Prove it!

[Dokimas]

That would be dishonouring His mother by using Her as a mere vessel and nothing more then. To throw Her away like an intrument. And then there’s the fact that She remains the Spouse of the Holy Spirit. Out of great respect on that alone, I woudn’t dare touch Her weather I’m Her earthly husband or not.

Having sex with her subject is akin to throwing Mary away?​

That’s a new one to me. I didn’t know the CC teaches Mary was the wife of the Holy Spirit. And where does the Holy Spirit records that: chapter and verse please.

 

[Des]

You seem to say there is no doubt that the verse in question says that after Mary gave birth to Jesus, Joseph never ‘knew’ Mary.

Yes because I believe in the Oral transmition of the Holy Word and not just in Written form remember. So to me, there is no doubt of course. If I were to use the Bible alone without the aid of the Church, I’d be doing alot of assuming when it comes to the implicit revealed truths in it.

-According to my Greek lexicon they are the same words in my passages and in yours. I suppose I could have not looked carefully.

Oh I don’t know. I was just asking is all. You could be right.

 

[Des]

Having sex with her subject is akin to throwing Mary away?

Making Her Holy then making her unholy would be IMHO.

-That’s a new one to me. I didn’t know the CC teaches Mary was the wife of the Holy Spirit. And where does the Holy Spirit records that: chapter and verse please.

I would say it’s just common sense. Did God (Holy Spirit) concieve Jesus with Mary? If so, how can this not make Him Her spouse on a supernatural level?

And yes, the CCC teaches this as well.

 

[Des]

I need to split for now Dokimas.

You’re actually not so bad to talk to after all once I warmed up to you.

God Bless and Have a very Merry Christmas.

 

[guanophore]

I agree it’s not really a meat issue but telling someone they must not eat it or they’ll be sinning.​

I hope you apply your logic equally to the man who spilled his seed disobediently. It was a disobedience issue, not a birth control issue.

In Onan’s case, it was both. It was his duty to give a child to his brother’s wife to preserve the family inheritance. He did not want the inheritance to go to his brother’s progeny, but his own. It was greed, just as much birth control is today. It also was disobedience.​

• If the CC was not speaking infallibly about a sin issue that wasn’t a sin, how do I know when they’re really speaking for God? That’s my original point.

This also an excellent question. None of the disciplines are part of the infallible teaching. However, we are all called to be obedient to those whom God has placed over us. Disobedience is sin.

 

[Dokimas]

Making Her Holy then making her unholy would be IMHO.

I would say it’s just common sense. Did God (Holy Spirit) concieve Jesus with Mary? If so, how can this not make Him Her spouse on a supernatural level?

And yes, the CCC teaches this as well.

Having sex as God instructed it makes a person unholy???​

The Holy Spirit did NOT conceive Jesus with Mary. There was no sex at all. As God, the Holy Spirit implanted the Holy Embryo in the womb of Mary as a doctor implant a fertilized egg in a woman. Would you say the spouse of a woman who had artificial insemination was the doctor?

 

[Dokimas]

I need to split for now Dokimas.

You’re actually not so bad to talk to after all once I warmed up to you.

God Bless and Have a very Merry Christmas.

-.
Thanks​

And God bless you and have a Merry Christmas, you and your loved ones.

 

[guanophore]

Who is any church to tell a believer how to be disciplined in a way not spoken in the Bible? The Bible tells us we should fast, it tells us we should pray. I can’t remember a verse that tells us we’re sinning if we don’t fast or pray.

Another excellent question Doki. Only the Church founded by Christ, given His authority to shepherd His One Flock, who has the keys to the Kingdom, and the power to bind and loose, has the ability to provide such guidance to the sheep. Only the Church united with the successor of Peter, to whom was given the responsibility of feeding and guiding the flock.

Disobedience is sin.

 

[Jars_of_Clay_1]

Then the Bible tranlators should have used another word in the examples I have given when the word till or until means not up to that point in the verse. Who do you think translated the Bible to English?

Originally Posted by Des
Yes, Context, Context, Context Dokimas.

And behold I am with you always, even UNTIL the end of the age.“And behold I am with you always, even UNTIL the end of the age.”…God isn’t with us after the end of the age?

Joe did not repent TILL the day he died…Joe repented after he died?

'The Lord said to my Lord, 'Sit at my right hand until [eos] I make Thine enemies Thy footstool"…The Lord then will no longer sit at the right Hand of the Father?

The above are your examples, correct? I don’t want to mis quote you.

Here’s my understanding:

I am with you always, even until the end of the age! It’s giving us an idea in our limited knowledge of how long he’ll be with you. Doesn’t at all mean he won’t be with us after this age ends - that’s a new beginning. Example., Des, I will be with you even until the end of my vacation! It doesn’t mean I’ll never be with you again - it gives you a defining timeline - but not a finite timeline. Des, I’ve given you this great gift (insert whatever you like) and you can keep it even until I get back from vacation. (Indicating that you could keep it even longer.)

Joe did not repent till the day he died. I can give you a real life example here - My mother died November 10 (last month) she repented on her deathbed. So let me make this statement. My mother did not repent till the day she died. You understand what that sentence means with the knowledge that I’ve given to you in the previous statement.

Can you also be correct - yes. If we knew Joe and he did not repent on his deathbed it is also true to say, “Joe did not repent till the day he died.”

'The Lord said to my Lord, 'Sit at my right hand until [eos] I make Thine enemies Thy footstool"…The Lord then will no longer sit at the right Hand of the Father? The day will come that this earth will end and He is called to Sit at the right hand until He make Thine enemies Thy footstool. A time will come when all we know will end is here - when God makes the Lord’s enemies His footstool (and that will happen because he says so) - something else will happen after that. Certainly not something we can debate here - it is unknown to all.

So, let’s look at Matthew 1:25 But he had no union with her until she gave birth to a son. And he gave him the name Jesus.

Let’s fill in different names: But Mike had no union with Maggie until she gave birth to a son. An he gave him the name Barney.

I think your 2nd of the use of the word “until” can best be used here. Before we can answer what happened, what do we know about these couples?

In the instance of Jesus and Mary, an angel of the Lord came down and said to one of them, “do not be afraid to take Mary home as your wife.” (Clearly a married couple. So if I say to you, “He had no union with her until she gave birth to a son.” What meaning can you arrive at?)

In the instance of Mike and Maggie we don’t know if they’re married, we don’t know anything about them at all. (What meaning can you arrive at? You can’t arrive at a definitive answer knowing nothing about them at all.)

Thanks for reading folks. (I hope I referenced your examples…wouldn’t want to get that wrong.)

 

[PRmerger]

• However I do cringe when you make statements that place the CC above the Bible and clearly you have done so in this post.

No, not above the Scriptures. Just *before *the Scripturres, chronologically.

It is a simple fact that for the first centuries of the Church there was no Bible.

First came the Church, then came the Bible.

It was the Church which claimed that the Gospel of Mark was inspired, but the Gospel of the Nazoreans was not.

You would not know that, were it not for the CC.

 

[fbl9]

If i were in St.Joseph’s shoes the thought of marital relations with Mary would never crossed my mind…“for that which is begotten in her is of the Holy Spirit” an angel told him this. Think about it for a bit please.Such thought of the Mother of God having relations is thinking of the flesh not the spirit.

 

[guanophore]

All this conversation because I’ve been told I need the CC as my authority so I can know properly and have issues settled. Are you understanding yet why I feel I can’t place myself under such an authority?

No, I am sorry, I don’t. It seems to me that you are not able to trust God to keep HIs promises.

 

[guanophore]

If the setting up of fast days by the church is Biblical, why’d it stop? Is it sinning or causing its people to sin?​

Sure disobeying the Bible is sin if the specific thing is for all of us to follow.

Fasting has not stopped. Spiritual disciplines of prayer and fasting have been observed from the beginning of the church. The types vary from region to region.

 

[Jars_of_Clay_1]

If i were in St.Joseph’s shoes the thought of marital relations with Mary would never crossed my mind…“for that which is begotten in her is of the Holy Spirit” an angel told him this. Think about it for a bit please.Such thought of the Mother of God having relations is thinking of the flesh not the spirit.

Fb - I think marital relations are a wonderful thing. A gift from God…He created our bodies, knows how they work, and marital relations is a beautiful intimate bonding between a man and a woman. Also, Mary and Joseph were flesh. Just like you and me and our families. Remember the angel also told him to take her home as his wife. That’s a wonderful thing.

I in no way can pretend to know what Joseph was feeling, but God did. He knew he was a fine upstanding man. A man good enough to be the husband to Mary. I would like to think Mary and Joseph were in love and enjoyed all aspects of a loving marriage… including marital relations.

I, in no way am trying to say or imply that you think of marital relations in a poor manner. Your personal life and thoughts are your own.

What I’m trying to share with you is why I think Joseph and Mary did have marital relations.

Thanks for listening.

 

[PRmerger]

[SIGN]It is a simple fact that for the first centuries of the Church there was no Bible. [/SIGN]
First came the Church, then came the Bible.

Another thought just occurred to me:

There was no Bible for the first 4 centuries of Christianity–that’s 400 years, folks!

That’s like the time from when the Pilgrims arrived on Plymouth Rock until approximately modern day.

When I think about that time frame, it’s *staggering *how long the Church existed without the Bible, relying only on Sacred Tradition.

(We are agreed that the Scriptures existed, but there was no one who codified the Scriptures to tell the Church: this is inspired, and this is not. That did not come for 400 years.)

Imagine this 400 years-- [SIGN1]from the time of the Pilgrims until present day[/SIGN1]–without the Bible! That really makes it real for me–what about you?

 

[fbl9]

Fb - I think marital relations are a wonderful thing. A gift from God…He created our bodies, knows how they work, and marital relations is a beautiful intimate bonding between a man and a woman. Also, Mary and Joseph were flesh. Just like you and me and our families. Remember the angel also told him to take her home as his wife. That’s a wonderful thing.

I in no way can pretend to know what Joseph was feeling, but God did. He knew he was a fine upstanding man. A man good enough to be the husband to Mary. I would like to think Mary and Joseph were in love and enjoyed all aspects of a loving marriage… including marital relations.

I, in no way am trying to say or imply that you think of marital relations in a poor manner. Your personal life and thoughts are your own.

What I’m trying to share with you is why I think Joseph and Mary did have marital relations.

Thanks for listening.

Are you good enough in God’s eyes to place seed in the field that He Himself seeded.?

 

[Jars_of_Clay_1]

Are you good enough in God’s eyes to place seed in the field that He Himself seeded.?

Me? No, obviously. But Joseph obviously was - God chose him.

 

[guanophore]

Look I am not nor will be a brainwashed Catholic who just goes along with whatever because someone in the Church deems it is the way it should be.

No one is asking you to, Tweety, although it is clear that your brain definitely needs some washing.

Persons who claim to be Catholic have an obligation to understand why the Church teaches what she does, and if they do not agree, assent that the Church is right, and seek by prayer, obedience, and study to be conformed to Christ’s image as manifested through the Church. At the very least, those having difficulty accepting the Teachings are to avoid public dissent, such as the kind you have demonstrated here. Public dissention by a person claiming to be Catholic is a grave insult.

 Now I am not saying that you are or those that just come to terms without understanding what it is that they believe.

Most of us have had to accept one or more elements that we just don’t understand (yet). Peter and the 'Apostles did not understand what Jesus meant when He said “my flesh is true food” either, but rather than walk away from Him, Peter said “to whom shall we go? You have the words of eternal life”. We trust that the Word committed to the Church by Christ are the Words of Life, and we will not find them anywhere else.

My faith in Jesus says different, He tells us to try thr Spirits and I do .

Tweety, Jesus is not going to give any one individual a special revelation that contradicts what He has already revealed to the Church. I believe you are sincere in your desire to discern the Truth, but the promise He made to lead into all Truth was given to the Church. Individuals can only benefit from it to the extent that they are in unity with the One Body.

If you don’t well then I guess you believe anything you are told and if that works for you so be it.

These type of comments are insulting. They imply that we do not study, and struggle, and examine all that we are told. It comes across really condescending. Especially from someone who does not appear to have ever studied the reasons behind the doctrines with which she disagrees.

I really don’t care what you think I am or not, what is important to me is following Jesus!

Do you really think it is a good representation of Jesus for you to present yourself as someone you are not? How does this glorify Him? How does insulting all the Catholics here by giving a bad example show love of your neighbors?

If you wish to pretend to be Catholic in your parish, that is between you and your pastor (and God, to whom you will answer for your duplicity). When you do it here on CAF, you malign the Church in public. You expose yourself to all to be held accountable for misreprenting yourself as well as the Church.

**

tweetymom:
I am not bickering just don’t agree on some issues.**

In that case, it is inappropriate for you to claim to be Catholic.

 

[guanophore]

Did Jesus say that you can’t be an ABC Catholic? Or that I have to agree with you?

Jesus said “choose Life”.

It is not agreement with individual Catholics that is the issue, Tweety. The problem lies in your disagreement with the Apsotolic Teaching that is preserved in the Church. If you don’t accept it, then it is disingenuous to call yourself Catholic. You are misrepresenting yourself. How does this glorify. God.

 

[fbl9]

Me? No, obviously. But Joseph obviously was - God chose him.

Where to do you get the idea that St.Joseph would have thought the oppsite of this…God choose St.Joseph because He knew St.Joseph was good enough not to.