Speak lovingly of Mary

MamaZ · Sep 9, 2008

Jesus went into the Temple and preached. Those in the temple wanted Him dead people. Do not try and tell me that the leaders of Jesus time to the Jewish people loved Christ and responded to Him following after their tradtions. We read in scripture where it was because He claimed who He was and that He did not stick to the tradtions set down that they would not believe in Him but wanted Him dead. The disciples may have been Jewish but when they met Christ they followed after Him and not the Jewish tradtions any longer. In fact because of this they were killed for Christs sake. Even Saul a devout Jewish man help to hunt and kill those to whom stood for Christ. When Christ revealed himself to Saul Jesus completely turned His life around.

MamaZ · Sep 9, 2008

At the time Jesus gave the care to Mary to John his brothers were not His brothers by the Spirit. So I see Jesus as giving Mary to Johns care as a spiritual decision and not a fleshy decision according to the traditions of the Jews.

Thekla · Sep 9, 2008

the term in the OT for Lot would have been the aramaic term. To state that the neccessity is that the same line of thinking MUST be taken forward to the greek, is just erroneous. The gospels were written in Greek. they did not seem to have any trouble with the Greek either. the "cultural" argument just masks the fact that if the author intended cousin or kin, they would know what word to use. Check out Colossians 4:10. Using the same ruberic, shouldn't they have used some form of adelphos?

-The LXX is a translation into Greek from the Hebrew; Aramaic was the language used by Christ.Both Hebrew and Aramaic are Semitic.
-My argument that the LXX usage (terminology and style as 'religious language') is attested to by linguistic analysis, and argued by Biblical scholars (including protestants).
- The earliest Chritian community was of Jewish origin. Paul's ministry was to the gentiles (including Greeks), hence Paul's terminology shifts with audience. (His adress to the Athenians is a remarkable example, when compared, for example, to his letter to the Galatians/Celts. Colossae is Greek. Further, the KJV translates anepsios: "Marcus, sister's son to Barnabus" ie Mark, nephew of Barnabus not cousin).
-Please revisit my post on relationship words and usage.

there is no evidence to this matter, that it was never the same name for child, and father... or variation of. Joses

you should research this for yourself:
- Joses and Joseph are the same name in different languages (like Demetrious and James).
- you can research Jewish naming custom online.

pardon?

the term anepsios could only be applied to blood relatives of Mary re: Christ, as Christ had no blood relationship to Joseph.

explain.

custom, into the oikos of one of Joseph's relatives.

oikos = household oikeios = belonging to the home, hosehold, family, relatives

in the event that a woman is widowed, her care (and her children's care) is given to the oldest son or a male relative of the woman's late husband

LittleLambofJesus · Sep 9, 2008

Originally Posted by sunlover1

Lunch is finished so I cant right now, but as arnold said,
I'll be bahck!

lionroar0 said:
eeeek!!!!(Jk)

Peace

The RCs tremble and FLEE for cover when the "Sun" comes in and shines her Light on them.

2Peter 2:1 There became yet also False-Prophets in the people as also in ye shall be False-Teachers whoany shall be carrying in sects of destruction, and the One buying them, Owner/despothn <1203>, disowning-- bringing on them swift destruction. [Matt 24:11/Jude 1:4]

Reve 6:10 And they cry out to a voice, great, saying: "Till when the Owner/despothV <1203> the Holy and True not Thou are judging and out-justicing the blood of us out-of the ones homing upon the land?"

Rick Otto · Sep 9, 2008

MamaZ said:
At the time Jesus gave the care to Mary to John his brothers were not His brothers by the Spirit. So I see Jesus as giving Mary to Johns care as a spiritual decision and not a fleshy decision according to the traditions of the Jews.

Jesus had something to say about those traditions:
Matthew 15:1-9 1 Then came to Jesus scribes and Pharisees, which were of Jerusalem, saying, 2 Why do thy disciples transgress the tradition of the elders? for they wash not their hands when they eat bread. 3 But he answered and said unto them, Why do ye also transgress the commandment of God by your tradition?4 For God commanded, saying, Honour thy father and mother: and, He that curseth father or mother, let him die the death. 5 But ye say, Whosoever shall say to his father or his mother, It is a gift, by whatsoever thou mightest be profited by me; 6 And honour not his father or his mother, he shall be free. Thus have ye made the commandment of God of none effect by your tradition.
Mr 7:9 - Show Context And he said unto them, Full well ye reject the commandment of God, that ye may keep your own tradition.

