Is Mary a source of Holiness?

[Uphill Battle]

"Until." The problem with this understanding is that it forces a modern English use of until on the Bible. In the Bible the Greek and Hebrew words for until means only that some action did not happen to a certain point. Scholars are in agreement on this point. For example, Dr. William Hendriksen, the former Professor of New Testament Literature at Calvin Seminary in Grand Rapids, Michigan writes: "This conclusion cannot be based merely upon the negative plus "until." That wording does not always introduce an event (in this case: she gave birth to a son) whereby the earlier situation (the couple had no sexual relations) is reversed (they now begin to have sexual relations)." From The Gospel of Matthew, p. 144.
Consider this quotation from Samuel: "And so Saul's daughter Michal was childless until the day of her death (2 Sam 6:23)." Are we to conclude that she bore children after her death? How about the raven released from the ark? We read that the raven "flew back and forth until the waters dried off from the earth (Gn 8:7)." Does that mean the raven returned? Other examples can be seen in Dt 34:6; 1 Macc 5:54 and Ps 109:1 [RSV 110:1].

http://www.totustuus.com/virgin.htm

do you notice something with all the other passages?

a change in status/situation.

until she died (changed status from life to death.)
flew back and forth until the waters dried. (this does not suggest that it returned, but that it flew until there was dry ground... logical, to say the least!


Ps 109:1???? God I praise you, do not be silent? (confused about this one being included.)

110:1 sit at right hand until enemies under control... situational change from enemies not being in control until them being in control.

Won't speak about maccabees.

However, in the passage about Mary, you do not have the same transition. Did not know her until Jesus was born. The context is very very clear.

 

[HisKid1973]

I mean why even have the verse if it wasn't supposed to mean that or give that impression..

 

[IamAdopted]

The "brothers" of the Lord. Neither Aramaic, the language Jesus probably spoke, nor Hebrew has a separate word for cousin. In reality the term, brothers, was commonly used in the Bible to describe close family members including cousins and uncles. Lot, for example was Abraham's nephew. He was the son of Abraham's brother Haran. Yet in Genesis 14:14, Lot is depicted as Abraham's brother. In Mt 29:15 Jacob is called the brother of his uncle Laban. Again in 1 Chron 23:21-22 the daughters of Eleazar married their brethren. This is not possible because Eleazar had no sons. These brethren were really their cousins, the sons of Cis. Cis was Eleazar's brother.

We learn from other Biblical passages that the word brother even had a broader use. In the case of the forty-two brethren of King Achaziah (2 Kings 10:13-14), the expression is used to refer to mere kinsman, not even close relatives. Similar uses are found in: Dt 23:7; Jer 34:9. Brother was also used to describe unrelated people, such as a friend (1 Kings 9:13, 20:32; and 2 Sam 1:26). In Amos 1:9 the word is used to describe an ally.
In the passages that refer to the brothers of the Lord, Mt 12: 46-47, Mk 3:31-32, and Lk 8:19 all seem to be relating the same incident. The use of the word brothers, as we have already seen, is not persuasive that Mary had other biological children.
Specific brothers are named in two passages. In Mt 13:55 James and Joseph and Simon and Judas are listed. James and Joseph are identified in Mt 27:56 as the son of another Mary, probably Mary of Clophas found in Jn 19:25. Simon appears to be Simon the Cananean of Mt 10:4. Judas is called the son of James in Lk 6:16 and Acts 1:13. The second listing of brothers occurs in Mk 6:3. They are James and Joses and Judas and Simon. James and Joses are identified in Mt 15:40 as the sons of another Mary. This is probably the same Mary discussed above who appears in Jn 19:25. Judas and Simon appear in Matthew's list (Mt 13:55).

http://www.totustuus.com/virgin.htm

Look at the greek word for brother for which the bible was written.. This explains it all.. The same word is also used for describing other brothers is the NT was written in Hebrew and Greek.. Not aaramic as you suggest..

 

[IamAdopted]

There is no need for Mary to remain a virgin.. None.. She is the wife of Joseph.. Bible says Jesus had brothers and sisters.. Now why would the bible tell us this? God is not the author of confusion and it is not anyone but those whom believe in the perpetual virign theory that try to explain this away.. Not only once is it mentioned but even when James the brother of the Lord is spoken about.. Now John the Baptist was His relative. Born from Elizabeth. Mary's cousin..

