Catholics and Non-Catholics: Do you believe in the Perpetual Virginity of the Blessed Mother?

  • Thread starter Thread starter lax16
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Well here is my summary on this end-of-life thread
I have no doubt about the Virgin Birth of Jesus, it is explicitly stated in multiple Gospels

I believe Matt 1:25 has the primary purpose of stating a virgin birth, but in contemporary english it can imply a loss of virginity for Mary, by using ‘until’ instead of ‘before’ etc. (poor heos translation).
I believe this was a translation error since nothing else explicitly supports this line of thought.

I don’t know if Mary was a PV and respect her to the utmost regardless of the truth.
I believe God did not feel it was important. Otherwise, PV would have been mentioned explicitly and multiple times in scripture, as with the ‘virgin birth’
 
elvisman said:
There is no such entity as “The Roman Catholic Church”.
It is simply, "The Catholic Church".

**The name, “Roman Catholic” came out of Henry VIII’s England after he broke **away from the Church. His adherents would identify themselves as the “English Catholic Church” (which is false) and would identify those who remained obedient to the Pope as “Roman Catholics”.

However - this is not the official name of the Church.

STUDY YOUR HISTORY.
Click to expand...
breviary.net/

ewtn.com/faith/teachings/churb3.htm

Conflicting info.
 
elvisman said:
Whenever you make an historically incorrect** statement - it is up to YOU to substantiate it - not your opponent.

I know for a fact that you are wrong - so I don’t have to look anything up.
I thought since you made the statement - you would provide something in the way of proof for your claim. If you know something different than millions of Catholics - it is your duty to let us know where we have erred.

If not - it is YOU ho have to stand if front of God and account for not having saved millions of souls when you had the chance.
Click to expand...
I don’t think your soul is in danger of hell fire for beliefs of yours that differ from mine if you’ve truly trusted Jesus to be your Savior.

Correcting you or your church is not my mission in life. My desire is to be used by God to help the unsave take a close look at Jesus the Savior. If you don’t know Him, then it would be my priviledge to tell you about Him. Give me a private message and I’ll tell you the Good News.

If we are brothers in Christ, you are not my opponent. If we are not brothers in Christ one or both of us are the opponent of Jesus, not of each other.
 
elvisman said:
The Ark of the Covenant was to be pure and undefiled by man. In fact - men were not allowed to touch it under penalty of death (1 Chron. 13:10).

It has been shown that Mary is the Ark of the New Covenant (Jesus) and that the Ark of the Old Covenant was a type of Mary *(**2 Sam. 6:9/Luke 1:43, *****2 Sam. 6:14/Luke 2:38, ****2 Sam. 6:11/Luke 1:56, **1 Sam 4:11, 1 Sam 6:13/Matt. 2:14).

Ezek. 44:1-2 further points to the fact that she was to remain pure and not to be “entered” by man.

The simple fact about NT fulfillments: They are ALWAYS more glorious than their OT types. ALWAYS - without exception.

If she didn’t remain a virgin, the the OT was a pack of lies. I happen to believe that it wasn’t.
Click to expand...
This is a totally different Ark being talked about here in 1 Chron. So you’re saying that if Joseph touched Mary he would die? Define touched.

2 Sam. 6:9 “David was now afraid of the Lord and asked, How can I ever bring the Ark of the Lord back into my care?” Where do you see Mary in this verse?

Luke 1:43 “What a honor this is, that the mother of my Lord should visit me!” Where do you see that Mary stayed a virgin in this verse?

2 Sam. 6:14 “And David danced before the Lord with all his might, wearing a priestly tunic.” Where is Mary in this verse?

1 Sam. 4:11 “The Ark of God was captured, and Hophni, and Phinehas, the two sons of Eli, were killed.” This event fulfills the prophecy in 2:34 stating that Eli’s sons would die on the same day. I see nothing here to do with Mary.

1 Sam 6:13 " The people of Beth-shemesh were harvesting wheat in the valley, and when they saw the Ark, they were overjoyed." How do you put this with Mary?

Matt.3:14 “That night Joseph left for Eqypt with the child and Mary, his mother.”
I don’t see where you are going with these verses compareing OT with NT to justify that they mean Mary.

Ezek 44: 1-2 You are suggesting that this gate means that its Mary . Pretty far fetched. Its talking about a physical gate. This was the gate through which God entered the Temple and no one else could walk where God had. It could mean the closed gate indicated that God would never again leave the Temple. It could mean that it would prevent people from worshiping the sun as it rises in the east from within the Temple grounds.
 
Dokimas said:
breviary.net/

ewtn.com/faith/teachings/churb3.htm

Conflicting info.
Click to expand...
Only if you are unwilling to do more than a cursory search.

From wiki (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_Catholic_%28term%29):
The term Roman Catholic appeared in the English language at the beginning the 17th century, to differentiate specific groups of Christians in communion with the Pope from others; comparable terms in other languages already existed. It has continued to be widely used in the English language ever since, although its usage has changed over the centuries. It is now even used to distinguish different groups of Catholics who recognize the Pope, e.g., those who belong to the Latin Rite from those who belong to the Eastern Catholic Churches.
Click to expand...
 
Dokimas said:
I don’t think your soul is in danger of hell fire for beliefs of yours that differ from mine if you’ve truly trusted Jesus to be your Savior.

Correcting you or your church is not my mission in life. My desire is to be used by God to help the unsave take a close look at Jesus the Savior. If you don’t know Him, then it would be my priviledge to tell you about Him. Give me a private message and I’ll tell you the Good News.

If we are brothers in Christ, you are not my opponent. If we are not brothers in Christ one or both of us are the opponent of Jesus, not of each other.
Click to expand...
Bottom line, friend:
If it is not your mission in life to correct Christ’s Church - then DON’T.
Don’t make unsubstantiated accusations or charges against her like you did - then refused to explain your charge.

That’s all the advice I have for you today . . .
 
rev_kevin said:
This is a totally different Ark being talked about here in 1 Chron. So you’re saying that if Joseph touched Mary he would die? Define touched.

2 Sam. 6:9 “David was now afraid of the Lord and asked, How can I ever bring the Ark of the Lord back into my care?” Where do you see Mary in this verse?

Luke 1:43 “What a honor this is, that the mother of my Lord should visit me!” Where do you see that Mary stayed a virgin in this verse?

2 Sam. 6:14 “And David danced before the Lord with all his might, wearing a priestly tunic.” Where is Mary in this verse?

1 Sam. 4:11 “The Ark of God was captured, and Hophni, and Phinehas, the two sons of Eli, were killed.” This event fulfills the prophecy in 2:34 stating that Eli’s sons would die on the same day. I see nothing here to do with Mary.

1 Sam 6:13 " The people of Beth-shemesh were harvesting wheat in the valley, and when they saw the Ark, they were overjoyed." How do you put this with Mary?

Matt.3:14 “That night Joseph left for Eqypt with the child and Mary, his mother.”
I don’t see where you are going with these verses compareing OT with NT to justify that they mean Mary.

Ezek 44: 1-2 You are suggesting that this gate means that its Mary . Pretty far fetched. Its talking about a physical gate. This was the gate through which God entered the Temple and no one else could walk where God had. It could mean the closed gate indicated that God would never again leave the Temple. It could mean that it would prevent people from worshiping the sun as it rises in the east from within the Temple grounds.
Click to expand...
And that’s what happens when you read the Bible with anti-Catholic blinders on.

"Who am I that the Ark of my Lord should come to me?" (2 Sam. 6:9)
"Who am I that the mother of my Lord should come to me?" (Luke 1:43)
When the Ark carrying the Word of God returned “David was leaping and dancing before the Lord” (2 Sam. 6:14)
When Mary came into Elizabeth’s presence carrying the word of God, the baby “leaped for joy” in Elizabeth’s womb (Luke 2:38)
The Ark carrying the Word of God is brought to the house of Obed-Edom for 3 months, where it was a blessing. (2 Sam. 6:11)
Mary (the new Ark) carrying the Word of God goes to Elizabeth’s house for 3 months, where she is a blessing (Luke 1:56)
The Ark is captured (1 Sam 4:11) and brought to a foreign land and later returns (1 Sam 6:13)
Mary (the new Ark) is exiled to a foreign land (Egypt) and later returns (Matt. 2:14)
 
Dokimas said:
And where did they get their info?
Click to expand...
oh the through the general means old documents, art, archeological discoveries, etc.

No matter how much you want to believe there was a big cover up there wasn’t. No body has effectively hid, destroyed, rewrote history.

In fact, we know of many, if not all the heresies during the history of the church and yet there is not one mention of a movement whose beliefs are even similar to yours. Go figure.
 
elvisman said:
Bottom line, friend:
If it is not your mission in life to correct Christ’s Church - then DON’T.
Don’t make unsubstantiated accusations or charges against her like you did - then refused to explain your charge.

That’s all the advice I have for you today . . .
Click to expand...
Gee, thanks.
 
ERose said:
oh the through the general means old documents, art, archeological discoveries, etc.

No matter how much you want to believe there was a big cover up there wasn’t. No body has effectively hid, destroyed, rewrote history.

In fact, we know of many, if not all the heresies during the history of the church and yet there is not one mention of a movement whose beliefs are even similar to yours. Go figure.
Click to expand...
Where do you get the idea that I think there was a cover-up?

I figure I’m lonely.😃
 
elvisman said:
And that’s what happens when you read the Bible with anti-Catholic blinders on.

"Who am I that the Ark of my Lord should come to me?" (2 Sam. 6:9)
"Who am I that the mother of my Lord should come to me?" (Luke 1:43)
When the Ark carrying the Word of God returned “David was leaping and dancing before the Lord” (2 Sam. 6:14)
When Mary came into Elizabeth’s presence carrying the word of God, the baby “leaped for joy” in Elizabeth’s womb (Luke 2:38)
The Ark carrying the Word of God is brought to the house of Obed-Edom for 3 months, where it was a blessing. (2 Sam. 6:11)
Mary (the new Ark) carrying the Word of God goes to Elizabeth’s house for 3 months, where she is a blessing (Luke 1:56)
The Ark is captured (1 Sam 4:11) and brought to a foreign land and later returns (1 Sam 6:13)
Mary (the new Ark) is exiled to a foreign land (Egypt) and later returns (Matt. 2:14)
Click to expand...
Sorry but I’m not anti-Catholic so please don’t acccuse me of that or even say that.
I see what you are trying to do here, comparing this with that and saying they mean the same. They are different, different meanings. You can try to spin it to mean what you want it to mean but you’re meaning on these verses is incorrect. I noticed that you underlined TYPE, saying that the OT was a “type” of Mary. Is it because of the word Ark that you believe makes it a “type” of Mary. There still is, no matter how you look at it, no positive proof that Mary stayed a virgin. Only speculation on the part of the CC.
 
lax16 said:
I know there are scriptural passages that can lead one to believe that Mary and Joseph had other childen as husband and wife.
There are references that point to her Perpetual Virginity as well.
  1. Numbers 30 shows that a vow of abstinence, even in marriage, was not unheard of in the Old Testament.
  2. St. Jerome argued for the well-known and commonly held belief in Mary’s virginity in St. Jerome’s “The Perpetual Virginity of Blessed Mary” vs Heluidius (380 A.D.)
  3. Church approved apparitions always speak of Mary as the Virgin (for example, the Virgin of Guadalupe).
What do you think?
Click to expand...
I agree
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top