Then you can't disprove that she was abducted by aliens, can you?
The Bible is silent on the "Alien Abduction of Mary".
But now we have pictures.
Can you see Mary standing on the hillside waiting to be abducted?
Posted on 12/11/2006 6:29:15 AM PST by xzins
What happened to Joseph the father of Jesus
We know very little about the years of Jesus prior to His public ministry. The gospels are without notation of any childhood events beyond Christ's birth except one reference that is found in Luke. It is the very last time that Joseph, the adoptive father of Jesus, is ever mentioned.
Luke 2:41 reads: "Every year his parents went to Jerusalem for the Feast of the Passover. When he was twelve years old, they went up to the Feast, according to the custom. After the Feast was over, while his parents were returning home, the boy Jesus stayed behind in Jerusalem, but they were unaware of it. Thinking he was in their company, they traveled on for a day. Then they began looking for him among their relatives and friends. When they did not find him, they went back to Jerusalem to look for him. After three days they found him in the temple courts, sitting among the teachers, listening to them and asking them questions. Everyone who heard him was amazed at his understanding and his answers. When his parents saw him, they were astonished. His mother said to him, 'Son, why have you treated us like this? Your father and I have been anxiously searching for you.' 'Why were you searching for me?' he asked. 'Didn't you know I had to be in my Father's house?' But they did not understand what he was saying to them. Then he went down to Nazareth with them and was obedient to them. But his mother treasured all these things in her heart. And Jesus grew in wisdom and stature, and in favor with God and men."
It is supposed that Joseph, the father of Jesus, died during the quiet years of Jesus' life. We do know that he trained Jesus in his trade, as that of a carpenter. He do know that Joseph and Mary had children after Jesus was born: James, Joses, Simon, and others.
Perhaps the cause or timing of his death is not nearly as important as the strength of character he displayed. In first hearing about Mary's pregnancy, Joseph did not want to subject Mary to public scorn. After hearing from the angel who confirmed Mary's incredulous story, Joseph obediently accepted the role as surrogate father for the baby Jesus, the Christ child. Matthew 1:24-25 says, "When Joseph woke up, he did what the angel of the Lord had commanded him and took Mary home as his wife. But he had no union with her until she gave birth to a son. And he gave him the name Jesus."
The last reference about Joseph in Luke confirms that Joseph was a devout follower of the customs of his religion with his observance of Passover. It implies that Joseph made certain of good spiritual training for the children in his family. Joseph proved his integrity and willingness to be obedient to God's direction and guidance.
IF Mary was so esteemed among the church, why did Paul not refer to her with the reverence afforded such an esteemed person. He just makes reference to her never mentioning her name. IF Mary held such a position of honor, the Apostle Paul, of ALL people, would have been among those to speak of her with reverence rather than just referring to her as "a woman". Would he not?
In the sense that we die because of Adam and Eve's trespass, then that death is our wage for his sin, but then so is the multiplication of our woes. It is through our choices that we sin. There have been people who had not sinned and were "swept away" by the Lord into heaven without dying before Christ came. How do you attone for their "original sin" then? Did God take them to heaven regardless of their innate faults?
I disagree, I think that's what Rev 12 is talking about, but that's an aside.
In any case, you can't conclude from that silence that being assumed into heaven is a prerogative reserved solely to Christ. Silence is just silence, nothing more.
We are predisposed to sin. Sin is very enticing because its so much simpler to simply give in. It is due to this that we often choose to sin. I would argue that it is impossible to go through life and not make that choice at least once. That Christ was able to is part of the miracle of His sacrifice, and the very reason he was able to pay all of our ransoms.
A really interesting question is: What would have happened if God did sin?
In the sense that we die because of Adam and Eve's trespass, then that death is our wage for his sin, but then so is the multiplication of our woes.
I don't understand that sentence.
