lovetruth:

the Jewish tradition and infancy of Christ

Ok. It is not Scriptural then. You can go ahead with your unfounded fairy tale.

ClareMarie:


But this the same church that cumulated writings of the disciples into the book you currently call 'The Bible'. Does that mean the bible you have is also a deviation from the truth?

Are your so-called fathers the writers of the Bible? Anyone can be used to compile already written records. Does that have any bearing on the quality of the message it contains?

MosesAlex:

Joseph was not mentioned of in adult life of Jesus (apart from when they asked is this not the carpenter's son) so it is that the died before Jesus public ministry.
So why did the relatives take her instead to their home?

Let us look at the passage, note the bolded.

John 19:26-27 (A book can be written on this two verses alone, I am sure many have been written)
When Jesus therefore had seen his mother and the disciple standing whom he loved, he saith to his mother: Woman, behold thy son. After that, he saith to the disciple: Behold thy mother. And from that hour, the disciple took her to his own.

Jesus had a special love for John, the beloved. Now Jesus was leaving, He placed her in the hands of his beloved disciple to take care of her as his mother.
Also note the language Jesus used "Behold thy Mother" That is more of a declaration.
Our Jesus, by giving her as a mother to John, gave her also as a mother to all who believe in him, who become children of God, and are not born of flesh and blood, or of the will of man, but of God. This is why we call her Mother Mary.
Rev 12:17 And the dragon was angry against the woman: and went to make war with the rest of her seed, who keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ.

Have you asked why did all the apostle flee? Even John ran away at the Garden of Gethsemane. But was present at the Crucifixion?
Have you asked why all the apostles were martyred but John died a natural death?
Have why Our Jesus called his mother "Woman"? Gen 3:15, John 2:4, Rev 12:1-17

Are you saying that the woman mentioned at Revelation 12 is Mary?

LaaJiblik:




But what is the EXACT Biblical source that specifically said Mary REMAINED a Virgin all through her life?
What is the origin of this fallacy?
I can’t find anywhere in the Bible where Mary was said to have remained a Virgin ALL through her life.


Or maybe you have another source? Maybe you have a book?
“The AutoBiography of Mary, Mother of Jesus and Wife of Joseph”

Maybe that’s the source material?
Apart from the Bible and the Quar’an; is there any other source material which x-rays the life of Mary?
Maybe if we read that material, we will see where it expressly states that Joseph immediately became celibate, and Mary remained a Virgin all through her life.

you are forgetting the writings of the early Christians... those were written before the Koran.

cyrilamx:
Your reaction shows u really ignorant of biblical exegesis. Your mind is so carnal that it can grasp spiritual things...no wonder there is so much confusion in pentecostalism resulting in splinter group emerging daily and erroneously claiming scholarship of the holy scripture. You think the humanity of Christ was separated from his divinity? I won't blame you because 3months of ur so-called Bible studies without the advantage Church history is really a set back in scriptural analysis to pentecostals. In christ Jesus, there are two natures- the nature of God as Son begotten of the Father from all eternity and nature of Man, born of the Virgin Mary at appointed time. However in christ Jesus, there is One Person- the second person of the blessed trinity. Just as humans have a spirit which is the person so Christ have a divine person. The Church fathers called the union of the two natures of Christ in on Person as the HYPOSTATIC UNION. So what was conceived in the womb of the blessed virgin was God the son who became man while still remaining God. That is why Mary is called God-bearer. In Greek the THEOTOKOS. MARY didn't give birth to a human Jesus distinct from the Person of Christ rather she conceived in her the second person of the blessed Trinity hence the Church Father at the council of Ephesus in 431 rightly called her Mother of God...and Jesus her son as God is not ashamed to call her mother. Pentecostalism should go and have a thorough scholarship in sacred scripture and stop misinterpreting same to the destruction of souls.

Amen wow, you are a teacher

Emyogalanya:
WILL IT MAKE HER LESS HOLY IF HE DID TOUCH HER? WILL IT MAKE JESUS LESS CHRIST? ITS NOT THE BIRTH OF JESUS THAT SAVED US IT IS HIS DEATH ON THE CROSS AND I MAKE BOLD TO SAY THAT IF JESUS DID NOT DIE EVEN MARY WONT BE SAVED

how will Jesus die if he wasn't born?


and I make bold to agree that no one will be saved without the birth, life and death of Christ

Investnow2017:


Just curious. Did the early Christians worship Mary as the Chatholics do today? Any evidence?

1 st Catholics are always happy to correct anyone who makes the mistake of thinking Catholics worship Mary.


2nd the early Christians are all Catholics in belief and practice.

