If Our Lady wasn't perpetually virgin

[Leeann]

“The devil can cite Scripture for his purpose. An evil soul producing holy witness is like a villan with a smiling cheek.”
William Shakespeare, The Merchant of Venice, 1. iii. 93

Ain’t that the truth Good Fella!

*Good Fella:

“Blessed are you who believed that what was spoken to you by the Lord would be fulfilled.”*Luke 1, 45

Leeann:
I don’t think that there was any doubt that Mary would do this, do you?
This is not great feat of faith on Mary’s part, consecrating and dedicating Jesus to God in the temple….she was simply following the Judaic customs.

But Mary did more “than just consecrate and dedicate her only son to God in the temple” – she did what every woman did at that time after giving birth:

Luke 2:

21And when eight days were accomplished for the circumcising of the child, his name was called JESUS, which was so named of the angel before he was conceived in the womb.

22And 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;

23(As it is written in the law of the Lord, Every male that openeth the womb shall be called holy to the Lord)

24And to offer a sacrifice according to that which is said in the law of the Lord, A pair of turtledoves, or two young pigeons.

Or – Mary was humbly observing the practices prescribed by Mosaic Law, because she was a woman and very human and indeed had “finished her days of purification” after giving birth to a male that had opened her womb at birth.

It is interesting to note that Simeon, was enthused over Jesus and proclaimed His importance – but in doing so, Simeon made no mention or afforded any special honor to Mary at that time for her “key role” ( as you state above )…this was a man who was lead by the Holy Spirit – “Mary’s spouse” ?…. if Mary’s role was of such eminence and importance and one that would affect the lives of so many believers in the years to come by her being a “Mediatrix of the entire world”, or being the one that we should look too as an example in faith and purity, or go through in supplication or “easier” access to Jesus- it appears strange that Simeon, with “the Holy Ghost upon him”, didn’t either recognize this in Mary at the time – or it wasn’t to be an issue of any importance then or at any time.

Luke 2:

25And, behold, there was a man in Jerusalem, whose name was Simeon; and the same man was just and devout, waiting for the consolation of Israel: and the Holy Ghost was upon him.

26And it was revealed unto him by the Holy Ghost, that he should not see death, before he had seen the Lord’s Christ.

27And he came by the Spirit into the temple: and when the parents brought in the child Jesus, to do for him after the custom of the law,

28Then took he him up in his arms, and blessed God, and said,

29Lord, now lettest thou thy servant depart in peace, according to thy word:

30For mine eyes have seen thy salvation,

31Which thou hast prepared before the face of all people;

32A light to lighten the Gentiles, and the glory of thy people Israel.

33And Joseph and his mother marvelled at those things which were spoken of him.
34And Simeon blessed them, and said unto Mary his mother, Behold, this child is set for the fall and rising again of many in Israel; and for a sign which shall be spoken against;

35(Yea, a sword shall pierce through thy own soul also,) that the thoughts of many hearts may be revealed.

36And there was one Anna, a prophetess, the daughter of Phanuel, of the tribe of Aser: she was of a great age, and had lived with an husband seven years from her virginity;

37And she was a widow of about fourscore and four years, which departed not from the temple, but served God with fastings and prayers night and day.

38And she coming in that instant gave thanks likewise unto the Lord, and spake of him to all them that looked for redemption in Jerusalem.

39And when they had performed all things according to the law of the Lord, they returned into Galilee, to their own city Nazareth

 

[Leeann]

John 19:26-27

Why does Mary’s virginity bother you? Do you find her chastity repulsive? Do you even question Mother Theresa’s virginity? You Fundamentalists are pathetic.

Let’s check the thread topic:
“If Our Lady wasn’t perpetually virgin”

If you are feeling uncomfortable, perhaps this isn’t the thread for you?

 

[Leeann]

Originally Posted by Leeann
*Getting back to the topic of the thread on the “perpetual virginity of Mary”…I asked a question quite awhile ago…a couple of times and no one responded.

Are there any scripture verses that refer to Mary as a “virgin” after Jesus’ birth?*

RobHom:
Why would they be necessary?

Credibility comes to mind - see my last comment below

• (cont’d. Leeann)*I can see ones that call her Jesus’ mother and Mary, the mother of Jesus and coupled in with Joseph (as in His parents), but nothing that states for instance:

Mary the virgin and the mother of Jesus - or – the Holy Virgin Mary, Jesus’ mother.

I ask, as we are often directed to verses in the Old Testament with regards to proof of her virginity and of course in the gospels (the Annunciation) prior to His birth – but is there any reference after His birth that would suggest that Mary was still a virgin, by way of how she was described in the writings.

RobHom:
The better question is this: Is there even one iota of scripture that even vaguely implies her lack of virginity.

Quite a few – in fact *all scripture *that mentions her name after the birth.

As stated above, they all simply refer to her as Mary, or the mother of Jesus, etc.
If it was of such significance, there were enough opportunities to make it clear, or even to make reference to the “importance”of her part in the “salvation plan”, as is so strongly put forth within the Catholic church.

RobHom:
Please don’t play the “brothers” card…that was resolved centuries ago. Lets not pick at nits. There is nothing that remotely supports anything other than the writings of the Early Church Fathers, whom we all can agree are far wiser and versed in this issue than contemporary “theologians”.

Oh yes….far wiser and versed….I wonder how many Early Church Fathers actually ever witnessed a human birth, or perhaps it’s the other way around, perhaps they did witness a few and viewed it as something vulgar or too messy, or too undignified a way for Jesus to enter the world and therefore managed to water down not only Mary’s own humanity, that God so desired to be a part of His plan for our salvation, but that also of Jesus’ humanity. The birthing process affects not only the woman in a physical way, but in a very real emotional and spiritual way. It’s all part of being “human”.

Reference again to :

Gottle of Geer Post #55
She was a virgin at the Annunciation. Unless child-bearing is possible without breaking the hymen, & if the integrity of the hymen is essential to what the Church means by virginity, she cannot have been a virgin after the birth of Jesus. That the fathers thought otherwise is explicable by their lack of knowledge about such things, a lack which most later generations have shared, for reasons beyond their control to change. That is not a reason to maintain, now, a belief based on faulty gynaecology then. Ditching it would do no harm to any statement in the Bible.

Post # 56
*The Fathers are not addressing the situation of people today though - we know details about human reproduction they did not, so what they say on that is no more helpful than their equally inaccurate ideas about the extent of the human race. No reverence for the Fathers can alter the fact that whether or not Antipodes should exist, they do, & are inhabited; & the same applies to the assumptions & ideas of the Fathers about gynaecology.

If they were wrong - they were wrong. What point is there in requiring anyone to hold to inaccurate & untruthful ideas ? What ideas will be next to go - gravity maybe ? Will the existence of Australia be denounced as a blasphemy ? Maybe the USA is a delusion of satan.
Piety is not piety when it requires us to be wilfully blind to facts. *

RobHom:
Given that “virginity” by no means requires an intact anything, and barring the proof that Joseph actually had conjugal relations with Mary…even though she bore Jesus to term, she was still a virgin. Splitting hairs over miniscule semantics is much like discussing how long it would take a single ant to devour an elephant.

That…or the difference between a false doctrine being perpetuated over the centuries as opposed to the truth…unintentionally, is my hope and prayer.

 

[planten]

**You are all discussing the subject of virgin Mary. The Quran tells much more about it than it is in the bible. If any one would like to read that carefully. There are references in chapter 3 and there is a complete chapter (19) on Mary.

Mary was virgin, in the temple. She was informed all about the birth of an illustrious son who would be the Messiah. That was long before she was even married. She was told that her son would grow to be a man and would be a messenger to the children of Israel.

The important thing is that she was told all that when she had no hope of getting married. According to Quran, her marriage was arranged by God Himself. That is marriage to Joseph the carpenter (even though name Jospeh is not mentioned) was approved by the will of Allah. Her husband was selected by God.

More can be seen in the Quran. There is mor ein the Quran about Mary. She was sinless, pious, and Satan never tempted her. She did something (everything) to bring about the truth of the words that were told to her by God. She was a symbol of goodness, such that all good believers (male and female) are likened to her ( Chapter 66,last two verses, 11 and 12).

**

 

[Hajnalcsillag]

John 19:26-27

Why does Mary’s virginity bother you? Do you find her chastity repulsive? Do you even question Mother Theresa’s virginity? You Fundamentalists are pathetic.

That’s nice…very classy. First all Protestants are heretics, then we’re pathetic. All this over the “issue” of whether or not Mary remained a virgin after birthing the Messiah.

There is no denial that Mary was a virgin when Jesus was conceived in her womb. Whether she remained a virgin (from the standpoint of copulating with a man) after that or became a cabaret singer in Tyre in no way challenges her virginity at the time of conception.

 

[Good_Fella]

Leeann:

It is interesting to note that Simeon, was enthused over Jesus and proclaimed His importance – but in doing so, Simeon made no mention or afforded any special honor to Mary at that time for her “key role” ( as you state above )…this was a man who was lead by the Holy Spirit – “Mary’s spouse” ?…. if Mary’s role was of such eminence and importance and one that would affect the lives of so many believers in the years to come by her being a “Mediatrix of the entire world”, or being the one that we should look too as an example in faith and purity, or go through in supplication or “easier” access to Jesus- it appears strange that Simeon, with “the Holy Ghost upon him”, didn’t either recognize this in Mary at the time – or it wasn’t to be an issue of any importance then or at any time.

Luke 2:

25And, behold, there was a man in Jerusalem, whose name was Simeon; and the same man was just and devout, waiting for the consolation of Israel: and the Holy Ghost was upon him.

26And it was revealed unto him by the Holy Ghost, that he should not see death, before he had seen the Lord’s Christ.

27And he came by the Spirit into the temple: and when the parents brought in the child Jesus, to do for him after the custom of the law,

28Then took he him up in his arms, and blessed God, and said,

29Lord, now lettest thou thy servant depart in peace, according to thy word:

30For mine eyes have seen thy salvation,

31Which thou hast prepared before the face of all people;

32A light to lighten the Gentiles, and the glory of thy people Israel.

33And Joseph and his mother marvelled at those things which were spoken of him.
34And Simeon blessed them, and said unto Mary his mother, Behold, this child is set for the fall and rising again of many in Israel; and for a sign which shall be spoken against;

35(Yea, a sword shall pierce through thy own soul also,) that the thoughts of many hearts may be revealed.

36And there was one Anna, a prophetess, the daughter of Phanuel, of the tribe of Aser: she was of a great age, and had lived with an husband seven years from her virginity;

37And she was a widow of about fourscore and four years, which departed not from the temple, but served God with fastings and prayers night and day.

38And she coming in that instant gave thanks likewise unto the Lord, and spake of him to all them that looked for redemption in Jerusalem.

39And when they had performed all things according to the law of the Lord, they returned into Galilee, to their own city Nazareth

I suppose we must doubt whether the infant Jesus was divine and that he came into the world to redeem us and reconcile us to God, since Simeon refrains from explicitly declaring these significant truths on which Mary’s position depends.

PAX :tiphat:

 

[Good_Fella]

*Originally Posted by Leeann

Post # 68 Leeann: I love and respect Mary.

Well….the Catholic church (as we know it today)……try a bit later than Pentecost….First Council of Nicaea 325 A.D.???*

And He never has left His church, or will…. He knows His sheep and they know His voice….and He guides them in all truth and the gates of hell will never prevail against His church. He will always be with His church of believers, *whatever *denomination, Baptist, Presbyterian, Catholic, Lutheran, etc. – where ever they may be….He knows His sheep and they know His voice….and He guides them in all truth and the gates of hell will never prevail against His church.

I guess you love and respect everybody whom God uses by abusing the free will he gave them. Do you love and repect Mary for being made an “incubator”, to quote a Fundamentalist term?

The first Ecumenical Council of the Catholic Church took place at Jerusalem. The apostle James was Bishop of this Holy See at the time. Peter (our first Pope) led the council (cf. Acts 15). It was at the Council of Nicea that the dogma of the Trinity was defined and declared. If you believe this same dogma that has been espoused by orthodox mainstream Protestants, then it’s very Catholic of you.

If the Paraclete is with each Protestant denomination guiding them in all truth and preserving them from doctrinal errors, then how is it that these denominations are significantly divided in their essential doctrines? Do you think that the fullness of divine truth is relative or insignificant? I’m afraid the Christian communities outside the Church have been left spiritually orphaned. :crying:

PAX :coffeeread:

 

[elvisman]

Well…first of all….I’m not an “anti-Catholic” poster…as in individual practicing Catholics.
Historical facts are wonderful, but then of course you get to “whose” historical facts are accurate don’t you? Look at the initial catholic church – take the one after Pentecost….and then take a look at what happened at the Council of Nicaea – and then take a look over the next few hundred years….and then take a look at the next few hundred years….and eventually you’ll come to the Catholic church as we know it today.
May I quote you elvisman….Ummmm…’nuff said….

As I’ve explained to your fellow anti-Catholics on many separate occasions - Jesus’ Church (the Catholic Church) is a living, breathing entity. It was an acorn in the New Testament and became the mighty Oak that it was meant to be.
By the way - nice way of dodging my original question about the historicity of the Church . . .

That is your opinion….and mine is different.

Praise God!

That’s correct…I’ve chosen not be a part of this particular body of believers.
But I’m definitely a part of the church Jesus prayed for in John 17 and as you stated above, we are ONE in our belief that He died for our sins and rose from the dead….as He and the Father are one.

Sadly - you’re thousands of splintered factions - not the ONE, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church.

 

[Leeann]

***Originally Posted by Leeann

It is interesting to note that Simeon, was enthused over Jesus and proclaimed His importance – but in doing so, Simeon made no mention or afforded any special honor to Mary at that time for her “key role” ( as you state above )…this was a man who was lead by the Holy Spirit – “Mary’s spouse” ?…. if Mary’s role was of such eminence and importance and one that would affect the lives of so many believers in the years to come by her being a “Mediatrix of the entire world”, or being the one that we should look too as an example in faith and purity, or go through in supplication or “easier” access to Jesus- it appears strange that Simeon, with “the Holy Ghost upon him”, didn’t either recognize this in Mary at the time – or it wasn’t to be an issue of any importance then or at any time.

Luke 2:

25And, behold, there was a man in Jerusalem, whose name was Simeon; and the same man was just and devout, waiting for the consolation of Israel: and the Holy Ghost was upon him.

26And it was revealed unto him by the Holy Ghost, that he should not see death, before he had seen the Lord’s Christ.***
27And he came by the Spirit into the temple: and when the parents brought in the child Jesus, to do for him after the custom of the law,

28Then took he him up in his arms, and blessed God, and said,

29Lord, now lettest thou thy servant depart in peace, according to thy word:

30For mine eyes have seen thy salvation,

31Which thou hast prepared before the face of all people;

32A light to lighten the Gentiles, and the glory of thy people Israel.33And Joseph and his mother marvelled at those things which were spoken of him.
34And Simeon blessed them, and said unto Mary his mother, Behold, this child is set for the fall and rising again of many in Israel; and for a sign which shall be spoken against;

35(Yea, a sword shall pierce through thy own soul also,) that the thoughts of many hearts may be revealed.

36And there was one Anna, a prophetess, the daughter of Phanuel, of the tribe of Aser: she was of a great age, and had lived with an husband seven years from her virginity;

37And she was a widow of about fourscore and four years, which departed not from the temple, but served God with fastings and prayers night and day.

38And she coming in that instant gave thanks likewise unto the Lord, and spake of him to all them that looked for redemption in Jerusalem.
39And when they had performed all things according to the law of the Lord, they returned into Galilee, to their own city Nazareth

Good Fella:
I suppose we must doubt whether the infant Jesus was divine and that he came into the world to redeem us and reconcile us to God, since Simeon refrains from explicitly declaring these significant truths on which Mary’s position depends.

You can doubt if you want too - or need too for some reason - but that doesn’t change what is actually put down in writing.

