Reformed views of Mary - KingdomCraft

[@ridgepayne500]

Redeemed Zoomer. I can honestly say you’ve been a big part of my salvation. I don’t know how I stumbled upon your videos, but I do believe it happened for a reason. I hate to sound like all of the gen z that are getting on catholic conversion bandwagon, but I started RCIA last month; however I did grow up Mormon, so I think you can give me a pass there😅 But I’ve really appreciated your videos. They helped me to appreciate the beauty of approaching religion from an intellectual perspective. I’m continuing to grow in my faith and love of Jesus Christ. God bless. From Alberta Canada🇨🇦

[@wrenithilduincats]

Blessings from Ontario, Canada, from a Dutch Reformed sister. 🇨🇦

[@kaktustustus1244]

Welcome! God bless

[@carlitobrigante404]

Fellow Ex mormon that converted to Christianity a little over 2 years ago. Became first an evangelical but now I’m an Eastern orthodox inquirer soon to be catechumen. God bless you☦️

[@RayRice-lr8vi]

As an evangelical, welcome aboard! I have a slew of disagreements with Catholic dogma, but those are trivial in comparison to the awesomeness of seeing someone leave darkness and meet the real Jesus and join His church!

[@ridgepayne500]

@@carlitobrigante404 Have great respect for the orthodox faith

[@JoWilliams-ud4eu]

I used to be a soft Nestorian before finding your channel, and now I have a proper Christology.

[@SobaOfPulaski]

Mary is a hugely important figure of our Faith being that she is the Mother of Jesus, and in turn the Mother of God. Jesus is God in the Flesh and thus to say Mary isn't the mother of God is to deny Jesus' divinity. ~ A Southern Baptist

[@karlkirbs5080]

Anyone notice the pillagers showed up and attacked RZ while he was criticizing John MacArthur? Coincidence?

[@Taterstiltskin]

well it wasn't "karma" so i'd call it God's providence :D

[@Lutheran_man]

they literally popped out of that hole they ambushed him

[@Olors64]

Timestamp?

[@Lyd404]

Baptist spies😭

[@J3D1D14H]

nah they’re just john macarthur fans

[@pandaman7999]

I don't deny that Mary is the mother of God, but she is not God's superior or ontological source, as the phrase may be construed. I don't think informed Catholics would make this mistake, but the connotations do appear to color their thinking in a way I'd rather just avoid.

[@alfieingrouille1528]

@@pandaman7999 thank you

[@kaktustustus1244]

This is the argument evangelicals make every time they disagree with the term Mother of God. They think it implies Mary is somehow superior to God or that she created God, but no Catholics would ever say that. They just thinks the term impies something which it doesn't.

[@yazoink6690]

​@@kaktustustus1244If my friend mentioned "the mother of his children," would it be reasonable to assume that the mother had a part in creating those children?

[@NJWEBER18]

​@@yazoink6690 nope, it is called 'procreation' not 'creation'. I did not create my son and daughter, God did. I participated in procreation of them which makes me their father. Mary participated in the procreation of Jesus which makes her His mother and thus the Mother of God. Likewise, I am not superior to my children due to procreating them, I am only equal to them due to having the same nature.

[@Captain_Autismo]

Literally not a single Christian believes Mary is superior to God. Total red herring

[@bible.animations]

Hey mate! Whats the best way to get in contact with you? I've got an invitation I think you'd be interested in :)

[@RockTank22YT]

Bible animations x Redeemed Zoomer collab?? 👀

[@WarriorcatGerda]

A colab between you two? I'm so happy

[@redeemedzoomer6053]

Email me at [e-mail]

[@olekcholewa8171]

Protestants respecting Mary is honestly one of the most beautiful things to see.

[@somefatrussian]

Josh Riley gave jobs to 5 million illegals

[@Summercamp1sland]

Any real Protestant should

[@friendlyolbum]

I don't know of any who do not respect her.

[@olekcholewa8171]

@@Summercamp1sland Tell that to evangelicals and American "Bible Christians" who start rattling and convulsing uncontrollably at the sole prospect of hearing the word "Mary". But then again you guys probably wouldn't call them real Protestants so there's also that.

[@pedropaulom.ribeiro6511]

​@@friendlyolbum are you being serious?

[@renlamomtsopoe]

Duns Scotus argument for the immaculate conception from the Supra framework is so cool! I never saw that connection.

[@WC3isBetterThanReforged]

Correction on the assumption of Mary. Her death is left undefined. She was bodily assumed into heaven but it may have been either after death or while still alive.

[@sird2333]

If her death was left undefined, how do you know she was taken up into heaven? Surely one of the gospels would have recorded such a magnificent occurrence, as did the Old Testament’s recounting of Elijah. Also hinted at having been assumed are Enoch and Moses. I see no mention nor hint of Mary having been assumed. That is a bit of paganism used to justify praying to her as though she were a goddess.

[@omarvazquez3355]

As a Catholic about to become Reformed, this was tremendously helpful. Thanks!! ❤

[@ReginaCæliLætare]

Goodbye, future prodigal son. We'll be right here waiting for you.

[@sird2333]

Congratulations on leaving a false church!

[@Matthew_Prescott]

Another great video Zoomer. It is heartening to see how close to Traditional Catholicism the real Reformers actually were, in contrast to many of the watered down and low effort "well I believe it because it seems right to me" takes that often pervade modern Christendom. Even where there are disagreements about authority, it's important to hit home that careful study and getting facts straight is a necessary part of a robust Faith - and the discussion of shared scholastics is always refreshing.

[@LedgerLegend-ns4ns]

I've always believed in god, but i never really learned about him, and the bible. But recently ive been wanting to get closer to him, and pray more. I searched up the story of the bible fun, and found this channel, so far i think this guy is a great person, wanting to spread the word of god, and i want to do the same, im gonna ask my really religious friend to teach me about the bible, I love this channel, and I want to be better. Thank you!

[@Lilpiktdude]

Friends can be good but it may also be good to talk to a priest

[@turboDout]

Spend time in the Word, it's the best way to learn. Can try talking to a pastor also, as mentioned above.

[@7th_blessing]

Have a blessed day everyone‼️💙✝️

[@BobBob-fm6oo]

The thing is, Mary could've been a perpetual virgin. I just don't think that she had to have been. There is nothing sinful about having sex with your spouse after marriage.

[@brittoncain5090]

From the Catholic viewpoint, we don't believe Mary was a perpetual virgin because it would've been bad to have sex, it's that her womb was consecrated solely to be a home for Jesus. So having sex is fine, but providing a home for the infant Christ is a greater good and it takes precedence if that makes sense.

[@TheNabOwnzz]

​@@brittoncain5090It doesn't make sense to hold to this AFTER Christ had been born.

[@brittoncain5090]

@@TheNabOwnzz Why do you think so?

[@fij715]

She is the Arc of the New Covenant. She was a a perpetual virgin.

[@jakubkosz1009]

​@brittoncain5090 , as Cathololics, we believe in that (and share this believe with Orthodoxes). The source is the Tradition

[@N0C7URN4L]

I KNEW you’d make a video on this, praise the Lord

[@BenjaminFrancois-w1v]

Thanks for creating this video! It helped clear the air on the air on this issue.

