Users Online Now:
2,053
(
Who's On?
)
Visitors Today:
1,492,025
Pageviews Today:
2,050,242
Threads Today:
507
Posts Today:
8,996
04:05 PM
Directory
Adv. Search
Topics
Forum
Back to Forum
Back to Thread
REPLY TO THREAD
Subject
Virgin Mary has just appeared in Medjugorje
User Name
Font color:
Default
Dark Red
Red
Orange
Brown
Yellow
Green
Olive
Cyan
Blue
Dark Blue
Indigo
Violet
Black
Font:
Default
Verdana
Tahoma
Ms Sans Serif
In accordance with industry accepted best practices we ask that users limit their copy / paste of copyrighted material to the relevant portions of the article you wish to discuss and no more than 50% of the source material, provide a link back to the original article and provide your original comments / criticism in your post with the article.
[quote:Anonymous Coward 70175159:MV80MTgwNTQ1Xzc2MDEwMjMzX0NGNERCOTk3] [quote:ljsikes:MV80MTgwNTQ1Xzc2MDA5NjMwXzExMjUyNkNC] [quote:Anonymous Coward 70175159:MV80MTgwNTQ1Xzc2MDA5MTY2XzgwN0U2MTNF] [quote:ljsikes:MV80MTgwNTQ1Xzc2MDA4OTU3XzZBRkIzNEI2] [quote:Anonymous Coward 70175159:MV80MTgwNTQ1Xzc2MDA4ODU3XzZCMzk1RTgx] [quote:ljsikes:MV80MTgwNTQ1Xzc2MDA4NzM2XzQxMzg4RUFD] [quote:Anonymous Coward 70175159:MV80MTgwNTQ1Xzc2MDA4Njk2X0JBMTUwQzEx] [quote:ljsikes:MV80MTgwNTQ1Xzc2MDA4NjEwXzlCQUYyMzJD] [quote:Anonymous Coward 70175159:MV80MTgwNTQ1Xzc2MDA4NTkzX0M4Mzk0NkM3] [quote:ljsikes:MV80MTgwNTQ1Xzc2MDA4NDAwXzgxMzBDNjAz] [quote:Anonymous Coward 70175159:MV80MTgwNTQ1Xzc2MDA4MzcxX0JDMzk3NkQ3] [quote:Anonymous Coward 78072502:MV80MTgwNTQ1Xzc2MDA3ODIyX0M3MTJDOUY=] [quote:Anonymous Coward 78072502:MV80MTgwNTQ1Xzc2MDA3NzgzXzhBQzVCM0JF] These people are so insane and so stupid to ignore that it is demonic to worship people. Mary was a specialy lady, chosen to give birth to Jesus in a human form. She was a righteous woman. But she was a person. She is not a saint, she is not God, she is not the mother of God. She should not be worshipped and she does not appear to people. [/quote] Also, Mary was a virgin only once. Then she had sex with her husband Joseph and had children. She did not remain a virgin. Calling her the virgin mary is ridiculous, but worshipping her is much worse. [/quote] Speaking of ridiculous—where does it say in the Bible, or anywhere else, that Mary and Joseph had a sex? Not that there would be anything sinful about it, but there was no reason for them to have such a relationship; they were both consecrated souls. That Mary and Joseph were both perpetual virgins is Catholic belief, which non-Catholics are free to reject. That Jesus was “firstborn” does not mean that Mary gave birth to subsequent children; the term referred to the first child to open the womb. The word in the biblical passage that speaks of Jesus’ brothers and sisters translates as “close relatives”, such as cousins. Again, no mentally balanced Catholics worship Mary; to do so would constitute idolatry. Mary is given honor and veneration, which is distinctly different from the worship that is due God alone. [/quote] It's answered in Matthew 1:24 - 25: 24 Then Joseph being raised from sleep did as the angel of the Lord had bidden him, and took unto him his wife: 25 And knew her not till she had brought forth her firstborn son: and he called his name Jesus. [b]So obviously there was nothing going on while Mary was pregnant with Jesus, but afterwards they did.[/b] [/quote] How do you know this? As Protestants are so fond of saying, where is that in the Bible? or anywhere else? [/quote] I listed the chapter and verse. You can see it for yourself. [/quote] Where? If you infer that “firstborn” means that Mary gave birth to children after Jesus, you need to do a bit of research. The term referred to the first child to open the womb, and does not imply that there were subsequent births. [/quote] I was responding to the question of whether Joseph and Mary ever had sex. They certainly would not have while Mary was carrying Jesus. But they did afterwards according to Matthew 1:25. [/quote] You still offer no proof of your assertion, and I have