So you are saying that Mary is not full of grace but individual believers are. Your anti-Mary animus is anti-Biblical.
Highly favoured (κεχαριτωμενη). Perfect passive participle of χαριτοω and means endowed with grace (χαρις), enriched with grace as in Eph 1:6, non ut mater gratiae, sed ut filia gratiae (Bengel). The Vulgate gratiae plena "is right, if it means 'full of grace which thou hast received'; wrong, if it means 'full of grace which thou hast to bestow"' (Plummer)
It is logically IMPOSSIBLE for Mary to bestow grace from just herself. Grace can only be received from Christ in the first place, contrary to the chronic misrepresentations of anti-biblical Mary bashers.
Kecharitomene does not apply to each individual believer. That is a man made tradition. It does not appear in 2 Cor 9:8. Steven was "full of grace" too, but even there, it does not mean Kecharitomene. You are blind to your own quote, written by the great Baptist Greek scholar A.T. Robertson, who is not wrong, you are forcing it to fit your anti-Biblical, anti-Mary paradigm.It is logically IMPOSSIBLE for Mary to bestow grace from just herself. Grace can only be received from Christ in the first place, contrary to the chronic misrepresentations of anti-biblical Mary bashers.
Kecharitomene has to do with God’s grace, as it is derived from the Greek root, charis (literally, “grace”). Thus, in the KJV, charis is translated “grace” 129 out of the 150 times that it appears. Greek scholar Marvin Vincent noted that even Wycliffe and Tyndale (no enthusiastic supporters of the Catholic Church) both rendered kecharitomene in Luke 1:28 as “full of grace” and that the literal meaning was “endued with grace” (Vincent, I, 259).
Likewise, well-known Protestant linguist W.E. Vine, defines it as “to endue with Divine favour or grace” (Vine, II, 171). All these men (except Wycliffe, who probably would have been, had he lived in the 16th century or after it) are Protestants, and so cannot be accused of Catholic translation bias. Even a severe critic of Catholicism like James White can’t avoid the fact that kecharitomene (however translated) cannot be divorced from the notion of grace, and stated that the term referred to “divine favor, that is, God’s grace” (White, 201).
So A. T. Robertson must be re-interpreted to say what he doesn't say. Greek scholar Marvin Vincent is wrong, Vine is wrong, Wycliffe and Tyndale are wrong, James White is wrong, and so is Luther and Calvin wrong, according to the Christian Taliban, the chaotic "theologians" that infect this forum.
We can't even appeal to your own scholars who write your Bible study manuals, thanks to the man made Protestant principle of Private Judgement, and the endless chaos that follows.
Last edited:
