Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

A Christmas REALITY - Mary Needed a Savior!
IFB ^ | 12/11/23

Posted on 12/11/2023 11:35:17 AM PST by The Ignorant Fisherman

Just a thought for this Christmas season. One of the greatest myths in all of Christendom is that Mary (Miriam) - the young Jewish girl of king David's line - who gave birth to the Savior of the world was sinless. I myself was taught this as a boy in the Catholic church and it wasn't till I was born again and started reading the Holy Scriptures for myself that I saw the true folly of such a myth. My dear friends, no greater lie could ever be told or fantasy ever believed! When this lie is embraced it derails the total ETERNAL movement of Almighty God and seeks to make the temporal, fallen and mortal the ETERNAL, RIGHTEOUS and DIVINE (Rom. 10:4). Mary herself testified that she rejoiced in Almighty God her Savior and one does not need a Savior if one is not a sinner (Rom. 3:23, 6:23, 10:2-4, Acts 4:12)! If we let the Holy Scriptures of Almighty God and Mary's own personal testimony speak to us then this great fantasy of many can NEVER stand. . Mary herself testified that she rejoiced in Almighty God her Savior and one does not need a Savior if one is not a sinner. . And Mary herself said, My soul doth magnify the Lord, And my spirit hath rejoiced in God my Saviour. For he hath regarded the low estate (to look with pity on her vile condition) of his handmaiden (slave): for, behold, from henceforth all generations shall call me blessed. For he that is mighty hath done to me great things; and holy is his name. And his mercy is on them that fear him from generation to generation (St. Luke 1:45-49).

Also the Holy Scriptures tell us that Mary offered a burnt offering and a sin offering for atonement after her purification (Leviticus 12:1-8). If Mary was not a fallen daughter fallen of Adam she would not have needed to offer an offering of sin.

And when the days of her purification according to the law of Moses were accomplished, they brought him to Jerusalem, to present him to the Lord; (As it is written in the law of the Lord, Every male that openeth the womb shall be called holy to the Lord;) And to offer a sacrifice according to that which is said in the law of the Lord, A pair of turtledoves, or two young pigeons (St. Luke 2:22-24).

My dear friends, if you are one who holds to the teaching of the Catholic church on Mary of Nazareth I would like to challenge you to believe Almighty God's Word and receive the biblical position of Mary and that of salvation (John 1:12, Acts 16:28-30, Romans 6:23, 10:2-4, 1 John 5:13). Mary the young maiden - by faith - trusted in Almighty God for her ETERNAL salvation as a young girl before her angelic visitation and little did she know that she would be the vessel of Almighty God to bring forth the perfect body for her Lamb and propitiation of her soul (John 1:29, John 3:16-17, 36, Rom. 10:2-4, 1 John 2:2, 4:10).

Mary the young maiden - by faith - trusted in Almighty God for her ETERNAL salvation as a young girl before her angelic visitation and little did she know that she would be the vessel of Almighty God to bring forth the perfect body for her Lamb and propitiation of her soul.

The first Christmas two thousand years ago - the young Jewish girl of the tribe of Judea - Mary; was trying to comprehend and take in the wonders of the last nine months (Matt. 1, Luke 2:24-80). Mary was highly favored above all women and was given the Divine assignment to prepare the body for the ETERNAL Spirit of the Son of Almighty God (Isa. 9:6-7, Micah 5:2, John 1:12, Heb. 10). The true servant's heart and faith of Mary are to be greatly commended and her exampled followed; but when individuals seek to change her testimony and her witness to fantastic fables they do her and her ETERNAL Savior a great disservice and dishonor.

Mary needed a Savior and believed as the Word of God clearly stated (Lev.). What about you? If Mary was here today she would point you to her God and Savior, the Lord Jesus Messiah to save your soul and give you ETERNAL LIFE (John 3:16-17). What will you do? Will you listen to Biblical Mary or traditional Mary?

The Kingdom of Heaven is at hand!!


TOPICS: Apologetics; Theology
KEYWORDS: marybible
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 441-460461-480481-500 ... 561-579 next last
To: Elsie

Sorry.


461 posted on 12/15/2023 2:07:19 AM PST by Trump_Triumphant ("Our hearts are restless, Oh Lord, until they rest in thee"- St. Augustine)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 451 | View Replies]

To: Trump_Triumphant

The Lutheran Church, established by Fr. Martin Luther in 1521.

Don't know much about history...


Luther translated the New Testament into German in 1522, making it accessible to common people for the first time. He followed that with the Pentateuch in 1523. During his lifetime, Martin Luther produced two catechisms, dozens of hymns, and a flood of writings that set forth his theology and explained key sections of the Bible.

By 1525, Luther had married a former nun, conducted the first Lutheran worship service, and ordained the first Lutheran minister. Luther did not want his name used for the new church; he proposed calling it Evangelical. Catholic authorities coined "Lutheran" as a derogatory term but Luther's followers wore it as a badge of pride.

 

Lutheran Church History and the Origins of Reform (learnreligions.com)

462 posted on 12/15/2023 2:36:33 AM PST by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 457 | View Replies]

To: Trump_Triumphant

Got the wrong party there friend. That’s your group that calls for banning and such.


463 posted on 12/15/2023 5:45:00 AM PST by ealgeone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 458 | View Replies]

To: Elsie

Facts matter! Well, at least to some they do.


464 posted on 12/15/2023 5:48:41 AM PST by ealgeone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 462 | View Replies]

To: Trump_Triumphant; ealgeone; Faith Presses On; Elsie; daniel1212; The Ignorant Fisherman
Hey, that's your territory what with the way you all condemn anyone not Catholic and decide for yourselves who is Catholic enough for you. There are some who call themselves Roman Catholic for whom no other Catholic is good enough, and many who are in rebellion to the Catholic hierarchy and your pope who was elected by your College of Cardinals.

I see no official Catholic doctrine that permits the laity to decide for themselves what qualifies as actual *true* Catholic doctrine and sit in judgment of it, thereby deciding for themselves what they can (or will) obey or not.

On the contrary, Unum Sanctum, an ex cathedra declaration by Pope Boniface, demands and requires for salvation the full submission to the pope and church. Which leaves all you FRomans who reject Pope Franics' authority over you in a really, really bad spot.

Unam Sanctam

One God, One Faith, One Spiritual Authority

Pope Boniface VIII - 1302

Bull of Pope Boniface VIII promulgated November 18, 1302

https://www.papalencyclicals.net/bon08/b8unam.htm

Furthermore, we declare, we proclaim, we define that it is absolutely necessary for salvation that every human creature be subject to the Roman Pontiff.

The entire document itself is a blatant power grab, claiming absolute authority over every single human being and institution on the planet.

465 posted on 12/15/2023 5:53:30 AM PST by metmom (He who testifies to these things says, “Surely I am coming soon.” Amen. Come, Lord Jesus.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 458 | View Replies]

To: ealgeone
The one verse I gave should open your eyes to other possible outcomes
when the word in question is used. Apparently it didn't. That's on you.


Open my eyes? Umm... No… been there, done that.
But I did agree with you, -other possible outcomes-
even though you can’t see the problem of inserting modern vernacular into 2000 year old text.
YES, there are other possible outcomes as you say- but not through a modern perspective.
That’s why perspicuity of ANCIENT scripture is a farce.
One verse pulled out in isolation does not suffice for context as well, you would agree.
That’s not how the Bible is meant to be read anyway- chapter/verse.
We two just read the Bible differently for different purposes.
That’s why there are hundreds of translations and yes, thousands of denominations I suppose.
But that’s not what Jesus prayed for. that can't be ignored- but it is.

But in reality, you who do not believe what you are saying there.
YOU do not believe there are other possible outcomes, because if you did-
than you can’t hold to the ”I’m right and your wrong.”
Worse yet as I pointed out,
if you truly believed in what you are saying about other possible outcomes here
, your whole perspective of “If it ain’t plain as day reading in the Bible, in ain’t so…”
falls apart badly… and so then there is your move to appeal to extra-Biblical interpretive “context” ? -
which becomes the once again subjective, substitution that allows you to feel you can maintain- once again-
“I’m right, your wrong.” That’s all I’m pointing out, the shell game that is played.
As I've said before the anti-Catholic position often boils down to, "Heads, I win, tails, you lose"

Possible Outcomes MEAN JUST THAT. Possible.

