Jesus was an only son.. Mary did not have more children!!

[1beleevr]

guanophore: Let me ask you something, actually two things:1) If as you say, God instituted the MEGA importance of Mary; does she then sit at His right hand, 2) Why would the apostles teach something that was not taught to them by Christ; such as Mary’s perpetual virginity being a part of the whole Gospel? I’ve never heard that until nowSomeone said that if you embrace Jesus, you must embrace His mother. We do, we just don’t have statues of her!

 

[Arandur]

arandur: Your ignorance is eclipsed only by your arrogance:thumbsup:

Show me where I was either ignorant or arrogant. I would seek to correct both conditions. Your post doesn’t identify where this attack came from.

I was merely trying to point out the different references to sexual relations in the Bible; you know:“He slept with his wifw, he knew his wife, he did not have sexual relations with her until after the birth of her son!”

You made a claim that implied that we Catholics were disagreeing with the plain meaning of “he knew his wife, and she conceived” when we defend Mary’s perpetual virginity. The problem is, the implication is false (we agree with the meaning), and it has no bearing on the discussion at hand (since nowhere in Scripture are those words used in relation to Mary and Joseph). I called you on it. Now you’re trying to say you made no such claim or implication, which means you were just saying something with no bearing at all to the topic of this thread.

For reference, here were your words:

How come in the Old Testament,“he knew his wife, and she conceived,” means they had sex, but in the New Testament, it means something else? Can we REALLY, without any shadow of a doubt, say that Joseph and Mary did NOT have sexual relations?

And to suggest that I have a shallow knowledge, and relationship with my God is disingenuous at best, disrespectful at worst.

Reread my post. It was an admonishment IF you only cared about some short list of “essentials.” IF you only care about that, as the words you commonly use suggest, then yes, I was saying that would be shallow. We should want much more than that. I explained this carefully in my post.

It seems that Paul and James were at odds concerning the importance of works!

Are you saying that Scripture contradicts itself? If not, then what the two were saying was in harmony. This is why it is important for the Bible to be taken in wider context instead of favoring one passage over another.

And there is an equal amount of stubbornesss, and hard heartedness from your side of the fence. So, put the stone down before you hurt yourself, and remove the plank from your eye! God loves all His children.

The difference seems to be that I do not rely on myself as the authority for proper interpretation. I have changed my beliefs when they were erroneous. I have submitted to Christ’s authority.

I was responding to your assertion that people don’t change their minds.

Please don’t imply that I believe God doesn’t love all His children.

 

[1beleevr]

prieldedi:???Trying to figure out why you chose to repeat post#529 I am the one “floating” the possibility of her having relations, and the possibility that she was married. And I believe we were talking about whether or not believing in her perpetual virginiity was required for salvation! The statement that I made about conveying the message to OTHER Christians that if they didn’t believe in it, that they were not embracing the “full” Gospel.ot guanophore all twisted up’ but it doesn’t take a whole lot to do that. For the record, I believe that you can get to Heaven even if you don’t believe that she was a perpetual virgin:thumbsup:

 

[Prieldedi]

prieldedi:???Trying to figure out why you chose to repeat post#529 I am the one “floating” the possibility of her having relations, and the possibility that she was married. And I believe we were talking about whether or not believing in her perpetual virginiity was required for salvation! The statement that I made about conveying the message to OTHER Christians that if they didn’t believe in it, that they were not embracing the “full” Gospel.ot guanophore all twisted up’ but it doesn’t take a whole lot to do that. For the record, I believe that you can get to Heaven even if you don’t believe that she was a perpetual virgin:thumbsup:

This is what you said:

If you can show something else, other than apostolic succession(or the opinions of some priests who believed in such an idea), you may persuade me to believe tha I have to believe in her virginity to see the Kingdom of God

By demonstrating that James, the Lord’s brother, was in fact His cousin I believe I have shown you “something else, other than apostolic succession” to persuade you to believe in Her Perpetual Virginity. The Church teaches Mary’s Virginity, and in light of Luke 10:16, “Whoever listens to you listens to me, and whoever rejects you rejects me; and he who rejects me, rejects the one who sent me”, those who deny Her Virginity are rejecting Jesus and the One that sent Him.

It’s the rejection of those who He sent what Jesus might held you accountable for. They are the ones telling you Mary is a Virgin and you reject them.

God bless you

 

[Prieldedi]

guanophore: Let me ask you something, actually two things:1) If as you say, God instituted the MEGA importance of Mary; does she then sit at His right hand, 2) Why would the apostles teach something that was not taught to them by Christ; such as Mary’s perpetual virginity being a part of the whole Gospel? I’ve never heard that until nowSomeone said that if you embrace Jesus, you must embrace His mother. We do, we just don’t have statues of her!

In the Old Testament the mother of the King sat at his side. An example, Solomon and his mother Bathsheba:

1 Kings 2:19, “So Bathsheba went to King Solomon, to speak to him on behalf of Adonijah. And the king rose to meet her, and bowed down to her; then he sat on his throne, and had a seat brought for the king’s mother; and she sat on his right.”

Is Jesus King? Yes. Is Mary the mother of a King? Yes.

What makes you think the Apostles taught something not taught to them by Christ? And even if Christ didn’t teach it to them, what prevented God to teach it at a later time, which is what He meant in John 16:12-13, “I have yet many things to say to you, but you cannot bear them now. When the Spirit of truth comes, he will guide you into all the truth; for he will not speak on his own authority, but whatever he hears he will speak, and he will declare to you the things that are to come.”

YOU CANNOT BEAR THEM NOW! Can you tell me of anything that fits that passage that is taught by your church? What do you teach that the Apostles couldn’t bear then?

We call it “doctrinal development”, and it is the on going teaching by the Holy Spirit to the Church founded by Jesus Christ, the Catholic Church. Look at the number of times the verb “will” is used in that passage. So nothing has prevented God to teach the Apostles and their successors after the resurrection, that which they couldn’t bear before Jesus had been crucified.

As for the statues… (here we go again!) … do you keep photos (images) of your loved ones? No? Really?

Do you know that statues where the “Kodak photos” of ancient times, only better because they were three dimensional? We also have statues of Jesus, and have them both, Jesus and Mary, together too! There is nothing wrong with our ancient times “Kodak photos”.

God bless you

 

[RickHolland]

Catholics are Christians, 1beleevr, and we find it a form of insult that you imply otherwise.

There is only One Faith. Either a person is a Christian, or not. Catholic is not one faith, and Christian another.

Catholics receive the Apostolic Teachings. One of those is that Mary was a perpetual virgin.

Another is that it is not up to us to judge the state of another’s soul. We are not at liberty to tell people whether they are saved, or not. It is improper to judge before the time, and inappropriate to take the judgement seat of God. The Apostles taught that we are not even to judge whether we are saved ourselves.

Why would you find it an insult unless you believe it may not be true for yourself. If is not true and you are firm in your belief that you are a Christian, then would would you be offended; God said to count it as all joy when people say evil and slanderous things about you. Perhaps you are not as firm as you think you are? Only you know the truth concerning that, well God does to.

Personally, I love insults because I do count as joy knowing I am usually insulted for presenting the living Word and being chastised by people for it.
rick

 

[elvisman]

Why would you find it an insult unless you believe it may not be true for yourself. If is not true and you are firm in your belief that you are a Christian, then would would you be offended; God said to count it as all joy when people say evil and slanderous things about you. Perhaps you are not as firm as you think you are? Only you know the truth concerning that, well God does to.

Personally, I love insults because I do count as joy knowing I am usually insulted for presenting the living Word and being chastised by people for it.
rick

You’re absolutely right.
I love it when people like you attack the Catholic Church because it reaffirms my belief and security that I belong to his ONLY Church!
John 15:18-19
***"If the world hates you, realize that it hated me first. ***
If you belonged to the world, the world would love its own; but because you do not belong to the world, and I have chosen you out of the world, the world hates you."

 

[1beleevr]

prieldedi:First of all, let me say to my Lord,“Thank You Jesus, for the Peace You freely give to me on a daily basis!!!”. You know, if I didn’t know better, I’d be tempted to believe that you are implying that those of us who don’t believe that Mary’s virginity is necessary for salvation, are dishonoring her I have never once dishonored Mary, or rejected her as the mother of Our King! and I imagine that most noncatholics do not have statues of her anywhere either; just as we don’t have corpuses on our Crosses! And it makes perfect sense for Jesus to tell His disciples that they “could not bear these things now.” They had not yet received the Holy Spirit! You do realize that the promise He made about sending the Advocate, who would lead Them into Truth was for US Christians as well! Mothers re and have always been extremely important, and Mary is, of course, no exception. And you really had to go out on a limb to use that sentence about James God Bless You my friend, and fellow Christian!

 

[1beleevr]

Hey, Rick Holland: Some of the best and nastiest insults I have gotten when discussing things spiritual, have come from catholics! Whoo, boy those catholics I work with can sure drop the F-bombs, and G… D"s! It really makes them mad, when I react with a "God bless you and a smile

 

[RickHolland]

You’re absolutely right.
**I love it when people like you **attack the Catholic Church because it reaffirms my belief and security that I belong to his ONLY Church!
John 15:18-19
***“If the world hates you, realize that it hated me first. ***
If you belonged to the world, the world would love its own; but because you do not belong to the world, and I have chosen you out of the world, the world hates you.”

Thanks Elvis,

Try not to get too overly secure; Trent had something to say about that…right?
Perhaps you should have moved a little further in John 15 over to the second half of the that verse??

 

[RickHolland]

Hey, Rick Holland: Some of the best and nastiest insults I have gotten when discussing things spiritual, have come from catholics! Whoo, boy those catholics I work with can sure drop the F-bombs, and G… D"s! It really makes them mad, when I react with a "God bless you and a smile

:tsktsk:

 

[SonofMonica]

Hey, Rick Holland: Some of the best and nastiest insults I have gotten when discussing things spiritual, have come from catholics! Whoo, boy those catholics I work with can sure drop the F-bombs, and G… D"s! It really makes them mad, when I react with a "God bless you and a smile

As long as you don’t expect us to believe you…

 

[Janet1983]

This is an interesting statement. On what basis, or by what standard do you decide what is “not essential towards our salvation”?

What I am trying to say is that Jesus Christ is the way, the truth and the life. Whether or not we believe in Mary’s virginity after giving birth does not have an impact on that.

Here is the distortion that causes part of our separation. One cannot embrace Christ without embracing His mother. Not only that, we cannot fully embrace Christ while refusing to embrace one another. This separating and dividing is fruit of the Reformation.
How is it she was good enough for Jesus to embrace, but not for you?

The embracing you are talking about is brotherly and sisterly love and of course that is a good thing. But this still is not the key to our salvation. Jesus Christ died on the cross for our sins and rose again. That is the key. We do not need Mary’s virginity after giving birth to the Lord for that.

No, it is all, or nothing. Either we receive the whole truth, or we are missing Truth.

Whether or not Mary was a virgin after giving birth is highly debatable as you can see. This aspect however does not have impact on anybody believing in Jesus Christ and making Him the master of their life.

“In essentials unity, in non-essentials liberty, in all things charity…”
(Attributed to Augustine)

 

[Prieldedi]

prieldedi:First of all, let me say to my Lord,“Thank You Jesus, for the Peace You freely give to me on a daily basis!!!”. You know, if I didn’t know better, I’d be tempted to believe that you are implying that those of us who don’t believe that Mary’s virginity is necessary for salvation, are dishonoring her I have never once dishonored Mary, or rejected her as the mother of Our King! and I imagine that most noncatholics do not have statues of her anywhere either; just as we don’t have corpuses on our Crosses! And it makes perfect sense for Jesus to tell His disciples that they “could not bear these things now.” They had not yet received the Holy Spirit! You do realize that the promise He made about sending the Advocate, who would lead Them into Truth was for US Christians as well! Mothers re and have always been extremely important, and Mary is, of course, no exception. And you really had to go out on a limb to use that sentence about James God Bless You my friend, and fellow Christian!

Thank you, my friend 1beleevr.

You know better, I’m not implying anything.

I know I’m not going to convince you to believe what we believe. With the help of the Holy Spirit though, perhaps you’ll eventually believe what we believe.

I have tried to explain what we believe and why. I have, like many of the other Catholic posters in this thread, explained why do we believe in what we believe, why do we trust and believe the men and women of the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, centuries who wrote about the Church in its beginning, as opposed to why we don’t believe the men and women who wrote and spread a totally different gospel after 1520. In letting you know what we believe and why do we believe it, I’m trying to do what Peter told us in 1 Peter 2:15, “Always have an answer ready when you are called upon to account for your hope, but give it simply and with respect.”

Back to Mary’s Perpetual Virginity:

Jesus told the Apostles in John 16:14-15, “He will take what is mine and make it known to you; in doing this, he will glorify me. All that the Father has is mine; because of this I have just told you, that the Spirit will take what is mine and make it known to you.”".

Jesus is referring to things that the Apostles didn’t know at that moment, they are obviously things that Jesus did not teach them during His public life, things that were to be revealed in the future, just as we read in verse 13… the Holy Spirit “will guide you into all the truth”.

I have to mention though, that it’s never said nor implied by Jesus that all the truth was to be revealed during the Apostles lifetimes. The same goes for “he will declare to you the things that are to come.” Again, not all “the things that are to come” came and stopped coming prior the year 95AD or earlier. They have continued to come. From all this we can say that, even if devotion to Mary was not expressed in the Bible as “clearly” as many Christians need it to be in order to believe it, you cannot deny the fact that devotion to Mary is part of “all the truth”, and also part of “the things that are to come” as they were revealed, by GOD, through the Holy Spirit as promised by Jesus, to His Church.

As for the passage about James… tell me where I’m wrong, point it out, please.

Regarding corpses… what’s wrong with having Jesus at the cross? We have Him as a newborn under our Christmas trees; in paintings as a young boy when He stayed behind at the Temple; or walking on water; multiplying bread and fish; giving the Sermon of the Mount; at the trial in front of the Sanhedrin, or Pilate, or Herod; we have Him asking Thomas to put his finger inside His wounds, etc… what’s wrong with having Him at the cross, which is the reason that He came for, to died for us? Isn’t that what John 3:16 tells us: that God “gave His only Son”, that is, God “gave His only Son” to DIE? Or was the suffering and dying at the cross a non-event? Jesus Himself told us His death was His greatest LOVE: “There is no greater love than this, to give one’s life for one’s friends.” (John 15:13) Jesus LOVED us so much that He died for us! Should we feel that we are offending Him (who died for us), if we depict Him dead in paintings and sculptures? We take ALL of Jesus, including a DYING Jesus and a DEAD Jesus.

Finally, do you know what’s the greatest relic in Christianity? The Turin Shroud. What do we see there? A dead Jesus! How that imprint came to be? By a miracle, a miracle by God… about a DEAD Jesus! Are you implying that God was wrong to have “a corpse” imprinted in the Shroud?

God bless you

 

[avflf]

Finally, do you know what’s the greatest relic in Christianity? The Turin Shroud. What do we see there? A dead Jesus! How that imprint came to be? By a miracle, a miracle by God… about a DEAD Jesus! Are you implying that God was wrong to have “a corpse” imprinted in the Shroud?

Not so Holy after all
ROME (Reuters) – An Italian scientist says he has reproduced the Shroud of Turin, a feat that he says proves definitively that the linen some Christians revere as Jesus Christ’s burial cloth is a medieval fake.
Carbon dating tests by laboratories in Oxford, Zurich and Tucson, Arizona in 1988 caused a sensation by dating it from between 1260 and 1390. Sceptics said it was a hoax, possibly made to attract the profitable medieval pilgrimage business.

 

[Arandur]

Not so Holy after all
ROME (Reuters) – An Italian scientist says he has reproduced the Shroud of Turin, a feat that he says proves definitively that the linen some Christians revere as Jesus Christ’s burial cloth is a medieval fake.
Carbon dating tests by laboratories in Oxford, Zurich and Tucson, Arizona in 1988 caused a sensation by dating it from between 1260 and 1390. Sceptics said it was a hoax, possibly made to attract the profitable medieval pilgrimage business.

This sounds like something I heard quite a while ago. Someone had tried to reproduce it, but ended up missing quite a few of its more unusual properties. The C-dating was found to be influenced by carbon remnants from a fire in the place it was stored around that time. Pollen present was strongly indicative of a particular region in Israel, and even a particular time. Various radiation tests revealed startling consistency of images across multiple spectrums, including 3-dimensional images. And various other evidences.

 

[Prieldedi]

Not so Holy after all
ROME (Reuters) – An Italian scientist says he has reproduced the Shroud of Turin, a feat that he says proves definitively that the linen some Christians revere as Jesus Christ’s burial cloth is a medieval fake.
Carbon dating tests by laboratories in Oxford, Zurich and Tucson, Arizona in 1988 caused a sensation by dating it from between 1260 and 1390. Sceptics said it was a hoax, possibly made to attract the profitable medieval pilgrimage business.

