perpetual virginity of Mary..T or F?

[stewstew03]

Wow, you do understand they aren’t actually a Baptist church, right? And that Baptists are highly offended by their use of the term? You were treating me with a level of respect that has just flown out the window if you are using such a Rhetorical and insulting analogy. Look at their fruit and you tell me if they are your brothers and sisters in Christ.

What authority does anyone have to proclaim they are not Baptists? They simply disagree with you – but that doesn’t make you (or any of their critics) right, does it?

 

[stewstew03]

Are not all Christians commanded to proclaim Truth? Is not Jesus Truth? Do you and I proclaim the same Christ?

Thankfully, you and I have some common ground (the creeds, for example), and I praise God for that. The problem is: (1) heresy and (2) authority. For you, the response is “to each his own – we are all ‘popes’, so to speak.” But from my perspective, the paradigm you preach produces collateral damage that harms souls and disrupts efforts to evangelize the world…

 

[zz912]

I don’t care for the authority of man, but the authority of God. One of the ways to check to see if man is right is to compare what man says to the word of God. In this case, I will go with the word of God. Further, I’m not “bent” on it; a boardmember asked for our opinions and I’m giving them.

Would you have submitted yourself to Paul’s authority? Would you submit to Timothy’s authority? What about the men that Timothy ordained? What about the men that those men ordained?

At what point in this string would you have stopped submitting to their authority and why? And where is your biblical basis for determining when to stop submitting to their authority?

 

[zz912]

We, you and I, are under one Shepherd, and hence one fold. We are both sheep following an ultimate leader; Jesus Christ Himself. The unity that we are to see in His disciples is love for one another, He didn’t say we had to espouse all the detailed things exactly the same. You and I can stand side by side and recite the Apostles’ and Nicene Creeds, we can each talk of our baptism and faith in Christ.

So you believe in this part of the Nicene Creed?

I believe in one, holy, catholic and apostolic Church.
I confess one Baptism for the forgiveness of sins
and I look forward to the resurrection of the dead
and the life of the world to come. Amen.

Does baptism remove sins?

Do you submit to the authority of the one, holy, catholic and apostolic Church? And how does this submission show itself? And how do you take your brother to this Church when you have a disagreement with him? And how do you remain in this Church so that you will know how to behave?

 

[YADA]

The problem of Perpetual virginity of Mary is an insult to the Jewish way of life. There are ways of remaining a virgin in Jewish life, but getting Married isn’t one of them. Since Mary got married, not having sex inside of marriage is a rather bizarre idea. If Mary was to be a virgin, then getting married is the furtherest thing to do and makes a mockery of marriage in Jewish culture. The only thing the Bible says is that while Jesus was in the womb, he refrained from having sex with Mary. You have to take a giant leap from that, when one isn’t there. In Jewish life, having children was considered a blessing and lack of Children was considered a curse. The fact the brothers were named and the sisters went is culturally accurate, so everything is lining up according to the cultural customs of Jewish practice.

And this is not exactly true - read the book of Numbers - there are clearly those who make this choice …

This may not be common [though what could be more uncommon then a Virgin Birth] … but in every age and in every culture people have made decisions to live chaste lives - even remaining virgins … and some do so within the bonds of marriage … it is neither unheard of nor unknown … even as rare as it may be …

And - as has been illustrated many times - it is far more of a leap to consider those named as children of Mary … no where in the scriptures are they identified as Mary’s children … which would be necessary …

And I am sure that you would not accept the passage identifying Jesus as the son of the carpenter to mean that Joseph was Jesus’ father - would you?

 

[Lochias]

Wow, you do understand they aren’t actually a Baptist church, right? And that Baptists are highly offended by their use of the term? You were treating me with a level of respect that has just flown out the window if you are using such a Rhetorical and insulting analogy. Look at their fruit and you tell me if they are your brothers and sisters in Christ.

OH, No.

No, no, no.

You’re the one who said the Holy Spirit leads us, without any benefit of the Church that Jesus started; the WBC uses the SAME**** argument you do.

Prove that they’re wrong, and that you’re right, please.

 

[YADA]

Morning Randy,

Would love to get your thoughts on a subject. Many use the Proto of James as evidence that Mary had no other children and was a ever virgin.

When some use the Gospel of Thomas as evidence of James being the leader of the Church, it is frowned upon and stated…that is not in the canon.

Here is the The Gospel of Thomas:

The disciples said to Jesus, “We know that you are going to leave us. Who will be our leader?” Jesus said to them, “No matter where you are, you are to go to James the Just, for whose sake heaven and earth came into being.”

Now not wanting to debate about the leadership of James, but simply using this as an example of should one really use the Proto of James as evidence?

The Gospel of Thomas is a work from the Gnostics - a heresy that was denounced by the early Church … to use it to inform authentic Christian faith is sot acceptable …

The Gospel of James on the other hand though not considered canonical was never denounced as heretical as was the Gospel of Thomas … dubious perhaps, recent in its appearance in the 3rd century … but some of the information was also known and written of by earlier commentators - Origen being one

The Gospel of Thomas was found in 1947 …Though known to have existed and been denounced - it was recovered from obscurity - a dust heap … its find is interesting - but a quick read and you will understand and know why the Church denounced - not only the Gospel of Thomas but Gnostism

The Gospel of James while not included in the Canon of the Church was widely translated, read and known throughout the centuries … I am sure you can see the difference

 

[YADA]

OH, No.

No, no, no.

You’re the one who said the Holy Spirit leads us, without any benefit of the Church that Jesus started; the WBC uses the SAME**** argument you do.

Prove that they’re wrong, and that you’re right, please.

 

[Nicea325]

We, you and I, are under one Shepherd, and hence one fold. We are both sheep following an ultimate leader; Jesus Christ Himself. The unity that we are to see in His disciples is love for one another, He didn’t say we had to espouse all the detailed things exactly the same. You and I can stand side by side and recite the Apostles’ and Nicene Creeds, we can each talk of our baptism and faith in Christ.

Yes my sister,but unfortunately we do not sit in the same church,because we do not profess the same beliefs.

 

[Kliska]

Would you have submitted yourself to Paul’s authority? Would you submit to Timothy’s authority? What about the men that Timothy ordained? What about the men that those men ordained?

At what point in this string would you have stopped submitting to their authority and why? And where is your biblical basis for determining when to stop submitting to their authority?

There are different levels and types of authority; God first, husband second. Then, if it is an organization church matter, they are in authority until they contradict the word of God. You don’t submit to someone not submitting to God in the sense of the church.

So you believe in this part of the Nicene Creed?

I believe in one, holy, catholic and apostolic Church.
I confess one Baptism for the forgiveness of sins
and I look forward to the resurrection of the dead
and the life of the world to come. Amen.

Does baptism remove sins?

I do. The difference is in how we see the one holy catholic and apostolic church, and also what is the one baptism. You see the one baptism as water baptism, I see it as the Holy Spirit Baptism into Christ. There is water baptism that is an outward sign of the Baptism of the Holy Spirit. Mark 1;8 “I baptized you with water; but He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit”

It is the baptism of the Holy Spirit that is efficacious. Should we fulfill the command to be baptized with water? Yes. But, that’s a different thread.

 

[Randy_Carson]

Morning Randy,

Would love to get your thoughts on a subject. Many use the Proto of James as evidence that Mary had no other children and was a ever virgin.

When some use the Gospel of Thomas as evidence of James being the leader of the Church, it is frowned upon and stated…that is not in the canon.

Here is the The Gospel of Thomas:

The disciples said to Jesus, “We know that you are going to leave us. Who will be our leader?” Jesus said to them, “No matter where you are, you are to go to James the Just, for whose sake heaven and earth came into being.”

Now not wanting to debate about the leadership of James, but simply using this as an example of should one really use the Proto of James as evidence?

Sorry for missing this earlier and not responding sooner. Yes, I have a few thoughts about this and every ancient writing.

1. It is important to know the most accurate assignment of authorship and dating of the material. Sometimes this is tricky at best.
2. It is important to remember that the text in question gives us insight into some ideas that were floating around at the time it was written. Either the author simply made them up out of thin air, or he recorded things that were generally known at that time.
3. The Church has correctly identified those works which are inspired.
4. Those works that are not inspired may still be historically accurate. Then again, they may not.

So, what can we say about the Proto and the two topics you mention?

First, the Proto suggests a possible reason for Mary’s marriage arrangement. Second, the Proto points to James as the head of the Universal Church.

How do these two ideas line up with other facts and ideas from other sources? In brief, it seems to me that the idea that Joseph was previously married (and thus much older than Mary) lines up with other known facts (ie, Joseph vanishes after Jesus is found in the Temple whereas Mary doesn’t…why?). On the other hand, the idea that James is the head of the universal church (as opposed to the local church in Jerusalem), does not find any support from other ECF’s.

So, in my estimation, the Proto records a likely scenario regarding the perpetual virginity of Mary while the idea that James was "the man"a does not line up with either scriptures or the writings of the ECF’s and the Tradition of the Church.

Hope this helps. :tiphat:

 

[Kliska]

For those of you blaming the teaching of SS for the Westboro “Baptist Church;” when someone insults a fellow group of believers, the true Baptists, by actually giving credence to the Westboro’s, I’m done conversing. It’s like someone claiming Hitler was Catholic and that is why we shouldn’t follow the RCC.

I’m done.

 

[Nicea325]

There are different levels and types of authority; God first, husband second. Then, if it is an organization church matter, they are in authority until they contradict the word of God. You don’t submit to someone not submitting to God in the sense of the church.

I do. The difference is in how we see the one holy catholic and apostolic church, and also what is the one baptism. You see the one baptism as water baptism, I see it as the Holy Spirit Baptism into Christ. There is water baptism that is an outward sign of the Baptism of the Holy Spirit. Mark 1;8 “I baptized you with water; but He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit”

It is the baptism of the Holy Spirit that is efficacious. Should we fulfill the command to be baptized with water? Yes. But, that’s a different thread.

Correct different types of authority and the Apostles were one and the folks they passed the office too commonly known as bishops.

Remember Jesus’ words:

Give to Caesar what belongs to Caesar and to God what belongs to God.

Jesus knew Caesar was an authority and had no issues with Him as an authority.

 

[Nicea325]

For those of you blaming the teaching of SS for the Westboro “Baptist Church;” when someone insults a fellow group of believers, the true Baptists, by actually giving credence to the Westboro’s, I’m done conversing. It’s like someone claiming Hitler was Catholic and that is why we shouldn’t follow the RCC.

I’m done.

Do not leave my sister in Christ. Do not let anyone get under your skin.

 

[Randy_Carson]

Randy, you are not judge, jury and executioner.

The jury of your peers (brothers and sisters in Christ) including Martin Luther and John Wesley disagree with your position, and I have judged your arguments to be insufficient. No one is the executioner…the case was dead on arrival.

This is the non-Catholic forum and this thread was addressed to those that don’t hold to the PV of Mary in large part. The Burden of proof lies on those making the positive assertion; Mary was Virgin all of her days. The ones that will cling the most tightly to the view are indeed those that place a higher value on tradition. That’s not all bad, but in this case where it could go either way, it can actually get in the way of digging into scripture.

Since Paul encourages us to “hold fast to the traditions” we received, I thank you for the compliment on our adherence to God’s Word.

Further, the NT that we have the most manuscripts are in Greek, regardless of the “original language” spoken. There is a reason for that, and God knows exactly what He’s doing. The Greek word for cousin is used elsewhere in scripture, the writers did not choose to use that for Jesus’ brothers.

You fail to understand the argument.

Further, as others have pointed out, to be fruitful and multiply is the basic commandment and applies to married couples. Either Mary and Joseph were married or not. To fulfill certain prophecies they had to be well and truly married, and Joseph had to be Jesus’ legal father for those prophecies/promises to be true. Why would God not want to bless Mary and Joseph both with children? They are faithful Jews living in a Jewish culture. What better sign to all around them that their marriage is blessed and they are favored than to have more healthy children?

All this might apply to a normal couple under normal circumstances. However, you cannot require normalcy from a couple who married not for common reasons but to protect Mary’s vow of virginity.

I would also add that His brothers thinking Him crazy lends a lot of apologetic weight when presenting the gospel to non-believers. It shows exactly what He was claiming, and then shows their conversion after the resurrection, and fulfills a Messianic Psalm.

Please explain Psalm 69:5 applies to Jesus.

 

[Randy_Carson]

My point is this…should people, Catholic or non, reference the Proto when it is not in the canon?

Of course.

Christians have cited Eusebius and Josephus in their apologetics…what’s the diff?

 

[Randy_Carson]

Really?

1st…Bill is not Catholic.

2nd…we are all Christians but not all Catholic so how very Christian of you sounds charitable rather than sacrastic.

Actually, since there is only ONE body of Christ and it has been called the Catholic Church since the end of the first century, all Christians are Catholics…they just don’t know it.

But that’s another thread.

 

[stewstew03]

For those of you blaming the teaching of SS for the Westboro “Baptist Church;” when someone insults a fellow group of believers, the true Baptists, by actually giving credence to the Westboro’s, I’m done conversing. It’s like someone claiming Hitler was Catholic and that is why we shouldn’t follow the RCC.

I’m done.

Okay. But what is a “true Baptist”?

 

[Randy_Carson]

Funny, I thought is was God, as even the RCC teaches.

Simple history is that there has never been one canon. Simple history underscores in all churches that scripture comes from God. We can all look into it and see if we agree with the canon. It always seems that the RCC clings to the idea that they gave the world the Bible; it didn’t. Certainly not the OT, and the NT was organically compiled save for several contended books.

Yes and no. God established one Church which began calling itself the “Catholic Church” before the end of the first century (during the lifetime of the last living apostle, John). So, out of the living experience of the Catholic Church, God inspired Catholic authors to write gospels and letters for the benefit of other Catholics, and later even more Catholics discerned which of the many texts in circulation were truly inspired and which were not.

There wasn’t a Protestant (or Baptist ) anywhere in sight when these things were done in God’s Church.

THESE are the true facts of “simple history”.

 

[FathersKnowBest]

For those of you blaming the teaching of SS for the Westboro “Baptist Church;” when someone insults a fellow group of believers, the true Baptists, by actually giving credence to the Westboro’s, I’m done conversing. It’s like someone claiming Hitler was Catholic and that is why we shouldn’t follow the RCC.

I’m done.

The principle remains.
Let’s not use the WBC if that insults you, but let’s use a hypothetical group that teaches things that we know are wrong, using SS as their basis.

If you need a more concrete example, how about a church that split off because they believed scripture supported slavery in the US?

How can you show their beliefs to be wrong?