Political Crossfire Forums

[perdidochas]

LetsGetReal wrote: perdidochas wrote: cap'n queasy wrote: Quote: you can't find significant documents to assert that Mary had other children beyond vague references in the Bible

They don't seem that vague at all to me.

Explaining them away by saying they meant a cousin or something is pretty specious in my opinion.

Have you read the Gospels in Aramaic? Honestly, to say that argument is specious is specious. I truly don't have a problem with you guys claiming she was a virgin her whole life. I don't believe thats truly that important, but when you say she didn't sin, was perfect, and the bride of Jesus we have some big problems.

She was without sin, not due to herself (as is the case with Jesus), but due to the actions of Jesus. The Church is the bride of Jesus. Mary is the Mother of Jesus.

[cap'n queasy]

perdidochas wrote: cap'n queasy wrote: Quote: you can't find significant documents to assert that Mary had other children beyond vague references in the Bible

They don't seem that vague at all to me.

Explaining them away by saying they meant a cousin or something is pretty specious in my opinion.

Have you read the Gospels in Aramaic? Honestly, to say that argument is specious is specious.
No, it's not.

Aramiac is not the original language the Gospels or New Testament were written in. But I have read them in Koine Greek, which is the language they were written in, and they say brother and sister, not cousin.

The words used are adelphos=brother,and adelphe= sister.

The thing about the Greek language is it is very precise. The words do not have ambiguous meanings. Furthermore if you bother to actually read the chapter in question Y'shua clearly mentions that these are members of His immediate family who do not believe in Him.

If Mary is a co-redemptrix, and has all of these special extrahuman attributes, like perpetual virginity and being the Queen of Heaven, how come the scripture never mentions any of them and, in fact, condemns these types of ideas?

[cap'n queasy]

Quote: Matthew 1:23 "BEHOLD , THE VIRGIN SHALL BE WITH CHILD AND SHALL BEAR A SON, AND THEY SHALL CALL HIS NAME IMMANUEL ," which translated means, "GOD WITH US." 24 And Joseph awoke from his sleep and did as the angel of the Lord commanded him, and took Mary as his wife, 25 but kept her a virgin until she gave birth to a Son; and he called His name Jesus.

How come Matthew tells us that Joseph kept Mary a virgin until she bore this child instead of pointing out that Mary was to be a perptual virgin?

There are some very real doctrinal issues with such an idea.

[John]

Quote: The thing about the Greek language is it is very precise. The words do not have ambiguous meanings.



Exactly. Which is why I believe God set things up to where the New Testament used Greek. It is very precise and there are few if and or buts if you do your homework.

[perdidochas]

cap'n queasy wrote: perdidochas wrote: cap'n queasy wrote: Quote: you can't find significant documents to assert that Mary had other children beyond vague references in the Bible

They don't seem that vague at all to me.

Explaining them away by saying they meant a cousin or something is pretty specious in my opinion.

Have you read the Gospels in Aramaic? Honestly, to say that argument is specious is specious.
No, it's not.

Aramiac is not the original language the Gospels or New Testament were written in. But I have read them in Koine Greek, which is the language they were written in, and they say brother and sister, not cousin.

The words used are adelphos=brother,and adelphe= sister.

The thing about the Greek language is it is very precise. The words do not have ambiguous meanings. Furthermore if you bother to actually read the chapter in question Y'shua clearly mentions that these are members of His immediate family who do not believe in Him.

A few things: 1) In the Septuagint (Greek translation of the Hebrew OT), adelphos is used for things other than brother . It is also used to denote nephew (to describe the relationship between Abraham and Lot). So much for the precision argument.....
2) If Mary had other sons besides Jesus, why did Jesus commend her to the care of John, who was definitely not related by blood? Makes no sense.

cap'n queasy wrote: If Mary is a co-redemptrix, and has all of these special extrahuman attributes, like perpetual virginity and being the Queen of Heaven, how come the scripture never mentions any of them and, in fact, condemns these types of ideas?

You consider perpetual virginity extrahuman? I think there are quite a few humans who were perpetually virgins throughout their life.

[John]

Quote: 2) If Mary had other sons besides Jesus, why did Jesus commend her to the care of John, who was definitely not related by blood? Makes no sense.


Because he lived the longest. Makes perfect sense when you understand who Jesus is.

[perdidochas]

John wrote: Quote: 2) If Mary had other sons besides Jesus, why did Jesus commend her to the care of John, who was definitely not related by blood? Makes no sense.