It’s 100% Holy. Carbon dating is not reliable, it’s overestimated. Besides, it’s not the only way that we can determine the truth about the Shroud. Pollen particles in the Shroud are from flowers that grow outside Jerusalem in the spring. If the Shroud is a medieval fake made in Europe, how come are those pollen particles there? This is just one example that proves the carbon dating process wrong. Another is the known fact that in 1532 a fire damaged the Shroud and water was used to stop the fire. Scientists say that both exposures of the Shroud, to fire and water, altered the Carbon 14 readings of the fibers of the linen. Furthermore, 1500’s linen was used to reconstruct part of the damaged parts. Were the samples tested taken from the reconstructed part?

The Shroud has been studied by experts from all fields of science: History, Art History, Archeology, Iconography, Numismatics, Photography, Anatomy, Science of Human Tissue, Palynology, Pathology, Traumatology, Radiology, Thanatology, Physics, Chemistry, Biology, Microbiology, Information Technology, Mathematics, Anthropology, History of Culture, Roman Law, Biblical Exegesis and Theology. The conclusions of so many experts from these diverse fields of human knowledge and science are conclusive: we are confronted by a mystery. (I personally call it a miracle.)

I invite you to read “Resurrection of the Shroud: New Scientific, Medical, and Archeological Evidence (Hardcover)”. This is an excerpt from a reader at the Amazon page of the book:

“If you haven’t read this book, you don’t have all the facts you need to come to an educated conclusion.Chapters on the how the images were created are eye-opening. Prior carbon dating testing is debunked once and for all. Surprising evidence is presented from flowers, pollens and coin images found on the Shroud in the last few years. History of the Shroud cloth and where it has been for the last two centuries is unearthed. A must read.”

Look at both sides of the coin. You know one side so far.

God bless you

 

[SonofMonica]

Well, this came out today: cnn.com/2009/WORLD/europe/10/07/italy.turin.shroud/

 

[forever1]

To think they could produce this with bear skins and grind stones of those times goes against logic. Not to believe in it for what it is is to lack faith.

 

[Prieldedi]

Well, this came out today: cnn.com/2009/WORLD/europe/10/07/italy.turin.shroud/

Does his recreation has pollen from spring flowers from the Jerusalem area? Does his recreation has imprinted the coins that were placed over Jesus closed eyelids, as was the custom in those times? You can count the lashes the body received, does his recreation has them?

The article you mention has this to say: “Luigi Garlaschelli created a copy of the shroud by wrapping a specially woven cloth over one of his students, painting it with pigment, baking it in an oven (which he called a “shroud machine”) for several hours, then washing it.”

The Shroud IS NOT PAINT NOR PIGMENT. The scientists that studied it don’t know what the imprint is. It’s there, but it’s not paint nor pigment. Mr. Garlaschelli is not the first person to have tried to reproduce the Shroud. He just made it “look like” the Shroud to the naked eye, just a any painter today could reproduce Da Vinci’s Mona Lisa. But when put under the microscope, in both instances you’ll know who the “faker” is.

A press release is not the in depth study needed to come to a conclusion. I would wait for other knowledgeable people of the Shroud to comment on Mr. Garlaschelli claim. A reporter is just that, a person reporting what this individual said. The reporter is not an expert in this field of science. Just wait for the other side of the coin to appear soon, most likely in a web page near you, as I doubt that the news network that reported Mr. Garlaschelli’s claim will report about it when his claim is debunked, as it will be.

Just as people has tried for 2000 years to destroy (by force or deceit) the truth about Christianity, they continue to do it today, in a more “civilized” manner, by the “priests of the modern world… the scientists.” They will face the same fate as those before them. (I think that would be a good subject for a new thread: “How much FAITH do you have in today’s scientists?”)

Look at John 20:5-8, “He bent down and saw the linen cloths lying flat, but he did not enter. Then Simon Peter came following him and entered the tomb; he, too, saw the linen cloths lying flat. The napkin, which had been around his head was not lying flat like the other linen cloths but lay rolled up in its place. Then the other disciple who had reached the tomb first also went in; he saw and believed.”

What was it that John saw that made him believe? The Shroud. By the way, the Shroud is also called “The Fifth Gospel”, as it makes clear many elements that the written Gospels don’t say, but above else it gives us a picture, a “photography” of Jesus. There is no description of Jesus figure in the Gospels. They don’t say if he was tall or short, thin or fat. The Shroud tells us how He was.

God bless you