You offered Jerome's commentary on what he thought the passages said.
I can offer other ECFs, and have offered though the RC ignores them,
who contradict the claim of Mary always being sinless or forever virgin.


You are only interested in talking past me.
If you re-read what Jerome wrote-
the commentary I pasted - was specifically FOR a rebuttal (Jerome’s) purpose-
to what you suggest to that Helvidius guy is contradicting.
So yeah, not a genius here, but I acknowledged the contradiction of Mary- that you so want to use as a defense.

Now you need to pause and think for a moment here.
Time machine back to the 4th century.

WHY is Jerome (requested to) defending the Perpetual Virginity of Mary- IN the 4th century A.D.?
I HOPE you can see that her Perpetual Virginity was a true belief early on,
and that it needed to be, AND was, defended, back then and in a matter of fact response.
The objector here is clearly thought of as a fringe player to the Early church.
THIS is your defense?
The Perpetual Virginity developed into a common belief THEN, with detractors sure-
(JUST LIKE Other doctrines, all having detractors, ie. heretical opposition),
and so we learn the Perpetual Virginity IS NOT a recent “invention”.
Dogmatized in the 7th century A.D. as well.
Now Jerome, MOST QUALIFIED in and of his day- who I have learned-
lived in Bethlehem for over 30 years before Rome, translating ancient scripture,,
for whatever reasons (and not certainly not to rile up Protestants)
held to this “obvious” Perpetual belief that he did not even want to validate this Helvidius’ guys “scandalous” ideas,
whom we could suggest was an OUTLIER view at that time.
Check out this dressing down from Jerome on this "contradiction"
This has been a long held belief, worthy of defense:

1. I was requested by certain of the brethren not long ago to reply to a pamphlet written by one Helvidius.
I have deferred doing so, not because it is a difficult matter to maintain the truth and refute
an ignorant boor who has scarce known the first glimmer of learning,

but because I was afraid my reply might make him appear worth defeating.
There was the further consideration that a turbulent fellow,
the only individual in the world who thinks himself both priest and layman,
one who, as has been said, thinks that eloquence consists in loquacity and considers speaking ill
of anyone to be the witness of a good conscience,
would begin to blaspheme worse than ever if opportunity of discussion were afforded him.
He would stand as it were on a pedestal, and would publish his views far and wide.
There was reason also to fear that when truth failed him
he would assail his opponents with the weapon of abuse.

But all these motives for silence, though just, have more justly ceased to influence me,
because of the scandal caused to the brethren who were disgusted at his ravings.
The axe of the Gospel must therefore be now laid to the root of the barren tree,
and both it and its fruitless foliage cast into the fire,
so that Helvidius who has never learned to speak,
may at length learn to hold his tongue.

2. I must call upon the Holy Spirit to express His meaning by my mouth and defend
the virginity of the Blessed Mary.
I must call upon the Lord Jesus to guard the sacred
lodging of the womb in which He abode for ten months from all suspicion of sexual intercourse.
And I must also entreat God the Father to show that the mother of His Son,
who was a mother before she was a bride,
continued a Virgin after her son was born.

Mic drop as we would say. Jerome was not a casual believer. He was among those we like to tout as "Inspired by the Holy Spirit".

WAS HE IN ERROR?

That's Jerome's perspective. Recall also, Jerome had a misplaced idealization of virginity.
Also, is he saying Joseph never ever touched her in any way?
No hug? Holding her hand? Helped her up on the donkey when they were traveling??
See the problem with Jerome's take on this?


Nope. The two-fold problem is yours in projecting your deficient, limited view of Christianity onto a man much more well versed in the Gospel, and dedicated his life to his faith. Furthermore, you are forcing into ancient times, from the modern,
a dispalaced and evolved state of cultural human sexuality from which you cannot compare. But you attempt to anyways.
Nope, you must disregard a faithful voice from long ago, to supplant a misguided sexual and marital ethic back into a tribal time we can't fully understand.

Helping her up on a donkey?
That’s pretty infantile hyperbole you are suggesting there, simply to discredit Jerome.
That is sad. He was pretty specific on what he wrote concerning the Blessed Virgin in his defense…
and who called on the Holy Spirit (which was his work divinely inspired? Or not anymore here?) to express himself as posted.
…and defend the virginity of the Blessed Mary.
I must call upon the Lord Jesus to guard the sacred
lodging of the womb in which He abode for ten months from all suspicion of sexual intercourse.
And I must also entreat God the Father to show that the mother of His Son….
continued a Virgin after her son was born.
I’m sure Joseph took care of her as the Angel instructed him to.

Maybe they held hands back then too… who knows… and maybe they didn't.
Either way your attempt to diminish Jerome, in his defense of Mary,
with "other possible outcomes"-
and ONLY the outcomes YOU agree with...
Is a very weak reply.


466 posted on 12/15/2023 7:30:41 AM PST by MurphsLaw (“Its One thing to profess and enforce a belief. It's another to let it transform your Life."M.Warner)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 413 | View Replies]

To: Elsie
You need to actually READ the Book
your chosen religious organization put together so long ago.
1 Timothy 2:5 KJV
For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus


Ah... shell game time...
YOU NEED TO LEARN HOW TO READ THAT BOOK PROPERLY...
And stop the dishonesty of pulling isolated text out of context... for your own deceptive purposes...
Or maybe just try reading the WHOLE STORY for a change...
Why would you pull ONLY One verse 2:5 and call it a day?
A very shallow understanding of the fullness of the Truth..
wouldn't you say?
... LOOK at what is Paul saying 4 verses earlier in 2:1 as an intro :

I exhort therefore, that, first of all, supplications, prayers, intercessions,
and giving of thanks, be made for all men;

Wait- what is this nonsense? Right from the beginning of this letter-
I AM supposed to intercede for someone else? all men? even you?
But NOW You're saying God...in 2:5.. won't even listen to me if I was to intercede for you..!!
obviously then an error in this Scripture- even in the same letter Paul contradicting himself.
Boy, you Christians... inerrancy?

Thankfully, that is not how the Bible is read or understood..
isolating those gotcha verses out of context...
Inasmuch,
What about those then Apostles back in the day too...
whom Jesus gave all power and authority to... ?
He who hears you, Hears me...?

Was Paul trying to cut them out of the game there in Tim 2:5?
Didn't the Apostles intercede for those converts back in the day...?
and didn't Ananias find out the hard way just how that mediation could work?
Didn't Paul as an Apostle mediate for God as well?
Didn't Paul often ask for prayers and intercessions for him, AND for others?
Was Jesus then confused in Matt then - where he tell us to pray for others to the Father..
and even to pray for OUR enemies?
"Sorry Jesus, I can't intercede for my enemy...
thats your job, you're the ONLY ONE who can do that"...

Doesn't the Holy Spirit mediate for You?

YES... There is one VERY SPECIAL mediator between God and the human race,
The ONE Who Died on the Cross,
THERE IS ONE MEDIATOR... WHO....ABSOLUTELY

2:6 who gave himself as ransom for all.

But the Bible CLEARLY READS... there are many lesser mediators
even ourselves... called upon to intercede unto God..
And The Blessed Virgin Mary, is not disqualified because she
chose celibacy, transcending her earthly sexuality,
to continue to be Full of Grace her entire Life,
to be the forever Virgin Mother of Our Lord.


(TL:DR)
I though you anti-Catholics types were suppoed to know your Bible,
the sole authority of your Faith?
Doesn't appear to be the case... now does it?


467 posted on 12/15/2023 8:56:54 AM PST by MurphsLaw (“Its One thing to profess and enforce a belief. It's another to let it transform your Life."M.Warner)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 448 | View Replies]

To: MurphsLaw
You are only interested in talking past me. If you re-read what Jerome wrote- the commentary I pasted - was specifically FOR a rebuttal (Jerome's) purpose- to what you suggest to that Helvidius guy is contradicting. So yeah, not a genius here, but I acknowledged the contradiction of Mary- that you so want to use as a defense.

IF you truly believe that you should recognize your immediate appeal to the passage from Samuel doesn't pass your statement above of being open to another opinion. But as I noted that's the apparent go to verse for RC apologists.

And as I noted you have to review the use of the word until, and how it's rendered in the Greek,....and in context.

YES, there are other possible outcomes as you say- but not through a modern perspective. That’s why perspicuity of ANCIENT scripture is a farce.

No it's not....not if one studies the time and the texts in question.

One verse pulled out in isolation does not suffice for context as well, you would agree.

Which is what RC apologists have attempted to do with the verse in Samuel.

That’s not how the Bible is meant to be read anyway- chapter/verse.

As I've said on these forums many times context is your friend in understanding the Bible.

We two just read the Bible differently for different purposes.

No...you offered texts to support your position which I showed were incorrect.

I offered you another one to show the possibility of action stopping while the word until is in the verse. Back to the context argument above.

That’s why there are hundreds of translations and yes, thousands of denominations I suppose.

Doubling down on the discredited denomination argument again I see. Sometimes you just can't fix ignorance....and yes, it is ignorance on your part as you've been shown that argument doesn't fly. To continue to try and repeat it is ignorant.

****

WHY is Jerome (requested to) defending the Perpetual Virginity of Mary- IN the 4th century A.D.? I HOPE you can see that her Perpetual Virginity was a true belief early on, and that it needed to be, AND was, defended, back then and in a matter of fact response.

I've read the arguments. It was his belief, most likely based on the discredited Protoevangelim of James and his view of virginity. So here's; the dilemma for the Roman Catholic....Jerome was basing his arguments most likely on the PoJ which later became rejected.

So instead of using the texts as a defense he used his opinion which was slanted to virginity and a discredited source.

The early writers of Scripture....that is Matthew, Mark and Luke, did not attribute perpetual virginity or sinlessness to Mary. Not. Once.

That's the dilemma for the Roman Catholic.

Take the opinion of Jerome over that of infallible writings.

Nope. The two-fold problem is yours in projecting your deficient, limited view of Christianity onto a man much more well versed in the Gospel, and dedicated his life to his faith.

You make some incorrect assumptions.

Furthermore, you are forcing into ancient times, from the modern, a dispalaced and evolved state of cultural human sexuality from which you cannot compare. But you attempt to anyways. Nope, you must disregard a faithful voice from long ago, to supplant a misguided sexual and marital ethic back into a tribal time we can't fully understand.

Once again the appeal to the "we can't understand their time" argument which fails. It's pretty easy to study that time even from this century. It's called history and studying. It's why seminary classes have classes on this time period so the student can understand the time. It's not that complicated.

Here's the bottom line though.

Jerome, nor can any Roman Catholic apologist, point to a clear verse saying Mary was a perpetual virgin or born sinless and remained sinless. Not. One.

I'm gonna go with the Bible over the opinion of a man. The time period of the man's opinion doesn't matter.

468 posted on 12/15/2023 8:57:50 AM PST by ealgeone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 466 | View Replies]

To: ealgeone
Well, actually, if you read the account in Luke one comes away
with the belief Joseph and Mary did know what was going on....why?


Why do you reduce the Incarnation as words to be read as text-
rather than understandind the majesty of God becoming Man-
in the chosen womb of Mary?

Mary and Joseph did NOT have Bibles to thumb through LIKE YOU DO-
and play the match-a-verse game to understand the Bible
- That they didnt have in the first place.

NOTHING LIKE THIS EVER HAPPENED BEFORE:

You have zero objectivity in being able to see that the events -
unfolding before this one-off Jesus' family in real time
and were in NO WAY explainable on any level, like we can today.
You make it sound like they flipped through their bibles
to see what was gonna happen next.
And that Joseph knew, biblically, he only had to wait the 10 months...

How'd that work out for "righteous" Zechariah in Luke?
you think he knew what was going on?
Mary was troubled by what the Angel was telling her...
Do NOT be Afraid... the Angel had to say often...
Why the heck would they be afraid- if they knew what was occurring?

I could go on... but the only way it's not pointless is if
you could understand the books you feel you understand
were written decades after these events-
and that its a fail to read back into them anachronistically as you do to make your interpretations work.


