Is 7:14

[theefaith]

No He calls her woman to recall the words of Gen 3:15

God has no mother or source that’s true, uncreated and eternal! But the second person of the Trinity became man and dwelt among us in Her for nine months, He is Her son the Bible says so: Is 7:14

14 Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel.

bear a son not a body! She is His mother!

Lk 1:35 And the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God.

He is the Son of God, She is His mother!

you still never explained Lk 1:43
Or debunked the perpetual virginity of Mary which even luther and calvin defended! Not to mention the fathers and doctors of the church saints like Jerome, Augustine, Aquinas and the like!

 

[Marymog]

Mary is not a Virgin, Matthew 1:25 "And knew her not till she had brought forth her firstborn son: and he called his name JESUS."


PICJAG.
101G The "Spiritual Saboteur"

Exodus 13:1-2 reveals something very important about the firstborn in Israel: “The Lord said to Moses, ‘Consecrate to me all the firstborn; whatever is the first to open the womb among the people of Israel, both of man and beast, is mine.’”

The “firstborn” were not given the title because there was a “second-born.” They were called “firstborn” at birth. Jesus being “firstborn” does not require that more siblings be born after him.

 

[101G]

Exodus 13:1-2 reveals something very important about the firstborn in Israel: “The Lord said to Moses, ‘Consecrate to me all the firstborn; whatever is the first to open the womb among the people of Israel, both of man and beast, is mine.’”

The “firstborn” were not given the title because there was a “second-born.” They were called “firstborn” at birth. Jesus being “firstborn” does not require that more siblings be born after him.

first thanks for the reply, second, nope not a "First born" ... "SON". if one an "ONLY", there is no need for the desigination first born. and in the scriptures you states it take two born in a "First Born" scenario where there is another child is born.

I'm very familiar with that understanding. see you must have a second siblings, when the inheritance from a father is decided.

so that want work, try again.

PICJAG.
101G The "Spiritual Saboteur"

 

[theefaith]

Amen!

Also

2 Samuel 6:23 tells us: Therefore Michal the daughter of Saul had no child UNTIL the day of her death.

Are we to assume that Michal had children after she died?

also Ezekiel 44:2 “This gate shall remain shut; it shall not be opened, and no one shall enter by it; for the Lord, the God of Israel, has entered by it; therefore it shall remain shut.”

Song of Solomon 4:12 A garden inclosed is my sister, my spouse; a spring shut up, a fountain sealed.

 

[101G]

2 Samuel 6:23 tells us: Therefore Michal the daughter of Saul had no child UNTIL the day of her death.

Are we to assume that Michal had children after she died?

MY, MY, MY, no, she never had children of her own. The children she brought up for Adriel were not her own, but adopted ones. did you ever read the story of Moses, who was adopted by pharaoh daughter.

also Ezekiel 44:2 “This gate shall remain shut; it shall not be opened, and no one shall enter by it; for the Lord, the God of Israel, has entered by it; therefore it shall remain shut.”

Song of Solomon 4:12 A garden inclosed is my sister, my spouse; a spring shut up, a fountain sealed.

and?

PICJAG.
101G The "Spiritual Saboteur"

 

[101G]

to all those May of God mother, get that nonsense out of your heads. Mary is no different than any other woman. GOD IS NO RESPECTER OF PERSON.
Mary was flesh and bone with blood as all women are, nothing special about Mary, only that she was chosen of God to bore the flesh he came in. no more no less. Mary put her dress on the same way every other woman do.

PICJAG.
101G The "Spiritual Saboteur"

 

[bbyrd009]

No He calls her woman to recall the words of Gen 3:15

God has no mother or source that’s true, uncreated and eternal! But the second person of the Trinity became man and dwelt among us in Her for nine months, He is Her son the Bible says so: Is 7:14

14 Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel.

bear a son not a body! She is His mother!

Lk 1:35 And the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God.

He is the Son of God, She is His mother!

you still never explained Lk 1:43
Or debunked the perpetual virginity of Mary which even luther and calvin defended! Not to mention the fathers and doctors of the church saints like Jerome, Augustine, Aquinas and the like!

so you have quite obv already made up your mind here, yes?

 

[Marymog]

first thanks for the reply, second, nope not a "First born" ... "SON". if one an "ONLY", there is no need for the desigination first born. and in the scriptures you states it take two born in a "First Born" scenario where there is another child is born.

I'm very familiar with that understanding. see you must have a second siblings, when the inheritance from a father is decided.

so that want work, try again.

PICJAG.
101G The "Spiritual Saboteur"

Hi 101G,

My research shows that the idea that Mary had other children first surfaced around 380 A.D. from a guy by the name Helvidius. This new theory caused quite a stir because no one held that belief at the time. Jerome responded to him with a treatise called On the Perpetual Virginity of the Blessed Mary. For you see Jerome had access to much documentation from the early Church and he cited earlier well known Christian writers such as Ignatius, Polycarp, Irenaeus, and Justin Martyr. Helvidius was unable to come up with a reply. His theory died and lay dormant for over 1500 years until it recently resurfaced after the Reformation.

Soooooo what The Church teaches, that Mary was a perpetual virgin, has been around since BEFORE your teaching which means MY teaching was first and yours was second soooooo you should try again since the theory you presented was an attempt to debunk what has always been taught.

What you have given is your OPINION to back up what you believe. What I Gave you was Scripture to back up what Christianity has taught since the beginning.

Here is some more for you: "Firstborn" was a very specific term in Jesus' time.
Firstborns were consecrated to God.
Firstborns inherited property, etc.

Also in the book of Moses, there is reference to Egyptian firstborns who died during the Passover. In Biblical times, children who were the only offspring still received the important title of firstborn so that they had the rights, privileges and obligations associated with it.

What this boils down to is that your belief is a misunderstanding of the way the ancient Jews used the term. For them it meant the child that opened the womb (Ex. 13:2, Num. 3:12). Under the Mosaic Law, it was the ‘first-born’ son that was to be sanctified (Ex. 34:20). Jesus, and only Jesus, is called the son of Mary in Scripture. Not one other person is.

I would also encourage you to do some research on the tombstone that was discovered at Tell el Jehudijeh (the Mound of the Jews), the ancient city of Leontopolis.

Sooooo I have presented Scripture, Christian History and Archeological evidence to back up what I believe. What you got kiddo?

Mary

 

[theefaith]

so you have quite obv already made up your mind here, yes?

I’m open to any insights into the word of God!

 

[101G]

Hi 101G,

My research shows that the idea that Mary had other children first surfaced around 380 A.D. from a guy by the name Helvidius. This new theory caused quite a stir because no one held that belief at the time. Jerome responded to him with a treatise called On the Perpetual Virginity of the Blessed Mary. For you see Jerome had access to much documentation from the early Church and he cited earlier well known Christian writers such as Ignatius, Polycarp, Irenaeus, and Justin Martyr. Helvidius was unable to come up with a reply. His theory died and lay dormant for over 1500 years until it recently resurfaced after the Reformation.

Soooooo what The Church teaches, that Mary was a perpetual virgin, has been around since BEFORE your teaching which means MY teaching was first and yours was second soooooo you should try again since the theory you presented was an attempt to debunk what has always been taught.

What you have given is your OPINION to back up what you believe. What I Gave you was Scripture to back up what Christianity has taught since the beginning.

Here is some more for you: "Firstborn" was a very specific term in Jesus' time.
Firstborns were consecrated to God.
Firstborns inherited property, etc.

Also in the book of Moses, there is reference to Egyptian firstborns who died during the Passover. In Biblical times, children who were the only offspring still received the important title of firstborn so that they had the rights, privileges and obligations associated with it.

What this boils down to is that your belief is a misunderstanding of the way the ancient Jews used the term. For them it meant the child that opened the womb (Ex. 13:2, Num. 3:12). Under the Mosaic Law, it was the ‘first-born’ son that was to be sanctified (Ex. 34:20). Jesus, and only Jesus, is called the son of Mary in Scripture. Not one other person is.

I would also encourage you to do some research on the tombstone that was discovered at Tell el Jehudijeh (the Mound of the Jews), the ancient city of Leontopolis.

Sooooo I have presented Scripture, Christian History and Archeological evidence to back up what I believe. What you got kiddo?

Mary

first thanks for the reply, but I have the church letter of the original fathers, right here in the bible. it's your church fathers who have their own opinion.

see, I have no stock in men who change the truth of God into a lie. let me give you an example of this. in one of the original fathers letters, from our brother Paul who was an apostle, states that the church at Rome first Pastor/Bishop was a woman. now do any of your church fathers have that information? ... no, not one.

so I have no stock in what your church fathers say. no offense, but just facts.

your church fathers letter hold no water with me.

PICJAG.
101G The "Spiritual Saboteur"

 

[Marymog]

first thanks for the reply, but I have the church letter of the original fathers, right here in the bible. it's your church fathers who have their own opinion.

see, I have no stock in men who change the truth of God into a lie. let me give you an example of this. in one of the original fathers letters, from our brother Paul who was an apostle, states that the church at Rome first Pastor/Bishop was a woman. now do any of your church fathers have that information? ... no, not one.

so I have no stock in what your church fathers say. no offense, but just facts.

your church fathers letter hold no water with me.

PICJAG.
101G The "Spiritual Saboteur"

Hi 101G,

It all comes down to interpretation kiddo. If it didn’t we wouldn’t be disagreeing ...now would we?

Also, I find it fascinating that I gave you Scripture, Historical and archeological evidence for what I believe and your response is ‘your wrong and I’m right because your men change the truth into a lie and my men don't’.

That is NOT a very good defense. Would you care to try again and put up a serious rebuttal to To the facts that I have presented?

Mary

PS...Please enlighten me on this first pastor/Bishop of Rome being a woman! I have never heard that.

 

[101G]

It all comes down to interpretation kiddo

first thanks for the reply, and second it don''t come down to interpretation. you said, "If it didn’t we wouldn’t be disagreeing ...now would we?" that's the problem, and here's the solution.
2 Peter 1:20 "Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation."

and i understand the scripture you gave about "first born", which changed nothing of Mar'svirginity. she's not a virgin anymore, did you not hear the scripture I gave? listen. Matthew 1:25 "And knew her not till she had brought forth her firstborn son: and he called his name JESUS."

KNEW here is to have sex. and having sex with her husband ended her virginity. see those scriptures are not changing, nor needs interpertation.

"PS...Please enlighten me on this first pastor/Bishop of Rome being a woman! I have never heard that". Read your bible, Roman chapter 16. as a matter of fact we have two women Bishop there.

PICJAG.
101G The "Spiritual Saboteur"

 

[Marymog]

first thanks for the reply, and second it don''t come down to interpretation. you said, "If it didn’t we wouldn’t be disagreeing ...now would we?" that's the problem, and here's the solution.
2 Peter 1:20 "Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation."

PICJAG.
101G The "Spiritual Saboteur"

First off Your welcome for the reply.

Second off, It does come down to interpretation because LOGICALLY if EVERYONE interpreted EVERY passage the exact same we WOULDN’T be disagreeing.....now would we????

Your “solution” is not in context of what that passage says. Have you ever read 2 Peter 1:21? Prophecy does not come by man but MEN who are moved by the Holy Spirit. Sooooooo.....ONCE AGAIN.....MAN interprets Scripture via the Spirit.

I find it fascinating that you say it doesn’t come down to interpretation and then provide a quote from Scripture that you privately interpret as support for your “solution”.

Soooooo you have your men (or apparently yourself?) you trust to interpret Scripture and I have mine. What men interpret Scripture for you? For me it is the men of The Church.

Curious Mary

 

[Marymog]

and i understand the scripture you gave about "first born", which changed nothing of Mar'svirginity. she's not a virgin anymore, did you not hear the scripture I gave? listen. Matthew 1:25 "And knew her not till she had brought forth her firstborn son: and he called his name JESUS."

KNEW here is to have sex. and having sex with her husband ended her virginity. see those scriptures are not changing, nor needs interpertation.

PICJAG.
101G The "Spiritual Saboteur"

Hi 101G,

Of course it changes nothing because you have interpreted Scripture different than MANY others have and you believe you have the truth.

The problems with your theory begins with the fact that no available scholarship concurs with it. In fact, the evidence proves the contrary. Heos hou and heos are used interchangeably and have the same meaning. Acts 25:21 should suffice to clear up the matter: “But when Paul had appealed to be kept in custody for the decision of the emperor, I commanded him to be held until (Gk. heos hou) I could send him to Caesar.”

Does this text mean that Paul would not be held in custody after he was “sent” to Caesar? Not according to the biblical record. He would be held in custody while in transit (see Acts 27:1) and after he arrived in Rome for a time (see Acts 29:16). The action of the main clause did not cease with heos hou.

2 Samuel 6:23: And Michal the daughter of Saul had no child to (until) the day of her death. (Does this mean she had children after she died?)

1 Timothy 4:13: Until I come, attend to the public reading of scripture, to preaching, to teaching. (Does this mean Timothy should stop teaching after Paul comes?)

1 Corinthians 15:25: For he (Christ) must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet. (Does this mean Christ’s reign will end? By no means! Luke 1:33 says, “he will reign over the house of Jacob foreverand of his kingdom there shall be no end.”)