LittleLambofJesus · Sep 9, 2008

Jesus had something to say about those traditions:

Is it any wonder the RCs are always the ones viewed in Revelation.

Matt 23:27 "Woe to ye, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! That ye are liken to tombs having been whitewashed who any outside indeed are appearing beautiful, inside yet are being crammed of bones of dead-ones and of every uncleaness.
28 Thus also ye outside indeed are appearing to the men righteous, inside yet, ye are distended of hypocisy and of lawlessness

Reve 18:11 "And the merchants of the land are lamenting and are mourning on Her, that the cargo of them not-yet-one is buying not-still.
13 "and cinnamon and incense, fragrant oil and frankincense, wine and oil, fine flour and wheat, cattle and sheep, horses and chariots, and bodies and souls of men.

lionroar0 · Sep 9, 2008

Rick Otto said:
Jesus had something to say about those traditions:
Matthew 15:1-9 1 Then came to Jesus scribes and Pharisees, which were of Jerusalem, saying, 2 Why do thy disciples transgress the tradition of the elders? for they wash not their hands when they eat bread. 3 But he answered and said unto them, Why do ye also transgress the commandment of God by your tradition?4 For God commanded, saying, Honour thy father and mother: and, He that curseth father or mother, let him die the death. 5 But ye say, Whosoever shall say to his father or his mother, It is a gift, by whatsoever thou mightest be profited by me; 6 And honour not his father or his mother, he shall be free. Thus have ye made the commandment of God of none effect by your tradition.
Mr 7:9 - Show Context And he said unto them, Full well ye reject the commandment of God, that ye may keep your own tradition.

And yet Christianity rests on Tradition.

Peace

lionroar0 · Sep 9, 2008

Uphill Battle said:
exactly. So why would he be boxed in with the Letter of the tradition thought that Mary would have to be "passed" to a sibling?

The only way that siblings would be released from the obligation of taking care of their mother is because the mother was involved in adulterous affair.

In other words while Mary was married to Joseph. She had sex with another man. Thus they are released from taking care of her, because they have different fathers.

That's what I meant when I posted if He had other brothers then by not giving her to them. He would be dishonoring her.

Geneaology(sp?) is traced through the fathers side in Jewish culture.

Peace

LittleLambofJesus · Sep 9, 2008

lionroar0 said:
And yet Christianity rests on Tradition.

Peace

Not for me I take no stock in what the early ECFs preached.

Matt 21:24 And, making answer, Jesus said unto them--"I also will ask you one thing, which if ye tell me, I also will tell you by what authority these things I am doing 25 The baptism by John, whence was it? Of heaven or of men?" But they began to deliberate among themselves saying--'If we say, 'Of heaven'; He will say unto us 'Wherefore then did ye not believe him'? 26 But if we say of men, we fear the multitude, for all as a prophet are holding John'. 27 And making answer to Jesus they said "We know not". He also said unto them "Neither do I tell you by what authority these things I am doing.

lionroar0 · Sep 9, 2008

LittleLambofJesus said:
Not for me I take no stock in what the early ECFs preached.

Matt 21:24 And, making answer, Jesus said unto them--"I also will ask you one thing, which if ye tell me, I also will tell you by what authority these things I am doing 25 The baptism by John, whence was it? Of heaven or of men?" But they began to deliberate among themselves saying--'If we say, 'Of heaven'; He will say unto us 'Wherefore then did ye not believe him'? 26 But if we say of men, we fear the multitude, for all as a prophet are holding John'. 27 And making answer to Jesus they said "We know not". He also said unto them "Neither do I tell you by what authority these things I am doing.

Your too much!!!

Peace

sunlover1 · Sep 9, 2008

lionroar0 said:
Let's go over it.

Awesome!

Who did he state this to.

I dont know, it appears the sisters sent an errand boy
or some other messenger.
3 Therefore his sisters sent unto him, saying,
Lord, behold, he whom thou lovest is sick.
4 When Jesus heard that, he said,
This sickness is not unto death, but for the glory of God,
that the Son of God might be glorified thereby.

