Who checked?

Uphill Battle · Mar 2, 2007

Latreia said:
You have posted a thread with an OP that I have challenged and for reasons I have made clear.

The way in which you have used the quote of an obviously devout member is in question.

You are free to adamantly voice your concerns, I think I am, as well. And I am deeply troubled by the device of the OP in this thread. You accuse me of "hounding" you when I disagree with you on a public forum.

This seems to be demanding an advantage for yourself that you do not wish for others as well.

Shall I get upset every time you have responded to my posts?

Mariology is not a huge forum, I assume all the threads in it are available to all Christian members of CF.

BTW, do I understand that you are accusing me of violating a rule?

I did no such thing.

I asked you to stop.

It's very simple.

What upsets me is you don't address anything the posts have to say, you merely post over and over again on how "rude" or "derogatory" everything is. I have not been rude, I have not been disingenous.

I am NOT questioning the person, I am questioning the belief. Which, this thread has shown very clearly is a held belief. I could have simply typed it instead, this was quicker.

Mary of Bethany · Mar 2, 2007

Latreia,

the quote is from an Orthodox poster in a thread in GT.

Mary

simonthezealot · Mar 2, 2007

Latreia said:
In other words, it's fine for you to refuse to even post a link to the thread, which is there for all to read, all posts for public eyes, even non-members and unregistered readers.

To me, the question is therefore dishonest, because you do not provide adequate background to answer it properly.

His question had nothing to do with the poster, only the subject. If you'd like me to show his questions basis in the Catholic church here it is...

Magisterium: 1) Lateran Council, Oct, 649, DS 503:

"If anyone does not in accord with the Holy Fathers acknowledge the holy and ever virgin and immaculate Mary was really and truly the Mother of God, inasmuch as she, in the fullness of time,and without seed, conceived by the Holy Spirit, God in the Word Himself, who before all time was born of God the Father, and
without loss of integrity brought Him forth, and after His birth preserved her virginity inviolate, let him be condemned."

His question is fair! and really you should be able to show the history behind this knowledge or it should be dismissed.
Seriously! who checked?

Benedicta00 · Mar 2, 2007

Uphill Battle said:
I think the reference is to the "remained a virgin until Jesus was born passage."

you know the one that is argues so much, is until doesn't mean neccessarily that something happened after...

Well it don't. If I say I will be here until I go to lunch, does that mean I'm never coming back again?

But the wording that it was Joseph who kept her a virgin is amusing to me.

Uphill Battle · Mar 2, 2007

Benedicta00 said:
Well it don't. If I say I will be here until I go to lunch, does that mean I'm never coming back again?

But the wording that it was Joseph who kept her a virgin is amusing to me.

no, but it means you leave. So, your status changes at the UNTIL.

yes, amusing wording.

Latreia · Mar 2, 2007

Uphill Battle said:
I did no such thing.

I asked you to stop.

It's very simple.

What upsets me is you don't address anything the posts have to say, you merely post over and over again on how "rude" or "derogatory" everything is. I have not been rude, I have not been disingenous.

I am NOT questioning the person, I am questioning the belief. Which, this thread has shown very clearly is a held belief. I could have simply typed it instead, this was quicker.

Since you are able to ignore or admit any credibility to me as a Christian or as a full member of Christian Forums, I am not surprised that the thoughts in my posts are also ignored as untrue and irrelevent, although many do, in fact, appreciate my contributions.

As a gesture of good-will, I have changed my avatar so that we can all remember that the Blessed Virgin Mary is not just about words and ideas and misinterpretations of the life and significance of both her and her Son.

Perhaps by a representation of her divine grace and her visage of a blessed woman, we can keep in mind of the reality of whom we are discussing on this forum.

Benedicta00 · Mar 2, 2007

Uphill Battle said:
no, but it means you leave. So, your status changes at the UNTIL.

yes, amusing wording.

Mary's statues changed... she was a pregnant virgin until she delivered then she was a non pregnant virgin again.

Uphill Battle · Mar 2, 2007

Latreia said:
Since you are able to ignore or admit any credibility to me as a Christian or as a full member of Christian Forums, I am not surprised that the thoughts in my posts are also ignored as untrue and irrelevent, although many do, in fact, appreciate my contributions.

As a gesture of good-will, I have changed my avatar so that we can all remember that the Blessed Virgin Mary is not just about words and ideas and misinterpretations of the life and significance of both her and her Son.

Perhaps by a representation of her divine grace and her visage of a blessed woman, we can keep in mind of the reality of whom we are discussing on this forum.

who ever denied you as a Christian?

who ever denied you as a full member?

Latreia · Mar 2, 2007

Uphill Battle said:
Is there a specific reason why you are traipsing around the board and hounding me?

I gave my reasons. STOP hounding me.

BTW... you can see from the responses on this thread that it IS a held belief. I didn't make it up.

Am I "traipsing around the board and hounding" you?

Is it possible that I am actually participating in discussions with honesty and consideration of the faiths of others?

Checkpoints:

Character: In a brown dress, holding a Holy Bible, eyes closed in deep veneration, tears for my Saviour's suffering for me. Nails from the cross at my unworthy feet. My Lord Jesus, present in His image and in my every breath.

Avatar: The dear and lovely image of Mary, Mother of God. Thinking of her with gratitude for her as for all women whom God created for the good of mankind.

