Mike winger helped me leave the Jehovah's witnesses behind, but he did not help me overcome my sexual perversions. Only our Lady helped me with that. Total Catholic victory over my soul.
@@macbride33 As a former Protestant, I've come to realize that the "plain reading" is a way to say, "just agree with me on how I read it". For example, the plain reading of John 6 is that Jesus and the Eucharist support the Real Presence. But, most Protestants don't believe that, so it must be a figure of speech. Even though nothing in the text suggests that this is the case. Including Jesus doubling down on what he was saying and not correcting them if he meant something else (which would be the only time in the Gospels that Jesus doesn't correct their misunderstandings on what he was saying).
@@hirakisk1973 I left Protestantism for a variety of reasons, but chose the EO over the RCC. I certainly believe in the real presence, just as I believe in regenerative baptism. I also reject sola fide and sola scriptura. Having said that, I also believe those who accept the Nicene Creed (like Winger) are in the faith, regardless of their rough edges. In the book of Revelation, all 7 churches were rebuked for very different errors and told to repent. If we don't humble ourselves accordingly, our own lampstands will be removed in the dark days ahead.
Jesus literally responded to the concerns they had about eating the flesh by saying the spirit is life, the flesh profits nothing (John 6:63). Read the rest of John 6, it is all symbolic or figure of speech, not literal. Nobody in the RCC beliefs Jesus came down as actual bread, nobody believes that eating the bread and wine means you will no longer be hungry, thirsty or die, at least I have never heard a Catholic claim they no longer have to eat or drink. Clearly when Jesus said that the spirit is life to explain his statement of eating his flesh, he meant it was a spiritual statement and not a physical statement. That is the reason that Protestants don’t take eating the flesh literally, the answer is plainly written in the text.
@@coloradodutch7480 If the people who left and lost eternal life just misunderstood what he was teaching and the only thing he meant was that they needed to believe, it's deeply messed up that he didn't clarify and just let them go.
1 Samuel 2:22 shows that Hophni and Phinehas were insulting God just by having illicit sex near the tabernacle, so yeah, I don't see what the deal is with Winger thinking that a righteous man like Joseph would take a consecrated person to bed, inside the holy residence of God. Even the married Temple priests did not have sex while serving their terms of service in the Temple, which was why most of them stayed in the Temple to sleep; and Joseph was serving all the time in God's house, with God Himself as a permanent resident.
@0311catholic I can for sure, and also offer you some helpful advice as someone who has also struggled with this on a very deep level. If you want to overcome this vice, you MUST develop a disciplined and scheduled prayer life. Fr. Ripperger, as an exorcist, says that the people who have the most difficult time with vice are the ones who don't have a disciplined prayer life. Let me share with you my prayer routine to give you an idea of what this should look like. Morning: Immediately upon waking up, pray a rosary for the intentions of overcoming specific vices, and obtaining specific virtues that you lack, be specific about what these vices/virtues are. During the day: Pray two rosaries at some point during the day for any intentions. Also, throughout the day, continually pray the Jesus prayer or the hail Mary. Night: Before retiring, examine your conscience and do an act of contrition, then pray the rosary again. There are no exceptions, or any good excuse for not completing this routine. This is what this looks like, a regular, continual prayer routine, developing the habit of prayer, and as you continue to pray you become more inclined to pray, and this simply becomes a part of your daily life. Now, it is also important to regularly practice acts of self sacrifice, fasting, abstinence from certain foods that you regularly eat or crave except on Sundays. I take a cold shower every morning and night as well, because this act of self denial also places my flesh under the subjection of my intellect. Many saints would flog themselves to do this and punish their flesh, but, this could cause self harm which isn't great. Cold showers are a perfect way to achieve the exact same thing, but it's actually quite healthy for you and brings many health benefits. If you're ever struggling with serious temptation, jump in that cold water! Put your flesh into subjection saying "NO!" Start praying to God, and for the intercession of our lady. You can also say your rosary when tempted and call upon God's help and grace to fight against it. You start adopting these practices and I guarantee you will have a MUCH easier time getting over this vice.
I like to take the stance that St Joseph was young and made a vow of Virginity as well. I remember reading once I think in Numbers 30 that a woman is allowed to keep her virginity even when Married to her husband, but the husband is allowed to break the Vow if he wishes, and God will forgive the woman. I always think about Joseph being described as a "just" man in the bible. A just man would be devoted to God, and I would think that a just man would also allow his wife to keep her vow of Virginity with God. Another reason why I take that stance is that I can't imagine that a 70 year old man would be able to travel from Nazareth > Bethlehem > Egypt by foot and would have to defend his Wife and Son from robbers and Idol worshippers in Egypt.
I think the rule was that if a husband doesn't immediatly strike down and reject a vow of virginity when he sees or hears it made by his wife, then the vow is valid and the husband can't anull it. Fathers could also do this if the girl makes it before marriage, so it seems either Mary's parents allowed it or Joseph had no problem with it, or maybe both
*I remember reading once I think in Numbers 30 that a woman is allowed to keep her virginity even when Married to her husband, but the husband is allowed to break the Vow if he wishes, and God will forgive the woman.* Yes, and Joseph was a good man and considerate of Mary's wishes when He thought of divorcing her, but the Angel reminded him it wasn't necessary and encouraged him to stay married, and Joseph did.
The 5 blasphemies against the Immaculate Heart of Mary: Blasphemies against the Immaculate Conception. Blasphemies against Her Virginity. Blasphemies against Her Divine Maternity, in refusing at the same time to recognize Her as the Mother of men. The blasphemies of those who publicly seek to sow in the hearts of children indifference or scorn, or even hatred of this Immaculate Mother. The offenses of those who outrage Her directly in Her Holy Images.
@@matthewoburke7202 using words like “Immaculate” “Mother of men” “Her” (capitalized) (And then of course there are others who use terms like, “Co-Redemptrix,” “Co-Mediatrix” and “Queen of Heaven”- at least he didn’t use those terms…)
That's not gonna happen... he knows mary is a sinner who needed a Saviour as she claimed herself to need Jesus as a Saviour for her sins--> Luke 1: 47And my spirit hath rejoiced in God my Saviour.
@@davidcrane6593 Mary can claim that Jesus is Her Savior because He kept her from corruption and also brought her to heaven. Jesus grants us grace everyday so that we won’t sin.
Much is based on irrefutable logic, right to the very end of any path in argument proving Dogma’s rightful existence in instruction, faith and history as Trinity and Christ-centric rooted.
The Ark of the Covenant must remain without blemish. Mary is the new Ark, therefore she is pure from the beginning to the very end. It's preposterous that Protestants do not see this.
The issue here is they don’t think the marital act is a blemish. You have to deal with that. The argument from the catholic should be that something set aside for God’s purpose should not be used for a non-sacred/secular/unholy purpose. The marital act is a secular act and natural children are secular. To use Mary’s womb for someone other than God violates the sanctity of the womb made holy by Jesus’s presence
@@vinciblegaming6817 If they don't get blemish part, then they don't get being set aside either. Many Protestants do not have any sense of sacredness as being set apart for God anymore. Their denominational traditions destroyed the border between sacrum and profanum.
@@PrzybyszzMatplanety yes… you are right about that. But it’s easier to teach that from scripture with the OT, focusing in on the Ark, the Holy of Holies, and the Ezekiel gate. You can draw from more material to promote an accurate and ancient understanding of the sacred. It needs to be taught, but the material is accessible to the Protestant.
@@vinciblegaming6817 I see your point and it is wise. It'll certainly work with those Protestant who are still within rudimentary Biblical scholarship and respect original context. Those who fell into error of "my personal interpretation is the only correct as Holy Spirit guides me but not thee" are beyond hope.
