Did the Virgin Mary have children after giving birth to Christ?
- Thread starter OldOrthodoxChristian
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
S
"Those who speak for themselves want glory only for themselves, but a person who seeks to honor the one who sent him speaks truth, not lies." (John 7:18)
This is what Jesus says about the person who speaks the Truth, he does not speak from his own authority but from another, higher authority.
This is what Jesus says about the person who speaks the Truth, he does not speak from his own authority but from another, higher authority.
Last edited by a moderator:
K
"Rather, blessed is he who hears the Word of God and obeys it."
You KNOW what came just before that.
Ain't denigrating anybody.
It's just that if you take Mary completely out of the picture, Jesus is still who He is. There would've been another virgin somewhere that God would've used as HIS "sign".
But, if you take Jesus out of the picture, there is no hope for mankind.
Big difference.
Didn't Jesus say that people can even blaspheme Him but if we shouldn't blaspheme the Holy Spirit? Yes He said that.
Why is that that you give Mary all the credit for Jesus being born on earth but we don't really hear (or read) about how exciting it is for the Holy Spirit to conceive Jesus?
Mary is lifted up. Mary is prayed to. Mary has her own scapular and prayer beads. Mary has a BUNCH of songs about her. Mary has literally dozens of titles including "Queen of Heaven".
Say something bad about Mary and RCCs will come from everywhere to defend her.
Yet, from us Christians, we DON'T SEE the Holy Spirit getting any glory and honor from the moment of conception to when Jesus first started His ministry.
It's "blessed mother"and "ever virgin" and "how she suffered so at the cross"... and so on.
The Holy Spirit seems to be a "second fiddle" to Mary at the earliest stages of Jesus' life on earth.
Jesus said He was doing His Father's business. He was saying what His Father told Him to. He raised Lazerus to prove that He was sent from His Father.
He even "dissed" his mother a few times, too, to reveal God's Will and to guide people towards God.
One "proof" in all of my reply is just HOW MUCH[ RCCs are defending Mary in this thread and in this web page. What did you expect from a Christian Chat when there's a Catholic Chat, too?
You KNOW what came just before that.
Ain't denigrating anybody.
It's just that if you take Mary completely out of the picture, Jesus is still who He is. There would've been another virgin somewhere that God would've used as HIS "sign".
But, if you take Jesus out of the picture, there is no hope for mankind.
Big difference.
Didn't Jesus say that people can even blaspheme Him but if we shouldn't blaspheme the Holy Spirit? Yes He said that.
Why is that that you give Mary all the credit for Jesus being born on earth but we don't really hear (or read) about how exciting it is for the Holy Spirit to conceive Jesus?
Mary is lifted up. Mary is prayed to. Mary has her own scapular and prayer beads. Mary has a BUNCH of songs about her. Mary has literally dozens of titles including "Queen of Heaven".
Say something bad about Mary and RCCs will come from everywhere to defend her.
Yet, from us Christians, we DON'T SEE the Holy Spirit getting any glory and honor from the moment of conception to when Jesus first started His ministry.
It's "blessed mother"and "ever virgin" and "how she suffered so at the cross"... and so on.
The Holy Spirit seems to be a "second fiddle" to Mary at the earliest stages of Jesus' life on earth.
Jesus said He was doing His Father's business. He was saying what His Father told Him to. He raised Lazerus to prove that He was sent from His Father.
He even "dissed" his mother a few times, too, to reveal God's Will and to guide people towards God.
One "proof" in all of my reply is just HOW MUCH[ RCCs are defending Mary in this thread and in this web page. What did you expect from a Christian Chat when there's a Catholic Chat, too?
Mary is a Disciple of Christ. She is blessed in what she did and said. She said, "Whatever He says to you, do it". Not the words of a Mother who should be denigrated and spoken against.
Blessing and honoring the Virgin Mary is not a Roman Catholic error. It's a Truth of the Orthodox Church, which is NOT so-called "Roman Catholic". Which is not Papist, that is, if the Papists steal the words "Roman Catholic", and they do!
