Hail” to Mary, one could argue that she is somehow superior to *the angel Gabriel. (*ellipsis)

5) According to the Catechism of the Orthodox Catholic Church, the intercession of the saints is well characterized in Zechariah 1:12; Matthew 22:31-32, Mark 12:26-27, Luke 2:35, also 15:10 and 20:37-38; John 2:3-5; Romans 15:30; Ephesians 6:18; 1 Thessalonians 5:25; 2 Peter 1:15, Revelation 8:3.

5a) It is not difficult to understand the Virgin Mary in the scope of this message as an intercessor in the kingdom in a qualified position. She is not a mediator, many are intercessors.

6) For the verb in the vocative translated as full of grace in Luke 1:28, “gratia plena” in the Old Vulgate, already much discussed and explained in ecclesiastical history, it should be understood that “grace”, had filled her, is deeply related to a Semitic background.

6a) Thus, it is perfectly possible to understand, in a more erudite sense, the lexicology of this Greek verb with the substance, the Hypostasis of God in Hebrews 1:3.

7) “And the angel came in, and said unto her, Hail, full of grace, the Lord is with thee. And she was troubled at his saying, and wondered what such a greeting might mean. And the angel said unto her, Fear not, Mary: for thou hast found grace with God.” Luke 1:28-30 Hail Mary Bible.

7a) The Virgin Mary was in doubt about the greeting made by the angel Gabriel, this is pertinent in the sense that she understood the language, although the verb full of grace in the past tense is possibly a hapax, however, the same angel deciphers part of the doubt mentioned: “you have found favor with God”; the rest is deciphered by the Virgin Mary herself, according to the concordance of the Armenian, Coptic and Latin languages.

The previous text, except for 6), follows the understanding seen in Greek, Latin and Armenian. Perhaps, the understanding cannot be seen in the New Testament in the Semitic languages (Arabic, Aramaic, Aramaic-Syriac) or be of any consideration in Georgian, Ethiopic, Persian, Slavic.

 

[Betho_br]

Verbs in the perfect tense, with a doubling similar to that of Luke 1:28:

κεχρηματισμένον = having been divinely revealed (Luke 2:26)
κέκλεισται = having been closed (Luke 11:7)
κεκοσμημένον = having been adorned (Luke 11:25)
κεκλημένους = having been invited (Luke 14:7)
κεκλημένος = having been invited (Luke 14:8)
κεκληκώς = having invited (Luke 14:10) 14:10)
κεκληκότι = having invited (Luke. 14:12)
κεκλημένοις = having been invited (Luke. 14:17)
κεκλημένων = having been invited (Luke. 14:24)
κεκρυμμένον = having been hidden (Luke. 18:34)
κεκόσμηται = having been adorned (Luke. 21:5)
κέκλικεν = having declined (Luke. 24:29)

Is there an idea of completeness in the preceding verbs?

What is the difference between the vocative verb κεχαριτωμένη of Luke 1:28 and the dative verb κεχαριτωμένῳ Ecclesiastics 18:17?

οὐκ ἰδοὺ λόγος ὑπὲρ δόμα ἀγαθόν καὶ ἀμφότερα παρὰ ἀνδρὶ ένῳ (Ecle-Sir. 18:17 LXX) οὐκ NO? ἰδοὺ SEE! λόγος LOGOS GIVES ABOVE THE GIFT OF GOOD GOOD AND GOODNESS BOTH ARE GIVEN BESIDE GOOD TO THE MAN GOOD TO HAVE BEEN COMPLETELY CHARITABLE

Do you not see that a word is better than a gift? The charitable man knows how to combine (aunar) both things. (Ecclesiastes 18:17) - The Bible (Spanish version of Father Seraphim of Ausejo, OFM Cap., revised and updated by Marciano Villanova). Copyright © 2003. Barcelona, Spain.

Can't you see that the logos is above the good gift and both were completely charitable towards man? Personal translation, from the Septuagint, using the verb “is” as an ellipsis.

The dative case is the indirect object of the verb, page 165, thus, “beside man” is the prepositional indirect object of the verb “having been completely charitable”, that is, the Logos and the good gift were completely charitable towards man. The vocative case indicates invocation or exclamation, page 166. A brief grammar of the Greek of the New Testament Greek, SELF-TEACHING, by Francisco Leonardo Schalkwijk, Seminário Presbiteriano do Norte, Recife, PE.