replied to you twice. [/quote] The proof is in verse 25. It's right there in that verse - He [b]knew her not till[/b] she had brought forth her firstborn son. It's throughout the bible. In Genesis, Adam [b]knew his wife[/b], and she conceived (gen 4:1) Cain [b]knew his wife[/b], and she conceived (17) Adam [b]knew his wife[/b] again (25) In Judges there is this: But the men would not hearken to him: so the man took his concubine, and brought her forth unto them; and [b]they knew her[/b], and abused her all the night until the morning: and when the day began to spring, they let her go. When the bible speaks of knowing a woman (or a man, as in the case of Lot), it's speaking of sex. And there is nothing at all wrong with Joseph and Mary having sex. They were married. [/quote] You are inferring that Joseph “knew” Mary after the birth of Jesus, and that is not stated whatsoever. The scripture passage you reference simply discounts any possibility of Joseph having been the biolological father of Jesus, that’s all. You are right that there would have been nothing wrong with Joseph and Mary having intercourse, since they were husband and wife, but there was simply no reason for them to have such a relationship. According to Church tradition (largely discarded by Protestants) both Mary and Joseph were consecrated virgins, and married only to cooperate with God’s will to provide Jesus with an earthly Family. People automatically think in carnal terms, but the fact is that not everyone those urges, and some with high callings are given the gift (yes, gift) of celibacy. [/quote] I'm not inferring. It comes down to how that particular passage should be interpreted. Is it in harmony with other such passages? What was the intent of the passage? Just as you say there was no reason for them to have a relationship like that, I say there is an actual verse in the bible that indicates they did. Church tradition may state one thing, but where is that tradition backed up or validated in God's word? And it's not just a Roman Catholic thing, so please don't think I'm attacking you or your church. Many churches have traditions which aren't supported by scripture. I'll also add that whether or not Joseph and Mary actually had a relationship like that doesn't really matter. It doesn't change the fact that Mary was blessed. And it doesn't change anything regarding our Lord. [/quote] The fact is, nowhere are the details of Mary and Joseph’s marital relationship explicitly stated anywhere. It is good to discuss differences in a mutually respectful manner. In the Catholic Church, Sacred Tradition is on equal footing with Sacred Scripture, so we understand that not everything there is to know about the Faith is mentioned in the Bible, and cannot possibly be contained in the Bible. Scripture itself tells us as much. We rely on the Magisterium (teaching body of the Church) to definitively interpret Sacred Scripture; this does not mean that Catholics are not to read the Bible on their own, because they are encouraged to do so, but we rely on the authorities to make definitive interpretations. The Church established by Christ is 2,000 years old, and is rich with extra-biblical teachings and writings, experiences of saints and mystics, rituals, sacramentals, etc., that enrich the Faith. Contrast this with the post-Reformation denominations that subscribe to the un-biblical practice of Sola Scriptura, and whose churches are less than 600 years old and have mostly abandoned the great traditions that all Christians once enjoyed. The disparity of church histories, primarily the non-Catholic Christian rejection of Sacred Tradition and central authority, is at the root of most of the disagreements. [/quote]
Original Message
Nov. 2, 2019
[
link to www.youtube.com (secure)
]
Pictures (click to insert)
General
Politics
Bananas
People
Potentially Offensive
Emotions
Big Round Smilies
Aliens and Space
Friendship & Love
Textual
Doom
Misc Small Smilies
Religion
Love
Random
View All Categories
|
Next Page >>