469 posted on 12/15/2023 9:19:23 AM PST by MurphsLaw (“Its One thing to profess and enforce a belief. It's another to let it transform your Life."M.Warner)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 441 | View Replies]

To: MurphsLaw; Elsie; metmom
For context:

1First of all, then, I urge that entreaties and prayers, petitions and thanksgivings, be made on behalf of all men, 2for kings and all who are in authority, so that we may lead a tranquil and quiet life in all godliness and dignity. 3This is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Savior, 4who desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth.

5For there is one God, and one mediator also between God and men, the man Christ Jesus, 6who gave Himself as a ransom for all, the testimony given at the proper time.

*****

Paul distinguishes the difference between asking for praying for people and Who is the Mediator who fulfills that....and he only notes that to be Christ; no one else.

Understand the definition of a mediator as used in the NT.

3316 mesítēs (from 3319 /mésos, "in the middle") – properly, an arbitrator ("mediator"), guaranteeing the performance of all the terms stipulated in a covenant (agreement).

3316 /mesítēs (a "mediator") intervenes to restore peace between two parties, especially as it fulfills a compact or ratifies a covenant.https://biblehub.com/greek/3316.htm

It is only Christ Who can fulfill this requirement. It's His sacrifice on the cross that fulfills this guarantee that the covenant will be fulfilled.

This is why Christians reject the RC elevating Mary to Mediatrix. Mary simply cannot fulfill the covenant as she did not die on the cross.

This is one of the fundamental differences between Roman Catholicism and Christianity.

The Roman Catholic simply does not understand these terms and as a result delves into false dogmas as a result.

470 posted on 12/15/2023 9:31:54 AM PST by ealgeone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 467 | View Replies]

To: ealgeone
The early writers of Scripture....that is Matthew, Mark and Luke,
did not attribute perpetual virginity or sinlessness to Mary. Not. Once.


Again Not in the Bible is your game... and a false doctrine.

Where in the Bible does it say the Gospel writers had to write down everything
that must be believed and followed and not a word more?
Where does the Bible say which Gospel writers/ books in the Bible are what God says should be in the Bible to begin with?
John says the whole world couldn't contain the more that could have been written.

Do any of the Gospel writers write that The Dogma of the TRINITY must be adhered to as well for a proper understanding of the Christian Faith?
There are scriptural passages that seem to actually deny the Trinty.

The Church NEVER teaches her ever-Virgin state is written about in the Bible.
She is forever Full of Grace.

That should be enough for you.


471 posted on 12/15/2023 9:32:33 AM PST by MurphsLaw (“Its One thing to profess and enforce a belief. It's another to let it transform your Life."M.Warner)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 468 | View Replies]

To: MurphsLaw; ealgeone

Which does not give ANYONE license to make stuff up and claim it to be truth that can’t be challenged.

Scripture is clear enough by a plain reading of what is written to know that Mary was kept a virgin by Joseph until after she gave birth to Jesus, and that they went on to have many children, some of whom are named.

WHY are Catholics so obsessed with the need for Mary to be perpetually virgin?

Do they really think sex is that bad and sinful or that is beneath someone that she couldn’t have had it?


472 posted on 12/15/2023 9:39:15 AM PST by metmom (He who testifies to these things says, “Surely I am coming soon.” Amen. Come, Lord Jesus.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 471 | View Replies]

To: MurphsLaw

I can show my positions based on Scripture as I’ve done. All I’ve seen from you is rhetoric.


473 posted on 12/15/2023 9:40:11 AM PST by ealgeone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 471 | View Replies]

To: MurphsLaw

No. She is blessed among women. “All generations will count me blessed.” Why? Because she’s the mother of Christ.


474 posted on 12/15/2023 10:32:20 AM PST by ealgeone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 471 | View Replies]

To: MurphsLaw; metmom; Elsie
Where in the Bible does it say the Gospel writers had to write down everything that must be believed and followed and not a word more?

