Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The Virgin Mary is the mother of Jesus and Easter is Christian. And December 25 is also Christian.
The first Christians of the era Christianized local pagan culture and that was (or is) a HUGE success.
The Mother of God deserves to be honored.
Dear Julian,
I think you are calling black, white, and good, bad. It was the Pagan emperor, Constantine, who instituted the Roman church, who established the date of Easter, and it was not Passover, which was on the 14th of Nissan, but it was scheduled to correspond to the pagan spring festival of Astarte. The Roman church was modeled after the Constantine's pagan church, and his god Sol Invictus, whose birthday was on the 25th of December.
Joseph was an octagenarian and unable to have intercourse.
If that is your argument....
Matthew 13:54 And when he was come into his own country, he taught them in their synagogue, insomuch that they were astonished, and said, Whence hath this man this wisdom, and these mighty works? 55 Is not this the carpenter's son? is not his mother called Mary? and his brethren, James, and Joses, and Simon, and Judas? 56 And his sisters, are they not all with us? Whence then hath this man all these things?
Mark 6:2 And when the sabbath day was come, he began to teach in the synagogue: and many hearing him were astonished, saying, From whence hath this man these things? and what wisdom is this which is given unto him, that even such mighty works are wrought by his hands? 3 Is not this the carpenter, the son of Mary, the brother of James, and Joses, and of Juda, and Simon? and are not his sisters here with us? And they were offended at him.4 But Jesus, said unto them, A prophet is not without honour, but in his own country, and among his own kin, and in his own house.
So when this was written;
Matthew 1:24 Then Joseph being raised from sleep did as the angel of the Lord had bidden him, and took unto him his wife: 25 And knew her not till she had brought forth her firstborn son: and he called his name Jesus.
The underlined is intercourse and the results have been given in Matthew 13:55-56 & Mark 6:3.
You can't say they were children from another marriage as some Catholics try to argue when you just said he could not have any intercourse.
Quote:
Not clearly stated above, sorry.
Reread that again;
Matthew 12:46 While he yet talked to the people, behold, his mother and his brethren stood without, desiring to speak with him. 47 Then one said unto him, Behold, thy mother and thy brethren stand without, desiring to speak with thee. 48 But he answered and said unto him that told him, Who is my mother? and who are my brethren? 49 And he stretched forth his hand toward his disciples, and said, Behold my mother and my brethren! 50 For whosoever shall do the will of my Father which is in heaven, the same is my brother, and sister, and mother.
Who did Jesus say was His brother, sister, and mother? Why did He say that when they had announced that His mother and brother were outside?
Quote:
You are extracting info that is not there,
I was not extracting when I am sharing how Jesus had deferred people away from focussing on His mother.
Quote:
Just because the bible does not say something you cannot take is as a NO.
John 5:22-23 is a no towards Mary.
John 5:22 For the Father judgeth no man, but hath committed all judgment unto the Son: 23 That all men should honour the Son, even as they honour the Father. He that honoureth not the Son honoureth not the Father which hath sent him....39 Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me. 40 And ye will not come to me, that ye might have life. 41 I receive not honour from men. 42 But I know you, that ye have not the love of God in you. 43 I am come in my Father's name, and ye receive me not: if another shall come in his own name, him ye will receive. 44 How can ye believe, which receive honour one of another, and seek not the honour that cometh from God only?
You are quoting the Bible and if you quote the Bible you must accept Mary is the Mother of God. See the bold. By the way I am quoting KJB so you have no issues. You must also accept Mary is honored (see the bold). And this is clearly stated,
28 And the angel came in unto her, and said, Hail, thou that art highly favoured, the Lord is with thee: blessed art thou among women.
30 And the angel said unto her, Fear not, Mary: for thou hast found favour with God.
42 And she spake out with a loud voice, and said, Blessed art thou among women, and blessed is the fruit of thy womb.
43 And whence is this to me, that the mother of my Lord should come to me?[/quote]
Mary was favoured by the Lord and therefore blessed by the Lord to give birth to Jesus. Mary is a blessing to others because of Jesus; not because of herself.
Quote:
Verse 43 states Mary is the Mother of God.
The point is; Jesus did defer people away from honouring Mary; He did not expound on the woman's praise of honouring Mary by giving a commandment for others to follow her in like manner in praising Mary, but instead, lifted that woman's sight higher to God only.
Quote:
And the Hail Mary is Biblical.
Explain why there is no teaching nor practise of this in the New Testament at all when plenty of references has been given that has Jesus lifting everybody sights higher from Mary as his mother to doing the will of God instead; which apparently was not including honouring Mary as His mother. See?
Mary was considered favoured and thus blessed because of Jesus in her womb. Now that Jesus was no longer in the womb, Jesus is the focus, not Mary. People are to set their sights on the God above.
quite frankly if "unbelievers" and "atheists" stay away from Christmas or Easter because we give up on gift giving or any of those other things (which BTW are simply popular customs NOT part of Christian doctrine and the Church does not and never has said that such practices were in any way necessary to the pious and sincere celebration of same)---who cares? for that matter even if some (so-called) Christians would somehow stop being Christians because gifts were no longer given or other things associated with the secular idea of celebrating the "holidays" curtailed it would still be more a matter of their ignorance of the "reason for the season" than anything else. what actually bothers me a bit is that some "Bible believing" Christians will actually not at least show up at Church on Christmas (literally the "mass of Christ") to publically acknowledge that Christ has indeed come into the world to save the world from sin and praise and bless Him for just that. we may quibble on the exact day as to when it happened but does it really matter exactly when and instead make much more sense that we say that it really did happen and on ONE particular day we individually and collectively as the Church/all Christian believers will take the time to specially and uniquely honor that blessed event thru both prayer and public worship and sometimes a certain amount of feasting and joy on our part?