 

[IamAdopted]

Specific brothers are named in two passages. In Mt 13:55 James and Joseph and Simon and Judas are listed. James and Joseph are identified in Mt 27:56 as the son of another Mary, probably Mary of Clophas found in Jn 19:25. Simon appears to be Simon the Cananean of Mt 10:4. Judas is called the son of James in Lk 6:16 and Acts 1:13. The second listing of brothers occurs in Mk 6:3. They are James and Joses and Judas and Simon. James and Joses are identified in Mt 15:40 as the sons of another Mary. This is probably the same Mary discussed above who appears in Jn 19:25. Judas and Simon appear in Matthew's list (Mt 13:55).

Are you suggesting that these people whom spoke of Mary as being His mother and His brothers and sisters did not know them as a family? Did not know of whom they were talking about? Why they were so amazed that Jesus declared whom He was thinking that how can this be is this not Jesus the son of Mary and are not these his brothers and sisters?

 

[lionroar0]

NKJV) Malachi 2:11 Judah has dealt treacherously, And an abomination has been committed in Israel and in Jerusalem, For Judah has profaned The LORD's holy [institution] which He loves: He has married the daughter of a foreign god.

According to my footnotes in my Oxfod NRSV. This is a woman who was a non Jew. Thus she is the daughter of a foreign God. A Jewish person was not supposed to Marry a gentile.

(NKJV) Jeremiah 13:18 Say to the king and to the queen mother, "Humble yourselves; Sit down, For your rule shall collapse, the crown of your glory."

Also from my handy dan dy Colligiate Oxford NRSV.

This is talkng about the imment fall ad deportation of the Jews by Babylon. Which happened twice. The Queen MOther is the mother of the king.

Peace

 

[lionroar0]

according to some pope years ago...NOT according to the Bible.

Actually it was declared by an ecumunical counsil(sp?) and then given Papal approval.

http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/3811.htm

Possibly his reason for thinking that our Lord Jesus Christ was not of our nature was this—that the Angel who was sent to the blessed and ever Virgin Mary said, ....

Peace

 

[lionroar0]

GOOD for you. That is cause it isn't true. I have a relative that is Arabic/Palestinian. They do NOT refer to cousins etc as 'brothers'. Brother is brother. PERIOD. SO...

Jesus wasn't a Arab He was a Jew. Two different cultures and languages.

Peace

 

[lionroar0]

I am not about to believe the doctrines of men on this. The Bible says He had siblings, which totally demolishes the 'perpetual virgininty' doctrine. Why is it so important that she remained a pure, intact virgin? Sex with your spouse is not wrong. And the C .C.'s teaching on this would imply that they think sex is dirty and immoral. Please expain this.

What Luther believed about the virginity of Mary is irrelevant. Same with Calvin and Zwingli.

I don't think so.

It shows just how much some protestants have deviated from orthodox christianity and accepted, a secular humanist view.

Which during the enlightment attacked christianity as whole regardless of church affiliation and put forth that all that we need is ourselves and science. In other words God is replaced by the individual and what the individual belives and science only looks at the natural world for answers not the supernatural(God.)



Peace

 

[Uphill Battle]

I don't think so.

It shows just how much some protestants have deviated from orthodox christianity and accepted, a secular humanist view.

Which during the enlightment attacked christianity as whole regardless of church affiliation and put forth that all that we need is ourselves and science. In other words God is replaced by the individual and what the individual belives and science only looks at the natural world for answers not the supernatural(God.)



Peace

ah, so now protestants are secular humanists.
My, the list grows ever longer!

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

ah, so now protestants are secular humanists.
My, the list grows ever longer!

http://www.secularhumanism.org/index.php?section=main&page=what

What Is Secular Humanism? ​

Secular Humanism is a term which has come into use in the last thirty years to describe a world view with the following elements and principles:
A conviction that dogmas, ideologies and traditions, whether religious, political or social, must be weighed and tested by each individual and not simply accepted on faith.
Commitment to the use of critical reason, factual evidence, and scientific methods of inquiry, rather than faith and mysticism, in seeking solutions to human problems and answers to important human questions.
A primary concern with fulfillment, growth, and creativity for both the individual and humankind in general.
A constant search for objective truth, with the understanding that new knowledge and experience constantly alter our imperfect perception of it.
A concern for this life and a commitment to making it meaningful through better understanding of ourselves, our history, our intellectual and artistic achievements, and the outlooks of those who differ from us.
A search for viable individual, social and political principles of ethical conduct, judging them on their ability to enhance human well-being and individual responsibility.
A conviction that with reason, an open marketplace of ideas, good will, and tolerance, progress can be made in building a better world for ourselves and our children.

 

[lionroar0]

ah, so now protestants are secular humanists.
My, the list grows ever longer!

This is the view that is being spoused as I explained in my previous post.

The view that Mary is not Ever-Virgin came from the age of enlightement not from the reformers themselves.

