Josiah: "You've repeatedly accused me of being WRONG in my view of Mary"
What is your view?
Ironic question since you've repeatedly called it wrong.
If you don't even know what it is, why do you keep posting that my position is wrong?
You seem to continually get things upside down. YOU are the one insisting that it's a dogmatic fact of greatest importance, relevance and certainty of truth that Mary Had No Sex Ever. It's YOUR position. And the issue is this: Is it true?
Let's review the discussion of this topic so far....
1. "It's a dogmatic fact of greatest certainty, importance and relevance that Mary Had No Sex Ever because Mary said to the angel, 'How can this be since I will forever more be a virgin until my death and/or undeath." Wrong
. As has been shown, the verb is PRESENT tense, not future perfect. Besides, such an interpretation (while grammatically IMPOSSIBLE) actually violates Catholic Tradition that you supposedly uphold.
2. "It's a dogmatic fact of greatest certainty, importance and relevance that Mary Had No Sex Ever because every bishop - East and West - since 31 AD taught that Mary Had No Sex Ever." Wrong
. NOT A SINGLE Bishop was (or can be) quoted teaching this - even a pure pious opinion - in the First Century. Or even second. It was not even declared a teaching until the 8th Century.
3. "It's a dogmatic fact of greatest certainty, importance and relevance that Mary Had No Sex Ever because the rejected, false, book of the Protoevangelium of James (c. 200 AD) teaches it." Wrong
. It never mentions it. At all. And it would be moot if it did, it's a false book rejected as teaching wrongly.
4. "It's a dogmatic fact of greatest certainty, importance and relevance that Mary Had No Sex Ever because it cannot be proven that Mary had any other children." Moot
. Having no children does not mandate having no sex. The dogma is NOT that Jesus had no sibs it's that Mary had no sex.
It's claimed that this DOGMA is true. It needs to be verified to the level claimed: as a matter of greatest importance, relevance and certainty of truth. So far, nothing has been offered of any substantiation (I'm not counting all the personal attacks, flames, evasions, diversions, "you anti! accusations by persons who actually are anti whereas I'm not, etc. - only actual attempts to substantiate the dogma as true).
What's ya got to support this insistence as true?
OBVIOUSLY, I have not "stopped" anyone from substantiating the insistence, I've been the one seeking it.
OBVIOUSLY, I have not "stopped" anyone from sharing an article of faith, but the insistence here has been the RCC one - that it's true (in fact, dogma).
IF I could post, It is a dogmatic fact of greatest importance, relevance and certainty of truth that Martin Luther had no sin" I doubt you'd just give a "pass" on whether such is true. The RCC gives a "pass" to no other and yet.....
The "I won't give any substantiation for what I insist is a dogmatic fact cuz you're pic'n on me" is just not constructive conversation or apologetics of any kind.
Friend, all the personal stuff is coming from YOU, not me. I'm trying to discuss the Dogma and whether it's true. You seem to rather want to discuss me (why, I don't know - I'm not that interesting or important).
Friend, the good folks here gave the Catholics (exclusively) a forum where they are protected from questions, facts, etc.; where only Catholics can talk to Catholics. You have chosen to not post there but here. Friend, there are MANY "Catholic Only" websites were all are to just give quiet, docility submission to whatever the RCC itself says and the truthfulness of such is moot; if that's what you need or want, I recommend you post there.
But let's get back to the issue before us. It is one that divides Christians at the highest level, as dogma.