I'm surprised that Mike does not account the historical and geographic reality of Jesus' time. The intimacy and closeness of cousins and distant relatives in Middle Eastern communities is so common even to this day. When he tried to make "isn't that Jesus' mother and cousins" sound obscure, he doesn't seem to realise that a person with Semitic roots will have no issue with such statement.
@@vinciblegaming6817Exactly and Greek of both Mark & Matthew is rather low quality, especially when you put it side by side with John, Luke and Paul. They had far greater mastery of the language.
@@soteriology400 That is a modern argument stripping the scriptures of the idea that culturally they were Jewish thinkers translating into another language. This means that they used Greek words for their Jewish thinking. You are projecting the assumption that because it was written in Greek, that they would be using the language as native Greek speakers. For example, in Genesis it spells out that Lot is Abraham's nephew (Gen. 12). But, Genesis calls Lot his brother (adelphoi) every time after that in the Greek Septuagint (using this as an example of Jewish thinkers translating into Greek like we see in the NT). You are VERY RIGHT that the Greek word for "cousin" was NOT used. BUT, do you know where the Greek word for "cousin" was used? In documenting Early Church history from the early 2nd Century, Hegesippus wrote that James and Simon were the kinsmen of Jesus. Eusebius makes reference to this as well in his writings and further elaborates that they were cousins of Jesus. There was a video floating around not too long ago on FB Reels. They were interviewing random people and asked them, "What do you call your Mom's best friend's kids"? Every African-American that was asked all responded with "Cousin". Culturally, they view them as family. There are many other cultures still around that view family differently than a literal use of a word. It was the same way back then. In Jewish culture most close family was referred to as brothers/sisters.
I can handle someone that's clueless. And I can handle someone that's smug. I find someone that's both clueless and smug to be pretty unbearable. But when that ignorant smugness is then used to blaspheme the Theotokos, that's when my blood boils.
@@sketchbook1 Being primarily a sin of the tongue, it will be seen to be opposed directly to the religious act of praising God. (2) It is said to be against God, **though this may be only mediately, as when the contumelious word is spoken of the saints or of sacred things, because of the relationship they sustain to God and His service.**
@@sketchbook1 Blasphemy (Gr. blaptein, “to injure”, and ph?m?, “reputation”) signifies etymologically gross irreverence towards any person or thing worthy of exalted esteem.
@@Ruudes1483 that definition is exactly why it’s blasphemy against God to say that one can blaspheme any person besides Him. He alone is worthy of exaltation.
It is spiritually revolting to hear Mike Winger call Mary "a wonderful woman". Patronizing the Mother of God having just denied her perpetual virginity... it's hideous. I hope ignorance will prove a solid defence for him on judgment day.
@@divineya11 there’s no prophecy, no scripture, no need for her to be vindicated. She’s already blessed and holy enough, as a faithful (yet sinful) human chosen to give birth to and be mother to the Christ.
@@csongorarpad4670 The Lord was with her, for sure, and she was truly fully graced. She was blessed above all women, also, and the fruit of her womb, Jesus, is ultimately eternally blessed, mighty, holy, sovereign, exalted.
To engage the argument: if we take Winger's "natural reading" argument seriously, the most "natural" reading of "adelphoi" is full brothers; but we know that isn't the accurate reading, since they don't share a father. So who really cares what the most "natural" reading is? In the end, all his argument proves is that he's interpreting the Scripture according to a theological tradition, much like us. Except that his tradition has no basis. Or historical pedigree. And is riddled with heresy. And is embarrassed by its own existence.
Let’s give Saint Joseph some credit here! Do people really think that Joseph knowing who Jesus was and how His conception came about would even dare to approach The Immaculate in a conjugal sense? Unthinkable!!
I don't know about other Catholic countries, but in Poland it was a general traditional view up until 19th - early 20th centuries that St. Joseph was an old man, we even have the expression "old Joseph" in our traditional Christmas carols, and also in the traditional Christmas plays he was always portrayed as an old man. So I just want to say it was a popular opinion at least in some Catholic regions.
i wrote a paper (as a protestant) critiquing the 'protestant' position which posits that The Blessed Mother had other children. Specifically misinterpretations of Matt 1:25. lmk if i should upload it somewhere
I know it is not Scrptual but in Maria Valtorta’s writings Mary is goes into the temple as a handmaiden to the Lord & also makes a vow to him to be a perpetual virgin to honour God & pray for the coming Christ. Interestingly in this she says Joseph has made a Nazaite vow & when he is chosen to be her husband by the high priest Mary tells him her vow & he says he will combine his vow to hers. It also explains why he is so shocked at her being pregnant. This is very close to Protoevangelium of James. Though Joseph is in his late 20’s or early 30’s. Maria Valtorta also suggested that he knew her parents well. Also she relates that his brothers Children are the ones called Jesus brothers Jude & James & Mary clopas is Mary’s sister in law. I would encourage everyone to look to & read Maria Valtorta it is ver edifying & as a Catholic convert it more than any argument helped me to accept all these things about our lady ina way that gave me deep peace & that fits rationally & logically & that the evidence, scripture & the church fathers support.
I find it so hard to be charitable towards protestant (and eo) preachers... I tried arguing these exact same things with some dude some weeks ago. I kind of see where his poor logic comes from since it seems he was just parroting mr.gooner himself. The argument that James, Joses, Simon, and Judah are his biological brothers because the Bible says "brothers" and because the word appears close to his mother's mention is so incredibly weak... Matthew 13:55: Is not this the carpenter’s son? is not his mother called Mary? and his brethren, James, and Joses, and Simon, and Judas? would not mr.gooners argument then also mean that Jesus is the biological son of Joseph in that case, since the "natural reading" refers to "blood brothers" as he puts it. Yet we all understand (yes even the protestants) that Jesus is not the biological son of Joseph, but he is the son of God. Does mr.gooner naturally read only the second half of the verse and unnaturally read the first? I can't stand heretical preachers... (sidenote: my jaw literally dropped when mr.gooner said syngenēs is not used XD)
People use brother and sister all the time when they are in the same family, it was and is done. The same is not true for cousins. Second, the people likely didn't know Jesus was not Joseph's biological son. In both cases it still makes the natural reading brother (even as half brother) primary and cousin as the unlikely meaning. It is why the meaning of brother needs to be explained away and changed to cousin. If not for saying Mary had no other kids, you would never read these verses as cousins.
Mike Winger's plain reading seems to mean trying to find a Norman Rockwell painting in a 1st century middle eastern household. You can't even find a "plain readin" of his family outside of the anglosphere. Aunts and cousins have a lot of power and kinship ties are strong. Most people in west, central, and southeast Asia view the coldness we treat our extended family as "a little strange"
The perpetual virginity of Mary is a non-problem because it’s unclear. The issue is this is used to promulgate fictions like the immaculate conception and the assumption.
I know you don’t like doing these, but you absolutely shredding these Protestants in reaction videos is priceless. You should consider doing these once a month. Reasons for such a demand: 1.The Church would greatly benefit from watching you shred prots and orthobros in reaction videos 2. Reaction videos gain traction comparatively 3. More views on these types, folks get curious. They discover scholastic Thomism 4. After 500ish years Protestant dies a gruesome death after your stuff hits the mainstream.
This was quite the unconvincing defense of perpetual virginity. If someone wants to believe it, no problem, just don’t disrespect God’s Word by pretending it teaches such a thing. It isn’t a matter of salvation if someone rejects perpetual virginity.
Yeah, cause no1 from africa or the Mediterranean ever called their close relatives brother. Its just unheard of cause some guy 2000 years later adopts a strict english reading. He is using his white privlage again.
It's also disingenuous in the current societal norms to act as though close friends don't call each other "brother," or those sort of things would never be recorded in scripture to show the close relationship between the two men. Strict literal reading for the sake of annulling context is just as good as lying, because it's deliberately misunderstanding the point in an effort to undermine it.
@eddardgreybeard I'm sure Nazareth was a small village where a rag tag group of friends, who saw eachorher eceryday, probably hang out at each other's places and call each one of their mums "mum". I even do that with my friends family out of respect. I know of many cultures that do that. So small narrow minded.
Out of curiosity how do you interpret Matthew 1:24-25? i may have missed it in your video “When Joseph woke from sleep, he did as the angel of the Lord commanded him: he took his wife, but knew her not until she had given birth to a son. And he called his name Jesus.” Matthew 1:24-25 ESV
He did at 47:39 It simply drives home the point of the miraculous birth of Jesus; Joseph had nothing to do with the birth of Jesus. The use of “until” does not mean a cessation of an action. “Now, be good *until* I get home.” Does that mean you can start misbehaving once I get home? “What does he mean then by saying, 'for he must reign, till he hath put all enemies under his feet'? Is the Lord to reign only until His enemies begin to be under His feet, and once they are under His feet will He cease to reign ? Of course His reign will then commence in its fulness when His enemies begin to be under His feet." - St. Jerome; Against Helvidius Paragraph 6 "This passage afforded the pretext for great disturbances, which were introduced into the Church, at a former period, by Helvidius. The inference he drew from it was, that Mary remained a virgin no longer than till her first birth, and that afterwards she had other children by her husband. Jerome, on the other hand, earnestly and copiously defended Mary’s perpetual virginity. Let us rest satisfied with this, that no just and well-grounded inference can be drawn from these words of the Evangelist, as to what took place after the birth of Christ. He is called first-born; but it is for the sole purpose of informing us that he was born of a virgin. It is said that Joseph knew her not till she had brought forth her first-born son: but this is limited to that very time. What took place afterwards, the historian does not inform us. Such is well known to have been the practice of the inspired writers. Certainly, no man will ever raise a question on this subject, except from curiosity; and no man will obstinately keep up the argument, except from an extreme fondness for disputation." - John Calvin
The answer is that the term "until" does not mean that something will necessarily take place after a set amount of time. For example, Jesus saying that He will be with us until the end of time, does not mean that Jesus will no longer be with us after the end time's. We know that those who are granted salvation at their death will be with Jesus forever. Another great example is of 2 Samuel 6:23: "And Saul's daughter Michal bore no children from that day on until the day she died." So the translation and use of the term "until" does not mean that something necessarily happened after a certain thing took place.
Its a waste of time trying to agrue with heretics who get to twist our Lords inspired scriotures for personal interpretation. Thanks be to God for his Holy Catholic Church 🙏 Holy Mary pray for us, St Michael defend us, our Lord Jesus Christ mave mercy on us 🙏
Just heard the II Sam 6 argument. The context of Michal is the punishment resulting in her never having kids as she had no kids till she died. That is clearly not the same context or semantic meaning as in Matthew, very poor reasoning.
Even Jesus said No! Luke 11 : 27 - 29 And it came to pass, as he spake these things, a certain woman of the company lifted up her voice, and said unto him, Blessed is the womb that bare thee, and the paps which thou hast sucked. But he said, Yea rather, blessed are they that hear the word of God, and keep it. And when the people were gathered thick together, he began to say, This is an evil generation: they seek a sign; and there shall no sign be given it, but the sign of Jonas the prophet. Kinda crazy how in Ninevah they worshipped Ishtar and Tammuz
Full brothers would mean they had the same mother and father so if Winger claims full brothers does he mean God was their father? I don't understand. They can't be full brothers if Joseph is their father, they technically would be step brothers (though everyone at that time would have assumed then that Joseph sired Jesus).
Got to his ridicule of ‘until’. At no time did Mike claim that in Samuel in context ‘until’ has the same meaning as in Mathew. This guy just completely slandered Mike with a false statement. While this guy doesn’t like the context of ‘until’ in Mathew by diverting to Greek (note that until is in context) and ridiculing the word ‘until’ in Samuel by taking it out of context, the meaning of until as mentioned by Mike fits. Why Protestants call her the Virgin Mary? Maybe because she is the only woman to conceive as a virgin as in Isaiah’s prophecy of the virgin will conceive. A directly prophesied miracle birth from a virgin seems to be attested better then the perpetual virginity claim.
Could it be that Mary asked the question, how could it be? because as a Jewish woman she would know Isaiah 7:14? As a Jewish woman she would look forward to messiah. That seems to be way more likely for a Jewish woman than assuming a vow of virginity.
It does raise a question. Then I suppose Joseph has gone back to Abraham time where he will have concubines. As a man; those who are married can never stay away from intercourse. Since Mary and Joseph are married; (which goes against Catholicism belief for their belief that Mary was a person who is like the vestal virgin which means who have consecrated herself to remain single and not be married) (as we see in the gospel; she was betrothed to Joseph which shows she did not consecrated herself to be like the vestal virgin ( Romans practice to their gods) So. If two people are married and are alive; God also would not go against the nature of abstaining them from sexual intercourse. Then the only option for that is if Joseph is having concubine to meet the needs. The. That also questions what about Mary needs? Due to men commandments added up to the word of God; we have involved ourselves in useless and in vain conversation and arguments which does not give glory to God. How far we are away from the true simplicity of the gospel of Jesus.
Love Mike Winger. He’s got a great channel and you can tell he’s very sincere in his theology. He does great work. Learned a lot from him. Keep going Mike
Why does the natural reading imply brothers? Because that is what it says, even in Greek. Why look up the semantic range of the meaning of the word if it is the natural meaning? Because you know it isn’t the natural meaning and the natural meaning doesn’t fit the doctrine of perpetual virginity. If not for the doctrine of perpetual virginity, there wouldn’t be any question as to the natural reading as brothers. Mark 6:4 doesn’t prove this guy’s claim at all. Syngenes is not referring to the brothers and sisters in vs3, it is Jesus talking about a prophet has no honor in his country, with his relatives (syngenes) and his own house.
Song of Kings by Clamavi de Profundis. They are a family of singers with a healthy mix of sacred music and epic fantasy and Tolkien-inspired stuff. And they're Catholic.
Blessed Anne Catherine Emmerich saw in her visions that Our Lady did have an older sister who was called Mary, and there’s a medieval tradition that St Anne had three daughters, all of which were named Mary
That's weird since it is tradition that St. Anne was barren, and concieved the Virgin Mary in old age. And then that Mary was consecrated to the temple and grew up there. (Which was a feastday celebrated by at least some parts of the church, mainly east I think.) That seems more fitting of Gods work, but its not dogmatic so you don't have to believe it.
@@HerImmaculateHeart To be more precise it is believed she was like many other Biblical woman barren and without children, so a sad time for them, but then God gave them Mary after St. Anne's childbearing age, through a miracle which is a foreshadowing of the even more miraculous conception of Jesus in Mary.
Hi Christian Wagner, can you tell me please, why are you calling to kill people when they don't agree with you? You've made such statements on X Portlas. Is it allowed in the USA to kill sb when you don't agree with him?
Does it say “only”? Because I found this: “These things write I unto thee, hoping to come unto thee shortly: But if I tarry long, that thou mayest know how thou oughtest to behave thyself in the house of God, which is *the church* of the living God, *the pillar and ground of the truth.”* 1 Timothy 3:14-15
@@aaronking9332 it refers to a type of sexual impurity. It's a meme around Mike because he doesn't think sexual impurity is sinful as long as you do it by yourself
Okay I think I am reading between the lines as explained...friends that's probably not super helpful or charitable to direct toward someone who I would say has some serious blind spots but seems to genuinely love our Lord. Let's pray for him and our own charity. Pointing out errors and mistakes in charity, not preaching as I cross the line myself sometimes. Calling him names or perpetuating a meme won't help him see his error and might even keep others who might benefit from hearing the valid points shared here to receive them.
