Mary and Joseph

[Justified112]

The Bible that was put together by saints who believed in the ever virginity of Mary? Nothing close to a canon existed until the late 300s AD

Actually, by the late first century, the writings of Paul and the Gospels were already considered Scripture by Jesus' apostles.

 

[☦Marius☦]

The fact that Jesus had a nuclear family is evidence that Mary did not remain a virgin. The Biblical writers wrote in plain language and I give them credit for knowing what terms like "brothers" and "sisters" mean in familial context. I don't have to engage in a lot theological gymnastics in order to re-interpret the Bible in order to accommodate a false teaching that is nowhere in the Bible.

Yes, but those only happened in special circumstances. It was not done in ordinary parlance, otherwise you would not be able communicate in a coherent manner. There were special circumstances where a given word might be expanded to refer to nephew as a son. That happens in the OT, but you can't make that the rule. Those instances are exceptions.

Furthermore, the burden of proof is on YOU, to prove that every instance where Jesus brothers and sisters are references that it doesn't mean what it says, that each of those references are talking about cousins or something else.

Yes, you have to rely on the opinions of fallible men. I rely on the evidence from the infallble, inerrant Scriptures, wholly inspired by God. So my appeal is to a much higher authority.



I don't trust in alleged miracles. I trust the Lord. The fact is that your appeals are always made to stuff outside the Bible and you have to appeal to anything and everything except the Bible. I will put my faith in the unmovable, indisputable rock of Scripture. You can trust in fallible men, if you want.

No it wasn't only in "special circumstances". I don't have to rely on the opinions of fallible men I just had to study greek and jewish culture. I used to be Baptist for heavens sake. I studied for years before I converted.

No theological gymnastics required.

 

[☦Marius☦]

Actually, by the late first century, the writings of Paul and the Gospels were already considered Scripture by Jesus' apostles.

lol most of the NT wasn't even written until the late first century.

 

[☦Marius☦]

Actually, by the late first century, the writings of Paul and the Gospels were already considered Scripture by Jesus' apostles.

No the burden isn't on me. Mine is already the established, 2000 year old tradition laid down by the apostles. I've already shown why it was likely she was ever virgin. Your argument boils down to "because its not within the only source I accept" which isn't actually a valid argument. Do you not accept a single historical document outside the Bible?

 

[Justified112]

lol most of the NT wasn't even written until the late first century.

Paul was writing in the mid to late first century and both the Gospels which were written earlier were already being called Scripture by the apostles before the death of Peter or Paul.

 

[☦Marius☦]

Paul was writing in the mid to late first century and both the Gospels which were written earlier were already being called Scripture by the apostles before the death of Peter or Paul.

The word "scripture" in Hebrew, merely means authoritative.

 

[Justified112]

No the burden isn't on me. Mine is already the established, 2000 year old tradition laid down by the apostles. I've already shown why it was likely she was ever virgin. Your argument boils down to "because its not within the only source I accept" which isn't actually a valid argument. Do you not accept a single historical document outside the Bible?

I don't treat anything outside the Bible as inerrant or infallible. And that only demonstrates the weakness of your position. You have to trust in tradition and men. You have not demonstrated at all, that Mary was a perpetual virgin. I have the Bible, which is inspired by God. You can trust in men, if you want. I will just stick with God.

 

[☦Marius☦]

I don't treat anything outside the Bible as inerrant or infallible. And that only demonstrates the weakness of your position. You have to trust in tradition and men. You have not demonstrated at all, that Mary was a perpetual virgin. I have the Bible, which is inspired by God. You can trust in men, if you want. I will just stick with God.

You assume too much. I don't treat any writing outside the Bible as infallible either. What I do consider infallible, is the authority of miracle working saints, which Protestantism has a severe lack of.

 

[Justified112]

The word "scripture" in Hebrew, merely means authoritative.

No, it doesn't. And the fact is that all Scripture is inspired by God. And Paul refers to the Gospels as Scripture and Peter refers to Paul's writings as Scripture. And Peter was writing under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. The Bible isn't merely authoritative, but is the Holy Word of God inerrant, infallible and immutable.

So if the Bible says that Jesus had brothers and sisters, I will go with the Bible. I am a Christian and Christians believe the Bible.

 

[Justified112]

You assume too much. I don't treat any writing outside the Bible as infallible either. What I do consider infallible, is the authority of miracle working saints, which Protestantism has a severe lack of.

I didn't limit my comment to writings. I said that that I don't consider ANYTHING outside of the Bible infallible at all. And that includes alleged "miracles" by dead men. I don't' consider anyone infallible outside the Bible. Again, you can trust in men if you want, I will trust God and His Word alone.

 

[☦Marius☦]

No, it doesn't. And the fact is that all Scripture is inspired by God. And Paul refers to the Gospels as Scripture and Peter refers to Paul's writings as Scripture. And Peter was writing under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. The Bible isn't merely authoritative, but is the Holy Word of God inerrant, infallible and immutable.

So if the Bible says that Jesus had brothers and sisters, I will go with the Bible. I am a Christian and Christians believe the Bible.

So the Bible isn't authoritative? All scripture is breathed by God is it not? So where in the Bible does it narrow itself down to the books of the Old and New Testament? Where in the Bible do the apostles talk about the canonization of Revelation and Hebrews? Where do they decline the gospel of Thomas along with various other "gospels" not included in the NT? The don't. That work was performed by ORTHODOX SAINTS who believed in the ever virginity of Mary.

 

[☦Marius☦]

I didn't limit my comment to writings. I said that that I don't consider ANYTHING outside of the Bible infallible at all. And that includes alleged "miracles" by dead men. I don't' consider anyone infallible outside the Bible. Again, you can trust in men if you want, I will trust God and His Word alone.

The apostles weren't men? Weird I thought they were and you argue a lot in favor of their writings.

 

[Justified112]

No the burden isn't on me.

Yes, the burden is on you. You are claiming that Mary was a perpetual virgin. Your problem is that you can't actually make a biblical case for it. You have to make appeals outside of the Bible, because the whole thing about the perpetual virginity of Mary is post biblical.

 

[☦Marius☦]

I didn't limit my comment to writings. I said that that I don't consider ANYTHING outside of the Bible infallible at all. And that includes alleged "miracles" by dead men. I don't' consider anyone infallible outside the Bible. Again, you can trust in men if you want, I will trust God and His Word alone.

Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle.

 

[☦Marius☦]

Yes, the burden is on you. You are claiming that Mary was a perpetual virgin. Your problem is that you can't actually make a biblical case for it. You have to make appeals outside of the Bible, because the whole thing about the perpetual virginity of Mary is post biblical.

No it isn't , you simply are understudied in Jewish Culture and Greek. The evidence is right there. No Jew alive would have trusted his mother to a member outside his family while his blood relative was alive. Neither would a man enter a woman if God himself had dwelt within her.

 

[Justified112]

So the Bible isn't authoritative?

It's more than authoritative. It is the inspired, inerrant, infallible Word of God.

All scripture is breathed by God is it not? So where in the Bible does it narrow itself down to the books of the Old and New Testament?

In it's textual witness. The interesting thing about 66 books of the Bible is the historical and textual witness that exists only for those books.

Where in the Bible do the apostles talk about the canonization of Revelation and Hebrews? Where do they decline the gospel of Thomas along with various other "gospels" not included in the NT? The don't. That work was performed by ORTHODOX SAINTS who believed in the ever virginity of Mary.

The Canon was determined by anyone other than God. The Church discovered the Canon. The Church did not sit in judgement on the Canon. The Canon 66 books of the Christian Bible were inspired and given by God. We don't owe that to men.

 

[Ttalkkugjil]

This thread has changed from what it started out to be.I have to accept a part, though certainly not all, of the blame for that. The questions in my OP concerned the respective ages of Mary and Joseph. They were not about whether Jesus had biological brothers and sisters. Let's go back please to the questions I asked in my OP.

 

[☦Marius☦]

It's more than authoritative. It is the inspired, inerrant, infallible Word of God.


In it's textual witness. The interesting thing about 66 books of the Bible is the historical and textual witness that exists only for those books.


The Canon was determined by anyone other than God. The Church discovered the Canon. The Church did not sit in judgement on the Canon. The Canon 66 books of the Christian Bible were inspired and given by God. We don't owe that to men.

That's actually not true. We don't even know the authors of Hebrews and Revelation, the two books most protestants spend most of their time worrying about.

"The church discovered the Canon", provide a source, because I know the exact saint who first established a written record of the established Canon.

 

[Justified112]

The apostles weren't men? Weird I thought they were and you argue a lot in favor of their writings.

The apostles are not source of their writings; God is the source. They were the human instruments God used to communicate His Word. I trust those writings because they do not have their origin in human thought, imagination or impulse. They wrote as they inspired by the Holy Spirit.

 

[☦Marius☦]

The apostles are not source of their writings; God is the source. They were the human instruments God used to communicate His Word. I trust those writings because they do not have their origin in human thought, imagination or impulse. They wrote as they inspired by the Holy Spirit.

Yet in the New Testament we see the Apostles passing on that gift through the laying of the hands on the elders they appointed, and then telling us to follow them. Most of those elders had writings of their own and were then martyred. Are you saying their works weren't authoritative and that they were lying and didn't have the Holy Spirit?