IS MARY REALLY IN HEven ??

A place to discuss Catholic topics and issues

Moderator: Moderators

dan p
Student
Posts: 81
Joined: Tue Apr 20, 2010 9:03 pm

IS MARY REALLY IN HEven ??

Post #1

Post by dan p »

Hi , and Catholics say that Mary has been elevated to heaven !!

If that is true , how can you explain Gal 3:28 it is written , " There is Neither Jew nor Greek , there is Neither bond nor free , , There is Neither MALE nor FEMALE , for ye are all One " IN CHRIST " .

In heaven there is NEITHER Male nor Female nor either any ethic group !!

So , what is Mary's name ??

dan p

jedicri
Scholar
Posts: 350
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2011 8:40 pm
Been thanked: 1 time

Re: IS MARY REALLY IN HEven ??

Post #2

Post by jedicri »

heaven.
dan p wrote: Hi , and Catholics say that Mary has been elevated to heaven !!

If that is true , how can you explain Gal 3:28 it is written , " There is Neither Jew nor Greek , there is Neither bond nor free , , There is Neither MALE nor FEMALE , for ye are all One " IN CHRIST " .

In heaven there is NEITHER Male nor Female nor either any ethic group !!

So , what is Mary's name ??

dan p
This has nothing to do with Mary's assumption into heaven.

Please read that verse in the context it was written in, ie. Gal 3: 1-29. St Paul speaks of baptism that makes us all of one faith that is rooted in Christ and Jesus makes no distinction whether they be Jew or Greek, slave or free, male or female. That is why the Catholic faith is described as "catholic" (from the Greek katholikos meaning universal) --- it accepts all individuals from, and evangelizes to, all parts of the world as mandated by Christ Himself (Mt 28:18-20).

The Tongue
Under Probation
Posts: 1667
Joined: Fri May 04, 2012 12:08 am
Location: Townsville Queensland Australia

Re: IS MARY REALLY IN HEven ??

Post #3

Post by The Tongue »

dan p wrote: Hi , and Catholics say that Mary has been elevated to heaven !!

If that is true , how can you explain Gal 3:28 it is written , " There is Neither Jew nor Greek , there is Neither bond nor free , , There is Neither MALE nor FEMALE , for ye are all One " IN CHRIST " .

In heaven there is NEITHER Male nor Female nor either any ethic group !!

So , what is Mary's name ??

dan p
Although jedicri made some attempt to explain what Paul was getting at in Gal 3:28; he/she made no attempt to answer your Question, "Is Mary Really In Heaven," and the answer is no. Mary is at rest in the bosom of Abraham as are all the righteous who have died since the true Christ who gave his body for we of the sinful body of mankind, in which He, "The Son of Man" develops.

jedicri
Scholar
Posts: 350
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2011 8:40 pm
Been thanked: 1 time

Re: IS MARY REALLY IN HEven ??

Post #4

Post by jedicri »

The Tongue wrote:
dan p wrote: Hi , and Catholics say that Mary has been elevated to heaven !!

If that is true , how can you explain Gal 3:28 it is written , " There is Neither Jew nor Greek , there is Neither bond nor free , , There is Neither MALE nor FEMALE , for ye are all One " IN CHRIST " .

In heaven there is NEITHER Male nor Female nor either any ethic group !!

So , what is Mary's name ??

dan p
Although jedicri made some attempt to explain what Paul was getting at in Gal 3:28; he/she made no attempt to answer your Question, "Is Mary Really In Heaven," and the answer is no. Mary is at rest in the bosom of Abraham as are all the righteous who have died since the true Christ who gave his body for we of the sinful body of mankind, in which He, "The Son of Man" develops.

Uh, no, Mary is in Heaven.

Tongue, you go against 2000 years of belief and tradition of what the early Christians, now known as Catholics, have believed since the time of the Apostles. This was passed down from the Apostles to their successors, many of whom wrote on it, these people known as the early Fathers of the Church.

“If the Holy Virgin had died and was buried, her falling asleep would have been surrounded with honour, death would have found her pure, and her crown would have been a virginal one...Had she been martyred according to what is written: 'Thine own soul a sword shall pierce', then she would shine gloriously among the martyrs, and her holy body would have been declared blessed; for by her, did light come to the world."
Epiphanius, Panarion, 78:23 (A.D. 377).

"[T]he Apostles took up her body on a bier and placed it in a tomb; and they guarded it, expecting the Lord to come. And behold, again the Lord stood by them; and the holy body having been received, He commanded that it be taken in a cloud into paradise: where now, rejoined to the soul, [Mary] rejoices with the Lord's chosen ones..." Gregory of Tours, Eight Books of Miracles, 1:4 (inter A.D. 575-593).

"As the most glorious Mother of Christ, our Savior and God and the giver of life and immortality, has been endowed with life by him, she has received an eternal incorruptibility of the body together with him who has raised her up from the tomb and has taken her up to himself in a way known only to him." Modestus of Jerusalem, Encomium in dormitionnem Sanctissimae Dominae nostrae Deiparae semperque Virginis Mariae (PG 86-II,3306),(ante A.D. 634).

