Evangelical / Catholic Dialogue About Mary?
Please treat this as what it is. One question. I am not calling the Catholic demoniacs.
In the first chapter of the Gospel of Matthew, 24th-25th verse says:
"Then Joseph, who was awakened from sleep, did as the Angel of the Lord commanded him and took him to his wife, and did not know until she had carried out their first son. And she called his name Jesus. "
A simple reading of the text, to me, suggests that once had handed Jesus Mary and Joseph was a normal relationship spouse .. namely that "knew" as in the carnal knowledge. They had sex from that moment, to end the virginity of Mary.
Catholic response? Again, it's just a question!
- The Catholic Mary and HTTP Question: Did you know that I really learned something from you?
- So where in the Bible tells us that Mary A remained a virgin throughout her life?
- The Virgin Mary has Jesus have brothers? I would love to answer many religious Please.
- Questions about Mary Magdalene with Jesus, the Last Supper, marriage ~ Why so hard to believe?
- What is the difference between birth and the Virgin Mary Immaculate Conception (Catholic Question)?
Mary is no longer a virgin. After the miracle of Jesus' birth, she and Joseph were common in many chilldren through sex. She is also dead, so you can not hear those asking for his "advocacy." These "intercession" is against Jesus Christ, anyway.
The problem is the English language, basically. And it does center on the interpretation of " 'til / until" - can be done in two ways. And because this is the case, you can not base the claim that Mary had other children - or that she and Joseph had a spousal physical, for that matter - in this verse alone.
Consider 2 Samuel 6:23: "Michal daughter of Saul had no children until his death." Obviously not give birth later. This is just one example. There are, of course, like many other verses that "until" means a fixed point before that one thing does not happen, but after that point it does. All the more reason, you can not use just this one verse to prove or disprove the perpetual virginity of Mary.
Another consideration is that often the fact that Jesus had brothers. Once again … English language translation. It is complicated to say in English "Jesus male relatives, including cousins," but that is the meaning of the original texts. If some take it as meaning that "brothers" by the brothers born of Mary, who are making an assumption, the reference is unclear. What I find telling is that if Jesus had brothers, then why does He put his mother in the care of John, just before he died?
He also argued that because Jesus is often called the "firstborn," shows that he was not the only son of Mary. An argument is rather thin, I did not have to wait until my second child's birth to the age which is considered my firstborn. She had done so, even if I had not had other children. Art that the term is "only child" does not change this.
Greg H,
I mean the lack of respect …. you know, but you are looking at the snake, not the elephant:
Are you looking for the snake or the elephant?
Indeed, Jesus Christ began the Roman Catholic Church. It was built on the Apostles. As a body on earth, He gave His Church by St. Peter. He changed his name from Simon to Peter (which means' rock '), and built His Church of San Pedro.
"He said," But who say I am? "Simon Peter answered," Thou art the Christ, the Son of God. "And Jesus replied," Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jona! For flesh and blood has not revealed to you, but my Father in heaven. And I say, you are Peter and on this rock I will build my church [nb a unique church], and the powers of death shall not prevail against it. To you I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and everything that bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven. "(Cf. Matthew 16:15-19).
San Pedro was the first Bishop of Rome, and the first Pope. His successor for 2000 years have become one of the bishops of Rome and the Pope, the head of the universal Church.
Now, the protesters believe that their RV represents 100% of the faith. It is clear that Jesus did not emphasize the written word, while on earth. As a matter of fact, there is no proof of Jesus pick a pencil, pen or pencil, or any evidence of him telling his disciples to write something down. The Holy Spirit really did later. My point is that the faith of most of the past 2000 years has been transmitted orally. About the preaching of Jesus traveled ORALLY. If He had wanted to emphasize that 100% of the Fe lay in the written word, who have sat on the same day and written the Bible. At least that has been addressed to the disciples to write things. Also, if you intended the word to represent 100% of the Faith, would have seen that word processors, fax machines and copiers have been developed and readily available during his public ministry, and he would have told His disciples by fax to the Bible to all nations. Instead of what he said was:
"Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you: and lo, I am with you always, to the close of the age. " (Matthew 28:19-20).
In fact, the Apostles, is saying things he wrote the New Testament books, but especially teaching and preaching the gospel ORALLY.
The Bible was not compiled as such until the end of the 4th century, and the general public was largely illiterate until the 20th century. Obviously, the spoken word is the main source of faith for many years. In fact it was written during the time, but faith is generally transmitted orally. We have evidence of this historic ORAL preaching in the writings of the Church of the Fathers and Doctors. Now, this statement of Faith orally and is reflected in the writings of the Fathers and Doctors called the Catholic Tradition. Traditio in Latin means "hand."
Imagine the value of studying the writings of St. Polycarp and Papias are taught directly by San Juan! They were eyewitnesses.
Now, the Catholic Church wrote the Holy Bible. Furthermore, the Holy Bible is incomplete. How do we know this? Because Scripture tells us. Consider:
"Now Jesus did many other signs in the presence of the disciples, which are not written in this book, but these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that believing you may have life in his name. (Cf. John 20:30-31)
"There are also many other things which Jesus did, but if these are described separately, I do not think the whole world would contain the books that would be written." (Cf. John 21:25).
"I still have much to say to you, but you can not bear now. When the Spirit of truth, he will guide you into all truth, He will not speak on his own authority, but whatever he hears the floor and declare to you things to come. He glorify me, because what is mine and declare to you. All that the Father is mine, so I said we will take what is mine and declare to you. "(Cf. John 16:12-15)
So where is the rest of the deposit of faith, if Scripture is incomplete? The answer lies in the Catholic tradition and the teachings of the Magisterium of the Church (remember that He is said to San Pedro ", which bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be released in heaven. ").
