Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Romanos 6:14: "Pois o pecado não terá domínio sobre ti, uma
vez que não estás debaixo da lei, mas debaixo da graça." (cf.
Rom 5:17,20-21, 2 Cor 1:12, 2 Timóteo 1:9)
Efésios 2:8-10: " Porque pela graça sois salvos, por meio da fé; e isto não vem
de vós, é dom de Deus; não vem das obras, para que ninguém se glorie. Porque
somos feitura sua, criados em Cristo Jesus para boas obras, as quais Deus antes
preparou para que andássemos nelas." (cf. Atos 15:11, Rom 3:24, 11:5,
Ef 2:5, Tito 2:11, 3:7, 1 Pe 1:10)
Assim, o argumento bíblico descrito acima prossegue como se vê
abaixo:
First, it was argued that St. Stephen was also described as "full of
grace" in Acts 6:8. But in that verse, the phrase is pleres charitos,
not kecharitomene. If the Greek terminology is different, then the
argument loses most or all of its relevance and force.
(Svendsen, 129)
Ephesians 1:5-6 reads, "He destined us in love to be his sons
through Jesus Christ, according to the purpose of his will, to the
praise of his glorious grace which he freely bestowed on us in the
Beloved."
2 Peter 3:18: "But grow in the grace and knowledge of our Lord
and Savior Jesus Christ. To him be the glory both now and to the
day of eternity. Amen."
Ephesians 4:7: "But grace was given to each of us according to
the measure of Christ's gift." (cf. Acts 4:33, Rom 5:20, 6:1, James
4:6, 1 Pet 5:5, 2 Peter 1:2)
The "freely bestowed" grace of Ephesians 1:6, then, cannot
possibly be considered the equivalent of that "fullness of grace"
applied to Mary in Luke 1:28 because it refers to a huge group of
people, with different gifts and various levels of grace bestowed,
as the verses just cited show. Svendsen's argument is as
fallacious as the following analogy:
Svendsen points out that Luke 1:28 uses the perfect tense,
whereas Ephesians 1:6 does not, and that Catholics might use
this argument to bolster their case (since that indicates a
difference between the two passages). But, he writes:
[T]his does not help their case since the perfect tense speaks only
of the current state of the subject without reference to how long
the subject has been in that state, or will be in that state.
(Svendsen, 129)
So he tries to show by cross-referencing and Greek grammar that
Luke 1:28 is neither unique nor a support for Mary's sinlessness
or the Immaculate Conception. But the perfect stem of a Greek
verb, denotes, according to Friedrich Blass and Albert DeBrunner,
"continuance of a completed action" (Greek Grammar of the New
Testament [Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1961], 66).
Mary, therefore, continues afterward to be full of the grace she
possessed at the time of the Annunciation. That cannot, of
course, be said of all believers in Ephesians 1:6, because of
differences of levels of grace, as shown earlier.
Luke 1:28: "to pursue with grace, compass with favor; to honor
with blessings."
SOURCE BIBLIOGRAPHY:
The Bible speaks only implicitly of many things which Protestants strongly believe, such as the proper mode of
baptism (immersion, sprinkling, or pouring?). The Immaculate Conception is entirely possible within scriptural
presuppositions.
[Blass & DeBrunner, Greek Grammar of the New Testament, Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press, 1961, 166; Smyth,
H.W., Greek Grammar, Cambridge: Harvard Univ. Press, 1968, sec. 1852:b.]
Uma Razão Suprema para o Privilégio: A Maternidade Divina
"e sem dúvida foi uma adaptação total que, de modo
maravilhoso, uma mãe deveria sempre resplandecer com a
glória da mais sublime santidade e assim, completamente livre de
toda mancha do pecado origina,l e de que ela triunfaria
completamente sobre a antiga serpente. Para ela, a vontade do
Pai em dar seu Filho unigênito --o Filho igual ao Pai e por Ele
criado, O Pai O ama de coração – e dar Seu Filho, de tal modo
que seria o único e o mesmo Filho comum de Deus Pai e da
Abençoada Virgem Maria. E foi ela a quem o próprio Filho
escolheu por sua Mãe e foi dela que o Espírito Santo desejou e
viabilizou, de modo que Ele deveria ser concebido e nascido de
quem Ele mesmo procede."
Encíclica Papal - Papa Pio IX, Ineffibilis Deus
Qualquer que seja a denotação de "chaire, Kecharitomene," sua
conotação, na verdade, significa para os antigos Pais Gregos
que precisamente Maria foi concebida de modo imaculado.
Os Pais Gregos
Eis aqui um número de experts antigos e o que eles dizem o que
isto significa; cada um deles é um grego nativo oriundo de uma
cultura basicamente idêntica àquela de S. Lucas. As passagens
são exposições pelos autores sobre o significado de Lucas 1:28,
geralmente centrados no termo chaire, Kecharitomene:
(Mt. 23:37) O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, you that kill the prophets, and stone them who are
sent to you, how often would I have gathered your children together, even as a hen gathers
her chickens under her wings, and ye would not! (Mt. 23:38) Behold, your house is left to
you desolate. (Mt. 23:39) For I say to you, Ye shall not see me henceforth, till ye shall say,
Blessed is he that comes in the name of the Lord.
Will The Jews accept Jesus as the Messiah before they see him again? I sincerely hope so. It is
quite possible that such a wonderful turn-around at his second coming will take place in the
Jewish nation. But the prediction of such an event will have to be found in another verse because
it cannot be found in the passage above, which is often used as a proof text of such an
eventuality. The way the passage reads in translation supports the implied idea that Jesus said to
the Jews of Jerusalem that they would see him again but not until they confessed him as the
Lord's messenger.