THEN, He after hearing about His friend, stayed away TWO more days!
Yet the Scripture makes it very clear adding how He LOVED the three
siblings:
5 Now Jesus loved Martha, and her sister, and Lazarus.
6 When he had heard therefore that he was sick,
he abode two days still in the same place where he was.http://christianforums.com/newreply.php?do=newreply&p=48533527#_ftn1
http://christianforums.com/newreply.php?do=newreply&p=48533527#_ftnref1

When he heard this, Jesus said,
"This sickness will not end in death.
No, it is for God's glory so that
God's Son may be glorified through it."

Who was there when He said this?

I think it was His disciples (and must be the messenger)

Also did those that were weeping know that He was coming back?

I'm going to guess that they got the message.
Check this out though, Jesus told His disciples that He was
GLAd that He wasnt there when Lazarus died... for THEIR
sakes, THAT THEY MIGHT BELIEVE! (without faith it's
impossible to "please" God.
If Jesus was GLAD that He wasn't there then it doesnt make
a lot of sense to me that He was weeping over Lazaruses
death. God weeping over 'death"? Death for lazarus would
mean to be present with God, no?

14 Then said Jesus unto them plainly, Lazarus is dead.
15 And I am glad for your sakes that I was not there,
to the intent ye may believe; nevertheless let us go unto him.http://christianforums.com/newreply.php?do=newreply&p=48533527#_ftn1
http://christianforums.com/newreply.php?do=newreply&p=48533527#_ftnref1

Those are my thoughts anyhow.
Sorry for the commentary heh.
What say ye?

sunlover1 said:
I'll be bahck!

lionroar0 said:
eeeek!!!!(Jk)

Yeah you BETTER be afraid!

LittleLambofJesus said:
The RCs tremble and FLEE for cover when the "Sun" comes in and shines her Light on them.

Hey now, you'll give me a bad name with
my newbie Catholic friends! lol.
Love you too LittleLamb.

lionroar0 said:
Your too much!!!

Peace

Aint that the truth.
But he's easily appeased,
(just mention the revelation)

LittleLambofJesus · Sep 10, 2008

If Jesus was GLAD that He wasn't there then it doesnt make
a lot of sense to me that He was weeping over Lazaruses
death. God weeping over 'death"? Death for lazarus would
mean to be present with God, no?

14 Then said Jesus unto them plainly, Lazarus is dead.
15 And I am glad for your sakes that I was not there,
to the intent ye may believe; nevertheless let us go unto him.

Those are my thoughts anyhow.
Sorry for the commentary heh.
What say ye?

The more I study on Lazarus, the more I am just AWED by it.
And everyone knows I am the "Revelation Fanatic" so I decided to see where that greek word #5463 was used in Revelation. Only used 2 times in Rev out of the 74 times used in the NT/NC.

Pretty awsome since Reve 11:10 shows people celebrating at the death of the "2 prophets", and they are soon Ressurected just as Lazarus was!!!!

John 11:15 And I am rejoicing/cairw <5463> (5719) because of ye that ye should be believing that not I was there that we may be going toward him.

Reve 11:10 And those dwelling upon the land are rejoicing/carousin <5463> (5692) on them, and are making merry, and gifts they shall be sending to one-another, that these, the two prophets, torment the ones dwelling upon the land.

Reve 19:7 We may be rejoicing/cairwmen <5463> (5725) and we may be exulting and may be giving the glory to Him. That came the marriage of the Lamb-kin, and the Wife/Woman of it makes ready herself.

LittleLambofJesus · Sep 10, 2008

Man, my heart skipped a beat when I saw this. The same Great Voice that called Lazarus out is also the same Voice calling those 2 witnesses up!!!! WHOW!!! AMEN! ALLEHUIA!!

http://christianforums.com/showthread.php?t=7282853

John 11:43 And these saying, to a Voice, Great, He cries-out "Lazarus, hither out!"

Reve 11:12 And they hear a Voice, Great, out of the Heaven saying to them "Ascend ye"! here. And they ascended into the heaven in the cloud and observed them, the enemies of them.

MamaZ · Sep 10, 2008

lionroar0 said:
And yet Christianity rests on Tradition.

Peace

actually Christianity rests on one Person. Christ Jesus

Rick Otto · Sep 10, 2008

lionroar0 said:
And yet Christianity rests on Tradition.

Peace

Well, I was high on my own gravitas.

...Are you followin' me around?(lol)

Mama Z 's been battin' a thousand for a few posts now. Stand back everybody, I think she's on a roll... You go girl!

