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.
How is it doubletalk? There is one church out there that is THE Church. There are two churches that both claim to be said church. Obviously you would think that one of them is the correct one and the other mistaken. You're implying that because there are two claimants to the title, then the title itself is invalid. That makes no sense.
There is one true church. It is the one with Jesus Christ as the head, and it's members are those who are in a covenant relationship with Him. This church is defined by the relationship that the saints have in which they can directly approach the High Priest Jesus Christ, and do not need a manmade church infrastructure of bishops and priests and their sacraments to intercede for us.
What we are talking about here is the methodology for discovering God's Truth. Protestants claim the Scriptures as the only infallable source of Truth. Eastern Orthodox claim the church as the only source of Truth, (which they graciously affirm includes the Scriptures). If there are two churches both claiming to own the Truth, then how are we to choose which is the truth church, assuming that the true church is even to be found among the two.
We have a dilemma. If we resort to the Roman Catholic's interpretation of Scriptures and tradition, then we will affirm that this is the true church. If we resort to the Eastern Orthodox interpretation of Scriptures and tradition, then we will affirm that they are the true church. They can't both be right.
Therefore, we must resort to the Holy Scriptures, without fallable tradition, in order to find the Truth. Which gets us right back to the starting point, therefore, Holy Scriptures is the ONLY infallable source of God's Truth.
What we are talking about here is the methodology for discovering God's Truth. Protestants claim the Scriptures as the only infallable source of Truth. Eastern Orthodox claim the church as the only source of Truth, (which they graciously affirm includes the Scriptures). If there are two churches both claiming to own the Truth, then how are we to choose which is the truth church, assuming that the true church is even to be found among the two.
We have a dilemma. If we resort to the Roman Catholic's interpretation of Scriptures and tradition, then we will affirm that this is the true church. If we resort to the Eastern Orthodox interpretation of Scriptures and tradition, then we will affirm that they are the true church. They can't both be right.
Therefore, we must resort to the Holy Scriptures, without fallable tradition, in order to find the Truth. Which gets us right back to the starting point, therefore, Holy Scriptures is the ONLY infallable source of God's Truth.
Dear superdave: Again, you didn't answer the question. You obsfuscate, and avoid directly answering the question correctly. If your doctrine wasn't taught by the Church in the first 1054 years of Her existence, it cannot be true. It's just a question of what is the True Church after 1054 AD.
You already know the correct answer if you are brave enough to listen to what StMichaeltheArchangel and me and other Orthodox Christians have been saying. We are telling you all the Truth.
(cf. John 16:13; cf. 1 Tim. 3:15). God bless and save us. Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on me, a sinner. Amen. In Erie Scott R. Harrington
PS What "appears" to you can be counted as delusion and self-deception on your part, sorry. Apostolic succession is true for both Rome and Constantinople until 1054; Rome officially changed from the faith beginning in 1014 AD, and so Rome lost her claim to Apostolic Faith, and thus her Apostolic Succession was lost when she excommunicated the True Church in 1054 AD.
i
You already know the correct answer if you are brave enough to listen to what StMichaeltheArchangel and me and other Orthodox Christians have been saying. We are telling you all the Truth.
(cf. John 16:13; cf. 1 Tim. 3:15). God bless and save us. Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on me, a sinner. Amen. In Erie Scott R. Harrington
PS What "appears" to you can be counted as delusion and self-deception on your part, sorry. Apostolic succession is true for both Rome and Constantinople until 1054; Rome officially changed from the faith beginning in 1014 AD, and so Rome lost her claim to Apostolic Faith, and thus her Apostolic Succession was lost when she excommunicated the True Church in 1054 AD.
i
Superdave. You spelled fallible and infallible incorrectly. You said "fallable" and "infallable", that's not correct. If Holy Scripture is the only infallible source, your interpretation of Scripture can't be correct, as the Scripture alone is correct, and no man or church can correctly and infallibly interpret it. See your dilemma of your false doctrine of Sola Scriptura? Scott
Erie PA
Erie PA
K
The Holy Spirit is our guide. Through the Holy Spirit, Scripture comes alive. The Bereans of Thessalonia checked the Scriptures to see if Paul was preaching the Truth. He was interpretting the Scriptures and teaching of them fulfilled in Jesus Christ.
The same Spirit that dwelled and guided Paul is in those who believes the Spirit's Testimony: Jesus.
Not really hard once you look at it. No man-made stipulations or regulations.
