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.
I, for one was firstborn for several years before my brother came along. A cousin in law was a firstborn and never had any siblings. The word 'firstborn' simply does not require any siblings to follow. To be a firstborn does not require a secondborn just as to be a secondborn does not require a thirdborn.chevyontheriver,
re: "To be 'firstborn' does not mean that there has to be a 'secondborn'. Could be an only child. The 'firstborn' argument against Mary having other children SHOULD be seen as deficient. Strangely it comes up again and again by people who think it has validity."
Can you provide any actual examples where the term "first born" was used when it absolutely couldn't have been implying that there had been a subsequent birth?
Colossians 1:15-21
“And He is the image of the invisible God, the first-born of all creation. For by Him all things were created, both in the heavens and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities — all things have been created by Him and for Him. And He is before all things, and in Him all things hold together. He is also head of the body, the church; and He is the beginning, the first-born from the dead; so that He Himself might come to have first place in everything. For it was the Father's good pleasure for all the fullness to dwell in Him, and through Him to reconcile all things to Himself, having made peace through the blood of His cross; through Him, I say, whether things on earth or things in heaven.”
The Gospel names 'the Beloved Disciple' without actually naming who that is. Tradition identifies John as the Beloved Disciple, the one whom Jesus loved.truefiction1,
re: "...just before Jesus died he gave his mother his beloved disciple John to be her son in His stead. (John 19:26-27)"
I don't see where John 19:26-27 mentions anyone named John
What does God say?
Ephesians 5:
Wives, be subject to your own husbands, as to the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife, as Christ also is the head of the church, He Himself being the Savior of the body. But as the church is subject to Christ, so also the wives ought to be to their husbands in everything.
Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ also loved the church and gave Himself up for her, so that He might sanctify her, having cleansed her by the washing of water with the word, that He might present to Himself the church in all her glory, having no spot or wrinkle or any such thing; but that she would be holy and blameless. So husbands ought also to love their own wives as their own bodies. He who loves his own wife loves himself; for no one ever hated his own flesh, but nourishes and cherishes it, just as Christ also does the church, because we are members of His body. FOR THIS REASON A MAN SHALL LEAVE HIS FATHER AND MOTHER AND SHALL BE JOINED TO HIS WIFE, AND THE TWO SHALL BECOME ONE FLESH.
There is no sin in a husband and wife loving each other and engaging in acts of love which were given to man and woman from the beginning. I disagree with the condemnation of marital sex as something dirty or sinful. The Bible makes no such claim.
The m word?????How can that be true (the idea of their theology unbibical), when obviously some of the curse words people say, like the m word, are so foul and obscene? To me they arent anything but sins.
I'm gonna slam-dunk this whole debate.
ready?
When the RCC places "church tradition" on equal footing with the scriptures, there is no longer ANY solid basis on which to debate.
Mary "was overshadowed by the Holy Spirit" (Luke 1:35). The same wording was used for the Shekinah that overshadowed The Ark of The Covenant.
(1) And Mary "conceived of the Holy Spirit".
Does the Holy Spirit do One-night-stands?
Does The Holy Spirit do divorce?
IMPOSSIBLE! Mary is The Bride of The Holy Spirit (Joseph is her protector)
(2)In this moment of conception Mary became The Ark of The New & Eternal Covenant.
Now think about this.........
What 3 objects were in The Ark of The Old Covenant?
(a)The Word of God on the stone tablets;
(b)Manna
&(c) Aaron's priestly Rod.
These three inanimate objects made the Ark was so holy that Uzzah was struck dead for touching it.
By the power of the Holy Spirit, and with Mary's consent, Mary gave living flesh to these three things in one person....Jesus, who is (a)The Word (b) The bread of Life & (c) The High Priest
So Mary is plainly The Living Ark of The New Covenant containing and giving her flesh to, The Living Word and The Living Bread of Heaven (Jesus) & The High priest.
Now, if you were Joseph, what would you do? Seriously?
The trouble is that, despite Mary's prophecy, in Luke "That henceforth all generations shall call me blessed" Protestants drifted from this (Not Luther or Calvin incidentally).
They just don't really think about Mary & Typology (Look it up in google or you-tube).
If The Old Ark was holy & venerated The New Ark of Christ is much holier & much more to be venerated.
I see everywhere on the internet Protestants wondering why/how "The Ark" is in Heaven with God in Revelations???.....It's Mary.! It's so obvious!
That's what the Catholic/Orthodox doctrine of the Assumption is about.
Sceptical?
Just read Revelations without the added chapter divisions. What does the verse immediately before the sign of the queen appearing in heaven say?......."Then God's temple in heaven was opened, and within his temple was seen the ark of his covenant. And there came flashes of lightning, rumblings, peals of thunder, an earthquake and a severe hailstorm."
Take the scales of hatred of Mary (or Catholicism) from your eyes.
Sorry, but your slam dunk went off the back of the rim!
Why you may ask? Because for almost 400 years there was no written New Testament to fall back on. All of the apostles and disciples taught orally for the first 400 years. (2 Thess. 2:15; Luke 10:16; Rom 10:17; 1 Pet. 1:25It is a mistake on your part to limit "Christ’s word" to the written word only or to suggest that all his teachings were reduced to writing. The Bible nowhere supports either notion.
Further, it is clear that the oral teaching of Christ would last until the end of time. "’But the word of the Lord abides for ever.’ That word is the good news which was preached to you" (1 Pet. 1:25). Note that the word has been "preached"—that is, communicated orally. This would endure. It would not be supplanted by a written record like the Bible (supplemented, yes, but not supplanted), and would continue to have its own authority.
This is made clear when the apostle Paul tells Timothy: "What you have heard from me before many witnesses entrust to faithful men who will be able to teach others also" (2 Tim. 2:2). Here we see the first few links in the chain of apostolic tradition that has been passed down intact from the apostles to our own day. Paul instructed Timothy to pass on the oral teachings (traditions) that he had received from the apostle. He was to give these to men who would be able to teach others, thus perpetuating the chain. Paul gave this instruction not long before his death (2 Tim. 4:6–8), as a reminder to Timothy of how he should conduct his ministry.
Catholic Tradition stands with Scripture in forming the one single deposit of the Faith. For Catholics, Sacred Tradition is not in opposition to Scripture: they compliment and confirm one another. Vatican II’s Dei Verbum speaks of “a close connection and communication between sacred tradition and Sacred Scripture”: “both of them… [flow] from the same divine wellspring.”
It says that “Sacred Scripture is the word of God inasmuch as it is consigned to writing under the inspiration of the divine Spirit, while sacred tradition takes the word of God entrusted by Christ the Lord and the Holy Spirit to the Apostles, and hands it on to their successors in its full purity.” The Church, “led by the light of the Spirit of truth, …may in proclaiming it preserve this word of God faithfully, explain it, and make it more widely known.” (Dei Verbum, 9) This statement reveals another key aspect of Catholic Tradition: it is linked to the active work of the Holy Spirit.
With that being said, your missed "slam dunk" was rebounded, taken the length of the court, and was drilled as a three pointer...... nothing but net!!
So then it is logically inescapable that The Protestant has NO infallible truth!The Protestant perspective is that Scripture is infallible, but Man's understanding is not.
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?