perpetual virginity of Mary..T or F?

[zz912]

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.

Could you give some scriptural support for this conditional authority that you describe? I see nothing suggesting that obedience to Timothy is conditional on a Christian’s personal opinion on scripture. In fact it seems scripture reiterates many times to be obedient, and that those in authority will be judged more stringently because of their office. Jesus Himself tells us to obey ecclesial authority, to do what they say, not what they do. He doesn’t tell us our obedience is conditional.

Could you provide some scripture for your opinion?

 

[zz912]

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

Have you read those passages and the chapters before? Are you claiming that there are animal sacrifices in the heavenly temple? And are you claiming that there is only one sense or level to Scripture, specifically prophetic Scripture?

 

[Lochias]

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.

The WBC uses the same arguments that you do for their beliefs. They are 100%, self-admitted Sola Scriptura.

Why are they wrong, and you right?



No Protestant I’ve talked to has EVER been able to answer that question. Each and every one either got defensive and shut down, or highly embarrassed and eventually admitted that they didn’t know. They just “felt that way”. (Clarification:****** No Protestant I’ve talked to who believed in Sola Scriptura. My sampling range is 6 individuals who I can remember off the top of my head. )

It’s like someone claiming Hitler was Catholic and that is why we shouldn’t follow the RCC.

Except that Hitler never used any of the Church’s stances or teachings to claim validity for his goals. Further complicating your example is the fact that Hitler slaughtered millions of Catholics alongside all of the other people he murdered.

I’m done.

Okay.

 

[Lochias]

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.

Exactly. This is part of what I mean when I point out to some people that they are ignoring the history behind what they’re claiming.

 

[Lochias]

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.

If an individual has enough authority to decide that an entire church is teaching incorrectly, then doesn’t that mean that the individual never really placed themselves under the authority of anyone in that church to begin with?

And if we choose to put God’s authority first in our lives, how are we to know that it’s God that’s really speaking to us and leading us on, and not our own “authority” in disguise?

Honestly, is there ever a time in one’s life that being under someone else’s authority doesn’t sometimes chafe, make us wish for times when we didn’t have to be under that authority?

Why is God’s authority the only type of authority that apparently needs to feel absolutely, completely perfect? Why is God’s authority the only authority that should completely conform to what WE feel is right? Would we expect that of our bosses at work? Our parents? Our spouses? I think not.

 

[AbideWithMe]

Why is God’s authority the only type of authority that apparently needs to feel absolutely, completely perfect? Why is God’s authority the only authority that should completely conform to what WE feel is right? Would we expect that of our bosses at work? Our parents? Our spouses? I think not.

Where do you get the idea that to non-Catholics, God’s authority “apparently needs to feel absolutely, completely perfect” and should “completely conform to what WE feel is right”???

 

[YADA]

Where do you get the idea that to non-Catholics, God’s authority “apparently needs to feel absolutely, completely perfect” and should “completely conform to what WE feel is right”???

Because with non-catholics - when you disagree with something taught by your faith community or faith tradition - you leave to form a new faith community or tradition … form a new church or community complete with modified beliefs and understandings … that is the fruit of the Reformation …

All based upon an interpretation of the Bible:
this is the example that the Protestant theology of sola scriptura illustrates … that is why some Protestants believe in Infant baptism and some do not …
some believe that baptism is necessary and some do not,
some believe in the “Sinners Prayer” and some do not …
some believe that “Once Saved Always Saved” and some to do not …
some believe that it is sinful to use musical instruments in worship and some do not
some believe that abortion is wrong - some do not
some believe that women can be priests/pastors and some do not
some believe that homosexual marriage is wrong and some do not
some believe in the Virgin Birth - some do not
some believe in the bodily resurrection of Christ - some do not
some believe in the perpetual virginity of Mary - some do not
and the list goes on and on …

Which of course violates that same Bible - which informs us that Jesus founded One Church - not many … that Jesus prayed for his followers to be One as He and the Father are One … one in faith … That the Church that Jesus founded was promised to survive until the end of time … and that the Church Jesus founded was left with an organization to ensure its survival … and that no where in the Bible is found sola scriptura but direct passages to referencing Traditions taught by word of mouth and letter and that ultimately the Church should provide direction and correction …

 

[aidanbradypop]

Because with non-catholics - when you disagree with something taught by your faith community or faith tradition - you leave to form a new faith community or tradition … form a new church or community complete with modified beliefs and understandings … that is the fruit of the Reformation …

In all fairness, the same can be said with the Catholic Church as well.

American Catholic Church in the United States
Anglo-Lutheran Catholic Church
Antiochian Catholic Church in America
Breakaway Catholic Churches
Catholic Charismatic Church of Canada
Christ Catholic Church
Conclavism
Ecumenical Catholic Church
Evangelical Catholic Church
Fraternité Notre-Dame
Free Church of Antioch
Imani Temple African-American Catholic Congregation
Independent Sacramental Movement
Liberal Catholic Church
Mariavite Church
National Catholic Church of America
Old Catholic Church
Old Roman Catholic Church
Old Catholic Mariavite Church
Order of Corporate Reunion
Orthodox-Catholic Church of America
Polish National Catholic Church
Philippine Independent Catholic Church
The Young Rite

as well as the groups that we are not allowed to post

I do not see how this has anything to do with the topic of the thread but felt the need to post it anyways.

 

[YADA]

In all fairness, the same can be said with the Catholic Church as well. American Catholic Church in the United States
et al

as well as the groups that we are not allowed to post

I do not see how this has anything to do with the topic of the thread but felt the need to post it anyways.

It has relevancy because the denial of the Perpetual Viginity of Mary is an innovation that is directly related to the Protestant belief in sola scriptura and the denial of an authoritative apostolic church where every Christian gets to decide his own “Truth” from the scriptures

And - in all fairness - you are wrong about the same being said of the Catholic Church.

There are many Rites that comprise the Catholic Church … All that are Catholic are in union with Rome and comprise original Church founded by Jesus … the proof is in the teachings … and unity with the Chair of Peter …

these Rites are “Catholic”:
Alexandrian liturgical tradition; 2 liturgical rites
Coptic Rite
Ethiopic Rite
Antiochian (Antiochene or West-Syrian) liturgical tradition; 3 liturgical rites
Maronite Rite
(West) Syrian Rite
Syro-Malankara Rite
Armenian Rite; 1 liturgical rite
Armenian Rite
Chaldean or East Syrian liturgical tradition; 2 liturgical rites
Chaldean Rite
Syro-Malabar Rite
Byzantine (Constantinopolitan) liturgical tradition; 1 liturgical rite
Byzantine Rite
Latin (Western) liturgical rites

Any of those churches that you name which are not part of the Catholic Church are just like any other of the post Reformation Protestant Churches - So - no … the same cannot be said for the Catholic Church

 

[aidanbradypop]

It has relevancy because the denial of the Perpetual Viginity of Mary is an innovation that is directly related to the Protestant belief in sola scriptura and the denial of an authoritative apostolic church where every Christian gets to decide his own “Truth” from the scriptures

PV has NOTHING to do with sola scriptura. Catholics were allowed to decided on whether or not they believed it until it was actually made s binding teaching of the Church. I am not a believer of the PV, yet I still believe in the OHCAC. That has nothing to do with the PV of Mary. I believe in the virgin birth of our Lord. Anything beyond that really has no weight on salvation. Claiming Mary to be a PV is solely to raise Mary up rather than Christ.

And - in all fairness - you are wrong about the same being said of the Catholic Church.

You have every right to believe so.

There are many Rites that comprise the Catholic Church … All that are Catholic are in union with Rome and comprise original Church founded by Jesus … the proof is in the teachings … and unity with the Chair of Peter …

I, as well as the ones I posted, will disagree with you. Being in communion with Rome does not make one Catholic.

Any of those churches that you name which are not part of the Catholic Church are just like any other of the post Reformation Protestant Churches - So - no … the same cannot be said for the Catholic Church

Once again, you have every right to believe they are not.

Shall we get back to the topic of the thread now?

 

[JonNC]

Because with non-catholics - when you disagree with something taught by your faith community or faith tradition - you leave to form a new faith community or tradition … form a new church or community complete with modified beliefs and understandings … that is the fruit of the Reformation …

All based upon an interpretation of the Bible:
this is the example that the Protestant theology of sola scriptura illustrates … that is why some Protestants believe in Infant baptism and some do not …
some believe that baptism is necessary and some do not,
some believe in the “Sinners Prayer” and some do not …
some believe that “Once Saved Always Saved” and some to do not …
some believe that it is sinful to use musical instruments in worship and some do not
some believe that abortion is wrong - some do not
some believe that women can be priests/pastors and some do not
some believe that homosexual marriage is wrong and some do not
some believe in the Virgin Birth - some do not
some believe in the bodily resurrection of Christ - some do not
some believe in the perpetual virginity of Mary - some do not
and the list goes on and on …

Which of course violates that same Bible - which informs us that Jesus founded One Church - not many … that Jesus prayed for his followers to be One as He and the Father are One … one in faith … That the Church that Jesus founded was promised to survive until the end of time … and that the Church Jesus founded was left with an organization to ensure its survival … and that no where in the Bible is found sola scriptura but direct passages to referencing Traditions taught by word of mouth and letter and that ultimately the Church should provide direction and correction …

One patriarch believes in the Filioque, the rest do not,
Most reject the supremacy of the Bishop of Rome, only one does not.
Most do not teach the IC, only one does.

The differences are not simply because or even in spite of sola scriptura. As one can see, there are divisions even among those who claim to use Tradition and scripture.

Jon

 

[YADA]

PV has NOTHING to do with sola scriptura. Catholics were allowed to decided on whether or not they believed it until it was actually made s binding teaching of the Church. I am not a believer of the PV, yet I still believe in the OHCAC. That has nothing to do with the PV of Mary. I believe in the virgin birth of our Lord. Anything beyond that really has no weight on salvation. Claiming Mary to be a PV is solely to raise Mary up rather than Christ.

The Church and the faithful believed this - before the dogmatic decree - your saying this means nothing … in fact the decree probably had more to do with confusion caused by non-Catholic Christians … similarly to the Canon … where not only the duetero canonical books were challenged but other books like 1Timothy and the Book of Revelation …

And how do you determine that you are a member of the Apostolic Church - especially when you hold beliefs that the Apostolic Fathers and Apostolic Church did not then and would not now?

Mary always points to Christ and the Truth detracts nothing from Christ

You have every right to believe so.

Of course I do - glad you allow this - usually it is only non-Catholics that are allowed this freedom … Catholics are just told they are drones of the Pope

I, as well as the ones I posted, will disagree with you. Being in communion with Rome does not make one Catholic.

Your opinion - however from the scriptures and the writings of the Early Chruch Fathers - the act of separating yourself from the Chair of Peter separates you from the Church Christ founded.

Once again, you have every right to believe they are not.

Shall we get back to the topic of the thread now?

How nice that you still believe in the Virgin Birth and all things you think are worthy of belief and important for salvation - However, you are ignoring that the same basis that allows you to pick and choose allows others to take the next step beyond denying the perpetual virginity of Mary. They use your arguments to question and deny the Virgin Birth and the bodily resurrection of Jesus … and that is the point …

The Truth is important … the truth is that from the early church to the present - this Truth - that Mary remained perpetually virgin - has been held by Christians … if it was important then - its important today [and the fact that we Christians discuss it today - gives testimony to its importance]

 

[YADA]

PV has NOTHING to do with sola scriptura. Catholics were allowed to decided on whether or not they believed it until it was actually made s binding teaching of the Church. I am not a believer of the PV, yet I still believe in the OHCAC. That has nothing to do with the PV of Mary. I believe in the virgin birth of our Lord. Anything beyond that really has no weight on salvation. Claiming Mary to be a PV is solely to raise Mary up rather than Christ.

Also … how you can deny that sola scripura has nothing to do with the perpetual virginity of May when nearly every Protestant has used a call to scripture passages and their interpretation of those passages to ‘prove’ that Mary and Joseph not only engaged in sexual relations but had additional children … clearly the idea of sola scriptura and interpretation aided by the Holy Spirit is at the root of the denial of this long held Christian belief …

 

[concretecamper]

One patriarch believes in the Filioque, the rest do not,
Most reject the supremacy of the Bishop of Rome, only one does not.
Most do not teach the IC, **only one does.
**
Jon

Profound… huh

 

[PRmerger]

the WBC uses the SAME**** argument you do

That fact is incontrovertible. :sad_yes:

 

[pocohombre]

Ithe denial of the Perpetual Viginity of Mary is an innovation that is directly related to the Protestant belief in sola scriptura

Tertullian ,Helvidius and Eunomius were around before SS. I am not thrilled by Aquinas arguing for ever virgin cause he states that intercourse for Mary would forever be a “desecration, undignified and unholy”.

 

[aidanbradypop]

Also … how you can deny that sola scripura has nothing to do with the perpetual virginity of May when nearly every Protestant has used a call to scripture passages and their interpretation of those passages to ‘prove’ that Mary and Joseph not only engaged in sexual relations but had additional children … clearly the idea of sola scriptura and interpretation aided by the Holy Spirit is at the root of the denial of this long held Christian belief …

They are not related. Episcopalians do not believe in SS and the PV Mary is not a required belief within the Church.

Answer this please…Does believing in the PV of Mary get you to heaven? If I do not believe in it, I am in the middle, does that damage my salvation?

 

[BellsMom]

Regarding the OP. I personally can neither confirm nor deny the state of Marys virginity.

I do have trouble imagining her chatting casually with others about her sex life. And the apostles? How exactly did this subject come up? Theorizing about whether your rabbi’s Mom was having sexual intercourse with her husband? Wow.

I have my own theories as why this teaching developed but I’ll keep them to myself for risk of offending the posters here.

For me its hard to believe that something is Truth simply because it “makes sense” or “it’s only right”. But I’m not a christian anyways…

 

[PRmerger]

Regarding the OP. I personally can neither confirm nor deny the state of Marys virginity.

I do have trouble imagining her chatting casually with others about her sex life. And the apostles? How exactly did this subject come up? Theorizing about whether your rabbi’s Mom was having sexual intercourse with her husband? Wow.

I have my own theories as why this teaching developed but I’ll keep them to myself for risk of offending the posters here.

For me its hard to believe that something is Truth simply because it “makes sense” or “it’s only right”. But I’m not a christian anyways…

As with all teachings on Mary,,Mary

but about her Son.

IOW: all teachings about Mary aren’t really about her, but point to a better understanding of Him.

How does Mary’s PV give us a better understanding of Christ?

But telling us that he was really, really special. So special that his mother was made just for him, and for no other.

 

[pocohombre]

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.

You have a point. What I have heard more often is that “mother” refers to “Israel”. Never the less, we both agree the psalm speaks of Christ at least in the next verse past “my mothers children” with the zeal of thine house’’ which the gospels say refer also to Christ. So, do we cafeteria style pick and choose which is only Davidic and which are also Messianic ? Is that your position that vs 9 is also Messianic, but no others ? I am weary, my throat is dry, they hate me without a cause, I bear reproach are not Messianic also ?
As far vs 5,ok maybe it is only Davidic, but it certainly does not separate the others. There are also explanations of vs 5. Certainly Christ became sin on the cross, which was not hid from God and caused much pain and separation for the Father and the Son. The "foolishness of the cross’ is a biblical saying is it not ? So to me vs 8 stands: I am become a stranger to my brethren and an alien unto my mother’s children". Thanks for the thoughtful response.