Did Jesus have brothers and sisters born of Mary

[Mobiosity]

Christ is the only begotten Son of the Father. It would be rather bizarre for him at the same time to be just one of a crowd for his mother.

Bizarre? Why?

 

[Mobiosity]

All those generations of ancestors in preparation, and then magic the Lord out of a hat? I don't think so.

I don't think that is what she intended.
My Bible study is currently in Genesis and if He spoke the universe into being, a person would be a cinch.

I think you are mistaking 'God's plan' for 'God's need'. The two are not the same; the Lord was the most planned baby in the whole history of the world.

God has no needs. As omnipotent, omnicient and omnipresent, things are as He wills.

Obviously this is my opinion, not Rosenherman's.

 

[Mobiosity]

The Bible is not clear on this point, but tradition certainly is. Tradition tells us very clearly, and unequivocally, that Mary is a perpetual Virgin, and that the Lord was her only child. The brothers of the Lord mentioned in Scripture are children of Joseph by a former marriage.

As has been said, there is no way of proving this either way, but I am happy to accept that this is a point on which I am uninformed, but for which tradition has a very clear answer, both in Orthodoxy and Roman Catholicism, and therefore also in High Anglicanism.

Even if 'Perpetual Virgin' proves ultimately to be only to be an honorific, it is at least erring on the side of polite caution. To me, it is an appropriate way of regarding the Theotokos, and all else is not for us to speculate about.

Tradition is all very well and good, however it isn't absolute truth.

 

[seashale76]

Tradition is all very well and good, however it isn't absolute truth.

The faith that was Traditioned to the Apostles isn't the absolute truth? I disagree.

 

[kiwimac]

Mary of Nazareth's virginity is a dogma. It is, moreover, a not-very-important one at that. I suggest that if it is important for you, you keep it. For me I rejoice in the likelihood that Mary and Joseph were lovers.

 

[CaliforniaJosiah]

.

Dogma, theory, superstition, doctrine; it doesn't matter what you call it; unless you were in bed with Joseph and Mary - you don't know whether they ever made love or not. No one does. The reports are all, at best, second hand.

1. I understand your second point. Who do you think likely knew about this "bedroom activity" as you put it? Why would he/she regard it as something so critically, fundamentally important so as it needed to be shared as a matter of most importance with everyone? I know you can only purely theorize (and such would hardly qualify as dogma), but any guesses?

2. I respectfully disagree with your first point. IMHO, it matters much whether it is pure speculation or pious opinion or dogma. Dogma is a matter of highest importance and greatest certainty - a matter about which salvation hinges. Someone disagreeing with dogma may be anathmatized, removed, excommunicated, condemned; people have been dispatched ahead of schedule smelling like smoke for such. Dogma is declared to separate and divide Christians. Now, in my denomination, the PVM is a PERMITTED one but not a REQUIRED one; it's a matter of "pious opinion." My pastor embraces it, most pastors in my denomination don't, and I hold no view on it whatsoever. None of us condemns the other of heresy, no pastor is defrocked over it, no member excommunicated. It simply is not regarded as a matter of highest importance or certainty - in fact, it is largely regarded as moot. So the STATUS of the teaching matters. Much, IMHO.



IF Jesus had siblings via Mary, than the issue IS relevant to the dogma of the PVM - because then it would be heresy (unless it could be proven that ALL Her children were conceived without _____). IF Jesus did not have siblings via Mary, then the point is entirely moot and irrelevant to the dogma of the PVM - since all over the age of 10 know that not every single act of _____ results in a child specifically mentioned in the Bible (or at all). Having no other children has nothing to do with having no ______ ever.




.

 

[CaliforniaJosiah]

.

Let me ask a question. If you carried God in your womb for 9 months, gave birth to Him and raised Him, would you want anything else in you after that experience?

Three questions, IF I'm so permitted.....


