Perpetual virginity of Mary!

[amigo de christo]

any guesses on who had the greater sin . those who delivered JESUS over to be killed .
ROME had the greater sin than even those secular authorities . tried to wash her conscious by saying , well we didnt kill them .
YEAH but you delivered them over to be killed , my popes , so called vicar of Christ .
And worse we need to watch out as of late what some of these modern popes are teaching .
Teaching things like preaching the gosple is like jihad . And that muslims , buddists and we all are worshipping the same GOD .
talk about blasphemy . After her ecumincal movment has rounded up all the religoins and the faiths
to be as one , she gonna do as she has always done . TIME TO round up the ones who did not conform and deliver them
over to our one world govt .
. Folks got no idea what is coming and where ROME is leading the world RIGHT TO . Read revelation .
The largest crusade against the true bible believing christains will begin as soon as this has ran its course . She never changed . She just played like she did to gain numbers and religoins .

 

[amigo de christo]

Has anyone ever bothered to think on that one .
Where do we think this we are one all inclusive religoin that does the bidding of a one world govt is gonna end up .
Well , the ones who wont conform to this , they gonna be rounded up and known as haters of humanity and of the world .
Rome has never and will never change . Why is it the popes , specially this one , sound just like those politicains who desire a one WORLD govt
a one world bank . Francis sounds like the mouthpiece of the social marxist move , just with some christanity throwed in the middle of it .
WE are being led right into the final world order . Wherein the beast shall rise and rule over the nations .
AND who is helping create its system . ROME IS and so are our protestant churches who go along with her move .
Folks we better wisen up . CLING TO JESUS . Learn our bibles and test all men .

 

[amigo de christo]

Remember if i didnt love you all , i would NOT warn . My desire is for souls to know the one true biblical Jesus
and to steer others away from certain dire and grave dangers .

 

[Grailhunter]

Remember if i didnt love you all , i would NOT warn . My desire is for souls to know the one true biblical Jesus
and to steer others away from certain dire and grave dangers .

Anytime politics gets involved with anything, it follows the fades and can instill a form of social insanity. There have been so many "isms" in history it makes for a good list. Some have issues with government and law and order as a whole. Add that to conspiracy theories and you have quite the theological stew going.

It does not matter what denomination you are, we all live in glass houses. So we should keep the stone throwing down to a minimum. The Catholic Church is ate up with politics. Why? It is huge and it is the oldest Christian denomination. They have had the time to come up with things. But the views of the Vatican are not necessarily the views of the Catholics in the pews, and the Catholic Church in the United States and South America have their own beliefs. Then on the other hand there are dozens of Protestant Churches that marry gay couples. You can check this list out
Blessing of same-sex unions in Christian churches - Wikipedia

It is the Christians in the pews that vote. Too many vote for political leaders that promote gay marriages, abortions, atheism, anarchy, drug use, communism, and occult activity. Theologically people believe different things but on these topics we should be in agreement.

Is it a sin to vote for a political party or person that supports gay marriages?
Is it a sin to vote for a political party or person that supports abortions?
Is it a sin to vote for a political party or person that supports atheism?
Is it a sin to vote for a political party or person that support anarchy?
Is it a sin to vote for a political party or person that supports drug use?
Is it a sin to vote for a political party or person that supports communism?
Is it a sin to vote for a political party or person that supports occultism?

This is something that the individual denominations need to address at the church level. It is something that every Christian should ask themselves. The godless are growing in numbers, even sex with minors is beginning to be socially acceptable. In reality, as it works, inactivity and apathy works as support for these moral deficiencies. Instead of bickering among ourselves we should stand in solidarity against these issues?

 

[Mungo]

During the time of Christ it was customary for the Jewish in-laws to fly into the local airport and pick-up the young couple in a Cadillac...preferably in a convertible, and take them to the Four Seasons where they would have a lavish wedding ceremony, presided over by a Catholic Priest. Afterward at the reception they could party with the band Alabama while they watched the Superbowl on a big screen TV. What is wrong with this statement? The same as yours. History, historical era, and timeline, you have to keep them straight.

Two of the most common mistakes in biblical understanding....

1. You cannot read the Bible like it is the latest edition of the local Sunday Paper.
2. You cannot superimpose your beliefs on the scriptures.

The terms you are using are not part of the biblical narrative. I understand the confusion because there was a wedding in the Gospels.

But the Hebrew language does not have a word for wed or wedding. Just like the Christians their wedding customs will develop long after the biblical era.

Hebrews "took" their wives....the union being the event that bound them.
Genesis 2:24 "For this cause a man shall leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave to his wife; and they will they shall become one flesh." The cleave and the one flesh is the finalization of the marriage. No mention of wedding or ceremony, no requirement.

No requirement in the New or Old Testaments for Jews or Christians....never was a requirement....the custom comes much later and it is modeled after Pagan weddings. Still today many parts of a normal wedding has Pagan customs. What does a balloon with a string on it look like?

There are two scriptures concerning Miriam and Joseph, one shortly after Joseph finds out that Miriam was impregnated by some one else and the other during their time in Jerusalem.

Luke 2:5 in order to register, along with Mary, who was engaged to Him, and was with child.

Matthew 1:24 And Joseph arose from his sleep and did as the angel of the Lord commanded, him and took her s his wife, and kept her a virgin until she gave birth to a Son, and he called His name Jesus.

How many problems do we have here? Number one they seem to conflict. One says that Joseph took her as his wife before they went to Jerusalem and one says that they were still engaged when they were in Jerusalem. Any possible explanation for this is speculation to a degree...so here it is...Since wedding ceremonies were not the custom, Joseph could announce publicly that they were married and stay off the controversy. And as the scripture indicates wait for her to have the baby to make it official....which means sex.

Now that would mean that Joseph would have to lie....for the pious pies, they are likely to take exception to Joseph lying, but that can of worms is already open...Miriam was impregnated by someone else while engaged to Joseph, and the scriptures say Christ was raised as Joseph's son. They are not telling people that the baby is the Son of God.

The scriptures certainly imply that Joseph was waiting for her to have the child before taking her as his wife. And if you understand Jewish law, custom, and even the storyline of the Jews, you would know that he was waiting to have sex with her to finalize the marriage. The alternative would be much worse. If he never had sex with her, than they were never married and just living together...literally, and Christ would be a completely illegitimate child.

Still, we do not have a video of their coupling or a body of witnesses and scriptures do not describe them having sex or not having sex...All we can go with is the narrative and the norm. Then again, the concept that Miriam could not be holy or blessed, or it would be wrong for her to deliver Christ normally or have sex with her husband or have children by him is completely dreamed up, man-made. Mostly do to the fact that the Church developed beliefs that women, sex and nudity were of the devil.

Because of that Miriam could not have sex, Christ could not be delivered normally, (could not touch the dirty, nasty and evil female genitalia) and Miriam had to remain a virgin forever. Which is not biblical, not logical, and goes against every biblical norm.

Unlike your UNFUNNY fantasies I took my information form a reliable source and quoted from a Jewish source.

In Luke 2:5 Mary is married to Joseph - at the first stage the kiddushin. She was not engaged. She was legally married. That is why Joseph was going to divorce her (Mt 1:19). You can only divorce someone you are maried to.

 

[Mungo]

"But he did not consummate their marriage until she gave birth to a son. And he gave him the name Jesus."

25"But he did not have sexual relations with her until her son was born. And Joseph named him Jesus."

25"and did not know her till she had brought forth her[j] firstborn Son. And he called His name Jesus."

25And knew her not till she had brought forth her firstborn son: and he called his name JESUS.

But he did not have sexual relations with her until after she had given birth to her Son, the firstborn; and he called His name Jesus.

Ah! It does say "not yet". That was your invention.
better to quote what scripture actually says not make up stuff.

Your claim has already been debunked in this thread. Try reading the posts.
Also see post #1609 and #1627 in this thread - It is not in the bible.....sola scripture

 

[Grailhunter]

Unlike your UNFUNNY fantasies I took my information form a reliable source and quoted from a Jewish source.

In Luke 2:5 Mary is married to Joseph - at the first stage the kiddushin. She was not engaged. She was legally married. That is why Joseph was going to divorce her (Mt 1:19). You can only divorce someone you are maried to.

It is amazing how people can say so many wrong thing in a single breath.
Most of what you said is not entirely wrong, just the wrong time period and does not pertain to the Bible era. You need to go study the Talmud. For example the terms you use kiddushin and nusuin occurs in the third order of the Mishnah Nashim, part of the Talmud a few centuries after the Gospels.


Legally married...lol...I know when people think about marriage they think of the legalities....licences....paperwork...witnesses..... lawyers... judges....courts. Legalities in Christian cultures did not occur until March 25th 1754, which required public wedding to prevent clandestine marriages. And the law was not about religion, it was about power and wealth and secret transfer or combining of the same.

None of that pertains to the biblical period. The Romans had laws regarding marriages and Jews had the Mosaic Law. There is no such thing as a platonic marriage in the Jewish culture. Because the couple had to join to validate the marriage. The only reference to not having sex was that Joseph was waiting for her to have the child. He wasn't waiting to shake her hand! A Jewish marriage cannot occur until the union occurs. No ceremonies to to get married, no ceremonies required. Divorces do not occur between the betrothed.

 

[BreadOfLife]

Big difference between being exalted and basically worshiped and simply being commended for having faith. A whole slew of folks are commended for having faith in scripture. Of course, she was blessed to be chosen. Your religion turns this into something else entirely. Do we ask all the people in the faith chapter to bless us and pray for us? Why not? They were also commended for their obedience.

And once again, the onus is on YOU to show me ONE single Catholic teaching on "worshipping" Mary.
This is a false and ignorant accusation - yet one that is in every anti-Catholic's arsenal.

YOU stated that Mary is "NEVER" exalted in Scripture - and I simply destroyed your point - with Scripture.
Leave the unsubstantiated falsehoods at the door . . .

 

[BreadOfLife]

Um, no. In fact, that's about the most ridiculous thing I've heard all week. She didn't know man, at that point in time. Duh!
It says nothing about her future intentions. She wasn't wondering how she would get pregnant in 10 years, but how she could be in that moment, seeing as she'd never had sexual relations with any man.

Then, unless you actually believe that Mary was an idiot - YOUR point makes NO sense.

If you are to believe that Mary was halfway intelligent and that she was puzzled by what the Angel was telling her - then itIt ONLY makes sense that her intention was to NEVER have relations with a man.

 

[101G]

Because the couple had to join to validate the marriage. The only reference to not having sex was that Joseph was waiting for her to have the child.

correct and on point, this is why these verses exist, Matthew 1:24 "Then Joseph being raised from sleep did as the angel of the Lord had bidden him, and took unto him his wife:"
Matthew 1:25 "And knew her not till she had brought forth her firstborn son: and he called his name JESUS."
he didn't consummated or validate the marriage untl she brought forth her first born.

this is why Matthew 1:24 & 25 exist to let us know that Joseph & Mary was "completely" married. he had sex with her.... God don't half way do nothing. they was fully married.


PICJAG
101G The "Spiritual Saboteur"

 

[Mungo]

It is amazing how people can say so many wrong thing in a single breath.
Most of what you said is not entirely wrong, just the wrong time period and does not pertain to the Bible era. You need to go study the Talmud. For example the terms you use kiddushin and nusuin occurs in the third order of the Mishnah Nashim, part of the Talmud a few centuries after the Gospels.


Legally married...lol...I know when people think about marriage they think of the legalities....licences....paperwork...witnesses..... lawyers... judges....courts. Legalities in Christian cultures did not occur until March 25th 1754, which required public wedding to prevent clandestine marriages. And the law was not about religion, it was about power and wealth and secret transfer or combining of the same.

None of that pertains to the biblical period. The Romans had laws regarding marriages and Jews had the Mosaic Law. There is no such thing as a platonic marriage in the Jewish culture. Because the couple had to join to validate the marriage. The only reference to not having sex was that Joseph was waiting for her to have the child. He wasn't waiting to shake her hand! A Jewish marriage cannot occur until the union occurs. No ceremonies to to get married, no ceremonies required. Divorces do not occur between the betrothed.

According to Jewish sources you are wrong. But I won't bother arguing any further with you. You obviously prefer your sarcasms and put-downs to discussion.

 

[101G]

According to Jewish sources you are wrong. But I won't bother arguing any further with you. You obviously prefer your sarcasms and put-downs to discussion.

the bible cut you down, no need to blame Grailhunter, the only blame is YOU, for believing a lie. the bible is clear, 1 Thessalonians 5:21 "Prove all things; hold fast that which is good." see you didn't prove that out what you believed. Matthews 1:24 & 5 provet that Joseph consummated or validate the marriage after, after, she brought forth her son. else why not go through with putting her away? and if he was not going to stay with her, why did he and she went in to Egypt to protect the child?

see your evidence is not adding up ours are.

PICJAG
101G The "Spiritual Saboteur"

 

[Mungo]

the bible cut you down, no need to blame Grailhunter, the only blame is YOU, for believing a lie. the bible is clear, 1 Thessalonians 5:21 "Prove all things; hold fast that which is good." see you didn't prove that out what you believed. Matthews 1:24 & 5 provet that Joseph consummated or validate the marriage after, after, she brought forth her son. else why not go through with putting her away? and if he was not going to stay with her, why did he and she went in to Egypt to protect the child?

see your evidence is not adding up ours are.

PICJAG
101G The "Spiritual Saboteur"

Well you claim to be infallible so you must be right.
On the other hand if your claim to be infallible is wrong then you could be wrong on this.
Interesting dilemma.

 

[Grailhunter]

According to Jewish sources you are wrong. But I won't bother arguing any further with you. You obviously prefer your sarcasms and put-downs to discussion.

I have tried to explain this before....you might say I have a dry sense of humor or a weird sense of humor. Either way I have no reason to put you down....sarcasm....guilty as charged, as a expression of humor.

Jewish sources....as a child I had a lot of Jewish friends in University City, Mo and have had Jewish friends all my life. Early in my studies I realized that you could not understand the Bible unless you understood biblical Judaism. There is a very good reason for that, most of the main characters of the Bible are Jewish, so knowing that perspective is important. Although interesting, I know enough about Judaism to know that you do not want to mix the Jewish religion with the Christian religion. Christ warned about this when talking about the new wine in old wine skins.

When I was in Washington DC I took courses and attended seminars at the Jewish Studies at the American University and also over a course of a few years took courses out of Hebrew University in Jerusalem. Just the study of the 613 Mosaic Laws is a daunting task, but worth while.

The truth is important but after having so many fingers in the pie over the last 2000 years it is like untangling that giant ball of twine in the Guinness book of world records and Ripley's believe or not. Like Christianity that ball of twine has sat out in the weather for a long time and a lot of people have contributed to it. Getting to the core, getting to the truth takes some effort.

Still, the fact that Miriam was not a perpetual virgin does not take away from the fact that, she is the most blessed of women, holy and favored of God, and a perpetual agent of God that blessed the believers for nearly 2000 years. I do not believe in Miriam, I am a witness. I love her, pray to her and look forward to seeing her again.

But virginity has nothing to do with physical or religious purity or piety. A woman's standing with God is not downgraded because she marries and has children. Mommies are just as pure and favored as any other women. This virgin belief has done great harm to Christianity, to women's status in society and in the Church. The core of this belief is sacrilegious to God Himself. God's first commandment and the only commandment He repeated over and over in the Torah was to be fruitful and multiply. It was among the promises that He made to his favored. The belief that sexual desire, the functions of the "private parts"' and procreation, is of the devil....is sacrilegious. I know it is preached from the pulpit that Man corrupted the sexual union but you will not find that statement in the scriptures. If it were, God would not have kept repeating this commandment in the Torah.

Physically men and women are not equal, but in God's eyes, as believers, they are equal. All the false beliefs we now have were thought up by men. If women were considered equals in the Church, stood side by side with men as leaders, we would not have as many false beliefs.

 

[Renniks]

Ah! It does say "not yet". That was your invention.
better to quote what scripture actually says not make up stuff.

Your claim has already been debunked in this thread. Try reading the posts.
Also see post #1609 and #1627 in this thread - It is not in the bible.....sola scripture

If I say I won't do something until a future happening, does it mean I will never do it? No, it means " not yet" or " not until."

 

[Renniks]

And once again, the onus is on YOU to show me ONE single Catholic teaching on "worshipping" Mary.
This is a false and ignorant accusation - yet one that is in every anti-Catholic's arsenal.

YOU stated that Mary is "NEVER" exalted in Scripture - and I simply destroyed your point - with Scripture.
Leave the unsubstantiated falsehoods at the door . . .

Mary is never exalted, but only commended the same as many others are.

 

[Renniks]

Then, unless you actually believe that Mary was an idiot - YOUR point makes NO sense.

If you are to believe that Mary was halfway intelligent and that she was puzzled by what the Angel was telling her - then itIt ONLY makes sense that her intention was to NEVER have relations with a man.

I still have no idea what you're talking about. If a person asks the obvious question: " How can I be pregnant seeing as how I've never had sex?" That doesn't make them stupid. It says nothing about the future.

 

[101G]

Well you claim to be infallible so you must be right.
On the other hand if your claim to be infallible is wrong then you could be wrong on this.
Interesting dilemma.

first thanks for the reply, second, I claim that I'm infallible... lol, YOU SAY.

and if you think I'm Wrong, what if you're wrong.... (smile). as 1 Thessalonians 5:21 "Prove all things; hold fast that which is good."

now, we have prove what is Good, and you? we used scripture, and the scriptures proved you in ERROR.

so as the Lord Jesus said, before you tell me to cast out the mote in my eye, first cast out the plank in your eyes.

in all honesty, ask yourself. putting away any religious belifs and just read the verses as is, Matthews 1:19, and Matthews 1:24 & 25 they clearly tell us that they had sex after her firstborn son was delievered.

now just be honest with yourself.

PICJAG
101G The "Spiritual Saboteur"

 

[Mungo]

If I say I won't do something until a future happening, does it mean I will never do it? No, it means " not yet" or " not until."

You are doing it again. Mary didn't say she would not do something until a future event.
Better to quote what scripture actually says not make up stuff.

Have you read the two posts I referred you to?
They explain the point you are attempting to make.

 

[Mungo]

first thanks for the reply, second, I claim that I'm infallible... lol, YOU SAY.

and if you think I'm Wrong, what if you're wrong.... (smile). as 1 Thessalonians 5:21 "Prove all things; hold fast that which is good."

now, we have prove what is Good, and you? we used scripture, and the scriptures proved you in ERROR.

so as the Lord Jesus said, before you tell me to cast out the mote in my eye, first cast out the plank in your eyes.

in all honesty, ask yourself. putting away any religious belifs and just read the verses as is, Matthews 1:19, and Matthews 1:24 & 25 they clearly tell us that they had sex after her firstborn son was delievered.

now just be honest with yourself.

PICJAG
101G The "Spiritual Saboteur"

No really! LOL (smile). You did claim you are infallible. YIKES!!!! (smile), LOL.