It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Please share your views on the Virgin Mary

page: 2
1
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 25 2011 @ 11:41 AM
link   

Attention...



As with any thread within any forum on this site, this thread is open to all members Christian and non-Christian alike as long as the post are civil and on topic. The derailing of this thread from both sides of the aisle will be removed. Those members that continue to post off-topic may very well find their post privileges suspended.

The continued flaunting of the rules and T&C within this thread by non-staff members will be considered off-topic as that is not the subject of this thread.

Consider this fair warning to all.
edit on 6/25/2011 by maria_stardust because: (no reason given)




posted on Jun, 26 2011 @ 02:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
Christians are monotheists. There is only one God.


Actually, the crux of Christianity is a belief that Jesus is God also. Jesus himself said, "Who calls me good? There is none good but the father" (Mark 10:18). He didn't see himself on par with God.



"Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel." Isaiah 7:14


This verse ONLY works if taken completely out of context. If you read the entire chapter you'll see that the argument about "virgin" or "young maiden" is moot. The whole chapter is a prophecy that the nation of Syria would fall before the time it would take a child to be conceived and grow old enough to know right from wrong. Here's a larger quote to help you out a little with that one, Isaiah 7:10-16. Ahaz is the king of Judah at this time.



Moreover the LORD spake again unto Ahaz, saying, ask thee a sign of the LORD thy God; ask it either in the depth, or in the height above. But Ahaz said, I will not ask, neither will I tempt the LORD. And he said, Hear ye now, O house of David; Is it a small thing for you to weary men, but will ye weary my God also? Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel. Butter and honey shall he eat, that he may know to refuse the evil, and choose the good. For before the child shall know to refuse the evil, and choose the good, the land that thou abhorrest shall be forsaken of both her kings.


If you look at that quote in its broader context, you just can't see it as a prophecy for Jesus. Not unless you think it is OKAY to cherry-pick single verses completely out of context. How people have managed to be okay with that for centuries is beyond me.



"And account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you; As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction." ~ 2 Peter 3:15-16

Peter endorses Paul's teachings in all his epistles and puts them on par with the other "scriptures".


Well, first off, modern scholars do not believe St. Peter wrote that.

Also, Paul deceived him and the other original leaders. In Acts 21 they ask Paul if it is true that he is teaching various things. He LIES to them, then goes to the temple and pretends to still be Jewish, going through a 7-day purification ritual with them. In 1 Corinthians 9:20-21 he brags about this deception. In 2 Gal 2:6 he says of the Jerusalem leadership "they added nothing to me" and then lies about what happened there.

He tells the Jerusalem leadership that he is not teaching that circumcision is no longer necessary - but of course through the new Testament we see he taught exactly that. Gal 5:12 is not translated literally, but it literally says that Paul wishes the "circumcisers" would "slip" and cut off their own penises. Ask a Greek scholar what that verse says literally.

This and many other things add up to this: I can't trust the word of Paul as a basis for my faith.

The book of James, which early church fathers fought hard to keep out of the canon, is the only book of the Bible that aligns with what Jesus himself taught. It's believed to be written by James the brother of Jesus, who was the leader of the Jerusalem church Paul fought with. James teaches very different ideals from Paul.

I don't want to continue arguing because I think it doesn't do any good. You have to come to your own conclusions. If your conclusions are to continue with your faith in Paul, then that is just fine. We're both only responsible for ourselves. I'm writing this only to defend myself.

Peace -



posted on Jun, 26 2011 @ 04:03 AM
link   
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 


You wrote:

["Someone like Peter perhaps?

"And account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you; As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction." ~ 2 Peter 3:15-16"]

Personally I don't find such a seemingly digression from initial topic irrelevant. It's natural, that there will emerge a regressive chain-of-reasoning.

You have on several occasions taken up Peter 2, repeating the same arguments on it, and being met with the same counter-arguments.

Even amongst christian scholars, the authenticity of Peter 2 is questionable.

And secondly it only takes a reading of acts in its totality, to become aware of the disgreements between those who (according to the text) knew Jesus, and the guy who's only claim was to have a vision.