Because he lived the longest. Makes perfect sense when you understand who Jesus is.
Whatever

[LetsGetReal]

perdidochas wrote: LetsGetReal wrote: perdidochas wrote: cap'n queasy wrote: Quote: you can't find significant documents to assert that Mary had other children beyond vague references in the Bible

They don't seem that vague at all to me.

Explaining them away by saying they meant a cousin or something is pretty specious in my opinion.

Have you read the Gospels in Aramaic? Honestly, to say that argument is specious is specious. I truly don't have a problem with you guys claiming she was a virgin her whole life. I don't believe thats truly that important, but when you say she didn't sin, was perfect, and the bride of Jesus we have some big problems.

She was without sin, not due to herself (as is the case with Jesus), but due to the actions of Jesus. The Church is the bride of Jesus. Mary is the Mother of Jesus. So she never commited one sin in her whole life? I'm not asking if they were forgiven, but if she commited one.

[cap'n queasy]

Quote: 2) If Mary had other sons besides Jesus, why did Jesus commend her to the care of John, who was definitely not related by blood? Makes no sense.

Because his other brothers ands sisters were not believers at the time.



Quote: A few things: 1) In the Septuagint (Greek translation of the Hebrew OT), adelphos is used for things other than brother . It is also used to denote nephew (to describe the relationship between Abraham and Lot). So much for the precision argument.....

It uses the word adelphos because the term used for nephew in the LXX is "son of my brother".

:lol:

So much for that lame argument.

[John]

cap'n queasy wrote: Quote: 2) If Mary had other sons besides Jesus, why did Jesus commend her to the care of John, who was definitely not related by blood? Makes no sense.

Because his other brothers ands sisters were not believers at the time.



Quote: A few things: 1) In the Septuagint (Greek translation of the Hebrew OT), adelphos is used for things other than brother . It is also used to denote nephew (to describe the relationship between Abraham and Lot). So much for the precision argument.....

It uses the word adelphos because the term used for nephew in the LXX is "son of my brother".

:lol:

So much for that lame argument.


I don't understand the need to believe that Jesus didn't have half brothers and sisters.

[psholtz]

cap'n queasy wrote: perdidochas wrote: cap'n queasy wrote: Quote: you can't find significant documents to assert that Mary had other children beyond vague references in the Bible

They don't seem that vague at all to me.

Explaining them away by saying they meant a cousin or something is pretty specious in my opinion.

Have you read the Gospels in Aramaic? Honestly, to say that argument is specious is specious.
No, it's not.

Aramiac is not the original language the Gospels or New Testament were written in.
Aramaic was the language Jesus Christ spoke and taught in.

[Todd D.]

Quote: How come Matthew tells us that Joseph kept Mary a virgin until she bore this child instead of pointing out that Mary was to be a perptual virgin?
Isaiah 46:4, God says "Even until your old age and gray hairs
I am he, I am he who will sustain you.
I have made you and I will carry you;
I will sustain you and I will rescue you."

Are you suggesting that once we get old (or even once Isaiah got old), God was no longer the great "I Am"?

English 101: "Until" denotes preterite and imperfect tenses, conditions which occur at some point BEFORE the effect. Mary was a virgin UNTIL Christ was born means nothing more than Jesus was born of a virgin. It neither confirms nor denies that Mary had relations following Christ's birth.

Quote: Because his other brothers ands sisters were not believers at the time.
It was just claimed that James, the supposed blood brother of Christ, became the first Bishop of Jerusalem. Surely Jesus knew that would have happened.

Regardless, it wouldn't have mattered. With other siblings around, there would have been no need to place Mary in John's care, as that decision would have immediately defaulted to the next brother anyway.

(I also think you are missing the big picture of what that passage means. Jesus was not telling John alone "Behold, your mother". He was telling you as well.)

[Todd D.]

John wrote: cap'n queasy wrote: Quote: 2) If Mary had other sons besides Jesus, why did Jesus commend her to the care of John, who was definitely not related by blood? Makes no sense.

Because his other brothers ands sisters were not believers at the time.



Quote: A few things: 1) In the Septuagint (Greek translation of the Hebrew OT), adelphos is used for things other than brother . It is also used to denote nephew (to describe the relationship between Abraham and Lot). So much for the precision argument.....

It uses the word adelphos because the term used for nephew in the LXX is "son of my brother".

:lol:

So much for that lame argument.