Rick Otto · Sep 10, 2008

If Jesus was GLAD that He wasn't there then it doesnt make
a lot of sense to me that He was weeping over Lazaruses
death. God weeping over 'death"? Death for lazarus would
mean to be present with God, no?

I'm thinkin' maybe He wasn't weeping over loss, but more simply expressing the grief we can expect to attend any curse, which is what death is,... as if He was feeling compassion for, as if He was weeping for the victims like we might when watching a movie.
"Know I mean?" (doin' rapstar Flava Flave)

MamaZ · Sep 10, 2008

Jesus was full of compassion. Even knowing that our loved ones that have Christ are with the Lord we weep. Out of the love we had for them and because of others weeping. I weep when I see a son weep for his mother that has passed. I weep when I see a child weep for a dog they have lost. If God rose them from the dead would I still not weep from compassion for those who are mourning the loss?

MamaZ · Sep 10, 2008

Rom 12:9 Let love be without hypocrisy. Abhor what is evil; cling to what is good.
Rom 12:10 Be devoted to one another in brotherly love; give preference to one another in honor;
Rom 12:11 not lagging behind in diligence, fervent in spirit, serving the Lord;
Rom 12:12 rejoicing in hope, persevering in tribulation, devoted to prayer,
Rom 12:13 contributing to the needs of the saints, practicing hospitality.
Rom 12:14 Bless those who persecute you; bless and do not curse.
Rom 12:15 Rejoice with those who rejoice, and weep with those who weep.

Rick Otto · Sep 10, 2008

Originally Posted by LittleLambofJesus

Not for me I take no stock in what the early ECFs preached.

I try to keep my ECF stock to a single-digit percentage of my portfolio. St Augustine stock I might let grow to say, 10%, but I try to keep the overwhelming majority of my stock in gold at any given time.(Today's Market Tip)lol

bbbbbbb · Sep 10, 2008

Kristos said:
Hogwash!

[bible]
Eze 44:1 Then he brought me back the way of the gate of the outward sanctuary which looketh toward the east; and it was shut.
Eze 44:2 Then said the LORD unto me; This gate shall be shut, it shall not be opened, and no man shall enter in by it; because the LORD, the God of Israel, hath entered in by it, therefore it shall be shut.
Eze 44:3It is for the prince; the prince, he shall sit in it to eat bread before the LORD; he shall enter by the way of the porch of that gate, and shall go out by the way of the same.
Eze 44:4 Then brought he me the way of the north gate before the house: and I looked, and, behold, the glory of the LORD filled the house of the LORD: and I fell upon my face.
[/bible]

This is the scriptural basis - like or not. And it has been for a very long time!

On brothers. Give me a break. A person's relationship to Christ has nothing to do with their relationship to Mary. It doesn't matter - brother, cousins, friends whatever - they weren't Mary's child and it doesn't even imply that they were.

Origen - 3rd century agrees - they were sons of Joseph from a previous marriage and he cites the 2nd century Protoevangelium. He goes on to say that this is in harmony with the rest of scripture - in other words - see Ezekiel above. And I already posted a quote from Ignatius - 1st century. So, from the beginning, this is what was believed. Perhaps not as doctrine, but believed nevertheless. When we jump into the 4th century, there are a multitude of supporting quotes.

No rumors. Just scripture.

Thank you for your usual erudite response.

I believe that you have made my point that there are no direct references in the Bible regarding the marital life of Mary and Joseph. It would be impossible for anyone to read into your verses from Ezekiel the meanings which you ascribe to it without forcing the dogma of EV through the eye (or gate) of the needle. There is no direct mention of Mary, virgins, sex, progeny, intercourse, or anything else related to the meaning which you apply to these verses. If "This is the scriptural basis - like or not. And it has been for a very long time!" then we are in agreement that there is no direct scriptural basis for your belief,

Speak lovingly of Mary

MamaZ

Guest

MamaZ

Guest

Thekla

Guest

Hebrews 2:14.... Pesky Devil, git!

The Dude Abides

Hebrews 2:14.... Pesky Devil, git!

Coffee drinker

Coffee drinker

Hebrews 2:14.... Pesky Devil, git!

Coffee drinker

Beloved, Let us love one another

Hebrews 2:14.... Pesky Devil, git!

Hebrews 2:14.... Pesky Devil, git!

MamaZ

Guest

The Dude Abides

The Dude Abides

MamaZ

Guest

MamaZ

Guest

The Dude Abides

bbbbbbb

Guest

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency