Just wondering if you also were looking for the same answers from Full Court, as I've tried to get them for some time now.
Are you open to, or allowed to, entertain the idea that you have a mistaken impression of what the passage actually meant to convey?
Sure, I could have a mistaken impression. But I don't believe I do.
Back to the point I have made many times with you. Is your mind closed on the matter?
Here's the point. I can allow (much like you) that the words written can be interpreted in more than one way. I can allow how one taking a "text only" viewpoint and not taking into account history or tradition might come to one conclusion. I believe it is the wrong conclusion, and it falls apart when one really digs into it and discovers who is named as the mother or father of the various persons identified as "brothers" of Jesus.
But, if one does not agree with this analysis or does not wish to look at things too deeply, I can accept that one simply taking one's own reading of the verses in question can come to that conclusion.
Full Court and those of her(?) persuasion are ill-informed and yet genuinely trying their best to understand the text. I do not think they are deliberately straying from the Bible nor making a liar of God or any of the other things which Catholics have been accused.
I ask only that the same consideration be given to the Catholic view.
I am not persuaded by anything that has been offered as proof to change my well-decided opinion. Largely because nothing has been offered except the repetition of the verses in English. I have rejected the arguments offered after examining them.
I do not think the other side can honestly say that.
SD