D
- Status
D
Dokimas
Guest
The first link is where you found this information and I was surprised to see that you visit an 'anti-Catholic website for your ‘apologetics’ and that you feel the need to link to such an ‘anti-Catholic’ website.
I can assure you ‘anti-Catholic’ websites have no desire for truth. They seek only that which can be twisted against the Catholic Church.
Who is the bride of Christ? Who is the wife of the Lamb?
Rev 21:9 And there came one of the seven angels, who had the vials full of the seven last plagues, and spoke with me, saying: Come and I will shew thee the bride, the wife of the Lamb.
Christ referred to Himself as the bridegroom. Do we see the ‘anti-Catholics’ denouncing Him or God’s word for this language?
The Holy Father speaks metaphorically, without fear of those ‘anti-Catholics’ who twist truth to fit their agenda. Mary was representative of the Church, now run off and tell all the anti-Catholics you saw a Catholic compare Mary to Jesus’ wife.
Mary was clearly married to Joseph in the scriptures and we’re not making it any other way. The ignorance of ‘anti-Catholics’ does that for us.
I was unaware of the anti-catholic slant of the first link. However, do you deny that the quotes mentioned are real?
Okay, let’s throw out the first link. What about the second link? You forgot to make comment on that, if I’m not mistaked.
And while we’re commenting on my post: just because light is shed upon a belief that may be false, does that make the ‘exposer’ anti or if a wrong belief is exposed, couldn’t it lead to getting rid of a wrong belief?
M
Mannyfit75
Guest
To those Protestants who are confused about Mary being the “Spouse of the Holy Spirit.”
The Catholic Church has never dogmatically declared that Mary is OFFICIALLY the Spouse of the Holy Spirit.
Catholic theologians like Pope Benedict XVI have addressed Mary as the Spouse of the Holy Spirit as a “figurative language or symbolic”. It is not LITERAL as you presumed. Perhaps, you have been brought up in the tradition to read things “literally” (no suprise there since Protestant Fundamentalist always take the Bible literally; open for another discussion not on this one).
Mary is viewed as a spouse of the Holy Spirit because it was the Holy Spirit who shadowed her and she be became pregnant with the Word of God (Jesus); much like when a male spouse impregnant his female spouse. We know that Joseph is not the biological father of Jesus. Joseph is the literal spouse of Mary and husband.
If you try to interpret Pope Benedict XVI’s writing on Mary as literal, all this belief will confused you.
I can only assumed BrianH and Dokimas are Literalists… since they are CONFUSED.
The Catholic Church has never dogmatically declared that Mary is OFFICIALLY the Spouse of the Holy Spirit.
Catholic theologians like Pope Benedict XVI have addressed Mary as the Spouse of the Holy Spirit as a “figurative language or symbolic”. It is not LITERAL as you presumed. Perhaps, you have been brought up in the tradition to read things “literally” (no suprise there since Protestant Fundamentalist always take the Bible literally; open for another discussion not on this one).
Mary is viewed as a spouse of the Holy Spirit because it was the Holy Spirit who shadowed her and she be became pregnant with the Word of God (Jesus); much like when a male spouse impregnant his female spouse. We know that Joseph is not the biological father of Jesus. Joseph is the literal spouse of Mary and husband.
If you try to interpret Pope Benedict XVI’s writing on Mary as literal, all this belief will confused you.
I can only assumed BrianH and Dokimas are Literalists… since they are CONFUSED.
D
Dokimas
Guest
As a literalist, I put up any idea that Mary is the spouse of the Holy Spirit up with a lot of other probable wrong understandings of Mary, the wonderful mother of Jesus.
M
Mannyfit75
Guest
Brother,
It isn’t literally. He wrote it in a context that is poetic and symbolic. Indeed, you misunderstand why Pope Benedict XVI addressed Mary as “spouse of the Holy Spirit”.
Mary is a wonderful mother of Jesus. I honor her and adore her because for 9 months, the Creator of the universe dwell inside of her womb. I would leap like John, who upon hearing the voice of Mary, the baby leap in her womb.
I pray my explanation helps you to understand better. I hope now you understand that Mary being called “spouse of the Holy Spirit” is not to be taken as literal.
P
Prodigal_Son1
Guest
I told you in my first post, that the Holy Father spoke ‘metaphorically’, which ‘anti-Catholics’ have twisted to fit a perversion of something pure only to support their biased opinion against the Catholic Church. You have not exposed anything, except the perversion of ‘anti-Catholics’ who will stoop to any level to falsely accuse the Catholic Church through such websites. Read back and see I did not forget to address the second link.
Scriptures plainly state that Joseph and Mary were married.
Mat 1:16 And Jacob begot Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ.
If you can’t find in scriptures how it’s possible a Jewish woman remained chaste, even after marriage, let me direct you to Numbers 30.
We are not ignorant people, nor do we change what’s written in scriptures.
People shouldn’t tell us what we believe, especially after we provide the correct answer.
D
Dokimas
Guest
B
BrianH
Guest
A figurative spouse? No it is NOT like when a male spouse impregnants his female spouse. That is absolutely not accurate imagery and should not be used figuratively . Mary did not have some form of special relationship with the Holy Spirit according to the Bible. It is all about her relationship with God. It is all about her saying yes to Gabriel. The rest of this is just make believe. I tell you what is also true. I can’t find any patristic writer who says it. Who was the first? Does anyone know?
P
Prodigal_Son1
Guest
I know you believed they were married, it seemed that you had some doubts that we believed it.
Did you read Numbers 30 to see how it was possible for a Jewish couple not to consumate a marriage carnally in Biblical times?
I know translations use the term ‘brothers’ or ‘sisters’, but even the reformers recognized that the same term used for siblings was used for cousins or those of the same tribe. There were writings that spoke of Jospeh being a widower prior to marrying Mary. His children would have been referred to as ‘brothers and sisters’ of Jesus. With these things in mind, it’s not conclusive that there was a ‘consumation’ of the marriage as we, in modern times, view a marriage to be consumated.
Lineages are specifically spelled out in scriptures, but no where does scriptures refer to Mary as the mother of anyone besides Jesus.
No, and I didn’t say that or insinuate it. The assertion from the ‘anti-Catholic’ website, you provided, was towards Catholics being and doing such.
You said, ‘And while we’re commenting on my post: just because light is shed upon a belief that may be false, does that make the ‘exposer’ anti or if a wrong belief is exposed, couldn’t it lead to getting rid of a wrong belief?’
As opposed to accepting our explanations, it seems you considered it ‘exposing’ a false belief. I apologize if I am reading more into it than that.
As for ‘getting rid of a wrong belief’, many right beliefs have already been removed by some Protestants, some that the reformers themselves held too. All one has to do is read the writings of the early Church fathers, upto the time of the reformation to see the many changes inflicted upon beliefs.
Catholic beliefs existed for 1500 years. Do you really think there is something that has not been ‘exposed’ already?
I invite you to read the Catechism of the Catholic Church. We hide nothing, and all our beliefs are explained in detail in the Catechism.
Telling someone not to tell us what we believe is not telling you to believe as we do. We hear misconceptions of Catholic beliefs all the time. We explain what we really believe and people reject that and continue with telling us what we believe, as if it were truth because that’s their view of something they don’t truly understand.
I saw explanations being given on this particular subject, yet it was brought up it was an exposing of a false belief. It seems to be another rejection of what we really believe.
P
Prodigal_Son1
Guest
**Luk 1:35 And the angel answering, said to her: The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee and the power of the Most High shall overshadow thee. And therefore also the Holy which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God. **
We know the Holy Spirit used to ‘overshadow’ the Temple that held the ark of the covenant.
Please share with us, anyone that had this form of a special relationship with the Holy Spirit besides Mary, as explained ‘ACCORDING TO THE BIBLE’?
B
BrianH
Guest
I have already shown that the word overshadow does not have any special connotation according to the Bible and there is nothing to indicate a “special relationship”. If you go into this believing the overshadowing reflects something the text does not say, presto you get Catholic pious opinion. That is just conjecture. This overshadowing could have taken .5 seconds, 1 minute, or been outside of linear time. No one has a clue and the Bible does not say. The Holy Spirit is inside of us. It lives in us. This we know.
The passage in Luke is all about Gabriel and God. The text says nothing about Mary having a special relationship.
D
Dokimas
Guest
D
Dokimas
Guest
You make too much of the Ark of the Covenant (and Mary) with respect to the ‘overshaddow’ IMO.
Le 16:2 and the LORD said to Moses: "Tell Aaron your brother not to come at just any time into the Holy Place inside the veil, before the mercy seat which is on the ark, lest he die; for I will appear in the cloud above the mercy seat.
The Presence of God was above the Mercy Seat. Yes I know the Mercy Seat was above the Ark.
Ex 25:22 "And there I will meet with you, and I will speak with you from above the mercy seat, from between the two cherubim which are on the ark of the Testimony, about everything which I will give you in commandment to the children of Israel.
P
Prodigal_Son1
Guest
It’s a special relationship if God had not overshadowed another, especially in light of the conception of His only begotten Son. You’re not going to find another special relationship equal to that.
P
Prodigal_Son1
Guest
I make too much of the ark of the covenant? There was the special ark of the covenant for the old covenant between God and man, and there was a much more special ark of the covenant for the NEW AND EVERLASTING covenant.
B
BrianH
Guest
No thats not it. A relationship denotes something that occurs over time. Otherwise, it is more accurately called an encounter. That is why the term spouse is not accurate. A spouse figuratively speaking has certain connotations specific to longevity for one. Mary had a special encounter with the Holy Spirit but to speak about it as a relationship is not in the Bible.
P
Prodigal_Son1
Guest
I’m sorry, I’m not responding to many points raised inside a quote. I’ve told you how difficult it is. One has to open two tabs, copy and paste each point, setting the html for each quote from you, then respond to them individually to make it easy for you to respond too.
M
Mannyfit75
Guest
There is no patristic sources who first coined the phrase. It is more of an analogy than figurative speakings, as Dave Armstrong (Catholic Apologist states).
*Calling Mary the “spouse of God” is, I contend, perfectly harmonious with Bible teaching:
- Jesus was conceived by the Holy Spirit (God).
- Jesus was conceived in the womb of Mary by the Holy Spirit; “with child of the Holy Spirit” (Matthew 1:18).
- In normal marital relationships, we say that a woman is “with child by (male so-and-so).”
- By analogy, then, if Jesus’ parents were Mary and the Holy Spirit, then by simple analogy it follows that Mary (in this particular sense, and this alone) is the “spouse of God” just as she was the Mother of God.
- The objection to this arguably flows (at least in part) from a mere emotional, irrational reaction based on misunderstanding of Hebraic and Catholic terminology and categories of thought. “Mother of God” is objected to, based on a rather dim comprehension of what it means in the first place; thus many objectors think it is putting Mary above God, as if God originated from her; whereas it only means that Jesus was God, and she was His mother; therefore she was the Mother of God (the Son).
- Likewise, I submit that perhaps the objection to “spouse of God” often flows from similar miscomprehensions and irrational apprehensions. It is thought to imply an equality with God, when in fact it does no such thing. It is only a limited analogical description based on Mary’s relation to the Holy Spirit in the matter of the conception of Jesus. This description is no more “unbiblical” or non-harmonious with Scriptural thought than St. Paul saying “we are God’s fellow workers” (1 Cor 3:9), “working together with him” (2 Cor 6:1), or St. Peter talking about men becoming “partakers of the divine nature” (2 Peter 1:4), or St. John joyously proclaiming “when he appears we shall be like him” (1 John 3:2). These are understood as not entailing equality with God; therefore, the phrase “spouse of God” (like the related “Mother of God”) is no different. It is well within biblical parameters of thought and doctrine. Thus, the problem seems (too often) to come down to an incorrect understanding of how certain biblical, Hebraic, Catholic language functions, and what it means.
Isaiah 1:21 (RSV) How the faithful city
has become a harlot,
she that was full of justice!
Righteousness lodged in her,
but now murderers.
Code:
Isaiah 54:5-6 For your Maker is your husband,
the LORD of hosts is his name;
and the Holy One of Israel is your Redeemer,
the God of the whole earth he is called.
[6] For the LORD has called you
like a wife forsaken and grieved in spirit,
like a wife of youth when she is cast off,
says your God.
Isaiah 62:4-5 You shall no more be termed Forsaken,
and your land shall no more be termed Desolate;
but you shall be called My delight is in her,
and your land Married;
for the LORD delights in you,
and your land shall be married.
[5] For as a young man marries a virgin,
so shall your sons marry you,
and as the bridegroom rejoices over the bride,
so shall your God rejoice over you.
Code:
Jeremiah 2:32 Can a maiden forget her ornaments, or a bride her attire? Yet my people have forgotten me days without number.
Jeremiah 3:1 . . . You have played the harlot with many lovers;
and would you return to me? says the LORD.
Jeremiah 3:6, 8-9 The LORD said to me in the days of King Josi'ah: "Have you seen what she did, that faithless one, Israel, how she went up on every high hill and under every green tree, and there played the harlot? . . .
[8] She saw that for all the adulteries of that faithless one, Israel, I had sent her away with a decree of divorce; yet her false sister Judah did not fear, but she too went and played the harlot.
[9] Because harlotry was so light to her, she polluted the land, committing adultery with stone and tree.
Jeremiah 3:20 Surely, as a faithless wife leaves her husband, so have you been faithless to me, O house of Israel, says the LORD*
P
Prodigal_Son1
Guest
Did she not ‘raise’ the Son and witness His suffering and sacrifice over time? You seem to separate God the Son, from God the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit; ONE God. Seems to me she totally submitted to God’s will, until her own end. Who else in scriptures did as much?No thats not it. A relationship denotes something that occurs over time. Otherwise, it is more accurately called an encounter. That is why the term spouse is not accurate. A spouse figuratively speaking has certain connotations specific to longevity for one. Mary had a special encounter with the Holy Spirit but to speak about it as a relationship is not in the Bible.
You seemed bent on keeping the semantics going on something metaphorically spoken. Is it only to keep a wedge driven between us?
B
Bill_Pick
Guest
I got the right to ask any question I like,believe me you are not god,but you may think you are .
Lets see if you can understand the Logic of this,if you can not I will understand.
! Mary is the Mother of God
2 Jesus is God
3 Therefore,Mary is the Mother f God, Does that help You
- Status