Posted on 06/14/2011 6:53:10 AM PDT by narses
Homosexuality is an abonimation in Gods eyes. So, no ... I don’t support it. Did you assume that I did because I am not Catholic?
this doctrine, by itself, doesnt impact ones standing before God with respect to their salvation
This doctrine is not a stand alone, but it is an integral piece in the mosaic of faith and salvation begun by Jesus and continuously confirmed and proclaimed by the Church, at Christ’s command. And again, it is not meant to defend Mary but her Son. And conversely, when one attacks this doctrine, one attacks not just the Church and not just Mary, but her Son. The Church ALWAYS focuses its exegesis and theology on the person of Jesus.
The Apostles did not accept Jesus as Messiah based on one thing He did or said. In fact, it was one particular thing He said that caused many to reject Him and leave Him.
Peter says in the Gospel of John, “To whom shall we go? You have the words of eternal life. You are the Christ. We have come to believe that you are the Holy One of God.”
How would an infant respond to the order to fast for two or three days before their baptism?
You are clouding a relatively simple issue. You have at least one church father that provides evidence that they were not all monolithic in their beliefs.
“One may truly believe that one is merely mocking Mary and through her the Church, but in believing thus, one would be wrong.”
I’m not mocking Mary- just the distorted relationship some people have toward her.
She was chosen by God to give birth to Jesus. In that, she was blessed by God.
She was chosen by Joseph to be his wife. In that, she was blessed by God.
She raised Jesus in her maternal role. In that, she was blessed by God
She lived as a wife to Joseph. In that, she was blessed by God.
Why so insistent that they had sexual relations? Because the God they serve instituted marriage, defined it, and included the sex act as an integral part of it.
Were Joseph and Mary married or not? Was Jesus raised by a dysfunctional family that did not partake in the act that defines marriage? An act, whose absence, the Catholic Church recognizes as a qualifier for anullment (recognizing that a true marriage did not exist).
It is far more compatible with scripture that were Mary to remain ever-virgin that she would have borne Jesus out of wedlock, instead of God destroying the institution of marriage in the relationship of his mother and her husband.
Will
But, scripture and logic are always overpowered by tradition- at least when it comes to Mary
And secondly, it's not "at least one", but "only one" and lastly Tertullian wasn't a Church Father.
I assumed nothing — I don’t make personal interpretations, I asked you “.do you support that? “
You’re missing the point ... thats ok ... I think we were done several posts ago. Regards.
And I answered definitively.
Consensus Patrum overrides all individual Church Fathers, and remains so to this day. But that is why individuals who attack the Church can sometimes point to a Church Father. Origen eventually believed in the subordination of the Persons of the Trinity, universal Salvation, and a few other heresies.
Baptism is followed in the Church by Confirmation of the Holy Spirit. I don't see any fasting of infants, though. The Catechism beginning at 1213 outlines Baptism and is followed by Confirmation.
This was already discussed on this thread.
Victorinus did not believe that the brethren were Mary's. However, he also DID NOT believe in her perpetual virginity.
You correctly stated that “this doctrine, by itself, doesnt impact ones standing before God with respect to their salvation”, but then you also said this doctrine is an integral part of salvation.....
I take issue with that, because as you noted this issue doesn’t impact salvation one way or the other. Therefore, it’s contradictory to say on the one hand it doesn’t impact salvation and on the other that it’s an integral part of salvation.
Very possible.
Notice in Mark 3:21 where Jesus' family thought he was crazy and went out to seize him.
Then a few verses later in 3:32 his mother and brothers appear and call to him but Jesus seems not to heed them and goes so far as to call those gathered around Him His "brother and sister and mother" likely because His family did not understand the message.
Also, Mary did not understand what was going on in Matt 2:48. She was astonished that Jesus had remained at the Temple. She seems to have regarded His action as a slight saying, "Son, why have you treated us so your father and I have been searching for you in great distress." The Scripture goes on to say that neither Mary or Joseph understood what she was saying to them.
Those who believe Mary to have been perfect will have difficulty believing these passages. But Mary was not perfect and, though she was blessed in having Jesus born to her, she was still fallible and had trouble understanding who He was early on.
You're implying that people believing that Mary remained a virgin forever somehow helps them come to trust in Jesus and thus obtain salvation. Conversely, that means you believe that people won't come to a true belief in Christ unless they first believe that Mary remained a virgin.
That's ridiculous. All that is required is a child-like faith in Jesus. One doesn't even have to worry whether Mary remained a virgin in order to be fully devoted to Jesus.
No, the NT Scriptures were all written before 100 AD. The early church fathers were very familiar with them, attempted to be in submission to them, and referred to them often as their authority.
It was not up to one man to choose what scriptures to include. Many men had input in what eventually became our Canon.
Jesus,s family were not his followers, including his mother until after his death and then they saw the light.
Very possible.
Notice in Mark 3:21 where Jesus’ family thought he was crazy and went out to seize him.
Then a few verses later in 3:32 his mother and brothers appear and call to him but Jesus seems not to heed them and goes so far as to call those gathered around Him His “brother and sister and mother” likely because His family did not understand the message.
Also, Mary did not understand what was going on in Matt 2:48. She was astonished that Jesus had remained at the Temple. She seems to have regarded His action as a slight saying, “Son, why have you treated us so your father and I have been searching for you in great distress.” The Scripture goes on to say that neither Mary or Joseph understood what she was saying to them.
Those who believe Mary to have been perfect will have difficulty believing these passages. But Mary was not perfect and, though she was blessed in having Jesus born to her, she was still fallible and had trouble understanding who He was early on.
Some of them are pseudoepigraphic, such as 2 Peter, written as late as AD 150.
It was not up to one man to choose what scriptures to include. Many men had input in what eventually became our Canon.
We believe that God had input; a group of Catholic bishops wound up determining Canon.
Interesting point, however, we must insist that sinlessness and infallibility are two separate issues and do not have to coincide.
I do not belong to any religious order or organization either. I have read the Bible many times in various versions. The one I have relied on for the past 10 years is a translation by a Messianic Jew, Daniel Stern. If Calvin, Luther, Cronos, not-so-SoothingDave, and JohnGrace want to express an opinion or conjecture, they are totally entitled. I find that these explanations you refer to (and that I reject) are full of holes. A couple of examples are shown below (from the KJV):
Luke 1:26 And in the sixth month the angel Gabriel was sent from God unto a city of Galilee, named Nazareth, 27To a virgin espoused to a man whose name was Joseph, of the house of David; and the virgin’s name was Mary... 34Then said Mary unto the angel, How shall this be, seeing I know not a man?
Response: Mary is simply declaring that she is still a virgin so how can she be pregnant — She is betrothed to be married - So, how does anyone get that she was devoting her life to celibacy in service to the Lord?
Mark 6:3-Is not this the carpenter, the son of Mary, the brother of James, and Joses, and of Juda, and Simon? and are not his sisters here with us? And they were offended at him. 4 But Jesus said unto them, A prophet is not without honour, but in his own country, and among his own kin, and in his own house.
Response: Obviously Jesus feels seriously alienated from his own family — from his own words in the 6:4.
Mark 3:31-35-There came then his brethren and his mother, and, standing without, sent unto him, calling him. 32And the multitude sat about him, and they said unto him, Behold, thy mother and thy brethren without seek for thee. 33And he answered them, saying, Who is my mother, or my brethren? 34And he looked round about on them which sat about him, and said, Behold my mother and my brethren! 35 For whosoever shall do the will of God, the same is my brother, and my sister, and mother.
Response: Obviously Jesus felt great rejection from his family. I don’t believe that included his mother because she knew from the Get-Go who Jesus was. If his brothers walked away from Him, not believing in Him until after the Resurrection, then it makes perfect sense that at the Cross, Jesus told the Disciple whom He loved to take Mary into his home and treat her as his own mother.
So maybe there were older siblings from Joseph’s previous marriage??? That makes no sense. There is no mention of that in the Bible. You can’t go making it up...or then you’re a heretic.....
**Jesus,s family were not his followers, including his mother**
Oh, you are so mistaken.
What are Mary’s last words in the Bible? Hint: She knew what he could do.
At the Wedding of Cana: “Do whatever he tells you.”
Yes, she definitely knew who he was. Besides that, had not Simeon prophesied to her when the baby Jesus was presented in the temple?
You do believe Holy Scripture, don’t you?
It doesn't matter, does it? Sola selectica, followed by sola scriptura, followed by sola exclusiva can produce almost every belief with Scriptural backing, as long as you make the snippets really short and arrange them like Legos.
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.