The same Spirit that dwelled and guided Paul is in those who believes the Spirit's Testimony: Jesus.
Not really hard once you look at it. No man-made stipulations or regulations.
K
The Roman Catholic Church says "yes" to the thread because it bases its whole belief and faith around Mary.
She is "lifted up" to a place not found in Scripture (Law and Prophets) given to the Jews.
To them, the very existence of space and time depends on Mary. If she shows up in a tuna fish sandwich in Miami, Florida, and says that you MUST "stand on one foot while praying my rosary", you can bet it all that many worldwide would do just that.
Even though we're supposed to be preaching the Gospel and making disciples of all nations, looking for the signs of Jesus' coming, people will be hopping around on one foot.
In reality, Mary was a sign of the coming Messiah. The sign was to tell the world that their Savior has come!
The "sign" was needed for one particular place and one particular time when God chose. After that, there is no mention on honoring or lifting-up the sign but only the Messiah. THAT'S what people were looking for for centuries: The Christ, not the virgin. The virgin was proof that the baby in Bethlehem was THE One that mankind was looking for.
Geesh. Praying to Mary over 50 times in one sitting. Wearing "her" scapular to escape Hell instead of relying on Jesus. Running to see an image of "her" on a grilled cheese sandwich. Having a "patron saint" of the internet.
It's no wonder why Christianity isn't taken seriously.
She is "lifted up" to a place not found in Scripture (Law and Prophets) given to the Jews.
To them, the very existence of space and time depends on Mary. If she shows up in a tuna fish sandwich in Miami, Florida, and says that you MUST "stand on one foot while praying my rosary", you can bet it all that many worldwide would do just that.
Even though we're supposed to be preaching the Gospel and making disciples of all nations, looking for the signs of Jesus' coming, people will be hopping around on one foot.
In reality, Mary was a sign of the coming Messiah. The sign was to tell the world that their Savior has come!
The "sign" was needed for one particular place and one particular time when God chose. After that, there is no mention on honoring or lifting-up the sign but only the Messiah. THAT'S what people were looking for for centuries: The Christ, not the virgin. The virgin was proof that the baby in Bethlehem was THE One that mankind was looking for.
Geesh. Praying to Mary over 50 times in one sitting. Wearing "her" scapular to escape Hell instead of relying on Jesus. Running to see an image of "her" on a grilled cheese sandwich. Having a "patron saint" of the internet.
It's no wonder why Christianity isn't taken seriously.
I made a typological error, so I made a spelling error. Yes. Sorry. But I know how to spell obfuscate, thank you.
Maybe I am making too much out of little. Sorry. I'm only human.
Generally, a person should try to have correct spelling, isn't that true?
It does not help one's case if one says "The Orthodox Church is fallable", and one can't even spell the words correctly!
A Church founded by Christ can't be fallible or Matthew 16:18 is not true; but members of the Church can be fallible. St. Paul in his writings acknowledged his struggles with (against) sin and his own personal fallibility.
And Paul was a Pillar of Orthodoxy, or sound doctrine. The problem is, Protestants act as if Paul is the only valid part of the NT, and they make Romans and other sections more important in their theology than the four Gospels, and they don't know what to do with James and 1 John.
Maybe I am making too much out of little. Sorry. I'm only human.
Generally, a person should try to have correct spelling, isn't that true?
It does not help one's case if one says "The Orthodox Church is fallable", and one can't even spell the words correctly!
A Church founded by Christ can't be fallible or Matthew 16:18 is not true; but members of the Church can be fallible. St. Paul in his writings acknowledged his struggles with (against) sin and his own personal fallibility.
And Paul was a Pillar of Orthodoxy, or sound doctrine. The problem is, Protestants act as if Paul is the only valid part of the NT, and they make Romans and other sections more important in their theology than the four Gospels, and they don't know what to do with James and 1 John.
Let me translate this. It is much easier to attack a person's credibility, than a person's reasoning and logic, if that person's reasoning and logic is correct.
Let us nitpik and obfuscate, rather than address the issue.
I have learned something, how to spell a word, and gained knowledge.
Your error shows a lack of character, i.e. attacking a person, rather than what they say. Perhaps you should learn something, and gain in character.
Let us nitpik and obfuscate, rather than address the issue.
I have learned something, how to spell a word, and gained knowledge.
Your error shows a lack of character, i.e. attacking a person, rather than what they say. Perhaps you should learn something, and gain in character.
Last edited: