Built On The Wrong Apostle

[BreadOfLife]

Why should Mary not continue to bear children rather than becoming "barren" after the birth of Jesus. What does God expect from people? Why is Mary to be different than other women who become wives?

Throughout the scriptures we find types and shadows of that which be realized in the fulfillment of prophecies with regard to the Messiah. Why would it or should it be different with Mary, the mother of the Messiah? I know that considering the Catholic established view on this that my entering into this discussion will not change the minds of anyone. But perhaps they [the Catholics here] can at least clear up the matter a bit. If it were important for believers to see Mary as forever virgin, where is the clear type or shadow of this found in the OT?

That Jesus needed to be the first born is something built upon many types or shadows in the OT. The first born were always important among God's people as well as among others.

Consider why it was so important to Leah and to Rachel to have additional children after they had that first child by Jacob. In the case of Rachel when she was seemingly barren while Leah was having children, she thought that having a child even through a surrogate mother would remove her reproach, so she gave one of her personal maids to Jacob. Similarly when Leah, even though she has already born 4 sons for Jacob, she gave her maid to her husband to bear yet more children.

Was the desire of both Rachel and Leah to bear children and then to bear even more children simply a local custom or was it something that God wanted?

"So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.
And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth." Gen 1:27-28

Why is it or why it be different with Mary?​

NONSENSE.

What about Sarah??
What about Hannah??

Not EVERY woman in Scripture had multiple children - so, why should Mary??​

 

[bbyrd009]

consecrated Temple Virgin

consecrated temple virgins did not get married, BoL

 

[bbyrd009]

and over and above all that, a point imo is that all we can do now is argue pointlessly about Mary.

if you want a Virgin Mary then fine, poof, she's a virgin, so now what?

 

[BreadOfLife]

consecrated temple virgins did not get married, BoL

NOT according to The Protoevangelium of James.
It is explained that they usually married elderly widowers for protection.

This would explain the many traditions that Joseph was much older than Mary - as in the Protoevangelium . . .

 

[BreadOfLife]

and over and above all that, a point imo is that all we can do now is argue pointlessly about Mary.

if you want a Virgin Mary then fine, poof, she's a virgin, so now what?

The point is that there is FAR more evidence - Biblical and extrabiblical - that she did NOT have children than the idea that she DID. As a matter of fact - there is not ONE single extrabiblical, apocryphal or historical writing that makes this claim. Not ONE.

WHY is that??

 

[BreadOfLife]

and over and above all that, a point imo is that all we can do now is argue pointlessly about Mary.
if you want a Virgin Mary then fine, poof, she's a virgin, so now what?

It's NOT pointless. It is a fulfillment of an OT Type.
WHY would you refer to the Word of God as "pointless"??

 

[bbyrd009]

The point is that there is FAR more evidence - Biblical and extrabiblical - that she did NOT have children than the idea that she DID. As a matter of fact - there is not ONE single extrabiblical, apocryphal or historical writing that makes this claim. Not ONE.

WHY is that??

my guess is bc that is what you need to believe, so to you that is some kind of important point or something.

temple virgins are not even Christian lol, they are strictly Pagan anyway. From Pagan right to Catholic, near as i can tell?
Jews did not have them

 

[bbyrd009]

It's NOT pointless. It is a fulfillment of an OT Type.

you mean warping of an OT type

 

[BreadOfLife]

my guess is bc that is what you need to believe, so to you that is some kind of important point or something.
temple virgins are not even Christian lol, they are strictly Pagan anyway. From Pagan right to Catholic, near as i can tell?
Jews did not have them

And you know this because . . .?

 

[BreadOfLife]

you mean warping of an OT type

Only to the spiritually-blind.
Nah - it couldn't be ANY clearer . . .

OT - The Word was written by God on Tablets of Stone (Ex. 25:10) placed inside the Ark (Deut. 10:1)
NT - The Word of God became Flesh (John 1) conceived inside Mary (Luke 2:38) Mary carried the Word of God.

OT - "Who am I that the Ark of my Lord should come to me?" (2 Sam. 6:9)
NT - "Who am I that the mother of my Lord should come to me?" (Luke 1:43)

OT - The When the Ark carrying the Word of God returned “David was leaping and dancing before the Lord” (2 Sam. 6:14)
NT - When Mary came into Elizabeth's presence carrying the word of God, the baby “leaped for joy” in Elizabeth's womb (Luke 2:38)

OT - The Ark carrying the Word of God is brought to the house of Obed-Edom for 3 months, where it was a blessing. (2 Sam. 6:11)
NT - Mary (the new Ark) carrying the Word of God goes to Elizabeth's house for 3 months, where she is a blessing (Luke 1:56)

OT - The Ark is captured (1 Sam 4:11) and brought to a foreign land and later returns (1 Sam 6:13)
NT - Mary (the new Ark) is exiled to a foreign land (Egypt) and later returns (Matt. 2:14)

OT - The On the Day of the Dedication of the Temple which Solomon built, there were 120 priests present (2 Chron. 5:11). The Ark of the covenant was carried into the Temple (2 Chron. 5:7) and fire came down from Heaven to consume the burnt offering (2 Chron. 7:7).
NT - The On the Day of Pentecost, there were 120 disciples of Jesus present in the Upper Room (Acts 1:15). Mary, the Mother of Jesus and the Ark of the NEW Covenant was also present while the Holy Spirit came downas tongues of fire (Acts 2:3).

 

[amadeus]

OT - The Word was written by God on Tablets of Stone (Ex. 25:10) placed inside the Ark (Deut. 10:1)
NT - The Word of God became Flesh (John 1) conceived inside Mary (Luke 2:38) Mary carried the Word of God.

And so it is to be with each child of God when the Holy Spirit brings the Word to Life in them. Where is perpetual virginity found in this?

OT - "Who am I that the Ark of my Lord should come to me?" (2 Sam. 6:9)
NT - "Who am I that the mother of my Lord should come to me?" (Luke 1:43)

What Bible version did you use for the II Samuel reference to make it a match with Luke 1:43?

"And David was afraid of the Lord that day, saying: How shall the ark of the Lord come to me? " II Sam 6:9 DRB
"That day David felt afraid of Yahweh. 'How can the ark of Yahweh come to be with me?' he said." II Sam 6:9 NJB
"And David was afraid of the LORD that day, and said, How shall the ark of the LORD come to me?" II Sam 6:9

Even if the match is good, how does it support perpetual virginity?

OT - The When the Ark carrying the Word of God returned “David was leaping and dancing before the Lord” (2 Sam. 6:14)
NT - When Mary came into Elizabeth's presence carrying the word of God, the baby “leaped for joy” in Elizabeth's womb (Luke 2:38)

Good type, but again where is the perpetual virginity in the verses? No one is doubting that Mary was the mother of Jesus, the Messiah...

OT - The Ark carrying the Word of God is brought to the house of Obed-Edom for 3 months, where it was a blessing. (2 Sam. 6:11)
NT - Mary (the new Ark) carrying the Word of God goes to Elizabeth's house for 3 months, where she is a blessing (Luke 1:56)

Same thing! Mary was blessed and was a blessing to Elizabeth's household, but what has this to do with perpetual virginity?

OT - The Ark is captured (1 Sam 4:11) and brought to a foreign land and later returns (1 Sam 6:13)
NT - Mary (the new Ark) is exiled to a foreign land (Egypt) and later returns (Matt. 2:14)

Ditto. Perpetual virginity is seen where?

OT - The On the Day of the Dedication of the Temple which Solomon built, there were 120 priests present (2 Chron. 5:11). The Ark of the covenant was carried into the Temple (2 Chron. 5:7) and fire came down from Heaven to consume the burnt offering (2 Chron. 7:7).

NT - The On the Day of Pentecost, there were 120 disciples of Jesus present in the Upper Room (Acts 1:15). Mary, the Mother of Jesus and the Ark of the NEW Covenant was also present while the Holy Spirit came down as tongues of fire (Acts 2:3).

So then, Mary was among the 120 needing what they all needed. No perpetual virginity seen there either.

This is a nice compilation of types and shadows, but where among them is something definite about Mary being a virgin and having no children at all after the birth of the Messiah? If I missed it please show me what I missed.

 

[BreadOfLife]

And so it is to be with each child of God when the Holy Spirit brings the Word to Life in them. Where is perpetual virginity found in this?

This was about the Ark of the Covenant - NOT the Perpetual virginity . . .

What Bible version did you use for the II Samuel reference to make it a match with Luke 1:43?
"And David was afraid of the Lord that day, saying: How shall the ark of the Lord come to me? " II Sam 6:9 DRB
"That day David felt afraid of Yahweh. 'How can the ark of Yahweh come to be with me?' he said." II Sam 6:9 NJB
"And David was afraid of the LORD that day, and said, How shall the ark of the LORD come to me?" II Sam 6:9
Even if the match is good, how does it support perpetual virginity?

Once again, we have a communication breakdown.
This was about the Ark of the Covenant - NOT the Perpetual virginity . . ,

Anyway - just a few verses later - David is dancing and leaping for joy before the Ark.

Good type, but again

where is the perpetual virginity in the verses? No one is doubting that Mary was the mother of Jesus, the Messiah...
Same thing! Mary was blessed and was a blessing to Elizabeth's household, but what has this to do with perpetual virginity?
Ditto. Perpetual virginity is seen where?
So then, Mary was among the 120 needing what they all needed. No perpetual virginity seen there either.
This is a nice compilation of types and shadows, but where among them is something definite about Mary being a virgin and having no children at all after the birth of the Messiah? If I missed it please show me what I missed.

What is wrong with you Amadeus.
This wasn't an argument for the Perpetual Virginity - but of the fact that Mary is the Ark of the New Covenant.

 

[Helen]

consecrated temple virgins did not get married, BoL

Yes, I agree, they were dedicated.

 

[amadeus]

NONSENSE.

What about Sarah??​

Sarah was not a young unmarried woman and no virgin when she gave birth to Isaac.

What about Hannah??

Hannah gave birth to Samuel and effectively gave him to God... but God did not leave her then unblessed by additional children:​

"And Eli blessed Elkanah and his wife, and said, The LORD give thee seed of this woman for the loan which is lent to the LORD. And they went unto their own home.
And the LORD visited Hannah, so that she conceived, and bare three sons and two daughters. And the child Samuel grew before the LORD." I Sam 2:20-21

Not EVERY woman in Scripture had multiple children - so, why should Mary??​

You clutch at straws. What I asked for was a type or shadow of Mary as a perpetual virgin and I still don't see one.

 

[amadeus]

This was about the Ark of the Covenant - NOT the Perpetual virginity . . .

Once again, we have a communication breakdown.
This was about the Ark of the Covenant - NOT the Perpetual virginity . . ,

Anyway - just a few verses later - David is dancing and leaping for joy before the Ark.

What is wrong with you Amadeus.
This wasn't an argument for the Perpetual Virginity - but of the fact that Mary is the Ark of the New Covenant.

My point was with regard to the perpetual virginity. You were having that discussion with @bbyrd009 in spite of what the OP was and in spite of the Ark of the Covenant. The OP had to do with on whom the Church was built. I did not move away from that. I simply jumped in re others already were.

You still have not come up with one good type or shadow in scripture for perpetual virginity.

 

[BreadOfLife]

Sarah was not a young unmarried woman and no virgin when she gave birth to Isaac.

Hannah gave birth to Samuel and effectively gave him to God... but God did not leave her then unblessed by additional children:​

"And Eli blessed Elkanah and his wife, and said, The LORD give thee seed of this woman for the loan which is lent to the LORD. And they went unto their own home.
And the LORD visited Hannah, so that she conceived, and bare three sons and two daughters. And the child Samuel grew before the LORD." I Sam 2:20-21

You clutch at straws. What I asked for was a type or shadow of Mary as a perpetual virgin and I still don't see one.

The Ark, being untouchable and not to be defiled by man was the foreshadowing of the Ark of the NEW Covenant (Mary), who was also not to be touched or defiled by man.

Whereas the Ark was purified inside and out - Mary was also purified and conceived without sin (Luke 1:28).

 

[BreadOfLife]

My point was with regard to the perpetual virginity. You were having that discussion with @bbyrd009 in spite of what the OP was and in spite of the Ark of the Covenant. The OP had to do with on whom the Church was built. I did not move away from that. I simply jumped in re others already were.

You still have not come up with one good type or shadow in scripture for perpetual virginity.

I wasn't the one who brought up Mary's virginity. In post #221, Ac28 brought up this subject. I merely defended it.

The whole reason for bringing up the Ark was when bbyrd ignorantly stated that Mary's Perpetual virginity was not important. I stated that IF he understood the type that was the Ark and fulfillment that is Mary - he would understand.

Now, YOU are having difficulty with it - NOT because of ignorance because I have explained it. YOU are simply rejecting it because it is a Catholic doctrine.

I suggest you read my LAST post #256 for further explanation . . .

 

[amadeus]

The Ark, being untouchable and not to be defiled by man was the foreshadowing of the Ark of the NEW Covenant (Mary), who was also not to be touched or defiled by man.

Whereas the Ark was purified inside and out - Mary was also purified and conceived without sin (Luke 1:28).

"Marriage is honourable in all, and the bed undefiled: but whoremongers and adulterers God will judge." Heb 13:4

So to say that Mary living with Joseph and sleeping with Joseph and copulating with Joseph, her lawful husband, was to defile her is
contrary to what the Apostle Paul wrote.

As to Mary being especially blessed, there is no disagreement on that point. She was. That also does not make her a perpetual virgin.

"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." Luke 1:28

 

[amadeus]

I wasn't the one who brought up Mary's virginity. In post #221, Ac28 brought up this subject. I merely defended it.

What difference does it make who initiated the discussion on it?

The whole reason for bringing up the Ark was when bbyrd ignorantly stated that Mary's Perpetual virginity was not important. I stated that IF he understood the type that was the Ark and fulfillment that is Mary - he would understand.

At best Mary is a type or shadow of the Church. Like all of the types or shadow they are less complete or perfect than the real thing of which they are types and shadows. If someone takes the best of cameras and takes a picture of your shadow it will still be a far cry from what you are able to see in any good mirror.

When the work is completed in each part of the Church, which is the reality only then it might might it be said that it was undefiled both inside and outside. Sexual intercourse between married spouses does not defile either one of them. Their defilement, if either or both of them are defiled, comes from elsewhere.

Now, YOU are having difficulty with it - NOT because of ignorance because I have explained it. YOU are simply rejecting it because it is a Catholic doctrine.

I suggest you read my LAST post #256 for further explanation . . .

I already did and I already replied to it with my post #258. I don't reject things because they are Catholic. The Catholic Church has some good things in it as do most Protestant churches of my experience, but what both of them practice to their detriment with few exceptions [if any] as I have told you before is quenching the Holy Spirit in individuals. This stunts the growth of individuals delaying or even stopping the individual from becoming a fitly joined part of the Body of Christ.

 

[BreadOfLife]

"Marriage is honourable in all, and the bed undefiled: but whoremongers and adulterers God will judge." Heb 13:4
So to say that Mary living with Joseph and sleeping with Joseph and copulating with Joseph, her lawful husband, was to defile her is contrary to what the Apostle Paul wrote.
As to Mary being especially blessed, there is no disagreement on that point. She was. That also does not make her a perpetual virgin.

"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." Luke 1:28

Oh, REALLY??

Rev. 14:14
These are those who did not DEFILE themselves with women, for they remained virgins. They follow the Lamb wherever he goes. They were purchased from among mankind and offered as firstfruits to God and the Lamb.

This verse is talking about those who have consecrated themselves to a life of celibacy for God - JUST like Mary.

Exodua 19:14-15
After Moses had gone down the mountain to the people, he consecrated them, and they washed their clothes. Then he said to the people, “Prepare yourselves for the third day. Abstain from sexual relations.”

Having sexual relations would have made them ceremonially UNCLEAN.
There ARE instances in Scripture where sex is NOT pleasing to God.