"It was fitting ...that the most holy-body of Mary, God-bearing body, receptacle of God, divinised, incorruptible, illuminated by divine grace and full glory ...should be entrusted to the earth for a little while and raised up to heaven in glory, with her soul pleasing to God." Theoteknos of Livias, Homily on the Assumption (ante A.D. 650).

"You are she who, as it is written, appears in beauty, and your virginal body is all holy, all chaste, entirely the dwelling place of God, so that it is henceforth completely exempt from dissolution into dust. Though still human, it is changed into the heavenly life of incorruptibility, truly living and glorious, undamaged and sharing in perfect life." Germanus of Constantinople, Sermon I (PG 98,346), (ante A.D. 733).

"St. Juvenal, Bishop of Jerusalem, at the Council of Chalcedon (451), made known to the Emperor Marcian and Pulcheria, who wished to possess the body of the Mother of God, that Mary died in the presence of all the Apostles, but that her tomb, when opened upon the request of St. Thomas, was found empty; wherefrom the Apostles concluded that the body was taken up to heaven." John of Damascene, PG (96:1) (A.D. 747-751).

"It was fitting that the she, who had kept her virginity intact in childbirth, should keep her own body free from all corruption even after death. It was fitting that she, who had carried the Creator as a child at her breast, should dwell in the divine tabernacles. It was fitting that the spouse, whom the Father had taken to himself, should live in the divine mansions. It was fitting that she, who had seen her Son upon the cross and who had thereby received into her heart the sword of sorrow which she had escaped when giving birth to him, should look upon him as he sits with the Father, It was fitting that God's Mother should possess what belongs to her Son, and that she should be honored by every creature as the Mother and as the handmaid of God." John of Damascene, Dormition of Mary (PG 96,741), (ante A.D. 749).

"Venerable to us, O Lord, is the festivity of this day on which the holy Mother of God suffered temporal death, but still could not be kept down by the bonds of death, who has begotten Thy Son our Lord incarnate from herself." Gregorian Sacramentary, Veneranda (ante A.D. 795).

"[A]n effable mystery all the more worthy of praise as the Virgin's Assumption is something unique among men." Gallican Sacramentary, from Munificentis simus Deus (8th Century).

"God, the King of the universe, has granted you favors that surpass nature. As he kept you virgin in childbirth, thus he kept your body incorrupt in the tomb and has glorified it by his divine act of transferring it from the tomb." Byzantine Liturgy, from Munificentis simus Deus (8th Century).

"[T]he virgin is up to now immortal, as He who lived, translated her into the place of reception." Timotheus of Jerusalem (8th Century).

The Tongue
Under Probation
Posts: 1667
Joined: Fri May 04, 2012 12:08 am
Location: Townsville Queensland Australia

Post #5

Post by The Tongue »

[jedicri wrote]..........Uh, no, Mary is in Heaven.

Tongue, you go against 2000 years of belief and tradition of what the early Christians, now known as Catholics, have believed since the time of the Apostles. This was passed down from the Apostles to their successors, many of whom wrote on it, these people known as the early Fathers of the Church.

“If the Holy Virgin had died and was buried, her falling asleep would have been surrounded with honour, death would have found her pure, and her crown would have been a virginal one...Had she been martyred according to what is written: 'Thine own soul a sword shall pierce', then she would shine gloriously among the martyrs, and her holy body would have been declared blessed; for by her, did light come to the world." Epiphanius, Panarion, 78:23 (A.D. 377).


My dear friend, Unlike yourself, I believe the gospels and the teachings of the apostle who walked and talked with Jesus, apart from Paul who knew him only after he had been given divine Glory by the God “WHO I AM.� I have not been deceived by the spirit of the anti-christ who refuses to acknowledge that Jesus came as a human being, who is the descendant of King David and the promised seed of Abraham who were all born of the seed of Adam.

You have been deceived into believing the lie that Jesus was born of some supposed virgin, which false teaching is based solely on two words, The Greek word “Parthenos� and the Hebrew word “ALMAH� which means an unmarried woman, irrelevant as to whether she was still a virgin of even if she had bore children out of wedlock. The Hebrew have a specific term for virgin, which is “Bethulah� and is used in every instance in the Old Testament, where a woman who has never had sexual contact with a man is referred to, the word that Isaiah would have used if it was the Lords intention for his prophet Isaiah to refer to a virgin, which obviously it was not.

Go to “A Dictionary of Biblical Tradition in English Literature,� by David Jeffery.
There you will find written, “Many scholars consider the new Revised Standard Version of the King James translation, which is probably the most widely used version of the English bible today, and considered by most modern scholars to be to be the most accurate translation of the Old Testament.

It follows the modern consensus in translating ‘Almah’ as ‘Young Woman’ in Isaiah 7: 14. In 1973, an ecumenical edition of RSV was approved by both Protestant and Catholic hierarchies, called the common bible. As a matter of fact, I have in front of me, A New English Translation of the Bible, published in 1970 and approved by the council of churches in England, Scotland, Wales, the Irish council of churches, the London Society of Friends, and the Methodist and Presbyterian churches of England. And what do we read in Isaiah 7: 14; “A young Woman is with child, and she will bear a son.� I also have before me The Good News Bible, Catholic Study Edition, now let’s turn to Isaiah 7: 14; I wonder what it says? Hmmm, are yes here it is, and what do you know? “A young woman who is pregnant will have a son, etc.�

You see, your church now agrees that the Hebrew word 'Almah' should never have been translated as the word Virgin, and when the Septuagint was translated from the Hebrew to the Greek by Jews, some 200 years before Christ, who in translating the word “Almah� in Isaiah 7: 14; as “a young unmarried woman� they were forced to use the Greek word “Parthenos�

The KJV Proverbs 30; 19; erroneously translates the Hebrew term “Almah� as virgin, whereas the New Revised Standard bible, translates the Hebrew “ALMAH,� as “GIRL.� “The way of a ship on the seas, and the way of a man with a girl� and the Good News Bible: Catholic Study Edition: correctly translates it as woman. “And a man and a woman falling in love.�

The old KJV cannot be trusted.

From the KJV 24: 13; Behold, I stand here by the well of water; and the “DAUGHTERS=banoth= daughters, descendants � of the men of the city come out to draw water. (14) And let it come to pass that the “DAMSEL=yaldah=lass,girl� to whom I shall say etc.

How many of those daughters of the men of city which included Rebecca were virgins? We don’t know, because the sexual status of those girls is not being referred to in this particular verse.

Now let us skip from Genesis 24: 13; to verse 16; In reference to Rebecca we read, “And the ‘DAMSEL=yaldah=girl’ was very fair to look upon, and was a virgin=bethulah= having never known a man sexually.

Whenever the sexual status of a girl is being referred to in the Hebrew “Bethulah� is always used, and never the word “Almah�.

Isaiah 7: 14; Jewish Translation: Therefore, the Lord, of His own, shall give you a sign; behold, the young woman is with child, and she shall bear a son, and she shall call his name Immanuel.

Isaiah 7: 14; Erroneous KJV Translation: Therefore the Lord Himself will give you a sign: Behold, the virgin shall conceive and bear a Son, and shall call His name Immanuel.

The Greek word parthenos (πα�θένος) used in Matthew 1:23 ; is ambiguous but the Hebrew term “Almah� that is erroneously translated in some Christian bibles as “virgin� is absolute, and according to Young’s Analytical Concordance to the Bible, the Hebrew term “Almah,� carries the meaning, (Concealment---unmarried female.)

Irrelevant as to what your holy fathers back in the dark ages believed, Isaiah’s prophecy was, that an unmarried woman is with child and shall bear a Son who would be called Immanuel.

The word “VIRGIN� in reference to the mother of Jesus was not introduced into the word of God until the Latin Bible ‘The Vulgate,’ which translation from the Greek and Hebrew by Jerome was completed in the 5th century, was translated into English many centuries later when the Latin word virgo, which has the same multiple connotations as does the Greek parthenos and can mean a unmarried woman, a Young girl, a maiden or a virgin, was erroneously translated as “Virgin� which has now been edited and has found to have been incorrect, and has been rectified.

As it has now been established by your church , that Isaiah’s prophesy was never to be interpreted to mean a virgin, we, the seekers of the truth, have already accepted that Matthew 1: 22-23; should read; “Now all this happened in order to make come true what the Lord had said through the prophet, “A young unmarried woman is pregnant and will bear as son and he shall be called Immanuel, (Which means, “God is with us), which your church now admits was the prophecy of the Lord through his prophet Isaiah, we wait for that erroneous interpretation of the word “ALMAH� in Matthew, to be changed also.

The emphasis of the prophecy, is on the fact that the child would be called Immanuel, (Which means, “God is with us), The Light of man came In the body of a human being, which he had filled with his spirit and lived with us, and we saw his Sh'khinah, (Dwelling place) the Sh'khinah, or Dwelling place, which was the body of the man Jesus that the Father had prepared for his Son, who was to come down from the heights of time and fill with his spirit, that body that his Father had prepared for him, the earthly dwelling of the Father's only Son, full of grace and truth: was our brother Jesus, who was the earthly host body and obedient servant, to the ‘Son of Man’ through which obedient host body, our Lord God and saviour, “The Son who is born of the great androgynous body of Eve=mankind,� revealed to us, his perfected nature, his divine power and the awesome sacrifice that he makes for us.

In translating the Hebrew words of the prophet Isaiah, that an “Almah� an “unmarried female� is with child and will bear a son,� into Greek, which unlike the Hebrew language, does not have a specific term for ‘virgin,’ the authors of the Septuagint and Matthew, correctly used the Greek word ‘Parthenos,’ which carries a basic meaning of ‘girl,’ or unmarried youth, and denotes ‘virgin’ only by implication, as it is the only word in the old Greek language, which could be used in the translation of Isaiah’s Prophecy;�A young unmarried girl/woman,is pregnant and will bear a son, etc.�

A more accurate rendering of the Greek “parthenos� is a person who does not have a regular sexual partner, a widow with a family of children, would be a “parthenos�, Hanna who nursed the baby Jesus before Mary performed the ceremony of purification, was a widow who had remained in her “Parthenia� (sexual chaste state) for those seven years of widowhood, was a “parthenos� for seven years, but she was in no way, a virgin.