Paulinism has constructed attributes to the character Mary, fitting to Pauline religious agenda. Completely in line with Paulus own MO.



edit on 26-6-2011 by bogomil because: paragraphing



posted on Jun, 26 2011 @ 08:52 AM
link   
About Mary in the Bible? no problem, but lets talk about the one of the Catholic church.
According to me she's a demon, worshipped by a bunch of devil worshippers, to stupid to ask questions and just believe all the rubish that their priest told them.
For the RCC Mary is also the queen of heaven right? Right, so why do the Bible warn you about her in Jer. 44?



posted on Jun, 26 2011 @ 04:44 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Jun, 26 2011 @ 04:44 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Jun, 27 2011 @ 07:09 PM
link   
reply to post by Schkeptick
 


You misquoted Mark 10:18. Yahshuah actually said, "Why do you call me good? There is none good but one, that is God" (Theos, no Abba). This can be taken two ways, he is saying he is not good, or he is challenging this man to think with a rhetorical question. Yahshuah only revealed that he was the Messiah to those closest to him. He rarely stated things directly especially the harder things to understand, like him being God. Yahshuah rarely makes a direct statement, this is especially apparent in Mark which underscores the Messianic secret throughout. Yahshuah made people think by his actions rather than words. Here is a good example of this:


John 10:25 Jesus answered them, “I told you, and you do not believe. The works that I do in My Father’s name, they bear witness of Me. 26 But you do not believe, because you are not of My sheep, 5as I said to you. 27 My sheep hear My voice, and I know them, and they follow Me. 28 And I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish; neither shall anyone snatch them out of My hand. 29 My Father, who has given them to Me, is greater than all; and no one is able to snatch them out of My Father’s hand. 30 I and My Father are one.” 31 Then the Jews took up stones again to stone Him. 32 Jesus answered them, “Many good works I have shown you from My Father. For which of those works do you stone Me?”


So when Yahshuah says "Why do you call me good? There is one good, that is God", he is making the man consider the implications of who He is. One can tell by Yahshuah's actions that He *is* good, so he is either the one that is good or he is not.

This is actually a great verse to prove Yahshuah's divinity if you know how to explain it.



posted on Jun, 27 2011 @ 07:46 PM
link   
reply to post by Partygirl
 


I believe in the Orthodox position of Mary, that she is Theotokos (God-bearer) and was ever virgin. Unlike Roman Catholics I believe Mary died (Dormition of the Theotokos as opposed to the Assumption) and I don't ascribe to an Augustinian view of original sin so I don't need to explain her grace by the immaculate conception dogma (that she was conceived without original sin. The virgin birth and immaculate conception are often used interchangably, but they are not the same). Mary was the culmination of the obedience of Israel, the only one righteous enough to give birth to the LOGOS. She is the greatest woman who ever lived, but I don't presume to call her sinless ( though some well meaning Orthodox do), because I think that is blasphemy. By her faith and righteousness, she achieved enough synergy with the will of God to bear the LOGOS within her, and like the burning bush, not be consumed. I believe she was ever virgin, though this takes some work to prove. First off, no one until much later in the Protestant reformation asserted that Mary was not ever virgin. Luther and even Calvin asserted the perpetual virginity of Mary. The idea of her not being ever-virgin is less than 500 years old. Yahshuah's brothers (adelphos) are never called children of Mary. Yahshuah's brothers are James, Joses, Simon, and Judas (never called children of Mary). Mary, mother of James(the less), Joses, and Salome is the wife of Cleopas. Furthermore, there is no word for cousin or half brother in Aramaic and adelphos is just as ambiguous. Adelphos can mean anything from blood brother, to kinsman, to spiritual brother. The oft used proof text "and Joseph knew her not until after she gave birth" isn't conclusive either. First of all: in using this as a proof text you are implying that Luke is opening speculation into their sex life. Secondly, you are assuming that until always denotes a reversal at its fulfillment. If this is the case, when Yahshuah said, "I am with you until the end of the age" then you are saying that He is leaving afterward. Lastly, when Yahshuah entrusted his mother to the Beloved Disciple in John, he is entrusting her care to someone who is certainly not her child. If Mary was a widow (Joseph is never mentioned later in Yahshuah's life so it is safe to assume he was dead) then care of her would have passed to the eldest son. If Yahshuah knew he was going to ascend to Heaven and entrusted the care of his mother to a non-relative, he wouldn't have had any brothers. If he had brothers and gave his mother to John, that would have been both unnecessary and insulting.
edit on 27-6-2011 by kallisti36 because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
1
<< 1   >>

log in

join