[@Mxswanson500]

The dogma of the Assumption does not claim that Mary was assumed before death

[@jakubkosz1009]

Exactly

[@isaaccooper9258]

“ While He was still speaking to the crowds, behold, His mother and brothers were standing outside, seeking to speak to Him. Someone said to Him, “Behold, Your mother and Your brothers are standing outside seeking to speak to You.” But Jesus answered the one who was telling Him and said, “Who is My mother and who are My brothers?” And stretching out His hand toward His disciples, He said, “Behold My mother and My brothers! For whoever does the will of My Father who is in heaven, he is My brother and sister and mother.” “ -Matt 12:46 If someone makes a statement “Oh this person was special because they were related directly to Jesus” then they have the burden proof. If you make a claim, you aren’t automatically wrong, but you’re certainly not automatically right. Prove it to me.

[@crusaderACR]

That's exactly what made Mary blessed, the fact she's Theotokos is icing on the cake. Source: See Luke 1:45 "Blessed is she who has believed that the Lord would fulfill his promises to her" Also Luke 1:38 and the whole Luke 1 and all other Gospels narrating Mary's part.

[@isaaccooper9258]

@@crusaderACR Ok. You've claimed Mary is Theotokos (Mother of God). This is true inasmuch as Jesus is God, and Mary was the Mother of Jesus. So the claim: "Mary is Theotokos" is true. Does that mean Mary is Divine as Theotokos? No, that remains to be proven. However, you have brought up Luke 1:45, and 1:38. From 1:38 we know Mary was "bondslave of the Lord". From 1:42 we know that Mary was "Blessed are you among women". From 1:45 we know "Blessed is [Mary who] believed that there would be a fulfillment of what had been spoken to her by the Lord." So from the Divine authority of Scripture, we know the following: Mary was the Mother of Jesus (God) (Mary is Theotokos). Marry was a bondslave of the Lord. Mary was blessed, among women. Marry was blessed as one who believed that there would be fulfillment of what had been spoken to her by the Lord. Mary was Theotokos, bondslave, and certainly blessed. True. However claims like "We should pray to this dead person", "We should build statues to this dead person", "This dead person was without sin", "This person never died", and "This person was always a virgin" remain all unproven.

[@crusaderACR]

@@isaaccooper9258 Mary is not divine and God have mercy on anyone who claims so, as that is some profoundly misguided heresy. She's the greatest of human creatures, but still a creature. That Mary is Theotokos, therefore deserving of great honor, is at the core of Christianity, affirmed even by all the Reformers. You brought up a bunch of different things unrelated to this fact. For the first two, we should ask ourselves whether something is permissible to do to a mortal, as if so it is permissible to do to Mary. A Catholic discovers some nice piece of land in the Americas, calls it City of Holy Mary and builds a statue in her honor. To my eyes, it's no different from an American naming cities and states after Washington then building statues in his honor, besides the fact one is godly (as it has a direct connection to our Savior), and the other secular and godless. I'm absolutely in favor of building statues to Mary, as also of Christ, the Apostles, the Saints, and all the founders of the Church. In fact you should ask yourself, if in case you're American, why do you give greater honor to the Founding Fathers when it comes to statues and dedications, than to the Church Fathers and the Theotokos? If you build a statue to Washington, you should build a statue ten times larger of Jesus Christ (as the good Brazilians did) and bow every time you pass, making some salutary recognition. Nay, go and kiss the statue's feet, YOU need to respect your Church Fathers, your Mother, as through them you knew your Lord. The perpetual virginity of Mary is pretty clear from Scripture, perhaps you could look into that. Immaculate Conception is a harder case, but not impossible, and nevertheless still held by most Christians in history (why, I wonder?) We are allowed to believe Mary died. Some don't think so, and we're fine with that, but the Assumption has a strong historical basis. The region where Mary died seems to have no tomb present, unlike the tombs all Apostles had, and the local Christian churches have celebrated what they call the Dormition for as far as there have been records. I'm not sure if I'd believe that one so strongly if I wasn't Catholic, truthfully. It's no certain case, but I do believe the Catholic Churh with certainty, and so I must hold the Church isn't leading me wrong in this grayer area.

[@GlowingCross]

He finally dropped a Mary video

[@ReginaCæliLætare]

It's the beginning of a whole new ear, full of grace.

[@TSN-WVK08]

I do believe she was the mother of God but not God the Father.

[@TSN-WVK08]

What is that Nestorian? I don’t think so but I might be wrong.

[@fij715]

God the Father and God the Son are both God ergo Mary is the Mother of God.

[@alfieingrouille1528]

Reports for heresy ​@@fij715

[@alfieingrouille1528]

​@@fij715speaks blasphemy

[@alfieingrouille1528]

​@@fij715GOD THE FATHER HAD NO PARENTS

[@patrickgroyper83]

St. Thomas did affirm the Immaculate Conception tho, sounds like someone isn't familiar with Wagner's content since Wagner did a stream about this very topic

[@Ningen8023]

Link please.

[@patrickgroyper83]

@@Ningen8023 kzbin.infoXpVRIKrm40g?si=fRDOtBLaMYfDHDWH

[@patrickgroyper83]

kzbin.info/www/bejne/jqG5g3yBp9JnZsk

[@drjanitor3747]

No he didn’t. He believed she was cleansed from original sin in the womb. Not the same thing.

[@professorquarter]

No, he did not. Please see Dr. janitors response and actually READ.

[@HemiSlant6828]

Random fun fact: When Bill France Sr., the founder of NASCAR was looking to build the biggest oval in the world (basically Daytona, but slightly bigger), the original plan was to build it in South Carolina, but because of Blue Laws implemented by the Baptist church in South Carolina that stated that they could not hold sporting events on Sundays. This prompted NASCAR to search for a different state to host the track. This led to finding an Air Force Depot in Talladega County, Alabama. This in turn led to NASCAR building Talladega Superspeedway. And the first NASCAR cup race in the history of Talladega is widely considered the worst race in NASCAR history.

[@Michiganman800]

Based Blue Laws

[@HemiSlant6828]

@@Michiganman800 To be fair, i do agree, but only for the fact that the Carolinas are packed full of racetracks. We need more out here in the west

[@johnnybridegroom8982]

You misrepresented the view St Thomas Aquinas held on the Immaculate Conception of Mary. His view stems from the understanding of biology in his time, which was very primitive. You also misrepresented why Catholics say Mary was Ever Virgin. It isn't because Catholics have a view of sex as 'icky'. I encourage you to look into these again.

[@BigBlobProductions]

Hello there! Would you please expand on historical views on the topic which you mentioned? Or perhaps send me some links, I would love to know and understand more about this view point. All love in Christ Jesus our Lord

[@PeccatorSpePlenus]

I have such a huge respect for you for explaining reasonable Mariology from a Protestant perspective. Protestants always get a bad rep for stubornly avoiding anything that feels too Catholic, yet you go straight against that stereotype without departing from the tradition you follow. Pax Christi!

[@DietZgeN92]

Why wouldnt you believe in the bodily assumption of Mary if you believe in the immaculate Conception of Mary?