Matthew 13:54 And when he was come into his own country, he taught them in their synagogue, insomuch that they were astonished, and said, Whence hath this man this wisdom, and these mighty works? 55 Is not this the carpenter's son? is not his mother called Mary? and his brethren, James, and Joses, and Simon, and Judas? 56 And his sisters, are they not all with us? Whence then hath this man all these things?
Jesus is the son of God. Joseph was his step father. The others were step brothers. One would think humans do not share DNA with God. As as per the Trinity Jesus is God.
Quote:
So when this was written;
Matthew 1:24 Then Joseph being raised from sleep did as the angel of the Lord had bidden him, and took unto him his wife: 25 And knew her not till she had brought forth her firstborn son: and he called his name Jesus.
The underlined is intercourse and the results have been given in Matthew 13:55-56 & Mark 6:3.
You can't say they were children from another marriage as some Catholics try to argue when you just said he could not have any intercourse.
Joseph was to old to have intercourse when he married Mary.
Quote:
Reread that again;
Matthew 12:46 While he yet talked to the people, behold, his mother and his brethren stood without, desiring to speak with him. 47 Then one said unto him, Behold, thy mother and thy brethren stand without, desiring to speak with thee. 48 But he answered and said unto him that told him, Who is my mother? and who are my brethren? 49 And he stretched forth his hand toward his disciples, and said, Behold my mother and my brethren! 50 For whosoever shall do the will of my Father which is in heaven, the same is my brother, and sister, and mother.
Who did Jesus say was His brother, sister, and mother? Why did He say that when they had announced that His mother and brother were outside?
I would call my step brother brethren, why not?
I was not extracting when I am sharing how Jesus had deferred people away from focussing on His mother.
Quote:
Explain why there is no teaching nor practise of this in the New Testament at all when plenty of references has been given that has Jesus lifting everybody sights higher from Mary as his mother to doing the will of God instead; which apparently was not including honouring Mary as His mother. See?
Mary was considered favoured and thus blessed because of Jesus in her womb. Now that Jesus was no longer in the womb, Jesus is the focus, not Mary. People are to set their sights on the God above.
Besides the NT the Catholic Church has Sacred Tradition and Apostolic Tradition as sources. You only use the NT, that is why you cannot see this.
Dear Julian,
I think you are calling black, white, and good, bad. It was the Pagan emperor, Constantine, who instituted the Roman church, who established the date of Easter, and it was not Passover, which was on the 14th of Nissan, but it was scheduled to correspond to the pagan spring festival of Astarte. The Roman church was modeled after the Constantine's pagan church, and his god Sol Invictus, whose birthday was on the 25th of December.
the emperor Constantine was baptized on his deathbed so can just on that count be truly called a "Christian" in least as far as we can tell things on earth---the final determination is of course God's. the official date of the celebration of Christ's Resurrection was determined by the (ecumenical) council of Nicea a meeting of Christian bishops and theologians called by the emperor to help bring unity to Christian practice on this and other matters including the very nature of Christ and His relationship to God (expressed in the Nicene Creed which many still profess). AFAIK, he did not propose any details on theology or practice and the participants made their deliberations free of his explicit or otherwise directions. FWIW, traditionally this and similar councils of the early Church were regarded as under the guidance of the Holy Spirit (which many Christians believe was part of Christ's promise to preserve His Church "in all truth") and thus free from error when determining the Christian Faith. there are many on-line resources about this council including Wikipedia that can give you much more info if you are interested.
Pagans are evil. Remember, PAGAN is an acronym for People Against Goodness And Normalcy.
LOL, Freak80 makes sense but it's not really true from a historical point of view---at least as far as "Wikipedia" is concerned. it is apparently derived from the latin "paganus" and as far as it's religious use is concerned seemingly refers to ignorant, uneducated, country folk (we would probably call them "yokels" or "hicks" who by extension were too foolish to understand and accept the "wisdom" of Christianity. perhaps we can think of it as similar in meaning to the Jews calling all non-Jews "gentiles" with a generally non-complimentary intent.
Mary was actually related to Joseph in tradition, like cousins or something.. and any children
in the family were all Joseph's from a previous marriage.. and cousins in general, as they were
all called "brothers" then, if they were in the Davidic bloodline, or cousins.
The apostles mentioned as brothers were all older than Jesus anyway.
So many Protestants who haven't done proper research just read the Bible (KJV actually,
which is not the whole Bible), so literally, and in English, it just leads to a lot of misinterpretations.
They are so paranoid about anything but the plain English meaning (in today's understanding).
Oh, and if it comes from a "Catholic" or "Orthodox" source, it's b.s. in their view, which is
really hilarious because their ancestors were all Catholic.
I didn't read the article, but I love the Virgin Mary and do pray to her. My mom gave me a little statue of her, and whenever there is bad weather she told me to put her in the window for protection.
FWIW, my understanding is that the early reformers Luther and Calvin were both apparently convinced of the perpetual virginity of Mary and if nothing else were anything but die-hard supporters of the "papist" party line, LOL.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
but it's not really true from a historical point of view---at least as far as "Wikipedia" is concerned. it is apparently derived from the latin "paganus" and as far as it's religious use is concerned seemingly refers to ignorant, uneducated, country folk (we would probably call them "yokels" or "hicks" who by extension were too foolish to understand and accept the "wisdom" of Christianity. perhaps we can think of it as similar in meaning to the Jews calling all non-Jews "gentiles" with a generally non-complimentary intent.