Soooo when you interpret Scripture a certain way your not really interpreting Scripture because “those scriptures are not changing, nor needs interpretation”. Translation: I’m not interpreting Scripture. I’m just telling you what it really means and those of you that disagree with my interpretation should remember 2 Peter 1:20 and YOU should stop violating it”!!!

Thank you for your time...Mary

 

[Marymog]

"PS...Please enlighten me on this first pastor/Bishop of Rome being a woman! I have never heard that". Read your bible, Roman chapter 16. as a matter of fact we have two women Bishop there.

PICJAG.
101G The "Spiritual Saboteur"

Hi 101G,

Lol....I have read my bible and many other people have read the Bible and their interpretation of Romans 16 is different than yours. I know, I know, you don’t interpret the Bible. You just read it and know the truth....let’s move pass that.

Would you please give me the exact passages in Romans 16 that talk of women Bishops?

Mary

 

[101G]

first thanks for the reply, second, you said,

I find it fascinating that you say it doesn’t come down to interpretation and then provide a quote from Scripture that you privately interpret as support for your “solution”.

Matthew 1:25 "And knew her not till she had brought forth her firstborn son: and he called his name JESUS." WHAT'S THERE TO INTERPERT?
the scripture plainly tell us that Joseph, here husband, had sex with his wife Mary after, after, after, he delievered her first born son. so what's to interpert? .... NOTHING. it's you who refuse to accept the truth, for the scriptures is KNOWLEDGE right in front of your eyes. for God is true, Hosea 4:6 "My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge: because thou hast rejected knowledge, I will also reject thee, that thou shalt be no priest to me: seeing thou hast forgotten the law of thy God, I will also forget thy children."
see M & M, you reject God, and he will reject you. now that the end of this story for me.

Lol....I have read my bible and many other people have read the Bible and their interpretation of Romans 16 is different than yours. I know, I know, you don’t interpret the Bible. You just read it and know the truth....let’s move pass that.

Would you please give me the exact passages in Romans 16 that talk of women Bishops?

(smile)... of course.
woman Bishop in front of your EYES.

First one, after the other one... (smile). Romans 16:3 "Greet Priscilla and Aquila my helpers in Christ Jesus:" that term "helpers" here is the Greek word,
G4904 συνεργός sunergos (sïn-er-ğos') adj.
a co-laborer, i.e. coadjutor.
[from a presumed compound of G4862 and the base of G2041]
KJV: companion in labour, (fellow-)helper(-labourer, -worker), labourer together with, workfellow

now since you're Roman catholic, do you know what a coadjutor is. if you don't mind please, for the rest sake, post what a coadjutor is. I have the definition, but if you don't mind please post it. and Romans 16:3 states that Priscilla, a female is one.

so we all will be looking for your answer... and once you answer, we will give the other woman who is Bishop/Pastor at Rome.....

your answer please.

PICJAG.
101G The "Spiritual Saboteur"

 

[101G]

M&M, where are you? it only take a second to either google coadjutor or just go to dictionary.com while you're online. it's not that hard to understand.... well


PICJAG.
101G The "Spiritual Saboteur"

 

[101G]

@Marymog
It's good to take that advice and not respond. .....

PICJAG.
101G The "Spiritual Saboteur"

Another successful sabotage operation.

 

[Marymog]

(smile)... of course.
woman Bishop in front of your EYES.

First one, after the other one... (smile). Romans 16:3 "Greet Priscilla and Aquila my helpers in Christ Jesus:" that term "helpers" here is the Greek word,
G4904 συνεργός sunergos (sïn-er-ğos') adj.
a co-laborer, i.e. coadjutor.
[from a presumed compound of G4862 and the base of G2041]
KJV: companion in labour, (fellow-)helper(-labourer, -worker), labourer together with, workfellow

now since you're Roman catholic, do you know what a coadjutor is. if you don't mind please, for the rest sake, post what a coadjutor is. I have the definition, but if you don't mind please post it. and Romans 16:3 states that Priscilla, a female is one.

so we all will be looking for your answer... and once you answer, we will give the other woman who is Bishop/Pastor at Rome.....

your answer please.

PICJAG.
101G The "Spiritual Saboteur"

Thank you. A coadjutor is a fellow worker or helper sooooo it sounds like we are in agreement on that.

Episkopos is the greek word for Bishop and poimén is the word for pastor. Neither of those words are used in Romans 16:3.

 

[Marymog]

M&M, where are you? it only take a second to either google coadjutor or just go to dictionary.com while you're online. it's not that hard to understand.... well


PICJAG.
101G The "Spiritual Saboteur"

Lol....right here kiddo. I'm doing housework and taking breaks to respond.