[@shbsuri]

Mary didn’t need to be conceived without original sin, it was a special grace given to her by God, not because she had to be sinless from the moment of conception.

[@SM12397]

Why?

[@legacyandlegend]

The problem is that it isn't biblical.

[@shbsuri]

@@legacyandlegend there isn’t any place in the Bible that specifically says she sinned, and this belief at least in seed form goes back as far as we have people mentioning it. It is substantially believed in the Eastern Orthodox Church, the oriental Orthodox Church, and the Assyrian church of the east. The only group to deny it are some Protestants.

[@legacyandlegend]

@shbsuri Yes. Because it's unbiblical. Just because the bible doesn't say she committed a specific sin, doesn't make her sinless.

[@shbsuri]

@@legacyandlegend is everything that the Bible doesn’t specifically mention unbiblical?

[@louannebvb]

These Catholic churches are gorgeous

[@tiagoviana5161]

"In the matter of sin, it is my wish to exclude absolutely all questions concerning the holy Virgin Mary, on account of the honor due to Christ. For since she conceived and brought forth Him who most certainly was guilty of no sin, we know that an abundance of grace was given her that she might be in every way the conqueror of sin." - St. Augustine (De Nat. et Grat. xxxvi)

[@isaaccooper9258]

So if St Augustine said it it has to be true? Where’s his source?

[@tiagoviana5161]

@@isaaccooper9258 Yes

[@dennycascade7455]

@@tiagoviana5161 tertuliian who came much earlier didn’t believe mary was sinless. Its an obvious later accretion

[@isaaccooper9258]

Then your no longer putting your faith in Christ or His word but a fallible servant. What makes this man infallible? Everything he says is true? Says who? If he 1,000 members of the early church decide that one guy is special and infallible does that make it true? I don’t think so. If you make a claim like “This man has divine authority” or “Everything this man says is infallible” then you have the burden of proof.

[@StephenAngelico]

Regarding the perpetual virginity of Mary - I don't think it makes sense to explain away James the brother of Jesus as Joseph's son from a previous marriage. I can't disprove the theory that Joseph was old when Jesus was born, but the evidence that Joseph and Mary offered the poor sacrifice to consecrate Jesus does not lend itself well to Joseph remarrying to Mary after a previous marriage with children. As for those described as Jesus's brothers, they could be Jesus's half-brothers, sons of Joseph and Mary; they could also be technically step-brothers, because "Jesus was the son, it was thought, of Joseph". The evidence is a wash between the affirmative and the negative, but as has been said elsewhere, without a good reason for the logical theological necessity of the perpetual virginity, burden of proof lies with the claimant, since consummation is usually a necessary part of marriage.

[@StephenAngelico]

In writing the above, I nearly made a factual error about the consecration of the firstborn - Jesus was the firstborn of Mary, which is what the law was concerned about - the firstborn of every womb. This is not evidence for or against Jesus being thought to be Joseph's firstborn.

[@WC3isBetterThanReforged]

From Matthew 27:26, we know that James and joses were sons of a mary. From John 19:25, we know that Clopas had a wife named Mary. Both of these descriptions are from the crucifixion account and from that we can determine that james was the son of clopas and the other mary. Clopas was the brother of Joseph making Jesus and james cousins. The greek word adelphoi in (rendered "brother" in English translations) was a catch-all word for any close family relationship so james and Jesus could be called brothers while actually being cousins with no blood relations. We also see this in Genesis where abraham is described as the adelphos (brother) of lot when he was actually his uncle.

[@siondafydd]

19:49 "Now Jesus is technically not a human person" - Redeemed Zoomer. That's heresy bro! Edit: I was wrong, sorry.

[@creativecontent3987]

Jesus is a divine person with a human nature, but not a human person (Yeah ik its weird but that's technically the orthodox teaching).

[@garrett2514]

The idea that Jesus is a human person (and presumably you also think a divine person) is actually Nestorianism. Jesus is one Person.

[@redeemedzoomer6053]

No. Jesus has a human nature, but is a divine person, not a human person. Jesus's personhood is one and undivided, and it is uncreated, therefore it is divine. The divine person of Jesus with a divine nature assumed a human nature. This is classic orthodoxy

[@Quenuen.]

Good on you for realizing your mistake 👍

[@MrDavePed]

@@redeemedzoomer6053 It might be "classic orthodoxy" but it results in a denial of the bread and the wine serving as a legal proxy in communion. If the "Lamb of God" is not really the explicit Passover Lamb in the legal sense, He saves no one. Jesus is a man and always will be a man. That is the only way He can serve as the last Adam or our Passover Lamb. When you use words such as "person" or "human" you miss the point completely by strolling into the realm of sectarian language. The moment Jesus is no longer a man He will have suffered and died in vain. He still bears the marks because, for our sakes, He must always retain His state of being a man. The objective of God is for us to return to innocency and be considered as His brothers. In this He will not be ashamed of us. 1 Corinthians 15: 20 But now is Christ risen from the dead, and become the firstfruits of them that slept. 21 For since by man came death, by man came also the resurrection of the dead. 22 For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive. 23 But every man in his own order: Christ the firstfruits; afterward they that are Christ's at his coming. ..

[@James.D.B.]

It might not be a great argument against the perpetual vitginity, but my understanding is that though the command wasn't given until Paul wrote 1 Corinthians the idea that husbands and wives shouldn't deny eachother their conjugal rights was probably still important. Though a point RZ brought up about the possibility of exceptions would be a solid counter-argument

[@Leavemealonenowplz]

I would argue that those verses actually support the perpetual virginity. “This I say by way of concession, not of command. 7 I wish that all were as I myself am. But each has a particular gift from God, one having one kind and another a different kind. 8 To the unmarried and the widows I say that it is well for them to remain as I am. 9 But if they are not practicing self-control, they should marry. For it is better to marry than to be aflame with passion.” Paul holds celibacy up as the ideal and allows marriage as a concession.

[@infallibleinterpreter]

God affirmed the immaculate conception at Lourdes and the scientifically proven healing miracles in relation to it.

[@kuafer3687]

If Mary had other children Jesus wouldn't have asked Apostle John to take care of her.

[@sird2333]

Jesus asked John to take care of her because he was the beloved apostle. James, writer of a Bible book, was the brother of Jesus.

[@kuafer3687]

@sird2333 but he wasn't called the don of Mary

[@Jbarnes1]

Saying Mary is sinless just doesn’t sit right with me. Jesus was the only sinless person on earth.

[@Notouchs]

Holy Mary Mother of God, pray for our evangelical brothers and sisters who are Nestorian heretics.

[@ethanmoon3925]

"Mary the mother of God" is ALL SEMANTICS The people who say Yes and the people who say No interpret the question COMPLETELY DIFFERENTLY. Is Mary the mother of Jesus, who is God? Yes, clearly. YOUR human mother existed before you, she is part of your ORIGIN, and she has some measure of authority over you. Applying that to Mary is ridiculous. God/Jesus exist before Mary, Mary has nothing to do with God's origin, and Mary does not in any sense have authority over God - "that's heresy!" So Mary is technically the mother of God but only after He created her and chose her. You didn't create your mother, so her relationship to God is nothing like your relationship with your mother.

