How do non-Catholics explain Eucharistic miracles, such as bleeding, and Marian...

[Standing Up]

you are assuming that it was a normal marriage

I'm explaining what was said (scripture quoted previously). If it wasn't a normal marriage, then Mary sins, but retains the ever-virgin myth. If it was a normal marriage, Mary is sinless, but loses the myth of ever-virgin.

 

[Standing Up]

Perhaps the association that is made in the above quote between virgins in Israel's temple and vestal virgins in a Roman pagan temple is just plain stupid?

I reckon that it is a very poor argument made worse for lack of sound foundations in history and logic. So how about dropping it and discussing the thread's topic?

I thought the link's author was interesting. He simply failed to deal with Anna. Therefore, the idea of "vestal virgins" in the second temple is simply false.

Isn't it amazing God had Luke tell us about Anna some 1950 years ago?

 

[Standing Up]

I am. However, what do you expect from ancient gentile Christians whose immediate intellectual and social context was what was inherited from Greece and Rome? Surely you don't think they should have been prescient enough to use Evangelical Protestant young women with Promise Rings as their model, right?

I see this as you justifying your presuppositions by taking the association as far as possible to draw a genetic link between the pagan Vestal Virgins and the portrayal of Mary and virginity in Marian traditions. It is a laughable genetic fallacy that you employ for the purposes of demonization as well as a striking example of Parallelomania.

The association to temple virgins (vestal virgins) of the second temple time was the RC author at the link provided. He was trying to prove the validity of the PoJ, etc. He simply failed to deal with Anna of scripture. Poof, there goes his hard work.

As such, the question remains. From where did the idea in the PoJ and subsequent history arise that Mary was dedicated at the temple, left when she menstruated, and remained an ever-virgin? Not scripture. Not apostles. Where then? Rome was the model.

 

[revrobor]

...apparitions, such as Fatima. Eucharistic bleeding miracles, that are confirmed with science? I also recently read in OBOB about a certain saint, that on the celebration of his feast day, every single year, a vial of his blood liquifies before the congregation; the one time it didn't liquify, in 1980, there was an earthquake that killed a lot of people in the region in which this miracle takes place.

Then there's also a bleeding Eucharist miracle that was scientifically tested. The Eucharist fell to the floor, where it began to bleed. Testing was positive for a damaged human heart...

Just curious how non-Catholics reconcile these things. And of course, Mary's wish for Russia to convert with her apparition at Fatima apparently came to pass with the Russian Orthodox Church.

Satanic deceptions.

 

[Rev Randy]

Where did you get this idea that strong sexual desire is not lust?

If you do not understand the difference between godly desire for your wife and lust, I can't help you beyond saying one is sin and one is ordained of God. The two are as different as poop and chocolate pudding.

 

[Rev Randy]

what we have here is a breakdown of communication

cool hand luke - YouTube
Sorry. I couldn't resist.

 

[Lion King]

If you do not understand the difference between godly desire for your wife and lust, I can't help you beyond saying one is sin and one is ordained of God. The two are as different as poop and chocolate pudding.

Having strong sexual desires (lust) for your wife is not a sin. Never has been, never will...

By the way, where are you getting your definition of the word lust? Im curious, that's all.

 

[Stryder06]

you are assuming that it was a normal marriage

Aren't you assuming it wasn't?

 

[Rev Randy]

Having strong sexual desires (lust) for your wife is not a sin. Never has been, never will...

By the way, where are you getting your definition of the word lust? Im curious, that's all.

I get my definition from
Mark 4:19, John 8:44, Romans 1;24, 6;12, 13:14, Galatians 5:24, Ephesians 2:3, 4:22, 1 Timothy 6:9, 2 Timothy 2:22, 3:6, 4:3, Titus 2:12, 3:3, James 4:1, 4:3, 1 Peter 1:14, 2:11, 4:2, 4:3, 2 Peter 2:18, 3:3, Jude 16 and 18.
Hope that helps.

 

[Stryder06]

No, that's not what it says. "Heos" references the past, never the future. Instead, "not until" she bore a son means "not up to the point that" she bore a son.
Matt. 28:29 - I am with you "until the end of the world." This does not mean Jesus is not with us after the end of the world.

Actually when defining "up to" as in "X happened up to Y point", the word that is used is achri.

Matt 24:38 - For as in the days that were before the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until (achri) the day that Noe entered into the ark,

Luke 1:20 - And, behold, thou shalt be dumb, and not able to speak, until (achri) the day that these things shall be performed, because thou believest not my words, which shall be fulfilled in their season.

Heos is used to point out an action that will occur once something else has come to pass

Luke 13:21 - 21 It is like leaven, which a woman took and hid in three measures of meal, till the whole was leavened.



Matt 5:25 Agree with thine adversary quickly, whiles thou art in the way with him; lest at any time the adversary deliver thee to the judge, and the judge deliver thee to the officer, and thou be cast into prison. 26 Verily I say unto thee, Thou shalt by no means come out thence, till (heos) thou hast paid the uttermost farthing.


So yes, And knew her not till she had brought forth her firstborn son...is saying that he didn't have sex with her until after she had the baby.

 

[Lion King]

I get my definition from
Mark 4:19, John 8:44, Romans 1;24, 6;12, 13:14, Galatians 5:24, Ephesians 2:3, 4:22, 1 Timothy 6:9, 2 Timothy 2:22, 3:6, 4:3, Titus 2:12, 3:3, James 4:1, 4:3, 1 Peter 1:14, 2:11, 4:2, 4:3, 2 Peter 2:18, 3:3, Jude 16 and 18.
Hope that helps.

Why did you omit Luke 22:15, Philippians 1:23 and 1 Thessalonians 2:17 from your list?

Could it be that the word "epithumia" translated as lust/great desire in English is used in a positive manner?

 

[Stryder06]

Guys can we please get back on topic? This thread isn't about what lust is or isn't.

 

[Standing Up]

Guys can we please get back on topic? This thread isn't about what lust is or isn't.

Those who defend the visions as true and good theology seem to have disappeared.

It's been shown that the children's visions are bad theology, deceptive, and point away from Christ to an entity called immaculate heart. That "heart" is their salvation based on what they said.

Let's hope they come to Christ before it's too late.

 

[Lion King]

Guys can we please get back on topic? This thread isn't about what lust is or isn't.

My bad. Please forgive me. I get carried away at times..

 

[Rev Randy]

Why did you omit Luke 22:15, Philippians 1:23 and 1 Thessalonians 2:17 from your list?

Could it be that the word "epithumia" translated as lust/great desire in English is used in a positive manner?

Because I have no issue with desire. I have an issue when it means:lewdness, lechery, lust, carnality, libidinousness. Not when it translates desire as a wanting or a longing due to love.
I had more verses but I figure those were enough. When the words line up with έκφυλος, πρόστυχος, λάγνος and ασελγής or derivatives of those words it means carnal and lewd and should be translated as lust or lustful. Words such as λαχτάρα, λαχταρώ , ποθώ , επιθυμία and their derivatives do not speak of something necessarily carnal but more along the lines of a loving meaning.
I concede that in modern english lust and desire are often interchanged. There are also greek words in which it can have both meanings. But a longing or desire is not lewd in a marriage. It's a longing caused of love and spoken as good by God.

 

[Rev Randy]

My bad. Please forgive me. I get carried away at times..

We seem both to have that issue.

 

[Rev Randy]

Guys can we please get back on topic? This thread isn't about what lust is or isn't.

Sorry Stryder. I wandered.

 

[Stryder06]

Sorry Stryder. I wandered.

It happens Sad thing is that I'm pretty sure the thread will die now

 

[Rev Randy]

It happens Sad thing is that I'm pretty sure the thread will die now

If it does then it had little life to begin with.

 

[Rhamiel]

Those who defend the visions as true and good theology seem to have disappeared.

It's been shown that the children's visions are bad theology, deceptive, and point away from Christ to an entity called immaculate heart. That "heart" is their salvation based on what they said.

Let's hope they come to Christ before it's too late.

you lack proper understanding of devotion to the Immaculate Heart of Mary

this devotion is about the grace that God gives to those who trust in Him
it is about how grace is an unearned gift
and it is about how the ways of God are far above the ways of man

we are not saved by the Immaculate Heart of Mary
just as we are not saved by hymns or revivals or the work of missionaries

but God has used all of these things to draw people closer to Him