V 26 And it was revealed unto him by the Holy Ghost, that he should not see death, before he had seen the Lord’s Christ. (this statement was put down in writing for future generations and as you read on, it is evident that “Lord’s Christ” is indeed the baby that Simeon held in his arms)

**From 28 – 32 **Simeon certainly distinguishes Jesus’ position, when he held Him in his arms.

And of course Anna (the prophetess), as shown in **Verse 38 **speaks about Jesus in a way that would distinguish this particular baby from any others.

 

[Leeann]

**Originally Posted by Leeann

Post # 68 Leeann: I love and respect Mary.

…

Well….the Catholic church (as we know it today)……try a bit later than Pentecost….First Council of Nicaea 325 A.D.???

…

And He never has left His church, or will…. He knows His sheep and they know His voice….and He guides them in all truth and the gates of hell will never prevail against His church. He will always be with His church of believers, whatever denomination, Baptist, Presbyterian, Catholic, Lutheran, etc. – where ever they may be….He knows His sheep and they know His voice….and He guides them in all truth and the gates of hell will never prevail against His church.
…**

Good Fella:
I guess you love and respect everybody whom God uses by abusing the free will he gave them.

You tend to “guess” and “presume” a lot.
That is **your **statement – not mine.

Good Fella:
Do you love and repect Mary for being made an “incubator”, to quote a Fundamentalist term?

I love and respect Mary - period.

The choice of words that someone uses to describe how they see her,has no affect on how I personally view Mary or her worth.

Good Fella:
The first Ecumenical Council of the Catholic Church took place at Jerusalem. The apostle James was Bishop of this Holy See at the time. Peter (our first Pope) led the council (cf. Acts 15). It was at the Council of Nicea that the dogma of the Trinity was defined and declared. If you believe this same dogma that has been espoused by orthodox mainstream Protestants, then it’s very Catholic of you.

*Already covered:
Post # 68 *
And I have no problem with accepting some of the concepts that the Catholic church has put forward, through their use of tradition/biblical research…as long as it is evident that there is an equal amount of evidence and credibility drawn from both of them.

Good Fella:
If the Paraclete is with each Protestant denomination guiding them in all truth and preserving them from doctrinal errors, then how is it that these denominations are significantly divided in their essential doctrines? Do you think that the fullness of divine truth is relative or insignificant?

Also – Already covered:

**Post # 95 **Originally posted by Good Fella:
God is one, the divine truth is one, and so the Church was established by Jesus as one unity of faith on Peter and the Apostles and through them on their valid successors: the Episcopacy. Independent religious leaders with your attitude have scattered Christ’s sheep. Luther, Calvin, Zwingli, Knox, (etc.) all believed he was led by the Spirit in his reading of the scriptures. But they disagreed with each other on many essential doctrines and were divided. Now which one of them can honestly claim to be guided in all truth by the one Spirit? None of them.
Response Leeann:
I agree…just as the Catholic church can’t…but it tries anyway!

Good Fella:
I’m afraid the Christian communities outside the Church have been left spiritually orphaned. :crying:

Don’t be afraid Good Fella, remember Paul’s words to the Philippians.

Philippians Ch.4:V4

4 Rejoice in the Lord alway: and again I say, Rejoice.
5 Let your moderation be known unto all men. The Lord is at hand.
6 Be careful for nothing; but in every thing by prayer and supplication with thanksgiving let your requests be made known unto God.
7 And the peace of God, which passeth all understanding, shall keep your hearts and minds through Christ Jesus.

 

[Leeann]

elvisman:
As I’ve explained to your fellow anti-Catholics on many separate occasions - Jesus’ Church (the Catholic Church) is a living, breathing entity. It was an acorn in the New Testament and became the mighty Oak that it was meant to be.

Yes…a living breathing entity and one that is very visible in each and every life of all true believers, whatever denomination they may be found in….and as such, as a whole….they are His church.
Regarding the acorn/oak - that is your viewpoint, as you know, mine’s not the same.

elvisman:
**By the way - nice **way of dodging my original question about the historicity of the Church . . .

Thank you.
It’s something I’ve learned in here from some of the responses to my own questions. And it does come in especially handy, when the thread gets off topic.