E
It sailed almost 2000 years ago. When pagan ritual and tradition was added to Gods truth and the institution became the religion of the state of rome. Just like the jewsih tradition and ritual became the religion of the state of Isreal. and this religion crucified my Lord. Because he rejected their ritual and tradition.
I know what came before that. You're implication however is that Our Lord broke one of the commandments and denigrated His mother. You get upset at us for defending the honor of the Virgin Mary, but the only reason we do so is because we love the Lord Jesus so much, that when we accepted Him as Our Lord and Saviour, we also accepted His mother as our mother. After all, right up until His death on the Cross we see how much He cared for her. He told the Apostle John (and indeed all Christians in a sense), "Behold your mother." Shouldn't you stand up for the mother of your friends if they were being denigrated? Or would you tell your friend, "I'm YOUR friend, not your mom's friend." The idea that when we defend the Virgin Mary's role we are somehow diminishing Our Lord's role is laughable. The only glory Mary has is because of who her son is.
And it's painfully obvious that you really don't know much about Catholic/Orthodox belief if you feel that we denigrate the Holy Spirit. There are numerous references to the Holy Spirit during a Catholic/Orthodox liturgy. We invoke the Holy Spirit constantly when we make the sign of the Cross, we have feast days celebrating the Holy Spirit! We've named cities after the Holy Spirit! But somehow, we're the ones who're denigrating the Holy Spirit?
And it's painfully obvious that you really don't know much about Catholic/Orthodox belief if you feel that we denigrate the Holy Spirit. There are numerous references to the Holy Spirit during a Catholic/Orthodox liturgy. We invoke the Holy Spirit constantly when we make the sign of the Cross, we have feast days celebrating the Holy Spirit! We've named cities after the Holy Spirit! But somehow, we're the ones who're denigrating the Holy Spirit?
What's wrong with supporting one's argument with credible sources? At least we're providing numerous Scriptural AND historical references. So far most of the arguments against the perpetual virginity of Mary seem to be based on just a few references to Our Lord's brothers, which Santo Subito pointed out from Scripture are more likely His cousins, and certainly aren't the sons of Mary, His mother; or they're relating to the word "until" which has also been pointed out to not necessarily imply that anything happened afterwards.
E
see this is how they work. The THINK they have shown proof. but all they have is circumstantial evidence at best, which prove nothing, saying it MAY be, does not mean it IS, and remember, it is ok if they use this proof. But how dare we do the same.
What you see is they say they have proved it with their sources. We say the same thing and we have a standstill.
When this happens, people usually resort to quoting other people they think support them, and even call them so called "credible sources" but again we have the hypocracy, because when we do the same, they say our sources are not credible blah blah... and it stops being a discussion between people, and a discussion of what people in the past said. which is why we never get anywhere.
What you see is they say they have proved it with their sources. We say the same thing and we have a standstill.
When this happens, people usually resort to quoting other people they think support them, and even call them so called "credible sources" but again we have the hypocracy, because when we do the same, they say our sources are not credible blah blah... and it stops being a discussion between people, and a discussion of what people in the past said. which is why we never get anywhere.
Like I said some 13 pages ago, this is a stronghold. It can only be taken down by the Lord Jesus. The plain, clear message in scripture testifies to Jesus and the Truth. If a person were to repent of their initial error through the Truth of scripture it would cause a cascade effect in leading them to repentance for a whole slew of other errors. This can only happen with humility and a desire to seek the Truth.
If one Tradition could be shown to be incorrect then how many other Traditions are equally incorrect? How many Traditions did the Pharisees hold as truth that we know are incorrect? How many Traditions would the Lord Jesus show us are incorrect today? Well Why don't You Ask?
Luke 11:27-28
27And it came to pass, as he spake these things, a certain woman of the company lifted up her voice, and said unto him, Blessed is the womb that bare thee, and the paps which thou hast sucked.
28But he said, Yea rather, blessed are they that hear the word of God, and keep it.
This is the word of God, will you hear it? I wonder, can you hear it? Can you humble yourself with a contrite heart before God?
Its strange, isn't it, how the bible shows how easily men will worship almost anything in the place of the Living God. It makes you wonder what they were thinking to worship something that wasn't God. It seems so silly looking back on it. But I guess if they had a 2000yr tradition of worshipping it, that would make it ok.
One last thought. Did Jesus die on the cross so you could have a relationship with His mother? Seems like spiritual adultery to pray to something that isn't God. Dangerous, wouldn't you say?
If one Tradition could be shown to be incorrect then how many other Traditions are equally incorrect? How many Traditions did the Pharisees hold as truth that we know are incorrect? How many Traditions would the Lord Jesus show us are incorrect today? Well Why don't You Ask?
Luke 11:27-28
27And it came to pass, as he spake these things, a certain woman of the company lifted up her voice, and said unto him, Blessed is the womb that bare thee, and the paps which thou hast sucked.
28But he said, Yea rather, blessed are they that hear the word of God, and keep it.
This is the word of God, will you hear it? I wonder, can you hear it? Can you humble yourself with a contrite heart before God?
Its strange, isn't it, how the bible shows how easily men will worship almost anything in the place of the Living God. It makes you wonder what they were thinking to worship something that wasn't God. It seems so silly looking back on it. But I guess if they had a 2000yr tradition of worshipping it, that would make it ok.
One last thought. Did Jesus die on the cross so you could have a relationship with His mother? Seems like spiritual adultery to pray to something that isn't God. Dangerous, wouldn't you say?
B
Hmmmm... Interesting. Never really thought of whether she had a family after giving birth to Jesus. I suppose it's entirely possible. I wonder what the psychological implications would've been after giving birth to the savior of the world and watch him crucified. The Roman's was probably watching her like a hawk. Killed all of her offspring, just in case they got any funny ideas. Probably was too emotionally scarred ay?
Doesn't matter though, the pride and joy of Mary was not Mary, but her offspring. It's all about Jesus. His birth, His life, His death, His resurrection, His ascension, His work in the Holy Place, His work in the Most Holy place, His return, His recreating the world, His throne, His life (with us). I'm sorry I started to ramble a little bit. Who were we talking about? Mary who?
S
Mary, the Theotokos (God bearer), is the Ark of the Covenant, for you to denigrate her holiness and virginity is for you so denigrate her ability to be the portal from earth to Heaven. She is Ever Virgin because she is the "Mother of Salvation". "Eve is called Mother of the human race, but Mary, Mother of Salvation." - (St Ambrose of Milan 4th C)
How is the Orthodox Tradition "shown to be incorrect"? Is it because you think you are infallible and can teach infallibly? The same goes for many other Protestants, they think that they are infallible in their own teachings and interpretations of Scriptures because they have no Ultimate Authority to submit to such as "the Church of the Living God, the ground and pillar of the Truth" ( 1 Tim 3:15)
Luke 11:27 And it happened, while He spoke these things, that a certain woman from the crowd raised her voice and said to Him, "Blessed is the womb which bore You, and the breasts which nursed You!"
Luk 11:28 But He said, "More than that, blessed are those who hear the word of God and keep it!"
That was from the Majority Text which is the true translation of the NT. The "word of God" here is Jesus Christ, because the Greek word that is used is LOGOS who is Jesus Christ. It was not talking about the Bible because the Bible was not created then.
[/QUOTE]
The Church is the Church of the Living God, the Ground and Pillar of the Truth. You only have letters (the Bible) which is just a text, it alone does not bring you salvation because you must have the Church and its Sacramental Grace. The Church is the Word of God in action, without the Church, you are walking in the path of self deception - and that without Sacramental Grace. Self deception occurs when a person believes that he already knows everything and has no need to be instructed anymore by anyone. That is the problem with Protestants, they think they know everything about what the Church is and about how to be a Christian.