1. What do you mean "anyTHING?" Did you mean anyONE? If you meant "thing," what "thing" do you mean?


2. It is your view that having a second child in some way lessens the quality of the first? If so, how? Why?


3. How does your asking a question substantiate a dogma? Let's say a Mormon asks a question: "If your father has a father, wouldn't God the Father have a father?" Does asking that question prove that God the Father does have a Father? Anyone can ask any question, it substantiates NOTHING except that anyone can ask anything. By your rubric, the Mormon must be stating a dogmatic fact of highest importance because he asked a question. I don't understand your epistemology here, would you please explain?





.

 

[lionroar0]

I find it quote telling that you did not answer Theklas question CJ but instead decided to repost a caricature or Am I jumping the gun?

 

[Catherineanne]

Tradition is all very well and good, however it isn't absolute truth.

Did I say it was? Or did I just express an opinion, and the reason for that opinion?

 

[Catherineanne]

The faith that was Traditioned to the Apostles isn't the absolute truth? I disagree.

It is certainly the closest thing we have to it, I would say.

 

[Catherineanne]

I don't think that is what she intended.
My Bible study is currently in Genesis and if He spoke the universe into being, a person would be a cinch.

Here is what I said again. Certainly God COULD have done it. The fact remains, however, that he had a plan and that he worked it out over many thousands of years. Not because he NEEDED to, but because that is what he chose to do. And having chosen to do so, it is rather trivialising for us to say, why did he not just magic a Messiah and save all that trouble.

Surely the whole point of the OT is that God chose a people and made a covenant with them, and from this people came the Chosen One of God? In other words, the OT is a story of relationship between God and his people, culminating in the Incarnation; the perfection of that relationship and the reconciliation of man to himself.

Replacing the beauty and poetry of this narrative with saying why did he not just magic a Messiah out of a hat is trivial in the extreme.

God has no needs. As omnipotent, omnicient and omnipresent, things are as He wills.

I did not say he had a need. I said he had a PLAN. He did not need to have a plan, but nonetheless this is what he chose.

 

[Catherineanne]

Bizarre? Why?

God likes poetry. Mary having lots of other children would not be poetic, but rather mundane.

A mundane Theotokos is bizarre.

 

[Dorothea]

Dorothea, your point is well taken. How can we believe that this was not a life-altering experience for her, and there would be an easy returning to the 'norm' afterwards? For Joseph either, as far as that goes. He believed that Mary had been over-shadowed by the Holy Spirit, conceived a child who was God incarnate, and gave birth to him. None of us can put ourselves in their positions, but we can be certain it was not a 'normal' anything from that point forward for either of them.

Good point. If I were Joseph, I would be afraid to have relations with her. LOL That sounds strange, but you know what I mean.

To me, it's no different than others such as some of the Apostles, Saints, and like who left their worldly possessions and lives to follow Christ.

 

[Dorothea]

You do realize that God didn't need anyone to bear Jesus for Him, He could have spoken Him into existence as He did the universe. Why would He have asked Mary and Joseph to give up the greatest joy of marriage?

The way I understand the reason for the Incarnation is that the Son of God had to have been born of the flesh (Mary's) in order for Him to descend to us and save us from death. Without taking on flesh and dying on the cross, there would be no eternal life. Everyone would be stuck in shoal till who knows when.

 

[Dorothea]

.





Three questions, IF I'm so permitted.....


1. What do you mean "anyTHING?" Did you mean anyONE? If you meant "thing," what "thing" do you mean?

Having sexual relations with her husband (if they indeed actually married. I'm still not sure about that part....) After having God in your womb, what else is there after that in this life? I would say life was worth through serving her Son, sharing and worshipping Him with the Apostles, etc.

2. It is your view that having a second child in some way lessens the quality of the first? If so, how? Why?

LOL We are talking about boring GOD, not a regular human being. You're putting this in human terms. The birth of Christ is more than the human side of Christ. It's also the God side of Him. It's a miracle, a mystery, our salvation. To answer your human/parent-directed question, of course it doesn't. Then again, I didn't bore God, and I am blessed with two wonderful boys.

