How many other children did Mary have?

[Standing Up]

Mark wrote: "While Scripture is silent regarding the Assumption, there are "extra Biblical" texts which, while questionable, do give testimony that this was believed very early in the Church; "

Would that be the same source, Gospel of James?

SUp: To which extra biblical questionable texts are you referring?

 

[Standing Up]

What is black and white is the fact "adelfos" does not have one translation/ interpretation and saying so...is well plain out wrong. Judging from linguistic scholars of the ancient times up to our times all seem to agree to that. Now if some do not IMHO I think there is indeed a bigger picture behind it. Or like I said then if we use the word bilaterally Paul must had many brothers

No one said there's only one translation for the word. I expect better from you Philothei.

But come, you've been assigned the greek-expert resident here, provide the scholarly quotes for the Greek definition of brother (not the translated hebrew).

 

[Standing Up]

No. You already know from this thread and many others that the historic Church and it's theologians find that the Canonical Scriptures support Semper Virago. It's time that you accept that the majority of Christians steadfastly accept this interpretation; just as we accept that you have a different interpretation.

Obviously you haven't expanded your search to find the ones who didn't teach that. They were even given a derogatory name, much like the quartodecimans.

One would be inclined to think that your purpose here is to "save" us from what you see as a most grievous error.

It's opposite of that actually. For EO and RC (and in the closet by others), the EV is a salvific issue. You are saved from hell by believing it. I hesitate to suggest otherwise without the context of salvation by grace through faith. I'd suggest folks don't make this personal.

I think we are here to discuss our various interpretations, and in doing so, understand (but not necessarily accept) the interpretation of others.

While the Gospel of James is pseudepigraphical, that is the authorship is someone other than who it is attributed to, it is not part of Scripture, nor should it be; it also includes a bunch of stuff which conflicts with the Canonical Scripture (Semper Virago does not as we have shown in this thread, and many others), and even recorded history. It does not prove Semper Virago; it does show that it was held though, at a very early date, no more than that.

Lets avoid being lead around in circles yet again. Please.

The easiest thing is simply to answer the question then.

 

[MarkRohfrietsch]

Obviously you haven't expanded your search to find the ones who didn't teach that. They were even given a derogatory name, much like the quartodecimans.



It's opposite of that actually. For EO and RC (and in the closet by others), the EV is a salvific issue. You are saved from hell by believing it. I hesitate to suggest otherwise without the context of salvation by grace through faith. I'd suggest folks don't make this personal.



The easiest thing is simply to answer the question then.

On and on

...as found under your name just about sums it up.

The Quatrodecimians; they keep coming back too. That was another thread; leave it there.

 

[MarkRohfrietsch]

One would be inclined to think that your purpose here is to "save" us from what you see as a most grievous error.

It's opposite of that actually. For EO and RC (and in the closet by others), the EV is a salvific issue. You are saved from hell by believing it. I hesitate to suggest otherwise without the context of salvation by grace through faith. I'd suggest folks don't make this personal.

The opposite; that would be to convict and condemn us for a most grievous error then?

 

[Philothei]

No one said there's only one translation for the word. I expect better from you Philothei.

But come, you've been assigned the greek-expert resident here, provide the scholarly quotes for the Greek definition of brother (not the translated hebrew).

I am not planning to re-post this agains SU that would be indeed against the rules...plus I am not in favour or double triples posts myself...It seems we are on a Mary-go-around... or we are just going on and on...

 

[Standing Up]

I am not planning to re-post this agains SU that would be indeed against the rules...plus I am not in favour or double triples posts myself...It seems we are on a Mary-go-around... or we are just going on and on...

C/u around about

 

[Montalban]

Philothei althought no one said that there is only one translation for the word, one person insists that in the case of the NT only one is to be preferred.

 

[Montalban]

I am not planning to re-post this agains SU that would be indeed against the rules...plus I am not in favour or double triples posts myself...It seems we are on a Mary-go-around... or we are just going on and on...

When someone highlights just one of many definitions and in fact supports that's the one to use then it's disingenuous for them to say that they don't support only one definition

 

[Standing Up]

Having already responded to the stuff many times, I know it still won't do any good to be invited back on.

Off the mary go round.

 

[Standing Up]

...as found under your name just about sums it up.

The Quatrodecimians; they keep coming back too. That was another thread; leave it there.

Quarto deciman (4 and 10)---Christ died on the 14th.

C/U around.

 

[Montalban]

I have still yet to see why one definition is to be preferred over the others

 

[Standing Up]

I have still yet to see why one definition is to be preferred over the others

Everyone else gets it, not sure why you don't.

 

[Philothei]

Everyone else gets it, not sure why you don't.

Who gets it and who does not is the true question... At least NOT ALL...
what is next SU?

 

[Montalban]

Who gets it and who does not is the true question... At least NOT ALL...
what is next SU?

The problem also, explained by appeal to a logical fallacy* is not of help.


(* in this case vox populi)

 

[Standing Up]

Who gets it and who does not is the true question... At least NOT ALL...
what is next SU?

The on/off switch to the Mary-go-round is in your hand. You were elected as resident Greek expert. It's up to you to show your scholarly work about adelphos, the Greek-only definition of the word.

 

[MarkRohfrietsch]

I'm still waiting for the proof that one particular definition is to be preferred to the others given

Well, we both know that's not going to happen.

 

[MarkRohfrietsch]

I am not planning to re-post this agains SU that would be indeed against the rules...plus I am not in favour or double triples posts myself...It seems we are on a Mary-go-around... or we are just going on and on...

C/u around about

Having already responded to the stuff many times, I know it still won't do any good to be invited back on.

Off the mary go round.

Everyone else gets it, not sure why you don't.

The on/off switch to the Mary-go-round is in your hand. You were elected as resident Greek expert. It's up to you to show your scholarly work about adelphos, the Greek-only definition of the word.

On the Mary-go-round, off the MGR, on the MGR... careful you don't fall and bust yourself SU!

 

[Thekla]

I, for one, am getting dizzy !

 

[jackmt]

Why does their definition exclude known usage beyond their list ?

Why do you always go outside of Scripture to support your pet doctrines?