Sadly - you’re thousands of splintered factions - not the ONE, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church.

Don’t be sad elvisman.:nope:
I’ll post the same scripture verses for you as I did for Good Fella, when he was afraid.

Philippians Ch.4:V4

4 Rejoice in the Lord alway: and again I say, Rejoice.
5 Let your moderation be known unto all men. The Lord is at hand.
6 Be careful for nothing; but in every thing by prayer and supplication with thanksgiving let your requests be made known unto God.
7 And the peace of God, which passeth all understanding, shall keep your hearts and minds through Christ Jesus.

 

[elvisman]

Yes…a living breathing entity and one that is very visible in each and every life of all true believers, whatever denomination they may be found in….and as such, as a whole….they are His church.
Regarding the acorn/oak - that is your viewpoint, as you know, mine’s not the same.

Thank you.
It’s something I’ve learned in here from some of the responses to my own questions. And it does come in especially handy, when the thread gets off topic.

Don’t be sad elvisman.:nope:
I’ll post the same scripture verses for you as I did for Good Fella, when he was afraid.

Philippians Ch.4:V4

4 Rejoice in the Lord alway: and again I say, Rejoice.
5 Let your moderation be known unto all men. The Lord is at hand.
6 Be careful for nothing; but in every thing by prayer and supplication with thanksgiving let your requests be made known unto God.
7 And the peace of God, which passeth all understanding, shall keep your hearts and minds through Christ Jesus.

**While you’re at it - can you post the Scripture verses in favor of factions (denominations)? **
Because this entire thread is based on the issue of Authority.

Please enlighten me - again . . .

 

[Leeann]

elvisman:
While you’re at it - can you post the Scripture verses in favor of factions (denominations)?
Because this entire thread is based on the issue of Authority.

Yessss …the issue of “Authority” is often raised in every thread…eventually.

This usually occurs when doubts begin to prevail from comments that have been posted by visitors addressing the “thread topic” in question…and the responders cannot reply directly to them (whether it be lack of reasoning ability on their part or simply blind faith in the church…as opposed to God) …who knows?

But nevertheless, you have to love 'em for trying!:yup:

 

[adstrinity]

Hi! Remember me? I started this topic. The topic of if Our Mother wasn’t perpetually virgin:

How did Her hymen break? (Could it be just because of the muscles stretching?)

If the hymen stayed in tact, did Jesus come out covered in amniotic fluid and whatever happened with the umbiblical cord.

Thank you for staying on topic.

 

[Hajnalcsillag]

Hi! Remember me? I started this topic. The topic of if Our Mother wasn’t perpetually virgin:

How did Her hymen break? (Could it be just because of the muscles stretching?)

If the hymen stayed in tact, did Jesus come out covered in amniotic fluid and whatever happened with the umbiblical cord.

Thank you for staying on topic.

Not every woman is even born with a hymen. It’s entirely possible that Mary was one of these.

 

[po18guy]

**You are all discussing the subject of virgin Mary. The Quran tells much more about it than it is in the bible. If any one would like to read that carefully. There are references in chapter 3 and there is a complete chapter (19) on Mary.

Mary was virgin, in the temple. She was informed all about the birth of an illustrious son who would be the Messiah. That was long before she was even married. She was told that her son would grow to be a man and would be a messenger to the children of Israel.

The important thing is that she was told all that when she had no hope of getting married. According to Quran, her marriage was arranged by God Himself. That is marriage to Joseph the carpenter (even though name Jospeh is not mentioned) was approved by the will of Allah. Her husband was selected by God.

More can be seen in the Quran. There is mor ein the Quran about Mary. She was sinless, pious, and Satan never tempted her. She did something (everything) to bring about the truth of the words that were told to her by God. She was a symbol of goodness, such that all good believers (male and female) are likened to her ( Chapter 66,last two verses, 11 and 12).

**

I find this fascinating. If Protestants will not believe us, maybe they will believe you!

 

[po18guy]

Yessss …the issue of “Authority” is often raised in every thread…eventually.

This usually occurs when doubts begin to prevail from comments that have been posted by visitors addressing the “thread topic” in question…and the responders cannot reply directly to them (whether it be lack of reasoning ability on their part or simply blind faith in the church…as opposed to God) …who knows?

But nevertheless, you have to love 'em for trying!:yup:

Your profile says “Believer”. W.C. Fields was a believer, too. He just believed that he would have another drink. What do you believe in? And, if it is Christ, why would you look to the teachings of a new church that was founded by men, when the original founded by Christ still exists? Its teachings are hard to accept, just as the “believers” who left Christ in John 6:66 declared.

And, part of these teachings are that Mary, chosen by God from all eternity to bear His Son, would remain pure throughout her life. Remember, this was before the sexual revolution of the 1960s!

Christ’s peace.

 

[Good_Fella]

Leeann:
You can doubt if you want too - or need too for some reason - but that doesn’t change what is actually put down in writing.

V 26 And it was revealed unto him by the Holy Ghost, that he should not see death, before he had seen the Lord’s Christ. (this statement was put down in writing for future generations and as you read on, it is evident that “Lord’s Christ” is indeed the baby that Simeon held in his arms)

**From 28 – 32 **Simeon certainly distinguishes Jesus’ position, when he held Him in his arms.

And of course Anna (the prophetess), as shown in **Verse 38 **speaks about Jesus in a way that would distinguish this particular baby from any others.

And so was this statement put down in writing for future generations:

“They have no wine.”

Isaac was also distinguished from other babies, but he wasn’t divine. Nor was Moses who was distinguished from other babies. Neither Simeon nor Anna make the claim that Jesus was divine. They were Jews who expected the Messiah to be of paternal lineage. By the word salvation, Simeon had the Jewish concept in mind. He wasn’t a Christian and member of the Church. The Holy Spirit was speaking through him. The same Spirit who descended at Pentecost interpreted Simeon’s prophecy through the medium of Sacred Tradition of the Church. Meanwhile, both Luke and John implicitly reveal Mary’s contribution to the plan of God’s salvation as co-Redemptrix, Mediatrix, and Advocatrix.

You are outside the Church, so don’t count yourself as part of a future generation. What you believe the Holy Spirit is telling you is just your own voice inside your head.The Spirit has spoken through Peter and the Apostles and through their valid successors: the Episcopacy of the Catholic Church, since Pentecost.

PAX :tiphat:

 

[Leeann]

Your profile says “Believer”. W.C. Fields was a believer, too. He just believed that he would have another drink. What do you believe in? And, if it is Christ, why would you look to the teachings of a new church that was founded by men, when the original founded by Christ still exists? Its teachings are hard to accept, just as the “believers” who left Christ in John 6:66 declared.

And, part of these teachings are that Mary, chosen by God from all eternity to bear His Son, would remain pure throughout her life. Remember, this was before the sexual revolution of the 1960s!

Christ’s peace.

Hi po18guy!
I believe that “God so loved the world, He gave His only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in Him shall not perish but have everlasting life” John 3/v16

Jesus born of a virgin (Mary) - suffered and died for the salvation of all mankind - dead three days and then rose from the dead - sits at the righthand of God the Father in heaven.

As for the original church “still existing” today as the one that Jesus founded – I don’t believe that the Catholic church of today, is the same church that existed back then. And mainly because of some of the “teachings that are hard to accept” as you put it…or the “teachings that have been “developed” over the years”, such as the perpetual virginity of Mary.

 

[Hajnalcsillag]

You are outside the Church, so don’t count yourself as part of a future generation. What you believe the Holy Spirit is telling you is just your own voice inside your head.The Spirit has spoken through Peter and the Apostles and through their valid successors: the Episcopacy of the Catholic Church, since Pentecost.

PAX :tiphat:

Isn’t it also possible that various popes over time have been listening to voices inside their own head believing it to be the Spirit? The Spirit isn’t going to force anyone to do anything; if It says to do something, you can certainly resist. Jonah tried to get as far away from Nineveh as possible after being told to go to the city, so what would prevent a church leader from following his own path?

Oh wait, there’s that apostate condemned Protestant “voice in my head” posting on this forum.