Posted on 08/16/2023 6:39:10 AM PDT by zucchini bob
(2 Peter 1:20) Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation. (Isaiah 28:10) For precept must be upon precept, precept upon precept; line upon line, line upon line; here a little, and there a little: (Isaiah 28:13) But the word of the LORD was unto them precept upon precept, precept upon precept; line upon line, line upon line; here a little, and there a little; that they might go, and fall backward, and be broken, and snared, and taken.
Her virginity did not need to remain intact.
Once she gave birth as a virgin and Scripture was fulfilled, her virginity was not relevant to anything and did not need to be ongoing.
In a culture that valued having babies as much as the Jewish one did?
I don't believe it for a minute.
BTW, got some proof of that claim?
So what????
Who cares???
Why do Catholics drag them into every debate as if anyone cares what they had to say?
It's like you think we're impressed by it or something.
Buy a clue. We are not followers of men like Catholics are of their pope.
Why are you not able- or willing - to speculate "that God could also have done something" as well with regard to the Sinless Conception of Mary,
and in a sinless manner for her as well- to be the impure vessel for Jesus?
All anyone has to do is read the Bible through and they will NEVER find a reference to Mary being sinless or perpetually virgin.
Just for the record, none of us ever claimed that.
It's a false accusation that is lobbed against Christians continually with no basis in fact.
You need to stop repeating something that you now know is untrue.
There were lots of Christians all along, and some may have even been in the Catholic church, but church affiliation does not make one Christian and lack of church affiliation does not mean someone is unChristian.
The terms *Catholic* and *Christian* are not interchangeable.
“Mary and Joseph did the evil deed (sex)”
I hate when that happens. ;-)
I see you’re back to your old tricks again. Using Scripture, facts and logic for your argumentation. And if that isn’t bad enough, you drag in Catholic dogma (sometimes contradictory) to use against them. That’s not fair. Not fair at all. I suggest you use some weak hyperbole so people won’t question if they’re going down the wrong path. And feel better about themselves if they are.
That never stops a Catholic who believes whatever they tell them - unless he doesn't like it.
Then he or she picks and chooses like a smorgasbord, creating his own Catholic denomination.
There are millions of those.
“ Catholics vote democrat, which is what matters.”
No abortion for any reason is a non-negotiable truth of the Catholic Church. If you claim to be Catholic and you support abortion you have excommunicated yourself from the church, which means you are not a Catholic. So these baby killers need to stop lying to the bean counters. The vast majority of practicing Catholics go to Mass on Sunday and some more than that. The baby killers either don’t go to church at all or only on Easter. Most bean counters only ask what denomination you are and nothing else. Regular church goers by and large vote Republican. Catholic in name only vote democrat.
By the way it’s the same with most denominations.
Yes, the baptized Catholic vote is a killer, and they aren’t excommunicated, and their party leaders meet with their Pope.
I hate when that happens. ;-)
😁 Well, look on the bright side. Two of the sons of Mary and Joseph, James and Jude, wrote books in the New Testament, and James (the half brother of Jesus) was the head of the Jerusalem church, not Peter. 👍
All true.
Granted the word *trinity* is not found in Scripture literally, however, there is no doubt the concept is.
The problem you all Catholics have is that the concept of the perpetual virginity of Mary, along with the Immaculate Conception, is that neither are even alluded to in any way in Scripture. It is an extra Biblical man inspired fabrication about her that has no bearing on Jesus, His divinity, His atoning death, or our salvation.
On the contrary, it certainly has in the past and it is part of the Catechism of the Catholic church.
http://www.scborromeo.org/ccc/p123a9p3.htm
846 How are we to understand this affirmation, often repeated by the Church Fathers?335 Re-formulated positively, it means that all salvation comes from Christ the Head through the Church which is his Body:
Basing itself on Scripture and Tradition, the Council teaches that the Church, a pilgrim now on earth, is necessary for salvation: the one Christ is the mediator and the way of salvation; he is present to us in his body which is the Church. He himself explicitly asserted the necessity of faith and Baptism, and thereby affirmed at the same time the necessity of the Church which men enter through Baptism as through a door. Hence they could not be saved who, knowing that the Catholic Church was founded as necessary by God through Christ, would refuse either to enter it or to remain in it.
Now, before we get too far into the weeds here, let me quote the Catechism of the Catholic Church, paragraphs 846-48, which—as is so often the case no matter the doctrine with the CCC—presents this teaching clearly and to the point under the heading: “Outside the Church there is no Salvation.”
Which *denomination* would that be?
If you know of that church, what is it’s name?
There’s not a thing in Scripture either that indicates what she was expecting Him to do about it, if anything.
Maybe she thought He’s send the servants out to buy more wine.
Maybe she was just in a tailspin and notified Him conversationally as you or I might to a friend or relative saying agahstly, *They ran out of wine! Can you believe it?*.
Apparently Peter (First Pope? as they claim 😁) did the evil deed too since he was married.
BTW...on a serious note. The cult of Mary is Babylonian in origin.
Jesus was pure (sinless) because He did not inherit a sin nature from His father, not because of the manner of His birth or the fact that He was born of a sinful mother.
Sin is not from outside contamination.
Ah a son of Luther AND Jack Chick!
Yeah because we’ve never seen a mother and child relationship before Babylon!
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.