The age of enlightement was when secularism adn humanist took hold.

That is the view that you are espousing.

Just thought I let you know where the belive that Mary was not ever-virgin came from.

Peace

 

[Uphill Battle]

This is the view that is being spoused as I explained in my previous post.

The view that Mary is not Ever-Virgin came from the age of enlightement not from the reformers themselves.

The age of enlightement was when secularism adn humanist took hold.

That is the view that you are espousing.

Just thought I let you know where the belive that Mary was not ever-virgin came from.

Peace

or, as evidence suggests, most everyone before 300 AD as well.

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

or, as evidence suggests, most everyone before 300 AD as well.

Like the Bereans.

Acts 17:11 and these were more noble than those in Thessalonica, they received the word with all readiness of mind, every day examining the Writings whether those things were so;

A conviction that dogmas, ideologies and traditions, whether religious, political or social, must be weighed and tested by each individual and not simply accepted on faith.

 

[FrauleinElsa]

Originally Posted by lionroar0


I don't think so.

It shows just how much some protestants have deviated from orthodox christianity and accepted, a secular humanist view.

Which during the enlightment attacked christianity as whole regardless of church affiliation and put forth that all that we need is ourselves and science. In other words God is replaced by the individual and what the individual belives and science only looks at the natural world for answers not the supernatural(God.)

Peace

E

This is the view that is being spoused as I explained in my previous post.

The view that Mary is not Ever-Virgin came from the age of enlightement not from the reformers themselves.

The age of enlightement was when secularism adn humanist took hold.

That is the view that you are espousing.

Just thought I let you know where the belive that Mary was not ever-virgin came from.

Peace

 

[lionroar0]

Lets brake it down.

Secular Humanism is a term which has come into use in the last thirty years to describe a world view with the following elements and principles:
A conviction that dogmas, ideologies and traditions, whether religious, political or social, must be weighed and tested by each individual and not simply accepted on faith.

Let's start with the above quote. Can a person prove God with no faith but with factual evidence, scientific methods of equiry, and the use of critical reason?

Commitment to the use of critical reason, factual evidence, and scientific methods of inquiry, rather than faith and mysticism, in seeking solutions to human problems and answers to important human questions.

Is God quatifiable? If not then He can't be proven by scientific methods of inquiry. Is there factual evidence of God? Has any one seen Him? Has any one spoken with Him face to face? Has any one touched God as a solid material object? If not then God cannot be proven by factual evidence. Since there are no facts about God then how can we sue critical reason in luie of the absence of facts?

A primary concern with fulfillment, growth, and creativity for both the individual and humankind in general.
A constant search for objective truth, with the understanding that new knowledge and experience constantly alter our imperfect perception of it.
A concern for this life and a commitment to making it meaningful through better understanding of ourselves, our history, our intellectual and artistic achievements, and the outlooks of those who differ from us.
A search for viable individual, social and political principles of ethical conduct, judging them on their ability to enhance human well-being and individual responsibility.
A conviction that with reason, an open marketplace of ideas, good will, and tolerance, progress can be made in building a better world for ourselves and our children.

Not a darn thing about praying to God. Reading the Scriptures. nada zip.!!!

It does say awful lot about humans turning to themselves for answer and not God.

Just like I stated.

Peace

 

[Uphill Battle]

Lets brake it down.



Let's start with the above quote. Can a person prove God with no faith but with factual evidence, scientific methods of equiry, and the use of critical reason?



Is God quatifiable? If not then He can't be proven by scientific methods of inquiry. Is there factual evidence of God? Has any one seen Him? Has any one spoken with Him face to face? Has any one touched God as a solid material object? If not then God cannot be proven by factual evidence. Since there are no facts about God then how can we sue critical reason in luie of the absence of facts?


Not a darn thing about praying to God. Reading the Scriptures. nada zip.!!!

It does say awful lot about humans turning to themselves for answer and not God.

Just like I stated.

Peace

and this is what you believe that protestants do?

what a wonderful example of marginalization!

 

[lionroar0]

or, as evidence suggests, most everyone before 300 AD as well.

Evidence that is not the concensus of the ECF's but tangent opinions.

Peace

 

[Uphill Battle]

Evidence that is not the concensus of the ECF's but tangent opinions.

Peace

are we reading the same ECF's?

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

Not a darn thing about praying to God. Reading the Scriptures. nada zip.!!!

It does say awful lot about humans turning to themselves for answer and not God.

Just like I stated.

Peace

That is the way of the Atheists. I imagine if more of them would have examined the Scriptures more thouroughly, they would not now be ex-Christians and anti-religion of any kind.