What made me leave catholicism is when my priest during his homily at Christmas told us that Jesus wasn't actually born but instead beamed out of mary and appeared in her arms. The loops these people go through!
@@tyd3407 Both. Mary needed a Savior and was also sinless. One isn't saved merely by being sinless. "My soul magnifies the Lord, and my spirit rejoices in God my Savior,"
Thanks for calling all this out - again. Most of us wouldn’t know where to begin. Having left the RC church behind me I know what it ls like to have folk impress upon you how informed they are, so you don’t need to think for yourself. How could you? Tradition and previous bastions of “the church” have done all the heavy lifting. You are just one person - how can you inform yourself? Being a Christian is difficult with so many “experts” telling you someone else is wrong or that your understanding of x y and z is misinformed. Thank you for helping us steer an even keel. The waters are definitely choppy these days!
Be careful with him tho! I say this in love, James white is often arrogant in his treatment of church history and uses it to push his own end. I’d recommend you first read the Church fathers yourself before having their insights explained away. Or at least do yourself the favor to ALSO hear an Orthodox teach the histroy of the church so you can see both sides honestly. I personally have read over 50 full works from the Fathers and see that they are in stark opposition to James White’s theology. Much love and prayer!
@@alexanderderus2087 That church father are not anything like the Catholic church today. I read church fathers before ever knowing about Dr james white.
God is ORDERLY and not confusion/chaos... God would not allow Blessed Mary and St. Joseph to commit the Vow of Celibacy freely while they are under OATH to God by the Sacrament of Matrimony or Marriage Vow... it would be UNHOLY to do the ACT of Celibacy while under their Marriage Vow... Take Note: ... before Angel Gabriel visited her to do the task offered to her voluntarily, she was already BETHROTAL (Jewish Pre-nuptial marriage) to St. Joseph... In his dream, the Angel told St. Joseph not to be afraid to TAKE (marry) Mary to be her lawful wife... and he ABIDED and did what he was told... Both of them have marriage duties to consummate their marriage vows and have children of their own... Only when Blessed Mary became the WIDOW of St. Joseph could she FREELY accept the Vow of Celibacy for she was already a FREE woman... and I believe, that was the right TIME that God had RESTORED her VIRGINITY before she died... to remind us ALL that a "VIRGIN MAIDEN" (Almah Betulah) gave birth to the Son of God/Christ Jesus in Bethlehem and not just a "Young Maiden/ Woman (Ha Almah) as prophesied by Prophet Isaiah... Facts and Truth, Biblically and logically speaking... Praise be to God in Christ ... Amen and Amen.
I went through the history of the marion cult, and especially since muslims want to use it to prove the christian beliefs are influence of roman culture. ruclips.net/video/XsSLH60Zk7s/видео.html
I’m not Catholic! But be careful how you speak! The pagans would have said the same thing of the virgin birth. I’ve found Protestants hypocritical often because they accept incredible and fantastical things from the holy scriptures yet the MOMENT something miraculous is recorded anywhere else it is suddenly foolishness to them. This God we serve is not confined to the pages of scripture but is alive and active
Mary was Prophesied to be a Virgin in the OT to fulfill God’s plan. The OT Prophecy of Mary’s Virginity was the foreshadowing of her Perpetual Innocence and Purity for God’s good purpose. Mary was to be made pure like the OT Ark and sinless like Eve. Through “Biblical Typology” we know these 2 things. 1) Mary is The New Ark of the Covenant. 2) Mary is the New Eve. Mary was created pure like the OT Ark and sinless like Eve. -The Ark was a foreshadowing of Mary. -Eve was a prefigure of Mary. Biblical Typology clearly demonstrates Mary is the New Ark and the New Eve. WHY? Because God did NOT want His Son to be bound within Mary's Womb; where the stain of sin had presence, or where Satan had Dominion. -It was for God's good purpose alone that Mary was preserved from sin to bring forth the Messiah.
@@annapennrose1158all of that is just straight up false. Mariology first appeared in gnostic sources, especially the perpetual virginity, since the gnostics denied the humanity of Christ and this is a great way of arguing for that. It’s heresy.
Wow! Thanks for that little bit of history, Mr. White. All those in the comments below, who are trying to defend the perpetual virginity of Mary - please read the early part of Luke's gospel (chapter 2) which so simply and plainly shows us that our Lord Jesus was BORN OF MARY. Also, that He was her FIRSTBORN. The term "born of" implies that Mary "bore Jesus." If this had been some sort of supernatural occurrence where Mary's body would not have been changed by the birthing process - SURELY, Luke -- the doctor who wrote this gospel -- would have indicated that, since he explains in Luke 1:3, that he decided, after investigating accurately to write it down in an orderly sequence. Why, oh why, can't those of us who profess to be believers in the bible, simply ... "believe the bible"? Life is too short and eternity too long for us to blindly go by myths and ex-scriptural heresies on which to lay our eternal souls. I'm supposing that neither James White's nor my explanation here would change any Roman Catholic's mind who is bent on believing everything that the Vatican posits, but, for what it's worth ... I'm repeating below the account of Jesus' birth in Luke's gospel, chapter 2 - (read it and insert your own interpretations if you wish): 1 In those days a decree went out from Caesar Augustus that the whole world should be enrolled. 2 This was the first enrollment, when Quirinius was governor of Syria. 3 So all went to be enrolled, each to his own town. 4 And Joseph too went up from Galilee from the town of Nazareth to Judea, to the city of David that is called Bethlehem, because he was of the house and family of David, 5 to be enrolled with Mary, his betrothed, WHO WAS WITH CHILD. 6 While they were there, THE TIME CAME FOR HER TO HAVE HER CHILD 7 and SHE GAVE BIRTH TO HER FIRTSTBORN SON. She wrapped him in swaddling clothes and laid him in a manger, because there was no room for them in the inn.