I don’t see why it matters, the virgin birth clearly matters but I don’t see why it matters if she had sex with her husband after the birth of our Lord or not. Mary is clearly blessed and should be held in high regard in the church but I really don’t get why we argue over this, there’s bigger fish to fry.
Key: “I don’t see….” Leviticus 10:10 “You must distinguish between what is sacred and what is common, between what is unclean and what is clean.” Joseph shepherded her. Thats history. She gave birth to the pure flesh and blood of God incarnate, and you think Joseph is going to think: “Well.. now we can have our own…” ?? Knowing she was chosen as the Ark of the New Covenant, which housed the Word of God/The bread of life. It matters because you have to reject what this religion has always taught, rooted in history, in favor of what subjectively matters to you and what does not matter.
@@Ancient_Man_In_Modern_World I’m not saying I disagree and I’m not taking up for winger, I’m pointing out that there’s bigger issues to attend to than this. The insanity that has come into most denominations has put the average professing Christian so far from the basics that I wouldn’t even waste my breath arguing about this, it’s practically a foreign language. The Catholic Church doesn’t lack its wolves in sheep’s clothing either, thankfully none of them seem to have gained enough power to pervert the fundamental doctrine. By Gods grace all the devices of satan against Christs bride will fail, the church will be reunited and its position renewed.
@@williamharris1890 You say “the basics” But what are “the basics” ? In light of Martin Lutherfer snatching two of the seven sacraments, calling them valid and negating the rest of what Jesus taught?
@@williamharris1890 Also, there has always been infiltrators within. But, with the apostolic Church, they are easy to spot when they begin teaching false doctrine. However, with the thousands and thousands of scattered and divided Protestant denominations, there is no distinction that can be made when discerning truth from delusion and error. Why? Because the constant appeal is: “Well.. that’s just your interpretation…” And everyone gets to go home “agreeing to disagree” without resolve of anything. Like an unhealthy relationship waiting to implode on itself, It’s just a matter of time.
@@Ancient_Man_In_Modern_World the simple things that are more plain in scripture is what I would consider the basics. The moral doctrines of the church and how they apply to Christ our Lord. Milk, as St. Paul would put it, before meat. On this topic, the virgin birth is clearly a must and scripture is very clear on it. The perpetual virginity is a deeper understanding, the meat if you will. I wouldn’t waste my time trying to explain the deeper teachings of scripture to someone who completely ignores the plain, moral pillars of scripture and the church, and teaches others to do the same in the name of Christ our King.
The most natural reading of scriptures is that Jesus was the firstborn of Mary and that she had other children later. There is no reason to think that such would not be the case. Other suggestions came much later, long after the apostles and the apostolic fathers had passed. It is to the Lord Jesus that we look for all things pertaining to salvation and in him do we trust. Glory to the Father and to the Son and to the Holy Spirit, now and forever, amen.
It's really not. There's 3 only begotten sons in Scripture: Isaac John the Baptist Christ. Sarah and Elizabeth would never have had other children outside of God's promise, and the births of Isaac and John wouldn't have been miraculous if there were other children. Likewise, Mary wouldn't have had other children outside of God's promise and Christ's birth wouldn't have been miraculous if there were other children. If you actually listen to the arguments from scripture which prove that through careful reading those "brothers" are not siblings, you can understand that Mary was indeed an ever virgin
Yes I don't understand why these pope loving Mary worshippers have such an issue with that ? I'm sorry to be rude and I know it's wrong but Catholics are really bothering me at this time
@@stephenbailey9969 the scriptures are not a time capsule. You have no special gift to read them perfectly as if they were, therefore doing so is a practical impossibility for you. Without such a gift, you must rely on the context from the fathers, or else you have no chance of discovering truth. The darkness of sin and ignorance into which you were born *will* overcome your reason, and you will fall into heresy. The context from the Fathers says you are wrong. Unanimously. They are more explicit about this than they are about the Trinity. That's not to say it is more important than the nature of God, but it is to say that your attempt to reason out of this topic is rank hubris.
Mike winger helped me leave the Jehovah's witnesses behind, but he did not help me overcome my sexual perversions. Only our Lady helped me with that.
Total Catholic victory over my soul.
God bless you
Beautiful testimony! I presume it was praying the rosary that did that, wasn't it?
W. God bless you. Holy Mary, pray for us.
@@AbsurdScandal it was.
The rosary changed my life.
Amen, Ave Maria
Husband: "I would like to stay chaste", Wife: "me too", Mike WInger: "isnt there someone you forgot to ask??"
The "plain reading" Mike is arguing for those passages would also lead you to believe Joseph is his natural father.
Just about to say that too!
@@macbride33 As a former Protestant, I've come to realize that the "plain reading" is a way to say, "just agree with me on how I read it". For example, the plain reading of John 6 is that Jesus and the Eucharist support the Real Presence. But, most Protestants don't believe that, so it must be a figure of speech. Even though nothing in the text suggests that this is the case. Including Jesus doubling down on what he was saying and not correcting them if he meant something else (which would be the only time in the Gospels that Jesus doesn't correct their misunderstandings on what he was saying).
@@hirakisk1973
I left Protestantism for a variety of reasons, but chose the EO over the RCC. I certainly believe in the real presence, just as I believe in regenerative baptism. I also reject sola fide and sola scriptura. Having said that, I also believe those who accept the Nicene Creed (like Winger) are in the faith, regardless of their rough edges. In the book of Revelation, all 7 churches were rebuked for very different errors and told to repent. If we don't humble ourselves accordingly, our own lampstands will be removed in the dark days ahead.
Jesus literally responded to the concerns they had about eating the flesh by saying the spirit is life, the flesh profits nothing (John 6:63). Read the rest of John 6, it is all symbolic or figure of speech, not literal. Nobody in the RCC beliefs Jesus came down as actual bread, nobody believes that eating the bread and wine means you will no longer be hungry, thirsty or die, at least I have never heard a Catholic claim they no longer have to eat or drink. Clearly when Jesus said that the spirit is life to explain his statement of eating his flesh, he meant it was a spiritual statement and not a physical statement. That is the reason that Protestants don’t take eating the flesh literally, the answer is plainly written in the text.
@@coloradodutch7480 If the people who left and lost eternal life just misunderstood what he was teaching and the only thing he meant was that they needed to believe, it's deeply messed up that he didn't clarify and just let them go.
1 Samuel 2:22 shows that Hophni and Phinehas were insulting God just by having illicit sex near the tabernacle, so yeah, I don't see what the deal is with Winger thinking that a righteous man like Joseph would take a consecrated person to bed, inside the holy residence of God.
Even the married Temple priests did not have sex while serving their terms of service in the Temple, which was why most of them stayed in the Temple to sleep; and Joseph was serving all the time in God's house, with God Himself as a permanent resident.
Here to remind, “NO GOONING”
@@Kingofkings07133 gooning damages the intellect
R E A L
@0311catholic I can for sure, and also offer you some helpful advice as someone who has also struggled with this on a very deep level.
If you want to overcome this vice, you MUST develop a disciplined and scheduled prayer life. Fr. Ripperger, as an exorcist, says that the people who have the most difficult time with vice are the ones who don't have a disciplined prayer life. Let me share with you my prayer routine to give you an idea of what this should look like.
