Posted on 09/03/2013 5:38:10 PM PDT by Gamecock
Question:
It is obvious that Mary had children after Jesus was born. As long as Jesus was conceived by the Holy Spirit, why was it necessary that Mary have no previous children? I am not asking why it was necessary that Jesus be conceived by the Holy Spirit—I understand that. I guess my question is, Why would it matter that Mary had other children first, as long as Jesus was conceived by the Spirit?
Answer:
I agree with you that from what is said in Scripture, it appears to be "obvious that Mary had children after Jesus was born. " Take, for example, this passage:
2When the Sabbath came, he [Jesus] began to teach in the synagogue, and many who heard him were amazed. "Where did this man get these things?" they asked. "What's this wisdom that has been given him, that he even does miracles! 3Isn't this the carpenter? Isn't this Mary's son and the brother of James, Joseph, Judas and Simon? Aren't his sisters here with us?".... (Mark 6:2-3, New International Version)
It has been argued (particularly by those who believe in the "perpetual virginity" of Mary) that the word translated "brother" (Greek "adelphos," as in "Philadelphia," "the city of brotherly love") might be taken as "cousin," but the context surely indicates that we are not talking about several households here, but one.
Incidentally, perhaps it should be noted in passing that although Jesus, James, Joseph, Judas, and Simon were all of the same household and all had Mary as their mother, Mary's husband Joseph was the physical father of James, Joseph, Judas, and Simon, but not of Jesus, who was conceived of the Holy Spirit (see Matthew 1:20; Luke 1:35). Thus, technically speaking, Jesus and his "brothers" were "half-brothers," since they only shared the same mother, but it would certainly be understandable for those in Nazareth who personally knew of the family to regard the five sons as "brothers."
Consider, also, how this passage speaks of the birth of Jesus:
22All this took place to fulfill what the Lord had said through the prophet: 23"The virgin will be with child and will give birth to a son, and they will call him 'Immanuel' which means, 'God with us'." 24When Joseph woke up, he did what the angel of the Lord had commanded him and took Mary home as his wife. 25But he had no union with her until she gave birth to a son. And he gave him the name Jesus. (Matt. 1:22-25, NIV)
The words "But he had no union with her until she gave birth to a son" certainly seem to suggest that after Mary gave birth to Jesus, Joseph did have union with her and that, having given birth to one Child, she gave birth to other children as well.
But let's get to the heart of your question: "Why was it necessary that Mary have no previous children?.... Why would it matter that Mary had other children first, as long as Jesus was conceived by the Spirit?
Here's the simple answer: It was necessary for Jesus to be born of a virgin to fulfill Isaiah's prophecy:
"Therefore the Lord himself will give you a sign: The virgin will be with child and will give birth to a son, and will call him Immanuel. (Is. 7:14, NIV)
Speaking of the birth of Christ of a virgin, Matthew (as we have already seen) says this:
22All this took place to fulfill what the Lord had said through the prophet: 23"The virgin will be with child and will give birth to a son, and they will call him Immanuel." (Matt. 1:22-23, NIV)
Although the exact meaning of the Hebrew word "'almah" in Isaiah 7:14 has been disputed (some—ignoring the context—take it as simply "young woman of marriageable age"), there is absolutely no dispute over the meaning of the Greek word "parthenos" in Matthew 1:23, which can have no other meaning than "virgin" (and Matthew 1:23 supplies us with an inspired interpretation of Isaiah 7:14).
Thus Scriptural prophecy found its fulfillment when our Savior was, in the familiar words of the Apostles' Creed, "conceived of the Holy Ghost, born of the virgin Mary."
I think he was clarifying that you posted that my wife was still Catholic, but it wasn’t my wife. It was William’s wife.
Considering the age difference between Joseph and Mary; that it’s possible that these were older son of Joseph. Or, you can accept on FAITH, that our Creator was willing to share our humanity. Enough Said...
AMEN!
Amen!
She knows Jesus has her in His hand and won't let go.
John 10:28 And I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish; neither shall anyone snatch them out of My hand.
If you notice the earlier response to my wife becoming a Born Again Christian was about rejoining the RCC, not joy at being saved. I've seen this in my wife's family. They think of their church membership as their ticket to heaven. We even have one uncle who goes to mass every day and is terrified that he won't be in a state of grace when he dies. My wife and I both have tried to open the Scriptures to him to share The Gospel, but for him it's all about reciting prayers and going to mass. It's really sad. He's a good guy.
I did notice that all my Born Again Christian brothers and sisters had to say was how great it is my wife is saved. For us it's not about church membership but is about the joy of being the body of Christ.
This seems rather petty, pinging the RM. I took no offense at ES knowing my first name. We have posted to each other on occasion over the years and even when we've disagreed it's been a good conversation.
Amen. And that's what out FRoman Catholic friends don't get. As a Presbyterian I recognize there are folks who are saved in the SBC, LCMS, Independent Bible Churches, etc... FRoman Catholics see us as all different. I see these folks as brothers and sisters united in Christ.
I’m happy to say I’m with you!
I don't think the problem is with ISCOOL's reading comprehension. Try re-reading what he wrote, more slowly and carefully, again.
The point is you denied a virgin mother of God.
No, he didn't. What he denied was the *perpetual* virginity. Re-read and look for the word "perpetual". You;ll find it in there.
Not to mention that he said anything about GOD having a perpetual virgin mother. I'm pretty sure that iscool doesn't believe that God had a mother, unlike Catholics, and that he believes God is eternal, without BEGINNING or end.
I could care less what happened to her privates after Jesus was born.
Well, the RCC does because they teach that she was perpetually virgin and Catholics cannot disagree with it because it's in their CCC, it must be believed by faithful Catholics.
http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/__P1K.HTM
499 The deepening of faith in the virginal motherhood led the Church to confess Mary's real and perpetual virginity even in the act of giving birth to the Son of God made man.154 In fact, Christ's birth "did not diminish his mother's virginal integrity but sanctified it."155 and so the liturgy of the Church celebrates Mary as Aeiparthenos, the "Ever-virgin".156
Have all the kids she wants, that would be human. But to deny that Jesus was born of a virgin birth shows your level of true “understanding.”
To claim that iscool denied the virgin birth shows the level of YOUR understanding.
Discuss the issues all you want, but do not make it personal.
Anyone could figure that calling you *William* would not be far off considering your screen name.
Salvation, it is not rocket science to conclude that *wm* stands for *William*.
It's not *outing* anyone.
Christmas, Easter, and Sunday worship are all unquestionably pagan, and a vile affront to Yehova.
None of these things are to be found in the word of Yehova.
All believers are instructed clearly by James, brother of Yehova in Acts 15 to keep the sabbath, and to listen to the reading of Moses and the prophets on that day. (Acts 15: 19-21) They are also instructed that no one is authorized to demand that they follow oral traditions. (Acts 15: 22-29)
>> “The point is you denied a virgin mother of God.” <<
.
No, read more carefully! He denied that Mary remained a virgin after Yeshua was born. God’s word declares that she had four sons and also daughters after Yeshua was born, so he is correct.
Also, God has no mother.
Amazing how people read what they want to read instead of what was actually written.
How very sad that you took your wife out of the true church into one of the very many partially true organizations.
It should have worked the other way around and you should have joined the RC. What a shame that your prejudices kept you from learning about the true church. And equally shameful is that your wife was either never taught or never learned her childhood religion which is all about Jesus and the closest relationship possible in the Eucharist.
There is only one baptism so that re-baptism your church did? Means absolutely nothing.
It should have worked the other way around and you should have joined the RC. What a shame that your prejudices kept you from learning about the true church. And equally shameful is that your wife was either never taught or never learned her childhood religion which is all about Jesus and the closest relationship possible in the Eucharist.
When she accepted Christ, she BECAME part of the one true church, she didn't *join* it. The church, the body of Christ, is an organism, not an organization.
We don't find God through the *church* but through Jesus.
John 14:6 Jesus said to him, “I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.
The closest possible relationship with Jesus is through having Him dwell in our hearts through faith, not through eating Him and having Him pass through our digestive tract.
Ephesians 3:14-19 For this reason I bow my knees before the Father, from whom every family in heaven and on earth is named, that according to the riches of his glory he may grant you to be strengthened with power through his Spirit in your inner being, so that Christ may dwell in your hearts through faith—that you, being rooted and grounded in love, may have strength to comprehend with all the saints what is the breadth and length and height and depth, and to know the love of Christ that surpasses knowledge, that you may be filled with all the fullness of God.
Hebrews 11:1 Now faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen.
Hebrews 11:6 And without faith it is impossible to please him, for whoever would draw near to God must believe that he exists and that he rewards those who seek him.
“Outside of paganism, there is no need for a virgin mother of God” - take it up with Iscool, it’s his quote. Find some preacher boy to explain what virgin birth is, or a biologist to teach y’all what a mother is.
Then you do not believe God’s word.
There could be many reasons, maybe Joseph was an old man and probably was, but even many younger men lose their ability to produce children. and women lose their ability also.
Any Scripture to back that up?
Or is it mere speculation?
God’s word declares that she had four sons and also daughters after Yeshua was born, so he is correct.
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.