Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: bimboeruption

The answer is absolutely “NO!”

Mary is the Ark of the New Covenant. Using typology, when the Ark of the Old Covenant was touched — the person died.

Joseph and Mary agreed to live lives of mutual respect and celibacy. Mary did not have any other children. Do You read about the births of other children in the Bible?

No. There was no word for “cousin” and so the word “brothers” was used in the ancient language.

To repeat — if anyone had tried to touch Mary in a sexual way — they would have died.

Even Luther, Zwingli and Calvan agree with the doctrine of perpetual virginity. Please read up on it on the links I provided in the previous post.


31 posted on 12/09/2012 3:18:35 PM PST by Salvation ("With God all things are possible." Matthew 19:26)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies ]


To: Salvation
I respectfully disagree.

Matthew 1:24-25 NIV

24 When Joseph woke up, he did what the angel of the Lord had commanded him and took Mary home as his wife. 25 But he did not consummate their marriage until she gave birth to a son. And he gave him the name Jesus.

Matthew 1:25 KJV

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

Truthfully, little of this matters. It is important that Mary was a virgin when the Christ was conceived and that He was Gods son. These discussions are distractions.

39 posted on 12/09/2012 3:27:31 PM PST by DJ MacWoW (My faith and politics cannot be separated)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies ]

To: Salvation
Mary is the Ark of the New Covenant. Using typology, when the Ark of the Old Covenant was touched — the person died.

First off, that is not true. There is no typology of that explained in Scripture.

Mary is the Ark of the New Covenant. Using typology, when the Ark of the Old Covenant was touched — the person died.

Big dichotomy......

In the OT, a person died if they merely TOUCHED the ark, not if they touched the ark in a sexual way.

If the RCC is going to try to use that about Mary, they are being disingenuous to qualify it as sexual touching as opposed to ANY physical contact.

Therefore, if any physical contact with the ark killed someone on the spot, then any physical contact with Mary should have likewise killed people instantly, and yet her mother conceived and bore her without dying. And for her to grow up as an emotionally healthy child, she HAD to have had physical contact with other human beings.

Hmm, so if other normal sinful human beings touched her, why was she not contaminated with sin, just like Catholics claim would have happened to Jesus if Mary had sinned? If Mary needed to be sinless as to not contaminate Jesus, then why didn't Mary's mother have to be sinless so as not to contaminate Mary? And how far back does that go?

But if God were able to keep Mary sinless being conceived and born of a sinful mother, then He could have done the exact same thing for Jesus being conceived and carried by a sinful mother.

And if the unholy coming in contact with a holy thing drop dead from it, then why didn't all the people Jesus touched when He healed them and all the people who came in contact with him while the crowds pressed in around Him die on the spot too?

Do Catholics even think this stuff through, or just swallow it hook, line, and sinker?

44 posted on 12/09/2012 3:31:16 PM PST by metmom (For freedom Christ has set us free; stand firm therefore & do not submit again to a yoke of slavery)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies ]

To: Salvation
To repeat — if anyone had tried to touch Mary in a sexual way — they would have died.

I don't see that in post 31 so I don't know what it is a repeat of unless you meant it was a repeat of...

...what you wrote: "Mary is the Ark of the New Covenant. Using typology, when the Ark of the Old Covenant was touched — the person died."

Therefore if that is true, anyone touching Mary would die. The use of typology seems quite a stretch unless there is a scripture in the NT saying that Mary is the latter day Ark of the Covenant.

I've never seen anything like that.

Mary and Joseph were married, as noted in scripture.

20 But while he thought about these things, behold, an angel of the Lord appeared to him in a dream, saying, “Joseph, son of David, do not be afraid to take to you Mary your wife...
There was no qualification (don't have sex with her or you will die), the angel said take her as your wife.

24 Then Joseph, being aroused from sleep, did as the angel of the Lord commanded him and took to him his wife, 25 and did not know her till she had brought forth her firstborn Son.[d] And he called His name Jesus.
"...and did not know her till she had brought forth her firstborn Son"

That is the same as saying that he DID "know" (Biblical lingo for having sex) her after Jesus was born.

Seems pretty cut and dried.

Joseph had sexual relations with his wife, and he did not die.

I know that Catholicism and the church fathers and many others outside of Catholicism spent centuries trying to make Mary a perpetual virgin, but scripture doesn't uphold that theory.

67 posted on 12/09/2012 8:42:26 PM PST by Syncro (The Tea Party is Dead-->MSM/Dems/GOP-e -- LONG LIVE THE TEA PARTY!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies ]

To: Salvation
No. There was no word for “cousin” and so the word “brothers” was used in the ancient language.

You couldn't be more wrong...

Luk 1:36 And, behold, thy cousin Elisabeth, she hath also conceived a son in her old age: and this is the sixth month with her, who was called barren.

Mat 13:55 Is not this the carpenter's son? is not his mother called Mary? and his brethren, James, and Joses, and Simon, and Judas?

Obviously there IS a word for cousin and it was not used in Mat 13:55...And that's because there were no cousins there...

Mat 13:56 And his sisters, are they not all with us? Whence then hath this man all these things?

ἀδελφή
adelphē
ad-el-fay'
Feminine of G80; a sister (natural or ecclesiastical): - sister.

Sister is sister...It is not kin, nor cousin nor kinsmen...It is sister...

Mat 13:57 And they were offended in him. But Jesus said unto them, A prophet is not without honour, save in his own country, and in his own house.

And the context is 'in Jesus' own house...No relatives...

That's why Bible Believers could never become Catholics...All this perversion of the scriptures to try to justify it's existance...

82 posted on 12/10/2012 5:18:46 AM PST by Iscool (You mess with me, you mess with the WHOLE trailerpark...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson