The Virgin Mary: Maybe Not

[Pluckiy Pilgrim]

"Ha-satan can't do a single thing without God's permission."

You may believe that, but I don't. I know what the bible says. Never-the-less, I don't buy that a God of love would give Satan permission to demonically possess someone. And I don't believe that God gave Satan permission to lead the angelic rebellion against God. There are a lot of things that Satan has done that I don't think received any sort of approval from God what-so-ever.

From my point of view, saying that "God gives Satan permission" is an attempt to justify what Satan does. I just don't buy it.

Satan may still be around simply because God hasn't taken him out yet, but that is DIFFERENT than saying God gives Satan "permission" to do what he does.

God and Satan are adversaries, i.e. enemies. Would you give your enemy permission to do damage to any one of your beloved children? If YOU wouldn't give Satan permission to hurt your beloved children, then what makes you think God would give Satan his permission to hurt you?

I think that whatever represents Satan and whatever represents God are two entirely different things. They are opposing forces. And as far as I know, those forces are universal in scope and manifest themselves in a number of ways, each capable of effecting both physical reality and spiritual reality.

John the Divine tells us that there is a WAR going on in heaven. (Rev 12:7)

As far as I know, in war a good commander NEVER gives the enemy "permission" to attack his troops.

 

[Albion]

Isaiah 7:14 is the English (KJV) translation that laid the foundation for "the virgin Mary." It states:

Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel.

The problem is, the Hebrew word for virgin is betulah. That word was NOT used in Isaiah 7:14. The word used was almah, which simply means "young maiden...one who is able to bear children, and mature enough for nuptials." There is no mention of virginity. In short, the 47 scholars working on the KJV (which was done in 1611 CE), made a bad translation.

Before you tie me to the stake and set fire, know this...the United States Council of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) has recently AGREED that the traditional English interpretation of Isaiah 7:14 is wrong, and that they are correcting it to reflect the Hebrew more accurately. The Pope/Vatican has yet to rule on their finding/request. According to the USCCB, it should read:

Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a maiden shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel.

Various translations are following the USCCB's lead. The NASB now includes the footnote for "maiden," and the NIV includes the footnote for "young woman."

Facts are facts, people.

The action of the US Council of Catholic Bishops sounds more titanic than it is. That's because changing the word(s) doesn't change doctrine in the least. Why so? Because it is clear in scripture that when the angel appeared to Mary, she answered that she had not known a man. So if one accepts the Bible is divine revelation, the conclusion remains the same.