Perpetual virginity of Mary!

[Prayer Warrior]

there are thousands of denominations or sects that make that claim all teach differently

You have just made my point for me! There is no spiritual unity in man's doctrine. Human reasoning cannot guide us into all truth. ONLY the Holy Spirit can do this! So much of what we call doctrine is based on man's understanding, and this is why there are so many denominations. I realize that I'm stepping on denominational toes when I say this, but so be it! I believe that when things really get tough in the West, I mean REALLY tough, denominational lines will fall away. A part of me looks forward to that day.

 

[amigo de christo]

The illuminator has been found guilty of his own rules . i never once attacked anyone here .
I simply exposed a dangerous pope . folks were free to do as they please with what i said .
But HE then turns arounds and mocks and goads , and says as he does about one who , how did he put it
cant even spell ...........
exactly . i see total hypocrisy going on . How come they can say all and defend Rome , yet
on a topic if we defend the truth , its called goading . Yet i never made fun of anyone . HE DID .
You been called out illuminator . Get rid of me . Do as you will . But hyprocrites GOD will judge .
I love you my friend . And i do and will pray for you . But my warnings will never cease . DO what you must do . But
i made it very simple for folks to see hyprocrisy now . IF you cant even keep your own rules .

 

[amigo de christo]

I forgive illuminator . He knows not what he does . I truly do . My desire is only life for HIM .
But i had to show us the hyprocrisy . It may have cost me my time here . But it was well worth it .
I have a safe place for all lambs who desire truth . I am so sorrowful for him .
But i had to expose it . i had too . even if it cost me being here .

 

[Marymog]

As I already stated, that since the Bible was written, nothing endures and propagates quite like false doctrine.



The Bible!

I can quote many writings of so-called "Christian" Gnostic heretics early on in Christianity.

Wiki tells a bit more than your failed argument from antiquity...

"Although a number of church councils condemned it as an inauthentic writing of the New Testament, this did little to diminish its popularity. Pope Innocent I condemned this Gospel of James in his third epistle ad Exuperium in 405 AD, and the so-called Gelasian Decree also excluded it as canonical around 500 AD.[23] Thomas Aquinas, in his Summa Theologiae, rejects the Protevangelium of James teaching that midwives were present at Christ's birth, and invokes Jerome as contending that the words of the canonical gospels show that Mary was both mother and midwife, that she wrapped up the child with swaddling clothes and laid him in a manger. And thus concludes, "These words prove the falseness of the apocryphal ravings."

Thank you.

Help me to understand what you are saying. You accept the teachings/writings (interpretation of Scripture) of the men from the Reformation and you believe that they are right in their teachings/writings which makes YOU right.

I accept the teachings (interpretation of Scripture) of men from the 2nd century and they are wrong which makes me wrong. How is that logical?

You do realize that what you quoted from wiki says that they rejected The Gospel of James as "canonical"??? It does not say that they rejected the teaching of Marys perpetual virginity!! Soooooo would you care to try again?

 

[Candidus]

I accept the teachings (interpretation of Scripture) of men from the 2nd century and they are wrong which makes me wrong. How is that logical?

Because the teachings you follow, are not Scriptural!

As I said before, there exist many deviations from Biblical Christianity, even in the first two centuries.

You can appeal to tradition, but not Scripture. Yes, it was an early opinion, from a writing that has been rejected by the vast majority of Christians as genuine or authoritative. There are early opinions that Jesus didn't die on the Cross either! Some taught that sin did not exist, it was only in the Body, and the body has no effect on the spirit. Only the "enlightened" can see it!

 

[theefaith]

1 Kings 2:19
Bathsheba therefore went unto king Solomon, to speak unto him for Adonijah. And the king rose up to meet her, and bowed himself unto her, and sat down on his throne, and caused a seat to be set for the king's mother; and she sat on his right hand.

Mary is the queen of heaven cos Jesus is the king, the mother of the king is always queen! She sits at His right hand!

 

[Candidus]

You do realize that what you quoted from wiki says that they rejected The Gospel of James as "canonical"??? It does not say that they rejected the teaching of Marys perpetual virginity!! Soooooo would you care to try again?

Do you realize that no matter what someone says is true concerning the virginity of Mary apart from Scripture, has no bearing whatsoever to support an absurd assumption?

1). The Scriptures never claim it.
2). The Scriptures speak of Jesus having brothers and sisters.

You can dodge the issue by saying that brothers and sisters in the faith, or step-brothers and sisters from a previous marriage by Joseph... all of which are based in pure fiction to justify that Mary is somehow perpetually virgin. Which, if true means absolutely NOTHING!

 

[Candidus]

1 Kings 2:19
Bathsheba therefore went unto king Solomon, to speak unto him for Adonijah. And the king rose up to meet her, and bowed himself unto her, and sat down on his throne, and caused a seat to be set for the king's mother; and she sat on his right hand.

Mary is the queen of heaven cos Jesus is the king, the mother of the king is always queen! She sits at His right hand!

This has as much proof as saying that because she sits on God's right hand. He has to be left handed!

 

[Marymog]

Because the teachings you follow, are not Scriptural!

As I said before, there exist many deviations from Biblical Christianity, even in the first two centuries.

Thank you.

OK....I Think I've Got it now....The longest held (1,900 years in this case) teachings of Christianity are wrong because those teachings deviated from Biblical Christianity and are not Scriptural BUT the most recent teachings (500 years old in this case) of Christianity are right because they got back to Biblical Christianity. And no Christian writing/teaching from the 16th century have any deviations from Biblical Christianity. Makes sense to me...
BTW.....Scripture never says that Mary had other children, naming Jesus and only Jesus, as her son. Soooo where is your Scriptural support that Mary had other children? (Jesus had brothers theory does not say that they were Marys children soooo don't go there)

If the Reformers got back to "Biblical Christianity" using Scripture to support what they teach/believe then Why do all the Reformers disagree with each other?

Respectfully, Mary

 

[Marymog]

Do you realize that no matter what someone says is true concerning the virginity of Mary apart from Scripture, has no bearing whatsoever to support an absurd assumption?

1). The Scriptures never claim it.
2). The Scriptures speak of Jesus having brothers and sisters.

You can dodge the issue by saying that brothers and sisters in the faith, or step-brothers and sisters from a previous marriage by Joseph... all of which are based in pure fiction to justify that Mary is somehow perpetually virgin. Which, if true means absolutely NOTHING!

Thank you Candidus. No dodgeing going on here. I have accepted the longest held teaching of Christianity sooooo how am I dodging?? See if you can dodge these facts:

The term brother (Gk. adelphos) has a broader meaning than uterine brothers. It can mean a biological brother, but it can also mean an extended relative, or even a spiritual brother. Greek has a separate word for cousin, anepsios, but the translators used adelphos which is even for true cousins.

James and Joseph (also called Joses), who are called Jesus’ “brothers” (Mark 6:3) are indeed the children of Mary—Just not Mary, the mother of Jesus. After St. Matthew’s account of the crucifixion and death of Jesus, he writes: “There were also many women there, looking on from afar, who had followed Jesus from Galilee, ministering to him; among who were Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James and Joseph, and the mother of the sons of Zebedee.” (Matt. 27:56; see also Mark 15:40).

These “brothers” that you mention are never once called the children of Mary, although Jesus himself is (John 2:1; Acts 1:14).

The earliest non-canonical writings (1,900 years ago) we have from Christian history support these facts from Scripture (Mary did not have other children).

The 500 year old non-canonical writings we have from the Reformers twist these facts from Scripture.

I know there is nothing I can say that will change your mind AND there is nothing you can say that will change my mind sooooo I digress and you can have the last word!!

God Bless Mary

PS....It looks like you didn't realize that what you quoted had NOTHING to do with rejecting Mary's perpetual virginity. Did you have to much pride to admit that?

 

[theefaith]

Thank you.

OK....I Think I've Got it now....The longest held (1,900 years in this case) teachings of Christianity are wrong because those teachings deviated from Biblical Christianity and are not Scriptural BUT the most recent teachings (500 years old in this case) of Christianity are right because they got back to Biblical Christianity. And no Christian writing/teaching from the 16th century have any deviations from Biblical Christianity. Makes sense to me...
BTW.....Scripture never says that Mary had other children, naming Jesus and only Jesus, as her son. Soooo where is your Scriptural support that Mary had other children? (Jesus had brothers theory does not say that they were Marys children soooo don't go there)

If the Reformers got back to "Biblical Christianity" using Scripture to support what they teach/believe then Why do all the Reformers disagree with each other?

Respectfully, Mary

mans none of the so called reformers were apostles? Eph 2:20

 

[Marymog]

mans none of the so called reformers were apostles? Eph 2:20

I don't understand your question/point....

 

[Marymog]

Your pride makes discussion impossible, the Bible was completed long before any councils pauls writings were even called scripture,

Good point EG. In Scripture Pauls writings were called Scripture. When was the book of James first called Scripture? I can't seem to find a time frame on that one.

Respectfully

 

[Eternally Grateful]

we cannot believe what ever we want!
We can only believe divine revelation!
Eph 4:5
Jude 1:3

Jesus is our salvation? Yes
Mary is His mother? Yes
Mother of our savior and salvation!
Why can’t you see she found the grace of salvation lost by Adam? Lk 1:28
Mary found favor.
Mary is blessed cod she consented and was faithful but Lk 1:28 says she is blessed even before that happened
Why is she herself blessed?
The only answer is she was conceived in her mother’s womb immaculate!
Lk 1:49 He that is mighty (God) has done great things (plural not only the miraculous conception of Jesus by the HS) what else is there accept the immaculate conception?
Gen 3:15 enmity none of satans works are found in Her!

Again and you claim not to worship her

 

[Eternally Grateful]

Even luther and calvin defended the perpetual virginity of Mary

And?

can you tell us how Mary having sex with HER HUSBAND after she gave birth to Christ would have affected Christ’s diety and our salvation?

 

[Eternally Grateful]

I don't see ANYTHING in scripture about the "mother of our salvation." I don't see anything about "the immaculate conception." I don't see these concepts mentioned or taught in scripture. These ideas have their basis in man's doctrine, not God's. I cannot live by man's doctrine because there is no life or power in it. Man's doctrine cannot set us free, but if we if we continue in JESUS' Word, then we will know the truth, and the truth will make us free! (John 8:31-32) Jesus did not tell us to continue in Mary's word, but in His Word. He is my Savior and Redeemer, my Prince and King, my Lord and God! In HIM I live and move and have my being! (Acts 17:28) THAT I MAY KNOW HIM!

But whatever things were gain to me, those things I have counted as loss for the sake of Christ. More than that, I count all things to be loss in view of the surpassing value of knowing Christ Jesus my Lord, for whom I have suffered the loss of all things, and count them but rubbish so that I may gain Christ, and may be found in Him, not having a righteousness of my own derived from the Law, but that which is through faith in Christ, the righteousness which comes from God on the basis of faith, that I may know Him and the power of His resurrection and the fellowship of His sufferings, being conformed to His death; in order that I may attain to the resurrection from the dead. (Phil 3:7-11)

I see it all over in paganistic theologies of all sorts but Not once in the word

 

[Eternally Grateful]

Good point EG. In Scripture Pauls writings were called Scripture. When was the book of James first called Scripture? I can't seem to find a time frame on that one.

Respectfully

James was written before Paul is I remember. So did James have to wait three hundred years before it was called scripture?
If so. Why? Why did God wait so long?

 

[amigo de christo]

I see it all over in paganistic theologies of all sorts but Not once in the word

because it comes from pagan roots sister . This will sting a bit for some folks , and i do not say it to be mean .
But Rome adapted to pagan religoins to WIN those religions . She like a chameleon . she appears as they , to draw them in .
What you speak of comes from pagan roots my friend . You are very correct . And now nigh the end
we see it flooding all over the places . ITS all about feminism and mother earth , mother this and mother that .
I think the babylonians called her , serm , it was something with an S . BUT ROME brought it in
to create what even constantine desired . a faith or religion that pandered to all mindsets . one that could easily
be controlled by politics , and controlled by whomever ruled thatreligoin too . it was death from its birth .
You are spot on correct . again i attacked no one here . I simply spoke truth about the dangers of rome .

 

[amigo de christo]

James was written before Paul is I remember. So did James have to wait three hundred years before it was called scripture?
If so. Why? Why did God wait so long?

We already know it was truth . Every word in that bible is truth .
And dont let the roman system fool us , some men within that institution may have preserved those words ,
BUT that system NEVER LIVED BY THOSE WORDS . GOD was in control . HE WAS . ITS WHY WE GOT THE BIBLE TODAY .
Folks may say , BUT ROME held it , yeah they did . BUT THEY SURE DIDNT LIVE IT .
GOD was in control . THANK GOD , not rome for the bible . THANK GOD FOR IT .

 

[amigo de christo]

And?

can you tell us how Mary having sex with HER HUSBAND after she gave birth to Christ would have affected Christ’s diety and our salvation?

Very good my friend . who cares who defended what . We dont follow men . FOLLOW THE LAMB , FOLLOW JESUS my friend .
Yes its true some reformers still held to some errors . YOU SPOT ON RIGHT . best reponse i seen as yet . SO . exactly . SO WHAT
if they did . WE DONT . praise GOD . I TELL US ALL PRAISE GOD .
MY SOUL is fired up for the truth and i have hope some will hear .
Wait you response was AND . BUT I KNEW WHAT YOU MEANT .