Posted on 06/25/2015 1:13:01 PM PDT by RnMomof7
Check your FReepmail.
And read the Religion Moderator's posting guidelines on his homepage.
Psalm69:8 I have become a stranger to my brothers, an alien to my mother's sons.
Matthew 1:24-25 When Joseph woke from sleep, he did as the angel of the Lord commanded him: he took his wife, but knew her not until she had given birth to a son. And he called his name Jesus.
Matthew 12:46-47 “While He was still speaking to the multitudes, behold, His mother “and brothers” were standing outside, seeking to speak to Him. And someone said to Him, “Behold, Your mother and Your brothers are standing outside seeking to speak to You.”
Matthew 13:55 “Is not this the carpenter’s son? Is not His mother called Mary, and ‘His brothers James and Joseph and Simon and Judas?”
Mark 6:2-3 “And when the Sabbath had come, He began to teach in the synagogue; and the many listeners were astonished, saying, “Where did this man get these things, and what is this wisdom given to Him, and such miracles as these performed by His hands?... “Is not this the carpenter, the son of Mary, and ‘brother of James, and Joses, and Judas, and Simon? Are not ‘His sisters’ here with us?”
John 2:12 “After this He went down to Capernaum, He and His mother, and ‘His brothers’, and His disciples; and there they stayed a few days.”
Acts 1:14 “These all with one mind were continually devoting themselves to prayer, along with the women, and Mary the mother of Jesus, ‘and with His brothers’.”
1 Corinthians 9:4-5 “Do we not have a right to eat and drink? Do we not have a right to take along a believing wife, even as the rest of the apostles, ‘and’ the brothers of the Lord, and Cephas?”
Galatians 1:19 But I did not see any other of the apostles except James, ‘the Lord’s brother’..
Strong's Concordance
http://biblehub.com/greek/80.htm
adelphos: a brother
Original Word: ἀδελφός, οῦ, ὁ
Part of Speech: Noun, Masculine
Transliteration: adelphos
Phonetic Spelling: (ad-el-fos')
Short Definition: a brother
Definition: a brother, member of the same religious community, especially a fellow-Christian.
Here is a link to the occurrences of the Greek word *adelphos*.
http://biblehub.com/greek/80.htm
The word *sister* (adelphe) in the Greek is the same.
http://biblehub.com/greek/79.htm
The word used is *brother* not *cousin*.
It can't mean a member of the same religious community in the context in which they occur, because then that would mean every man in Israel could be identified as Jesus' brother. So that would not identify Jesus as anyone in particular's brother.
It's not going to mean *brother in Christ* as that concept was not yet in place and the Jews, who knew Jesus as a Jew and knew His brothers as Jews, would not even begin to understand the new birth and what being in Christ meant.
They didn't even understand who JESUS was, much less being a *brother in Christ*.
The only definition left then, is to mean physical brother.
And it would not be *cousin*.
The word for *relative* that is used for Elizabeth is *suggenes*, not *adelphe*.
http://biblehub.com/greek/4773.htm
Strong's Concordance
suggenes: akin, a relative
Original Word: συγγενής, ές
Part of Speech: Adjective
Transliteration: suggenes
Phonetic Spelling: (soong-ghen-ace')
Short Definition: akin, a relative
Definition: akin to, related; subst: fellow countryman, kinsman.
All error comes down to calling God a liar.
The idea is still around...
Every one of these are; quite obviously; POORLY catechized!
Quite a broad statement.
If a women entered into marriage never intending or allowing for marital relations then i believe it would be grounds for annulment.
Thus Mary came into the world to save Jesus from sins and as many Catholics profess, to her Christ owed His sinless blood to. Which is consistent with the elevation of the Mary of Catholicism, while in Scripture the Lord owes man nothing, and Mary owed her very existence to Christ.
