GRPL PING!
Time to hang up the spurs on this issue. Those closer to the Apostles knew what they were talking about... *sigh*
Ottofire! Good to see you around!
This IS a joke, right?
12.1 is TOTALLY incorrect regarding lions:
Lionesses DO have more than one litter of cubs. The cub does NOT tear up its mother’s womb.
The gestation period of the lion is NO WHERE NEAR 26 MONTHS. It is, in fact, more like 26 weeks.
Lions are NOT born fully developed.
I just don’t get the *weight* placed on perpetual Virginity. I have seen people go so far as to say that if after Christ had been Born Mary later had relations *with her husband* that she would have been a whore!
To me the Nature of Christ and the Gospel of Christ has Nothing to do with Mary. As special as she must have been in Gods eyes for him to use her as he did its still completely insignificant to Christ.
Epiphany of the Salami!?
I have been trying to come up with a legitimate reason as to why I received a “Calvinist” apologetic and I can’t. I really have no interest in getting into debates with you people so I respectively ask that you take me off Calvinist Apolegetic pings.
I think my sig clearly designates what camp I am in.
Pax et bonum
That’s it??? That’s the whole deal??? Let me guess...This guy is a ‘church father’...
Yah'shua said :shalom b'SHEM Yah'shua HaMashiach AdonaiNAsbU Acts 20:29 "I know that after my departure
savage wolves will come in among you, not sparing the flock;
I’ve known lots of teens
who’d have lots of reasons to argue for
perpetual and renewable virginity.
. . . all such being about as reasonable and reality based in the final analysis as this rubber-Bible, rubber-history based bunch of fantasy.
IN SCRIPTURE
about Christ's blood half-brothers and sisters
to be absolutely conclusive.
The absolute nonsense about the words meaning otherwise just do not fit the logic nor context of the text.
And silliness expecting folks XXX years later to speak more authoritatively and accurately than
GOD'S WORD
is another level of blasphemy, imho.
They are nothing but bureaucratic, power-mongering groping for yet another rationalized, fantasized pseudo-justification for elite ecclesiastical power over the serfs.
That anyone would think that God or the authentic Mary would be anything but outraged is incredible.
Says who? You? How did you get to be an authority on the sources of Catholic doctrine?
Both Jerome and Pope Damasus slapped down Helvidius over the issue, and neither one referred to Epiphanius in their refutation.
The doctrine is pretty easy to prove from the Scriptures anyway; Jesus had no right to give Mary to John if he had younger (living) siblings. Mary's question to the angel makes no sense if she planned to have relations with her husband, etc.
Says who? You? How did you get to be an authority on the sources of Catholic doctrine?
Both Jerome and Pope Damasus slapped down Helvidius over the issue, and neither one referred to Epiphanius in their refutation.
The doctrine is pretty easy to prove from the Scriptures anyway; Jesus had no right to give Mary to John if he had younger (living) siblings. Mary's question to the angel makes no sense if she planned to have relations with her husband, etc.