HOT! Listen to Jason Ling's Music now!
need to be a virgin so original sin will not be passed down to Jesus.Originally posted by breytonhartge:then follow on to verse 25... Yosef did not have sexual relations with her UNTIL she had given birth to Yeshua. So to still call her a virgin is denying reality. She is not. After the birth of Yeshua she was not. So why still call her a virgin?
Then consider these verses:Originally posted by breytonhartge:then follow on to verse 25... Yosef did not have sexual relations with her UNTIL she had given birth to Yeshua. So to still call her a virgin is denying reality. She is not. After the birth of Yeshua she was not. So why still call her a virgin?
1 Cor 15:25 - For he must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet.Your logic will be absurd if used in these verses, especially 1 Cor.
1 Tim 6 - 13In the presence of God, who gives life to all things, and of Christ Jesus, who in his testimony before Pontius Pilate made the good confession, I charge you 14to keep the commandment without spot or blame until the manifestation of our Lord Jesus Christ, 15which he will bring about at the right time—he who is the blessed and only Sovereign, the King of kings and Lord of lords.
Yup .. this is so that the prophecy in Isaiah is fulfilled.Originally posted by Chin Eng:the term "virgin Mary" is usually used when describing the birth of Christ. Hence, as long as she's virgin prior to that event, there is nothing really wrong with it.
after that no issue lah... afterall JC is suppose to have siblings, but totally inconsequential to what Mary is suppose to do.Originally posted by Icemoon:Yup .. this is so that the prophecy in Isaiah is fulfilled.
As to whether she is a virgin after that, it is inconclusive from the text alone.
Yup, all christian attempts to explain it as virgin are nothing more than using buckets to save a sinking ship. If the gospels are inspired, then the question of the septuagint shouldn't even come into the picture. Don't use the septuagint as the excuse!Originally posted by Phaze:What is your view on the claim that the idea that the mother of Jesus was a virgin was due to a mistranslation of the Hewbrew text?
The Old Testament talks about almah 'young woman,' not bethulah 'virgin.' However, the scholars in the 3rd century BC translated the Hebrew almah as parthenos in Greek. Thus the 'young woman' in Hebrew metamorphosed into a 'virgin' in Greek—and she has remained a virgin ever since in translations across the world. The notion of 'virgin birth' was born, thanks to a mistranslation.
But, like I've said, it has to do with Jesus not inheriting the original sin also.Originally posted by Phaze:What is your view on the claim that the idea that the mother of Jesus was a virgin was due to a mistranslation of the Hewbrew text?
When Miryam gave birth to Yeshua, she was a virgin, so what is the issue with her not being one after? how can Yeshua inherit sin after being born? I don't see the connection.Originally posted by Icemoon:But, like I've said, it has to do with Jesus not inheriting the original sin also.
Originally posted by Chin Eng:I can see our dear brey splitting hairs again....
the term "virgin Mary" is usually used when describing the birth of Christ. Hence, as long as she's virgin prior to that event, there is nothing really wrong with it.
...this whole thing reminds me of the episode with that pesky kid Huaqing who insisted that Mary is NOT the mother of Jesus....
don't see your connection...Originally posted by Icemoon:Your logic will be absurd if used in these verses, especially 1 Cor.
So the answer is inconclusive lah, after all it was the Catholic Church who gave you the Brit Chadasha, so don't argue with them whether Mary is perpetual virgin or not.
I have no issue with the Brit Chadashah, but the christian view of the trinity as 3 separate but co-eternal persons is a bit skewed to me... and very paganistic in origin...Originally posted by Icemoon:You watched too much DVC liao issit?
I'd say Constantine was only instrumental in convening the council, not the doctrine.
If you have no issue with the Brit Chadasha, then you should know the seeds of the Trinity are sowed in the gospel, particularly Yohann.
1 Cor 15:25 - For he must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet.Originally posted by breytonhartge:don't see your connection...
Originally posted by Icemoon:still CNB....
1 Cor 15:25 - For he must reign [b]until he has put all his enemies under his feet.
So what happens after his enemies are under his feet? [/b]
what is CNB? Changi Naval Base?Originally posted by breytonhartge:still CNB....
could be... could be...Originally posted by Icemoon:what is CNB? Changi Naval Base?
The christian view of the trinity comes from the Brit Chadashah. Indeed the three persons are distinct, your understanding of it as a singular God with a triune nature cannot bring out the distinctiveness of Abba, Yeshua and the Ruach.Originally posted by breytonhartge:I have no issue with the Brit Chadashah, but the christian view of the trinity as 3 separate but co-eternal persons is a bit skewed to me... and very paganistic in origin...
and no, I don't watch DVC, it is a whole lot of nonsense... to me.
I think the Hebraic view point on this is more likely... a SINGULAR GOD with a TRIUNE NATURE. Many of mistranslations of the Brit Chadashah come from not understanding that hebrew words have gender specific values.
which part is not clear?Originally posted by breytonhartge:seriously still cannot follow you...
The christian view is obviously not one I hold.Originally posted by Icemoon:The christian view of the trinity comes from the Brit Chadashah. Indeed the three persons are distinct, your understanding of it as a singular God with a triune nature cannot bring out the distinctiveness of Abba, Yeshua and the Ruach.
The distinctiveness is important. For example, who was the one who suffered at the cross? Not the Abba obviously!
Originally posted by breytonhartge:Unfortunately your view did not survive the embroyic faith, if it was held at all.
The christian view is obviously not one I hold.
If you take a single strand of rope between your hands and yank really hard, you can easily brake it. However, if you take three or more strands and wind them together very tightly, you probably won't be able to break the rope.
The idea of one by the joining of many is that no part or portion is complete without the other.
Yahweh has no body outside of Yeshua, Yeshua has no Ruach outside of the Ruach Hakkodesh, and the Ruach Hakkodesh has no soul outside the Yahweh. They are not separated in any way. They are not three, separate or distinct entities. [b]They are three, separate and distinct facets of one entity.
[/b]