By the way, Heli, “Alexander Helios,� the father of Mary and husband to Anna/Hanna the mother of Mary, was killed at Herod's command in 13 BC, 7 years before the birth of Jesus, in 6 BC, but that's another story.

To translate something from the Hebrew to the Greek, or from any language to another, one must not lose the essence of the original, and the original was, that “An unmarried woman" would be with child.�

‘Parthenos,’ was often used in reference to non-virgins who had never been married. Homer uses it in reference to unmarried girls who were no longer virgins, and Homer was the standard textbook for learning Greek all throughout antiquity, so any writer of Greek, including Matthew, who translated Isaiah’s words, that (An unmarried woman would be with child etc) while being well aware of this words versatile and indefinite meaning; was in no way implying that Mary was a virgin. For the Hebrew has a specific term for ‘virgin,’ “Bethulah,� which word is used in every instance in the Old Testament where a woman who has never had sexual intercourse with a man is referred to, which is obviously not the case with the unmarried woman/Almah, who is mentioned in Isaiah 7:14.

In Pergamos, as one of the final stages in the quest for enlightenment, the initiated adept would participate in sex with the Temple Virgin/Parthenos.

"Parthenos" did not mean possessing an intact hymen. A parthenos was simply an unmarried woman, a woman who claimed ownership of herself.

n Matthew you will find the genealogy of Joseph the son of Jacob from the tribe of Judah, this Joseph, is the 24th descendant of Solomon, the biological son of King David and Bathsheba, who was the wife of Uriah the Hittite, and this Joseph who married Mary, is not genetically connected to Jesus, as he had no sexual relations with Mary “until after� she had given birth to Jesus, the first of her three biological sons, and although, according to the Torah, an adopted son inherits, the rights of his adopted father: because his step father, Joseph the son of Jacob, was a descendant of the cursed line of Jehoiachim, he had no claim to the throne of David through the genetic line of Joseph ben jacob. Jeremiah 22: 30; Thus saith the Lord. “Write ye this man childless, a man that shall not prosper in his days; for no man of his seed shall prosper, sitting upon the throne of David, and ruling any more in Judah.�

In Luke 3: 23; you will find “the genealogy of Jesus,� Mary was the daughter of Heli (Alexander Helious) and Anna, one of three daughters of Yehoshua/Jesus III, who was high priest in Jerusalem from 36 to 23 BC. Anna was given as a bride to Alexander Helios (Heli) and Jesus is the son of “Joseph, the son of Heli,� And this Joseph, who is the biological Father of Jesus is about the 40th descendant of Nathan the half brother to Solomon, who is the biological son of King David, as they both had the same mother, “Bathsheba the wife of Uriah the Hittite,� who is the biological father of Nathan and a member of the tribe of Levi by his marriage to Bathsheba the daughter of Ammiel, the son of Obed-Edom the Levite, not of the order of Aaron, but of Moses, who was to be to Aaron, as God on earth.

Presumably, Joseph the son of Heli, a Levite through Moses, who had come from Cyprus, would have met his half sister Mary for the first time, at the gathering of the family and friends of Elizabeth the aged sister of Hanna and the aunty of Mary, who were both of the daughters of Levi. This was some months after the young “parthenos� (Unmarried) Mary had told the angel that up until that point in time she had never had any sexual relations with a man. Implying that the unmarried girl, “Almah=Parthenos� was still a virgin, before she met Joseph the Levite from Cyprus. Undoubtedly they did not realise at that time that they had a common father, Heli, from the tribe of Levi/Judah, who was seen as a threat to the throne of Israel, by Herod the Great, who had him murdered in 13 BC, seven years before the birth of Jesus, which left Hanna the grand mother of Jesus as a widow and “Parthenos� for some seven years. Jesus was a legitimate heir to the throne of David due to the adoption of his great ancestor, Nathan the priest, by King David, who married his mother, “Bathsheba�

Young’s Analytical Concordance to the Bible, gives the meaning of the Hebrew word “Almah,� which is used in Isaiah 7: 14; as, (Concealment: Unmarried woman.) when Mary, the obedient handmaid to her indwelling spirit, who had told the angel three months earlier that she was at that time still a virgin, after being told of Elizabeth’s pregnancy, she then went from her home town of Nazareth to a small town near Jerusalem to join with many other members of the family of Elizabeth the aunty of Mary who were of the daughters of Levi, where she must have met for the first time and was spiritually attracted to the biological father of Jesus, (in who was the specific genetic inheritance for the creation of the body of Jesus) who had come from Cyprus. The act of obedience from which the child of God’s promise was conceived in the womb of the “Almah,� unmarried woman, was concealed in the shadow beneath the wings of the Lord of spirits.
"
Bathsheba had four sons and they are, in order of age "Shimea, Shobab, Nathan and Solomon her youngest child. After the death of the first child that was born of the adulterous union, see 2nd Samuel 12: 24' David comforted his wife Bathsheba. He had intercourse with her, and she bore him a son, whom David named Solomon, the youngest of Bathsheb’s four sons.

Zechariah 12: 12-14; Each family in the land will mourn by itself: the family descended from David, (which includes all of his biological sons and their wives) by themselves. The family descended from Nathan and their wives, by themselves etc. this shows clearly that Nathan is not a biological son of David from the tribe of Judah.

According to the Talmud, any adopted child inherits the right of the Father by whom he is adopted. Meaning that all the descendants of Nathan the adopted son of David, had a legitimate claim to the throne of Israel.

This Joseph the Levite who is the descendant of Nathan, came from Cyprus and he had a half sister by the name Mary, (Same father “Heli� different mothers) who was the adopted mother of John, who Jesus had surnamed “Son of Thunder,� and who is identified with the young John who was surnamed “Mark,� which means ‘Hammer,’ or “The Hammerer.� After the death of Jesus, this Joseph the Levite, took his half sister Mary and young John up north into the land of Pamphylia, where today, in the town of Ephesus, the grave sites of Mary and John can still be visited.

Her body has been returned to the universal elements from which it was created, and the spirit which is the real Mary, is at rest in the body of her son where she awaits the resurrection.

Galatians 4: 29; “Just as at the time the child(Ishmael) who was born according to the flesh, despised and persecuted him (Isaac) who was born according to the workings of the Holy Spirit, etc.

Isaac, the biological son Abraham, the son of Terah, was born according to the workings of the Holy Spirit as was Jesus, the son of Joseph, the son of Heli. Isaac is a prototype of Jesus and like Jesus, was born of God’s promise according to the workings of the Holy Spirit. Both are seen as the seed that was promised to Abraham. Both Isaac and Jesus were the sons of parents who were both sired by the one Father. ‘Terah,’ is the father to both Abraham and Sarah by different mothers, while ‘Heli,’ is the father of both Joseph and Mary, by different mothers. Both Mary and Sarah were informed by an angel that they would become Pregnant and bear the son of God’s promise. Isaac was offered up as a sacrifice by his physical father, Jesus was offered up by his spiritual father, who descended upon him in the form of a dove as the voice was heard to say, ‘ you are my beloved in whom I am well pleased, today I have become your Father.� Or rather, “Today I have begotten thee.� See the more ancient authorities of Luke 3: 22; and Isaac was offered up on the same mountain at the very spot where Jesus was crucified.

In Luke 3: 22; (In place of “Thou art my beloved son in who I am well pleased.�) The following authorities of the second, third, and fourth centuries read, “This day I have begotten thee,� vouched for by Codex D, and the most ancient copies of the old latin (a, b. c. ff.I), by Justin Martyr (AD 140), Clemens Alex, (AD. 190), Methodius (AD. 290), among the Greeks. And among the Latins, Lactaitius (AD 300), Hilary (AD) Juvencus (AD. 330), Faustus (AD. 400) and Augustine. All these oldest manuscripts were changed completely. They now read, “This is my son in whom I am well pleased.� Whereas the original variant was, “Thou art my Son. This day I have begotten thee.�

If Jesus was not born of the flesh as all human beings are, but was born of a virgin without the male semen having been introduced into her uterus, then this would have been the greatest of all miracles, and would have been shouted from the roof tops by all four gospel writers and yet we see that Mark and John ignore the physical birth of Jesus as being totally irrelevant to the story of salvation and begin their account of He who was sent in the name of the Lord, with the Baptism of the man Jesus, when he was born of the spirit and the heavenly voice was heard to say, “You are my beloved in whom I am well pleased, Today I have become your father.�

Matthew merely translates the Hebrew, Isaiah 7: 14; “A young unmarried woman who is pregnant will have a son and will name him ‘Immanuel.’�

While Luke simply reveals that the young unmarried 14 year old Mary, was still a virgin over 3 months before she was found to be pregnant. Due to her obedience to our indwelling ancestral spirit, she conceived in her womb, the child of the father chosen by the Holy Spirit, which act of obedience by the handmaid of the Lord, was hidden in the shadows beneath the wings of the Lord of Spirits.

The Tongue
Under Probation
Posts: 1667
Joined: Fri May 04, 2012 12:08 am
Location: Townsville Queensland Australia

Post #6

Post by The Tongue »

[jedicri wrote]............."[T]he Apostles took up her body on a bier and placed it in a tomb; and they guarded it, expecting the Lord to come. And behold, again the Lord stood by them; and the holy body having been received, He commanded that it be taken in a cloud into paradise: where now, rejoined to the soul, [Mary] rejoices with the Lord's chosen ones..." Gregory of Tours, Eight Books of Miracles, 1:4 (inter A.D. 575-593).

"As the most glorious Mother of Christ, our Savior and God and the giver of life and immortality, has been endowed with life by him, she has received an eternal incorruptibility of the body together with him who has raised her up from the tomb and has taken her up to himself in a way known only to him." Modestus of Jerusalem, Encomium in dormitionnem Sanctissimae Dominae nostrae Deiparae semperque Virginis Mariae (PG 86-II,3306),(ante A.D. 634).

"It was fitting ...that the most holy-body of Mary, God-bearing body, receptacle of God, divinised, incorruptible, illuminated by divine grace and full glory ...should be entrusted to the earth for a little while and raised up to heaven in glory, with her soul pleasing to God." Theoteknos of Livias, Homily on the Assumption (ante A.D. 650).

"You are she who, as it is written, appears in beauty, and your virginal body is all holy, all chaste, entirely the dwelling place of God, so that it is henceforth completely exempt from dissolution into dust. Though still human, it is changed into the heavenly life of incorruptibility, truly living and glorious, undamaged and sharing in perfect life." Germanus of Constantinople, Sermon I (PG 98,346), (ante A.D. 733).

"St. Juvenal, Bishop of Jerusalem, at the Council of Chalcedon (451), made known to the Emperor Marcian and Pulcheria, who wished to possess the body of the Mother of God, that Mary died in the presence of all the Apostles, but that her tomb, when opened upon the request of St. Thomas, was found empty; wherefrom the Apostles concluded that the body was taken up to heaven." John of Damascene, PG (96:1) (A.D. 747-751).

"It was fitting that the she, who had kept her virginity intact in childbirth, should keep her own body free from all corruption even after death. It was fitting that she, who had carried the Creator as a child at her breast, should dwell in the divine tabernacles. It was fitting that the spouse, whom the Father had taken to himself, should live in the divine mansions. It was fitting that she, who had seen her Son upon the cross and who had thereby received into her heart the sword of sorrow which she had escaped when giving birth to him, should look upon him as he sits with the Father, It was fitting that God's Mother should possess what belongs to her Son, and that she should be honored by every creature as the Mother and as the handmaid of God." John of Damascene, Dormition of Mary (PG 96,741), (ante A.D. 749).

"Venerable to us, O Lord, is the festivity of this day on which the holy Mother of God suffered temporal death, but still could not be kept down by the bonds of death, who has begotten Thy Son our Lord incarnate from herself." Gregorian Sacramentary, Veneranda (ante A.D. 795).

"[A]n effable mystery all the more worthy of praise as the Virgin's Assumption is something unique among men." Gallican Sacramentary, from Munificentis simus Deus (8th Century).

"God, the King of the universe, has granted you favors that surpass nature. As he kept you virgin in childbirth, thus he kept your body incorrupt in the tomb and has glorified it by his divine act of transferring it from the tomb." Byzantine Liturgy, from Munificentis simus Deus (8th Century).

"[T]he virgin is up to now immortal, as He who lived, translated her into the place of reception." Timotheus of Jerusalem (8th Century).


The only virgins on this earth who have ever conceived a child in their womb and given birth to that child and still remained a virgin, would be one who was artificially inseminated, or had a viable embryo implanted in her womb through some process, by which her hymen was not broken, and the child was later delivered into the world by caesarean section, but the father of that child born of a virgin, would not be the son of God, but the son of the human sperm donor. And the only people who would believe other wise, would be that mob that you have quoted above. I’ve noticed that you did not quote your once long time saint of the catholic church, Clement of Alexandria, he said much the same thing as did your other mob of poor deceived souls, who cannot verify any of that rubbish with the Holy Scriptures. But when has the universal church of Constantine worried about what the word of God says, when they have their traditions from such people as the above mentioned by you, to cling to, and the traditions that were handed down by Hellena the mother of Emperor Constantine the first Pope of the universal church that was founded in the 4 th century.

Constantine was to later appoint his mother Helena as Augusta, and gave her unlimited access to the imperial treasury in order to locate the relics of early Judeo-Christian times.

According to the traditions of the Church of Constantine, Mary and her child rested in a cave, called the Milk Grotto (la Gruta de la Leche), near the place where today stands the Church of the Nativity (la Iglesia de la Natividad). There, (Or so it is said) their supposed Virgin Mary breastfed her child. A drop of milk fell on a stone of the cave, and the stone turned white. During the early centuries, this white rock, diluted in water, took the appearance of milk and was used as a religious relic.

Both Christians and Muslims believe scrapings from the stones in the grotto boost the quantity of a mother’s milk and enhance fertility. Mothers usually mix it in their drinking water; would-be mothers place the MAGICAL rock under their mattress.
There is also an old tradition that identifies this as the burial site of the young victims of Herod’s Slaughter of the Innocents. There is a chapel dedicated to them in the caves beneath the Church of St. Catherine.

Along the south side of the church of the Nativity, there’s a street that leads to the Milk Grotto which is venerated, by both the Christians and the Muslims, and it’s believed by them that it’s there that Mary (According to Hellena) hid with her child Jesus, from Herod’s soldiers as they slaughtered all the boys who were two years of age and younger until they could flee from there into Egypt, and it’s believed by them that Mary spilt some milk there and it turned the rocks white and gave them the miraculous power to heal the problems of lactating mothers who grind the chalky stone to powder and mix it in their drinks.

This of course, is long before you reckon that her dead body was taken to heaven, before it began to decompose, where now, according to your mob mentioned above, she is worshipped as the Queen of heaven, mother of the god who was the co-creator of the entire cosmos, with his father who he is: and with their god, she is supposed to be the co-redeemer of mankind.

It is believed by the church of Constantine and other daughter denominations, which have been born of her spirit/teachings, before breaking away from their mother body to begin their own families, that if those people care to purchase a small bag of the white powder from those rocks, which had magically turned white by the mother’s milk of Mary, that white powder has the magical power to heal their problems.