I don't understand the need to believe that Jesus didn't have half brothers and sisters.
There really isn't one. That's why I think the issue is rather silly to get worked up about. I think there's significant evidence on both sides to suggest that she either did or did not have children. I personally tend to think it's more logical to believe that she stayed a virgin, you disagree. What's the big deal?

[John]

Quote: Isaiah 46:4, God says "Even until your old age and gray hairs
I am he, I am he who will sustain you.
I have made you and I will carry you;
I will sustain you and I will rescue you."

Are you suggesting that once we get old (or even once Isaiah got old), God was no longer the great "I Am"?

English 101: "Until" denotes preterite and imperfect tenses, conditions which occur at some point BEFORE the effect. Mary was a virgin UNTIL Christ was born means nothing more than Jesus was born of a virgin. It neither confirms nor denies that Mary had relations following Christ's birth.

But the passage is referring to Joseph, that he kept her a virgin....until....after Christ was born.

[cap'n queasy]

Quote: It neither confirms nor denies that Mary had relations following Christ's birth.


It confirms that Joseph kept her a virgin until the child was born. Which implies that she lived as a normal married woman afterward.

Quote: What's the big deal?

Nothing I guess. ;P :lol:

[ChuckBerry]

melchizedek22 wrote: CCD wrote: This is the Catholic Church's official teaching on the perpetual virginity of Mary:

Mary's virginity

496 From the first formulations of her faith, the Church has confessed that Jesus was conceived solely by the power of the Holy Spirit in the womb of the Virgin Mary, affirming also the corporeal aspect of this event: Jesus was conceived "by the Holy Spirit without human seed".146 The Fathers see in the virginal conception the sign that it truly was the Son of God who came in a humanity like our own. Thus St. Ignatius of Antioch at the beginning of the second century says:


You are firmly convinced about our Lord, who is truly of the race of David according to the flesh, Son of God according to the will and power of God, truly born of a virgin,. . . he was truly nailed to a tree for us in his flesh under Pontius Pilate. . . he truly suffered, as he is also truly risen.147

497 The Gospel accounts understand the virginal conception of Jesus as a divine work that surpasses all human understanding and possibility:148 "That which is conceived in her is of the Holy Spirit", said the angel to Joseph about Mary his fiancee.149 The Church sees here the fulfillment of the divine promise given through the prophet Isaiah: "Behold, a virgin shall conceive and bear a son."150

498 People are sometimes troubled by the silence of St. Mark's Gospel and the New Testament Epistles about Jesus' virginal conception. Some might wonder if we were merely dealing with legends or theological constructs not claiming to be history. To this we must respond: Faith in the virginal conception of Jesus met with the lively opposition, mockery or incomprehension of non-believers, Jews and pagans alike;151 so it could hardly have been motivated by pagan mythology or by some adaptation to the ideas of the age. The meaning of this event is accessible only to faith, which understands in it the "connection of these mysteries with one another"152 in the totality of Christ's mysteries, from his Incarnation to his Passover. St. Ignatius of Antioch already bears witness to this connection: "Mary's virginity and giving birth, and even the Lord's death escaped the notice of the prince of this world: these three mysteries worthy of proclamation were accomplished in God's silence."153

Mary - "ever-virgin"

499 The deepening of faith in the virginal motherhood led the Church to confess Mary's real and perpetual virginity even in the act of giving birth to the Son of God made man.154 In fact, Christ's birth "did not diminish his mother's virginal integrity but sanctified it."155 And so the liturgy of the Church celebrates Mary as Aeiparthenos, the "Ever-virgin".156

500 Against this doctrine the objection is sometimes raised that the Bible mentions brothers and sisters of Jesus.157 The Church has always understood these passages as not referring to other children of the Virgin Mary. In fact James and Joseph, "brothers of Jesus", are the sons of another Mary, a disciple of Christ, whom St. Matthew significantly calls "the other Mary".158 They are close relations of Jesus, according to an Old Testament expression.159

501 Jesus is Mary's only son, but her spiritual motherhood extends to all men whom indeed he came to save: "The Son whom she brought forth is he whom God placed as the first-born among many brethren, that is, the faithful in whose generation and formation she co-operates with a mother's love."160

Mary's virginal motherhood in God's plan

502 The eyes of faith can discover in the context of the whole of Revelation the mysterious reasons why God in his saving plan wanted his Son to be born of a virgin. These reasons touch both on the person of Christ and his redemptive mission, and on the welcome Mary gave that mission on behalf of all men.

503 Mary's virginity manifests God's absolute initiative in the Incarnation. Jesus has only God as Father. "He was never estranged from the Father because of the human nature which he assumed. . . He is naturally Son of the Father as to his divinity and naturally son of his mother as to his humanity, but properly Son of the Father in both natures."161

504 Jesus is conceived by the Holy Spirit in the Virgin Mary's womb because he is the New Adam, who inaugurates the new creation: "The first man was from the earth, a man of dust; the second man is from heaven."162 From his conception, Christ's humanity is filled with the Holy Spirit, for God "gives him the Spirit without measure."163 From "his fullness" as the head of redeemed humanity "we have all received, grace upon grace."164

505 By his virginal conception, Jesus, the New Adam, ushers in the new birth of children adopted in the Holy Spirit through faith. "How can this be?"165 Participation in the divine life arises "not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God".166 The acceptance of this life is virginal because it is entirely the Spirit's gift to man. The spousal character of the human vocation in relation to God167 is fulfilled perfectly in Mary's virginal motherhood.


506 Mary is a virgin because her virginity is the sign of her faith "unadulterated by any doubt", and of her undivided gift of herself to God's will.168 It is her faith that enables her to become the mother of the Savior: "Mary is more blessed because she embraces faith in Christ than because she conceives the flesh of Christ."169

507 At once virgin and mother, Mary is the symbol and the most perfect realization of the Church: "the Church indeed. . . by receiving the word of God in faith becomes herself a mother. By preaching and Baptism she brings forth sons, who are conceived by the Holy Spirit and born of God, to a new and immortal life. She herself is a virgin, who keeps in its entirety and purity the faith she pledged to her spouse."170

http://www.scborromeo.org/ccc/p122a3p2.htm#484

BS in spades

Riveting analysis.

And thanks to the rest of you for ignoring this post.

[Todd D.]

Quote: But the passage is referring to Joseph, that he kept her a virgin....until....after Christ was born.
More specifically it says he kept her a virgin until Christ was born. Like I said, that speaks NOTHING to what happened later.

Quote: It confirms that Joseph kept her a virgin until the child was born. Which implies that she lived as a normal married woman afterward.
Again, it speaks nothing over what happened later. The Greek Orthodox, for example, believe that Joseph was an older widower and that Mary was a consecrated virgin even before Christ was conceived. In that context, "normal" would not have been to have any children and continue as a virgin anyway.

[John]

Quote: More specifically it says he kept her a virgin until Christ was born. Like I said, that speaks NOTHING to what happened later.

Well....add that to the Bible mentioning Christ's brothers and sisters...and it seems like a closed case.


Like Galatians 1....



8 Then three years later I went up to Jerusalem to become acquainted with Cephas, and stayed with him fifteen days.

19 But I did not see any other of the apostles except James, the Lord's brother.

20 (Now in what I am writing to you, I assure you before God that I am not lying.)

[Todd D.]

Quote: Well....add that to the Bible mentioning Christ's brothers and sisters...and it seems like a closed case.


Like Galatians 1....



8 Then three years later I went up to Jerusalem to become acquainted with Cephas, and stayed with him fifteen days.

19 But I did not see any other of the apostles except James, the Lord's brother.

20 (Now in what I am writing to you, I assure you before God that I am not lying.)
There were only two Apostles named James: James son of Zebedee (sp?) and James "the lesser", son of Clopas.

So, is it more likely that Mary had relations with either Zebedee or Clopas, or is it referring to the son of Clopas and Mary's Sister (who, according to the Gospels, was also named Mary)? Such a situation would result in James the lesser being Jesus's cousin, and the word would "brother" in Koine would absolutely be appropriate to describe such a relationship.

[perdidochas]

John wrote: cap'n queasy wrote: Quote: 2) If Mary had other sons besides Jesus, why did Jesus commend her to the care of John, who was definitely not related by blood? Makes no sense.

Because his other brothers ands sisters were not believers at the time.



Quote: A few things: 1) In the Septuagint (Greek translation of the Hebrew OT), adelphos is used for things other than brother . It is also used to denote nephew (to describe the relationship between Abraham and Lot). So much for the precision argument.....

It uses the word adelphos because the term used for nephew in the LXX is "son of my brother".

:lol:

So much for that lame argument.


I don't understand the need to believe that Jesus didn't have half brothers and sisters.

It's inconceivable to me that after bearing the Son of God in her womb for 9 months, that Mary would have any more children.