Morning: Immediately upon waking up, pray a rosary for the intentions of overcoming specific vices, and obtaining specific virtues that you lack, be specific about what these vices/virtues are.
During the day: Pray two rosaries at some point during the day for any intentions. Also, throughout the day, continually pray the Jesus prayer or the hail Mary.
Night: Before retiring, examine your conscience and do an act of contrition, then pray the rosary again. There are no exceptions, or any good excuse for not completing this routine.
This is what this looks like, a regular, continual prayer routine, developing the habit of prayer, and as you continue to pray you become more inclined to pray, and this simply becomes a part of your daily life.
Now, it is also important to regularly practice acts of self sacrifice, fasting, abstinence from certain foods that you regularly eat or crave except on Sundays. I take a cold shower every morning and night as well, because this act of self denial also places my flesh under the subjection of my intellect. Many saints would flog themselves to do this and punish their flesh, but, this could cause self harm which isn't great. Cold showers are a perfect way to achieve the exact same thing, but it's actually quite healthy for you and brings many health benefits. If you're ever struggling with serious temptation, jump in that cold water! Put your flesh into subjection saying "NO!" Start praying to God, and for the intercession of our lady. You can also say your rosary when tempted and call upon God's help and grace to fight against it.
You start adopting these practices and I guarantee you will have a MUCH easier time getting over this vice.
@0311catholicof course I will pray for you
Any hatred of Our Blessed Lady is a sign of reprobation as Saint Louis De Montfort said. Pray the rosary and fast for Mike Winger.
I like to take the stance that St Joseph was young and made a vow of Virginity as well.
I remember reading once I think in Numbers 30 that a woman is allowed to keep her virginity even when Married to her husband, but the husband is allowed to break the Vow if he wishes, and God will forgive the woman.
I always think about Joseph being described as a "just" man in the bible. A just man would be devoted to God, and I would think that a just man would also allow his wife to keep her vow of Virginity with God.
Another reason why I take that stance is that I can't imagine that a 70 year old man would be able to travel from Nazareth > Bethlehem > Egypt by foot and would have to defend his Wife and Son from robbers and Idol worshippers in Egypt.
I think the rule was that if a husband doesn't immediatly strike down and reject a vow of virginity when he sees or hears it made by his wife, then the vow is valid and the husband can't anull it. Fathers could also do this if the girl makes it before marriage, so it seems either Mary's parents allowed it or Joseph had no problem with it, or maybe both
*I remember reading once I think in Numbers 30 that a woman is allowed to keep her virginity even when Married to her husband, but the husband is allowed to break the Vow if he wishes, and God will forgive the woman.*
Yes, and Joseph was a good man and considerate of Mary's wishes when He thought of divorcing her, but the Angel reminded him it wasn't necessary and encouraged him to stay married, and Joseph did.
The 5 blasphemies against the Immaculate Heart of Mary:
Blasphemies against the Immaculate Conception.
Blasphemies against Her Virginity.
Blasphemies against Her Divine Maternity, in refusing at the same time to recognize Her as the Mother of men.
The blasphemies of those who publicly seek to sow in the hearts of children indifference or scorn, or even hatred of this Immaculate Mother.
The offenses of those who outrage Her directly in Her Holy Images.
I feel like someone would have to be influenced by demons in order to say these things.
@@ojhn this is such blasphemy.
Honor Mary, don’t deify her.
@@sketchbook1 How is this deifying her in any way, shape, or form?
@@matthewoburke7202 using words like
“Immaculate”
“Mother of men”
“Her” (capitalized)
(And then of course there are others who use terms like, “Co-Redemptrix,” “Co-Mediatrix” and “Queen of Heaven”- at least he didn’t use those terms…)
@@sketchbook1 Tell me you don't understand Mary without telling me you don't understand Mary
The "until argument" is an IQ test. Until can and is regularly used in the way in English where the thing mentioned does not necessarily happen
“I will not eat breakfast until I die”. Catch me in the casket with eggs and bacon 😅
Let’s pray and fast for Mike Winger’s conversion.
Based and fasting-pilled
Blessed and christ-pilled
Amen
That's not gonna happen... he knows mary is a sinner who needed a Saviour as she claimed herself to need Jesus as a Saviour for her sins--> Luke 1:
47And my spirit hath rejoiced in God my Saviour.
@@davidcrane6593 Mary can claim that Jesus is Her Savior because He kept her from corruption and also brought her to heaven. Jesus grants us grace everyday so that we won’t sin.
I have discovered over my lifetime that what I thought originally was dogma is now logical when understood from a Divine perspective.
Much is based on irrefutable logic, right to the very end of any path in argument proving Dogma’s rightful existence in instruction, faith and history as Trinity and Christ-centric rooted.
All who deny that Our Lady is a perpetual virgin is not a Christian.
The Ark of the Covenant must remain without blemish. Mary is the new Ark, therefore she is pure from the beginning to the very end. It's preposterous that Protestants do not see this.
The issue here is they don’t think the marital act is a blemish. You have to deal with that. The argument from the catholic should be that something set aside for God’s purpose should not be used for a non-sacred/secular/unholy purpose. The marital act is a secular act and natural children are secular. To use Mary’s womb for someone other than God violates the sanctity of the womb made holy by Jesus’s presence
@@vinciblegaming6817 If they don't get blemish part, then they don't get being set aside either. Many Protestants do not have any sense of sacredness as being set apart for God anymore. Their denominational traditions destroyed the border between sacrum and profanum.
@@vinciblegaming6817 Many of them don't have this sacred/secular distinction anymore so this line of argumentation will not be effective either.
@@PrzybyszzMatplanety yes… you are right about that. But it’s easier to teach that from scripture with the OT, focusing in on the Ark, the Holy of Holies, and the Ezekiel gate.
You can draw from more material to promote an accurate and ancient understanding of the sacred. It needs to be taught, but the material is accessible to the Protestant.
@@vinciblegaming6817 I see your point and it is wise. It'll certainly work with those Protestant who are still within rudimentary Biblical scholarship and respect original context. Those who fell into error of "my personal interpretation is the only correct as Holy Spirit guides me but not thee" are beyond hope.
I'm surprised that Mike does not account the historical and geographic reality of Jesus' time. The intimacy and closeness of cousins and distant relatives in Middle Eastern communities is so common even to this day. When he tried to make "isn't that Jesus' mother and cousins" sound obscure, he doesn't seem to realise that a person with Semitic roots will have no issue with such statement.
The Greek word for cousin was not used, it was brother. The cousin and relative argument does not hold water.
@@soteriology400Greek wasn’t the original language, but a translation. So isn’t it at most ambiguous because the underlying word itself is ambiguous?
@@vinciblegaming6817Exactly and Greek of both Mark & Matthew is rather low quality, especially when you put it side by side with John, Luke and Paul. They had far greater mastery of the language.
@@soteriology400 That is a modern argument stripping the scriptures of the idea that culturally they were Jewish thinkers translating into another language. This means that they used Greek words for their Jewish thinking. You are projecting the assumption that because it was written in Greek, that they would be using the language as native Greek speakers. For example, in Genesis it spells out that Lot is Abraham's nephew (Gen. 12). But, Genesis calls Lot his brother (adelphoi) every time after that in the Greek Septuagint (using this as an example of Jewish thinkers translating into Greek like we see in the NT).
You are VERY RIGHT that the Greek word for "cousin" was NOT used. BUT, do you know where the Greek word for "cousin" was used? In documenting Early Church history from the early 2nd Century, Hegesippus wrote that James and Simon were the kinsmen of Jesus. Eusebius makes reference to this as well in his writings and further elaborates that they were cousins of Jesus.
