What's new
By:
Filters
Christian Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • Focus on the Family

    Strengthening families through biblical principles.

    Focus on the Family addresses the use of biblical principles in parenting and marriage to strengthen the family.

    Read daily articles from Focus on the Family in the Marriage and Parenting Resources forum.

  • Guest, Join Papa Zoom today for some uplifting biblical encouragement! --> Daily Verses

  • The Gospel of Jesus Christ

    Heard of "The Gospel"? Want to know more?

    There is salvation in no other, for there is not another name under heaven having been given among men, by which it behooves us to be saved."

    Read The Gospel Online.

Mary the mother of Jesus

2024 Website Hosting Fees

Total amount
$1,048.00
Goal
$1,038.00
Donate View
Thess,

Let me offer this:

IF Mary refused to have sex with Joseph, then she disobeyed the COMMANDMENT of God to be submissive to her husband, (unless she was SO undesirable as to be shunned sexually by her husband). And she would have gone AGAINST the teaching of Paul who told us that we are NOT to deny our bodies to our spouses UNLESS it is agreed upon for fasting or prayer.

So, the idea itself that Mary remained a virgin AFTER the birth of Christ goes against EVERYTHING that we have been taught through the Word.

And Mary having sex with Joseph and having other children in NO way diminishes her 'place' as far as I'm concerned. But then I don't choose to worshp Mary as a 'perpetual virgin', so I simply respect her in history as the Mother of Jesus. She was NOT the wife of God, but of Joseph, and once Christ was born, she was NOT held to any different teachings than any other human on this planet.
 
Imagican,

You avoid the topic. This is not about whether Mary was a perpetual virgin or not. That discussion has been had many times on this board and your one man, my holy spirit is better than your holy spirit, theology on the subject has been answered. This thread is simply about whether it is an abuse of scripture to use Matt 27 and Gal 1:19 to defend your belief that Mary was not a perpetual virgin. If you can't follow the exegesis I have given in the OP then you have no business giving an OPINION in the matter. So deal with the question raised and stop going off topic.
 
Imagican,

I am curious about one thing with regard to your arguement. Where would Mary have found this command of God? Thanks in advance for your answer.
Blessings
 
thessalonian said:
Is noone going to answer? Is it scripture abuse to use a wrong arguement (obviously so in scripture) to support a position even if you believe that position to be true? Do you people have true reverance for the word of God or not?
Click to expand...

Thess, Thess, Thess,

Who died and made YOU the pope? he he he. Thess, if God chooses to reveal or chooses to conceal that is NOT up to us to question. There is a MUCH bigger picture offered through scripture than a complete LITERAL translation. For without the intervention of The Spirit, NONE of what man understands is of ANY effect.

You seem to think that if ANYONE rejects YOUR understanding that it is 'them being' blind or straight out WRONG. I disagree. The REASON that we are to be IN THE BODY is so that which is offered to one may be revealed to ALL. NO, not that which is 'thought' by one MUST BE ACCEPTED BY ALL.

I know that you must find it daunting to come in contact with the freedom exhibited by others to accept Christ and follow God 'on their own'. To be able to develope a 'personal relationship' without the aproval of 'a man' must seem to you to be heresy. But I know and others also that I NEED NO MAN'S aproval to be loved and accepted by God.

Please understand that I am only able to keep up with the threads that I post in in a half-hazard order. I must work, and I have a family that has it needs too. So, if you respond to my posts and don't receive an immediate reply, please DON'T think that I am avoiding you by any means. If I forget to return to a particular thread that we are involved in mutual debate, please feel free to send me a message and I will reply ASAP.

Love ya brother,

MEC
 
thessalonian said:
Imagican,

I am curious about one thing with regard to your arguement. Where would Mary have found this command of God? Thanks in advance for your answer.
Blessings
Click to expand...

Mary WAS a Jew and even of the house of David. Therefore, not only did she have her SON to offer her the Word, but she had the WRITTEN LAW of Moses and the teachings that had been 'passed down' for over three thousand years of heritage.

The first five books of the Holy Bible were the MOST important to the Jews. In it, there IS the story of Adam and Eve. Part of Eve's punishment was that in the future, women WOULD be submissive to their husbands. And, with a tiny bit of understanding of the history concerning women and men, it is quite plain to see and understand that; not only were women commanded to be submissive to their husbands, they were FORCED to be so by the society in which they lived.
 
No, I am not pope. There are not multiple truths as people on this board seem to think. The only one that will damn you to hell it seems is Catholicism. The true meaning of scripture seems to be of less importance than men coming up with their own meanings on this board. What is it that sets men free? Men having their own theologies and understandings or truth?
 
Verse that says she had to have sex please?

And she would have gone AGAINST the teaching of Paul who told us that we are NOT to deny our bodies to our spouses UNLESS it is agreed upon for fasting or prayer.
Click to expand...

Apparently it dawned on you that this one won't work will it. How could she be accountable for Paul's command if it was not written and she never heard it? You say Jesus told her. Prove it? Are you going outside of scripture here when it is convenient Imagican? It would seem that way.

Please understand that I am only able to keep up with the threads that I post in in a half-hazard order. I must work, and I have a family that has it needs to
Click to expand...


Don't we all.
Blessings
 
By the way are you telling me that Paul's revelation is superfoulous??? (sp???) That he didn't really recieve new revelation?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top