Posted on 03/12/2016 9:36:07 AM PST by Salvation
Perpetual virginity
3/9/2016
Question: I am a lifelong and devout Catholic and have always considered Mary to be ever virgin. But recently, I read in my Bible that Joseph had no relations with Mary “before” she bore a son (Mt 1:25). Now, I wonder if our belief does not contradict the Bible.— Eugene DeClue, Festus, Missouri
Answer: The Greek word “heos,” which your citation renders “before,” is more accurately translated “until,” which can be ambiguous without a wider context of time. It is true, in English, the usual sense of “until” is that I am doing or not doing something now “until” something changes, and then I start doing or not doing it. However, this is not always the case, even in Scripture.
If I say to you, “God bless you until we meet again.” I do not mean that after we meet again God’s blessing will cease or turn to curses. In this case, “until” is merely being used to refer to an indefinite period of time which may or may not ever occur. Surely, I hope we meet again, but it is possible we will not, so go with God’s blessings, whatever the case.
|
|
In Scripture, too, we encounter “until” being used merely to indicate an indefinite period whose conditions may or may not be met. Thus, we read, “And Michal the daughter of Saul had no child until the day of her death” (2 Sam 6:23). Of course, this should not be taken to mean that she started having children after she died. If I say to you in English that Christ “must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet” (1 Cor 15:25), I do not mean his everlasting kingdom will actually end thereafter.
While “until” often suggests a future change of state, it does not necessarily mean that the change happens — or even can happen. Context is important. It is the same in Greek, where heos, or heos hou, require context to more fully understand what is being affirmed.
The teaching of the perpetual virginity of Mary does not rise or fall on one word, rather, a body of evidence from other sources such as: Mary’s question to the angel as to how a betrothed virgin would conceive; Jesus entrusting Mary to the care of a non-blood relative at this death; and also the long witness of ancient Tradition.
The Bible tells us that the life is in the blood, hence the law against drinking the blood of the creature.
Now understand this: The life is in the blood; the blood is not life, it carries the life in it. The creature draws the life from the blood to every living cell in the body of the creature. The life is, and in this portion of our being that life is IN, carried by, delivered throughout the body, by the blood. But we humans are more than just animal creatures. we have a spirit which can deliver LIFE to our souls. Our soul is not our physical, creature body; we are souls who inhabit a body.
Spiritual life is not drawn from the circulating blood. The spirit of man is dead in trespasses and sin, unless GOD places LIFE in the human spirit. As Jesus illustrated (let the dead go bury their dead), the soul can exist in a state of deadness; where the spirit in the soul has no life in it (it was taken out when Adam sinned), the soul can be carried around connected to the living body, but that soul is in a state of 'deadness'. Jesus came to bring LIFE to the dead spirit of men. He doesn't place that LIFE in the human spirit via the same system whereby the life of the creature is in the blood. The Blood Jesus offers is not creature blood.
When I was a little boy there was an Army colonel who washed his big car in the parking lot of Fairlington apartments, on Utah Street, and he used Army buckets made of canvas which had a metal ring sewn into the canvas at the bottom and a larger canvas ring sewn into the rim of the opening at the top of the bucket. I was captured by the way the water gave shape to the bucket, and how a full bucket would 'spill' water over the top if you pushed your finger into the side of the bucket. Think of the human spirit like the canvas bucket. without the water in it was flat, not even a bucket. But when full of water it had a full shape of 'bucket' and if jostled would allow water to pour out of the bucket to the surroundings.
Life of the creature is in the blood. The blood is not the life, the life is carried, is in the blood and gets distributed to all living parts of the body.
When John O'Brien, in The Faith of Millions, says that the Catholic Priest brings Jesus from the Heavenly throne, this Jesus would not be drawing LIFE from blood, so this myth of ingesting the body, blood, soul, and Divinity of Jesus The Christ is just that, a myth, a great error. The Jesus in Heaven is not drawing His Life from blood but from the Spirit of God.