-A8
Many early Christian sources refer to Jesus as a descendant of David (Matthew 1:1, Mark 10:47-48, Luke 1:32, Romans 1:3, Revelation 22:16), and Jesus seems to have accepted the claim (Matthew 12:22-32, 15:21-28, 21:1-16, Mark 10:46-52, 12:35-37). Since relatives of Jesus were available to and prominent in the early church and since some genealogical records were kept among the Jews of the first century, the early Christian accounts of Jesus’ being a descendant of David seem credible. Some of the earliest Christians had been active in the leadership of Judaism during the early stages of Christianity (Acts 6:7, Philippians 3:4-6), so they probably would have heard of objections to Jesus' Davidic ancestry if there were any. Paul, for example, was active in persecuting the church and surely would have had significant knowledge of the arguments used against Christianity by the earliest opponents of the movement, and he was in contact with Jesus' immediate family. He affirms Jesus' Davidic descent (Romans 1:3, 2 Timothy 2:8). How could Jesus' claim to be the Messiah have gotten far among so many people who had the expectation of Davidic descent, and why would He have even thought of Himself as such a Messiah in the first place, if He wasn’t descended from David? As the author of Hebrews indicates, information on Jesus’ background was "evident" to the public (Hebrews 7:14). Raymond Brown referred to Jesus' Davidic descent as accepted by "the majority of scholars" (The Birth Of The Messiah [New York, New York: Doubleday, 1999], p. 505). Craig Keener writes:
"there is little doubt that Jesus’ family historically stemmed from Davidic lineage. All clear early Christian sources attest it (e.g., Rom 1:3); Hegesippus reports a Palestinian tradition in which Roman authorities interrogated Jesus’ brother’s grandsons for Davidic descent (Euseb. H.E. 3.20); Julius Africanus attests Jesus’ relatives claiming Davidic descent (Letter to Aristides); and, probably more significantly, non-Christian Jewish polemicists never bothered to try to refute it (Jeremias 1969: 291). Jesus’ relatives known in the early church seem to have raised no objection to the claim of their family’s background (Brown 1977: 507)….B. Sanh. 43a, bar., may preserve a [non-Christian Jewish] tradition that Jesus was of royal lineage (unless it suggests connections with the Herodian or Roman rulers, or that he was about to take control of the people; both views are unlikely)." (A Commentary On The Gospel Of Matthew [Grand Rapids, Michigan: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1999], p. 75 and n. 9 on p. 75)
http://triablogue.blogspot.com/2006/12/son-of-david.html
It is an old controversy that was settled long ago.
I do not find it odd that every Advent in here the question resurfaces because protestants are defined by their opposition to the Church Jesus established and they use "arguements" from the Bible the Catholic Church wrote to prove the Catholic Church is wrong about the Bible.
It makes sense to some but it certainly seems odd to me because the Church Jesus established has taught authoritatively on this and the Bible does call the Church Jesus establised the Pillar and Ground of Truth...and the Bible tells us to bring our disputes to the Church, and this dispute has been settled repeatedly by the Church, and the Bible tells us the Church is Jesus and that when the Church teaches it is Jesus Teaching..
But, I guess folks get bored during Advent... and so they stop making sense
Catholics pray to Mary.
Then you can't disprove that she was abducted by aliens, can you?
The Bible is silent on the "Alien Abduction of Mary".
But now we have pictures.
Can you see Mary standing on the hillside waiting to be abducted?
But, there are none to say He didn't either.
But Catholics are using a different definition of 'pray' than Protestants use, as I explained here.
-A8
I could see how that could be an issue. I don't believe humans save themselves, but I don't believe we are born with original sin. I'll have to think on that.
In the sense that we die because of Adam and Eve's trespass, then that death is our wage for his sin, but then so is the multiplication of our woes. I don't understand that sentence.
And I don't blame you as it was poorly worded. I mean to say that death and having families (to multiply the woe) is punishment for the Fall. Obviously if not, then Cain would've lived forever.
Chaste vs celibate? The two are different.
However, conceptually, the image is the same: that Mary was a "package" (Dr. E's word, not mine), and that God in effect used her, impregnated her, and then handed her off to somebody else, as if she were a temporary hook-up.
Mary is his Beloved. God would not have treated her like a concubine.
BTW, a great deal of insight can be gained by looking at the many, many instances of marital imagery in the Old Testament, as "Daughter Zion" is a poetic "type," both for Mary and for the Church (it's a matter of reiterated images: copies, models, recurrences of meaning.) For she--- Mary, Daughter of Zion, Israel as "the Espoused" ---is the faithful, the poor, the beloved, as you can just glimpse here:
Isaiah 62:4
It will no longer be said to you, " Forsaken,"Nor to your land will it any longer be said, "Desolate";But you will be called, "My delight is in her,"And your land, " Married";For the LORD delights in you,And to Him your land will be married.
Malachi 3:12
" All the nations will call you blessed, (WOW! Could it be any clear with neon!) for you shall be my Delight," says the LORD of hosts.
There's so much there, and so much more, one doesn't know where to begin.
"Behold, the handmaid of the LORD: be it done to me according to Your Word."
"And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt amongst us."
I believe that the eartly parents of Jesus enjoyed a model marriage in all aspects that God intended for a marriage to be; including sexual relations.
Ok, then you do believe in original sin, unless you think that Adam and Eve were also (in their original, pre-Fall state) "predisposed to sin".
-A8
Some questions for you:
Do you think that Eve was "immaculate" at the beginning of her existence in Eden?
Do you think Eve was a "real girl"?
Where is Elijah? Was he taken up to heaven?
Do you believe in the resurrection of the body? Do you think that the saved will be taken up to heaven, body and soul?
Right. As in, we've always been this way. I will agree that its much worse now than its ever been.
i don't beleive for a second that this predisposition is worse than it ever has been, what is different now is the variety, abundance, and stamina of temptations.
itll take a bit for me to find links to adequeatly address that (the OT prophecy in general)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.