That was a really interesting video. The Quran has borrowed these stories and placed them into that book (which is co-eternal with Allah, by the way). The story of the infant Jesus beaming out of Mary's womb is something they teach and now we know where they got the story. Islam is Gnosticism too, as is Jehovah's Witnessism. Many modern bible scholars are converting to Gnosticism too. The newer translations are decidedly Gnostic. Seems like everybody wants to get into the act of dethroning the King these days.
The Origination of the Continual Virginity of Mary 1. Anglican Archbishop of Canterbury Thomas Cranmer (1489 - 1556) was the theological architect of the Protestant Church of England and author of its Book of Common Prayer that contains the 39 Articles of Religion. Cranmer accepted the consensus of the first millenium church fathers that this teaching was rooted in the Bible. The following article 'In Defense of the Perpetual Virginity of Mary' by John Fisher 2.0 from Feb. 28, 2000, quotes Thomas Cranmer's (with a screen shot taken from Cranmer's own writings) defense of the doctrine based upon the prophetic interpretation of Ezekiel 44:2: Argument "They say, moreover, that the perpetual virginity of our Lady is to be believed of necessity, as Cyprian, Chrysostom, Jerome, Ambrose, Austen, and all other speaking thereof say. But this is not found in Scripture: Ergo, there is something to be believed, that is not written in Scripture." Answer "The minor, that is to say, THAT THIS IS NOT WRITTEN IN SCRIPTURE, IS FALSE. First, none of the old authors that rehearse traditions of the Apostles, make mention of the perpetual virginity of Mary to be one of them; but they rehearse only divers ceremonies, or bodily gestures, and such rites used in baptism, prayers, holydays and fastings: which I have manifestly declared, are not necessary to salvation, but the most part of them are clean taken away, and the contrary commanded and used by the universal church. Moreover, all of the said authors prove her perpetual virginity by this text of Scripture, Ezech xliv. 'This door shall still be shut, and not opened for any man to go through it; but only for the God of Israel: yea, he shall go throught it, or else it be shut still.' For if these, and other such Fathers, to judged that her perpetual virginity to have been written in the Scriptures, they would never have judged it to be a thing to be believed under pain of damnation. Saint Jerome also called Helvidium a rash and ungodly man, because he taught that our Lady had other children by Joseph, after Christ's." [St John Fisher Medium Com /in-defense-of-the-perpetual-virginity-of-mary-b1925444c6ef] 2. Ezekiel 44:2 (KJV): Then said the LORD unto me; "This gate shall be shut, it shall not be opened, and no man shall enter in by it; because the LORD, the God of Israel, hath entered in by it, therefore it shall be shut." 3. And if the King James Bible was good enough for the prophet Ezekiel ...
Between the "Protevangelium of James" and the "Infancy Gospel of Thomas" have come many lies...some of which have found their way into even more heretical works, like the Quran.
So why exactly is “Hyman“ also used as a male name in the Jewish culture? I know the spelling is slightly different than the female body part but it sounds the same.
Depends what you mean by “Catholic Church”. If you are referring to it as a denomination, it started 380AD. If you are referring to universal believers, some say it started on Pentecost.
@@urawesome4670 It was created in 33 AD....now the Papist church began in 1054 AD, because the Papists left the One Holy Apostolic Catholic Church which is the Orthodox Church. Then non-apostolic Heretical movements were started by Martin Luther and Jan Calvin
@@marlam8625 Except he forgot to include the Part where Christ said you will now have primacy over the other Apostles and over all of the Churches and will have a line successors to sit in your seat. 😐
@@1776iscoolhe’s saying it’s something you hav to believe de fide in his church so if you don’t believe it you’re a doubting Thomas who needs Jesus to come affirm it himself
Mary was Prophesied to be a Virgin in the OT to fulfill God’s plan. The OT Prophecy of Mary’s Virginity was the foreshadowing of her Perpetual Innocence and Purity for God’s good purpose. Mary was to be made pure like the OT Ark and sinless like Eve. Through “Biblical Typology” we know these 2 things. 1) Mary is The New Ark of the Covenant. 2) Mary is the New Eve. Mary was created pure like the OT Ark and sinless like Eve. -The Ark was a foreshadowing of Mary. -Eve was a prefigure of Mary. Biblical Typology clearly demonstrates Mary is the New Ark and the New Eve. WHY? Because God did NOT want His Son to be bound within Mary's Womb; where the stain of sin had presence, or where Satan had Dominion. -It was for God's good purpose alone that Mary was preserved from sin to bring forth the Messiah.
Mother of God and Virgin, rejoice! Hail Mary, full of Grace, the LORD is with Thee. Blessed art Thou amongst women, and blessed is the fruit of Thy womb, for Thou hast given birth to the SAVIOUR of our souls...
I encourage you to start studying the bible through Historical Contextual hermeneutics and Exegesis through context. Show me the verse where the scriptures say Mary is the mother of God. You can't it is made up from the Catholic church. In the New testament Mary is only ever called the mother of the Lord. Not God. Mary is the mother of Yashua in his flesh not in his divinity.
Id love to see you do a video on John Kostik and his research and videos. Id like to see James White look into the matter! Hopefully you see this James! Check out his God Math 137 videos!
