perpetual virginity of Mary..T or F?

[Randy_Carson]

Because the RCC itself says that it recognized (not produced) scripture.

Technically, the Church did produce the NT under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, so your assertion holds no water.

But now we come to it…The Catholic Church did recognize which books were inspired and which were not. Consequently, your debt to the Catholic Church for everything it has done to pen, protect and preach the Gospel down through the centuries is inestimable.

 

[GaryTaylor]

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.

This is what Maximus the Confessor states about the Protoevangelium of James, which he quotes on the pre biblical account of Mary…

“Their works are beautiful and virtuous, these are Gregory of Neocacesarea the Thaumaturge, the great Athanasius of Alexandria, Blessed Gregory of Nyssa and Dionysius the Areopagite, and others similar in virture. And if we say some things from the apocryphal writings, it is true and without error, and it is what has been accepted and confirmed by the above mentioned Fathers”

Page 38 Life of the Virgin 600-AD

 

[stewstew03]

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?

I like the hypothetical (as a former southern baptist), but why give up so easily on the WBC? They cite the following confessions of faith on their website:

The First London Baptist Confession of Faith, 1646
The Savoy Declaration of Faith and Order, 1658
The Philadelphia Confession of Faith, 1742

Whatever their methods, they are Baptists in the Reformed (Calvinist) tradition.

 

[aidanbradypop]

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.

With a little c maybe

 

[Randy_Carson]

With a little c maybe

Not according to Protestant scholars who acknowledge the development of the name.

 

[aidanbradypop]

Not according to Protestant scholars who acknowledge the development of the name.

This would be a fun conversation but not here lol

 

[aidanbradypop]

Not according to Protestant scholars who acknowledge the development of the name.

This would be a fun conversation but not here lol

 

[AbideWithMe]

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.

That was kind of you, Nicea.

Dear people, please keep in mind that there are only a small handful of non-Catholics that post here. Kliska has done a really nice job of being charitable and contributing to the discussion. But when I see one after another, after another, Catholic poster press a single person (here, Kliska) or two, to respond to thread-derailing challenges leisurely coming from a much larger base of Catholic posters…well, it makes me wince…as if I saw a bunch of oversized grown men all trying to ride a game racehorse at the same time. I don’t know…something about some of these threads just strikes me as ungentlemanly and ugly. Blech.

 

[YADA]

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.

Now you sound like the Episcopalian who took offense at my discussion of where abandoning the teachings can lead - and using Bishop Spong as an example …

First Christians for 1800 years believed that [and the Catholic Church still ]:
Mary was a Virgin -
She conceived of the Holy Spirit and gave birth to Jesus - God Incarnate - Virgin Mother
She remained ever Virgin … Perpetual Virgin

Today many Protestant Christians only believe that [for the last 100 or 150 years +/-]:
Mary was a Virgin -
She conceived of the Holy Spirit and gave birth to Jesus - God Incarnate - Virgin Mother
NOTE: Lost is the belief in the Perpetual Virgin

Bishop Spong - the Episcopal Bishop of the Newark Diocese for 8 years even after he wrote a book … wrote that he was rethinking the Virgin Birth … that Jesus was probably the result of a rape by a roman soldier … Now - the poster who got upset that I would even bring up Spong - wrote that Bishop Spong was only writing about his opinion - and did not speak for the his Church …

The problem with “inspiration” from the Holy Spirit and biblical scholarship that is answerable only to the person doing the scholarship and guided by what they perceive as reasonable, what they perceive as the typical family, what seems logical to them … what ‘connects the dots’ … is exactly what Bishop Spong devolved to … in fact he even wrote a book questioning Jesus’ resurrection from the dead …

This is the fruit of Protestantism - it becomes whatever Truth you want it to be

You can discount the Westboro Baptist Church because it offends your sensibilities … you can discount the books by Bishop Spong … and you ignore the Jesus Seminar … but they are all part of the Traditions of the Protestant Reformation …

And there in lies the problem … say the sinners prayer and be saved [though that is not found in the scriptures - anywhere]

I ask you - do you think the writings of a Bishop have no impact or influence on the Christians he serves?

So Christians can - at will … redefine marriage ?.. allow abortion … ?

All of the above - are acceptable in many Christian churches today …

Without the apostolic Church - an authoritative body - founded by Christ and guided through all time - there is no certainty - faith is the free for all of opinion

 

[pocohombre]

I beg your pardon? What is a “standard” family? Really? The Holy Family was mentioned here and yet you question what is a “standard” family? You buy into that garbage? Unbelievable!

Buy into what garbage ?

 

[pocohombre]

Oh, I wish it were true that my wife was a saint. How she must wish that I were, also. How we wish that our eldest son could be divine, blah, blah, blah.

Seriously?

This was no ordinary family…

When “garbage” and “blah blah blah” is only rebuttal I’m wondering about burnout, and so early in the year… What are you talking about?.. Are you following posts.? It was questioned that if Jesus had brothers why didn’t they believe. Is that what you read? I think it was this year.

 

[pocohombre]

Thanks for the laugh. Needed it due to lack of intellectual stimulation in last few responses. True. people like a good “fight”.

 

[Randy_Carson]

When “garbage” and “blah blah blah” is only rebuttal I’m wondering about burnout, and so early in the year… What are you talking about?.. Are you following posts.? It was questioned that if Jesus had brothers why didn’t they believe. Is that what you read? I think it was this year.

See posts #297 and #299 on Psalm 69:5.

How can you apply “folly” and “guilt” and “sins” to Jesus?

Psalm 69:5
King James Version (KJV)
5 O God, thou knowest my foolishness; and my sins are not hid from thee.

Psalm 69:5
New International Version (NIV)
5 You, God, know my folly;
my guilt is not hidden from you.

 

[Randy_Carson]

While we’re waiting for Kliska and Poco to formulate their responses to my questions concerning Psalm 69, let me remind everyone of the context: it has been asserted that Psalm 69 is a messianic prophecy that proves that Jesus had brothers and or sisters because v. 8 reads:

8 I am a foreigner to my own family, a stranger to my own mother’s children;

However, if we are being asked to accept a literal interpretation that verse as evidence that disproves the Perpetual Virginity of Mary, then I will ask why another, earlier verse does not prove that Jesus was both foolish and a sinner:

5 You, God, know my folly; my guilt is not hidden from you. (NIV)

5 O God, thou knowest my foolishness; and my sins are not hid from thee.(KJV)

Alternatively, we might conclude that v. 5 applies to the Psalmist, personally (remember Bathsheba, Uriah’s wife whom David probably has in mind here?), but then it can be said that v. 8 only applies to him, also. If that is the case, then Psalm 69 does not provide the fatal blow to Catholic doctrine as claimed.

 

[Randy_Carson]

In the Gospel of John, we read the following:

23 Now while he was in Jerusalem at the Passover Festival, many people saw the signs he was performing and believed in his name. 24 But Jesus would not entrust himself to them, for he knew all people. 25 He did not need any testimony about mankind, for he knew what was in each person. (John 2:23-25)

Later in that gospel, we read the following concerning Jesus’ knowledge of Judas Iscariot’s heart:

11 For he knew who was going to betray him, and that was why he said not every one was clean.

These passages are just two of the many showing that Jesus had significant insight into the hearts of those around him along with foresight about future events. Thus, Jesus must have known the ultimate goodness of his “brother”, James’ heart and that James would eventually come to accept Jesus as the Messiah and the divine Son of God.

Knowing all things, why would Jesus instruct His mother to live John instead of with her own son, James, after Jesus’ death?

Much has been made by certain posters about how the perpetual virginity of Mary makes a mockery of the Jewish marriage customs of the day, but those same people are adamant that Jesus was willing to offend his own family and make a mockery of Jewish customs regarding the responsibilities of sons to care for their own widowed mothers.

You can’t have it both ways, folks.

Jesus commended Mary into the care of John because she had no other family to whom she could turn; her husband, Joseph, being much older, had already died, and she had no other children.

 

[QNDNNDQDCE]

Or not. The Greek language was the perfect language to communicate what God was communicating in the NT. Each language is different, and apparently He wanted the NT in Greek.

It is not accurate to say that the New Testament is in Greek if you are treating Greek as a language uniform across authors. Homer, Plato and St. Matthew did not all speak the same. So even if there are Greek words to distinguish between brother and cousin in Greek, that does not mean that Jewish Greek-speakers would have made use of them in the same way as Athenians, especially if it was foreign to their culture.

 

[Eric_Hilbert]

The charity level of this thread is troubling.
Both Catholics and non-Catholics need to debate with maturity and respect.
Contrary to what many think, I really do not like passing out infractions.
So don’t force me.

 

[Peter_J]

Because the RCC itself says that it recognized (not produced) scripture.

I think you misunderstood. We say both.

Keep in mind that the church doesn’t mean just the pope.

 

[rbarcia]

Perpetual Virginity of Mary. True.

And He said to me,
“This gate shall remain shut;
it shall not be opened,
and no man shall enter by it;
for the Lord, the God of Israel,
has entered by it;
therefore it shall remain shut. Ezekiel 44:2.

A whole section on the future temple Christ will rule from twisted into Mary’s Womb. What an abuse of scripture

 

[Peter_J]

That was kind of you, Nicea.

Dear people, please keep in mind that there are only a small handful of non-Catholics that post here.

True. But on the other hand, I generally skip a lot of the Catholic posts, so it kind of balances out.