There was a video floating around not too long ago on FB Reels. They were interviewing random people and asked them, "What do you call your Mom's best friend's kids"? Every African-American that was asked all responded with "Cousin". Culturally, they view them as family. There are many other cultures still around that view family differently than a literal use of a word. It was the same way back then. In Jewish culture most close family was referred to as brothers/sisters.
To add to this further, Muslims/Arabs call all their friends "brother".
I can handle someone that's clueless. And I can handle someone that's smug. I find someone that's both clueless and smug to be pretty unbearable. But when that ignorant smugness is then used to blaspheme the Theotokos, that's when my blood boils.
One cannot blaspheme a mere human, no matter how holy and blessed that human is. It’s actually blasphemy of God to do so.
@@sketchbook1 Being primarily a sin of the tongue, it will be seen to be opposed directly to the religious act of praising God. (2) It is said to be against God, **though this may be only mediately, as when the contumelious word is spoken of the saints or of sacred things, because of the relationship they sustain to God and His service.**
@@sketchbook1 Blasphemy (Gr. blaptein, “to injure”, and ph?m?, “reputation”) signifies etymologically gross irreverence towards any person or thing worthy of exalted esteem.
@@sketchbook1 I'm not sure where you're getting that definition from, but it's factually incorrect. Sorry man. Nice try.
@@Ruudes1483 that definition is exactly why it’s blasphemy against God to say that one can blaspheme any person besides Him. He alone is worthy of exaltation.
It is spiritually revolting to hear Mike Winger call Mary "a wonderful woman". Patronizing the Mother of God having just denied her perpetual virginity... it's hideous. I hope ignorance will prove a solid defence for him on judgment day.
The Blessed Ever Virgin will be vindicated and the calumniators will be silenced!
@@divineya11 there’s no prophecy, no scripture, no need for her to be vindicated.
She’s already blessed and holy enough, as a faithful (yet sinful) human chosen to give birth to and be mother to the Christ.
@@sketchbook1Hail Mary, full of grace, the Lord is with thee. Blessed are thou among women and blessed is the fruit of thy womb, Jesus
@@csongorarpad4670 The Lord was with her, for sure, and she was truly fully graced.
She was blessed above all women, also, and the fruit of her womb, Jesus, is ultimately eternally blessed, mighty, holy, sovereign, exalted.
To engage the argument: if we take Winger's "natural reading" argument seriously, the most "natural" reading of "adelphoi" is full brothers; but we know that isn't the accurate reading, since they don't share a father. So who really cares what the most "natural" reading is? In the end, all his argument proves is that he's interpreting the Scripture according to a theological tradition, much like us. Except that his tradition has no basis. Or historical pedigree. And is riddled with heresy. And is embarrassed by its own existence.
Our Lady is Semper Virgo!
54:07 dang Mike that’s crazy considering, you know, the guy who *invented* sola scriptura literally believed in the perpetual virginity of Mary
Let’s give Saint Joseph some credit here! Do people really think that Joseph knowing who Jesus was and how His conception came about would even dare to approach The Immaculate in a conjugal sense? Unthinkable!!
Brother your intro makes me want to go take back the Holy Land 🇻🇦
I don't know about other Catholic countries, but in Poland it was a general traditional view up until 19th - early 20th centuries that St. Joseph was an old man, we even have the expression "old Joseph" in our traditional Christmas carols, and also in the traditional Christmas plays he was always portrayed as an old man. So I just want to say it was a popular opinion at least in some Catholic regions.
Wagner said to comment, thus i will comment, for that which Wagner says, we do, Wagner said to comment, therefore we comment.
SO true
How are you this based
This is your brain on gooner:
*it’s spelled ‘yuor’
i wrote a paper (as a protestant) critiquing the 'protestant' position which posits that The Blessed Mother had other children. Specifically misinterpretations of Matt 1:25. lmk if i should upload it somewhere
Yes
I know it is not Scrptual but in Maria Valtorta’s writings Mary is goes into the temple as a handmaiden to the Lord & also makes a vow to him to be a perpetual virgin to honour God & pray for the coming Christ. Interestingly in this she says Joseph has made a Nazaite vow & when he is chosen to be her husband by the high priest Mary tells him her vow & he says he will combine his vow to hers. It also explains why he is so shocked at her being pregnant. This is very close to Protoevangelium of James. Though Joseph is in his late 20’s or early 30’s. Maria Valtorta also suggested that he knew her parents well. Also she relates that his brothers Children are the ones called Jesus brothers Jude & James & Mary clopas is Mary’s sister in law. I would encourage everyone to look to & read Maria Valtorta it is ver edifying & as a Catholic convert it more than any argument helped me to accept all these things about our lady ina way that gave me deep peace & that fits rationally & logically & that the evidence, scripture & the church fathers support.
This one? The Virgin Mary in the Writings of Maria...
by Gabriel M. Roschini
I find it so hard to be charitable towards protestant (and eo) preachers... I tried arguing these exact same things with some dude some weeks ago. I kind of see where his poor logic comes from since it seems he was just parroting mr.gooner himself.
The argument that James, Joses, Simon, and Judah are his biological brothers because the Bible says "brothers" and because the word appears close to his mother's mention is so incredibly weak...
Matthew 13:55: Is not this the carpenter’s son? is not his mother called Mary? and his brethren, James, and Joses, and Simon, and Judas?
would not mr.gooners argument then also mean that Jesus is the biological son of Joseph in that case, since the "natural reading" refers to "blood brothers" as he puts it. Yet we all understand (yes even the protestants) that Jesus is not the biological son of Joseph, but he is the son of God. Does mr.gooner naturally read only the second half of the verse and unnaturally read the first?
I can't stand heretical preachers...
(sidenote: my jaw literally dropped when mr.gooner said syngenēs is not used XD)
People use brother and sister all the time when they are in the same family, it was and is done. The same is not true for cousins. Second, the people likely didn't know Jesus was not Joseph's biological son. In both cases it still makes the natural reading brother (even as half brother) primary and cousin as the unlikely meaning. It is why the meaning of brother needs to be explained away and changed to cousin. If not for saying Mary had no other kids, you would never read these verses as cousins.
Mike Winger's plain reading seems to mean trying to find a Norman Rockwell painting in a 1st century middle eastern household.
You can't even find a "plain readin" of his family outside of the anglosphere. Aunts and cousins have a lot of power and kinship ties are strong. Most people in west, central, and southeast Asia view the coldness we treat our extended family as "a little strange"
The perpetual virginity of Mary is a non-problem because it’s unclear. The issue is this is used to promulgate fictions like the immaculate conception and the assumption.
I know you don’t like doing these, but you absolutely shredding these Protestants in reaction videos is priceless. You should consider doing these once a month. Reasons for such a demand:
1.The Church would greatly benefit from watching you shred prots and orthobros in reaction videos
2. Reaction videos gain traction comparatively
3. More views on these types, folks get curious. They discover scholastic Thomism
4. After 500ish years Protestant dies a gruesome death after your stuff hits the mainstream.
This was quite the unconvincing defense of perpetual virginity. If someone wants to believe it, no problem, just don’t disrespect God’s Word by pretending it teaches such a thing. It isn’t a matter of salvation if someone rejects perpetual virginity.
Yeah, cause no1 from africa or the Mediterranean ever called their close relatives brother. Its just unheard of cause some guy 2000 years later adopts a strict english reading. He is using his white privlage again.
It's also disingenuous in the current societal norms to act as though close friends don't call each other "brother," or those sort of things would never be recorded in scripture to show the close relationship between the two men.
Strict literal reading for the sake of annulling context is just as good as lying, because it's deliberately misunderstanding the point in an effort to undermine it.
@eddardgreybeard I'm sure Nazareth was a small village where a rag tag group of friends, who saw eachorher eceryday, probably hang out at each other's places and call each one of their mums "mum". I even do that with my friends family out of respect.
I know of many cultures that do that. So small narrow minded.
@@TheGreekCatholic Wait you call your friend's mom "mom" as well? Not ma'am (madam shortened), or miss'es?
@AbsurdScandal I'm not American LOL. U guys live in a massive bubble when u think Ur version of English is official
@@TheGreekCatholic Neither am I, but this is still the first time I'm hearing about this
I think profane is a better word than defile… profane is to take something holy and to use it for secular or non-holy purposes
Gooner mike can't stop taking Ls
Out of curiosity how do you interpret Matthew 1:24-25? i may have missed it in your video
“When Joseph woke from sleep, he did as the angel of the Lord commanded him: he took his wife, but knew her not until she had given birth to a son. And he called his name Jesus.”
Matthew 1:24-25 ESV
He did at 47:39
It simply drives home the point of the miraculous birth of Jesus; Joseph had nothing to do with the birth of Jesus. The use of “until” does not mean a cessation of an action. “Now, be good *until* I get home.” Does that mean you can start misbehaving once I get home?
“What does he mean then by saying, 'for he must reign, till he hath put all enemies under his feet'? Is the Lord to reign only until His enemies begin to be under His feet, and once they are under His feet will He cease to reign ? Of course His reign will then commence in its fulness when His enemies begin to be under His feet." - St. Jerome; Against Helvidius Paragraph 6
"This passage afforded the pretext for great disturbances, which were introduced into the Church, at a former period, by Helvidius. The inference he drew from it was, that Mary remained a virgin no longer than till her first birth, and that afterwards she had other children by her husband. Jerome, on the other hand, earnestly and copiously defended Mary’s perpetual virginity. Let us rest satisfied with this, that no just and well-grounded inference can be drawn from these words of the Evangelist, as to what took place after the birth of Christ. He is called first-born; but it is for the sole purpose of informing us that he was born of a virgin. It is said that Joseph knew her not till she had brought forth her first-born son: but this is limited to that very time. What took place afterwards, the historian does not inform us. Such is well known to have been the practice of the inspired writers. Certainly, no man will ever raise a question on this subject, except from curiosity; and no man will obstinately keep up the argument, except from an extreme fondness for disputation." - John Calvin
The answer is that the term "until" does not mean that something will necessarily take place after a set amount of time. For example, Jesus saying that He will be with us until the end of time, does not mean that Jesus will no longer be with us after the end time's. We know that those who are granted salvation at their death will be with Jesus forever.
Another great example is of 2 Samuel 6:23: "And Saul's daughter Michal bore no children from that day on until the day she died."
So the translation and use of the term "until" does not mean that something necessarily happened after a certain thing took place.
@@csongorarpad4670thanks for clarifying your understanding of that passage. i disagree with your comparison but appreciate the answer.
When we said "This is not about the Lactation of Saint Bernard," i felt that.
brotoher, this intro song- can you give me a link?
It’s called song of kings
Its a waste of time trying to agrue with heretics who get to twist our Lords inspired scriotures for personal interpretation. Thanks be to God for his Holy Catholic Church 🙏 Holy Mary pray for us, St Michael defend us, our Lord Jesus Christ mave mercy on us 🙏
Just heard the II Sam 6 argument. The context of Michal is the punishment resulting in her never having kids as she had no kids till she died. That is clearly not the same context or semantic meaning as in Matthew, very poor reasoning.
Even Jesus said No!
Luke 11 : 27 - 29
And it came to pass, as he spake these things, a certain woman of the company lifted up her voice, and said unto him, Blessed is the womb that bare thee, and the paps which thou hast sucked.
But he said, Yea rather, blessed are they that hear the word of God, and keep it.
And when the people were gathered thick together, he began to say, This is an evil generation: they seek a sign; and there shall no sign be given it, but the sign of Jonas the prophet.
Kinda crazy how in Ninevah they worshipped Ishtar and Tammuz
Gooners always taking L's
Gooners gonna goon
Mike Winger early life check?
Full brothers would mean they had the same mother and father so if Winger claims full brothers does he mean God was their father? I don't understand. They can't be full brothers if Joseph is their father, they technically would be step brothers (though everyone at that time would have assumed then that Joseph sired Jesus).
At 41:15 you say, "Just read McCue". How do you spell that? What's the title of the text?
that music you used in the intro, where is it originally from?
I enjoy the joy you get dunking on Winger. You are at your happiest in these streams.
Got to his ridicule of ‘until’. At no time did Mike claim that in Samuel in context ‘until’ has the same meaning as in Mathew. This guy just completely slandered Mike with a false statement. While this guy doesn’t like the context of ‘until’ in Mathew by diverting to Greek (note that until is in context) and ridiculing the word ‘until’ in Samuel by taking it out of context, the meaning of until as mentioned by Mike fits.
Why Protestants call her the Virgin Mary? Maybe because she is the only woman to conceive as a virgin as in Isaiah’s prophecy of the virgin will conceive. A directly prophesied miracle birth from a virgin seems to be attested better then the perpetual virginity claim.
Could it be that Mary asked the question, how could it be? because as a Jewish woman she would know Isaiah 7:14? As a Jewish woman she would look forward to messiah. That seems to be way more likely for a Jewish woman than assuming a vow of virginity.
47:41 was the part that I was waiting all along 😂
You’re the next Michael lofton I pray you get 100k
@@carsonianthegreat4672 no I like lofton a lot
@Marcissus Cringe
This is such nonsense. Jesus had biological brothers, not cousins or stepbrothers.
This intro goes hard.
It does raise a question. Then I suppose Joseph has gone back to Abraham time where he will have concubines. As a man; those who are married can never stay away from intercourse.
Since Mary and Joseph are married; (which goes against Catholicism belief for their belief that Mary was a person who is like the vestal virgin which means who have consecrated herself to remain single and not be married) (as we see in the gospel; she was betrothed to Joseph which shows she did not consecrated herself to be like the vestal virgin ( Romans practice to their gods) So. If two people are married and are alive; God also would not go against the nature of abstaining them from sexual intercourse.
Then the only option for that is if Joseph is having concubine to meet the needs. The. That also questions what about Mary needs?
Due to men commandments added up to the word of God; we have involved ourselves in useless and in vain conversation and arguments which does not give glory to God.
How far we are away from the true simplicity of the gospel of Jesus.
Love Mike Winger. He’s got a great channel and you can tell he’s very sincere in his theology. He does great work. Learned a lot from him. Keep going Mike
Yet he blasphemes the holy Theotokos and thus also insults God in a most heinous way
Why does the natural reading imply brothers? Because that is what it says, even in Greek. Why look up the semantic range of the meaning of the word if it is the natural meaning? Because you know it isn’t the natural meaning and the natural meaning doesn’t fit the doctrine of perpetual virginity. If not for the doctrine of perpetual virginity, there wouldn’t be any question as to the natural reading as brothers. Mark 6:4 doesn’t prove this guy’s claim at all. Syngenes is not referring to the brothers and sisters in vs3, it is Jesus talking about a prophet has no honor in his country, with his relatives (syngenes) and his own house.
what is the chant in the begining before the stream?
Song of Kings - Clamavi de Profundis
Song of Kings by Clamavi de Profundis. They are a family of singers with a healthy mix of sacred music and epic fantasy and Tolkien-inspired stuff. And they're Catholic.
@@Nate-ri5lzthe trinity of Christ-pilled goodness 😊
Mike Whinger
If you decide to believe and follow these false Preaches, then you have no one to blame but yourself.