Therefore, reiterate the Deposit of Faith is composed as follows: The Catholic tradition, Scripture and the Teachings of the Church.
Protestants do not recognize the totality of Scripture. Have gotten 7 books called deuterocanonicals. Who have done this despite the fact that Scripture says, to do otherwise.
Now, why do Catholics who get annoyed with the accusations of Protestants against the Roman Catholic faith, is largely due to the fact that the attack complete deposit of faith only to Scripture (and only one fraction of that). In addition, many treat their RV as their security blanket. Are governed by their feelings. They believe that if something makes them feel good from then is the Holy Spirit, if you feel uncomfortable then it is from Satan. Many verses in the Holy Scripture (such as those listed above) that are uncomfortable, so deal with it by ignoring those verses, or twisting its meaning so that they feel comfortable again. They do so despite the following:
"This is good and pleasing to God our Savior, who wants everyone to be saved and come to the knowledge of the truth." (1 Timothy 2:3-4)
Consider the following story to me to illustrate his conclusions about faith on the basis of using only their RV:
"Once upon a time there was a man born blind. He spent his entire life in darkness. One day, his friend offered to take him to the zoo to introduce God's creatures, that the blind had not found before. The blind was very excited about this opportunity.
The day came to an adventure, and his friend took the blind man and took him to the zoo. It came from animal to animal, and is filled with blind emotion.
When they arrived at the elephant, the blind man took hold of the tail of the elephant, and after running his hand up and down his tail, he exclaimed, "Oh, I see, the elephant is very much like snakes!"
Now, the conclusion reached by the blind man in the void above story was due to their inability misfortunate. Please understand that Catholics have no problem with Protestants believe in their RV. The problem is that they have closed their eyes with just the tail in his hand, and we are criticized and have his eyes open the whole elephant.
Only the Scripture? Is this enough half the story?
http://www.call2holiness.org/era-of-peace.htm …
How do we know that Jesus Christ founded the Catholic Church: http://home.inreach.com/bstanley/how.htm
The names of the men who founded the Protestant ecclesial communities: http://home.inreach.com/bstanley/reform ….
A simple reading in English, no perhaps not in the original Greek.
"Until she was a child"
The evangelist relates to emphasize that Joseph was not responsible for the conception of Jesus.
The Greek word translated "until" does not imply the normal civil behavior after the birth of Jesus, nor exclude them.
With love in Christ.
Thank you for calling this a "simple reading of the text"
There are two cases in the Bible, the word "up" is translated like this. The original word in Greek was translated into Aramaic and Latin, but means more than "up." Actually mean that she did not know at all. "Until" is a mistranslation. I wish it was a biblical scholar, but I'm not. I'm going to scare you a link to peruse.http: / / # http://www.newadvent.org/summa/4028.htm …
A very strict law at that time was that if his wife was pregnant by another man, who had two options. You can "put out of his silence" or not having sex with her ever.
Joseph knew that God is the Father, and that belonged to him. Joseph did not dare to have sex with her once he did two things: 1) that he knew the child was not yours and 2) are not "put away"
To have sex with her after they have become dirty.
Joseph was also much older widower with children
(Probably after years of sexual activity). These are the "brothers" of Jesus mentioned in the Bible. Why would a Jewish man to have a woman at that time that Jews were considered "damaged goods", except for a server and a babysitter for your children already? The community has seen its delicate condition and rushed to get to his farm to be better than a widower.
Jesus had a sister named Mary (one name and Salome). It is customary for the name of mother to child, but against the Jewish custom of a mother giving a child the same name. Therefore, Sister Mary was the daughter of a move to the Mother Mary. Jesus only had step brothers and sisters.
About Jesus brothers. A call in Mark 6:3 is James. We know that James the Just was a brother of the Lord. We also know that Paul was an apostle tells us, because in Galatians 1:19 ( "But other of the apostles who saw none, save James the Lord's brother" RV) Here Paul is speaking of his visit to the Church in Jerusalem and that he saw James, because James was the bishop of that community. In Epiphanius' Panarion, we know that James the Just, brother of the Lord, died when he was 96 years,
( "But the Lord's brother James and son of Joseph, died in Jerusalem, after living twenty-four years, more or less, after the Ascension of the Savior. He was ninety-six years when he was beaten in the head by a full with his club, launched from the pinnacle of the temple and the cast, which had done nothing wrong "Epiphanius, Panarion, 78.14.5)
and that he was not the son of Mary and was a Nazarite
( "If James was the son of José José <first> wife, not Mary, as we have said in many places and deal more clearly. 2. However, we find that David is through of actions that the son of Joseph, <and> that was a Nazarite (for he was the eldest son of Joseph and devoted )…" Epiphanius, Panarion, 29.3.4.1-2)
Since we know this information, thanks to Epiphanius, was known to James, the brother called the Lord Jesus really was step-brother of Joseph's first marriage. If we know this and interpret the Bible says that the Lord's brothers were his "brehtren blood" rather than relatives, or their interpretation is wrong or is the Bible.
P.S. I really do not think that the Bible is wrong.
Dios te bendiga!
Mary was the mother of Jesus. Joseph was his earthly father.
Both were of humanity and the need for the salvation of all mankind.
If God did not send his Son, who have been held in death as well as all mankind.
It is sad to put the Catholic religion in that emphesis Mary. However, they do so and is contrary to the Word of God.
Does no good to pray to Moses, Isaac, Jacob, David, or Mary. Not one of these can save you from eternal damnation.
Only prayer to God and believe in His Son, a man can be saved from death.