Note that many Catholic Marian attributions much parallel even that of Christ:
For in the the Catholic quest to almost deify Mary, it is taught by Catholics*,
as Christ was sinless, so Mary was;
as the Lord remained a virgin, so Mary;
as Christ was called the Son of God, indicating ontological oneness, so Mary is called the Mother of God (which easily infers the same, and is not the language of Scripture);
as the emphasis is upon Christ as the Creator through whom God (the Father) made all things, including Mary, so it is emphasized that uniquely “to her, Jesus owes His Precious Blood,” shed for the salvation of mankind, (the logic behind which can lead back to Eve);
as Catholics (adding error to error) believe Christ gave His actual flesh and blood to be eaten, so it is emphasized that Mary gave Him this, being fashioned out of Mary's pure blood and even being “kneaded with the admixture of her virginal milk,” so that she can say, "Come and eat my bread, drink the wine I have prepared" (Prov. 9:5);
as Scripture declares that Christ suffered for our sins, so Mary is said to have done so also;
as Christ saves us from the condemnation and death resulting from the fault of Adam, so it is taught that man was condemned through the fault of Eve, the root of death, but that we are saved through the merits of Mary; who was the source of life for everyone.
as the Lord was bodily ascended into Heaven, so Mary also was;
as Christ is given all power in heaven and in earth, so Mary is “surpassing in power all the angels and saints in Heaven.”
as Christ is the King of the saints and over all kings, (Rv. 15:3; 17:14; 19:16) so Mary is made Queen of Heaven and the greatest saint, and that “Next to God, she deserves the highest praise;”
as the Father made Christ Lord over all things, so Mary is enthroned (all other believers have to wait for their crowns) and exalted by the Lord as Queen over all things;
as Christ is the express image of God, and highly exalted above all under the Father, having the primary position among all creation, so Mary is declared to be the greatest saint of all, and the first of all creatures, and as having a certain affinity with the Father, with a pre-eminent resemblance which she bears to the Father;
as Christ ever liveth to make intercession for the saints, so is Mary said to do so;
as all things come from the Father through the Son, so Mary is made to be the dispenser of all grace;
as Christ is given all power on Heaven and on earth, Mary is said to have (showing some restraint) “almost unlimited power;”
as no man comes to the Father but through the Son, so it is taught that no one can come to the Son except through Mary in Heaven;
and as the Lord called souls to come to Him to be given life and salvation, so (in misappropriation of the words of Scripture) it is said of Mary, “He that shall find me shall find life, and shall have salvation from the Lord;” “that through her are obtained every hope, every grace, and all salvation. For this is His will, that we obtain everything through Mary.”
And as Christ is given many titles of honor, so Mary also is, except that she is honored by Catholics with more titles than they give to the Lord Himself!
Mary was a holy, virtuous instrument of God, but of whom Scripture says relatively little, while holy fear ought to restrain ascribing positions, honor, glory and powers to a mortal that God has not revealed as given to them, and or are only revealed as being possessed by God Himself. But like as the Israelites made an instrument of God an object of worship, (Num. 21:8,9; 2Kg. 18:4) Catholics have magnified Mary far beyond what is written and warranted and even allowed, based on what is in Scripture.
“and have never met one single, solitary Catholic who thought sex between a husband and wife is dirty and sinful.”
Wow! Fantastic.
Finally a Catholic that understands that Mary and Joseph enjoyed the command to have sex as a married couple. That it wasn’t sinful or dirty, but beautiful and wholesome and commanded by God for every married couple. It is refreshing to find someone who isn’t bound by false dogma, at the expense of what God commanded.
Thank you for posting.
“I’ve read a lot of the CCC.”
The CCC is like the “statement of faith” you find in the (c)atholic churches. One can only know if it is accurate by testing the spirits, holding it up to the light of the revealed Word.
I don’t need it because I have Scripture. Now, I don’t always obey THAT (being honest); much less the uninspired writings of ANY men sitting around talking ABOUT inspired Scripture.
Jesus had YOUNGER brothers and sisters. Mary was still alive after the crucifixion. There is zero evidence of Joseph divorcing Mary. What magic does catholicism offer to account for the brothers and sisters of Jesus, WHO WERE YOUNGER THAN JESUS?
Ah, you've made a wild extrapolation there without even pausing to take a breath and notice some huge essential distinctions.
What I did say was that I never met a Catholic who thought sex between a husband and wife was dirty. What I didn't say was that after the Incarnation and Birth of God from her body, Mary and Joseph had sex.
I'm sure you can see the difference here.
Mary had already been overshadowed by the power of the Most High, and given to God to be the mother of the Divine Child. Being already given, she's not going to later consider herself God's "ex," God's divorcee, or God's widow, and thus be free to join herself to another spouse.
It's inconsistent for you --- I assume you're a sola Scriptura guy --- to pencil in that Mary and Joseph had sex, which is not stated in Scripture, and when no Christian even imagined such a thing until 1500 years after the Incarnation.
An even large issue, if possible, is that you assume that if a couple doesn't have sex, it must be because they think sex is dirty and sinful.
That doesn't follow. It doesn't follow for anyone. Especially in view of Mary's extraordinary intimacy with God, that deserves a little more thought, doesn't it?
That's not Biblical. Jesus didn't just "carry" God or any of God's attributes (glory.) Jesus IS God.
"Is." We both know that.
Jesus is God. Mary carried God.
Types and foreshadowings are often multivalent--- that is, they have more than one application. They aren't identical, but they rhyme. So I am in no position to rule out that Jesus was in some sense like the Ark of the Covenant. But He would be MORE like the CONTENTS of the vessel: the manna (He, the Bread of Life), the Tablets of the Law (He, the Lawgiver), the powerful Staff of Aaron (He, the Power of Life itself).
He was the sacred cargo, the portable Presence of God so to speak, so to speak, the sacred entity being carried. And who carried Jesus? His mother, the Ark.
"Mary was not untouchable. There's not one shred of evidence for support of that in Scripture.... Did people die when they touched Mary? How did her mother not die then, if touching Mary resulted in death? "
Nobody said Mary was untouchable. I didn't say that. Types aren't point-by-point duplicates. They suggest, they allude, they "Rhyme". (She was also not made of wood overlaid with gold, and was not carried around on poles, either.)
The idea was "inviolability," which is not the same as untouchability. How could the mother of God's child be given to somebody else in the full sense, in a one-flesh union, if she were already given to God? She was already united with God--- the living God, she was not God's widow! --- and her flesh was given over for the Incarnation of the Son of God. His flesh and human nature were all from her.
"How did people not die when Jesus touched them?"
I never said they would. It's true that the Hebrews believed you could not see God, and live. You could not even touch Sinai, the holy Mountain, when God was present upon its heights, let you die. So, people touching Jesus and living? I must bow my head and say, "A miracle of grace."
The spider is THE Lie: “You shall be as God, knowing good and evil”. The rest are cobwebs proceeding from it. All of it combined stands in unbelief towards what God has SPOKEN.
Ergo making Him out to be a liar.
As you assert that Mary 'carried God in her womb', think about the implications of such an assertion with regard to the 'body' Jesus Christ had when He was with God in the Beginning. Is it possible that Mary carried in her womb 'a' body into which Jesus Christ would come in whatever body form He had in the beginning with God? Being the vessel He would come into, the Holy Spirit prepared a body for The Christ. That does not mean the body was already God in Mary's womb. The Bible even states that very concept with 'behold, though hast prepared for me a body'.
These sorts of though lines are so difficult for a magic mystery religion adherent because they step past learning what the Word of God actually teaches to hide behind the 'it's a mystery I just was never meantr to understand but my leaders might answer that for you.'
Try Hebrews 10:5 and the OT passage Paul was referring to ...
Unless Rome says so.
Mary’s womb carried the body spoken of in Heb10:5 referencing the OT proclamation. Mary did not carry God in her womb.
ALL error is NOT caused by...
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.