What is your opinion on the Virgin Mary?

JoeP222w · Jun 30, 2016

"Where? Where does it say that Mary bore other children? Please point that out."

If you cannot understand that which I already wrote, I cannot help you there.

"Lots of scholars believe that he was married before. Google is your friend there. Plus, it does not state he wasn't married before in the Bible. "

Appeal to scholarship, does not truth make. Appealing to Google is fallacious by nature.

Appealing to the Bible has to specifically point something out for it to be true, is fallacious. The Bible says nothing about the Internet, yet here we are.

"He was a lot older than Mary and in all probability those 'brothers' mentioned were 'his' children from an earlier marriage! "

Assertion without evidence, is simply opinion, not proof.

"Of course, you will not entertain the Catholic teachings!"

No, I will not, as I do not hold the Roman Catholic church to be an authority over me. And Rome has shown itself to be far to erroneous to be any standard of truth.

"Well, i think it is a good exegesis."

I don't think you understand what exegesis is. If the Bible does not support it, that is not exegesis. That is eisegesis.

"This is the Catholics belief and others too. Again, google is your friend!"

Belief does not truth make. And popularity does not truth make.

"Catholic beliefs are based on Scripture 'and' 'Holy Tradition' as given by the Holy Spirit. You do not want to see the Catholic way which is up to you, that is fine."

When you hold tradition on the same level or higher than scripture, you err. Obviously my tradition is different than yours. But my traditions, by God's grace, come under the authority of scripture. Tradition cannot be an authority, when one tradition contradicts another. So the authority comes from and outside source, i.e. solely from the only infallible source, that is God's word in the Bible.

Goatee · Jun 30, 2016

JoeP222w said:
If you cannot understand that which I already wrote, I cannot help you there.

Because you cannot answer that! Nowhere in scripture does it state that Mary bore other children!

Appeal to scholarship, does not truth make. Appealing to Google is fallacious by nature.
Appealing to the Bible has to specifically point something out for it to be true, is fallacious. The Bible says nothing about the Internet, yet here we are.

Lol, you cannot just pick up a verse and read into it what you like as you do!

Assertion without evidence, is simply opinion, not proof.

This is a well discussed topic with scholars etc. Nowhere does it state that he didn't have other children or was not a widower!

No, I will not, as I do not hold the Roman Catholic church to be an authority over me. And Rome has shown itself to be far to erroneous to be any standard of truth.

That is your choice my dear friend. The CC is 'The' church of Christ

I don't think you understand what exegesis is. If the Bible does not support it, that is not exegesis. That is eisegesis.

Exegesis is 'the' right term for what i was saying.

Belief does not truth make. And popularity does not truth make.

Faith and the Holy Spirit make truth. The CC has been led by the Holy Spirit and still leads the CC

When you hold tradition on the same level or higher than scripture, you err. Obviously my tradition is different than yours. But my traditions, by God's grace, come under the authority of scripture. Tradition cannot be an authority, when one tradition contradicts another. So the authority comes from and outside source, i.e. solely from the only infallible source, that is God's word in the Bible.

'Tradition' is not the same as 'tradition'. Scripture and Tradition go hand in hand with the CC. Your 'tradition' comes from 'Sola Scripture' and like the 1,000s of protestant denominations, 1,000s of different interpretations! Your 'interpretation' of scripture comes from guess work. Pluck a verse and make it fit!

4x4toy · Jun 30, 2016

JoeP222w said:
"Where? Where does it say that Mary bore other children? Please point that out."

If you cannot understand that which I already wrote, I cannot help you there.

"Lots of scholars believe that he was married before. Google is your friend there. Plus, it does not state he wasn't married before in the Bible. "

Appeal to scholarship, does not truth make. Appealing to Google is fallacious by nature.

Appealing to the Bible has to specifically point something out for it to be true, is fallacious. The Bible says nothing about the Internet, yet here we are.

"He was a lot older than Mary and in all probability those 'brothers' mentioned were 'his' children from an earlier marriage! "

Assertion without evidence, is simply opinion, not proof.

"Of course, you will not entertain the Catholic teachings!"

No, I will not, as I do not hold the Roman Catholic church to be an authority over me. And Rome has shown itself to be far to erroneous to be any standard of truth.

"Well, i think it is a good exegesis."

I don't think you understand what exegesis is. If the Bible does not support it, that is not exegesis. That is eisegesis.

"This is the Catholics belief and others too. Again, google is your friend!"

Belief does not truth make. And popularity does not truth make.

"Catholic beliefs are based on Scripture 'and' 'Holy Tradition' as given by the Holy Spirit. You do not want to see the Catholic way which is up to you, that is fine."

When you hold tradition on the same level or higher than scripture, you err. Obviously my tradition is different than yours. But my traditions, by God's grace, come under the authority of scripture. Tradition cannot be an authority, when one tradition contradicts another. So the authority comes from and outside source, i.e. solely from the only infallible source, that is God's word in the Bible.

Mathew 1:25 , Mathew 2:13 , Luke 2:7 , .. Mary was as fine a mother who ever lived .. She did not stay a virgin and had an otherwise normal Jewish family .. Jesus had brothers and sisters .. No "scholar" can do more than speculate any different ..

Goatee · Jul 1, 2016

4x4toy said:
Mathew 1:25 , Mathew 2:13 , Luke 2:7 , .. Mary was as fine a mother who ever lived .. She did not stay a virgin and had an otherwise normal Jewish family .. Jesus had brothers and sisters .. No "scholar" can do more than speculate any different ..

That passage doesn't say she bore other children. It just states that Jesus was her first. Doesn't mean she had others!

My wife and I had our first, and only child nearly 10 years ago!

Lord's Servant · Jul 8, 2016

That is true and Joseph could have had more children from a previous marriage

4x4toy · Jul 8, 2016

My wife had our firstborn 37 yrs ago .. Then I took her and our son and moved 35 miles away to a town closer to my work ..

bbbbbbb · Jul 8, 2016

Lord's Servant said:
That is true and Joseph could have had more children from a previous marriage

And Mary and Joseph could have engaged in intercourse without having children. That is, unless, we have a record from eyewitnesses to every moment of their personal lives together.

4x4toy · Jul 8, 2016

We know he had brothers , that's fact .. they had to be from Mary and Joseph because any other way they could not have been brothers .. We know Joseph was not his father so Joseph bringing in children from the outside could not have been of Mary .. Jesus had brothers from Mary and Joseph with one common parent

Another thing kinda related is when Abraham lied to king Abimilech and coached Sarah to say she was his sister to save his skin .. Go back a few verses starting at 10 to
Genesis 11:27 and Terah is listed as having only 3 sons no other sons or daughters .. The word kitha translates sister or cousin .. IMO Abraham claimed God as their common father as deception , Cousin probably but not sister

Luke17:37 · Jul 9, 2016

antletems said:
Proof of other children?

Matthew 13:54-58
54 When He had come to His own country, He taught them in their synagogue, so that they were astonished and said, “Where did this Man get this wisdom and these mighty works? 55 Is this not the carpenter’s son? Is not His mother called Mary? And His brothers James, Joses, Simon, and Judas? 56 And His sisters, are they not all with us? Where then did this Man get all these things?” 57 So they were offended at Him.
But Jesus said to them, “A prophet is not without honor except in his own country and in his own house.” 58 Now He did not do many mighty works there because of their unbelief.

James the brother of Jesus, though he did not believe in Jesus (as the Son of God) during Jesus' ministry, after Jesus' resurrection (and Jesus had appeared to His brothers) James and his brothers believed and eventually James became the leader of the church in Jerusalem. (God is gracious.) James the brother of Jesus is the one who wrote the book of James. Jude (Judas), brother of James and Jesus, wrote Jude.

Paul identifies James as "the Lord's brother" in Galatians 1.

I urge you to read the whole Bible for yourself. The gospels are a great place to start.

bbbbbbb · Jul 9, 2016

Luke17:37 said:
Matthew 13:54-58
54 When He had come to His own country, He taught them in their synagogue, so that they were astonished and said, “Where did this Man get this wisdom and these mighty works? 55 Is this not the carpenter’s son? Is not His mother called Mary? And His brothers James, Joses, Simon, and Judas? 56 And His sisters, are they not all with us? Where then did this Man get all these things?” 57 So they were offended at Him.
But Jesus said to them, “A prophet is not without honor except in his own country and in his own house.” 58 Now He did not do many mighty works there because of their unbelief.

James the brother of Jesus, though he did not believe in Jesus (as the Son of God) during Jesus' ministry, after Jesus' resurrection (and Jesus had appeared to His brothers) James and his brothers believed and eventually James became the leader of the church in Jerusalem. (God is gracious.) James the brother of Jesus is the one who wrote the book of James. Jude (Judas), brother of James and Jesus, wrote Jude.

Paul identifies James as "the Lord's brother" in Galatians 1.

I urge you to read the whole Bible for yourself. The gospels are a great place to start.

I am always amazed at the incredible amount of twisting of scripture that our friends who believe in the PV (perpetual virginity) of Mary need to do in order to keep their unorthodox dogma intact.

Goatee · Jul 9, 2016

Luke17:37 said:
Matthew 13:54-58
54 When He had come to His own country, He taught them in their synagogue, so that they were astonished and said, “Where did this Man get this wisdom and these mighty works? 55 Is this not the carpenter’s son? Is not His mother called Mary? And His brothers James, Joses, Simon, and Judas? 56 And His sisters, are they not all with us? Where then did this Man get all these things?” 57 So they were offended at Him.
But Jesus said to them, “A prophet is not without honor except in his own country and in his own house.” 58 Now He did not do many mighty works there because of their unbelief.

James the brother of Jesus, though he did not believe in Jesus (as the Son of God) during Jesus' ministry, after Jesus' resurrection (and Jesus had appeared to His brothers) James and his brothers believed and eventually James became the leader of the church in Jerusalem. (God is gracious.) James the brother of Jesus is the one who wrote the book of James. Jude (Judas), brother of James and Jesus, wrote Jude.

Paul identifies James as "the Lord's brother" in Galatians 1.

I urge you to read the whole Bible for yourself. The gospels are a great place to start.

It does not state that Mary bore these children though? They could just have well been Josephs children from an earlier marriage!

I have read the Bible but obviously as a non-Catholic you interpret it differently.

More info:

http://catholicstraightanswers.com/did-jesus-have-blood-brothers-and-sisters/

Luke17:37 · Jul 9, 2016

antletems said:
It does not state that Mary bore these children though? They could just have well been Josephs children from an earlier marriage!

I have read the Bible but obviously as a non-Catholic you interpret it differently.

More info:

http://catholicstraightanswers.com/did-jesus-have-blood-brothers-and-sisters/

If they were Joseph's children (but not Mary's), they wouldn't have been Jesus's brothers and sisters.

FireDragon76 · Jul 9, 2016

Luke17:37 said:
If they were Joseph's children (but not Mary's), they wouldn't have been Jesus's brothers and sisters.

Brother in this case means kin, family... not necessarily biological relative. Even John Calvin in his Institutes saw this interpretation as the most fitting.

4x4toy · Jul 9, 2016

FireDragon76 said:
Brother in this case means kin, family... not necessarily biological relative. Even John Calvin in his Institutes saw this interpretation as the most fitting.

Sorry John Calvin or no one else can offer no more than an opinion outside what scripture states .. I value all Christians opinions and profit much but starting with my first Baptist preacher two weeks after I got saved after he answered a question , I told him , but it says right here ! So

Luke17:37 · Jul 9, 2016

antletems said:
It does not state that Mary bore these children though? They could just have well been Josephs children from an earlier marriage!

I have read the Bible but obviously as a non-Catholic you interpret it differently.

More info:

http://catholicstraightanswers.com/did-jesus-have-blood-brothers-and-sisters/

You just aren't reading straightforwardly. The fact that you asked if Jesus even had brothers or sisters made me think you never really read the gospels, because they are mentioned several times, once by name (the brothers' names in Matthew 13) and several times as "Jesus's brothers."

It says that Joseph took Mary his wife, and Jesus, and fled to Egypt when Jesus was young.

Matthew 2:13-15
13 Now when they had departed, behold, an angel of the Lord appeared to Joseph in a dream, saying, “Arise, take the young Child and His mother, flee to Egypt, and stay there until I bring you word; for Herod will seek the young Child to destroy Him.”
14 When he arose, he took the young Child and His mother by night and departed for Egypt, 15 and was there until the death of Herod, that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the Lord through the prophet, saying, “Out of Egypt I called My Son.”

No other children are mentioned. If he had other children, they would have been independent (since they were not with him), so probably they were older than Mary. Can you imagine Jesus' stepfather being old enough to be his mother's father, or of Mary having stepchildren older than her? Your conjecture is ridiculous.

Luke17:37 · Jul 9, 2016

FireDragon76 said:
Brother in this case means kin, family... not necessarily biological relative. Even John Calvin in his Institutes saw this interpretation as the most fitting.

Says who? I doubt you are a Greek expert or that you have examined every instance of Jesus' brothers being mentioned in the gospel.

bbbbbbb · Jul 9, 2016

antletems said:
It does not state that Mary bore these children though? They could just have well been Josephs children from an earlier marriage!

I have read the Bible but obviously as a non-Catholic you interpret it differently.

More info:

http://catholicstraightanswers.com/did-jesus-have-blood-brothers-and-sisters/

Or, they could have been space aliens. The Bible doesn't say they aren't, does it? Or, this could be further evidence that as Joseph Smith and others believed, this could be evidence that the Bible was rewritten during the Great Apostasy and some heretic inserted these clever passages into it.

Or, just possibly, these passages could actually mean what they say.

amariselle · Jul 9, 2016

What I don't understand (after having read through this thread) is why it is more believable to think Joseph may have had a previous marriage and children from that marriage, then to believe that Joseph and Mary actually had a normal married life, in terms of physical intimacy and other children.

Children were absolutely viewed as a blessing from God to the Jewish people (and still should be, of course) It does not diminish Mary's blessed role as Jesus' earthly mother to concede that she may have had other children with her husband.

And, quite frankly, there is FAR more Biblical evidence to support THAT possibility than the possibility that Joseph had a pervious marriage and children from that marriage. The idea that Joseph was married before his marriage to Mary is pure conjecture.

Luke17:37 · Jul 9, 2016

bbbbbbb said:
I am always amazed at the incredible amount of twisting of scripture that our friends who believe in the PV (perpetual virginity) of Mary need to do in order to keep their unorthodox dogma intact.

Yes, and "Perpetual Divinity" is clearly debunked by Scripture:

Matthew 1:24-25
24 Then Joseph, being aroused from sleep, did as the angel of the Lord commanded him and took to him his wife, 25 and did not know her till she had brought forth her firstborn Son. And he called His name Jesus.

FireDragon76 · Jul 10, 2016

Luke17:37 said:
Says who? I doubt you are a Greek expert or that you have examined every instance of Jesus' brothers being mentioned in the gospel.

As long as you are going to take a cynical attitude and make baseless assumptions (one does not have to be a Greek expert to realize that brother has many meanings in the New Testament, always it relates to kinship, but often not to biology), not much can be gained by discussion.

What is your opinion on the Virgin Mary?

Well-Known Member

Jesus, please forgive me, a sinner.

Newbie

Jesus, please forgive me, a sinner.

Ave Maria

Newbie

Well-Known Member

Newbie

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Jesus, please forgive me, a sinner.

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Newbie

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Jesus Never Fails

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Similar threads