Mary- other children

  • Thread starter Thread starter glow8worm
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
sfp said:
(See my responses above inside your reply)
Click to expand...

The length of time in apologetics is important because there is a level where one is still learning and then there is a level where one matures but is still learning from others.

I have had several years experience on several lists around the Internet. It has not been easy at times to continue when one is being viciously attacked by people who are only interested in fishing for converts than they are in really listening to the other side.

Now, this is getting off topic. I am willing to set up another thread to continue with our discussion. But I will not be diverted in this thread.
 
John1717 said:
No, that makes her the mother of Jesus who is God AND MAN! :banghead: You continue to focus ONLY on His Divinity and ignore His humanity!
Click to expand...

They are inseparable, Nestorius!
 
You deny the authority of the Catholic Church yet you accept the non-authority of the likes of James White, Dave Hunt and Eric Svendsen, even when these men are in gross error.

John1717 answered:
Actually these men have discovered the truth found in the Scriptures.

You are a hoot Sandra!

smileys.smileycentral.com/cat/36/36_11_6.gif smileys.smileycentral.com/cat/4/4_1_72.gif smileys.smileycentral.com/cat/4/4_1_210.gif smileys.smileycentral.com/cat/4/4_1_205.gif smileys.smileycentral.com/cat/4/4_1_102.gif smileys.smileycentral.com/cat/4/4_1_100.gif smileys.smileycentral.com/cat/4/4_1_4.gif smileys.smileycentral.com/cat/4/4_1_103.gif
 
John1717 says: For 47 years I blindly followed Rome, then because of a brush with death, I started to read the bible for myself. I discovered, like so many others, that the church of Rome does not teach according to the Word of God! I praise God for opening my eyes to the truth!

I’ll say it again Sandra. I’ll pray for you. For 47 years you had access to the fullness of truth. I’ll also pray that the intercession of The Mother of God and ever virgin Mary will bring you home again to Rome! 🙂

:blessyou:
 
40.png
MaggieOH:
The length of time in apologetics is important because there is a level where one is still learning and then there is a level where one matures but is still learning from others.

I have had several years experience on several lists around the Internet. It has not been easy at times to continue when one is being viciously attacked by people who are only interested in fishing for converts than they are in really listening to the other side.

Now, this is getting off topic. I am willing to set up another thread to continue with our discussion. But I will not be diverted in this thread.
Click to expand...
Maggie, I love you, but this is completely irrelevant to my points. I still maintain my position wholeheartedly.

You can’t have a meaningful discussion about the perpetual virginity of Mary without going into those other topics. They are philosophically essential for someone to understand the doctrine’s roots.

I’m not saying that we should ignore diversion tactics, but you are way too quick to dismiss some of these.

With love and kindness,
 
40.png
John1717:
…Actually these men have discovered the truth found in the Scriptures. …
Click to expand...
Who says?

John, listen to yourself. There’s a great deal of arrogance in this statement.

Where does the Bible tell us that it is the sole rule of faith?
 
*You are all fair, O Mary,
and the original stain is not in you.
You are the glory of Jerusalem,
You are the joy of Israel,
You are the honor of our people,
You are the Advocate of sinners!
O Mary, Mary,
Virgin most pure,
Mother most merciful;
Pray for us,
Intercede for us with Our Lord Jesus Christ. It is truly proper to glorify you who have borne God;
the Ever-Blessed and Immaculate Mother of our God.
More honorable than the Cherubim
and beyond compare more glorious than the Seraphim,
Who a virgin gave birth to God the Word.
You, truly the Mother of God, we magnify! *
 
mayra hart said:
You are all fair, O Mary,

and the original stain is not in you.
You are the glory of Jerusalem,
You are the joy of Israel,
You are the honor of our people,
You are the Advocate of sinners!
O Mary, Mary,
Virgin most pure,
Mother most merciful;
Pray for us,
Intercede for us with Our Lord Jesus Christ. It is truly proper to glorify you who have borne God;
the Ever-Blessed and Immaculate Mother of our God.
More honorable than the Cherubim
and beyond compare more glorious than the Seraphim,
Who a virgin gave birth to God the Word.
*You, truly the Mother of God, we magnify! *
Click to expand...

:amen:

smileys.smileycentral.com/cat/36/36_3_16.gif
 
Originally Posted by John1717
No, that makes her the mother of Jesus who is God AND MAN! :banghead: You continue to focus ONLY on His Divinity and ignore His humanity!
Click to expand...
They are inseparable, Nestorius!
Click to expand...
Mickey,

I almost choked laughing! :rotfl:

Pio
 
To: Protesters against the Mother of God:

Subject: Council of Ephesus
Re: Twelve Anathemas Proposed by Cyril and accepted by the Council of Ephesus
  1. If anyone does not confess that Emmanuel is God in truth, and therefore that the holy virgin is the mother of God (for she bore in a fleshly way the Word of God become flesh, let him be anathema.
  2. If anyone does not confess that the Word from God the Father has been united by hypostasis with the flesh and is one Christ with his own flesh, and is therefore God and man together, let him be anathema.
  3. If anyone divides in the one Christ the hypostases after the union, joining them only by a conjunction of dignity or authority or power, and not rather by a coming together in a union by nature, let him be anathema.
  4. If anyone distributes between the two persons or hypostases the expressions used either in the gospels or in the apostolic writings, whether they are used by the holy writers of Christ or by him about himself, and ascribes some to him as to a man, thought of separately from the Word from God, and others, as befitting God, to him as to the Word from God the Father, let him be anathema.
  5. If anyone dares to say that Christ was a God-bearing man and not rather God in truth, being by nature one Son, even as “the Word became flesh”, and is made partaker of blood and flesh precisely like us, let him be anathema.
  6. If anyone says that the Word from God the Father was the God or master of Christ, and does not rather confess the same both God and man, the Word having become flesh, according to the scriptures, let him be anathema.
  7. If anyone says that as man Jesus was activated by the Word of God and was clothed with the glory of the Only-begotten, as a being separate from him, let him be anathema.
  8. If anyone dares to say that the man who was assumed ought to be worshipped and glorified together with the divine Word and be called God along with him, while being separate from him, (for the addition of “with” must always compel us to think in this way), and will not rather worship Emmanuel with one veneration and send up to him one doxology, even as “the Word became flesh”, let him be anathema.
  9. If anyone says that the one Lord Jesus Christ was glorified by the Spirit, as making use of an alien power that worked through him and as having received from him the power to master unclean spirits and to work divine wonders among people, and does not rather say that it was his own proper Spirit through whom he worked the divine wonders, let him be anathema.
  10. The divine scripture says Christ became “the high priest and apostle of our confession”; he offered himself to God the Father in an odour of sweetness for our sake. If anyone, therefore, says that it was not the very Word from God who became our high priest and apostle, when he became flesh and a man like us, but as it were another who was separate from him, in particular a man from a woman, or if anyone says that he offered the sacrifice also for himself and not rather for us alone (for he who knew no sin needed no offering), let him be anathema.
  11. If anyone does not confess that the flesh of the Lord is life-giving and belongs to the Word from God the Father, but maintains that it belongs to another besides him, united with him in dignity or as enjoying a mere divine indwelling, and is not rather life-giving, as we said, since it became the flesh belonging to the Word who has power to bring all things to life, let him be anathema.
  12. If anyone does not confess that the Word of God suffered in the flesh and was crucified in the flesh and tasted death in the flesh and became the first born of the dead, although as God he is life and life-giving, let him be anathema.
In Christ,

Pio
 
40.png
Mickey:
You deny the authority of the Catholic Church yet you accept the non-authority of the likes of James White, Dave Hunt and Eric Svendsen, even when these men are in gross error.

John1717 answered:
Actually these men have discovered the truth found in the Scriptures.

You are a hoot Sandra!

smileys.smileycentral.com/cat/36/36_11_6.gif smileys.smileycentral.com/cat/4/4_1_210.gif smileys.smileycentral.com/cat/4/4_1_102.gif smileys.smileycentral.com/cat/4/4_1_100.gif smileys.smileycentral.com/cat/4/4_1_103.gif
Click to expand...
I can hardly believe my eyes that someone will deny the infallibility of the Magisterium of the Catholic Church and then in the next breath state that infallible men such as White and Svendsen have discovered the truth in Scripture?