This is not the meaning of Jesus' words, and if it were it presents a problem, because they did see
very much more of him, and that both publicly and privately. In the next few days, after this
statement, He would be arrested, escorted to two different houses of the two High Priests,
confess his "sonship" in the evening to the Sanhedrin before they found him guilty on the next
morning; He would be marched all over the city, first to Pilate and then to Herod who sent him
back to Pilate again, and then be beaten for the third or fourth time and compelled to carry his
cross to the place of crucifixion where those who passed by on the highway hurled ridicule in his
face all day Friday. Jesus could hardly have meant that they would not "see" him. But read the
scripture and notice this problem which demands more investigation into the actual meaning of
the statement.
(Mt. 23:39) For I say to you, Ye shall not see me henceforth, till ye shall say, Blessed is he
that comes in the name of the Lord.
This verse (39) is not properly rendered in English because the Greek verbal system has been
over-simplified in translation. The only verbal phrase translating Greek idiom into English is, "I
say to you." In Greek there are no future verbs in the sentence even though the KJV translation
uses two and implies the third, i.e. "that comes." In Greek "ye see" and "ye say" are both aorist
subjunctive verbs. The verbal system in Greek does not show time outside of the indicative
mode. The subjunctive mode used here therefore could be any time but likely implies the future.
However, if the subjunctive idea is not stated, nor even implied, then the translation is not
conveying the major verbal idea intended in the original. The original sentence, in Greek, is
emphatically subjunctive. Time is altogether secondary.
It is difficult to render Greek idiom into English except with very ponderous and clumsy
construction. It is necessary to adjust the words to English idiom to smooth out the construction
so that it is readable. But meaning is lost in this kind of transfer. The smoother the translation the
greater the loss.
The meaning of the word "idate" ( ) or "see" is taken by some* to mean "know" or
"recognize" (relating the verb to "oida" rather than "horao"). Thus the first statement of Jesus
would be that, "it was doubtful that they would recognize him until..." Until what?
* Exell & Spence, op. cit.; (Lukyn Williams); Matthew, Vol. 15; pg. 406.
The second verb, "eipate," ( )is also an aorist subjunctive and means "ye may say" or "ye might
say." The idiom is difficult but the English translation using the future, which says that Jesus will not
appear to the Jews again until they confess his divine mission, is close but not exactly what He implied.
He did not imply that his future coming would be controlled by their confessing him as Lord. What is
stated is that it is doubtful that they will ever recognize who he is until the doubt in their minds is
removed about the validity of his initial divine mission. Thus, when the Jews are able to recognize and
clearly state his relevance to their own history, which they are reluctantly coming closer to doing, they
will then be able recognize in Jesus who he is.
The context favors this idea. "Oh Jerusalem, I would have taken you, I still would, but you did
not recognize me!" This is exactly what the companion passage says in Luke 19:42: "If you had
known, even you, at least in this your day, the things which belong to your peace! but now they
are hidden from your eyes." In other words, "you did not recognize me and you will not
recognize me [until]..."
Luke 13:35 quotes the same saying of Jesus and uses exactly the same verbs as Mt. 13:39 but
places Jesus in a different place, which would compound the initial problem posed in the third
paragraph; (he was yet in Galilee on his way to Jerusalem). The whole sentence is the same
except that the word "until" is a different Greek synonym, but no argument, as we have seen, is
created by any time at all, near or distant, being attributed to "until."
The rest of the verse is a quotation of that which will have been confessed. That which will
accompany, and be a result of, Jewish recognition, is a direct quotation from the Septuagint in
Ps. 118:26, "Blessed be he that comes in the name of the LORD." This verse also is better
understood with a Greek analysis. The word Blessed, "eulogamenos," ( ) is a
perfect passive participle. It literally means "having been blessed or praised." The "perfect"
action of the participle is considered to have been completed before the time of the speaker. How
long before is not a consideration but the Greek verbal idea is that the action has already been
completed. Time is still secondary but perfected action must imply the past in relationship to the
speaker. The person using the word is confessing that the one referred to has already been
blessed.
The verb "to be" is understood and is so noted in the KJV by the usual method of placing "is" in
italics. It is necessary to supply it because the verb "he that comes" is also a participle in Greek.
It is actually a famous participle, well known by all first century people, who were anticipating
the coming of the Messiah. In Greek it is "ho erchomenos" meaning "the coming one." It is a key
phrase that, all scripturally informed people knew, meant "Messiah." John the Baptist used it
when he sent messengers to ask of Jesus, in Mt. 11:3, "Are you he that should come, or do we
look for another?" The question uses exactly the same form, "he that should come" is the
translation of "ho erchomenos." ( ) He asked, "Are you the "ho erchomenos" or
do we look for another of a different kind (than you)?" The question is, "are you the "coming one
i.e. the Messiah?" Thus the quotation in literal terms means, "Already having been blessed is the
coming [Messiah], in the name of the Lord."
Thus Jesus said it was a precondition, needed by the Jews, that recognition of his first coming, as
a Messianic event, must take place first before recognition of who he is would be possible. And
so for the Jew, Jesus' first mission, not his second, must be seen by them as having been this
valid (Blessed) and relevant part of Jewish history. This much is required for Jews to be able to
recognize who is.
This is what Jesus said in Mt. 23:39: "From this time onward it is doubtful that you can
recognize me until you may be able to say, The Messianic Coming One, in the name of the
LORD, has already been praised [here]." Those who suppose that Jesus' majestic second
coming will produce faith in the Jewish nation miss the point of this passage. Since his first
coming it has been and will remain that every Jewish knee as well as every Gentile knee, must
bow, not to majesty, but to the humble carpenter of Galilee.