Is there salvation without Mary?

bbbbbbb · Sep 25, 2021

Jaxxi said:
They weren't liars. Are you suggesting the Holy Bible contains lies?

Not at all, although you might think so. I have yet to hear a reasonable explanation as to why God, in His infinite wisdom, forgot to include such major dogmas as the Immaculate Conception of Mary, the Perpetual Virginity of Mary, and the Assumption of the Virgin Mary in the Bible. There is not even the slightest mention of these when, flying in the face of the PVM are the five explicit mentions of brother and sisters of Jesus Christ without any explanation that they were not, in reality, His brothers and sisters.

concretecamper · Sep 25, 2021

Jaxxi said:
Now the birth of Jesus Christ was as follows: After His mother Mary was betrothed to Joseph, before they came together, she was found with child of the Holy Spirit. Matthew 1:18

Saying that they came together afterwards
obviously making her no longer a virgin.

this comment displays an utter lack of knowledge of the Jewish Wedding ceremony at this time in history

Fidelibus · Sep 25, 2021

robycop3 said:
Yes.

Okay

Yes, all humans except Jesus while He was one.

Absolutely all humans with the exception of Jesus, that's what you believe?

I have been saved since 1978.

That is not what I asked. I asked if you are seeking God?

You also!

Thank You!

(Perhaps this'll be the day you abandon the RCC !)

Now why would I do that? Besides, where would you suggest I should go?

Have a Blessed Day!

concretecamper · Sep 25, 2021

Jaxxi said:
Saying that they came together afterwards
obviously making her no longer a virgin.

I was going to let this go, but I cant.

What do think "came together afterwards" means?

bbbbbbb · Sep 25, 2021

Just a quick question for our Catholic viewers - Is human sexual intercourse sinful in all circumstances?

concretecamper · Sep 25, 2021

bbbbbbb said:
Just a quick question for our Catholic viewers - Is human sexual intercourse sinful in all circumstances?

So, what is your answer to this?

Jaxxi said: ↑
Saying that they came together afterwards
obviously making her no longer a virgin.

Fidelibus · Sep 25, 2021

bbbbbbb said:
Just a quick question for our Catholic viewers - Is human sexual intercourse sinful in all circumstances?

Hey bbbbbbb, just a reminder, I am still waiting for the bible verse/verses where you said on post # 326 in the now closed 'Can you find the Church' thread:

If a brother has something against another brother he is to go to him in person. If the problem is not resolved, then he is to bring two or three others. If they cannot resolve it then the matter is to be laid before the church (a larger body of believers) who will judge the matter.

That we are supposed to take it too.......

The local church, of course.

Where I responded: "Again, book, chapter, and verse where it says this please."

Along with what you said on post #329 of same thread:

If you suppose that the pillar and ground of truth rests with a self-professedly infallible leader of a huge religious bureaucracy, you are most assuredly wrong. It rests with Jesus Christ alone and His word, the Bible, alone.

So again I ask you, an adherent of the belief in the doctrine of Sola Scriptura, (the Bible alone) could you please show where it says this in the Bible? Book, Chapter and verse please.

Have a Blessed Day!

Valletta · Sep 25, 2021

Jaxxi said:
These all continued with one accord in prayer and supplication, with the women and Mary the mother of Jesus, and with His brothers. Acts 1:14

Just because you don't know something do not accuse others of spreading lies. Just educate yourself.

robycop3 said:
You made MY point in your above post. I said Mary had at least six other children, as Scripture says, not that she didn't have any others after Jesus.

You completely missed the point, "first born" to a Jew says nothing about any other children. As with the Bible passage with Abram, brother and sister can mean people with completely different parents. Even the three leaders of the Protestant reformation agreed Mary had no other children, I don't know when your belief gained popularity with Baptists.

bbbbbbb · Sep 25, 2021

concretecamper said:
So, what is your answer to this?

Jaxxi said: ↑
Saying that they came together afterwards
obviously making her no longer a virgin.

I asked the question to Catholics such as yourself and I would like your answer. Thank you.

concretecamper · Sep 25, 2021

bbbbbbb said:
I asked the question to Catholics such as yourself and I would like your answer. Thank you.

as soon as I get my answer. Thank you.

Valletta · Sep 25, 2021

bbbbbbb said:
Not at all, although you might think so. I have yet to hear a reasonable explanation as to why God, in His infinite wisdom, forgot to include such major dogmas as the Immaculate Conception of Mary, the Perpetual Virginity of Mary, and the Assumption of the Virgin Mary in the Bible. There is not even the slightest mention of these when, flying in the face of the PVM are the five explicit mentions of brother and sisters of Jesus Christ without any explanation that they were not, in reality, His brothers and sisters.

