Why Heretics Hate Mary and We Should Love Her More

One Peter Five ^ | August 5, 2019 | Timothy Flanders

[MHGinTN]

It is only my opinion but here goes.

It is possible that Joseph died leaving Mary with a step ladder of ages children, boys and girls. If there were little ones the Jewish custom was for aunts and uncles to take in the older boys and girls (they made good servants to the household don'tchaknow) and the little ones remained with their Mother. we have no indication that Mary remarried so it is possible that she was supported by carpentry work (we know Who was an apprentice to His carpenter father) and help from aunts and uncles. There is some indication that Mary had at least one wealthy close relative who owned lead mines.

We have the scene of Mary and the brothers and sisters (some or all?) showing up at a house seeking a private audience with Jesus, just as the division of Judaism was heating up and the Sanhedrin was getting their gumption up to arrest Jesus. So the family was not scattered afar if they show up to seek a private audience.

[2nd amendment mama]

placemarker

[ravenwolf]

I think that James who was the son of a woman named Mary and her husband Clopas was older than Jesus.

[aMorePerfectUnion]

“But wait, he broke his vows, and got married. And had children.

Blessed Saint Luther realized from scripture that the vows of celibacy were unscriptural.

He married a former nun who (along with many) was destitute.

As married couples are commanded to do, they bore children.

Their marriage and home were a blessing to many.

[Al Hitan]

As fun as it would be to see how long it’d take you to break down into profanity

I don't use profanity and you'll be hard pressed to find a post where I have. Sorry to disappoint you. It's sounds like you were looking forward to it.

I have better things to do

I don't blame you:

V. That the Son became man in this manner, that He was conceived, without the cooperation of man, by the Holy Ghost, and was born of the pure, holy [and always] Virgin Mary. The Book of Concord, the Confessions of the Lutheran Church.

Oops, I forgot. The Book of Concord, i.e. Lutheran doctrine, is in error according to Lutherans.

[Al Hitan]

Blessed Saint Luther realized from scripture that the vows of celibacy were unscriptural.

Jesus replied, “Not everyone can accept this word, but only those to whom it has been given. 12 For there are eunuchs who were born that way, and there are eunuchs who have been made eunuchs by others—and there are those who choose to live like eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. The one who can accept this should accept it." Matthew 19-11:12

[Luircin]

Al, good ole Al. He does some research but not all of it. I appreciate that any of it is done at all.

FYI, The original text of the Smalcald Articles doesn’t have the bracketed portion in it; that bit was added only when translated into Latin at a later date and is not binding on us.

[Mark17]

Blessed Saint Luther realized from scripture that the vows of celibacy were unscriptural.

He married a former nun who (along with many) was destitute.

I don’t know a whole lot about Luther, but I am sure what you say is true. 😁
When I was a catholic, my dad asked me several times, if I wanted to be a priest. I said no, I didn’t want to be without female companionship. 😁 The principal of my catholic high school, was a priest. We used to wonder if he was into a bit of hanky Panky with the nuns. We never knew for sure.
Even when I was still a catholic, I was sweet on one of the nuns, and tried to get her to leave the nun thing, but she stayed with it.
By the way, my wife is an ex catholic too. 😁😆👍

[Mom MD]

That would e why it is never taught at any church or class I have gone to. And again the book of Concord is not scripture nor does it claim to be equal with scripture unlike the catholics who elevate their writings to be equal to (and i have been time by some better than) scripture

[metmom]

1 Timothy 4:1-5 Now the Spirit expressly says that in later times some will depart from the faith by devoting themselves to deceitful spirits and teachings of demons, through the insincerity of liars whose consciences are seared, who forbid marriage and require abstinence from foods that God created to be received with thanksgiving by those who believe and know the truth. For everything created by God is good, and nothing is to be rejected if it is received with thanksgiving, for it is made holy by the word of God and prayer.

[metmom]

There's a world of difference between *Let those accept it who can*, and being forced to by some organization calling itself Christian in violation of Scriptural commands concerning leadership in the church.

To make it a condition of priesthood, though, removes the choice from the man and violates God's clear command regarding NT church leadership. It's just another area that Rome has gone off the rails. And they don't even have a good reason for it.

It was started because they were losing money as the priests family inherited his wealth, not the church, and they just could not pass up that nice little source of income, greedy organization that they are.

1 Timothy 3:1-13 The saying is trustworthy: If anyone aspires to the office of overseer, he desires a noble task. Therefore an overseer must be above reproach, the husband of one wife, sober-minded, self-controlled, respectable, hospitable, able to teach, not a drunkard, not violent but gentle, not quarrelsome, not a lover of money. He must manage his own household well, with all dignity keeping his children submissive, for if someone does not know how to manage his own household, how will he care for God's church? He must not be a recent convert, or he may become puffed up with conceit and fall into the condemnation of the devil. Moreover, he must be well thought of by outsiders, so that he may not fall into disgrace, into a snare of the devil.

Deacons likewise must be dignified, not double-tongued, not addicted to much wine, not greedy for dishonest gain. They must hold the mystery of the faith with a clear conscience. And let them also be tested first; then let them serve as deacons if they prove themselves blameless. Their wives likewise must be dignified, not slanderers, but sober-minded, faithful in all things. Let deacons each be the husband of one wife, managing their children and their own households well. For those who serve well as deacons gain a good standing for themselves and also great confidence in the faith that is in Christ Jesus.

Titus 1:5-16 This is why I left you in Crete, so that you might put what remained into order, and appoint elders in every town as I directed you— if anyone is above reproach, the husband of one wife, and his children are believers and not open to the charge of debauchery or insubordination. For an overseer, as God's steward, must be above reproach. He must not be arrogant or quick-tempered or a drunkard or violent or greedy for gain, but hospitable, a lover of good, self-controlled, upright, holy, and disciplined. He must hold firm to the trustworthy word as taught, so that he may be able to give instruction in sound doctrine and also to rebuke those who contradict it.

For there are many who are insubordinate, empty talkers and deceivers, especially those of the circumcision party. They must be silenced, since they are upsetting whole families by teaching for shameful gain what they ought not to teach. One of the Cretans, a prophet of their own, said, “Cretans are always liars, evil beasts, lazy gluttons.” This testimony is true. Therefore rebuke them sharply, that they may be sound in the faith, not devoting themselves to Jewish myths and the commands of people who turn away from the truth. To the pure, all things are pure, but to the defiled and unbelieving, nothing is pure; but both their minds and their consciences are defiled. They profess to know God, but they deny him by their works. They are detestable, disobedient, unfit for any good work.

[metmom]

I don't use profanity and you'll be hard pressed to find a post where I have. Sorry to disappoint you. It's sounds like you were looking forward to it.

Nice.....

Behavior like Luricin referenced is far to frequent from Catholics and it's not anticipated with delight, but certainly not unexpected either based on the number of times it's happened and the number of posts that are pulled. So start reading at post 700 this thread and you'll find out why in short order. It won't take much of your time.

[Elsie]

Are you out of touch, or a little touched?

Both; probably.

Christ the son existed but not Jesus.

Well; if this wordplay makes you happy.

[Elsie]

And what the hell does that have to do with this conversation?

Just admit you have no logical answer, and go on.

Perhaps down thread someone else might take a stab at it.

[Al Hitan]

Al, good ole Al. He does some research but not all of it. I appreciate that any of it is done at all.

Maybe you need to do more.

and is not binding on us.

It used to be the standard belief for LCMS. From Shepard of the Hills:

4. The traditional Lutheran position is that Mary is “ever virgin” and even now remains as virgin (SD, section VIII, para 24, Latin text). Luther, who translated the entire Bible, held this view. All of our Lutheran fathers into the 20th century held this view. It was not until our current LC-MS’ official systematics text was published that pastors could officially believe that Mary did not remain a virgin.

If the Christology of a theologian is orthodox in all other respects, he is not to be regarded as a heretic for holding that Mary bore other children in a natural manner after she had given birth to the Son of God. [Franz Pieper, Christian Dogmatics (St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1951), 2: 308]

Notice that Francis Pieper, LC-MS President from 1899-1911, shows the normal, default position for Lutherans: They believe in the perpetual virginity of Mary. Not believing it to be true is the exception, which is allowed “if the Christology of a theologian is orthodox in all other respects.” Denying the perpetual virginity of Mary is a recent innovation and a historical aberration within the Church.

Did you get that? "Denying the perpetual virginity of Mary is a recent innovation and a historical aberration within the Church[LCMS]".

I wonder if Lutherans used to believe in the perpetual virginity because "sex is evil", which is the claim made by some about Catholics.

Oh well. At least LCMS stayed with the "Mother of God" phraseology. But I suppose that could also be eliminated soon with the fluidity of their belief.

[Elsie]

Have you ever known anyone who was infallible in their knowledge and understanding of divine revelation?

I just picked this up. Maybe I can recycle it here:

And what the hell does that have to do with this conversation?

[Al Hitan]

Behavior like Luricin referenced is far to frequent from Catholics and it's not anticipated with delight,

Don't kid yourself. Catholic and non-Catholic alike have done it here. And it is not a good thing, whoever does it. Don't be so sanctimonious.

[Elsie]

If you visualize their Apostolic Traditions as being drawn on clear plastic sheets and then laid atop one another, they don't map on each other point-for-point, but all together they give the same coherent picture, not contradicting one another and not, of course, contradicting the written Tradition (the written NT).

Well; it appears that SOMETHING got 'overlaid' on...

Call no man father.

[Elsie]

The way I would say it, is that the written Tradition (the 27 books of the NT) and the oral Tradition (the practices, teachings, and beliefs of the Apostolic Churches) are not "identical", but they are ONE: they make up one coherent whole, without internal contradiction.

And those Traditions have worked quite well in the doctrine of those 7 churches in Asia that the angel had John to write to.

[mostly_lies]

Yes, I acknowledged earlier that I had forgotten the last words to John and Mary.

As for your interpretation of that saying:

John 19:26-27 when Jesus saw his mother there, and the disciple whom he loved standing nearby, he said to her, “Woman, here is your son,” 27 and to the disciple, “Here is your mother.” From that time on, this disciple took her into his home.

we can see very plain that Jesus was her only child how to read a fatuous interpretation into an otherwise innocuous section of scripture, and how to ignore the plain rules of grammar and language to do so. Fixed it for you.......proof texting 101.