We don't believe in a book, we believe in the Church, for the letter kills but the Spirit gives life (to the Church).
2Corinthians_3:6 Who also hath made us able ministers of the new testament; not of the letter, but of the spirit: for the letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life.
Dear kujo: To deny Scripture is to deny calling Mary "blessed", and to be one of those cursed generations who does not call Mary blessed, in defiance of Mary's Holy Spirit-inspired prophecy, "Behold, all generations will call me blessed". Mary, as St. Elisabeth said, is "Blessed among women" and "blessed is the fruit of her womb".
We bless Mary because Christ blessed her to be the Mother of God. Of God the Son, Jesus Christ.
To deny Mary is indeed to deny Jesus Christ. It is against the commandment of God, "Honor thy father and thy mother". Christ honored His Mother. Who are we not to honor Christ's Mother, are we better than Christ? No! Not at all! We must do WHAT CHRIST TELLS US TO DO. And Christ tells us to honor Mary.
Scott in Erie
We bless Mary because Christ blessed her to be the Mother of God. Of God the Son, Jesus Christ.
To deny Mary is indeed to deny Jesus Christ. It is against the commandment of God, "Honor thy father and thy mother". Christ honored His Mother. Who are we not to honor Christ's Mother, are we better than Christ? No! Not at all! We must do WHAT CHRIST TELLS US TO DO. And Christ tells us to honor Mary.
Scott in Erie
Grandpa, If the one major Protestant Tradition of "Sola Scriptura", by
Scripture alone (the Bible alone), can be shown to be incorrect, all of
the other Protestant Traditions based on private, personal,
subjectivistic, rationalistic, individualistic interpretations of the
Scriptures (many of these many Traditions contradict each other!), all
of these other human traditions of men can also be shown to be false!
"FALSE ASSUMPTION #1: The Bible was intended to be the final
word on faith, piety, and worship.
"a) Do the Scriptures themselves teach that they are "all sufficient"
apart from Church Tradition?
"The most obvious assumption that underlies the doctrine of "Scripture
alone" is that the Bible has within it all that is needed for the Christian
life -- for true faith, practice, piety, and worship. The passage that is
most often cited to support this notion is:
.... from a child thou hast know the Holy Scriptures, which are able
to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.
All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for
doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
that the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all
good works (2 Timothy 3:15-17).
"Those who would use these verse to advocate sola Scriptura argue
that this passage teaches the "all sufficiency" of Scripture -- because,
"If, indeed, the Holy Scriptures are able to make the pious man perfect
... then, indeed to attain completeness and perfection, there is no need
of tradition." (1) But is this really what the passage teaches?
"To begin with, we should ask what the Apostle Paul is talking about
when he speaks of the "Holy Scriptures" Saint Timothy has known
since he was a child. We can be sure that Saint Paul is not referring to
the New Testament, because the New Testament had not yet been
written when Saint Timothy was a child. In fact, only a few of the
books of the New Testament had been written when Saint Paul wrote
this epistle to Saint Timothy. They certainly had not been collected
together into the canon of the New Testament as we know it today.
"Obviously here, and in most references to the Scriptures that we find
in the New Testament, Saint Paul is speaking of the Old Testament.
Therefore, if this passage is going to be used to set the limits on
inspired authority, not only will Tradition be excluded, but this
passage itself - and the entire New Testament!
"In the second place, if Saint Paul meant here to exclude Tradition as
not being profitable, then we should wonder why he uses non-biblical
oral tradition in this very same chapter. The names Jannes and
Jambres are not found in the Old Testament, yet in 2 Timothy 3:8
Saint Paul refers to them as opposing Moses.
"The Apostle Paul is drawing here upon the oral tradition that the
names of the two most prominent Egyptian magicians in the Exodus
account (chapters 7; 8) were "Jannes" and "Jambres" (2). And this is
by no means the only time a nonbiblical source is used in the New
Testament. The best-known instance is in the Epistle of Saint Jude,
which quotes from the Book of Enoch (Jude 14, 15; cf. Enoch 1:9).
