Posted on 02/25/2017 6:53:54 AM PST by Salvation
Question: We are often told that “brother” or “sister” in the New Testament texts can also be understood as cousins. By why then, in Luke 1:36, does the New Jerusalem Bible refer to Elizabeth as Mary’s “cousin?” Why was the word for “sister” not used there as it is elsewhere?— Robert Tisovich, via email
Answer: The Greek word used in Luke 1:36 is “suggenes” and means “relative” or “kinsman.” It is from the Greek roots “syn” (with) and “genos” (seed or offspring). So, the word here refers to Elizabeth as being related to Mary in some physical but unspecified way. Thus, the English word “cousin” is perhaps too specific. “Kinswoman” or “relative” are more accurate translations.
Even today we are often flexible in our use of terms like relative, brothers and sisters, etc., when speaking. For example, when it comes to the word “brother” in its most technical sense, there are only two men on this planet who are my actual brothers. Yet I also stand before my congregation and call them “my brothers and sisters.” But here I am using the terms in a broader sense of our shared humanity.
In Jesus’ day, things were similar; people use terms in the strict sense and the wider sense. Many Protestants today, seeing references to Jesus’ brothers and sisters, simply presume these terms were meant in a strict sense, and that such references therefore disprove that Mary was ever-virgin. But this is a linguistic fallacy for the reasons stated.
For your discussion.
Monsignor Pope Ping for one of his OSV columns.
This is only an observation, of course, not a condemnation. I thought it interesting.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Christian_denominations_by_number_of_members
Best we can do is pray for them that their eyes will be open. Often, it is difficult for people to give up a belief they have held for all of their lives.
And prayers up for Holy Mother Church.
==========================================
1. You are 100% correct. I NEVER underestimate the efficacy of prayer. Nag God...in a nice way.
2. Also 100% correct. Closed mindedness is something learned at a VERY early age, usually from parents.
3. Always!
Gruel so thin it can’t fill a spoon.
Christ had biological siblings - resulting from sex between Joseph and Mary.
Exactly how God designed marriage and commanded couples to “be fruitful and multiply.” He gave married couples the gift of pleasurable sex, the bounty of children, and He says to them in inspired Scripture, “imbibe deeply, o lovers.”
It wasnt until blessed Mary was made into a demigoddess that this other kind of nonsense arose.
thank goodness you backed that up with unimpeachable biblical texts that specifically say she had sex with Joseph, and names the biological siblings and proves beyond a doubt, from the bible alone, since that is what you believe in, that they had sex, unlike the historical teaching from those who were there and knew the real story.
Msgr. Pope’s name is misspelled in the credit (Popeo - like the new CIA director?)
My husband’s family calls everyone, regardless of distance of relationship, “cousin.” Theirs is a huge extended family and I suppose “cousin” just makes it easier than, say, “second cousin three times removed.”
It's really amazing how you guys insist you have to have clear, direct Biblical warrant for everything, and then you turn something like this into some sort of brand-spanking-new essential of the Christian faith.
There's not a trace of clear, direct Biblical warrant for it -- not a scintilla of a particle of a verse in the NT which says that anyone (except Jesus) is a biological child of Mary. (And substantial evidence to debunk it, at that.) Yet you exalt it into some kind of litmus test of correct doctrine. On what basis, since it flunks your own test?
But wait, it gets better. You guys never hesitate to cite St. Jerome as your authority against the OT deuterocanon (the so-called "apocrypha"), but you never, ever quote the (admittedly nasty) stuff he said against Helvidius on the subject of Mary having other children. Why is the cherry-picking?
Jerome, Luther, Calvin, and Zwingli all agreed with us on this topic, and disagreed with you. Did they make Mary a "demigoddess" [sic] too?
Really not point in repeating the same thing endlessly on FR... and it has been done many times.
In the end, those who prefer a demigoddess, need to keep her ever virgin and without original sin. In other words, they have decided and verses are explained away to prevent cognitive dissonance.
1. I'm not "guys". I am only posting on one account.
2. Believing Mary had sex as the obedient woman who was desirous to fulfill the commands of God is nor required for salvation.
There's not a trace of clear, direct Biblical warrant for it -- not a scintilla of a particle of a verse in the NT which says that anyone (except Jesus) is a biological child of Mary.
I understand the methods Catholicism uses to explain away Scripture to justify a non-Scriptural, pagan belief.
"Yet you exalt it into some kind of litmus test of correct doctrine."
No. I pointed out the truth. Freudian projection on your part, amigo.
"You guys never hesitate to cite St. Jerome as your authority against the OT deuterocanon (the so-called "apocrypha"), but you never, ever quote the (admittedly nasty) stuff he said against Helvidius on the subject of Mary having other children.
Good one. Except that I am not guys. I am posting just what I posted from just my account. I did not reference Jerome. Guess you should track down the poster who did - if any did - and interact with them.
Jerome, Luther, Calvin, and Zwingli all agreed with us on this topic, and disagreed with you. Did they make Mary a "demigoddess" [sic] too?
I see your point. God is good to use people, even with their flaws in practice and belief.
Blessed Father Luther recovered the Gospel. That is enough legacy for any man.
So you are saying that there ARE Scripture verses proving that Mary was not a virgin and that she had other children, but you’re just too TIRED to cite them.
Your zeal for the truth is inspiring!
Answer: The Greek word used in Luke 1:36 is “suggenes” and means “relative” or “kinsman.” It is from the Greek roots “syn” (with) and “genos” (seed or offspring). So, the word here refers to Elizabeth as being related to Mary in some physical but unspecified way. Thus, the English word “cousin” is perhaps too specific. “Kinswoman” or “relative” are more accurate translations.
So the question did not get answered at all...Why wasn't the word sister used if sister means kin???
Mar_3:35 For whosoever shall do the will of God, the same is my brother, and my sister, and mother.
Sister
ἀδελφή
adelphē
ad-el-fay'
Feminine of G80; a sister (natural or ecclesiastical): - sister.
Sister does NOT mean kin...Sister means sister...Mary had a cousin and Jesus had a sister...
But I'll bet your husband doesn't call his sister 'cousin' (if he has one)...
Did you read the original post? It discounts your theory.
**Jesus had a sister... **
Wrong.
Then her picture would be in the pictures of the Holy Family of Jesus, Mary and Joseph.........and it is not there!
Unfortunately, like most of Arch-pope's work, it is thin gruel and his hermeneutic is situational at best.
Not tired at all. I am experienced after this great number of years on FR.
There are plenty of previous threads where this has been examined biblically by many in addition to myself.
I'm assuming that these pictures were taken so long ago that they must have been Poloroids?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.