Daniel Wallace says that as for (2) function: the vocative is syntactically independent of the rest of the sentence, and is extremely rare in the New Testament, 1%, page 66. Second, although within a sentence the vocative is grammatically absolute, at the discourse level it carries semantic weight. That is, although the vocative appears within a sentence, it is really an indicator of an audience and is thus "supraphrasal", helping the reader to understand not only who is being invoked, but also how it is done. There are three basic uses: (1) direct invocation, (2) exclamation, and (3) appositive. The third category, as with all uses of a simple appositive, is not really a distinct syntactic category (since the case is simply "attached" to the noun to which it is apposed). The first category is, overwhelmingly, the most frequently used. Simple Invocation a. Definition. This is the use of the vocative without a preceding ^w. Note 9 on page 68 says: The vocative on Jesus' lips (and others' at times) often seems to be emotional even without this particle. Cf. Matt 4:10; 7:5; 8:29; 11:21; 18:32; 23:26; 25:26; 27:46; Mark 1:24; 8:33; 10:47; Luke 4:34; 19:22; Acts 5:3; 1 Cor 15:55. It may be that the "dry vocative" is really a jumble of things, containing both address and emphatic/emotional calling. That is, it is unmarked, but the context can naturally inform its value.

This verbal syntactic class only appears again in Luke 9:41, διεστραμμένη having been completely corrupted.

Therefore, one is the use given to the Virgin Mary by the Archangel Gabriel, while the other is the one used by Jesus to exclaim the corruption of that generation that would lead Him to Golgotha. Thus, the comparison is inevitable. It should also be noted that this is a particularity in the sentence context, it should also be considered that God was with her, the personal greeting of the Archangel to Her, etc...

If we consider the most accepted conjecture about the authorship of the Book of Acts of the Apostles, which says it is Luke, we have another significant case: κεκονιαμένε, having been completely whitewashed.

Word number G02867 in Strong’s Dictionary, κονιαω - koniao, from konia (to sprinkle, by analogy, to fertilize); TDNT - 3:827,453; v1) to cover with lime, to plaster, to whitewash 1a) the Jews were accustomed to whitewash the entrances to their tombs, as a warning against contamination by touch 1b) a term applied to a hypocrite who hides his malice under an outward pretense of piety.

It is clear that a tomb with a minimum of unwhitewashed area is not acceptable; if there were a contrast of color, the optical effect of purity would not be achieved, so the verbal syntax really indicates the idea of completeness, totally, which can still be seen in other passages such as Tobit 10:13; Susanna 1:52; Matthew 17:17; 1 Thess. 1:4; 2 Thess. 2:13.

The Virgin Mary did not understand the greeting, which was partially explained to her by the Archangel Gabriel in Luke 1:30. Thus, when she expresses herself in the Magnificat, she uses several verbs that are synonymous with κεκονιαμένε, by inference, in other biblical passages, in the translations from Greek into languages of that time, to then express the understanding of her mission.
.
Note: This content was also posted on the Greek Orkut Community Coiné in 2007, and also defended by Aureo Ferreira, a Catholic Christian.

1) And when they were come into the house, they found the young child with Mary his mother, and fell down, and worshipped him... Matthew 2:11

In your interpretation (...opinion), if the colleague were one of the "Megas", whoever reads, understand... Would he ask to place the baby Jesus in the manger, to worship him in private focus or would he worship him together with the virgin Mary?

My intention is not to proselytize, except in favor of the Truth. In the topic Mary, a son, it is well explained that James is not the uterine brother of Jesus in Mary, despite the many counter-reactions, erroneously based on an exclusive focus on the Portuguese language.

The Romanist APPROACH teaches that Mary Most Holy is also called co-redeemer in the sense that she offered her Son Jesus, with her maternal rights, when she authorized the beginning of His Ministry: “... Do whatever He tells you...” Thus, Mary, in suffering alongside her Son, bears witness to the Passion of Jesus, for the salvation of humanity. By this act, Mary herself merited the grace of the redemption of all humanity. This was foretold by Simeon, who said to Mary: “a sword will pierce your own heart, too.”

The “co” does not mean “equal,” but “with.” Mary does not play an equal role in the Redemption. Her role in the Redemption was in every sense secondary and dependent on the work of Christ. Without Christ, there would have been no redemption and Mary would not have been co-redeemer. Thus, the Blessed Mother, who is the Mother of the Word, the Mother of the Logos, is the one who went to Christ so that He could perform the first miracle.

As for adoration or veneration, this is also another question of APPROACH, a subject that has already been well discussed in various forums. Therefore, even if I do not agree with an approach, just by studying it deeply and for a long time, I will dare to consider it heretical.

 

[Eliana]

ECCLESIASTES 18:17 REFUTES THE IMMACULATE CONCEPTION OF MARY?

REFUTATION AND RESPONSE:

In the Bible, not only is Mary called "kecharitomene," but it is also used in Sirach (Ecclesiasticus) 18:17. So, is Mary not that special?

Edit: clipped for brevity

You might want to double check what you write. Ecclesiasticus is not Ecclesiastes and I was breaking my head wondering where Ecclesiastes 18:17 was from or if Christians had some bastardized version I was unaware of.

I can refute the immaculate conception, because there is no such thing as original sin in the entirety of the Tanakh to start with. Since there was no "original sin" to shield her from to start with it's a moot point. One would have to ask if HaShem was willing to make Mary immune to this "original sin", why won't he do the same for everyone else?

This is one of many reasons why I say Catholics have deified Mary, as they attribute all these divine aspects to her:

- Calling her holy, (she is not only G-D is)
- Stating she went to heaven without dying
- She had painless childbirth
- Calling her mother of G-D (blasphemy, HaShem states clearly he has no beginning or end.)
- Calling her queen of heaven (G-D has no partners, this is blasphemy and totally contrary to the plain teachings of the Tanakh)
- The idea she is mediating between people and HaShem... he does not need anyone to "mediate", he is G-D. Nowhere in the Tanakh is there anyone mediating with HaShem.
- Praying to Mary (and other "saints")... G-D specifically forbade this.

...and so on.

Your own bible plainly says Jesus had brothers... not step-brothers, half-brothers or cousins. As a Jewish woman who presumably believed in the Torah it would be a sin for her not to have intercourse with her spouse and to have children. Having sex with ones spouse is not a sin in any way (unless you're Catholic apparently) and therefore there was no reason for her to even remain a virgin to start with.

Yes Catholics and other apologists will insist they don't worship her, they just perform all the actions of worship. Nonsense.

Septuagint interpreters correctly interpreted and translated "almah" in Genesis 24:43 by parthenos (virgin).

They didn't have it right and no modern scholar of ancient Hebrew agrees with you. Just because you like the Septuagint better because it fits your theology doesn't make is correct, it just means you're biased.

 

[Betho_br]

You might want to double check what you write. Ecclesiasticus is not Ecclesiastes and I was breaking my head wondering where Ecclesiastes 18:17 was from or if Christians had some bastardized version I was unaware of.

The Book of Sirach

 

[Betho_br]

I can refute the immaculate conception, because there is no such thing as original sin in the entirety of the Tanakh to start with. Since there was no "original sin" to shield her from to start with it's a moot point. One would have to ask if HaShem was willing to make Mary immune to this "original sin", why won't he do the same for everyone else?

I will not discuss this subject, it is too philosophical and erudite for me, I apologize for this.

 

[Betho_br]

- Calling her holy, (she is not only G-D is)

She was made full of grace, in the condition of being justified, therefore without sins. This is what “KECHARITOMENE” represents grammatically, but Protestants “reduce” the expression of the verb. I have left many proofs that they are wrong if we consider the Greek text of the Christian Bible (“New Testament”).

 

[Betho_br]

- Stating she went to heaven without dying

There are many philosophical developments, this is one example, the dogma of the Trinity is another. Technically she cannot die, because she is totally justified, without blemishes, so the solution is to have been taken up like Enoch was.

 

[Betho_br]

- She had painless childbirth

Eve, before her transgression, already had pain in conception, which was increased as punishment after she was deceived by the serpent. Mary in Christianity is the Eve who gives rise to a new generation of God's children.