Posted on 12/09/2012 2:05:12 PM PST by Alex Murphy
Edited on 12/09/2012 5:21:35 PM PST by Admin Moderator. [history]
(Excerpt) Read more at catholicbridge.com ...
As I understand it, you guys claim Mary was not burdoned with 'original sin' as all humans are...
Jesus, the Second Person of the Blessed Trinity, is eternally begotten by the Father from before the ages. Nothing that happened, or didn't happen, or could have happened in Bethlehem could have changed that.
You want to provide some scripture that makes that claim???
There's no Catholic doctrine that says that Mary could not have been tempted to sin, sorry.
If Mary was fully human, she sinned...The only one who was tempted and never sinned is Jesus...
So Mary was born without original sin...And what if Joseph had dreams telling him to remain or become celibate???
And you bury little idols in the ground to help you get a good price on your real estate...
How can you take your religion seriously, and even expect others to take it seriously after listening to you???
You are not going to win souls by feasting on one another.
But it doesn't follow that He likes "declassifying" consecrated, sacred persons, places and things for ordinary handling. The Ark of the Covenant in the OT prefigures Mary in the NT. There’s a good short YouTube video about Mary as Scripturally prefigured in the O.T. here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kUdYeYy3NQA . Please watch it: it's short and clear and worth your time.
The Ark was not even supposed to be touched, because it carried objects, like bits of manna and the tables of the Law, associated with God's saving work in Exodus. And Mary who bore the Living Bread, the Lawgiver, the Savior Himself, the very Word of God in the flesh, was she LESS sacred than that?
But you mistake "original sin" with "human nature." Before sin, Adam and Eve had human nature but did NOT have original sin.
So you're saying that Jesus would be born to a woman who was sinful and inferior to Innocent Eve?
She married Joseph. The sacrament of marriage makes their procreation proper.
You degrade an act which is nigh unto holy in its proper context, demeaning her as little more than God’s whore for doing what God has ordained as righteous behavior between husband and wife.
The Levites ate of sacrificed meat and bread as their source of sustinence. Joseph, proper husband of Mary, was entirely right to partake of the wife which was sanctified as his.
**Joseph, proper husband of Mary, was entirely right to partake of the wife which was sanctified as his.**
But he didn’t. They had no other children and agreed that living celibately was what the Lord wanted.
You have to look at the whole picture — very unusual.
A child conceived of the Holy Spirit
Joseph wanting to divorce Mary quietly.
Then told in a dream to take her and be a guardian for the Son of God and Son of man.
Then told in a dream to flee to Egypt to protect the child.
Please look at things as God looks at them. (Not YOPIOS)
FYI, I know of several saints who also had this arrangement with their spouses. They agreed to live celibately.
Our modern world is so hung up on sexuality that we automatically think that way.
Please try thinking out of the box — as God was thinking in providing a guardian for Mary and Jesus.
Secondly, Catholics do not worship Mary. We ask her to pray for us.
I never stated that Miriam was a pagan ! Clearly she was a Jewess, chosen by YHvH However when an organization promulgates Please see Jer. 7:18; 44:17ff, 25 to see what Miriam is dead as are all who have gone before us. Conceived as the light entering the temple (John 10:22 / John 8:12) I start by reading John 1:14 under the illumination of the Ru'ach HaKodesh. [fn](1:14) Or, tabernacled; i.e. lived temporarily The verse also provides illumination as to Shekhinah means the dwelling or settling, and denotes the dwelling Here is a very visual source: Just based on scripture. Again the first clue to the birth of Yah'shua is John 1:14 as cited above. Important events in the life of Yah'shua occurred Conceived as the light entering the temple (John 10:22 / John 8:12) Who knows if the final trump will occur on the Feast of Trumpets Seek YHvH in His WORD. Clearly you did not read nor comprehend my post.
shalom b'SHEM Yah'shua HaMashiach
to provide the tabernacle for Himself in order
to create His Shekhinah( John 1:14).
such phrases as MOTHER OF GOD, QUEEN OF HEAVEN
or perpetual virginity, these are PAGAN constructs.
YHvH thinks of the phrase "queen of heaven"
A clear reading of Jeremiah will note that
it is a term of Paganism.
I'm sure she was saved when she accepted the opportunity
offered her during Hanukkah, to allow the Light of the World
to enter His Tabernacle. This would have produced Yah'shua's birth
on the Feast of Tabernacles (John 1:14). John 1:14 And the WORD became flesh,
The word for Tabernacle, mishkan, is a derivative of the
and [fn]dwelt among us,
and we saw His glory,
glory as of the only begotten from the Father,
full of grace and truth. σκηνόω Strong's G4637 - skēnoō
1) to fix one's tabernacle,
have one's tabernacle,
abide (or live) in a tabernacle (or tent),
tabernacle
2) to dwell
same root and is used in the sense of dwelling-place in the Bible
Yah'shua being the Shekhinah glory.
or settling of the divine presence of God, especially in the Temple in Jerusalem.
Jesus' date of birth
on YHvH commanded Feast days as metaphors of the feast.
Born on the Feast of Tabernacles.(John 1:14)
Circumcised on the Feast of Simchat Torah ( Joy of the WORD)
Bread and wine of the Pesach.
Death as the Lamb of G-d on Hag Matzoh.
Rising on the Feast of First Fruits.
Sending the Ru'ach HaKodesh on the Feast of Shavuot(Pentecost).
The instance we're talking about, though, is not "overall," but is specific; and not just "specific" but, more than that, an absolute singularity: never happened in the Universe before, and will never happen again: the case of the one woman hailed with the unheard-of and noble title Kecharitomene ("All-Filled with Grace") by an angel and who consented to the procreative act by which God was made Man.
If such acts even between two humans are holy --- which we agree they are --- then this indescribable procreation between God and a human woman, must be incomparably more sacred.
Humans procreate children who are (even though flawed by having a sin-marred human nature) bearers of the image and likeness of God. But Mary was wed, not by a man coming into her, but by the Holy Spirit coming upon her (in the Archangel's words) --- are you saying this would create a bond inferior in strength, durability, or significance to the bond between mere human procreative partners?
Really?
Don't we see great signs in Scripture that this Divine-human procreative espousal created a lasting bond?
Note how the first Pentecost came precisely when Mary and the Apostles were gathered in the Upper Room. Now they were all, --- accompanying the espoused Mary --- filled with the Holy Spirit!
The Bride Unwed has a bond to the Holy Spirit: one of total consecration. This deserves to be thought upon with care. Note how at the end of time (Rev 22:17) you catch yet another glimpse of this enduring nuptial bond: "The Spirit and the Bride say, Come!"
"And let him who hears, say Come!"
Ohhh... is that what God was thinking? Now I understand everything. Now can we get off the topic of Mary's sex life and get back to promoting Jesus' teachings?
“who consented”
She didn’t have a choice.
And Joseph was her rightful husband, in no way denied his right to her.
What, she was an adulteress for marrying Joseph?
A marriage without consummation isn’t.
The PoJ was not included in the Canon of Scripture because it contained errors. That it was considered means that it contained some truth. (An interesting side note is that this, along with numerous other works accredited to Apostles and Disciples, presented the problem that a formal Canon satisfied.) Those of us concerned with accurate hermeneutics look to a number of sources to understand the original intent. Agricultural archeology helps us to understand references to people who lived close to the land. History and archeology help us to understand the geopolitical context of events and pressures on peoples. Contemporaneous writings like the PoJ give us clues into the culture and interpersonal relations of the peoples of the times. All of this is necessary because presumed knowledge of the day does not always survive 2,000 years and multiple translations.
This particular example is important to Catholics because Tradition is important to us. In contradiction to Protestant teaching that Catholics must choose between Scripture and Tradition, embracing one OR the other as Revealed Word, Catholics embrace BOTH Scripture AND Tradition as comprising the Sacred Deposit of Faith. This Sacred Tradition from which the written Scripture of the New Testament was derived has always taught certain aspects of the Blessed Virgin Mary not specifically addressed in Scripture. From Tradition we believe in the perpetual virginity of Mary. Sacred Scripture, being silent on the issue, does not contradict that. Contemporaneous writings and the subsequent writings of the Early Church Fathers whose life times overlapped Hers, and in some cases actually knew Her, affirm the Tradition. However, proof is not needed. Faith is what we believe in the absence of proof.
Peace be with you.
Why have you chosen to reject the possibility that Joseph had children, who would have been brothers and sisters of Jesus, before his marriage to Mary?
Peace be with you
Well... 115 replies later, it appears that yes; there are a lot of people worried about this. Yes; it does matter in some way.
lolol
And just think! Think of the dozens of FReepers who have read the comments and said to themselves; "Wow! I've apparently been wrong on the subject. Based on these replies; I'm changing my mind!"
more lolol
Is it worth arguing on the internet? No. It won't change anyone's mind.
Mary is not an ordinary human being. The following excerpts from a widely published interview with Professor Salvatore Mancuso, the Head of the Dept. of Gynecology at the Univ. of Milan establish that physically, Mary was indeed part divine. Her body, like that of all mothers was colonized by embryonic stem cells of her fetus (Jesus).
"Moreover, it has been discovered that the embryo sends stem cells that, thanks to the mother's immune system tolerance, colonize the maternal medulla, and adhere to it. What is more, lymphocytes are born from here and remain with the woman for the rest of her life."
Mancuso continued: "From the fifth week there is clearly a passing of cells, but messages begin at conception. Even during the first phase of cellular subdivision, when the embryo is moving in the fallopian tubes, there are transmissions through contact with tissues touched by the moving embryo.
"Later, after implantation in the uterus, the dialogue is more intense through the blood and cells, and chemical substances enter the mother's bloodstream.
"Finally, the child's stem cells pass to the mother in great quantity, both at the moment of birth, whether spontaneous or Caesarean, as well as at the time of abortion, whether spontaneous or voluntary. These cells are implanted in the mother's medulla and produce lymphocytes, which have a common origin with the cells of the central nervous system; they have receptors for the neurotransmitters and can make messages pass that the maternal nervous system understands."
When asked how long the fetus' influence on the mother lasts, the professor answered: "Stem cells have been found in the mother even 30 years after the birth. It could be said, therefore, the pregnancy does not last the 40 canonical weeks, but the woman's entire life."
As the Church has long taught, Mary is who she is because Jesus is who He is. She is definitely not a rented womb.
Peace be with you
???
A key difference beween the True God, and, on the other hand, the pagan gods and the Islamic Allah, is that God endowed His rational creatures --- humans --- with the capacity for choice, and He always respects that capacity.
There were a LOT of pagan gods who supposedly procreated by taking human consorts, and they took them by trickery or force. Zeus and Leda, Apollo and Daphne, Pan and Echo: rape, rape, rape.
Then here's Allah, who loves not freedom, but rather Kismet and Qadar, Fate and the Inexorable. He never really created other wills, his is the only will in the Universe; and consequently he treats people like robots, puppets. Muhammad was no more a knowing willing being, than a ventriloquist's dummy. Allah commands "recite," and Muhammad recites something that didn't even pass through his brain. He babbles out the Quran, and knows not what he spoke.
To hell with them.
The True God, by contrast, created true personal beings with wills of their own. To us he says "choose" and we can actually choose. Like Christ, we can say "Not my will but thine be done," because our will and God's will are both real.
That is why it must be a misstatement to say Mary didn't have a choice. It makes God out to be something like Zeus, a rapist; or Allah, a despot served by androids.
Of course Mary had a choice. It's not for nothing that she said, "Be it done unto me according to Thy will." If she didn't have a choice, then she would have been of a lower order of being than any Israelite to whom God says, "Refuse evil and choose the good," or "Choose life," or "Choose for yourselves this day whom you will serve." Without choice, she'd have been either a stupid puppet or a battered victim.
But thank God, the true God doesn't deal with people that way. God is good.
That she was willing doesn’t mean she had a choice.
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.