Ubenedictus:
how will Jesus die if he wasn't born?


and I make bold to agree that no one will be saved without the birth, life and death of Christ

WHERE IN MY POST DID I MAKE SUCH STATEMENT

Ubenedictus:
how will Jesus die if he wasn't born?


and I make bold to agree that no one will be saved without the birth, life and death of Christ

EVEN MARY WILL NOT BE SAVED PROVE ME WRONG IF YOU FEEL OTHERWISE

Emyogalanya:
MosesAlex A Man Married A Woman And You Are Here Telling Me That Its A Sin For Him To Meet That Same Woman. WHERE DID YOU SEE THEM TAKE THE VOW. YOU THINK MARY IS THE ONLY VIRGIN AT THAT TIME? AND WHATS THE BIG DEAL IN A VIRGIN CONCEIVING? WAIT TILL YOU HEAR ABOUT ARTIFICIAL INSEMINATION. VIRGIN OR NO VIRGIN EXTRA CHILD OR NOT DOES IT REDUCE THE POWER OF CHRIST AS SAVIOUR? NO. WHEN MY DAD DIED WE THE CHILDREN WERE NOT AROUND SO THAT MEANS WE ARE NOT HIS CHILDREN. SO IF MY DAD CALL ANY YOUNG MAN SAYING MY SON GIVE ME WATER AND BEFORE HE CAME AROUND HE DIED IT THEN MEANS HE HAS HANDED OVER THE WHOLE HOUSE TO HIM? INCLUDING MY MUM? DID THE APOSTLE TELL YOU HE IS MOTHERLESS DO YOU EVEN KNOW THAT JESUS WAS SEEN AS ENEMY OF THE STATE AS SUCH NO ONE COULD ASSOCIATE WITH HIM. AS EVEN HIS ARMSTLES RAN AWAY EVEN IN OUR CONTEMPORARY LIFE ITS EASIER FOR WOMEN TO COME CLOSE DID YOU ALSO NOTE THAT ONLY WOMEN FOLLOWED HIM TO THE PLACE COS NO MAN COULD DARE CONFRONT SOLDIERS BUT WOMEN COULD HENCE THE ABSENSE OF HIS BROTHERS

1st according to Jewish tradition, a man will not sleep with his wife if he is aware she was pregnant for another... even if he keeps her as part of his household.

2nd the Jews had a religious fear for anything touched by the presence of God, in fact the moment a thing or person was touched by God's presence it was reserved from normal use.

in fact Joseph been a Jew would know these things... he can't sleep with a woman who had a child that wasn't his while betrothed to him, even if he keeps her in his house as wife or concubine, it becomes weirder if he knew the presence of God overshadowed her ...then he'll certainly not touch her....

Add that to the fact that Joseph only took her home by the angels command just to provide a legal name for Jesus.


As for me this argument of 13 pages is weird... every Christian of good repute who talked about the virginity of Mary from 1 AD to 1700AD all teach that Mary was a perpetual virgin and those that didn't discuss the issue do not disprove it either, in fact the first Protestants like Martin Luther, John Wesley, John Calvin all agree she is a perpetual virgin

...this idea that Mary has other kids is very new... it come around only recently, crept into the Protestant churches and gained traction about 250 years ago.

if you are following an end time teaching that began about 250 years ago and you are using this new teaching to condemn those who hold the faith as taught and believed by all Christians both Catholic, Orthodox and Protestants for 2000 years... then be careful. you may be the one in trouble.

Emyogalanya:
BOOK OF enoch? The CanOn Of The Old Testament Is Diff From That Of The New Testament. If Such Book Exist The Canon Do The Apostle Have Power To Cannoise The Old Testament? Whose Authenticity Has Been Established Befor Christ Came They Were Already In Use. Granted That Some Books From The Apostle's ( gospel Of Thomas) Did Not Make It Into The New Testament So What Your Now Saying Is That A Book That Was Not Considered eligible By CannoNical Standard hence Its Removal Is What You Now Use As YardsTiCK For Eternal Virginity. If It Teach About It Why Did They Remove It From The Bible Only One Reason ; Cos It Is Heresy And Falsehood

the Church chose the canon and left out even the book of Enoch quoted in Jude.


if you disagree you can make your own Bible

Emyogalanya:
ITS NOT IMPOSSIBLE FOR GOD. BUT MY POINT IS THIS ITS NOT GOD THAT IS INVOLVED HERE IT IS JOSEPH AND MARY LIVING IN THE SAME ROOM FOR 12 TO ALMOST 30 YEARS AND YOU ARE SAYING HE DID NOT TOUCH HER IS MARY NOW A SPIRIT. YOU SHE DON'T EVEN REMOVE HER CLOTHS TO BATH USING TOWEL AND THEY DID NOT LIE ON THE SAME BED TOGETHER YOU JUST MADE A GODESS OF MARY

I am just curious...

are you aware that the teaching that Mary had other children only became part of the Protestant churches less than 300 year ago?