[@jdotoz]

Applying that to Mary is ridiculous, which is why nobody with any authority who affirmed the title ever did.

[@stratmatt22]

But Jesus did listen to his mother. In fact it was Mary who commanded Jesus when to begin his Ministry even when he felt unready. Mary knew before and at that moment where Jesus would end up after exposing himself to the world but she knew it was God's will and set him free. Jesus did not just abandon his mother, and he respected her wishes. Also, God created me and you, but we still have mothers we are born to. That doesn't make them not our mother. Mary gave birth to God's Divine human body. She is 100% his mother in the same way ours is.

[@ethanmoon3925]

@stratmatt22 She is the mother of God and the daughter of God. She herself said that He is her Savior and has been merciful to her. Her famous response to God, her example for all of us to follow, is submission and willingness: "I am the Lord’s servant. May it be unto me as you have said." That is a beautiful thing, and that is the core of who she is. And later in His ministry, when she and His brothers came to see Him, He kept her waiting because the people who He was ministering to were also important to Him. He called those "strangers" His mother and brothers. Mary obviously has a special relationship with God. But it is still the relationship that a human has with God.

[@crusaderACR]

​@@ethanmoon3925 There's an old Christian way of putting that, in that Mary is daughter of the Father, mother of the Son, and spouse of the Holy Spirit. Jesus did listen to Mary, who was His mother according to His humanity. It would've been a sin not to do so, and Jesus didn't sin.

[@ethanmoon3925]

@crusaderACR I mostly agree with that phrasing. I'm not sure the Holy Spirit is exactly Mary's husband. Some say Luke 1:35's "the Holy Spirit will come upon you and the power of the Most High will overshadow you" is not repeated for emphasis but invoking the Spirit and the Father so that the sentence includes the whole trinity. It is the Holy Spirit in us who is the spirit of adoption, by whom we cry "Abba, Father". So the Spirit fills us and shares the relational role with us. As if when we say "Abba" it is both us speaking and Spirit speaking, because we are indwelt and one. It's my understanding that the church as the bride of Christ is the same way. We are indwelt and united by the Spirit and together with the Spirit are Christ's bride. So I don't see it as God having a human mother and sons and spouse. I see it as humans being filled up with the Holy Spirit and united inseparably to Him, so that we are pulled in and included in the relationships of the trinity. Holy Spirit-Mary is the mother of Jesus just as Holy Spirit-you are a child of God like Holy Spirit-us is the bride of Christ.

[@brucedewitt4994]

As someone in the evangelical sphere, this is one topic I never thought about, and I therefore would have previously denied that Mary was the Mother of God. While I don't think this should be used as a common title for Mary due to the confusion it causes about her nature, it is important to Trinitarian theology to be able to affirm it. RZ, your previous videos largely brought this to my attention and helped me think it through. Bravo!

[@Steve7318]

The Theotokos, Mary as the mother of God was affirmed at the Council of Ephesus i believe in 451 AD so it goes back to the 5th century so understanding the history in what was happening at that time puts it in context. The teaching predates any Protestant confession by centuries. It has more to do with the divinity of Christ than it has to do with Mary if one studies that period of church history

[@InkLore-p3h]

“If all these church leaders believed it, I see no reason to disagree with it even if I don’t see a compelling theological argument” pretty much sums up the distinction between your takes and more Baptist ones.

[@wills9392]

Also sums up the majority of most catholic and eastern orthodox believers in general

[@gabesmith9171]

There has been a lot of trash talking on Twitter- are you “going Catholic”? Doesn’t seem like it

[@fij715]

That is mostly by baptists but we all know that bapists aren’t Christians. There is a big Lutheran account that basically said that Lutherans are with Catholics on this one.

[@alfieingrouille1528]

​@@fij715bruh

[@redeemedzoomer6053]

@@fij715 Baptists are Christians

[@alfieingrouille1528]

​@@redeemedzoomer6053thank you

[@alfieingrouille1528]

Reports for misinformation ​@@fij715

[@Zoom_Ology]

God first always 🙏

[@davidfitzpatrick6535]

So my question with Mary stayed a virgin is if that's true then why is Jesus said to have brothers (plural)?

[@Ievademy_taxes]

The original New Testament texts were written in Greek. And the Greek word for brother is quite unspecific, it can refer to a close friend, an actual blood brother, are someone who has personal relations with you. So we can’t really say Jesus had brothers in terms of being blood relatives.

[@YaboyiNathan]

​@@Ievademy_taxesI mean we definitely can since the marriage was consummated as in relation to the last verse in Mathew 1

[@aliengoboom-t9k]

@@YaboyiNathan My understanding is that the greek word used in that verse doesn't translate exactly into english. The english word "until" implies a change in something after the point designated. Saying Joseph kept Mary a virgin until after Jesus was born very clearly implies that something changed. Therefore, they consumated the marriage. The Greek doesn't do that. The original word used for "until" only talks about the time before that point in time. In this case, that's Jesus's birth. Mary could have consumated the marriage. Mary could have stayed a virgin. Mary could have run off on Joseph and joined a brothel. None of these possibilities contradict the verse because it doesn't make an implication about the future. There just isn't a way to translate accurately because we don't have an equivalent word in English. And no, I don't actually think Mary was a prostitute; it's just the most extreme example I can come up with. (I'm evangelical protestant, not Catholic/Orthodox, for full disclosure. My personal belief is that Jesus does have biological brothers through Mary. I just think we're wrong about how to get there, and we put way too much trust in the wording of an uninspired translation.)

[@rockzalt]

I don't buy that Mary is a perpetual virgin because that would be breaking one of the first commandments. "Be fruitful and increase in number; fill the earth and subdue it". Which also counts for Jesus having blood brothers because parents with a half dozen coming out of the oven tend to lose one often enough. LOL

[@alexwr]

And also Matthew 1:25 directly contradicts the idea of Mary's PV.

[@stevied3400]

@@alexwrno it doesn’t. RZ mentioned this very verse in this video how it doesn’t disprove Mary’s PV.

[@jdotoz]

That wasn't a general command to the entire human race.

[@larryf4180]

Quick correction on the Assumption. The Catholic Church does not teach either in the affirmative or in the negative on whether or not Mary died. The Catechism of the Catholic Church paragraph 974 states “The Most Blessed Virgin Mary, when the course of her earthly life was completed, was taken up body and soul into the glory of heaven, where she already shares in the glory of her Son's Resurrection, anticipating the resurrection of all members of his Body.” This leaves open the possibility that her body was assumed after death or before.

[@josephdhippolito5456]

Fair question: once Mary gave birth to Jesus, who really cares if she remained a virgin or not?

[@mav.-]

The Catholic Church, who is obsessed about things of this nature. Somehow sleeping with someone you are married to is unclean even though God literally designed it for that lol

[@josephdhippolito5456]

@@mav.- as someone who is raised Catholic, I believe you’re right. Catholicism is obsessed with esoteric minutiae like this because Catholicism is not interested in fidelity to God but control, especially over the laity, whom the bishops of view has nothing more than medieval serfs.

[@stevied3400]

@@mav.- when and where did the Catholic Church state that? Sounds like you just made it up.

[@johnathanrhoades7751]

It would have been extremely odd for a Jewish woman to have had sex after GIVING BIRTH TO THE SON OF MOST HIGH GOD. It’s not that sex is defiling, but it would be like drinking orange juice out of the Eucharistic chalice after communion. Nothing wrong with orange juice, but that’s not what the chalice was set apart for. Nothing wrong with sex and child bearing but that’s not what Mary was set apart (and set herself apart) for. And this isn’t considered a forced thing. She would have chosen it herself.

[@josephdhippolito5456]

@@johnathanrhoades7751 with all due respect, how do you know? All you’re doing is guessing, just like those people who believe that Mary either did or did not have sexual relations with Joseph after giving birth to Jesus. Ultimately, it doesn’t matter what Mary did after she gave birth to Jesus. What matters is what her son did three decades after his birth.

[@RomaCatholica]

Zoomer, I must say that I find you one of the most civilized and well informed protestant. Here, in my country, many calvinists are actually nestorian hahaha

[@JoWilliams-ud4eu]

10:18 I think he means Mary having other children, not Jesus.

[@charles21137]

Yeah, doesn’t the Bible say Jesus has siblings? How would that work if Mary remained a virgin?

[@JoWilliams-ud4eu]

@charles21137 to steal man the Catholic argument, the greek word used for brother does not always mean brother. But I would watch Trent Horn's video on it if you want to know what the argument actually is.

[@jakubkosz1009]

​@@JoWilliams-ud4eu There are also many linguistic Semiticisms in the Gospels. It is also possible that Joseph could have had children from another marriage. Tradition states that Mary was always a virgin, so Carolingians, Orthodox Christians (and some Protestants) recognize this

[@JomayOfficial]

Can we get a video on how king james convert the bible in english?

[@John.Smith98765]

Make a video the state of Israel vs Biblical Israel

[@srbrekingbkop8071]

Bro I love your God so much, oh wait its my God to!!! what a JOY

[@daniellenm395]

I guess it wouldn’t let me share a video. There’s a video put out recently of a guy (keith nester) who did a sermon on mary when he was a methodist before he became catholic. It’s worth a watch.

[@sidthesquidh]

I haven't heard anyone say that they think Mary wasn't a virgin because "Joseph would be sad." I just assumed that because Jesus had a brother, Mary wasn't forever a virgin.

[@kaktustustus1244]

Some people do say that. They're like "How would Joseph feel about being in a chaste Marriage?". It's a vad argument because Joseph already believed Mary got pregnant as a virgin so he knew it was a special situation

[@sidthesquidh]

@@kaktustustus1244 exactly

[@jdotoz]

Those "brothers and sisters" (very ambiguous terms in ancient times) are never identified as Mary's children, and some of them are further identified as the children of other women.

[@JasonHoltz]

I need a discussion on this, RZ and Christian Wagner

[@erikabutterfly]

One of the biggest encouragements to be gleaned from the incarnation, is that Jesus can fully understand our perspective as humans. If he hadn't been able to sin, being born without original sin, his sinless life would have been meaningless to us as an example. Having a sinless mother would also have greatly reduced the trials and tribulations our savior would have faced during childhood. It doesn't make sense that God would take on human flesh in such an incomplete way, unless he had only been virtue signaling, which doesn't reflect his character as shown in scripture.

[@jacobpalmer7538]

Day 19 of asking Redeemed Zoomer to livestream himself listening to the 2006 album Go by the Newsboys because it's good contemporary Christian music E

[@Machturtle7491]

So how would you interpret Mark 6 other than saying that Jesus had siblings?

[@jakubkosz1009]

Brother sometimes means cousin (understood broadly) in Greek (but also in other Indo-European languages, but also in Semitic ones). There are many linguistic Semiticisms in the Gospels, so there is a high probability that this was meant). Additionally, there is a possibility that Saint Joseph had children earlier (even from another marriage, but this is a guess). Catholics and Orthodox believe that Saint Mary was always a virgin, because Tradition says so, and the Bible is silent about it

[@KildaltonBTS]

The locus classicus for Supralapsarianism vs Infralapsarianism is Romans 9:21 and whether the “lump” in view is pre or post fall.

[@fallenkingdom-zd8xh]

As a Catholic, as soon as I laid eyes on this video, I immediately clicked on it. I love you, Mom.

[@crusader2112]

Same. Catholic too, this is a great channel. God Bless 🙏🏻

[@alfieingrouille1528]

Mom?

[@N0C7URN4L]

@@alfieingrouille1528our blessed mother

[@alfieingrouille1528]

​@N0C7URN4L she isn't though?.

[@alfieingrouille1528]

​@N0C7URN4L she isn't?.

[@GrantKeeny]

Yo! A pretty good justification (not proof mind you) can be made for the immaculate conception of Mary. The short version is that, via the gospel of Christ crucified, all of humanity is given the choice to OPT-IN to grace. But, this wasn't always the case. Adam and Eve famously had the choice to OPT-OUT of grace (and subsequent to that the choice opt back in). That's cute language, but a brass tacks way of saying it is that you either surrender to your own will or you surrender to God's will. Mary, being the mother of God, was in the insular position out of all humanity to fulfil both cases. The big critique of immaculate conception is that she, without the stain of sin and then proceeding to live sinless, would be self-justified and unable to surrender to Christ. However that is not the case; She was called to bear the Messiah, a calling she could have refused. I.e. an opportunity to opt-out. At the same time though, obedience here means opting in to the full spiritual and bodily surrender to Christ. To hit the Christian symbolism side, she is given the opportunity to be the redeemed role of Eve, partaking of the fruit only when presented to her by God. And getting back to the reason side, this also dodges the issue of infinite regress of immaculately conceived mothers. I could go into more detail on this and the other dogmas, but this comment is verging on an essay as it is. Best regards, Grant

[@carlose4314]

The Assumption is also known as the Dormition in the Eastern Churches.

[@oldfarmerboy4158]

So, what about Jesus's brothers? How did they come about? I think the speculation that they might be from a different marriage is really a stretch in order to believe that. The Bible says nothing about her being an eternal virgin.

[@jakubkosz1009]

The original language of the NT is Greek. I found that "brother" can also refer to "cousin". Plus the Tradition says so

[@Postenebraslux-n4y]

And it would be a sin for Mary to abstain from sex during marriage.

[@kermit_king5169]

@@Postenebraslux-n4y Why would it be?

[@jakubkosz1009]

@@Postenebraslux-n4y I don't know about Orthodoxy, but in Catholicism there is something called a "white marriage" (Josephite marriage). It is not a sin. It is based, according to tradition, on the model of the marriage of Saints Joseph and Mary

[@samtjman]

Word for brother, half brother, and cousin are the same in Greek. Ergo, Joseph was a widower and had children from a previous marriage, or siblings of Joseph or maybe Joachim and Anna's siblings having children. All could trigger the term brother.

[@shirkam3657]

10:23 fun fact: the catholic church also affirms the chastity of Joseph.

[@Nguyenzander]

10:17 Some people said Jesus had other children???!! They could've been Joseph's children?????

[@alfieingrouille1528]

He mispoke

[@MossW268]

I watched Gavin Ortlund's video earlier today

[@VictoriousCatholic]

The dogmas about Mary make perfect sense if you factor in a theological concept called typology. Example: Eve, the ark of the covenant, Jacobs Ladder, East Gate of the Temple, the role of the kings mother in the davidic kingdom, and the burning bush are all considered types for Mary.

[@MatthewGrove-i1i]

But typolog7ly means it's just a metaphor, like how Modes was a type for Jesus but that doesn't mean he sinned like Moses, also if we're reading the arc into mary, the arc was destroyed/taken to babylon, evidently something that was pure was destroyed and defiled.

[@VictoriousCatholic]

@@MatthewGrove-i1i no it isn’t. It prefigures and/or superseded by antitypes. I’ve seen found typology is also common in Calvinism and books are still being published on the topic

[@cheryl9856]

The Assumption shouldn't be dogma per Gavin's points. But, it just seems odd that we would have lost her body if she was buried somewhere (unless God hid her).

[@Erlc_10]

We are respecting Mary with this one Protbros 🗣🗣🗣🗣🔥🔥🔥🔥

[@Thatoneguy-pu8ty]

We’ve always respected her we just don’t need to pray to her 🫡

[@david.leikam]

Anglo-Catholic here. 🙏

[@powerfulaura5166]

Ephesus was a robber synod, the Nestorian party wasn't even allowed to attend to debate (where Arians were w/ Nicæa, & most were won over), against the wishes of St. John of Antioch who was meant to convene it.

[@a_muqadashaql_i]

A common claim is that many of the Reformers affirmed the perpetual virginity of Mary. While it's true that some Reformers, such as Martin Luther and John Calvin, expressed views that seemed to support this doctrine, it's important to understand the context and the basis for their statements. The doctrine of the perpetual virginity of Mary-that she remained a virgin before, during, and after the birth of Jesus-does not have a solid scriptural foundation. In fact, Scripture seems to suggest otherwise. Matthew 1:24-25 (LSB) says, "And Joseph arose from his sleep and did as the angel of the Lord commanded him, and took her as his wife, but kept her a virgin until she gave birth to a Son; and he called His name Jesus." The word “until” (Greek: heōs) implies that after Jesus' birth, the normal marital relationship between Mary and Joseph began. Moreover, Matthew 13:55-56 mentions Jesus' "brothers" (James, Joseph, Simon, and Judas) and "sisters," which strongly suggests that Mary had other children after Jesus. The common Roman Catholic argument that these were cousins or Joseph’s children from a previous marriage does not have strong support from the text. The plain reading of the Greek word adelphoi (brothers) in the New Testament refers to biological siblings, not distant relatives. While we respect the Reformers for their stand on key doctrinal issues, we must remember that they were not infallible. Many of them came out of a context steeped in Roman Catholic tradition, including Marian doctrines. For centuries, the Roman Catholic Church had upheld Mary's perpetual virginity, and it was difficult to completely break away from these ingrained traditions in a short time. Some Reformers, such as Luther, retained certain views that lacked clear biblical support, such as this one. However, what matters most is that the doctrine of the perpetual virginity cannot be upheld by Scripture alone, the very principle the Reformers fought for-sola Scriptura. This principle is the heart of the Reformation, and any belief not supported by Scripture must be discarded. It's worth noting that even in the early church, opinions on Mary’s perpetual virginity were divided. Some early church fathers, like Tertullian and Helvidius, rejected the notion, while others, such as Jerome, defended it. This means that it was not a universally accepted doctrine even in the early centuries of Christianity. The fact that some Reformers sided with Jerome’s view is not surprising, but it doesn't necessarily validate the belief. Protestant theology, as it developed, increasingly emphasized the centrality of Christ alone (solus Christus) in matters of salvation. Mary's role as the mother of Jesus is honored, but she is not accorded special veneration or placed in a position of perpetual sinlessness or virginity. To hold to the perpetual virginity of Mary risks elevating her to a status not warranted by Scripture and could detract from the unique role of Christ as the sole mediator between God and man (1 Timothy 2:5). Though some early Reformers may have held views close to Roman Catholic Marian beliefs, the trajectory of Protestant thought quickly moved away from these ideas. Later Reformers and Protestant theologians, especially those in the Reformed and Puritan traditions, increasingly rejected the idea of Mary’s perpetual virginity because it was not biblically grounded. While some of the early Reformers might have affirmed the perpetual virginity of Mary, they were operating within a context where certain Roman Catholic traditions had not yet been fully reexamined. However, as the doctrine of sola Scriptura was more thoroughly applied, the lack of biblical support for this doctrine became clear. The plain reading of Scripture does not support the perpetual virginity of Mary, and Protestant theology rightly emphasizes Christ alone, leaving behind unbiblical traditions.

[@isaaccooper9258]

Don’t forget to be nice down here in the comments section!

[@fij715]

She is the greatest and kindest woman that ever lived. She is the mother of all Christians.

[@alfieingrouille1528]

Eh

[@michaels7325]

There is not much biblical reference to make such a confident assertion.

[@Taterstiltskin]

you knew her to say that? wow.

[@garywinthrop6828]

Amen

[@fij715]

@@michaels7325 I don’t worship the Bible so I don’t need that. God is my authority and not a man made book.

[@smallbeginning2]

People in my church do say 'she was just a woman. Not even a particularly special woman'

[@user-cz8gi2om3n]

John Calvin explicitly denied the perpetual virginity of Mary in his commentary on Luke 1:34. Tbh his argument is pretty solid.

[@lvl_zer0]

He said the thing.

[@BasiliscBaz]

6:08 God just spoke through RZ

[@JoWilliams-ud4eu]

Based

[@georgehoyt7879]

Aquinas only rejected the immaculate conception because of faulty science (he didn't know ovum was active in fertilization and thus thought original sin was passed down only by the father of children, meaning he saw no reason for Mary to be immaculately conceived). Moreover, it is important to note that Thomist Infralapsarians affirm that the world was created for Christ's Incarnation, but that this is precisely why God let sin come into the world, so that Christ could love us even more in our brokenness by dying for us ("Oh most necessary sin of Adam, oh happy fault, which has won for us so great, so glorious a Redeemer"). This is important in understanding why Catholics believe in the Immaculate Conception and Infralapsarianism.

[@ShepherdGuyIsHere]

No Nestorianism November starts in 15 days. Y'all ready?

[@Abdul_Jaami]

I see so many NEETs on TikTok going "Protestants do not affirm Mary to be the mother of God! You should now become TikTokian Orthodox and make edits of icons all day!"

[@FLPhotoCatcher]

Language means things, and unclear language leads to problems. Mary was the mother of Jesus - the human side of God. She was not the mother of God. We know she is called the mother of God because of those who venerate or worship Mary.

[@jonf4287]

Based

[@gwooseytunes5115]

@@FLPhotoCatcher then was Jesus God in the womb, or purely man? because if he was only Divine after birth His Divinity would be a created nature, and therefore not Divine. I think thats why Mary should be called Theotokos, and ofc because that is her title in Holy Tradition.

[@Thatoneguy-pu8ty]

@@Abdul_Jaami NEET?

[@SemiOmni314]

@@FLPhotoCatcher That's Nestorianism, Patrick.

[@joeface448]

It feels like the deeper you dive in to semantics, the less you understand the big picture. It feels like a tactic from satan, trying to split up the body of Christ by making them bicker over insignificant details.

[@whatdadogdoin-j1o]

You know im tired and my faith has been strangled. I have a stack of books/confessions and other books on the faith and many bibles. I still dont know what God wants. My only conclusion has been "I dont know what the truth is, but its not the church i am at now". I need help.

[@TiagoDuarte1313]

Go watch, "justification by faith alone, Tim Keller"

[@whatdadogdoin-j1o]

@@TiagoDuarte1313 Thank you, I've never heard that Pastor before but that message was certainly comforting. But... what do I do from here. Also what about all of the well constructed arguments against faith alone. It feels like I could ping pong back and forth for eternity.

[@TiagoDuarte1313]

@@whatdadogdoin-j1o We usually interpret a verse that is not so clear using a more clearer verses. For exemplo: Romans 4:2-5 NKJV [2] For if Abraham was justified by works, he has something to boast about, but not before God. [3] For what does the Scripture say? “Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness.” [4] Now to him who works, the wages are not counted as grace but as debt. [5] But to him who *does not* work but *believes* on Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is accounted for righteousness, - can it be more clear ? Yes. Romans 3:27-28 NKJV [27] Where is boasting then? It is excluded. By what law? Of works? No, but by the law of faith. [28] Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith *apart* from the *deeds* of the law. ( law of God, 10 commandments) Can you be more clear ? Yes. Ephesians 2:8-9 NKJV [8] For by grace you have been saved through faith, and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God, [9] not of works, lest anyone should boast. I could go on and on. But let me put what Luther has said: "There is a righteousness called 'civil righteousness' which is the righteousness of the law, by which men do external works. And this is good. God has ordained it, and he will reward it. But this civil righteousness has nothing to do with a man's eternal life. Over and above civil righteousness, we must have another righteousness, namely, the 'righteousness of faith' or 'Christian righteousness,' by which we are made righteous before God. We do not seek this righteousness through works of the law, but we obtain it freely by faith in Jesus Christ. It is the passive righteousness, by which we are justified by Christ’s merits alone. The law cannot justify anyone, because it demands that we do what is impossible for us to do." Wherefore, do we nothing to obtain this righteousness? No, nothing at all. For this passive righteousness, which is the righteousness of Christ and given freely unto us, is not wrought by us. We work nothing for it, nor do we give anything for it; we only receive it and suffer ourselves to be adorned therewith." Galatians 2:16 NKJV [16] knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law but by faith in Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Christ Jesus, that we might be justified by faith in Christ and not by the works of the law; for by the works of the law no flesh shall be justified.

[@echofarer_art]

Hey I'm really sorry you're struggling right now. I know it can be really difficult to see what God wants sometimes and that's hard to go through. If you don't mind me asking, what type of church are you going to right now?

[@whatdadogdoin-j1o]

@@echofarer_art I go to a pentecostal church (Assembly of God). But I don't believe in the pentecostal manifestation of tongues or their view of the sacraments.

[@lutheranrussian]

I wish Protestants did more in depth analysis on this rather than just being lazy and saying that “Mary is just the birther of Christ.”

[@alexwr]

Mary maintaining perpetual virginity to me is such a bizzare thing to believe... - I mean, for starters you have Mark 6, Matthew 13 and other passages telling us Jesus had brothers and sisters. - In the Greek, the word brother is always used. There was no use of the word cousin, even though that does exist in the Greek. - There is no reference to them being half-brothers and sisters in scripture and we don't hear about them at all during Jesus' birth story. - Not only that, but you have clear references in Matthew 1:25 that Mary and Joseph did 'know each other', but only after giving birth to Jesus. The whole belief in Mary's Perpetual Virginity is an absolute farce, and you have to seriously bend over backwards to make it fit even a little bit. You have to add soooo much to the text it's just ridiculous, and all for a doctrine that isn't particularly core... I just don't get it...

[@vinektobas3706]

even then, having sex in marriage is not a sin, nor impure, as it was conceived as the way to multiply, so mary P.V is like a pharisee rule of washing their hands to be pure, even thought it was never on the mosaic law, so is this dogma

[@erikabutterfly]

I agree. If it were important, it would have been more clearly emphasized in scripture. Even if "until" didn't have to mean "until", there are more distinct ways to phrase "Joseph didn't consummate the marriage". Since it's never put this clearly, it's clearly not important for Mary to remain a virgin, and since no indication or reason is given for her perpetual virginity in scripture, it's only reasonable to assume that it's not true.

[@jakubkosz1009]

Brother also means distant relatives in ancient Greek (not to mention Joseph's possible children, even from a potential first marriage). Additionally, the New Testament, despite being written in Greek, is full of Semiticisms (syntax, semantics, etc.). Matthew does not explicitly mention anywhere that they had sex (because it is written that the Lord told him not to approach her until she gave birth). Additionally, especially since this phrase can be understood in different ways (again, Matthew's Greek contains a lot of Semiticisms and it could be compared to writing Hebrew but with Greek words). To sum up, you are wrong, and besides, in drawing your conclusions you do not follow the principle (so popular among Protestants, that if the Bible is silent about something, it means that you do not have an opinion about it)

[@alexwr]

@@jakubkosz1009 fair enough. Could you point me to some clear resources that explains it? Granted, the word 'heōs' isn't ALWAYS used to show a change in events after the 'until' eg. Luke 1:80 in reference to John living in the wilderness. But it is also used in the sense that I mean (Matt 18:30, Matt 17:9, Matt 16:28, Matt 10:11 etc, etc, etc). In fact, the way Matthew consistently uses the word 'heōs', I can't see why I wouldn't use the seemingly plain and clear reading of the Greek, that Mary and Joseph consumated the marriage after Jesus was born. It seems like such bizzare phrasing in Matthew 1:25 if it was meant to mean that they didn't consumate. I mean, there are so many better, easier and clearer ways of telling us that their marriage was never consumated if that was the intended purpose of Matt 1:25. Or we could just read it plainly, without presuppositions or dogma. If we do that, it seems just the most bizarre thing to come to the conclusion that, despite nothing in scripture claiming otherwise, that Mary and Joseph never consumated their marriage and that Mary's womb was set apart, exclusively for Jesus.

[@ReginaCæliLætare]

Abraham and Lot were "brothers" despite being uncle and nephew

[@drjanitor3747]

As a good Protestant i personally interpret scripture myself. I also personally interpret my own medical tests and have my legal documents interpreted by my mail man.

[@andreassvensson895]

That is a weak counterargument against the Immaculate Conception-the claim that Mary's entire maternal lineage would also need to be immaculately conceived. If Mary had been conceived in the mind of God before original sin, then her entire lineage would also need to be sinless, this is not suggested by Scotus’ argument. Instead, Scotus highlights something far more profound about Mary: even in a hypothetical scenario where no other human existed, God would have created Mary out of nothing just for the purpose of bringing Jesus into the world. In reality, in our world, it was fitting for Mary to be born naturally.

