Perpetuation of Virginity

[jcrichton]

I know precisely where you’re coming from. I’ve gotten to the point where I wince when I hear the words “that’s not biblical”.

Have you read Eusebius’ “Early Church History”? It offers some excellent insight into the debates that took place in the centuries before the Bible was compiled.

Hi!



…can you imagine Jesus being queried by the Disciples, ‘Lord, where is that in Sacred Scriptures?’

…and ever read a passage where it states that as Jesus or the Apostles Taught the audience read through the Scrolls to verify that they were being Taught according to the Word of God?

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[joeybaggz]

I apologize if it is self indulgent and trivial in the greater scope. Marian Dogma, has always been a considerable hurdle for me in exploring the Catholic Church further. For me, these historical roadblocks are not just something I can ignore in favor of other things if I am to give things a fair shake.

Erikzen: No need to apologize, my post wasn’t meant in any accusatory way. What I was simply trying to say is that some things belong only in the realm of faith, they are beyond any empirical basis of proof. If you can believe, fine, if not, fine.
I think one that that is not emphasized enough for those considering the RCC is that what Catholics must believe is contained in the Creed said at every Sunday Mass. The only thing about Mary is the words, “born of the Virgin Mary” in relation to Christ. One extra biblical doctrine we also believe is the Assumption of the Blessed Mother. Beyond that, it’s up to the individual. One thing to remember though, Mary’s message in all her reported apparitions is simply the last words we hear from her in Scripture; “Do whatever He tells you.” It’s easy for a cradle Catholic like myself to accept Marian doctrine, I can understand how it is difficult for someone coming from a different background.

Shalom