Emyogalanya:
LIKE I SAID EARLIER ITS NOT AN ARTICLE OF FAITH HENCE ITS ABSENCE FROM THE 'APOSTLE'S CREED OR ARE YOU SAYING THAT BELIEF PERPETUAL VIRGINITY IS CRITERIA FOR ENTERING HEAVEN. THAT JESUS DO OTHER THIS WHICH ARE NOT RECORD THATS BETWEEN BOOK OF JOHN ACCOUNT OF JESUS. WHAT DO YOU NOW SAY OF LUKE. MIND YOU ONCE THE CANON REJECTS A BOOK ITS ENTIRE CONTENTS STANDS REJECTED. HOW DOES IT SOUND LOGICAL TO YOU THAT A BOOK THAT COULD NOT MEET UP TO CANNOICAL STANDARD SHOULD NOW BE USE AS YARDSTICK TO DETERMINE AND UNREVEALED TRUTH. THE FIRST THING TO DO IS TO CANONISE THEM AS WAS DONE TO DEUTROCANONICAL BOOKS

the apostles creed is not the only place the Church lays down articles of faith... you should know this since you claim to be Catholic.


an entire book doesn't get rejected because it wasn't added to the canon. in fact the book of revelation is not canonical in some ancient churches but that doesn't mean it was rejected.

historically canonical simply mean the book read in the local Church... it is possible in the early Church for a book to be accepted and still be uncanonical.


read up on how the Bible was canonized.

Emyogalanya:
EVEN MARY WILL NOT BE SAVED PROVE ME WRONG IF YOU FEEL OTHERWISE

as I said

and I make bold to agree that no one will be saved
without the birth, life and death of Christ.



in case you can't understand my English... I agree that Mary couldn't be saved without Christ.

Ubenedictus:


1 st Catholics are always happy to correct anyone who makes the mistake of thinking Catholics worship Mary.


2nd the early Christians are all Catholics in belief and practice.

You mean Jesus' apostles, Paul and others were wearing long garbs like we see among catholics today? Pls see my questions as an honest and sincere ones because i want to know.

Investnow2017:


You mean Jesus' apostles, Paul and others were wearing long garbs like we see among catholics today? Pls see my questions as an honest and sincere ones because i want to know.

Garments never makes one a Catholic. It is baptism that makes you a member of the Catholic Church.

Investnow2017:


Ok. It is not Scriptural then. You can go ahead with your unfounded fairy tale.

what is scripture? tell me

Investnow2017:


You mean Jesus' apostles, Paul and others were wearing long garbs like we see among catholics today? Pls see my questions as an honest and sincere ones because i want to know.

from a historical point of view YES.

the long garbs worn by Catholic priest today is actually the same with what early Christians wore with minor exceptions.
do you think the apostles were wearing suits?
infact Jesus wore something similar.

BUT,

That isn't the point I was making, my point is that if you xray the belief of early Christians and check that of Catholics today you would find that they are basically the same, if you read up on the practices of the early Christians and how they worshipped and compare them with the Catholic mass you'll again find that they are basically the same, in fact every Catholic Bishop and priest is a successor of the Bishops and presbyter of the early Church. so that it is accurate to say that the Catholic church is same as the early Church and is that very Church established by the apostles.

Ubenedictus:


from a historical point of view YES.

the long garbs worn by Catholic priest today is actually the same with what early Christians wore with minor exceptions.
do you think the apostles were wearing suits?
infact Jesus wore something similar.

BUT,

That isn't the point I was making, my point is that if you xray the belief of early Christians and check that of Catholics today you would find that they are basically the same, if you read up on the practices of the early Christians and how they worshipped and compare them with the Catholic mass you'll again find that they are basically the same, in fact every Catholic Bishop and priest is a successor of the Bishops and presbyter of the early Church. so that it is accurate to say that the Catholic church is same as the early Church and is that very Church established by the apostles.

Go ahead. You are talking to a baby. Nothing could be farther from the truth. Catholic's form of worship is anything but scriptural and bears no resemblance whatsoever with the documented form of worship established by our Lord and Saviour, Jesus Christ.

I feel deliberately irked by comparing Jesus' simple and practical form of worship with the tradition-filled manner of worship peculiar to the catholics.

Investnow2017:


Go ahead. You are talking to a baby. Nothing could be farther from the truth. Catholic's form of worship is anything but scriptural and bears no resemblance whatsoever with the documented form of worship established by our Lord and Saviour, Jesus Christ.

I feel deliberately irked by comparing Jesus' simple and practical form of worship with the tradition-filled manner of worship peculiar to the catholics.

why not make your research, it is not enough to be irked. research how the early Church worshipped. start from what the Bible records then read up the writings of early Christians.


the funny truth is that all biblical worship is tradition filled, the first and in fact the act of worship commanded by Christ is the Lords supper. the same we find the apostles doing

They devoted themselves to the apostles' teaching
and to fellowship, to the breaking of bread and to
prayers

even Paul when he wrote about how the early Christians worshipped wrote it as tradition

or I have received of the Lord that which also
I delivered unto you, that the Lord Jesus the same
night in which he was betrayed took bread:


read up on how the early Church worship and that is how the Catholic Church basically worships