[@johnathanrhoades7751]

For the Assumption of Mary, EO believe in a dormition of Mary and then an Assumption. I don’t know if the Catholics believe in a dormition prior to an assumption. Also I don’t think it’s a dogma issue. EO believe that Mary never personally sinned, but due to their difference in belief on ancestral sin (original corruption is inherited but not original guilt as such and sin isn’t an STD, so to speak) the Immaculate conception is just not a requirement in any way and risks making Mary out to be something other than a natural human person. For the perpetual virginity I kind of think about it like the Eucharistic chalice. Drinking orange juice isn’t defiling in any way, but you would never just drink orange juice from the Eucharistic chalice after communion because it was set apart and made sacred for a particular purpose. Likewise there’s nothing defiling about sex, but Mary (and God) set herself and her womb apart for a special dedicated purpose and it would be weird if she was like “ok, that’s done. Now where’s the OJ at”. Particularly in that culture. (I acknowledge that it might not sound so weird in a culture with as little sacredness as the US)

[@WC3isBetterThanReforged]

@@johnathanrhoades7751 regarding the Catholic view of the assumption of mary, the dormition is left undefined. She may have been alive or assumed after death.

[@Me-pt7ik]

What are your thoughts on the Dormition assumption vs the Catholic version of the assumption

[@jakubkosz1009]

Orthodox believe that Saint Mary died and was then taken to Heaven (mortalism). In contrast, the Catholic Church does not have a single, universal version. Some Catholics (including John Paul II) share a mortalist view. Others (immortalists) believe that Saint Mary was taken to Heaven while still alive. So, to be clear, we don't differ so mutch

[@Christopher_Irons]

So iv never really put much thought into this. I always thought it as divinity confined to a human vessel (jesus' dual nature) and mary having given birth to the human vessel and not the divine nature, as god has no creation/begging. Can anyone help me understand/correct me on this, also explain what specifically nestorianism is?

[@Swiftninjatrev]

Yoooo everybody get ready, RZ said he would feature as SAINT NICOLAS in my Nativity Scene Christmas Animation! SUBSCRIBE AND RING THE BELLS GUYS. Film is in stage 2 of production rn.

[@jdotoz]

9:28 Or, perhaps Paul and Jesus, both of whom were clear that it is better to live celibately for the sake of the Kingdom (even though marriage is perfectly fine). I'd also note that you have the Assumption slightly wrong. The Catholic dogma does not define whether Mary died, it merely says that "at the end of her earthly life" she was assumed. This is compatible with the Orthodox tradition (and, what may actually be the prevailing Catholic tradition) that Mary died, was buried, and her tomb was found empty shortly after. Re: "until," as I recall Calvin himself stated that this was not a good argument against perpetual virginity.

[@sololoquy3783]

Thomas' main beef with immaculate conception was the implication that the act of marital conception is holy. He, being a monk, didn't believe this at first. That's why he has this more nuanced believe that Mary was sinless only in the womb, not at conception. But he later kinda conceded this point to the church. If you think the act of marital sex is sacred, then you should have no problem believing in immaculate conception. In my opinion, Mary's perpetual virginity has less to do with Mary, and more to show Joseph's character. Just as God graced Mary to rear The Son, He also trusted Joseph to guard Mary. Mary's perpetual virginity, tells us that Joseph was worthy. A holy man would not touch the vessel that brought God to the world, the ark of the covenant. The Holy Family, was indeed holy.

[@skybattler2624]

Problem with this Dogma is that it undermines the verse that Jesus himself said: Matthew 12:46-50 ESV [46] While he was still speaking to the people, behold, his mother and his brothers stood outside, asking to speak to him. [47] Someone told him, “Your mother and your brothers are standing outside, asking to speak to you” [48] But he replied to the man who told him, “Who is my mother, and who are my brothers?” [49] And stretching out his hand toward his disciples, he said, “Here are my mother and my brothers! [50] For whoever does the will of my Father in heaven is my brother and sister and mother.” And this is done because Jesus' immediate family thought that He was crazy! In the Bible, there is no such thing as a Holy Family, because ALL SAINTS are that.

[@danteshollowedgrounds]

Wow, and centered all around minecraft??? 👀👁👁👁 Interesting.

[@EvanG529]

Jesus died for Mary and her other children.

[@jakubkosz1009]

Yes, for us all ❤

[@noahtylerpritchett2682]

I'm neutral indifferent to Marology. If she was sinless a argument i heard was "Jesus called her thee woman and Genesis basically says Satan will be enmity with the snake" but that could be misrepresentation. Mary's assumption sounds like a honor not a theology and God doesn't work based on honor but reasons so i assume the assumptions of Elijah and Enoch may have to do with the two witnesses and lastly perpetual virginity, I don't know if Joseph was horny or not and I don't care. So as a Protestant i have neutral indifference I only truly affirm Theotokos. Mother of God

[@Thatoneguy-pu8ty]

@@noahtylerpritchett2682 Agreed. I’m fine with perpetual virginity, the bodily assumption and the sinlessness of Mary are pretty much made up but it’s not a massive deal

[@charliehustle815]

How does one go about joining this server? I want to build and explore. Day 3

[@littlewhisky4992]

The server IP is 15.204.145.102:25565. It's version is currently 1.19.4. Enjoy, fellow brother! : )

[@charliehustle815]

@@littlewhisky4992 Greatly appreciated

[@kylie5741]

✝️

[@JustaRandomCatholic]

How to make (some) protestants a bit ticked off: hail mary full of grace :3

[@littlewhisky4992]

Brother, this is just a reminder that the purpose of this kind of video is meant to demonstrate what some believers believe, some don't. I think you should take into account how important it is that people diagnose the issues that the Catholic Church brings of the person of Mary, and how many believers feel this has been used to hurt peoples relationships with God. I understand you are a Catholic, but have you ever truly looked into the problems that praying to Mary and worshipping her brings up in accordance to His word?

[@drjanitor3747]

@@littlewhisky4992no, Christians don’t care if you heretics are offended by the truth.

[@xaviercopeland2789]

Mary is full of grace, doesn’t mean Marian dogmas are real. Doesn’t really make people mad, but just writes out that it’s something important enough to be a dogma with so little evidence.

[@dennycascade7455]

How to make catholics a bit ticked off: Show me one time where Paul even mentions Mary or shows any importance to Jesus’s mother.

[@rebeccawells1580]

I completely agree that Mary is the mother of God. But I feel like this argument stems from Mary being called such. To a Protestant (I’m a former Protestant), this phrase sounds like someone is putting Mary on a higher pedestal than God. No, Mary did not create/birth God’s divine nature, but this is what Protestants hear with that phrase. So saying “Mother of the Messiah” can work because calling God the Messiah is not denying that Mary is the mother of God. It does not mean you are separating the divinity.

[@almond6658]

zoomer catholic arc fr on skibidi ‼

[@JoWilliams-ud4eu]

On skibidi

[@alfieingrouille1528]

You people are so obnoxious

[@mycroft3322]

I think immaculate conception of Mary falls short of the Bible6 explanation of it, of how sin descends through the seed of man in generations, therefore anyone with a father is born with sin.