Lets talk about the supposed vow of chastity of Mary

[Philothei]

Because the loving sharing of marital intimacies is a dirty, sinful, impure thing for the wife?

Odd, because faith and faithfulness would cause a man to love his wife MORE, not LESS, it seems to me. Or do you think most men love their wives MORE if they are faithless and disobedient and far from the Lord?

In any case, this assumption that Joseph considered marital intimacies something that would make Mary impure, sinful, "dirty" is not confirmation of a dogmatic fact of highest importance and greatest certainty of Truth - it's just an assumption. Another could say, "Joseph Smith wouldn't lie about finding those plates ERGO it is a dogmatic fact of highest importance and greatest certainty of Truth that he did." I doubt many here would so embrace that apologetic.





.

It is not a matter of sexual relations be dirty ...you are missing the point here CJ it has to do with Mary and her role in the incarnation and reverence to God's will. If God willed her to be EV it is just as nobody's business to say the opposite... Her vow was to God through Christ's incarnation and that was indeed between her God and Joseph. So the same way you doubt that you should realize that it is not impossible. Still wondering since you have no position why you are taking one

 

[washedagain]

The Bible is going to write that? Give me a break. The Bible isn't centered on that, obviously. But in a matter of common knowledge, it is mentioned in Luke, not explicitly, but in Greek, it is more clear. You choose to read it through 21st century, individualistic American ideology.

No... I read it as it says. God is not ambiguous.

 

[Dorothea]

Because the loving sharing of marital intimacies is a dirty, sinful, impure thing for the wife?

Odd, because faith and faithfulness would cause a man to love his wife MORE, not LESS, it seems to me. Or do you think most men love their wives MORE if they are faithless and disobedient and far from the Lord?

In any case, this assumption that Joseph considered marital intimacies something that would make Mary impure, sinful, "dirty" is not confirmation of a dogmatic fact of highest importance and greatest certainty of Truth - it's just an assumption. Another could say, "Joseph Smith wouldn't lie about finding those plates ERGO it is a dogmatic fact of highest importance and greatest certainty of Truth that he did." I doubt many here would so embrace that apologetic.

.

I guess this is what happens when some sects of Christianity drop monasticism in their churches and such. They don't understand celibacy as a choice. But some type of punishment or something ridiculous like that.

No, not because marriage is dirty, because there are people who were to remain celebate their whole lives, and Mary was one of them. You know, not everything revolves around sex.

 

[Thekla]

Because the loving sharing of marital intimacies is a dirty, sinful, impure thing for the wife?

How do you derive that conclusion ?
Certainly this is not the only possible conclusion - especially if one is "agnostic" on the issue.
Indeed, the position of "no position" should have the benefit of allowing a greater flexibility of thought, and should be interested in considering all possible evidence and conclusions.
So why do you so adamantly (for years) embrace this and only this conclusion ?

Odd, because faith and faithfulness would cause a man to love his wife MORE, not LESS, it seems to me. Or do you think most men love their wives MORE if they are faithless and disobedient and far from the Lord?

So logically, Christian men who love their wives never leave the bedroom ?

In any case, this assumption that Joseph considered marital intimacies something that would make Mary impure, sinful, "dirty" is not confirmation of a dogmatic fact of highest importance and greatest certainty of Truth - it's just an assumption. Another could say, "Joseph Smith wouldn't lie about finding those plates ERGO it is a dogmatic fact of highest importance and greatest certainty of Truth that he did." I doubt many here would so embrace that apologetic.

Again, it is curious that this can be the only possibility you can think of - perhaps you might consider others.

Really think it through; inspect the Scriptures for the effect of encounters with God, for the treatment given to the places where God "dwelt", and the Jewish attitude toward them.

 

[washedagain]

No devout man in his right mind would've touched her in that way, but only honored her.

Are you suggesting that a husband having sex with his wife is dishonoring her?

Joseph was TOLD to take her as his wife... how is having marital sexual relations with her, dishonored her?

 

[Dorothea]

No... I read it as it says. God is not ambiguous.

Yes, and you've read it through your perceptions that seem to show a biased against believing that Mary could, heaven forbid, be a virgin the rest of her life. You haven't read the original Greek, as Thekla pointed out, and even when she tried to explain the difference, you ignored it. Blinders are up. Now, I don't know why this is. I have a feeling it might be some Romaphobia or something instead of actually just reading it free of anti-Catholic biases and seeing what it truly says.

