Speak lovingly of Mary

[Philothei]

So now you tell me why a woman that had no plans of ever knowing a man would betroth herself to a man?

I already said it in my previous post. God wanted her to be betrothled as she had to be "legally" pregnant with Christ so she would not be an unmarried maiden and be stoned to death... according to Jewish custom... To be protected as Joseph was the protector of her. It was divine providence.

 

[Rick Otto]

Wow. That makes Joseph "God's Protector". Theoprotektros. Awesome dude, that Joeseph.

 

[Rick Otto]

Paul says that each has a particular calling - skopos. Not all have the same calling. There was no need in the epistles to correct anyone who thought that Mary had other children - this teaching of men that Mary had other children was not a problem in the Churches Paul wrote to.

Luke travelled with Paul; Luke wrote the most detail about Mary. Luke writes that Mary did not limit the verb when she said "I know not a man", but includes the future in her statement. This shows that Mary having other children is a teaching of men.

How without speculation, does her asking Gabriel how she will give birth get projected into a life long committment to chastity? Remember she was espoused to Joseph before Gabriel showed up.
Is the tense of one word what you base your conclusion about a life long committment to chastity? Seems like a leap AND a stretch.

 

[Philothei]

Wow. That makes Joseph "God's Protector". Theoprotektros. Awesome dude, that Joeseph.

No it makes him a God-man's protector...why you have a problem with it?

Joseph and Mary travelled to Egypt to "save" Christ from being killed by Herod... Was Joseph needed for that? Yeah actually he was an awesome "dude"

 

[CaliforniaJosiah]

please read the verses in Luke 1 -- why do you not keep the clear meaning of the verse instead of changing it ?

The words say that Mary was a virgin at the Announciation.
There are no words saying that Mary is a PERPETUAL virgin.

You seem to constantly confuse the interpretation of 3 denominations with what Luke penned by inspiration, you are simply imposing and imputing what you WISH God had caused Luke to pen with what He actually did.





.

 

[Philothei]

Is the tense of one word what you base your conclusion about a life long committment to chastity? Seems like a leap AND a stretch.

That is much better than the "stretch" you all have to do to prove the Trinity....where is the word Trinity in the Bible I asked and no one answered...

 

[Rick Otto]

quote=Philothei; No it makes him a God-man's protector...why you have a problem with it?

Say what? What problem? Me? Problem? No problem here. Jesus is God, Joseph protected Him, so Joseph is God's protector.
Maybe it's you that has a problem with it, certainly not me, mam'.

Joseph and Mary travelled to Egypt to "save" Christ from being killed by Herod... Was Joseph needed for that? Yeah actually he was an awesome "dude"

Exactly, so why razz me about it?

 

[CaliforniaJosiah]

please give the verse/s that support what you say

Don't hold your breath, we've been waiting for centuries....



I'd add, even giving the specific quote of ANYONE (even a single heretic) who clearly knew Mary and who wrote during her lifetime that she was a PERPETUAL Virgin. We have heretics (many, many of them) who knew Joseph Smith and who wrote during his lifetime that all the claims about him were true - and this our Catholic and Orthodox friends reject as inadequate substantiation, so let's have at least much LESS to substantiate this DOGMA of Mary as a Perpetual Virgin. If not from God in Scripture, then from someone - anyone - who clearly knew her and clearly states that she was a PERPETUAL VIRGIN.



Why does this matter?

1. Because she's our Mother and we love, adore, esteem and venerate her.

2. Because truth matters; to spread falsehood is NOT "loving" (the issue of this thread) NO MATTER HOW WELL INTENDED.

3. Because Catholics reject as inadequate far, far, far better substantiation than what has been offered here to support this DOGMA.


"Rumor." An unsubstantiated popularly held story or report. According to the Catholic Catechism, to spread a rumor is a sin and thus UNloving. Thus, the singular issue here is this: Is this report substantiated in a manner the RCC or EO itself accepts as valid and sufficient for a DOGMA?


Yes, we're waiting.
And waiting.
And waiting.


Because love and respect MATTER, especially when speaking of Our Mother, Our Blessed Lady.







.







.

 

[jckstraw72]

she was also betrothed to fool Satan. Satan knew from Isaiah to keep an eye out for a pregnant virgin, so she was betrothed to throw him off the trail.

If Mary was expecting to get married and consummate that marriage then she wouldnt have been so shocked when the Angel told her she would conceive, bc he didnt say she would conceive immediately so the normal thought would have been that he meant once she was married. but she knew she was never going to consummate her betrothal, and thus the Angel's announcement is quite strange to her.

 

[Philothei]

Jesus is God,

you donatist...hehehe....Christ was also man... we kind of forgetting that eh??

 

[Rick Otto]

That is much better than the "stretch" you all have to do to prove the Trinity....where is the word Trinity in the Bible I asked and no one answered...

Because it is a silly question.
I could likewise ask you where the phrase "perpetual virgin" is in the Bible, or where in the NT is the word "perpetual"?
You only try people's patience with questions like that.
The three persons of God are individualy described as individualy present at Jesus' baptism. You act like you haven't been told that a dozen times already. The substantiation for the Trinity is far & away more & better than the vainly imaginative specultions about Mary's perpetual virginity.
On every point about it speculation has to be employed. Not so in the case of the Trinity. Give up thinkin' they are remotely similar.

 

[CaliforniaJosiah]

No it makes him a God-man's protector...why you have a problem with it?

Protector from loving, marital, intimate relations?
Do you regard such as horrible, something from which a wife must be "protected?"

So, you honor St. Joseph because he "protected" his wife from loving, marital, intimate sharing? Interesting view of marriage and intimacy there (such DOES seem to be the entire basis of this DOGMA).



Back to the issue of whether it is LOVING to spread as DOGMA an unsubstantiated rumor....





.

 

[Philothei]

If Mary was expecting to get married and consummate that marriage then she wouldnt have been so shocked when the Angel told her she would conceive, bc he didnt say she would conceive immediately so the normal thought would have been that he meant once she was married. but she knew she was never going to consummate her betrothal, and thus the Angel's announcement is quite strange to her.[/quote]

maybe if we put the pica size up....people will respond?

Exactly the Angel did not specify time... So if she was getting married why the suprise???? She would have been saying "oh...wonderful news..." Thanks... but instead she says ....."I AM a virgin" why saying that is she was going to be married????


The text is obvious....your minds are the ones who deny to read it as is....

 

[Philothei]

The substantiation for the Trinity is far & away more & better than the vainly imaginative specultions about Mary's perpetual virginity.
On every point about it speculation has to be employed. Not so in the case of the Trinity. Give up thinkin' they are remotely similar.

yeah sure sure whatever you say.. My point is why would you believe it if it is not? Whether it is "imaginative speculation" does not prove anything...I can say the same about Trinity... I will not give up anything that testifies to falshood just because you are telling it so... And you still cannot prove it... so you let it alone. Protestants always set those two double standards with the Trinity and the canon of the Bible... Those two who cannot support since there are no where in the Bible to be found....

 

[Rick Otto]

What makes you think she was shocked at all?
It says Gabriel's greeting troubled her.
Gabriel said thou shalt conceive, not you & your husband will have a son.
What you say she knew is total speculation & your way of "denying to read it as is".

 

[MamaZ]

the verb to know (γινώσκω ginōskō) is in the present active indicative

 

[MamaZ]

I already said it in my previous post. God wanted her to be betrothled as she had to be "legally" pregnant with Christ so she would not be an unmarried maiden and be stoned to death... according to Jewish custom... To be protected as Joseph was the protector of her. It was divine providence.

God does not deceive people. This is absurb.. He is Holy and truth. Legally pregnant?

 

[MamaZ]

If Mary was expecting to get married and consummate that marriage then she wouldnt have been so shocked when the Angel told her she would conceive, bc he didnt say she would conceive immediately so the normal thought would have been that he meant once she was married. but she knew she was never going to consummate her betrothal, and thus the Angel's announcement is quite strange to her.[/quote]

maybe if we put the pica size up....people will respond?

Exactly the Angel did not specify time... So if she was getting married why the suprise???? She would have been saying "oh...wonderful news..." Thanks... but instead she says ....."I AM a virgin" why saying that is she was going to be married????


The text is obvious....your minds are the ones who deny to read it as is....

The text shows that when Gabriel summoned Mary that she was not married as of yet.. This is why she states she was not knowing a man. It is in the presense text. the verb to know (γινώσκω ginōskō) is in the present active indicative If God wanted to hide Mary from men why was it prophecied that this was going to happen. You guys make no sense..

 

[MamaZ]

Fool Satan? Please.. God does not need to fool anyone.. He is God

 

[jckstraw72]

yes, it says she was not knowing, not she had not known. it demonstrates an ongoing condition.