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

[SonofMonica]

sonofmonica: Still waiting for a reason to take you seriously I was merely responding to a post by Rick Holland; someone who has also felt the wrath of catholics! And I was referring to those catholics that I have come in contact with; wasn’t painting all with the same broad brush! As for me, people can persecute or curse me allday long, because I have the peace of Christ, and have finally learned to “turn the other cheek”, as Or Saviour told us today! None of us Christians could come close to enduring the persecution that His disciples went through; yet there are some who say,“we are being bashed!” Who cares; carry on for Christ and put on your big boy pants! And I do not appreciate being called holier-than-thou!:

In the same sentence you say the words “wrath of Catholics” but claim you aren’t painting us with a broad brush. Then you say you don’t appreciate being called-holier-than thou, immediately after bragging about how you are so good at turning the other cheek while the rest of us whine about being persecuted. Based upon these gems, I would be offended if you did take me seriously, as I have no idea what that would mean to you.

 

[elvisman]

Exactly. Saying that Catholics were persecuted and giving this as an example for His Church being persecuted and as proof for them being the true Church however is exactly as pointless.
I am not saying that Catholics are not Christian, but I am saying that there are Christians outside of the CC that were persecuted as well and partly by members of the CC who were not as charitable as they should have been, had they been Christian.
Persecutions are simply not Christian. Be it that there were Protestants persecuting other Protestants or persecuting Catholics or be it Catholics persecuting other Catholics or Protestants.
It doesn’t give proof for the persecuted to be Christian, but it does give proof for the individuals that persecuted others to have a severe lack of the charity and love given by the Holy Spirit.

You have completely missed the point.

**Originally, I wasn’t speaking of Catholic martyrs - I was speaking of persecution in the sense that Protestants continually come to site like this one to bicker and belittle Catholic Beliefs.

You should ask yourself why you are here.

 

[elvisman]

I never took that verse as evidence that St. John was Mary’s biological son, but since she Mary gave birth to the Son of God, that would make her the spiritual mother of all humanity.

**It means that IF Mary had other children, Jesus would not have given her into John’s care. **That would not only have been extremely inappropriate - it would be an unthinkable indignity to his supposed siblings and would have had no right to do this.

**He gave Mary to all of us because, as you said, she is the spiritual mother of all humanity. Besides, if Jesus only said this to to tie up loose ends and make sure that his mother was cared for, they make no sense in the light of the fact that He had plenty of time to make those provision for her. He knew way ahead of time when he was to die.

 

[SonofMonica]

It means that IF Mary had other children, Jesus would not have given her into John’s care.
That would not only have been extremely inappropriate - it would be an unthinkable indignity to his supposed siblings and would have had no right to do this.

Not to mention, I’m sure Mary would have objected to be “given” to some dude that hung around with her Son. “No thanks, I’ll hang out with my own sons.” That’s what my mom woulda said.

 

[1beleevr]

sonofmonica: If you had read the entire post where I mentioned that ALL Christians probably have or still do use profanity, or think about it! I wasn’t targeting all catholics, just sharing with Rick Holland about my encounters with catholics. Please don’t deny that you guys don’t cuss Even us non catholics have bad thoughts from time to time. And when I mention the “turning the other cheek,” I am rejoicing that I am growing in the Lord, not bragging----sheesh! You say that you don’t take me seriously, which is fine with me, I have bigger fish to fry, than worry about whether someone takes mre seriously This thread started out as a discussion about whether Mary was a perpetual virgin, and has taken many detours, most notably one about believing in her virginity to be saved; a stretch you must admit! My sin was replying to your previous post, by saying that I didn’t take you seriously, which was wrong; and I’m sorry; both to you and God! May He richly bless you, my fellow Christian!

 

[1beleevr]

W-O-W! Sounds like there was a lot of religious persecution and killing in the old days Good thing it has slowed down to a trickle! I think the worst thing we face today is character assassination and division, rather than unity

 

[elvisman]

Not to mention, I’m sure Mary would have objected to be “given” to some dude that hung around with her Son. “No thanks, I’ll hang out with my own sons.” That’s what my mom woulda said.

My mom, too - uhhh . . . only with a Spanish accent.

 

[1beleevr]

hey there, elvis man: Isn’t persecution part of the Christian life, no matter how slight? If being disagreed with or perhaps being called ignorant, or blind is the worst thing WE face, then we should just turn the other cheek, and keep on witnessing for our Lord! ALL of us Christians face persecution, in some way, shape or form; but nothing like what His disciples went through!

 

[elvisman]

hey there, elvis man: Isn’t persecution part of the Christian life, no matter how slight? If being disagreed with or perhaps being called ignorant, or blind is the worst thing WE face, then we should just turn the other cheek, and keep on witnessing for our Lord! ALL of us Christians face persecution, in some way, shape or form; but nothing like what His disciples went through!

I agree with you that sometimes we should simply ignore ignorant ramblings. But, I also think we are to witness to those attackers and provide a defense of our beliefs. Simple disagreement is not persecution.

It would be less charitable of me to ignore an attack on my faith than to let them know what they’re missing.

 

[1beleevr]

elvisman: I don’t know how anyone can go through life, without Jesus! I think about the Jews who still don’t know Him, and think,"if they only knew what they were missing! I have accepted persecution, for my being a christian, as part of my Christian walk(not that I wish for it). Because of the peace of Christ, I can go through it without whining about someone badmouthing me, or putting me down:thumbsup:

 

[Prieldedi]

This thread started out as a discussion about whether Mary was a perpetual virgin, and has taken many detours, most notably one about believing in her virginity to be saved

If, in explaining the Catholic teaching on Mary’s Perpetual Virginity, one can do it in 5 or 10 posts, then what else is there to say? You have to recognize that many times the non believers in Her Perpetual Virginity are leading us into those detours you mention. When they can’t refute on biblical terms the Church’s position, this is when they point out other teachings of the Church as if to say, “You are wrong here, so this proves you are wrong about Her Perpetual Virginity too.”

So, in order to prove the Church is right on Mary, we have to prove the Church is right on the other issues as well. We have to take the detour…

As for believing in Her Virginity in order to be saved: perhaps Jesus will ask you, not if you believed in His Mother’s Perpetual Virginity, but He’ll ask you “did you believe in the ones that I sent you? They have explained for 2000 years about my Mother’s Perpetual Virginity, what did you do with their teachings?”

So far, I believe the only reason why you don’t believe in Mary’s Perpetual Virginity is your own reasoning. You haven’t shown us a single passage that says that Mary had other children. “Jesus’ brethren” is not sufficient proof that Mary is their mother. We have shown, again and again, that the Aramaic meaning of the word “brother” includes “cousins, relatives, clansmen, tribesmen, countrymen,” etc. We have shown the real mother and father of three of the supposed “brethren” of the Lord. We have shown you other passages of the Bible where the word “brother” is used to describe a relation other than siblings. We have shown you the writings of the Early Christians who believed in Her Perpetual Virginity, plus many other biblical proofs of Her Virginity, so large that I can’t list them all here. What else is there to say?

No one can convince a convinced person. You are convinced She is not a Perpetual Virgin and you refuse to accept that you are wrong. You have used your interpretation of several biblical passages that we have been able to refute, and at the same time, explain them to you in light of other biblical passages that correct your misconception or misinterpretation. I don’t believe you have been able to do likewise with our Church’s teachings.

So, my friend, can you for a moment stop, reread all our explanations, look at yours, and impartially decide, as if you were a non Christian, where lays the Truth in this matter?

God bless you

 

[PRmerger]

elvisman: I don’t know how anyone can go through life, without Jesus! I think about the Jews who still don’t know Him, and think,"if they only knew what they were missing!

Funny. I just posted on another thread (which will probably soon be closed as it’s over 1000 posts) that I don’t know how non-Catholics can go through life without Jesus in the Eucharist! I think, 'Wow, you people who don’t believe in the Real Presence don’t know what you’re missing." sigh

 

[1beleevr]

prmerger: Ah, but I am one who walks and talks with Christ; and I have the gift of the Holy Spirit So you must be addressing non Christians!

 

[guanophore]

Exactly. Saying that Catholics were persecuted and giving this as an example for His Church being persecuted and as proof for them being the true Church however is exactly as pointless.
I am not saying that Catholics are not Christian, but I am saying that there are Christians outside of the CC that were persecuted as well and partly by members of the CC who were not as charitable as they should have been, had they been Christian.
Persecutions are simply not Christian. Be it that there were Protestants persecuting other Protestants or persecuting Catholics or be it Catholics persecuting other Catholics or Protestants.
It doesn’t give proof for the persecuted to be Christian, but it does give proof for the individuals that persecuted others to have a severe lack of the charity and love given by the Holy Spirit.

Janet, I find something in almost every post of yours with which I disagree. Finally here is one where I agree 100%!

:extrahappy:

 

[guanophore]

This thread started out as a discussion about whether Mary was a perpetual virgin, and has taken many detours, most notably one about believing in her virginity to be saved; a stretch you must admit!

The stretch involved here is the thinking that we can start slicing and dicing the one deposit of faith, committed once for all to the church. It is not up to us to decide which parts are “essential” and which are not. Once we start excising part of that One Faith, then the integrity of it is lost.

 

[1beleevr]

prieldedi: It seems like it has become not so much an issue of whether Mary was or was not a perpetual virgin, but rather, whether Jesus passed on through His disciples, that she was, and ALL must believe in the fact that she was to be saved To presume what Jesus or for that matter God MAY have said is treading on dangerous ground You can probably convince of her perpetual virginity; but her being a part of salvation, is a major stretch! Look, we know that apostolic successors have taught many things, seemingly passed down from Jesus, through chosen men, who may or may not have changed a word here or there; but until now, I have never heard of the theory that in order to be completely saved, one must believe that Mary was a perpetual virgin

 

[1beleevr]

guanophore: I mentioned the word detour, because someone was whining about non sequitors, and straying off topic! And slicing and dicing seems to be the order of the day; as it seems a few posts back, that someone said that because the priests(and presumably the apostles) taught that one must also believe in the perpetual virginity of Mary.But what does that issue have to do with whether or not she had additional children?

 

[SonofMonica]

prieldedi: It seems like it has become not so much an issue of whether Mary was or was not a perpetual virgin, but rather, whether Jesus passed on through His disciples, that she was, and ALL must believe in the fact that she was to be saved To presume what Jesus or for that matter God MAY have said is treading on dangerous ground You can probably convince of her perpetual virginity; but her being a part of salvation, is a major stretch! Look, we know that apostolic successors have taught many things, seemingly passed down from Jesus, through chosen men, who may or may not have changed a word here or there; but until now, I have never heard of the theory that in order to be completely saved, one must believe that Mary was a perpetual virgin

Do you think Faith in Jesus Christ means Faith in only certain things he taught the disciples or all the things he taught them? When Paul said to cling fast to the traditions, which ones was he talking about, and how do you know?

 

[guanophore]

It seems like it has become not so much an issue of whether Mary was or was not a perpetual virgin, but rather, whether Jesus passed on through His disciples,

The two are not separated. Any doctrine, whether the perpetual virginity or the Trinity, if it is separated from the One Faith that was committed to the Church, and preserved in the Church by the power of the HS negates the integrity of the whole gospel. The liberty is not given to us to slice out sections, and determine for ourselves what is “essential” and what is not.

 that she was, and ALL must believe in the fact that she was to be saved:confused:

Do you not think the Mother of our Lord was saved?

 To presume what Jesus or for that matter God MAY have said is treading on dangerous ground;) You can probably convince of her perpetual virginity; but her being a part of salvation, is a major stretch!

If Mary’s part in the salvation of humanity is a 'stretch" for you, then you are suffering from a severely deficient gospel.

 Look, we know that apostolic successors have taught many things, seemingly passed down from Jesus, through chosen men, who may or may not have changed a word here or there; but until now, I have never heard of the theory that in order to be completely saved, one must believe that Mary was a perpetual virgin:eek:

It is not the men to whom the message was given that are responsible for keeping His word. This is the work of the HS, who brings to mind all that Jesus taught. You make it sound as though you do not believe that God is able to preserve what He gave to the Apostles…as if, after their deaths, it dissolved into the grave with them. Why bother to build a church upon the foundation of them, if He was not able to preserve His word in the church?

No one here has said that belieiving in the Apostolic Teachings about Mary was a requirement to “be completely saved”, whatever that means. God can save whoever He wants, however He likes. He can save those who never heard of Jesus or His mother.

The problem lies with those of us who claim to have received the gospel, but then abrogate parts of the One Faith to a “non essential” status.

 

[Janet1983]

You have completely missed the point.

**Originally, I *wasn’t ***speaking of Catholic martyrs - I was speaking of persecution in the sense that Protestants continually come to site like this one to bicker and belittle Catholic Beliefs.

You should ask yourself why you are here.

You do however realize that I am participating in discussions and that I almost exclusively write on News and in the Non-Catholic forum, do you?
I am a former Catholic and I have an opinion… when I came to this forum I was on the brink between being a Catholic and a Non-Catholic… I joined on the 26th of September 2007 and I got saved after that date… So when I joined I was still Catholic.
Other than that I spend most of my time in a forum that has the following description (according to the forum rules):
Forum Rules:

Non-Catholic Religions - understand the history and beliefs of non-Catholic and non-Christian faiths, dialogue with their adherents

(LINK)
So if you go ahead and write in this part of CAF, don’t wonder if you run into a lot of Protestants who have their own views about certain subjects…
Call it persecution if you like… call it a discussion between people who have equal rights of participating in it too… This forum is made for interdenominational and inter-religious interaction and communication… get used to it and let’s just get back on-topic instead of talking about whether or not I should be here…