Signature: Speaks for itself, of greeting and love.

CF History and Homepage. There is more evidence, a preponderance, I think, to clearly represent my real
concerns, faith, and dedication to my fellow Christians.

There are many, both members and staff, who are well acquainted with me over the years.

You may slight and demean my character, but you cannot force distortions about who I am and what I stand for, not only on CF, but those who know me in real life as well.

Hope this will ease your anger.

IamAdopted · Mar 2, 2007

Benedicta00 said:
Mary's statues changed... she was a pregnant virgin until she delivered then she was a non pregnant virgin again.

Tee hee.. This strikes me as funny.. And how was Jesus born if not from the way all babies are born. therefore making Mary a non virgin because her hymen would not be in tact.. Unless of course He was born from a cesereian birth. But I don't see that in the scripture.. So therefore He must have been born the normal way.. Wouldn't you think?

Uphill Battle · Mar 2, 2007

Benedicta00 said:
Mary's statues changed... she was a pregnant virgin until she delivered then she was a non pregnant virgin again.

you aren't using the subject of the sentance.

your example doesn't match up.

The subject, is that Joseph and Mary didn't have sexual relations UNTIL after Jesus was born.

That is not the same.

The status is not the virginity, it is the absence, or presence, of sexual activity.

CaliforniaJosiah · Mar 2, 2007

Latreia · Mar 2, 2007

CaliforniaJosiah said:
Quote:
what better proof could Mary offer that Christ was born from her virgin womb than for her to remain forever virgin. Her hyman was not torn during his birth. She remained fully intact. (How did he get out? I don't know but it's a miracle!) Yet they had seen her with child, witnessed that he had been born.

Some questions:

1. "Proof?" To whom? How would that proof be supplied to whomever you say it was proof to?

2. Who was given this proof at her death or nondeath in order to verify the Perpetual Virginity of Mary? How do you know?

Thank you.

Pax!

- Josiah

Josiah, if you know whom you are addressing that posted that, could you please inform the rest of us?

That is a quote from an unknown member in an unspecified thread, so who are you talking to?

You also seem to challenge a member who is unable to answer, since the quote used in the OP may have been placed there without the knowledge of the member who originally posted it.

See the problem? It is like talking to a answering machine.

Uphill Battle · Mar 2, 2007

Latreia said:
Josiah, if you know whom you are addressing that posted that, could you please inform the rest of us?

That is a quote from an unknown member in an unspecified thread, so who are you talking to?

You also seem to challenge a member who is unable to answer, since the quote used in the OP may have been placed there without the knowledge of the member who originally posted it.

See the problem? It is like talking to a answering machine.

This has been addressed. It is about the belief. NOT THE POSTER.

Benedicta00 · Mar 2, 2007

IamAdopted said:
Tee hee.. This strikes me as funny.. And how was Jesus born if not from the way all babies are born. therefore making Mary a non virgin because her hymen would not be in tact.. Unless of course He was born from a cesereian birth. But I don't see that in the scripture.. So therefore He must have been born the normal way.. Wouldn't you think?

The Hyman thing is not my speculation.

Uphill Battle · Mar 2, 2007

Uphill Battle said:
There is a belief among EO that I have seen whereas they claim that Mary, upon giving birth to Christ, had her hymen remain intact, despite the birth.

Can I ask how was this even remotely verified?

****edited to keep the dead horse from being beaten again.

now maybe we can get on with what this thread is REALLY about.

Latreia · Mar 2, 2007

Uphill Battle said:
This has been addressed. It is about the belief. NOT THE POSTER.

You miss the point. If that was the case, you should have taken time to paraphrase the question in your own words. That you cannot see how unfair it is to quote verbatim another member whose faith is so obvious to start debate on another forum without that member's consent and participation is very sad.

Why do staff try so hard to separate members from their own feelings and depersonalize thoughts posted by real people about their faiths? Members are admonished very strongly by staff about consideration and respect for others, all the while displaying defensive indifference toward complaints, as irritating.

How right is it to try to surgically remove a person's own thoughts and rights to their posts?

Just once, could you think you may be in error with this attitude of entitlement to just use others to bounce your views and agendas off of?

Just a glimmer of comprehension about caring how others really feel?

Benedicta00 · Mar 2, 2007

Uphill Battle said:
now maybe we can get on with what this thread is REALLY about.

Why do you ask this? No one checked, in those days they weren't any OBGYN's. What would prompt you to even ask this?

...it is just believed on faith. Not everyone needs physical verification to believe stuff you know...

Uphill Battle · Mar 2, 2007

Benedicta00 said:
Why do you ask this? No one checked, in those days they weren't any OBGYN's. What would prompt you to even ask this?

...it is just believed on faith. Not everyone needs physical verification to believe stuff you know...

ok then... what's to stop us from believing ANYTHING we darn well please then?

I'd like to know the historicity of the claim.

Rdr Iakovos · Mar 2, 2007

Uphill Battle said:
no, but it means you leave. So, your status changes at the UNTIL.

yes, amusing wording.

Jesus tells us that He will be with us to the close of the age. Do you propose that He will then leave us on our own?

Of course not. "Until" is not action-specific.

Who checked?

Well-Known Member

Only one thing is needful.

have you not read,what God has spoken unto you?

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Gone

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Gone

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Gone

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Gone

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency