- Apr 25, 2005
- 18,279
- 1,221
- 48
- Faith
- Non-Denom
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- CA-Conservatives
nice avoidance. If you do not hold to Marian Dogmas, can you be Roman Catholic? yes or no.
verrrrrry simple.
Upvote
0
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
nice avoidance. If you do not hold to Marian Dogmas, can you be Roman Catholic? yes or no.*stares into the void with a blank look on his face*
That does not computed. Accept belief or be excommunicated. Resistance is futile. You will be assimilated.
Nope. Next question.nice avoidance. If you do not hold to Marian Dogmas, can you be Roman Catholic? yes or no.
verrrrrry simple.
Because of a misapplied understanding of the word "until" in:
[bible]matthew 1:25[/bible]
It is assumed that after Jesus was born, Joseph and Mary started kickin' it.
It never ceases to amaze me how some say scripture either does not mean what it says or it is misapplied or that it could have meant. When we have the Prophetic writings of David stating she did. We have eye witness accounts stating Jesus had brothers and sisters. We have Apostle Paul stating that she did.. But yet this cannot be what it means why? Because someone somewhere has started a belief that Mary was a PV so therefore instead of that being wrong it must be the scriptures and all the eye witness accounts that are wrong. When the bible doesn't state that Mary was a PV..
But yet they wrote that Jesus was Gods only begotten but then they write that Jesus was Marys firstborn son.. Now come on. If Jesus was Mary's firstborn then she must have had more after Him. I am pretty sure that if Mary was to be a PV they would have said Marys only begotten. But since they did not and later in scripture we see Jesus had brothers and sisters this kind of adds up.. 2+2 does =4. Since we don't try to make scripture fit a belief that is not spoken of in Scripture we don't have to assume anything. We can read it as it is written and know we are safe.Oh I know that...
But still, that is merely an assumption, Scripture still does not clearly say she had sexual relations, or other children besides Jesus. Her having other children isn't even remotely mentioned..
Acts 1:14There is no Psalm by David that says anything to the fact. Jesus' brother's and sister's are never mentioned to be Mary's children. Paul never said she had other children. The belief of Mary's PV was believed from the beginning, because it was a known fact. It was never contested. Ignatius who was a Disciple of John the Apostle, wrote about her PV. He would have known. We also have the ECF's who were well versed in SCripture AND the labguage in which it was written, along woth the handed to Tradition to rely on. Her PV was not even questioned by the earliset reformer's...
Galatians 1:1914They all joined together constantly in prayer, along with the women and Mary the mother of Jesus, and with his brothers.
1 Corinthians 9:519I saw none of the other apostles—only James, the Lord's brother.
There sure is alot of talk of the Lords brothers saying He didn't have any..5Don't we have the right to take a believing wife along with us, as do the other apostles and the Lord's brothers and Cephas?
But yet they wrote that Jesus was Gods only begotten but then they write that Jesus was Marys firstborn son.. Now come on. If Jesus was Mary's firstborn then she must have had more after Him. I am pretty sure that if Mary was to be a PV they would have said Marys only begotten. But since they did not and later in scripture we see Jesus had brothers and sisters this kind of adds up.. 2+2 does =4. Since we don't try to make scripture fit a belief that is not spoken of in Scripture we don't have to assume anything. We can read it as it is written and know we are safe.
Acts 1:14 Galatians 1:19 1 Corinthians 9:5There sure is alot of talk of the Lords brothers saying He didn't have any..
That is because you try to say that scripture written by Paul. Matthew Mark Luke and all that where there and an eye witness to the fact of all of this really don't mean what they say. If they were Joseph's Children I am pretty sure one of these men would have cleared this up for us. Because this is not a belief that ran with the first believers. It is written and stated as God would have it be. Bringing us to the conclusion that Mary was not a PV for that is not what was required of her. She was required to be a virgin for His birth only.Umm, I think I said the Bible never says Mary had other childen, and none of your quotes there say that.
Also (for the millionth time) the James who is called the Lord's brother, is one if the 2 Apostles names James, neither of which was Mary's son...it was either son of Clopus, or son of Zebedee....and you still do not know what aldephos means to the Greek culture...
You said clearly that SCripture says Mary had other children, and for the 10th time now you have yet to produce this "fact" you claim is in Scripture...
That is because you try to say that scripture written by Paul. Matthew Mark Luke and all that where there and an eye witness to the fact of all of this really don't mean what they say. If they were Joseph's Children I am pretty sure one of these men would have cleared this up for us. Because this is not a belief that ran with the first believers. It is written and stated as God would have it be. Bringing us to the conclusion that Mary was not a PV for that is not what was required of her. She was required to be a virgin for His birth only.
I don't think the Scripture writers even thought about having to be so specific about this stuff. They were writing in their language at their time. Nearly all credible linguistic and cultural scholars agree that the context of the bible does not indicate that Mary had other children. The fact that Mary's "other children" are never referenced outside of Scripture is even more telling. Probably because there is nothing to write about.That is because you try to say that scripture written by Paul. Matthew Mark Luke and all that where there and an eye witness to the fact of all of this really don't mean what they say. If they were Joseph's Children I am pretty sure one of these men would have cleared this up for us. Because this is not a belief that ran with the first believers. It is written and stated as God would have it be. Bringing us to the conclusion that Mary was not a PV for that is not what was required of her. She was required to be a virgin for His birth only.
other than brothers and sisters you claim are cousins.Oh I know that...
But still, that is merely an assumption, Scripture still does not clearly say she had sexual relations, or other children besides Jesus. Her having other children isn't even remotely mentioned..
please post the Ignatius writings on PV.There is no Psalm by David that says anything to the fact. Jesus' brother's and sister's are never mentioned to be Mary's children. Paul never said she had other children. The belief of Mary's PV was believed from the beginning, because it was a known fact. It was never contested. Ignatius who was a Disciple of John the Apostle, wrote about her PV. He would have known. We also have the ECF's who were well versed in SCripture AND the labguage in which it was written, along woth the handed to Tradition to rely on. Her PV was not even questioned by the earliset reformer's...
saw none of the other apostles—only James, the Lord's brother.Umm, I think I said the Bible never says Mary had other childen, and none of your quotes there say that.
Also (for the millionth time) the James who is called the Lord's brother, is one if the 2 Apostles names James, neither of which was Mary's son...it was either son of Clopus, or son of Zebedee....and you still do not know what aldephos means to the Greek culture...
You said clearly that SCripture says Mary had other children, and for the 10th time now you have yet to produce this "fact" you claim is in Scripture...
just googled Ignatius.They are not in the bible. What difference would it make.
other than brothers and sisters you claim are cousins.
other than brothers and sisters you claim are cousins.
saw none of the other apostles—only James, the Lord's brother
just googled Ignatius.
Just for intrest sake.
The 15 forged letters of Ignatius:
http://www.bible.ca/history-ignatius-forgeries-250AD.htm
Alot of stuff on the site is off base.
but is is this statement that is supposedly about PV?
the virginity of Mary as "hidden from the prince of this world loudly proclaimed, but wrought in the silence of God"
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?