There is nothing in the Bible about the Bible itself, no list of books, no mention to drop what has been orally handed down and only go by the written word, no mention of Jesus sending out his disciples to hand out Bibles, no mention that the Catholic Church will choose a list of 73 books and Bibles shall contain all 73 for over a thousand years until Protestants take the list Catholics came up with keeping the same order of books but dropping books and finally getting it right, no mention of Bible-only--all of this "flying in the face" of Protestant teaching. My brother, Jesus did have brothers and sisters, but Mary had no other children.

bbbbbbb · Sep 25, 2021

Valletta said:
There is nothing in the Bible about the Bible itself, no list of books, no mention to drop what has been orally handed down and only go by the written word, no mention of Jesus sending out his disciples to hand out Bibles, no mention that the Catholic Church will choose a list of 73 books and Bibles shall contain all 73 for over a thousand years until Protestants take the list Catholics came up with keeping the same order of books but dropping books and finally getting it right, no mention of Bible-only--all of this "flying in the face" of Protestant teaching. My brother, Jesus did have brothers and sisters, but Mary had no other children.

Actually, the canon of scripture in other branches of Christianity which are centuries older than the Protestant churches do not have your 73 books. Some, such as the Coptic Church have a lot more and some have less. The fact that your branch waited until its Council at Trent to determine is 73-book canon makes it really quite late in the scheme of things.

Valletta · Sep 25, 2021

bbbbbbb said:
The fact that your branch waited until its Council at Trent to determine is 73-book canon makes it really quite late in the scheme of things.

Wrong. The Catholic Church, in a process that spanned centuries, chose the 73 books of the Bible and gave the world the Bible in the later 300s. Saint Athanasius is credited with the first Biblical canon (NT) containing the same books in the same order we use today. The list was approved by Pope Damasus, and formally approved of by Councils at Hippo and Carthage in the late 300s. Pope Innocent I wrote a letter to the Bishop of Toulouse in 405 A.D. containing the list. The list was re-affirmed at Carthage in 419 A.D., by the Council of Florence 1442 A.D., and by the Council of Trent in 1546 A.D.

concretecamper · Sep 25, 2021

bbbbbbb said:
The fact that your branch waited until its Council at Trent to determine is 73-book canon makes it really quite late in the scheme of things

incorrect. The canon was set prior to Trent. :doh:

bbbbbbb · Sep 25, 2021

Valletta said:
Wrong. The Catholic Church, in a process that spanned centuries, chose the 73 books of the Bible and gave the world the Bible in the later 300s. Saint Athanasius is credited with the first Biblical canon (NT) containing the same books in the same order we use today. The list was approved by Pope Damasus, and formally approved of by Councils at Hippo and Carthage in the late 300s. Pope Innocent I wrote a letter to the Bishop of Toulouse in 405 A.D. containing the list. The list was re-affirmed at Carthage in 419 A.D., by the Council of Florence 1442 A.D., and by the Council of Trent in 1546 A.D.

The RCC did not exist in the fourth century. It was not until after the Great Schism that the RCC schismed from the EOC to form its own unique denomination.

concretecamper · Sep 25, 2021

bbbbbbb said:
The RCC did not exist in the fourth century. It was not until after the Great Schism that the RCC schismed from the EOC to form its own unique denomination.

Ummm, the great Schism, 4th Century, oh my goodness.

Valletta · Sep 25, 2021

bbbbbbb said:
The RCC did not exist in the fourth century. It was not until after the Great Schism that the RCC schismed from the EOC to form its own unique denomination.

As I said, the Catholic Church, in a centuries long process, chose the 73 books of the Bibles. Pope Damasus and Pope Innocent I were Catholics, and so were the Councils at Hippo and Carthage in the late 300s and the Councils that re-affirmed the Catholic Bible canon at Carthage in 419 A.D., at Florence in 1442 A.D., and at Trent in 1546 A.D.

Jaxxi · Sep 25, 2021

bbbbbbb said:
Not at all, although you might think so. I have yet to hear a reasonable explanation as to why God, in His infinite wisdom, forgot to include such major dogmas as the Immaculate Conception of Mary, the Perpetual Virginity of Mary, and the Assumption of the Virgin Mary in the Bible. There is not even the slightest mention of these when, flying in the face of the PVM are the five explicit mentions of brother and sisters of Jesus Christ without any explanation that they were not, in reality, His brothers and sisters.

Maybe it's because the Dogmas you speak of were ways that the enemy could trick you and divert your prayers from God to a being who can do absolutely nothing for you. Where does it say one time to pray to Mary, or say that Mary can go before God and intercede? It does not. That is man made. No one prays to Mary, she can do nothing. All she could do for Jesus was weep.

Jaxxi · Sep 25, 2021

concretecamper said:
this comment displays an utter lack of knowledge of the Jewish Wedding ceremony at this time in history

What does that have to do with anything? Where does it mention their wedding ceremony? I thought their situation was different which is why God sent His angel to Joseph.

The Liturgist · Sep 26, 2021

prodromos said:
Its crazy how you take a verse in Scripture which supports Jesus being an only child of Mary, and twist it to claim He wasn't. If Jesus was the eldest of multiple children, it was His place to leave His mother in the care of those younger siblings, not to take their mother away from them.

One could also object to referring to St. Joseph the Adoptive Father of incarnate God and the faithful husband of the Theotokos as “Joe.”

Is there salvation without Mary?

Well-Known Member

Member of His Church

Well-Known Member

Member of His Church

Well-Known Member

Member of His Church

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Member of His Church

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Member of His Church

Well-Known Member

Member of His Church

Well-Known Member

Half-ready for Anything.....

Half-ready for Anything.....

Traditional Liturgical Christian

Similar threads