 

[Dorothea]

Are you suggesting that a husband having sex with his wife is dishonoring her?

Yes, when we're talking about Joseph and Mary. Any other average citizen out there, no, it isn't.

Joseph was TOLD to take her as his wife... how is having marital sexual relations with her, dishonored her?

Oh good gravy. Do you have any idea WHY?

 

[washedagain]

It is not a matter of sexual relations be dirty ...you are missing the point here CJ it has to do with Mary and her role in the incarnation and reverence to God's will. If God willed her to be EV it is just as nobody's business to say the opposite... Her vow was to God through Christ's incarnation and that was indeed between her God and Joseph. So the same way you doubt that you should realize that it is not impossible. Still wondering since you have no position why you are taking one

And yet, you are unable to substantiate that Mary ever made such a vow and that a nice Jewish man was willing to be married to such a woman that made such a vow...

Imagine that!

 

[washedagain]

=Dorothea;58255826]Yes, when we're talking about Joseph and Mary. Any other average citizen out there, no, it isn't.

Why?
Oh good gravy. Do you have any idea WHY?

No I don't!

 

[Dorothea]

No I don't!

So, you are saying you are ignorant on the ways of Jewish tradition and living at that time?

 

[washedagain]

=Dorothea;58255811]Yes, and you've read it through your perceptions that seem to show a biased against believing that Mary could, heaven forbid, be a virgin the rest of her life. You haven't read the original Greek, as Thekla pointed out, and even when she tried to explain the difference, you ignored it. Blinders are up. Now, I don't know why this is. I have a feeling it might be some Romaphobia or something instead of actually just reading it free of anti-Catholic biases and seeing what it truly says.

It has nothing to do with being anti Catholic... it has to do with evidence of which none has been presented.

Show me where Mary took such a vow.

 

[Dorothea]

It has nothing to do with being anti Catholic... it has to do with evidence of which none has been presented.

Show me where Mary took such a vow.

Anna's promise to God to dedicate her child to HIM in the Temple. That's where Mary grew up. In Luke, as pointed out 50 million times.

 

[washedagain]

So, you are saying you are ignorant on the ways of Jewish tradition and living at that time?

No, not at all.... Jewish tradition is that a man and woman come together and become one.... are fruitful and multiply.


What is your point?

 

[washedagain]

Anna's promise to God to dedicate her child to HIM in the Temple. That's where Mary grew up. In Luke, as pointed out 50 million times.

And what does that have to do with Mary?

Show me the evidence that Mary made a vow of celibacy?

 

[Thekla]

And yet, you are unable to substantiate that Mary ever made such a vow and that a nice Jewish man was willing to be married to such a woman that made such a vow...

Imagine that!

Can you substantiate your position ?

 

[Thekla]

It has nothing to do with being anti Catholic... it has to do with evidence of which none has been presented.

Show me where Mary took such a vow.

If you insist on evidence for a vow - as I have said, there is no Biblical evidence that I know of for any vow of Mary.


However, despite the lack of explicit evidence, it cannot be concluded that:
1. Mary never made such a vow
2. Mary did not remain a virgin

In fact, the Lukan passages do state that she had no intention of engaging in conjugal relations. Vow or no vow.

 

[Thekla]

No, not at all.... Jewish tradition is that a man and woman come together and become one.... are fruitful and multiply.

What is your point?

And from Christ, born of Mary, the Seed promised of Abraham, the Seed of the woman promised in Genesis, there is a great multiplication of fruit ...

One must recognize that those who were called by God for a particular purpose often had few if any children.

Consider the prophets.

Moses, after his deep encounter with God, became celibate.

Abraham, whose son Isaac was a typos of Christ (sacrifice) was of Abraham's two sons the only "legitimate" son (son a free woman).

The preferred son to God in families with multiple children was the younger son, not the eldest
(Jacob, Joseph, David ...).

 

[justinangel]

The preferred son to God in families with multiple children was the younger son, not the eldest
(Jacob, Joseph, David ...).

Case closed! Jesus wasn't an elder sibling.

PAX

 

[Philothei]

Case closed! Jesus wasn't an elder sibling.

PAX

 

[mrmccormo]

And what does that have to do with Mary?

Show me the evidence that Mary made a vow of celibacy?

I think the rest of us are still waiting for evidence that Mary had children, or that she had sex at all.

I mean, if evidence is so important to you...