30Therefore many other signs Jesus also performed in the presence of the disciples, which are not written in this book; 31but these have been written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing you may have life in His name. John 20:30-31 NASB

*****

13These things I have written to you who believe in the name of the Son of God, so that you may know that you have eternal life. 1 John 5:13 NASB

*****

6Now these things, brethren, I have figuratively applied to myself and Apollos for your sakes, so that in us you may learn not to exceed what is written, so that no one of you will become arrogant in behalf of one against the other. 1 Corinthians 4:6 NASB

*****

10The brethren immediately sent Paul and Silas away by night to Berea, and when they arrived, they went into the synagogue of the Jews. 11Now these were more noble-minded than those in Thessalonica, for they received the word with great eagerness, examining the Scriptures daily to see whether these things were so. Acts 17:11 NASB

475 posted on 12/15/2023 2:11:03 PM PST by ealgeone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 471 | View Replies]

To: ealgeone

Yup, the Bereans were COMMENDED for comparing Paul’s teachings to Scripture to verify them.


476 posted on 12/15/2023 2:43:22 PM PST by metmom (He who testifies to these things says, “Surely I am coming soon.” Amen. Come, Lord Jesus.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 475 | View Replies]

To: metmom
Scripture is clear enough by a plain reading of what is written
to know that Mary was kept a virgin by Joseph until after she gave birth to Jesus,
and that they went on to have many children, some of whom are named.


NO. You are presuming. There is no factual evidence for your claim.

Where does it say - IN the plain readable Bible that MARY birthed or bore ANY other children?
Nowhere.
You assume or presume then, that Jesus' brothers and sisters ARE born of Mary.
The Bible NEVER says that. You are reading that into it the text.
Isn't that your objection case for perpetual virginity? Its not explicit in the Bible?
You can't have it both ways.

In that ancient culture, those Brethren could very well be
(and most likely are) cousins, step-brothers -
or even orphans raised by one another, in the ancient tribal family.
Some of those brothers "named", are also named elsewhere in scripture as having a different Mother.
So that's another anti-Catholic bust from assuming they are Mary's direct offspring.

I would go so far to say, assume, that it is even more preposterous to BELIEVE that Jesus had 6 -or More- siblings-
that are never written about in the Gospels,
didn't become his Apostles,
and mentioned in context as "brethren".
Oh sure, they all went bad... and Mom couldnt tell them of the wonderful prophesy her and joseph fulfilled...sure...
And Jesus was just a normal kid...
except for the Temple thing when he was 12... c'mon
Its easier for you to need that, All 6 or more siblings abandoned Jesus and THEIR Mother in their hours of need-
then to have Mary giving birth an ONLY SON, in Jesus.
Thats just foolish, and much harder to swallow than Jesus being an only child.

And then in the next breath, you'll want me to believe that as Mary and Joseph knew of their critical role in salvation history as it unfolded-
and that this magnificent Incarnation-
while Glorious and Heavenly inspired-
was just not fulfilling enough for Mary and Joseph-
to the point they needed to have many more children to meet that Catholic family stereotype.
And then Joseph goes away somewhere, leaving super Mom Mary to raise 7 + children in the Judean desert-without any honorable scriptural mention from Luke or anyone else.
That's a bible story all in and of itself !
Jeepers, yeah, I believe that !.

WHY are Catholics so obsessed with the need for Mary to be perpetually virgin?

Firstly - We Love Mary, because we Love Jesus.
We can never Love Mary - MORE THAN Jesus Loves Mary.
The More we Love Jesus, The Mary we Love Mary.
(P. Kreeft)
And yet God CHOSE HER to bring God incarnate into our fallen human world.
Her soul Magnifies the Lord.
She can bring us to Jesus if necessary.
She tells us, what she told the servant:
DO whatever HE tells you.
Do they really think sex is that bad and sinful or that is beneath someone that she couldn’t have had it?
,br> Why are you so hung up on sex?
Sex is of this world- not the next...
Focus on an eternally saved life DOES NOT include sex relations any longer.
Can you understand this?
It is difficult in this hyper-sexualized culture we live in
to get past the idea that sex is the end all, be all, of our earthly existence
but WE WILL TRANSCEND sexual relations in our Glorified Bodies.
Catholic vows of Chastity emulate this "going beyond the carnal"
Christ himself TELLS YOU... Please read it...Matt 19
LISTEN TO JESUS:

"... and there be eunuchs, which have made themselves eunuchs
for the kingdom of heaven's sake. He that is able to receive it, let him receive it."