3. How does your asking a question substantiate a dogma? Let's say a Mormon asks a question: "If your father has a father, wouldn't God the Father have a father?" Does asking that question prove that God the Father does have a Father? Anyone can ask any question, it substantiates NOTHING except that anyone can ask anything. By your rubric, the Mormon must be stating a dogmatic fact of highest importance because he asked a question. I don't understand your epistemology here, would you please explain?

What would those children be IF Mary had other children which seems totally impossible after her experience of God in her womb. But let's just say you're right. Somehow, Joseph decides to pursue that, which I find highly unlikely. As I said in another post, I would think he wouldn't want to be with her in that way after she bore Christ. But let's say they somehow get past the transformation in Mary's life, and raising the 2nd person in the Trinity and decide to get married (if they hadn't already) and have some kids. I'm sorry, but this seems so totally incongruous, I can't even finish this thought. Forgive me.

 

[Dorothea]

.





Three questions, IF I'm so permitted.....


1. What do you mean "anyTHING?" Did you mean anyONE? If you meant "thing," what "thing" do you mean?


2. It is your view that having a second child in some way lessens the quality of the first? If so, how? Why?


3. How does your asking a question substantiate a dogma? Let's say a Mormon asks a question: "If your father has a father, wouldn't God the Father have a father?" Does asking that question prove that God the Father does have a Father? Anyone can ask any question, it substantiates NOTHING except that anyone can ask anything. By your rubric, the Mormon must be stating a dogmatic fact of highest importance because he asked a question. I don't understand your epistemology here, would you please explain?





.

I do have a question for you, Josiah, if you don't mind. Does God not transform people's lives? Do people change quite dramatically in most instances? Going by the Saints' lives, Mary's life, etc. St. Mary of Egypt was a prostitute. She totally changed her life after her experience with God (actually I think it was after seeing the Theotokos on top of the Church's front doors, but my memory isn't too good...will have to look that us). I suppose she could've had her epiphany (or experience with God), and then decided to find a husband and live with him the rest of her life. But did she do that? No. She left men all together. She went to the desert for decades. She died after many years of ascetic struggles by herself and after the monk finds her, she gets to partake of His Body and Blood, and then she died peacefully. Now, does that make her strange because she didn't stop being a prostitute and find a man and marry him and be faithful for him and have children with him for the rest of her life on Earth?

 

[Dorothea]

Here is what I said again. Certainly God COULD have done it. The fact remains, however, that he had a plan and that he worked it out over many thousands of years. Not because he NEEDED to, but because that is what he chose to do. And having chosen to do so, it is rather trivialising for us to say, why did he not just magic a Messiah and save all that trouble.

Surely the whole point of the OT is that God chose a people and made a covenant with them, and from this people came the Chosen One of God? In other words, the OT is a story of relationship between God and his people, culminating in the Incarnation; the perfection of that relationship and the reconciliation of man to himself.

Replacing the beauty and poetry of this narrative with saying why did he not just magic a Messiah out of a hat is trivial in the extreme.



I did not say he had a need. I said he had a PLAN. He did not need to have a plan, but nonetheless this is what he chose.

And what would that have taught us if God just magically poofed and everyone had salvation? Absolutely nothing. He had to become flesh and live amongst us. Before that time, He was far up above everyone (except for those in the OT that were able to encounter Him in a spiritual way). And yes, even though some didn't believe He was the Messiah, many people did. People learned more from Christ's 3 years of ministry on Earth. They could relate to Him because he was there in the flesh. Just some thoughts I had.

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

And what would that have taught us if God just magically poofed and everyone had salvation? Absolutely nothing. He had to become flesh and live amongst us. Before that time, He was far up above everyone (except for those in the OT that were able to encounter Him in a spiritual way). And yes, even though some didn't believe He was the Messiah, many people did. People learned more from Christ's 3 years of ministry on Earth. They could relate to Him because he was there in the flesh. Just some thoughts I had.

Isn't that amazing that it was for so short a period of time

 

[Dorothea]

Isn't that amazing that it was for so short a period of time

Yes.

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

Yes.

How long did the Apostle Paul preach the Gospel?