Posted on 05/31/2011 11:34:50 AM PDT by sigzero
Mary was a virgin who was to conceive by being overshadowed by the Holy Spirit and give birth to the Son of God. Few in Christian realms would deny Mary was a virgin and remained a virgin through pregnancy and the birth of Christ. This was the ultimate fulfillment of a prophecy from Isaiah:
Therefore the Lord Himself will give you a sign: Behold, the virgin shall conceive and bear a Son, and shall call His name Immanuel. (Isaiah 7:14, emphasis added)
However, Mary’s virginity after the birth of Christ can become a heated debate in some circles. Though some may think this is a Roman Catholic versus Protestant view, it is not. Many Protestants, including people like Martin Luther and John Calvin, have held to Mary remaining a virgin for the duration of her life. Let’s look at the issues in a little more detail.
(Excerpt) Read more at answersingenesis.org ...
Oh, so now you know that “the devil” is controlling my posts? What if he is using “asymmetrical warfare” against you instead of me?
Frankly I didn't understand your response to my obvious point. You were making a conclusion about a future event based on a statement made in the present tense.
So your conclusion is WRONG. I don't care where you copied it from, you used it to TRY to make YOUR point. Maybe you could prove your point in another way, but this dog won't hunt.
Also, ScriptureCatholic? There is your problem. Man telling you what scripture means instead of just reading it for yourself with the help of the Holy Spirit for understanding. No wonder you are confused.
You see I went to biblegateway.com, you know, God's Word.
But, there is still a “till” in the text. Did the angel not communicate God's message accurately, down to the word?
i have never met anyone who believes Mary was not ever-virgin and was orthodox in their belief in Baptism, The Real Presence and The Church. They claim to follow “sola scriptura”, but where the Scriptures clearly teach baptismal regeneration, The Eucharist being the Body of Christ and there only being One Church, they twist Scripture into a pretzel, to follow the 16th century tradition of men. It never ceases to amaze me, i can only believe these people truly don’t believe Jesus sent the Holy Spirit to lead the Church into all truth.
why do you believe Jesus gave Mary to St John to take care of, if he had living brothers?
The Church are the believers not an organizaton. He no longer lives in temples made by man.
Some things, like "Trinity" and "Ever Virgin," are not written on the face of scripture, but understood from the earliest Christians as part of the deposit of Faith, which comes from Scripture AND Tradition, as Scripture attests.
Some things simply are anti-scriptural, like the whole Sola Scriptura straw man you are arguing from.
The Church is made up of believers absolutely, but if you deny baptism is for the remission of sins, are you really a believer?
The Scripture does not say so my thoughts would only be opinions. The brothers could be dead or maybe they weren’t present at Jesus’ execution. Maybe they weren’t believers or didn’t have the means to care for her. There could be many reasons. I consider some of my church members closer “family” than I do my biological family memebers that do not know Christ.
This example does not prove that Jesus had no brothers.
"Then Philip ran up to the chariot and heard the man reading Isaiah the prophet. “Do you understand what you are reading?” Philip asked. “How can I,” he said, “unless someone explains it to me?” So he invited Philip to come up and sit with him."
instead of just reading it for yourself with the help of the Holy Spirit for understanding.
"Bear in mind that our Lord’s patience means salvation, just as our dear brother Paul also wrote you with the wisdom that God gave him. He writes the same way in all his letters, speaking in them of these matters. His letters contain some things that are hard to understand, which ignorant and unstable people distort, as they do the other Scriptures, to their own destruction. Therefore, dear friends, since you have been forewarned, be on your guard so that you may not be carried away by the error of the lawless and fall from your secure position."
"While he yet talked to the people, behold, his mother and his brethren stood without, desiring to speak with him. Then one said unto him, Behold, thy mother and thy brethren stand without, desiring to speak with thee. But he answered and said unto him that told him, Who is my mother? and who are my brethren? And he stretched forth his hand toward his disciples, and said, Behold my mother and my brethren! For whosoever shall do the will of my Father which is in heaven, the same is my brother, and sister, and mother."
I present all six verses to make it clear that the first group of brethren are his physical brothers not spiritual brothers. He contrasts the former with the latter, his disciples and all who "shall do the will of his Father."
What are you talking about. Who denied that we should be baptized?
As good as biblegateway is, I sometimes use blueletterbible because it includes strongs numbers and the original greek and hebrew with meanings and occurences.
One can get a good education just rooting around in the original languages an hour or so each day.
The dialog from Scripture only makes sense if she intended to remain a virgin.
Other explanations are strained. “She was confused by the angel so she forgot where babies come from”.
“She knew what the angel was going to say before he said it”.
“She knew that conceiving a child meant a Virgin Birth but humored the angel by playing dumb”.
All silly arguments made worse by a failure to own the implications of the statements you make.
God will straighten it out for all of us when we meet. We do agree that Christ was born of a virgin, and that by accepting his sacrifice our sin is forgiven. If He meant for us to have full understanding, we would have it.
i hope you agree from Scripture that the Church is the pillar of truth and Jesus sent the Holy Spirit to lead the Church to all truth. if so, how can the whole Church have not understood the Scriptures as you have for the first 16 centuries of it’s existence? Where was the Holy Spirit? i bet if pressed further, it wouldn’t suprise me if there are many doctrines that were unknown to the Scriptures or the Church for 1,500 years that are held to nonetheless.
yes, but are you baptized for the remission of sins as Peter preached in Acts and Paul was told in Acts 22 or do you follow the 16th century heresy that baptism is a “first act of obedience” useless ceremony?
“Trinity”, “Sola Scriptura” and, to a lesser degree, “ever virgin” are mere labels. Sometimes their meaning is clearly sufficient enough for the phrase to fairly completely “mean what it says”. Ever virgin does that. It means, basically, that the person to which it is applied never had sex in their entire life. The other two are deep with subtle meaning and, on their own, don’t mean much unless used in the company of like minded people on the subject. That is, the word “Trinity” is used by one group to mean one thing while used by another to mean something similar, but different.
I will say this: I’ll take the bible as gospel before I will believe any man, simply due to his title. It is not only my right, but as a Christian it is also my responsibility. But I do understand that this is not the Catholic way. They believe, like the Mormons, that their leaders are placed by God and to be honored and believed accordingly. I think Islam does that too, come to think of it. As for me, I believe the believers are the “Church” and gather together in His name. It is, like the apostles, a loosely formed organization. It brings its own problems, e,g, Judas, but the rewards are greater.
It doesn’t make sense that she was engaged to be married if she intended to remain a virgin. However, I now understand your first post and I did not before.
I don’t think Mary was confused and forgot where babies came from. I think she needed an explanation about where THIS baby was going to come from because she was not yet married and had not yet been with a man.
The Perpetual Virginity of Mary has been taught from Apostolic times, and recorded since the second century in Christian writings, and was universally held among all Christians until 1500 years later. That Mary was not a Perpetual Virgin is a new false gospel that comes with the heresies attendant with protestantism.
It is you who proclaim a new false gospel. Therefore the onus is on you to prove from scripture that Mary had relations with Joseph after the birth of Christ.
That you cannot do.
this is why Jesus gave us a visible Church, we are meant to have unity in the Church and not argue over the Scriptures.
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.