The Perpetual Virginity of Mary a SAVING doctrine?
Vložit
- čas přidán 7. 09. 2024
- According to Rome, the idea that Mary remained a virgin is not only true but it is something that has been revealed by God and formally defined by the infallible authority of Rome's magisterium and therefore it is a dogma of the faith and something that one must believe in order to be saved.
----------------------------
To become a regular supporter on Patreon, go here: / anthonyrogers1
To support on Paypal, go here: www.paypal.com...
To help with books related to future show topics and debates, here is a link to my Amazon page:
www.amazon.com...
If you are interested in supporting my work among prisoners, you can give here: give.pcamna.or...
__________________
To follow on other social media platforms:
IG: anthony.rogers.12382
TikTok: Ousias1
Lord Jesus Alone is Enough For Salvation.
Amen
Yeshua is the only way to the Father. Amen!
People denying His holy catholic and apostolic church are denying Jesus and his commandments.
@@IsfeanRoman Catholic Church isn’t the Catholic Church alone, saying that is contradictory
@@Isfeanname the commandment
This really is the crux of the issue. My biggest hangup when I nearly converted to Eastern Orthodoxy, was the idea that the conditions of salvation were arbitrary, and could change over time due to new things being "clarified" in a conciliar setting. If you would've told Clement of Rome that at some point in the future, The Church would say one could not be saved if they didn't kiss icons of departed saints, they would call you a heretic and a blasphemer.
This is really well said.
Have you lost your mind? You as a Protestant (I assume) are appealing to Clement of Rome? That is extremely odd.
Please show us where the Orthodox Church teaches one is condemned to hell if they do not kiss icons of departed saints…
Are you equating kissing icons of departed saints to idolatry?
@@Faith_Of_The_First_Order Sure!
The Condemnation (Session 1 of Nicaea II)
Anathema to those who do not salute the holy and venerable images.
Definition of Anathema according to Nicaea II (The Letter of the Synod to the Emperor and Empress)
Now anathema is nothing less than complete separation from God.
The New Advent page describes the many uses of Salute in history, and it is always used to mean kissing and bowing.
Hope this helps!
@@ScroopGroopI LOVE IT 🤣🤣🤣 “Where did we say that!?”
Scroop: right here in High Definition 🤣🤣🤣
@@Faith_Of_The_First_Orderyou should’ve probably looked it up before denying it but that is par the course for Papists.
I left Orthodoxy because God opened my eyes to the truth that only He saves and that any work apart from His saving is idolatry. Read your Bible.
Galatians 1:6-9:
6 I am astonished that you are so quickly deserting him who called you in the grace of Christ and are turning to a different gospel- 7 not that there is another one, but there are some who trouble you and want to distort the gospel of Christ. 8 But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach to you a gospel contrary to the one we preached to you, let him be accursed. 9 As we have said before, so now I say again: If anyone is preaching to you a gospel contrary to the one you received, let him be accursed.
Orthodoxy is preaching another gospel if they say you need Mary’s perpetual virginity to be saved.
praise God brother! God bless you
So mary did not indirectly participate in uour salvation when she said yes to the angel
Or she was coupelles to. Accept
@@Pat.hibuleireshe never said yes…. she was told the Holy spirit would come upon her and that she would be overshadowed by the most high and have a child…… she was chosen, she was not given an option. she was a servant of God therefore accepted it without question……. she was the vessel!
@@mrkushykush1 you got it wrong pal
That s not love
If you love someone
Will you compell him to love you in return
The devil does such à thing
God always gives us liberty to accept or reject
Otherwise god is not all knowing and all powerful
@@Pat.hibuleire and because God is all knowing, HE knew she was a FULL SERVANT of GOD therefore she would do what God COMMANDED OF HER! you would be adding to the scripture if you said she “accepted”…. The Angel Gabriel TOLD Marry what was to come-what was going to happen, he did NOT ASK Marry…
In the sixth month the angel Gabriel was sent from God to a city of Galilee named Nazareth,
27 to a virgin betrothed to a man whose name was Joseph, of the house of David. And the virgin's name was Mary.
28 And he came to her and said, "Greetings, O favored one, the Lord is with you!"
29 But she was greatly troubled at the saying, and tried to discern what sort of greeting this might be.
30 And the angel said to her, "Do not be afraid, Mary, for you have found favor with God.
31 And behold, you will conceive in your womb and bear a son, and you shall call his name Jesus.
32 He will be great and will be called the Son of the Most High. And the Lord God will give to him the throne of his father David,
33 and he will reign over the house of Jacob forever, and of his kingdom there will be no end."
34 And Mary said to the angel, "How will this be, since I am a virgin?"
35 And the angel answered her, "The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you; therefore the child to be born will be called holy--the Son of God.
36 And behold, your relative Elizabeth in her old age has also conceived a son, and this is the sixth month with her who was called barren.
37 For nothing will be impossible with God."
38 And Mary said, "Behold, I am the servant of the Lord; let it be to me according to your word." And the angel departed from her.
I wouldn't have so much problem with the claims fo the Catholic church if they didn't require belief and enforce them with anathemas. They should provide strong reasoning from the scripture instead of appealing to their human magisterium.
100% it completely distorts the gospel that we hear clearly in scripture
◄ Matthew 1:25 ►
But he did not consummate their marriage until she gave birth to a son. And he gave him the name Jesus.
Believe me they have an explanation for this. They argue over the word 'until' and go in circles just to deny the truth. It's so silly.
@@HopeOfChrist yup been there
Nice! Now read *1 Corinthians 15:25* “For he must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet.”
@@catholictruth102 context context!
@@SeekTheCross Oh you mean how the word “until” doesn’t mean Jesus will ever stop reigning, just like how the word “until” used in Matthew 1:25 doesn’t mean Mary ever lost her virginity?
Only Jesus saves 👍🏼
You’re right, and Jesus said to listen to the church (Matthew 18:17). So do as He said.
@@catholictruth102 What is the church n how has it historically proven infallible demonstrably besides making claims without proofs.
@@catholictruth102yet you had to pull a Bible verse, which btw you twist out of its context horribly (it’s referring to Christ not leaving any of his sheep behind and saving all his elect. Read the next two verses.) to prove your point.
@@NATAR160 The Church is the Catholic Church and it’s infallible because it claims to be.
@@SabbatarianCalvinist He still gave the church authority to settle disputes.
My biggest issus with the catholic church is that they believe they decide what saves and is doctrine.
Of course
It s the church established 2000 years ago by christ himself
Who established your church 20 years ago
Pastor Bill
@@Pat.hibuleire Bra God decides what saves and what doesn't the Bible says God's word will never change even after the Earth pass away so you think the pope has power to change that then he is your God not the father
@@orpheemulemo8053 you are not qualified to be your own pope
Stop it
@@Pat.hibuleire Ah number one their is no pope in the Bible number
Two from Genesis to Revelation the Bible calls all people to study it day and night
And even in the new Testament it talks about you praying and asking for guidance from the holy spirit
Pastors are there for concepts you don't understand
But the Bible makes every concept pretty understandable if you read it linearly the only problem is you need to have good language skills as for myself I take English subject in my school so old English ain't that hard to understand
@@orpheemulemo8053 bro i from one church now we have thousands
Was that jesus will
Mary didn't remain a virgin. The bible is very clear that she had other children. You have to be a moron, or really wicked to try and deny that fact in scripture. The Roman Catholic church glorifies Mary to the point of God like status even praying to her and crediting her with helping Christ in the salvation of mankind. That is absolutely ridiculous and I wouldn't take that movement seriously at all. They get alot of things wrong and they say alot of things that cannot be found in scripture. This isn't even an argument.
I wouldn't say you have to be stupid or even naive. It's misplaced trust and pride for many and ignorance for most. I have witnessed Romanists be flabbergasted when prompted about a heresy, that they will as a reflex understand to be wicked but some priest, cardinal, bishop, etc. will fervently affirm as the correct position to hold to. Throughout the centuries we've had most of the church attendants having no clue what the priest was talking about to the point we have idioms like 'hocus pocus' because to the laymen, the priest magically made the bread and wine into Christ's flesh and blood using nonsense words. That's a failure of communication at best(which is already a major condemnation meaning these men were not shepherding the sheep meaning these people were lead into the pit by blind guides) and an arrogant complacency to allow the devil to do his work at worst.
To Roman apologists, there's always some way of explaining around a concept that is condemned or denied in Scripture. The Roman church says blue, Scripture says red, so here's why somehow when Rome said blue it actually meant red or that Scripture is insufficient(denigrate God's perfection to prop up your doctrines) and what Scripture _really_ meant(Genesis 3) was blue. If you look at the NCSRV the way 1 Timothy 3 is written is awful. Nearly every other version including the greek affirms θεόπνευστος which is a strong term Paul used only once and the language is definitive about making the man of God _perfect,_ _thoroughly equipped,_ _complete,_ and the NCRSV says that it _might_ make the man of God _proficient._ So there is a bit of trickery, but from my anecdotal experience I have yet to meet a Romanist who has read the bible throughout, in fact unfortunately I've met so few supposed Christians who have. It seems to be that most people treat salvation and eternal life like a pension plan.
After watching the movie Apostle Paul on netflix, seeing how Romans under Nero burned Christians at the stake, and hundreds of years later seeing Roman Catholics burning Christians at the stake I figured Roman Catholicism is a twisted mix of Roman paganism and parts of Christianity or atleast it was. They don't follow the Bible but use it and twist it to come up with new doctrines of their own liking and enforce what they want the gospel to be as witnessed by them enforcing Mariolatry for salvation.
The idea she remained a virgin was an idea that started to appear in the 2nd century, though the idea didn’t pick up until later. It is a unbiblical idea founded on the idea that Mary was so pure, she was never defiled by sex. To remedy the mention of Jesus’ brothers, the idea that either they were children of Joseph from a previous marriage or actually cousins was created. The idea Joseph had a previous marriage has no basis in scripture. It seems unlikely that Joseph would have remarried. An infancy gospel claimed he was a 90 year old widower who was chosen by lot to take care of Mary, and he seemed intent on preserving her virginity. The infancy gospels are works of pious fiction, sort of like fan fiction, designed to fill in the unknowns in the Biblical narrative.
@@Apollo1989VThis whole idea Mary would be "defiled" if she didn't remain a virgin just reeks of Gnostic heresy. I'd bet money that's where it came from.
@@thegodofalldragonsThis makes sense. Mary’s achievement of raising Jesus while also having other regular children like a normal mother is something to be celebrated - not suppressed
Perpetual Virginity is first eroneus and for the second not gospel, and never preacher by apostoles as such. To claim that to beliving in it is necessary to salvation, is denying the only Gospel that egxist by adding to it - and such is an error of Galatianism, where galatians added to Gospel and full Christology elements that was not part of it, denying all of it in consequence of their heretical action. Nothing that Apostoles was not preaching can be proclaimed by anyone to be gospel that Christians preach till Second Coming of Lord Jesus Christ.
Sadly they appeal to traditions not documented until 200-400 years later and pretend they go back to the apostles teaching because they believe the church is infallible when institurions of man are so demonstrable as errant.
What's ironic this is exactly what the Jews did that Jesus rebuked. The oral Torah as it's called is equal authority but really it has more authority than the word.
@@faithfulservantofchrist9876 Yes, protestants confronts rabinists about OT same like they confront Romanists for NT, its all about sect claiming their oral traditon is equal and higher than Apistolic Highest authority of written down tradition.
It saddens me that they also keep our Messiah on the cross.
Satanic.
1 corinthians 1:23 23 but we preach Christ crucified, a stumbling block to Jews and folly to Gentiles,
Paul tells us that we are to only boast about the cross that Christ was crucified on… reject Baptist theology. Pictures, crosses or statues are not idols unless they are being “venerated”
My biggest issue with the perpetual virginity is those claiming it is a salvation requirement. Could you imagine being denied salvation because of not believing that? It seems so arbitrary. What if Mary did have sexual relations, would it then be a salvation requirement to believe that she did have sexual relations? It's so odd to me.
Great stuff Anthony!
I’ve noticed these organizations defend their doctrines and do not contend for the gospel and lift Jesus up.
Acts 4:12 says only JESUS CHRIST can Save US . And Mary who we as Christian love And Respect BUT Don't Pray too did have sons and daughters after she gave birth to JESUS. It's in the new Testament .🙏✝️❤
and it's irrelevant to our salvation
Nope. Reject it and see what happens on judgement day!
@@catholictruth102 Bra were is it in the Bible catholics made it up
@@orpheemulemo8053 It doesn’t have to be in the Bible because the Bible is not the only authority for a Christian. Our Lord said you must listen to the church, and whoever doesn’t listen to the church is to be treated like pagan or tax collector (unsaved). Matthew 18:17.
@@catholictruth102 scripture is so hopelessly unclear that catholics and orthodox can freely cite it without any form of exegesis whatsoever. This is what Mathew 18, 17 says, no need to explain, no need to give context. Scripture is clear and easy to understand.
@@georgwagner937 No one said scripture is easy to understand.
Fantastic topic! Thanks so much 🙏
I would be more comfortable following the "magisterium" if they followed scripture.
One thing I don’t know is when exactly this RCC started. I realize it’s technically (and literally) a continuation and culmination of the secret societies and “mystery” religions as it’s obvious by their practices and traditions and such, but when was it in its full effect?
We need to pray for our Catholic brothers and sisters. Pray the Holy Spirit opens their eyes & that Yeshua (Jesus) is the only way to the Father.
Glory to God. great video brother
Mary and Joseph had other children. And James, Jesus' half brother didn't believe He was the Messiah, at first, but after His resurrection went on to write the book of James. Matt. 12:46, 13:55. James.
Scripture identifies those "brothers" as being sons of Mary the wife of Cleopas, not Mary and Joseph. They use the term brothers for cousins also as they didn't have the particular language we have today.
St Paul referring to scripture contextually refers to the OT simply because the NT was not formed at the time St Paul's letters were written. The NT refers to Moses seat, the church and tradition as sources for faith and authority included in St Pauls reference to scripture able to formthe man of God.
The scriptures were not fromally written as an apologetic for Marian dogmas more formally found in tradition.
"Perpetual Virgin" is like the "Refurbished Virgins"
of alLah.
See how utterly
blasphemous
it is ?
Blasphemous is your mouth bro
Shame on you
It'd be one thing if it was in the Gospel.
Brother can you make a video of Candance Owens conversion to Roman Catholicism please (special request)
By the way have you read 12 sons of Israel yet?😅
Hey Anthony! I was wondering what your take was on Jimmy Akins position on justification as he presented in his debate with Dr. White. It seems very novel... a bit too novel. Is this Rome shifting or repackaged.
Hey, I haven't seen that debate. I started watching their debate on Sola Scriptura but Akin's getup and mannerisms were so theatrical I didn't finish. I may listen to his opening statement and let you know my thoughts if I get some time.
@@Ousias1 Thank you brother! Dr. White said he had never heard this position before in 20 years of debating. Akins went on a debrief of his debates with Dr. White and further explained that the RCC proper teachings never defines that salvation is through faith and works. "The Catholic Church does not have a problem with Faith Alone."
Video:DEBRIEF | Recent Debates with James White (Sola Scriptura, Justification)
Timestamp: 1:04:17
Excellent points!
I have always seen this as a really silly teaching.
Anthony, I know that USED to be the case, but don't they now, post-Vatican II, basically teach that anything goes?
“Calvin argues that in Matthew 1:25 ("[Joseph] knew her [Mary] not till she had brought forth her firstborn son") the term "firstborn" and the conjunction "till" do not contradict the doctrine of perpetual virginity”
You didn’t follow the point of the video, did you?
I'm surprised Mary didn't have triplets and twins after the birth of Jesus. Lol
well stated. The bigger issue you find in this regard is not the idiot idea of the mother of Jesus being divine in having miraculous characteristics like the one you state of supernatural virginity, but you find Jesus the messiah figting against the inuendos of the Religious Leaders that he was actually a Bastard. That is why Jesus used the strong words "lying against the son will be forgiven, but lying against the Holy Spirity will not be forgiven, neither in this or the next life". As usually Roman Catholic is the false instrument of satan, and allways bringing great sadness to the true Mary who remains asleep until Jesus will call the living and dead to judgement.
What is worse? The Catholic/Orthodox mishandling of 2Tim 3, or the Dispensational/Free Grace mishandling? “All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness,” but that does not mean ALL scripture is good for these things for all believing people.
If scripture doesn’t contain all of the necessities of the faith then what is the point of scripture?
Please give us the verse where jesus said the 27 books of the nt are god s word
💯
Glory to God Apostate Prophets wife is now a Christian in the Orthodox Church.
I am also one who believes Mary was “ever Virgin.” But I also believe it is not a doctrine that one’s salvation hinges upon. It is a matter of Christian liberty.
You certainly have the liberty to conclude something that is directly contradicted by the Bible, but why would you?
@@Charles.WrightYou say this because you do not appreciate the thinking of 20 centuries of Christian theology that happened before the 20th Century. Not only was the perpetual virginity of Mary believed UNIVERSALLY by the early Christian church throughout the Patristic period and on throughout the Medieval period, but it was universal among the magisterial Protestant Reformers. Perpetual virginity was believed by Luther, Melanchthon, Zwingli, Calvin, Bullinger, Westley and others. There is nothing in the text that compels one to have to believe these others were conceived by Mary and Joseph, especially since it was quite common amongst the Jews to refer to kinsmen of every type as “brothers.” They could have been Joseph’s by a previous marriage. It is also possible they could have been adopted., or any combination of the above. The idea of rejecting Mary as “ever virgin” is relatively new, and is driven mainly by eisegesis of modern ideas of sex prevalent especially among worldly American Evangelicals into the 1st Century text. Of course you are free to assume you have an insight into the text that was not shared by the vast history of Christianity and was not perceived by the greatest minds before you… but why would you?
Yeah Shamoun.. You Fake
A lying doctrine
I encourage people to read the 7 ecumenical councils! Mariology was important! Pope Leo 1 referred to Mary as "EVER-VIRGIN" 😮.
I encourage everyone to read the words of Christ and His apostles. Belief in the perpetual virginity of Mary is not taught in Scripture. And if it is not taught, then it is not necessary for salvation, *even if it were the case that it is true *. Something can be true and yet not a necessary article of faith. And since Scripture makes one wise unto salvation, all saving truths must be taught therein.
@@MrCharlesMartel "The Church" is the Pillar and foundation of the Truth!
@@loganmisiak5573I think you meant to say Christ is the cornerstone. The church is still being sanctified by her groom. We ain’t pure in the visible church. Only the invisible. Distinct. Not seperate. Purely Chalcedonian christology applied to the church.
@@loganmisiak5573A pillar lifts something up and puts it on display. The church lifts up the truth and puts it on display, and God’s word is the truth. Submit to it.
Yes, and doctor of the Roman Catholic Church, Alphonsus Liguori, in his “Prayer to Our Lady” says this “I place in you [Mary] all my hopes for salvation”. Utter idolatry. Not chastised, not disciplined, condemned or corrected, but made a Saint and Doctor of the church.
A heretic and blasphemer? Really? You’re not exaggerating?
That’s putting it mildly. Rome has been downright murderous in history.
Tbh I think that the topic of whether the perpetual virginity of Mary is historically possible is an entirely different topic entirely from whether it is required for salvation. Martin Luther and the other reformers saw no problem with the possibility (Luther even affirmed it!) but drew the line at the idea that the Church had the right to declare such a doctrine a requirement for salvation.
So as a Protestant myself seeing how a lot of these discussions go, entering into a debate about whether Jesus’ brothers were biological or not is a fools errand with evidence supporting either side. The right approach and the crux of the argument made by the Reformers on the basis of scripture is whether the church had the right to make such required doctrines, or should only Scripture be the standard for infallible doctrine.
Just my two cents.
You probably should have watched the video. Your comment looks really out of place.
He didn’t argue anywhere in the video that PV is biblically or historically impossible, though the tide of evidence IS against Mary remaining a virgin. Rather, his argument was precisely that the doctrine is not positively taught in Scripture and cannot therefore be an obligatory doctrine one must believe as Rome asserts.
@@MrCharlesMartelWhat is taught is to listen to the church (Matthew 18:17) and to obey what they tell you (Hebrews 13:17), thus if they tell you Mary was a virgin you accept it. If you reject it then you reject Christ, because you reject His church.
@@catholictruth102That comment assumes much, and solves little. Countless sects and churches claim the Bible and Jesus as their own, meaning countless sects and churches claim they are Jesus’s church to the exclusion of all other churches, and could therefore demand the same unquestionable obedience that you believe is due to the Catholic Church alone.
We have all seen where that conversation goes…
Each Christ follower has God’s Holy Spirit within, and may ask God for wisdom and guidance without rebuke.
I would call on all Christians to embrace the Holy Spirit and let Him lead you to the fullness of God’s truth.
Men do their best but are fallible. Test everything against God’s Word with the Spirit’s guidance and He will show the way.
Well, the early church fathers from the 2. century such as Irenaeus or Ignatius would call submitting to the church a requirement for salvation, as the church is Christ's body and thus rejection of it is as rejecting Christ himself. They also believed in the Eucharist, saying that where the bishop is, there Christ is also and that there should be no Eucharist apart from who is ordained. The bible also never speaks about Sola Scriptura, especially since the canon wasn't finished until around the 3. century, but rather Paul wrote in 1 Timothy 3:15 that the church is the pillar and bulwark of the truth. Hence the church guides us to all truth and cannot fail as Christ promised in Matthew 16:17-19.
Protestants are too prideful to admit, that they might not interpret everything right and reject early church history, which frames a constant picture of how obedience to the church was a salvific issue from the beginning. Even today the catechism teaches, that those willingly rejecting what the church is, will be damned. However, it does not apply to Protestants who just criticize a strawman of what the Catholic church actually teaches. The catechism is freely available online, I advise reading it and judging by it instead of a random CZcams video, which might or might not tell the truth. After all, without research one cannot find out. Test everything.
Mary wasn't perfect, wasn't sinless and had no powers whatsoever... besides the fact that she had at least 4kids possibly 6.
I really don't understand what is the importance of that. I really don't understand why making a fuss of Mary's virginity, of "praying" to Mary...virginity is her own business, I'm not at all interested. As concerns "praying" I can pray to whomever I like to ask something. Mary is not a Goddess but she is a very very important Person, the mother of Jesus. She is thus a very influential Person if you want to ask a favour. The same is valid for the Saints, you can "pray" to whomever you like. All that is a different kind of "praying" when compared to praying to God.
Stop insulting The Virgin Mary!!!
Stop putting your faith in a creature and look to Christ alone for salvation.
What's with sam shamoun these days
He’s found the truth.
@@catholictruth102 ok. I m not aware much of Catholicism, but i just always wanted to know, why pray to Mary? Does the bible says that?
He became a pagan. He denies the gospel like Rome and rages against Christian’s like the worst of the Inquisitors, but, contrary to the claim above, he did not “find the truth” of Catholicism. First, Catholicism is an apostate institution, and second, Shamoun has moved around a lot from different heretical sects. He is presently Assyrian Orthodox.
@@itzjustamyth You should look into Catholicism if you’re not aware of it friend, the very earliest christians were Catholics, those who succeeded the disciples.
The reason we pray to Mary is because the more righteous you are, the more efficacious your prayers. Mary was the most righteous person, as she was the very mother of God, and thus her prayers for us are powerful.
@@MrCharlesMartel Rome is the only church with the full and complete gospel.