Oh please spare me, because I have a great need to roll all over the floor and laugh my head off.

smileys.smileycentral.com/cat/4/4_1_103.gifsmileys.smileycentral.com/cat/4/4_1_4.gifsmileys.smileycentral.com/cat/36/36_11_6.gifsmileys.smileycentral.com/cat/4/4_1_72.gifsmileys.smileycentral.com/cat/4/4_1_205.gif

Maggie
 
Bump for an answer.

Thanks.
40.png
reggie:
Originally Posted by reggie
*When the Angel Gabriel says to Mary that she will bear a son. Her response is “How will this be, seeing I know not a man?”
Now why would she ask this question? As a woman engaged, it was reasonable for her to expect that she and Joseph would have children. I am sure that as a Jewish girl she was aware that there are many examples in the OT when the Lord promised a child to a couple or a woman and He always delivered.

Note that the question comes before the angel tells her that the Spirit of God would overshadow her. Does it not make you wonder why then she would have put the question to him in such a way?
She at first doesn’t understand that this child would be God Himself. She accepts that He will be holy and all that the angel says about Him. Her only question is ‘how will this happen as I know not a man’. It is not until after this question that she is told.

The church offers as a possible interpretation that though Mary was engaged to be married, she had no intention of having relations with her future husband. Women were to be married in those days. All women, and if a women were widowed, she was expected to be married again. We don’t know all of the details of her or Joseph’s life. They are not important. The Scriptures give us all that is necessary for our knowledge and salvation.
Through the decades and centuries, the church has studied upon Scripture and has always interpreted it in light of the OT and Tradition. The doctrine of the Trinity is never explicitly stated in the Bible, and yet you accept the Catholic Churches teaching on that. In a way, I guess you could call all protestants cafeteria Catholics!*
Click to expand...
Hello Reggie,

No argument here, I just want to be sure I’m properly tuned in. So-
  • Gabriel tells Mary she will have a son.
  • Mary assumes Gabriel is telling her that she is already with child and replies “how can this be?”.
  • Then Gabriel explains the deal to her.
  • Then Mary, having planned to remain a virgin (and obviously childless) after Joseph’s and her marriage, says “let it be done to me according to His will”. In other words Mary gave her consent for her life plans to be altered for the will of God.
Is this about right?

You know, when a person stands back and looks at the believability of the whole mystery of God, believing Mary’s perpetual virginity is a relatively miniscule detail that seemingly wouldn’t get so much debate.
 
mark a:
Bump for an answer.

Thanks.

Hello Reggie,

No argument here, I just want to be sure I’m properly tuned in. So-
  • Gabriel tells Mary she will have a son.
  • Mary assumes Gabriel is telling her that she is already with child and replies “how can this be?”.
  • Then Gabriel explains the deal to her.
  • Then Mary, having planned to remain a virgin (and obviously childless) after Joseph’s and her marriage, says “let it be done to me according to His will”. In other words Mary gave her consent for her life plans to be altered for the will of God.
Is this about right?

You know, when a person stands back and looks at the believability of the whole mystery of God, believing Mary’s perpetual virginity is a relatively miniscule detail that seemingly wouldn’t get so much debate.
Click to expand...
this is very good logic

Maggie
 
mark a:
Bump for an answer.

Thanks.

Hello Reggie,

No argument here, I just want to be sure I’m properly tuned in. So-
  • Gabriel tells Mary she will have a son.
  • Mary assumes Gabriel is telling her that she is already with child and replies “how can this be?”.
  • Then Gabriel explains the deal to her.
  • Then Mary, having planned to remain a virgin (and obviously childless) after Joseph’s and her marriage, says “let it be done to me according to His will”. In other words Mary gave her consent for her life plans to be altered for the will of God.
Is this about right?

You know, when a person stands back and looks at the believability of the whole mystery of God, believing Mary’s perpetual virginity is a relatively miniscule detail that seemingly wouldn’t get so much debate.
Click to expand...
I believe the early centuries Church Fathers had a different understanding…this is what I’ve understood was written in the first centuries…

Mary does NOT assume that Gabriel is telling her that she is already with child. On the contrary, when she says, “How SHALL this be,” this reveals that it is definitely possible (and it was understood by some of the fathers) that she had made a vow of virginity.

In other words, instead of “in addition to,” this actually REVEALS her vow, because if she had NOT had a vow of virginity, then the statement doesn’t make sense. (It would have been EXPECTED that she would have a child with her betrothed Joseph, therefore it wouldn’t make sense for her to ask “How shall this be?”)

This is VERY hard to understand if you don’t actually think of yourself in the situation, but when you do, it turns on a light bulb:

Imagine being told that you were going to have a child with your betrothed husband (betrothal was much different than “engaged” as we know it today)…

If an angel of God came and told you that you would bear a child when you were betrothed to a man, then your first response might be something like…
“Wonderful, Praise God…WHEN shall this be?” NOT "HOW shall this be…she obviously knew how babies were made, so the statement if out of place if she didn’t have a vow of virginity.

Now, I had a fairly watered-down priest tell me that this is only an exegesis, and not a likely truth, since it was not common for a young girl to take vows like that at the time, however Tim Staples indicates some writings of the fathers that indicate otherwise on his latest CD series of the Blessed Mother. And historians tell me although it was uncommon, it was not unheard of. There are other examples in the Bible of women taking vows of virginity, so it is completely reasonable to assume that God would protect the N.T. ark of the covenant from ALL stain or sin…forever. Just like the O.T. types…when something is consecrated to God, it is consecrated FOREVER!
 
Thanks sfp, you sort of explained it the way I was trying to get across. The sequence and the way the questions are asked provide a pretty good indication of what Mary’s position was at the time.
  1. Gabriel announces to Mary that she is to bear a son and that he will be holy.
  2. Now Mary would not have found this strange, as there are numerous times in the OT when God announced the pending birth of a child.
  3. Since she is betrothed to Joseph, one would expect her response to be one that indicated that the child she would bear would be that of Joseph.
  4. Her response however is “How will this be?” Why? One must wonder if she has taken a vow of virginity. It may also have been that Joseph was beyond the child bearing years.
There has to be a reason that Mary asks, ‘How’, instead of ‘when’.
We don’t know and can’t really know for certain. That is why we trust the beliefs handed down from century to century. That is why history is so important. It is not blind belief in the Church, it is belief in Jesus’s own words.

Jesus told the Apostles, Whoever you forgive, they are forgiven.
Whoever you do not forgive, they are not forgiven.
What you bind on earth, will be bound in heaven. What you loose on earth will be loose in heaven.

We who trust the Church trust Jesus first and foremost. If the Church says this is what we are to believe, then I trust that Jesus will honor His Word when I am judged.

The first thing a disciple must let go of is himself. As they say in sports, there is no “I” in Church.
 
40.png
Mickey:
They are inseparable, Nestorius!
Click to expand...
Duh!!! No kidding they are inseparable! My point is, why do** you continue to call Mary ONLY the mother of God and NOT the mother of man? :banghead: **
 
John1717 said:
Duh!!! No kidding they are inseparable! My point is, why do** you continue to call Mary ONLY** the mother of God and NOT the mother of man? :banghead:
Click to expand...

If you aknowledge both why are you so bothered with her title?
 
40.png
MaggieOH:
Every response that you gave is in grave error and off topic. You continue to know nothing and as far as the comment about the Holy Spirit is concerned, well that is off topic and will not be discussed here.

Maggie
Click to expand...
Oh Harry, you always have to assert that I am in error. It must be that you consider yourself to be all knowing and infallible!
 
John1717 said:
Duh!!! No kidding they are inseparable! My point is, why do** you continue to call Mary ONLY** the mother of God and NOT the mother of man? :banghead:
Click to expand...

How many times do we have to repeat “MAN-GOD” before you get it? We acknowledge both because we recognize Mary as Theotokos :banghead:
 
40.png
Lisa4Catholics:
If you aknowledge both why are you so bothered with her title?
Click to expand...
**Because her title “mother of God” ignores Christ’s humanity and that is heresy! In Catholicism, the title is used to glorify Mary instead of Christ! :love: **
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top