"The primary purpose in the Church establishing an authoritative list of
books which were to be received as sacred Scripture was to protect the
Church from spurious books which claimed apostolic authorship, but
were in fact the work of heretics, such as the "Gospel of Thomas".
Heretical groups could not base their teachings on Holy Tradition
because their teachings originated from outside the Church. So the
only way they could claim any authoritative basis for their heresies
was to twist the meaning of the Scriptures and to forge new books
in the names of Apostles or Old Testament saints." [pp. 10-12:
Sola Scriptura: An Orthodox Analysis of the Cornerstone of
Reformation Theology. by Fr. John Whiteford. Ben Lomond, CA:
Conciliar Press, 1996.].
In Erie PA USA January 2012 AD Mr. Scott R. Harrington
Notes.
1. George Mastrantonis, trans., Augsburg and Constantinople: The
Correspondence between the Tubingen [Lutheran] Theologians and
Patriarch Jeremiah II of Constantinople on the Augsburg Confession
(Brookline, MA: Holy Cross Orthodox Press, 1982), p. 114.
2. A.F. Walls, "Jannes and Jambres," The Illustrated Bible Dictionary,
vol. 2 (Wheaton, IL: Tyndale House Publishers, 1980), pp. 733-734.
Mary is not "the portal from earth to Heaven". She is the mother of Jesus Christ.
Jesus is the mediator, not Mary.
1 Tim 2:5)For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;
Mary was not "ever virgin". That is a religious teaching of your (and one big other) denomination. After the birth of Christ, Mary and Joseph had children together.
Your church, a religion made of men, is NOT the "ultimate authority".
But all the OT scripture was available. That's what Jesus read, and that's what he was talking about.
The bible is the written word of God. It is not "just a text".
That is not true. What is necessary for salvation is to confess Jesus as Lord and believe God raised him from the dead (Rom 10:9).
When the true church, the body of Christ, is walking by the spirit, yes. The EOC is not the true church.
Another untruth. The EOC is certainly not necessary. And I would submit harmful.
Do you mean like the EOC? They think they know everything, even though much of what they practice is not biblical.
That is the problem with the EOC, they think they know everything about what the Church is and about how to be a Christian.
A fact made obvious by yours and Scott's posts. Many of the things you post contradict the word of God.
You do know that "the letter" there is referring to the OT law, right?
Jesus is the mediator, not Mary.
1 Tim 2:5)For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;
Mary was not "ever virgin". That is a religious teaching of your (and one big other) denomination. After the birth of Christ, Mary and Joseph had children together.
Your church, a religion made of men, is NOT the "ultimate authority".
But all the OT scripture was available. That's what Jesus read, and that's what he was talking about.
The bible is the written word of God. It is not "just a text".
That is not true. What is necessary for salvation is to confess Jesus as Lord and believe God raised him from the dead (Rom 10:9).
When the true church, the body of Christ, is walking by the spirit, yes. The EOC is not the true church.
Another untruth. The EOC is certainly not necessary. And I would submit harmful.
Do you mean like the EOC? They think they know everything, even though much of what they practice is not biblical.
That is the problem with the EOC, they think they know everything about what the Church is and about how to be a Christian.
A fact made obvious by yours and Scott's posts. Many of the things you post contradict the word of God.
You do know that "the letter" there is referring to the OT law, right?
Dear Eternallygratefull:
Sorry Eternallygratefull:
You, a man, are not the ultimate, final infallible authority in all matters
of truth, Scripture, and sound doctrine. No man is. Only the Church is
the final authority (1 Tim. 3:15).
But you do not believe the Scripture, because you know not the
Scriptures, nor the power of God (Holy Spirit). It is you, not the
Orthodox Church, who contradicts the Word of God.
God bless you. In Erie PA USA Scott R. Harrington