@@Vae07 Really? Clearly you didn't read the channel description: "The Dividing Line Highlights is a fan channel which is not associated with aomin{dot}org. This channel's owner is not James White, Rich Pierce nor any member of the Alpha and Omega Ministries. And while everyone is free to comment in the comment section of all/most published videos, I cannot reply with respect to A&OM's input/sincerity on your commentary, as I am not James White"
Why listen to FALLIBLE PROTESTANT PASTORS like James White, when we have the infallible Holy Scriptures? Mary herself questioned the Archangel Gabriel on how a future Conception would take place, prior to the Archangel Gabriel revealing to Mary that this future Conception would be supernatural! In Matthew 1, it states Joseph was one of 12 BROTHERS! Yet, these BROTHERS were born of 4 different mothers! Peace always in Jesus Christ our Great and Kind God and Savior, He whose Flesh is true food and Blood true drink
@@jfschmidt84nothing. Although what they’re trying to say has been thoroughly refuted. They’re trying to stretch the word brother in Greek and ignore the fact that the distinction between the apostles and brothers of Christ are made. Also that celibacy during marriage is a divorce able offense. God wouldn’t command that. They do all kinds of weird forced interpretations to get to the final result. As well as using non canonical sources.
@@KristiLEvans1 No Kristi, that's a complete lie. The fully adult baby Jesus comes from a gnostic gospel. Jesus was born, but was born with a fully matured intellect. Nowhere at all in the Catholic Church is Jesus ever portrayed this way. Ever. But like Mr.White, William is a liar. And hates God's people. So he has every reason to completely fabricate mythology against God's paople. Nowhere in
@@thepalegalileanthe Marian dogmas come from gnostic sources. When you line them up together it pretty much just makes another Christ. How Catholics actually believe this is beyond me.
“…useful resource…?” 🤔 Nope, don‘t think so. Pastor, as you were reading some / most of those citations you had in your presentation, it sounded to me very much like what little of the Koran I have read and / or listened to. 🙄 To me, that just sounded “nutty.”
ascension of Isaiah is definitely not gnostic though that last bit might be there to promote perpetual virginity. however that's only if the author of it assumes that Jesus' brothers are cousins or are 'older from a prior marriage.' Going thru it it appears to basically be a primitive but orthodox book. the OT pseudepigrapha isnt as off the way as NT pseudepigrapha. It's also possible that last bit got tacked on later.
@@barrykroukamp4566 Only in poetic/metaphorical description. Not literal. Please don’t twist the word. That would give you grounds to call God “mother” if that were the case.
Marian Dogmas Mary is the New Eve (Gen 3:15, Luke 1:28 -1:38, Jn 2:4, Jn 19:26, Gal 4:4, Rev 12:1, Rev 12:17) Immaculate Conception: As Eve was created sinless, the New Eve was born unstained by original sin. How can the New Eve be inferior to the old? ASSUMPTION OF MARY: If Adam and Eve had obeyed God, they would have entered heaven body and soul. Since the new creation is the fulfillment of the failure of the old, Jesus, the New Adam, and Mary, the New Eve, obeyed God perfectly. Because of their perfect obedience, Jesus and Mary entered heaven body and soul. CO-REDEMPTRIX: Both Adam and Eve sinned but it was Adam's sin that caused the downfall. Nevetheless, Eve was Co-Transgressor as she played a vital part in man's downfall. In a similar manner, although Jesus' obedience redeemed man, Mary was Co-Redemptrix as she played a vital role in man's redemption. In Luke Ch 1, God draws a parallel between Eve and Mary. Eve listens to a fallen angel, sins, and tempts Adam who brings the fall of man. Mary listens to an Angel, accepts God's plan, gives birth to Jesus who is the redeemer of man. MEDIATRIX OF ALL GRACES: Mary is Mediatrix of All Graces because Mary gives birth to Jesus who reconciles man to God so we can receive God's grace. Also through Mary's intercessory prayers, we receive God's grace as displayed at the wedding at Cana when Mary asked Jesus for help and he truned water into wine. It is not Mary's grace, but God's grace that we receive through Mary's intercession. Mary is the New Ark of the Covenant (Ex 40:34-35, Lk 1:35), (2 Sam 6:1-11, Lk 1:39), (2 Sam 6:14, Lk 1:43), (2 Sam 6:15, Lk 1:42), (2 Sam 6:9, Lk 1:43), ( 2 Sam 6:11, Lk 1:56), (2 Sam 6:11, Lk 1:39-45), (Ex 16:33-34, Ex 25:16, Num 17:10, Heb 9:4), (Rev 11:19, Rev 12:1) Prefigured in Jephthah's daughter (Luke 1:34,38 Judges 11:35-39) EVER VIRGIN: No man could touch the Ark (2 Sam 6:7). Similarly no man could touch Mary the New Ark of the covenant. Mary's viriginy upholds the divinity of Jesus. The Ark's main purpose was to bring the presence of God to his people. Similarly, the New Ark's main purpose was to bring the prescence of Jesus (God/Man) to the world. Sacred vessles set aside for God, cannot be used for normal use. Like a goblet used in worship cannot be used to drink wine at dinner. Simiarly Mary's womb set aside to bring God's prescence into the world cannot be used for normal use. Luke 1:34,38 was alluding to Jephthah's daughter in Judges 11 who accepted the will of her father and was ever virgin. Likewise because Mary accepted God the Father's will, she became ever virgin. Her womb dedicated to God, could not be used for normal activity.
Jesus is literally compared to Adam (as well as many “perfect versions of Old Testament such as Jonah) in scripture, whereas the Mary comparisons have to assume Mary’s importance and project it onto things in order to get the doctrine.
@@secondratefilms635 Mary as New Eve is Biblical. Jesus addressed his mother as “woman”. Jesus alluding to Gen 3:15 seed of woman will crush Satan Rev 12:17 the woman who gave birth to Jesus is also yhe spiritual mother of all who believe in Jesus. Eve mother of all man. Mary Mother of all believers.
PERPETUAL (Forever) VIRGIN Dogma of the R.C.C. is Non-Biblical... Blessed Mary was a VIRGIN before she gave birth through the CONCEPTION of the Holy Spirit, which Father God (YHWH) had "PREPARED BODY" for HIS Son (ref. Hebrews 10:5) was the BIBLICAL TRUTH ... but not AFTER the birth of her FIRSTBORN SON, in human form, named Christ Jesus... Blessed Mary's IMMACULATE CONCEPTION, ASSUMPTION/ASCENSION, PERPETUAL VIRGIN, THE MOTHER OF GOD, ROSARY are just some of the R.C.C. DOGMAS that are nowhere to be found and supported by the Holy Scripture both O.T. and N.T. Scriptures... Facts and Truth of the Matters... Glory, Praise, and Thanks be to God in Christ Jesus... Amen and Amen...
The earliest I found was a comment from Clement of Alexandria saying "But, as appears, many even down to our time regard Mary, on account of the birth of her child, as having been in the perpetual state, although she was not. For some say that, she after she brought forth, she was found, when examined to be a virgin" this quote is ironically in a chapter titled "scripture the criterion by which truth and heresy are distinguished" of his book "The Stomata, or Miscellanies" you can find the full writing on Bible Hub
As a Catholic it’s always fascinating to see White’s interpretative strategy to get around the beliefs of the early church. Th gnostic angle is ingenious as much as it is an abuse of history.
Do you know who the earliest father who mentions it as being a dogmatic belief of the church? What I found was Clement of Alexandria but his quote says "some say" and then he mentions that many consider her to have been in a perpetual state although she was not.
Tell me. What's the earliest source for the perpetual virginity of Mary? Because I can tell you this, it isn't the apostles or any Christians the first few centuries.
@@Locomedic1 "Orthodox" is often ignored as far as these things go. My dad converted from a conservative United Methodist to "Antiochan Orthodox" - and I have to be careful how to broach the issue of bringing him back to the truth, because, well, *he's my dad* and there's only so much you can do without falling afoul of #5, and destroying my own eternity to save his.
If you search about a Sanskrit text called the Mahabharata, written somewhere between 300 BC and 1000 BC, and a male character in it called "Karna" and you will find out how a woman can give birth and remain a virgin. Either the Biblical story of Mary was derived from this or God is very imitative of Sanskrit writers, which would not be a particularly god look. For those who don't want to invest the time, I'll give a synopsis. A woman named Kunti used a mantra to summon the god of the sun, called Surya. He made love with her and produced a son, and then he restored her virginity. Being unmarried, she put the baby in a basket coated with wax and put it in the river Ganges. It was found by a charioteer and his wife who adopted the baby. Cool story huh?
The subject of this video was the earliest texts which speak explicitly of the perpetual virginity of Mary. Which part of these texts do you think he butchered?
The root of the problem is that Calvinists believe that all of God's creation is, at its heart, evil and so any honor or hyperdulia (as is the case with our Lord's mother) to a creature is repugnant. This is why Calvinists are essentially modern-day Gnostics.
You seem to not understand what Calvinism is. We don’t believe all of Gods creation to be evil. I assume you’re referring to total depravity which is exclusive to the human nature.
What made me leave catholicism is when my priest during his homily at Christmas told us that Jesus wasn't actually born but instead beamed out of mary and appeared in her arms. The loops these people go through!
Stuff like this is why when I became a Christian I didn’t choose Catholicism.
Yeah because there was nothing miraculous about the birth of Christ. Like Mary being a virgin.
@@markrome9702 Did Mary need to be saved? Or was she sinless?
@@markrome9702 We don’t deny Mary being a virgin. She was just not perpetually a virgin.
@@tyd3407 Both. Mary needed a Savior and was also sinless. One isn't saved merely by being sinless. "My soul magnifies the Lord,
and my spirit rejoices in God my Savior,"
Thanks for calling all this out - again.
Most of us wouldn’t know where to begin. Having left the RC church behind me I know what it ls like to have folk impress upon you how informed they are, so you don’t need to think for yourself. How could you? Tradition and previous bastions of “the church” have done all the heavy lifting. You are just one person - how can you inform yourself?
Being a Christian is difficult with so many “experts” telling you someone else is wrong or that your understanding of x y and z is misinformed.
Thank you for helping us steer an even keel. The waters are definitely choppy these days!
I think this is the essence of what Paul was telling the Thessalonians to do:
1 Thess 5:21 - Prove all things; hold fast that which is good.
Does anyone know if one can take Church history classes with Dr James White online? What a huge blessing would be
all access Apología
@@_lux__ :) Yes
2000 years of Christ Power are great church history Books he recommends by Nick Nedham. There are 4 volumes. Awesome scholarly work
Be careful with him tho! I say this in love, James white is often arrogant in his treatment of church history and uses it to push his own end. I’d recommend you first read the Church fathers yourself before having their insights explained away. Or at least do yourself the favor to ALSO hear an Orthodox teach the histroy of the church so you can see both sides honestly. I personally have read over 50 full works from the Fathers and see that they are in stark opposition to James White’s theology. Much love and prayer!
@@alexanderderus2087 That church father are not anything like the Catholic church today. I read church fathers before ever knowing about Dr james white.
God is ORDERLY and not confusion/chaos... God would not allow Blessed Mary and St. Joseph to commit the Vow of Celibacy freely while they are under OATH to God by the Sacrament of Matrimony or Marriage Vow... it would be UNHOLY to do the ACT of Celibacy while under their Marriage Vow...
Take Note: ... before Angel Gabriel visited her to do the task offered to her voluntarily, she was already BETHROTAL (Jewish Pre-nuptial marriage) to St. Joseph... In his dream, the Angel told St. Joseph not to be afraid to TAKE (marry) Mary to be her lawful wife... and he ABIDED and did what he was told...
Both of them have marriage duties to consummate their marriage vows and have children of their own... Only when Blessed Mary became the WIDOW of St. Joseph could she FREELY accept the Vow of Celibacy for she was already a FREE woman... and I believe, that was the right TIME that God had RESTORED her VIRGINITY before she died... to remind us ALL that a "VIRGIN MAIDEN" (Almah Betulah) gave birth to the Son of God/Christ Jesus in Bethlehem and not just a "Young Maiden/ Woman (Ha Almah) as prophesied by Prophet Isaiah...
Facts and Truth, Biblically and logically speaking... Praise be to God in Christ ... Amen and Amen.
The odes of Solomon... hmm, learn something new everyday. Thank you.
I went through the history of the marion cult, and especially since muslims want to use it to prove the christian beliefs are influence of roman culture.
ruclips.net/video/XsSLH60Zk7s/видео.html
Of all the things Rome teaches this one might make the least sense lol
I’m not Catholic! But be careful how you speak! The pagans would have said the same thing of the virgin birth. I’ve found Protestants hypocritical often because they accept incredible and fantastical things from the holy scriptures yet the MOMENT something miraculous is recorded anywhere else it is suddenly foolishness to them. This God we serve is not confined to the pages of scripture but is alive and active
@@alexanderderus2087 This doctrine is used to deify Mary.
It's right to reject it.
Mary was Prophesied to be a Virgin in the OT to fulfill God’s plan.
The OT Prophecy of Mary’s Virginity was the foreshadowing of her Perpetual Innocence and Purity for God’s good purpose.
Mary was to be made pure like the OT Ark and sinless like Eve.
Through “Biblical Typology” we know these 2 things.
1) Mary is The New Ark of the Covenant.
2) Mary is the New Eve.
Mary was created pure like the OT Ark and sinless like Eve.
-The Ark was a foreshadowing of Mary.
-Eve was a prefigure of Mary.
Biblical Typology clearly demonstrates Mary is the New Ark and the New Eve.
WHY?
Because God did NOT want His Son to be bound within Mary's Womb; where the stain of sin had presence, or where Satan had Dominion.
-It was for God's good purpose alone that Mary was preserved from sin to bring forth the Messiah.
@@annapennrose1158all of that is just straight up false. Mariology first appeared in gnostic sources, especially the perpetual virginity, since the gnostics denied the humanity of Christ and this is a great way of arguing for that. It’s heresy.
Typology can gesture, but it cant even claim, much less show, and certainly not prove.
Wow! Thanks for that little bit of history, Mr. White. All those in the comments below, who are trying to defend the perpetual virginity of Mary - please read the early part of Luke's gospel (chapter 2) which so simply and plainly shows us that our Lord Jesus was BORN OF MARY. Also, that He was her FIRSTBORN. The term "born of" implies that Mary "bore Jesus." If this had been some sort of supernatural occurrence where Mary's body would not have been changed by the birthing process - SURELY, Luke -- the doctor who wrote this gospel -- would have indicated that, since he explains in Luke 1:3, that he decided, after investigating accurately to write it down in an orderly sequence. Why, oh why, can't those of us who profess to be believers in the bible, simply ... "believe the bible"? Life is too short and eternity too long for us to blindly go by myths and ex-scriptural heresies on which to lay our eternal souls.
I'm supposing that neither James White's nor my explanation here would change any Roman Catholic's mind who is bent on believing everything that the Vatican posits, but, for what it's worth ... I'm repeating below the account of Jesus' birth in Luke's gospel, chapter 2 - (read it and insert your own interpretations if you wish):
1 In those days a decree went out from Caesar Augustus that the whole world should be enrolled.
2 This was the first enrollment, when Quirinius was governor of Syria.
3 So all went to be enrolled, each to his own town.
4 And Joseph too went up from Galilee from the town of Nazareth to Judea, to the city of David that is called Bethlehem, because he was of the house and family of David,
5 to be enrolled with Mary, his betrothed, WHO WAS WITH CHILD.
6 While they were there, THE TIME CAME FOR HER TO HAVE HER CHILD
7 and SHE GAVE BIRTH TO HER FIRTSTBORN SON. She wrapped him in swaddling clothes and laid him in a manger, because there was no room for them in the inn.
Amen🙏🏽
That was a really interesting video. The Quran has borrowed these stories and placed them into that book (which is co-eternal with Allah, by the way). The story of the infant Jesus beaming out of Mary's womb is something they teach and now we know where they got the story.
Islam is Gnosticism too, as is Jehovah's Witnessism. Many modern bible scholars are converting to Gnosticism too. The newer translations are decidedly Gnostic. Seems like everybody wants to get into the act of dethroning the King these days.
Eeeewww! I find the Odes of Solomon to be 'odious' & on par with the Salome's disturbing 'internal investigation' account. 😱😱😱
Babylon is the mother of all idolatry.
I just cannot believe they have so much LIES about this and they act like it's no big deal
The Origination of the Continual Virginity of Mary
1. Anglican Archbishop of Canterbury Thomas Cranmer (1489 - 1556) was the theological architect of the Protestant Church of England and author of its Book of Common Prayer that contains the 39 Articles of Religion. Cranmer accepted the consensus of the first millenium church fathers that this teaching was rooted in the Bible. The following article 'In Defense of the Perpetual Virginity of Mary' by John Fisher 2.0 from Feb. 28, 2000, quotes Thomas Cranmer's (with a screen shot taken from Cranmer's own writings) defense of the doctrine based upon the prophetic interpretation of Ezekiel 44:2:
Argument
"They say, moreover, that the perpetual virginity of our Lady is to be believed of necessity, as Cyprian, Chrysostom, Jerome, Ambrose, Austen, and all other speaking thereof say. But this is not found in Scripture: Ergo, there is something to be believed, that is not written in Scripture."
Answer
"The minor, that is to say, THAT THIS IS NOT WRITTEN IN SCRIPTURE, IS FALSE. First, none of the old authors that rehearse traditions of the Apostles, make mention of the perpetual virginity of Mary to be one of them; but they rehearse only divers ceremonies, or bodily gestures, and such rites used in baptism, prayers, holydays and fastings: which I have manifestly declared, are not necessary to salvation, but the most part of them are clean taken away, and the contrary commanded and used by the universal church. Moreover, all of the said authors prove her perpetual virginity by this text of Scripture, Ezech xliv. 'This door shall still be shut, and not opened for any man to go through it; but only for the God of Israel: yea, he shall go throught it, or else it be shut still.' For if these, and other such Fathers, to judged that her perpetual virginity to have been written in the Scriptures, they would never have judged it to be a thing to be believed under pain of damnation. Saint Jerome also called Helvidium a rash and ungodly man, because he taught that our Lady had other children by Joseph, after Christ's."
[St John Fisher Medium Com /in-defense-of-the-perpetual-virginity-of-mary-b1925444c6ef]
2. Ezekiel 44:2 (KJV): Then said the LORD unto me; "This gate shall be shut, it shall not be opened, and no man shall enter in by it; because the LORD, the God of Israel, hath entered in by it, therefore it shall be shut."
3. And if the King James Bible was good enough for the prophet Ezekiel ...
Between the "Protevangelium of James" and the "Infancy Gospel of Thomas" have come many lies...some of which have found their way into even more heretical works, like the Quran.
Can you believe in the perpetual virginity and not the immaculate conception and have a sound Christology ?
Ode #19 - Odes of Solomon - makes me ABSOLUTELY cringe.
So why exactly is “Hyman“ also used as a male name in the Jewish culture? I know the spelling is slightly different than the female body part but it sounds the same.
🤦
What year did the Catholic Church begin?
Depends what you mean by “Catholic Church”. If you are referring to it as a denomination, it started 380AD. If you are referring to universal believers, some say it started on Pentecost.
@@urawesome4670 okay good to know thanks 😊
@@urawesome4670 It was created in 33 AD....now the Papist church began in 1054 AD, because the Papists left the One Holy Apostolic Catholic Church which is the Orthodox Church. Then non-apostolic Heretical movements were started by Martin Luther and Jan Calvin
When Christ Jesus in the course of his life and mission founded His Church on earth and built it upon the rock of Peter and his confession.
@@marlam8625 Except he forgot to include the Part where Christ said you will now have primacy over the other Apostles and over all of the Churches and will have a line successors to sit in your seat. 😐
Well this is so funny. Like the doubting Thomas who put his finger in the wound...
Sorry, what?
@@1776iscoolhe’s saying it’s something you hav to believe de fide in his church so if you don’t believe it you’re a doubting Thomas who needs Jesus to come affirm it himself
Mary was Prophesied to be a Virgin in the OT to fulfill God’s plan.
The OT Prophecy of Mary’s Virginity was the foreshadowing of her Perpetual Innocence and Purity for God’s good purpose.
Mary was to be made pure like the OT Ark and sinless like Eve.
Through “Biblical Typology” we know these 2 things.
1) Mary is The New Ark of the Covenant.
2) Mary is the New Eve.
Mary was created pure like the OT Ark and sinless like Eve.
-The Ark was a foreshadowing of Mary.
-Eve was a prefigure of Mary.
Biblical Typology clearly demonstrates Mary is the New Ark and the New Eve.
WHY?
Because God did NOT want His Son to be bound within Mary's Womb; where the stain of sin had presence, or where Satan had Dominion.
-It was for God's good purpose alone that Mary was preserved from sin to bring forth the Messiah.
Mother of God and Virgin, rejoice!
Hail Mary, full of Grace, the LORD is with Thee.
Blessed art Thou amongst women, and blessed is the fruit of Thy womb, for Thou hast given birth to the SAVIOUR of our souls...
I encourage you to start studying the bible through Historical Contextual hermeneutics and Exegesis through context. Show me the verse where the scriptures say Mary is the mother of God. You can't it is made up from the Catholic church. In the New testament Mary is only ever called the mother of the Lord. Not God. Mary is the mother of Yashua in his flesh not in his divinity.
Id love to see you do a video on John Kostik and his research and videos. Id like to see James White look into the matter! Hopefully you see this James! Check out his God Math 137 videos!
This isn't his channel, this is a fan channel, you're better off tweeting him on twitter
@@louiscorbett3278 it is his channel
@@Vae07 Really? Clearly you didn't read the channel description:
"The Dividing Line Highlights is a fan channel which is not associated with aomin{dot}org. This channel's owner is not James White, Rich Pierce nor any member of the Alpha and Omega Ministries.
And while everyone is free to comment in the comment section of all/most published videos, I cannot reply with respect to A&OM's input/sincerity on your commentary, as I am not James White"
@@louiscorbett3278 yep I did read the description and that’s not what it says
@@Vae07 I literally just copy-pasted the quote to you.
Why listen to FALLIBLE PROTESTANT PASTORS like James White, when we have the infallible Holy Scriptures?
Mary herself questioned the Archangel Gabriel on how a future Conception would take place, prior to the Archangel Gabriel revealing to Mary that this future Conception would be supernatural!
In Matthew 1, it states Joseph was one of 12 BROTHERS! Yet, these BROTHERS were born of 4 different mothers! Peace always in Jesus Christ our Great and Kind God and Savior, He whose Flesh is true food and Blood true drink
Amen
What does that have to do with the issue at hand?
@@jfschmidt84nothing. Although what they’re trying to say has been thoroughly refuted. They’re trying to stretch the word brother in Greek and ignore the fact that the distinction between the apostles and brothers of Christ are made. Also that celibacy during marriage is a divorce able offense. God wouldn’t command that. They do all kinds of weird forced interpretations to get to the final result. As well as using non canonical sources.
@@brianrich7828another Catholic stretching and grasping at straws to back up the gnostic Marian dogmas. It’s heresy.
Catholics once taught that Jesus was born fully adult, but baby sized.
Are you serious???
@@KristiLEvans1
No Kristi, that's a complete lie. The fully adult baby Jesus comes from a gnostic gospel. Jesus was born, but was born with a fully matured intellect.
Nowhere at all in the Catholic Church is Jesus ever portrayed this way. Ever.
But like Mr.White, William is a liar. And hates God's people. So he has every reason to completely fabricate mythology against God's paople.
Nowhere in
quit the psychotropics
Umm, no. That is a lie.
@@thepalegalileanthe Marian dogmas come from gnostic sources. When you line them up together it pretty much just makes another Christ. How Catholics actually believe this is beyond me.
“…useful resource…?” 🤔 Nope, don‘t think so. Pastor, as you were reading some / most of those citations you had in your presentation, it sounded to me very much like what little of the Koran I have read and / or listened to. 🙄 To me, that just sounded “nutty.”
ascension of Isaiah is definitely not gnostic though that last bit might be there to promote perpetual virginity. however that's only if the author of it assumes that Jesus' brothers are cousins or are 'older from a prior marriage.' Going thru it it appears to basically be a primitive but orthodox book. the OT pseudepigrapha isnt as off the way as NT pseudepigrapha. It's also possible that last bit got tacked on later.
I don't think you are going to find any serious scholar both Christian and Secular that would agree with this statement.
It calls the Holy spirit a she
@@barrykroukamp4566 Only in poetic/metaphorical description. Not literal. Please don’t twist the word. That would give you grounds to call God “mother” if that were the case.
It’s gnostic bro
Marian Dogmas
Mary is the New Eve (Gen 3:15, Luke 1:28 -1:38, Jn 2:4, Jn 19:26, Gal 4:4, Rev 12:1, Rev 12:17)
Immaculate Conception:
As Eve was created sinless, the New Eve was born unstained by original sin. How can the New Eve be inferior to the old?
ASSUMPTION OF MARY:
If Adam and Eve had obeyed God, they would have entered heaven body and soul. Since the new creation is the fulfillment of the failure of the old, Jesus, the New Adam, and Mary, the New Eve, obeyed God perfectly. Because of their perfect obedience, Jesus and Mary entered heaven body and soul.
CO-REDEMPTRIX:
Both Adam and Eve sinned but it was Adam's sin that caused the downfall. Nevetheless, Eve was Co-Transgressor as she played a vital part in man's downfall. In a similar manner, although Jesus' obedience redeemed man, Mary was Co-Redemptrix as she played a vital role in man's redemption. In Luke Ch 1, God draws a parallel between Eve and Mary. Eve listens to a fallen angel, sins, and tempts Adam who brings the fall of man. Mary listens to an Angel, accepts God's plan, gives birth to Jesus who is the redeemer of man.
MEDIATRIX OF ALL GRACES:
Mary is Mediatrix of All Graces because Mary gives birth to Jesus who reconciles man to God so we can receive God's grace.
Also through Mary's intercessory prayers, we receive God's grace as displayed at the wedding at Cana when Mary asked Jesus for help and he truned water into wine. It is not Mary's grace, but God's grace that we receive through Mary's intercession.
Mary is the New Ark of the Covenant (Ex 40:34-35, Lk 1:35), (2 Sam 6:1-11, Lk 1:39), (2 Sam 6:14, Lk 1:43), (2 Sam 6:15, Lk 1:42), (2 Sam 6:9, Lk 1:43), ( 2 Sam 6:11, Lk 1:56), (2 Sam 6:11, Lk 1:39-45), (Ex 16:33-34, Ex 25:16, Num 17:10, Heb 9:4), (Rev 11:19, Rev 12:1)
Prefigured in Jephthah's daughter (Luke 1:34,38 Judges 11:35-39)
EVER VIRGIN:
No man could touch the Ark (2 Sam 6:7). Similarly no man could touch Mary the New Ark of the covenant. Mary's viriginy upholds the divinity of Jesus. The Ark's main purpose was to bring the presence of God to his people. Similarly, the New Ark's main purpose was to bring the prescence of Jesus (God/Man) to the world. Sacred vessles set aside for God, cannot be used for normal use. Like a goblet used in worship cannot be used to drink wine at dinner. Simiarly Mary's womb set aside to bring God's prescence into the world cannot be used for normal use.
Luke 1:34,38 was alluding to Jephthah's daughter in Judges 11 who accepted the will of her father and was ever virgin. Likewise because Mary accepted God the Father's will, she became ever virgin. Her womb dedicated to God, could not be used for normal activity.
Those verses don't indicate those dogmas at all. And sounds like it's all just an assumption based on typology. Kind of a stretch
@@Ampwich they support the dogmas and the typology is valid.
What is asserted gratuitously can be denied gratuitously
Jesus is literally compared to Adam (as well as many “perfect versions of Old Testament such as Jonah) in scripture, whereas the Mary comparisons have to assume Mary’s importance and project it onto things in order to get the doctrine.
@@secondratefilms635 Mary as New Eve is Biblical. Jesus addressed his mother as “woman”. Jesus alluding to Gen 3:15 seed of woman will crush Satan
Rev 12:17 the woman who gave birth to Jesus is also yhe spiritual mother of all who believe in Jesus. Eve mother of all man. Mary Mother of all believers.
It is so ridiculous that those first words were uttered.
PERPETUAL (Forever) VIRGIN Dogma of the R.C.C. is Non-Biblical... Blessed Mary was a VIRGIN before she gave birth through the CONCEPTION of the Holy Spirit, which Father God (YHWH) had "PREPARED BODY" for HIS Son (ref. Hebrews 10:5) was the BIBLICAL TRUTH ... but not AFTER the birth of her FIRSTBORN SON, in human form, named Christ Jesus...
Blessed Mary's IMMACULATE CONCEPTION, ASSUMPTION/ASCENSION, PERPETUAL VIRGIN, THE MOTHER OF GOD, ROSARY are just some of the R.C.C. DOGMAS that are nowhere to be found and supported by the Holy Scripture both O.T. and N.T. Scriptures... Facts and Truth of the Matters...
Glory, Praise, and Thanks be to God in Christ Jesus... Amen and Amen...
So what exactly year was this that the Catholic Church started preaching the perpetual virginity of Mary?
The earliest I found was a comment from Clement of Alexandria saying "But, as appears, many even down to our time regard Mary, on account of the birth of her child, as having been in the perpetual state, although she was not. For some say that, she after she brought forth, she was found, when examined to be a virgin" this quote is ironically in a chapter titled "scripture the criterion by which truth and heresy are distinguished" of his book "The Stomata, or Miscellanies" you can find the full writing on Bible Hub
Took them 400+ years
As a Catholic it’s always fascinating to see White’s interpretative strategy to get around the beliefs of the early church. Th gnostic angle is ingenious as much as it is an abuse of history.
It's (proto evangelium of james) the earliest source for that belief.
Do you know who the earliest father who mentions it as being a dogmatic belief of the church? What I found was Clement of Alexandria but his quote says "some say" and then he mentions that many consider her to have been in a perpetual state although she was not.
Tell me. What's the earliest source for the perpetual virginity of Mary? Because I can tell you this, it isn't the apostles or any Christians the first few centuries.
Jesus Christ was fully God and fully man. And Mary was **fully** human. Jesus would not have been birthed in supernatural fashion.
What is an abuse is suggesting that Jesus, the babe, just magically appeared.
Hank is 85% Roman Catholic now. And I smelt it 13 YEARS AGO when he would answer questions on BAM regarding the mass!!
Isn't he 100% Greek Orthodox?
He is Greek Orthodox....(Roman Catholicism lite)
@@Locomedic1 "Orthodox" is often ignored as far as these things go. My dad converted from a conservative United Methodist to "Antiochan Orthodox" - and I have to be careful how to broach the issue of bringing him back to the truth, because, well, *he's my dad* and there's only so much you can do without falling afoul of #5, and destroying my own eternity to save his.
If you search about a Sanskrit text called the Mahabharata, written somewhere between 300 BC and 1000 BC, and a male character in it called "Karna" and you will find out how a woman can give birth and remain a virgin. Either the Biblical story of Mary was derived from this or God is very imitative of Sanskrit writers, which would not be a particularly god look. For those who don't want to invest the time, I'll give a synopsis. A woman named Kunti used a mantra to summon the god of the sun, called Surya. He made love with her and produced a son, and then he restored her virginity. Being unmarried, she put the baby in a basket coated with wax and put it in the river Ganges. It was found by a charioteer and his wife who adopted the baby. Cool story huh?
So....not really Mary of the Bible. No sex involved at all
ALL the marian dogmas are true
1800 years too late. No they are not
Many visited me and told me she was sad. She always wanted a girl.
I'm just a few minutes into this video but the word that comes to mind when I hear this other than gross is pantheism.
wow. be sure, your sin will find you out.
Amazing how much he butchers Catholic Doctrine. If he would do some honest study, he would be taken seriously.
The subject of this video was the earliest texts which speak explicitly of the perpetual virginity of Mary. Which part of these texts do you think he butchered?
if
These comments are funny. When he debates these topics with actual Catholic apologists, they never make this claim about him.
The root of the problem is that Calvinists believe that all of God's creation is, at its heart, evil and so any honor or hyperdulia (as is the case with our Lord's mother) to a creature is repugnant. This is why Calvinists are essentially modern-day Gnostics.
You seem to not understand what Calvinism is. We don’t believe all of Gods creation to be evil. I assume you’re referring to total depravity which is exclusive to the human nature.
@@theburlyburrito Rocks and birds are good but human beings are evil. Got it.
@@markrome9702 Can you find a scripture that says rocks and birds sinned? I’ll wait. 😉
@@tyd3407 Do you believe that everything a person does is sinful? I mean every action?
@@markrome9702 Do you believe the scripture that says for all have sinned and fallen short of the Glory of God?