This is in total contradiction to the truth as revealed in God’s word. But if they, who believe the non-biblical teaching of the bride of the anti-christ, (The universal church of Constantine who refuses to acknowledge that Jesus came as a human being) that a mortal virgin conceived in her womb, the son of an alien life form that pre-dated the creation of the cosmos, and the human like body of the son of that alien, which was forming in the womb of their so-called virgin, was actually an eternal and immortal god, who himself was the co-creator of the cosmos, then they will believe anything that she is prepared to dish out for them.

Matthew is not concerned as to where the holy family actually lived, only that the child was born in Bethlehem of Judaea, he then skips forward in time, to speak of the wise men, who are believed to have been Astronomer/Astrologers from Mesopotamia, who had seen the star in the east, that they believed had heralded the birth of the promised Messianic King of Israel, and even if they had left their own country that very day, to travel to Jerusalem, (Which is more than highly unlikely) we know from biblical records that it would have taken them some four months to reach there, and by then, the family, according to Luke, had returned to their home in Nazareth.

The most likely scenario is, that the wise men saw the triple conjunction of Jupiter the king star with Mars the God of war and Saturn, the Golden age on earth, this was in 6 BC, and to them it would have been the sign that heralded the birth of the promised King and successor to the throne of David the warrior king, who would subdue all nations and bring in a golden age of peace on the earth.

But as Herod died in 4 BC, shortly after the slaughter of the innocents, which was immediately after the wise men were warned of what was going to occur and to return home by a different route that that be which they had travelled to Israel, It would seem that the comet of 5 BC which appeared to have come out of the king planet Jupiter, (All short period comet which have their aphelia in the orbit of Jupiter were known as the family of Jupiter) was the deciding factor to convince them that the promised King had been born in Israel.

Ezra 7: 8-9; “They left Babylonia on the first day of the first month, and with God’s help they arrived in Jerusalem on the first day of the fifth month.�

Luke is more concerned with the approximate 2 month period that the family were in Bethlehem of Judaea. He speaks of the birth of the child in the stable of an Inn, and the visit of the shepherds, who were out in the fields, where they would not have been in the middle of winter of late December, where they saw the baby in the manger wrapped in swaddling cloth etc. There is no mention of any wise men there.

Luke 2: 21; A week after Jesus was born he was circumcised according to the law of Moses. “Then ‘CAME THE TIME’ according to the Law of Moses,� for Mary to perform the ceremony of purification as the law of Moses commanded.

(Leviticus 12: 3-4; “On the eighth day the male child shall be circumcised. Then it will be thirty three days more until she is ritually clean from her loss of blood and then can she enter the tent/temple and perform the ceremony of purification.)

After she had performed everything “According to the law of Moses� some 33 days after the baby was circumcised, they returned to the home of Mary in Nazareth, to where the wise men would later travel some months later, and shower the young child with gifts, which included Gold, which apparently the family did not have when Mary offered the two pigeons at the ceremony of purification. Leviticus 12: 8; poor families who cannot afford a lamb shall bring two doves or two pigeons one of which, would be used as the burnt offering etc.

As it has already been stated, even if the wise men had left their country of origin in the east, on the day that they had first sighted the heavenly pheromone that had heralded the birth of Jesus, which is more that highly unlikely, they would not have reached Jerusalem until at least two month after Mary had returned to Nazareth.

Four month, it took them to travel to Jerusalem. Even if we halve that time and take into account that the comet which inspired them to travel to Jerusalem had not appeared until about 12 months after the conjunction of 6 BC, which had heralded the birth of Jesus, there is no possible way that the wise men could have seen the baby Jesus in the manger in Bethlehem of Judaea.

Travelling presumably, across the “Kings Highway� to Jerusalem to pay homage to the new King, they went to the palace of Herod the Great, the current ruler of Israel, expecting to find there, the young child whose birth had been heralded by the heavenly sign of 6 BC, the young child that they believed was the Messianic heir to the throne of David, and they asked, “where is the child that has been born to be King of the Jews.�

After receiving verification from his priests that the prophesied King was to be born in Bethlehem of Judaea, Herod then called them to a SECRET meeting and enquired of them the EXACT time that they had first seen the star which was to herald the birth of the long awaited king and savour, and it was in accordance with the information he received from the wise men, that he determined the age of the children who were to be slaughtered, “‘all the males who were two years of age and below.�

Having been told that the child was to be born in Bethlehem of Judea, the wise men left the palace and the star that they believed was the comet of 5 BC appeared once again, and Oh what joy was theirs. Revealing that the original star that they had seen while in the east had disappeared, and it was this star that guided the wise men, not to Bethlehem of Judaea in the south, but to Nazareth of Galilee to the north, which is just 2 miles from the northern city of Bethlehem, which today, is called “Beitlahm.�

Having witnessed the comet of 5 BC, which was said to have a vertical tail, fading into the distance getting smaller and smaller as it returned to the outer reaches of the solar system, and knowing that it would have long disappeared before they reached Jerusalem, we can only assume that this was another much smaller comet, low to the horizon to the North of Jerusalem. Perhaps a non-periodic, or long period comet that would not appear in our solar system again, for thousands, or millions of years, if ever.

A small insignificant comet, way off in the distance, which would have gone un-noticed by the casual observer, but seen in the northern sky, hanging low to the horizon with it tail streaming up into the heavens seeming to point to the house in which the child Jesus was, by the wise men who believed it to be the same fading comet of 5 BC.

We can almost picture the scene, the wise men with their entourage travelling along the dusty roads of northern Israel, it’s late in the day and as they come to a rise, there, just above the distant horizon, in the deepening darkness of the evening sky, is the star with its fading tail streaming up into the heavens and appearing to stand over the small and insignificant hamlet of "Nazareth."

The term “Stood Over� in ancient literature refers to comets and comets only. And we are told that the star stood over the HOUSE (Not the manger in Bethlehem of Judaea in which Jesus the baby had been born) and it was in the house to which the family had returned after the ceremony of purification had been performed, in which the wise men found Mary with her child, who by then was well over 12 months old.

That night, the wise men, who would have travelled to Jerusalem across the Kings Highway, were warned in a dream not to reveal to Herod the child’s whereabouts, and they returned home by a different route from which they had come, which would have more than likely been up through the northern route of Damascus, and Joseph was also warned to get out of bed immediately and take the child and his mother and flee into Egypt.

Herod’s secret police had eyes and ears throughout the entire land, and when he realised that he had been tricked and the wise men were not going to return and reveal the child’s location as promised, he was furious and gave the order to kill all the male children in the district that Herod's spies had confirmed that the wise men with their entourage had travelled to, which was around Bethlehem of Galilee, who were two years and below according to the time that he learned from the wise men about when they had first sighted the star that had heralded the birth of the promised king and savour.

According to Josephus, Sepphoris which is only about 4 miles from Bethlehem of Galilee, now called Beitlahm, had a population of around thirty thousand and he called it, “The Ornament of Galilee.�

Around the time of Herod’s death, just after he had ordered the death of the innocents around the district of Bethlehem who were two years and below, according to the time that he had learned from the wise men the exact time that they had first seen the star, there were riots among the peasants of the area in Galilee of which Sepphoris was the centre, which IMO were caused because of Hreod's order. Judas, the son of Hezekias attacked the arsenal of Herod in the city of Sepphoris in order to arm the peasants.

The Romans under Quintillius Varus of Syria, attacked and burnt the city, putting down the uprising in which many families died and others were taken prisoner and transported to Rome, where they were sold as slaves. But Joseph, with his wife and her child had escaped the slaughter by fleeing into Egypt.

After a failed suicide attempt, which I believe may have been an option given to him by Caesar Augustus, in the spring of 4 BC, Herod the Great died, then in the spring of 3 B.C., after the death of Herod his father, when Herod Antipas returned from Rome where his father’s will was ratified by Augustus, he chose and rebuilt the magnificent city of Sepphoris as his capital city for ruling over Galilee.

You stick to the yarns and traditions handed down by Hellena and all your supposed saints, I'll stick to the word of God.

chestertonrules
Scholar
Posts: 380
Joined: Sun Oct 02, 2011 9:18 pm

Re: IS MARY REALLY IN HEven ??

Post #7

Post by chestertonrules »

[Replying to post 1 by dan p]

Jesus said that if we live and believe in him we will never die.

Rev. 12 describes Mary in heaven.

Where do you think she is?

User avatar
Nickman
Site Supporter
Posts: 5443
Joined: Mon Sep 06, 2010 8:51 am
Location: Idaho

Re: IS MARY REALLY IN HEven ??

Post #8

Post by Nickman »

chestertonrules wrote: [Replying to post 1 by dan p]

Jesus said that if we live and believe in him we will never die.

Rev. 12 describes Mary in heaven.

Where do you think she is?
If Mary was a real person and not just a character in a book, she is in the ground. Her flesh has long been destroyed by bacteria and parasites. Her bones are possibly still intact.

chestertonrules
Scholar
Posts: 380
Joined: Sun Oct 02, 2011 9:18 pm

Re: IS MARY REALLY IN HEven ??

Post #9

Post by chestertonrules »

[Replying to post 8 by Nickman]

If they were, wouldn't we know where they are?

We know where the bodies of Peter and Paul are because the early Christians treated the bodies of saints with reverence and veneration. I don't think that it is likely that the body of the Mother of Jesus would have been ignored.

User avatar
Nickman
Site Supporter
Posts: 5443
Joined: Mon Sep 06, 2010 8:51 am
Location: Idaho

Re: IS MARY REALLY IN HEven ??

Post #10

Post by Nickman »

chestertonrules wrote: [Replying to post 8 by Nickman]

If they were, wouldn't we know where they are?
No. Nature is very good at destroying evidence. Especially after 2000 years. There would be nothing left if she wasn't properly embalmed.
We know where the bodies of Peter and Paul are because the early Christians treated the bodies of saints with reverence and veneration. I don't think that it is likely that the body of the Mother of Jesus would have been ignored.
We do? Where are the bodies of Peter and Paul?

Post Reply