Can you please understand JESUS is telling you that celibacy
can be of a higher offering-
even for the sake of the Kingdom of God?
Sex is fun, doing something for the Kingdom come is alot better.

Please rid yourself of the idea that Catholics think sex is bad or sinful or however delusional one must be to think Chastity is an evil thing-
in order to think Mary's Virginity must be so then.
Its not.
THAT'S why Mary has to be perpetually virginal.
God intended it to be that way. Dismiss that all you want- you can explain later.
NO it is so- because Catholics believe God intended MARY for ONE PERSON- and not some run of the mill ordinary Jewish Mom, to shlep a brood of kids around Nazareth.


477 posted on 12/15/2023 2:44:18 PM PST by MurphsLaw (“Its One thing to profess and enforce a belief. It's another to let it transform your Life."M.Warner)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 472 | View Replies]

To: MurphsLaw; metmom; Elsie
Where does it say - IN the plain readable Bible that MARY birthed or bore ANY other children? Nowhere. You assume or presume then, that Jesus' brothers and sisters ARE born of Mary. The Bible NEVER says that. You are reading that into it the text. Isn't that your objection case for perpetual virginity? Its not explicit in the Bible? You can't have it both ways.

“Is not this the carpenter’s son? Is not His mother called Mary, and His brothers, James and Joseph and Simon and Judas? Matt 13:55 NASB

The Bible doesn't have to say Joseph and Mary had sex each time they did. The Greek behind this tells us these are the brothers (half) of Christ.

There is far more Biblical support for the brothers and sisters of Jesus than there is for Rome's false claims of Mary being immaculate and ever virgin. And recall, the latter is based upon a writing that is rejected by one of Rome's own popes. Talk about having it both ways.

In that ancient culture, those Brethren could very well be (and most likely are) cousins, step-brothers -

Except Scripture doesn't call them cousins. And there is a Greek word for that but it isn't used in relation to His brothers and sisters.

I would go so far to say, assume, that it is even more preposterous to BELIEVE that Jesus had 6 -or More- siblings- that are never written about in the Gospels, didn't become his Apostles, and mentioned in context as "brethren".

*****

Even though they are mentioned in the text in Matthew....I mean, do Roman Catholics even realize how foolish they sound when they say these things that are so easily provable.

Oh, James is written about in Acts btw....suggest you read the book of Acts. It might be insightful to you.

*****

And then in the next breath, you'll want me to believe that as Mary and Joseph knew of their critical role in salvation history as it unfolded- and that this magnificent Incarnation- while Glorious and Heavenly inspired- was just not fulfilling enough for Mary and Joseph- to the point they needed to have many more children to meet that Catholic family stereotype. And then Joseph goes away somewhere, leaving super Mom Mary to raise 7 + children in the Judean desert-without any honorable scriptural mention from Luke or anyone else. That's a bible story all in and of itself ! Jeepers, yeah, I believe that !.

Well, I'm not even sure where to begin with all that nonsense.

Let me say this murph....and I say it very seriously.

Spend time this weekend reading the Gospel of John. That's a good starting place for someone who doesn't understand the Bible or who Jesus is.

478 posted on 12/15/2023 2:55:23 PM PST by ealgeone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 477 | View Replies]

To: metmom

I never, ever condemned anyone who is not Catholic. Unlike some of the Protestants who consider anyone who believes differently from them damned, and some on this forum seem gleeful about that. God can do what He wants. I hope everyone on this thread is saved.

Catholics have a right to resist corrupt officials, even the Pope. St. Thomas Aquinas makes that clear, as does the Holy Bible.


479 posted on 12/15/2023 3:12:27 PM PST by Trump_Triumphant ("Our hearts are restless, Oh Lord, until they rest in thee"- St. Augustine)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 465 | View Replies]

To: ealgeone

Protestants have a history of rejecting other Protestants, and then the guy who leaves starts his own Church.


480 posted on 12/15/2023 3:15:43 PM PST by Trump_Triumphant ("Our hearts are restless, Oh Lord, until they rest in thee"- St. Augustine)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 463 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 441-460461-480481-500 ... 561-579 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson