The Virgin Mary

[Postmaster]

If I'm not corrected did the Virgin Mary also ascended to heaven like Jesus? Apparently she went to the "Micra Sia" which was the Greek settlements of western Turkey after the death of Christ. A lot of Greek Cypriots originate from there that fled to Cyprus when the Ottomans started taking it all up. Also my roots can be directly traced back to there.

Did Mary settle in Greek part of western Turkey and is her tomb there? Or did she also ascended or did her body ascended after death?

There seems to be no clear information of happened to her after death. Apart from the visions and witness's of the weeping Mary of course. There are many that believe that Mary was Greek descent.

[Quahom1]

Originally Posted by Postmaster

If I'm not corrected did the Virgin Mary also ascended to heaven like Jesus? Apparently she went to the "Micra Sia" which was the Greek settlements of western Turkey after the death of Christ. A lot of Greek Cypriots originate from there that fled to Cyprus when the Ottomans started taking it all up. Also my roots can be directly traced back to there.

Did Mary settle in Greek part of western Turkey and is her tomb there? Or did she also ascended or did her body ascended after death?

There seems to be no clear information of happened to her after death. Apart from the visions and witness's of the weeping Mary of course. There are many that believe that Mary was Greek descent.

Hello Postmaster,

Initially I was going to suggest that we blend this thread in with the one already discussing Mary, however, after reading through, (realizing the topic is separate from the other), it should remain as is.

This is a delicate subject for many Christians, so I will state the declarations of the two main camps of thought pertaining to the assumption of Mary.

First both camps agree there is nothing in the Bible that specifically states the assumption of Mary into Heaven, and that if there was such an occurance it would have been an assumption vice having ascended. Mary would not have had the power to ascend herself into Heaven like Jesus did. She would have to have been taken into Heaven (assumed).

2. The catholic church never defined whether Mary died or not, and even in Munificentissimus Deus (1950), Pope Pius XII stated that "after the completion of her earthly life" (note the silence regarding her death), " Mary was assumed body and soul into the glory of heaven." Though this is not backed by scripture directly, the catholic church states it does not conflict with the question of sola scriptura, or the Protestant "Bible only" theory. The reasoning is that it does not bring contradiction to scripture.

3. The possibility of a bodily assumption before the Second Coming is suggested by Matthew 27:52–53: "The tombs also were opened, and many bodies of the saints who had fallen asleep were raised, and coming out of the tombs after his resurrection they went into the holy city and appeared to many." Did all these Old Testament saints die and have to be buried all over again? There is no record of that, but it is recorded by early Church writers that they were assumed into heaven, or at least into that temporary state of rest and happiness often called "paradise," where the righteous people from the Old Testament era waited until Christ’s resurrection (cf. Luke 16:22, 23:43; Heb. 11:1–40; 1 Pet. 4:6), after which they were brought into the eternal bliss of heaven.

4. There is also what might be called the negative historical proof for Mary’s Assumption. It is easy to document that, from the first, Christians gave homage to saints, including many about whom we now know little or nothing. Cities vied for the title of the last resting place of the most famous saints. Rome, for example, houses the tombs of Peter and Paul, Peter’s tomb being under the high altar of St. Peter’s Basilica in Rome. In the early Christian centuries relics of saints were zealously guarded and highly prized. The bones of those martyred in the Coliseum, for instance, were quickly gathered up and preserved—there are many accounts of this in the biographies of those who gave their lives for the faith.

5. It is agreed upon that Mary ended her life in Jerusalem, or perhaps in Ephesus. However, neither those cities nor any other claimed her remains, though there are claims about possessing her (temporary) tomb. And why did no city claim the bones of Mary? Apparently because there weren’t any bones to claim, and people knew it. Here was Mary, certainly the most privileged of all the saints, certainly the most saintly, but we have no record of her bodily remains being venerated anywhere.

Based on that information we are left to choose which is true, or even if it really matters in the overall picture of Salvation.

Now as for your comment about Mary's decendancy, well scripture does point out that Mary was from the tribe of Judah, and therefore could not be of Greek decent.

Again, I am of no mind on this issue, one way or the other, as I find it interesting but not important to salvation for man.

As Sgt. Friday would say "just the facts man, just the facts."

Happy Easter!

v/r

Q

[Geist]

I always thought she went to Avingion (South France) with Mary Magdalene and the other Mary's also a servent girl called sara (Spellt the welsh way cause I'm not sure how its spellt in english) Elegidly the daughter of Jesus.

[Faithfulservant]

Recall Jesus telling Mary to behold her son and telling John to behold his mother.. telling them to care for each other.. I think its reasonable to assume that John and Mary were together through his ministry much like Mary was with Jesus during his. I always wondered why Joseph and Mary were never mentioned after their parts in the life of Jesus till a pastor explained it that their roles were finished in the story of Christ and Christianity.. They were not main characters in that particular "story" So apparently they didnt do anything major in defining Christianity after Christ resurrected and with Joseph after Jesus grew up.. Probably because Joseph passed away.. he was older than Mary.


As to whether Mary was greek... that wouldnt be scripturally sound because Jesus was Jewish not Greek.

[Quahom1]

Originally Posted by Faithfulservant

Recall Jesus telling Mary to behold her son and telling John to behold his mother.. telling them to care for each other.. I think its reasonable to assume that John and Mary were together through his ministry much like Mary was with Jesus during his. I always wondered why Joseph and Mary were never mentioned after their parts in the life of Jesus till a pastor explained it that their roles were finished in the story of Christ and Christianity.. They were not main characters in that particular "story" So apparently they didnt do anything major in defining Christianity after Christ resurrected and with Joseph after Jesus grew up.. Probably because Joseph passed away.. he was older than Mary.


As to whether Mary was greek... that wouldnt be scripturally sound because Jesus was Jewish not Greek.

I think you mean Joseph the richman, who gave his own tomb to Jesus...?

[didymus]

Isaiah 7:14 " Behold a virgin shall conceive and bear a son, and his name shall be called Emmanuel, which means God with us"

The term virgin was a septuagint translation. The original Hebrew read "young woman" ( almah) virgin in hebrew was betulah. A young woman becoming pregnant is not the same as a virginal conception. Therefore when readers of the Hebrew Isaiah saw this they would have been perplexed. The misleading rendering of 'almah' as parthenos(virgin, maid) was later corrected in Greek translations of Isaiah. they replaced parthenos(virgin) with neanis(young girl).

The Mishnah, the oldest of the rabbinic codes, defines virgin as a female who has"never seen blood even though she is married"(mNiddah 1:4) The tosefta, another early Jewish code of law, claims in the name of Rabbi Eliezer ben Hyrcanus (late 1st century AD) that such a woman would continue to count as a virgin even after she had conceived and borne children w/out menstruation(tNiddah 1:6)

Philo of Alexandria(contemporary of Jesus) described the post menopausal wife of Abraham as a woman who had become a virgin for the second time(De posteritate Caini,134) He even characterized Isaac, the miraculously born child of Sarah and Abraham, as the son of God" (De mutatione nominum, 131)

[Quahom1]

Originally Posted by didymus

Isaiah 7:14 " Behold a virgin shall conceive and bear a son, and his name shall be called Emmanuel, which means God with us"

The term virgin was a septuagint translation. The original Hebrew read "young woman" ( almah) virgin in hebrew was betulah. A young woman becoming pregnant is not the same as a virginal conception. Therefore when readers of the Hebrew Isaiah saw this they would have been perplexed. The misleading rendering of 'almah' as parthenos(virgin, maid) was later corrected in Greek translations of Isaiah. they replaced parthenos(virgin) with neanis(young girl).

The Mishnah, the oldest of the rabbinic codes, defines virgin as a female who has"never seen blood even though she is married"(mNiddah 1:4) The tosefta, another early Jewish code of law, claims in the name of Rabbi Eliezer ben Hyrcanus (late 1st century AD) that such a woman would continue to count as a virgin even after she had conceived and borne children w/out menstruation(tNiddah 1:6)

Philo of Alexandria(contemporary of Jesus) described the post menopausal wife of Abraham as a woman who had become a virgin for the second time(De posteritate Caini,134) He even characterized Isaac, the miraculously born child of Sarah and Abraham, as the son of God" (De mutatione nominum, 131)

Considering that she was around 14 years old at the time of her betrothel, and knowing full well what stones could do if hurled at her (to say the least), I am pretty certain she was infact a virgin.

I am also certain that Joseph who was considered a man in good standing within the community, would have honored that.

One must take in the entire picture in order to get a better view...

v/r

Q

[didymus]

what are you saying here? do you disagree with the mistranslation from hebrew to greek?

[Quahom1]

Originally Posted by didymus

what are you saying here? do you disagree with the mistranslation from hebrew to greek?

I'm of no opinion concerning the translation Did. I look at the historical criteria of everyday life in that part of the world 2000-2200 years ago, while I read the stories as presented in the Bible. I can't say if the mistranslations occured. Look at King James, the Latin Vulgate and the NIV, for example.

And if you want to consider a more contemporary pair of interpretations on a particular issue, look at the written history of the American Revolution vs the Colonial Revolt of the 1770s through 1814...and decide which one is true, and from who's point of view.

v/r

Q

[didymus]

ah yes, this is the point I wanted to make. Does one base his eternity on whether or not that translation is accurate? I think not. This is why the appositeness of biblical translation and accuracy is so paramount.

[Quahom1]

Originally Posted by didymus

ah yes, this is the point I wanted to make. Does one base his eternity on whether or not that translation is accurate? I think not. This is why the appositeness of biblical translation and accuracy is so paramount.

Perhaps to some, but others prefer to see the Forest for the trees...

v/r

Q