LOOK!!!
GOD and his Mother caused the sun to do that!!!
Posted on 03/01/2016 6:48:33 PM PST by truthfinder9
The disciples know who she is.
Of course they know who she is. She’s the mother of their Teacher and Lord. Over the previous forty days, He had been giving them instructions through the Holy Spirit and presenting Himself alive to them by many proofs after He had suffered, appearing to them and speaking about the kingdom of God. After telling them that they will receive power when the holy Spirit comes upon them, they saw Him lifted up, and a cloud take Him from their sight. And now they are with the mother of their Master. Why wouldn’t they have a great deal of honor and respect for her?
Regarding the brothers of Jesus being the children of Mary and Joseph, they could be. Scripture does not say that Mary and Joseph did not have other children. Scripture does not say that the brothers were adopted. It is not written that Joseph was a widower and these brothers were issue from that marriage. Scripture does not say anything other than that they are brothers of Jesus. What was that you were saying about reading anything else into it?
I guess you disagree with Paul when he says he met James, the Lord's brother.
We know Joseph and Mary consummated the marriage based on the text in Matthew when it says he kept her a virgin until Jesus was born. After Jesus was born they consummated the marriage like any other newlywed couple.
However, catholics base their incorrect teaching on Mary remaining a virgin forever based on their incorrect understanding of the passage in Luke when Mary asks Gabriel,"how will this be since I am a virgin", which for some erroneous reasoning they understand to be a vow of perpetual virginity. There is nothing in the context of the passage to suggest what catholicism teaches.
All Mary is asking is how will she conceive a child as she's a virgin. Mary has been a good girl. She knows the birds and the bees.
Joseph and Mary had other children.
He may not have cited chapter and verse, but he did refer to the upper room. is this another one of your famous rushes to judgement?
They sure do seem to have a lot of rules. I think one of the rules is not talking much to non Amish. I really don't know what they know about the bible though. Maybe they have a lot of weird beliefs like that God the Father has a wife and parents and grand parents etc.
He may not have cited chapter and verse, but he did refer to the upper room. is this another one of your famous rushes to judgement?
Well, on the Day of Pentecost we do the Holy Spirit gifted the believers, which we know for sure were the 12 disciples based on Acts 2:14, to be able to speak in tongues.
These were foreign languages as also evidenced by Acts 2:6-11.
The question to be asked now is why?
From the text we can see it was to advance the Gospel as indicated by Acts 2:11 when Luke writes of "speaking of the mighty deeds of God."
Is this a requirement for salvation or a sign of salvation?
We can say that only a believer would be able to be gifted via the Spirit with this gift.
What we cannot say is that ALL believers are gifted with this gift. The Word tells us that not all will have this gift. Some will, some will not.
Pentecostals tend to insist that speaking in tongues is always the initial physical sign of receiving Spirit baptism. This is not supported in the Word.
Paul has made it clear that not all believers receive the gift of tongues in 1 Corinthians 12:11. "But one and the same Spirit works all these things, distributing to each one individually just as He wills." And again in 1 Corinthians 12:30, "All do not have gifts of healings do they? All do not speak with tongues do they? All do not interpret to they?"
Context of Scripture will tell you the answer to these type of questions.
Mary was clearly a common name in those days.
The other Mary’s were also identified with phrases or names.
I agree. There are several women named Mary. Several of them played important roles in the Passion and Resurrection narratives. While it is likely that they were among the women who were part of the first community of Jerusalem, their specific names are not given.
Only John puts the mother of Jesus at the cross, and does not even mention her name. Jesus gives her the role as the mother of the disciple whom He loved, and that disciple takes her into his home. She is not mentioned in the Resurrection narrative. But for whatever reason, the Holy Spirit inspired Luke to clearly reveal that Mary the mother of Jesus was part of the first community of Jerusalem.
If it is; then you can produce the evidence; right?
LOOK!!!
GOD and his Mother caused the sun to do that!!!
No no NO!
That would be them thar MORMON folk!
Well; MORMONs speak in tongues; too!
* Articles of Faith #7, March 1842; Pearl of Great Price;: "We believe in the gift of tongues, prophecy, revelation, visions, healing, interpretation of tongues, and so forth.
* Omni 1:25: "...exhorting all men to come unto God, the Holy One of Israel, and believe in prophesying, and in revelations, and in the ministering of angels, and in the gift of speaking with tongues, and in the gift of interpreting languages, and in all things which are good; for there is nothing which is good save it comes from the Lord; and that which is evil cometh from the devil."
* Alma 9:21: "Having been visited by the Spirit of God; having conversed with angels, and having been spoken unto by the voice of the Lord; and having the spirit of prophecy, and the spirit of revelation, and also many gifts, the gift of speaking with tongues, and the gift of preaching, and the gift of the Holy Ghost, and the gift of translation;"
* Mormon 9:24: "And these signs shall follow them that believein my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues; they shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick and they shall recover;"
* Moroni 10:15-17: "And again, to another, all kinds of tongues; And again, to another, the interpretation of languages and of divers kinds of tongues. And all these gifts come by the Spirit of Christ; and they come unto every man severally, according as he will."
* DC 46:24-26, March 1831: "And again, it is given to some to speak with tongues; And to another is given the interpretation of tongues. And all these gifts come from God, for the benefit of the children of God."
WHAT DOES MORMON HISTORY SAY? ---> http://www.frontiernet.net/~bcmmin/tongue1.htm
Well...
...it looks like kttp://www.frontiernet.net/~bcmmin/tongue1.htm didn’t pay their bill.
Try THIS link instead.
Your Comment: I guess you disagree with Paul when he says he met James, the Lord’s brother.
My Response: Paul wrote in Galatians that he saw James the brother of the Lord. This could mean that Mary gave birth to James. But it is not written in Scripture that Mary gave birth to James. To say that she did so is reading into Scripture that which is not written.
Your Comment: We know Joseph and Mary consummated the marriage based on the text in Matthew when it says he kept her a virgin until Jesus was born. After Jesus was born they consummated the marriage like any other newlywed couple.
My Response: Matthew writes that Joseph had no relations with Mary until she bore a son. But Matthew does not write what happened after she bore a son. They might have had relations, Mary might have conceived, she might have carried other children to term. To say that Mary did give birth to other children is to read into Scripture that which is not written.
Your Comment However, Catholics base their incorrect teaching on Mary remaining a virgin forever based on their incorrect understanding of the passage in Luke when Mary asks Gabriel, “how will this be since I am a virgin”, which for some erroneous reasoning they understand to be a vow of perpetual virginity. There is nothing in the context of the passage to suggest what Catholicism teaches.
All Mary is asking is how will she conceive a child as she’s a virgin. Mary has been a good girl. She knows the birds and the bees.
My response: Luke wrote that Mary said: “How can this be, since I have no relations with a man?” As you indicate, this is an expression of her present condition. Mary might have remained a virgin or she might not have remained a virgin. To say that she remained a virgin forever is reading into Scripture that which is not written. To say it is an incorrect understanding is also to read into Scripture something that is not written.
Your comment: Joseph and Mary had other children.
My response: It is written in Scripture that Mary conceived of the Holy Spirit and gave birth to a Son whom the angel instructed is to be named Jesus. It is not written in Scripture that Mary conceived of and gave birth to other children, by Joseph or by anyone else. It can be inferred that she had other children, but to assert that she did is to read into Scripture that which is not written.
Yeah, like that Mitt Romney character who was so proud of Trump's endorsement 4 years ago.
Weird beliefs lead to weird behavior.
The context of all these passages tells us this.
My response: Luke wrote that Mary said: “How can this be, since I have no relations with a man?” As you indicate, this is an expression of her present condition. Mary might have remained a virgin or she might not have remained a virgin. To say that she remained a virgin forever is reading into Scripture that which is not written. To say it is an incorrect understanding is also to read into Scripture something that is not written.
However, official roman catholic church teaching does just that. The position of the rcc is that Mary is avowing a life of perpetual virginity. This is in no way substantiated by the text. That is the error of roman catholicism.
If it is; then you can produce the evidence; right?
It is not; therefore, I cannot produce the evidence.
I can refer you to the Proto Evangelium of James. But that’s not Holy Scripture.
You've just got a thousand candles lit for you!
Ah; I see.
And put it all together and we see Joseph and Mary had children.
One can assume that Joseph and Mary had children. But there is insufficient evidence from Scripture to definitively assert that they had children. Similarly, there is insufficient evidence from Scripture to definitively assert that they did not have children. There just isn’t enough written about it in Scripture to substantiate it one way or another.
Good grief. It never ceases to amaze me that roman catholicism will so readily accept a non-biblical source as evidence upon which to build a dogma over the actual Word itself.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.