Posted on 05/07/2008 8:53:09 AM PDT by Manfred the Wonder Dawg
Both direct and circumstantial evidence in God's Word, the Bible, clearly disproves the Roman Catholic Church claim that Mary, the mother of Jesus, remained a virgin, not only prior to, but during and after our Lord's miraculous birth. It was this "perpetual virginity" doctrine and several others that forced the infamous 16th century Council of Trent to declare "Sacred Tradition" equal in every way to the divine Scriptures, and to arrogate to itself alone the right to interpret both Scripture and so-called "Sacred Tradition." As we review the Scriptural evidence applicable to this false doctrine, it will become crystal clear why the Vatican insists that its members abide by Rome's determination of what certain controversial Scriptures actually mean.
Our first inkling that the lifetime virginity doctrine is only a myth is found in the first chapter of Matthew's Gospel. In verse 18 and following, God's Word tells us that Mary was espoused (engaged) to Joseph, but that, "before they came together she was found with child of the Holy Ghost." In the original Greek, the phrase "came together" is contained in the word, sunerchomai, {soon-er'-khom-ahee} whose meaning to the Jews of that era (Matthew was a Jew) meant conjugal cohabitation. A modern paraphrase of the Bible's statement would go something like this: "Mary was found to be pregnant" before they consummated their marriage through normal sexual intercourse.
(Excerpt) Read more at contenderministries.org ...
Silly pointless argument. If you study the words in the original language, the verb used describes her virginity up to the point of marriage without making any qualifications of what happened after marriage. There is not clear information in the Bible either way. Personally, I think she was a Godly woman who would have fulfilled her marriage duties, but that’s just me.
Actually the Protestant Reformers themselves—Martin Luther, John Calvin, and Ulrich Zwingli—honored the perpetual virginity of Mary and recognized it as the teaching of the Bible, as have other, more modern Protestants.
Is this really important?
It’s not a “hate site.”
It is, however, filled with hate.
I don’t know if what you say of Calvin, et al. but all that would show is that they are imperfect men who fail to comprehend all od has revealed - kind of like you, me, and the Pope.
Yeah. Fair and balanced.
“The Roman Catholic doctrine stating that Mary the mother of Jesus retained her virginity after Christ’s birth and for the rest of her life is just plain heresy.
Worse, it is a blasphemy of the Holy Spirit, author of the Scriptures, because it in effect accuses the Word of God of lying to us.”
I’d hate to see an antiCatholic site.
Well, the Bible never mentions Jesus’ siblings as being virgin born. That would seem to me to be a detail not likely to be left out if they were.
I think it is, because Marian theology can only serve to detract from proper focus on and worship of the Lord Jesus.
How did she have other children? Didn’t Jesus have brothers and sisters?
Evidently.
Nobody except Jesus is ever identified as Mary's biological child in Scripture. To claim that they are is to put something above Scripture, something you guys claim you don't do.
“The perpetual virginity of Mary has always been reconciled with the biblical references to Christ’s brethren through a proper understanding of the meaning of the term “brethren.” The understanding that the brethren of the Lord were Jesus’ stepbrothers (children of Joseph) rather than half-brothers (children of Mary) was the most common one until the time of Jerome (fourth century). It was Jerome who introduced the possibility that Christ’s brethren were actually his cousins, since in Jewish idiom cousins were also referred to as “brethren.” The Catholic Church allows the faithful to hold either view, since both are compatible with the reality of Mary’s perpetual virginity.”
Manfred for a moment I thought you meant the posted thread. I guess that was too much to wish for. I would love to see discussions between Catholics and Protestants not turn into hatefests. But we have to save up our prayers for miracles for the really big stuff, like Cancer.
Not so.
This is how it works...
Non-Catholic site stating Catholic beliefs=heresy, cool.
Catholic site stating the same about non-Catholics , Hate Site.
Just the FReeper way.
You mean like fundamentalists' endless squabbling over the fine points of eschatology? Pretrib, posttrib, amill, postmill, microchips are the mark of the beast, all of that silliness?
Pot, kettle, black.
seems like just more of the BS “lost book” arguments derived from cenuries old discredited or unprovable sources.
http://www.gotquestions.org/Jesus-siblings.html
The Bible tells us that Jesus had four brothers: James, Joseph, Simon, and Judas (Matthew 13:55). The Bible also tells us that Jesus had sisters, but they are not named or numbered (Matthew 13:56).
Parthenogenesis.
I believe you are correct. I'll have to look it up, but I recall reading that in comparing the language, the word 'virgin' in this context translates directly to 'young woman', there is nothing other than tradition that holds to 'lifetime virginity'. I personally find this a pointless debate because Christ is the focus, not Mary. This just removes the focus from Christ and somehow, makes sex, even after marriage, a sin or at least something to look down upon, which contradicts the rest of the bible.
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.