Sorry what's gooning? 😂😂
It's slang for self-abuse
@eddardgreybeard ahh I see. Thanks for that
I wonder if Mike think that all mothers are the mother of Jesus as his Marry is, since Jesus say whosoever do the will of my father, he is my Mother 😢
Interesting. Every Reformed I know deny in partu and post partum.
Gooner Mike at it again lol
Blessed Anne Catherine Emmerich saw in her visions that Our Lady did have an older sister who was called Mary, and there’s a medieval tradition that St Anne had three daughters, all of which were named Mary
That's... An odd naming choice. Why all 3? Wouldn't it get confusing?
That's weird since it is tradition that St. Anne was barren, and concieved the Virgin Mary in old age. And then that Mary was consecrated to the temple and grew up there. (Which was a feastday celebrated by at least some parts of the church, mainly east I think.) That seems more fitting of Gods work, but its not dogmatic so you don't have to believe it.
…huh.
@@eals255 being barren and conceiving Mary in her old age doesn’t necessarily imply that she was always barren (and old)
@@HerImmaculateHeart To be more precise it is believed she was like many other Biblical woman barren and without children, so a sad time for them, but then God gave them Mary after St. Anne's childbearing age, through a miracle which is a foreshadowing of the even more miraculous conception of Jesus in Mary.
More like Mike Wingingit *amiright*
Hee hee
Hi Christian Wagner, can you tell me please, why are you calling to kill people when they don't agree with you? You've made such statements on X Portlas. Is it allowed in the USA to kill sb when you don't agree with him?
Is he saying McHugh for Mary if Clopas, or am I mishearing? Anyone got a link?
I think it’s John McHugh and the book is called “The mother of Jesus in the New Testament”
I hope you asked clamavi de profundis for license.... you've got a good channel, but that group is wonderful.
Did Wagner discuss about Revelation 12?
Hard to take winger seriously. Just another false teacher.
Thinking Heretically
Really appreciate this video.
He means well but
How will he ever recover?
He can recover by becoming Catholic
Never goon
John 5:39-47
Seems like Protestants foundation to me.
Does it say “only”? Because I found this: “These things write I unto thee, hoping to come unto thee shortly: But if I tarry long, that thou mayest know how thou oughtest to behave thyself in the house of God, which is *the church* of the living God, *the pillar and ground of the truth.”*
1 Timothy 3:14-15
@atgred not sure what you mean...but I'm referring to here what appears to be Jesus refutation of those holding to sola scriptura. Would you concur?
Missed the Stream :(
Stop saying the NT was written in Greek. Matthew's Gospel wasn't.
🤓
@@MilitantThomist cry and mock all you want, you're wrong.
Babylon bagel
Babylon B-Rag
What are gooners?
@@aaronking9332 it refers to a type of sexual impurity.
It's a meme around Mike because he doesn't think sexual impurity is sinful as long as you do it by yourself
Okay I think I am reading between the lines as explained...friends that's probably not super helpful or charitable to direct toward someone who I would say has some serious blind spots but seems to genuinely love our Lord. Let's pray for him and our own charity. Pointing out errors and mistakes in charity, not preaching as I cross the line myself sometimes. Calling him names or perpetuating a meme won't help him see his error and might even keep others who might benefit from hearing the valid points shared here to receive them.
Indulgers in self lust
Comment
I don’t see why it matters, the virgin birth clearly matters but I don’t see why it matters if she had sex with her husband after the birth of our Lord or not. Mary is clearly blessed and should be held in high regard in the church but I really don’t get why we argue over this, there’s bigger fish to fry.
Key: “I don’t see….”
Leviticus 10:10
“You must distinguish between what is sacred and what is common, between what is unclean and what is clean.”
Joseph shepherded her. Thats history.
She gave birth to the pure flesh and blood of God incarnate, and you think Joseph is going to think:
“Well.. now we can have our own…”
??
Knowing she was chosen as the Ark of the New Covenant, which housed the Word of God/The bread of life.
It matters because you have to reject what this religion has always taught, rooted in history, in favor of what subjectively matters to you and what does not matter.
@@Ancient_Man_In_Modern_World I’m not saying I disagree and I’m not taking up for winger, I’m pointing out that there’s bigger issues to attend to than this. The insanity that has come into most denominations has put the average professing Christian so far from the basics that I wouldn’t even waste my breath arguing about this, it’s practically a foreign language. The Catholic Church doesn’t lack its wolves in sheep’s clothing either, thankfully none of them seem to have gained enough power to pervert the fundamental doctrine. By Gods grace all the devices of satan against Christs bride will fail, the church will be reunited and its position renewed.
@@williamharris1890 You say “the basics”
But what are “the basics” ?
In light of Martin Lutherfer snatching two of the seven sacraments, calling them valid and negating the rest of what Jesus taught?
@@williamharris1890 Also, there has always been infiltrators within.
But, with the apostolic Church, they are easy to spot when they begin teaching false doctrine.
However, with the thousands and thousands of scattered and divided Protestant denominations, there is no distinction that can be made when discerning truth from delusion and error.
Why? Because the constant appeal is:
“Well.. that’s just your interpretation…”
And everyone gets to go home “agreeing to disagree” without resolve of anything.
Like an unhealthy relationship waiting to implode on itself,
It’s just a matter of time.
@@Ancient_Man_In_Modern_World the simple things that are more plain in scripture is what I would consider the basics. The moral doctrines of the church and how they apply to Christ our Lord. Milk, as St. Paul would put it, before meat. On this topic, the virgin birth is clearly a must and scripture is very clear on it. The perpetual virginity is a deeper understanding, the meat if you will. I wouldn’t waste my time trying to explain the deeper teachings of scripture to someone who completely ignores the plain, moral pillars of scripture and the church, and teaches others to do the same in the name of Christ our King.
Why does it matter if she retained her virginity after Jesus the birth? It does not change the core of the gospel
It doesn’t really matter but Catholics both Roman and Eastern take Mary’s perpetual virginity to be important.
The most natural reading of scriptures is that Jesus was the firstborn of Mary and that she had other children later.
There is no reason to think that such would not be the case.
Other suggestions came much later, long after the apostles and the apostolic fathers had passed.
It is to the Lord Jesus that we look for all things pertaining to salvation and in him do we trust. Glory to the Father and to the Son and to the Holy Spirit, now and forever, amen.
The most natural reading of scripture is that she was an everlasting virgin.
It's really not.
There's 3 only begotten sons in Scripture:
Isaac
John the Baptist
Christ.
Sarah and Elizabeth would never have had other children outside of God's promise, and the births of Isaac and John wouldn't have been miraculous if there were other children.
Likewise, Mary wouldn't have had other children outside of God's promise and Christ's birth wouldn't have been miraculous if there were other children.
If you actually listen to the arguments from scripture which prove that through careful reading those "brothers" are not siblings, you can understand that Mary was indeed an ever virgin
Yes I don't understand why these pope loving Mary worshippers have such an issue with that ? I'm sorry to be rude and I know it's wrong but Catholics are really bothering me at this time
@@stephenbailey9969 the scriptures are not a time capsule.
You have no special gift to read them perfectly as if they were, therefore doing so is a practical impossibility for you.
Without such a gift, you must rely on the context from the fathers, or else you have no chance of discovering truth. The darkness of sin and ignorance into which you were born *will* overcome your reason, and you will fall into heresy.
The context from the Fathers says you are wrong. Unanimously. They are more explicit about this than they are about the Trinity. That's not to say it is more important than the nature of God, but it is to say that your attempt to reason out of this topic is rank hubris.
@@eddardgreybeard I'm not certain about this argument, but it's extremely based so I will support it for now.
Peace of Christ brother.
Song at start?
Song of Kings, Clamavi de Profundis.