When anyone takes the bread and wine at the Passover Remembrance of Jesus Sacrifice for us as the Lamb of God, there is no life transferred by the tokens, but there is spiritual life for the believers in Him. This Life doesn't get into us via the gastronomic system, it comes by way of believing in Him as The source of Life.
When the ones who come out of the Tribulation arrive in Heaven, they will have washed their garments in the blood of the Lamb of God.
The parable Jesus told of the man who showed up at the wedding without the proper wedding garment gives us a clue via metaphor for the thing washed in the blood of the Lamb of God, for the blood must be seen on 'the doorposts and lentils' so angel would pass over and not take the life of the first born.
The LIFE is in the blood, the blood is not the life. How does Jesus say He has life as He speaks to the twisters and chasers after signs and wonders, in John 6.
Clearly these guys are SNAKES; for Jesus SAID so!!
Matthew 23:33
"You snakes! You brood of vipers! How will you escape being condemned to hell?
HE also said some men were snakes.
How can you DENY the VERY WORDS OF JESUS in this matter?
The event depicted in 1 Thess 4:13-17 will change in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, the creature body drawing life from the blood which carries the life, to drawing life directlty from the same means Jesus is utilizing today in Heaven.
By...
"What?
"Did you say something?"
or...
"Which two?"
I don't don't...
...but Rome DOES send the message that, "You'd better NOT try to avoid children when having sex."!
Everybody should be fruitful and multiply!!!
Except Mary; of course.
The supreme power of the priestly office is the power of consecrating. “No act is greater,” says St. Thomas,” than the consecration of the body of Christ.”23 In this essential phase of the sacred ministry, the power of the priest is not surpassed by that of the bishop, the archbishop, the cardinal or the pope. Indeed it is equal to that of Jesus Christ. For in this role the priest speaks with the voice and the authority of God Himself.
When the priest pronounces the tremendous words of consecration, he reaches up into the heavens, brings Christ down from His throne, and places Him upon our alter to be offered up again as the Victim for the sins of man. It is a power greater than that of monarchs and emperor: it is greater than that of saints and angels, greater than that of Seraphim and Cherubim.
Indeed it is greater even than the power of the Virgin Mary. While the Blessed Virgin was the human agency by which Christ became incarnate a single time, the priest brings Christ down from heaven, and renders Him present on our altar as the eternal Victim for the sins of man – not once but a thousand times! The priest speaks and lo! Christ, the eternal and omnipotent God, bows his head in humble obedience to the priest’s command.
The Faith of Millions: The Credentials of the Catholic Religion, O’Brien, John Anthony Rev, Our Sunday Visitor, Inc, Huntington, Indiana, Nihil obstat: Rev. Lawrence Gollner, Censor Librorum, Imprimatur: Leo A Pursley, Bishop of Fort Wayne-South Bend, pages 255-256
The Faith of Millions: The Credentials of the Catholic Religion
No it's not, at worst it is a close approximation because of calendar changes and the exact date that Christ founded His Catholic church....I'll allow about a 20 year variation from 2,016....but does it really make any difference?....could even be a little longer.
Yeah, but page 330 describes the Catholic Sacrament of Baptism and has nothing to do with Angels.
Mary had Jesus by a man?
John 6:57 As the living Father has sent me, and I live by the Father: ... 63 It is the spirit that gives life; the flesh profits nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life.
I don’t think he is asserting that. The thinking of the people of the time would discount a miraculous origin and just jump right to ‘she had sex’.
Read my post carefully....I didn't say that the book was that old, I said that the teaching was.....you don't get to change the definition of Baptism just because you don't like it.....
Well, yeah, because she was betrothed, which is why everyone thought Jesus was the carpenter’s son.
I said “the father of her first child was still living”
Is there some part of that you disagree with?
Hmmm. According to this blasphemy, Christ cannot be omnipotent if he obeys a human (created being) priest.
I'm with you: I'd be interested to know if Roman Catholics believe this heretical crap.
Hoss
Yeah, those tiny Catholic families 6-8-10 kids didn't do the evil deed.....wake up. My wife is the oldest of 15, my sister had 9.....the old fashioned way.
It's supposed to be passed down.
:)
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.