Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Brothers of Jesus: Biblical Arguments for Mary’s Virginity
Seton Magazine ^ | Dave Armstrong

Posted on 05/31/2014 4:33:21 PM PDT by narses

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 441-452 next last
To: narses

Does the RCC believe that sex within a marriage covenant makes you unrighteous?


41 posted on 05/31/2014 5:58:16 PM PDT by Kandy Atz ("Were we directed from Washington when to sow and when to reap, we should soon want for bread.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: narses

Break out your Bibles and study the messianic Psalms.
The words of Jesus prophesized 1,000 years before Christ

Psalm 69 8

I am become a stranger unto my brethren, and an alien unto my mother’s children.


42 posted on 05/31/2014 6:01:55 PM PDT by winodog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: narses
Since it was accepted truth for the first aeon and a half of the Christian Era that Mary was a Virgin

What a coincidence! That was the exact same aeon and a half where the Church prevented the Bible from getting into the hands of the common Christian.

43 posted on 05/31/2014 6:05:36 PM PDT by Hoodat (Democrats - Opposing Equal Protection since 1828)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: winodog
with God the Father. Now verse 8:

Psalms 69:8

“I am become a stranger unto my brethren, (His fellow Jews) and an alien unto my mother’s children.” Now there’s one group of people that don’t like that verse. And who are they?

Well, the Roman Catholics are just exercised by the thought that Jesus had physical brothers. Yes, Mary and Joseph had sons beyond Christ. She was just a human mother. She wasn’t the mother of God. She was the mother of human beings. So here is a good verse to show these people. That He is “an alien unto my mother’s (Mary’s) children.”

Now stop and think. When did the family of Joseph and Mary recognize and believe who Jesus was? Not until after, I think, His crucifixion. Hey, they detested Him just as much as anybody else in Nazareth for the longest time. But I think they finally came to believe that He was who He said He was. So it’s evident that Joseph and Mary had other children after Christ was born (Matthew 13:55-56). All right, read it again.

Psalms 69:8-9

“I am become a stranger unto my brethren, (His fellow Jews. His family) and an alien (He was a castoff.) unto my mother’s children. (Who would have been His physical brothers. Half brothers!) 9. For the zeal of thine house hath eaten me up; and the reproaches of them that reproached thee are fallen upon me.” In other words, all the anger of Israel in rebellion against the Grace of God—they heaped on Him with their scorn and their ridicule and their demand in that He be crucified.

Psalms 69:10-11

“When I wept, and chastened my soul with fasting, that was to my reproach. 11. I made sackcloth also my garment; and I became a proverb to them.” Now what’s He referring to? Did He walk up and down the streets and highways of Israel in the apparel of the kings and queens? NO! But what? As almost one who had nothing.

And I think He put it best when He said that birds have nests and animals have dens but He does not have a place to lay His head. See, He was absolutely the poorest of the poor from the physical aspect, so that no one could use that as an excuse for rejecting Him. He was right on their level, and yet, they hated Him. Verse 11 again:
http://lesfeldick.org/lesbk79.html

44 posted on 05/31/2014 6:08:34 PM PDT by winodog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: BeadCounter

> “Maybe First-Born has a rather expanded meaning.” <

Someone else alluded to ‘firstborn’. I haven’t investigated that. My comments concerned a different part of the passage.


45 posted on 05/31/2014 6:13:45 PM PDT by GJones2 (Mary a virgin throughout her marriage?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: narses; Hoodat

“How does that question pop into the discussion?”

Mary and Joseph were married, but hew never copulated with her? That is a bunch of baldersash!


46 posted on 05/31/2014 6:16:03 PM PDT by GGpaX4DumpedTea (I am a Tea Party descendant...steeped in the Constitutional Republic given to us by the Founders)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: bike800
Woman, there is your son...son, there is your mother. And from then on, John took her into his care. Wouldn’t have been necessary if she had sons to take care her...

Concur, that is scriptural evidence

47 posted on 05/31/2014 6:16:39 PM PDT by af_vet_1981 (The bus came by and I got on, That's when it all began)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: narses

“Strikingly, it looks like every time St. Paul uses adelphos (unless I missed one or two), he means it as something other than blood brother or sibling. He uses the word or related cognates no less than 138 times in this way.”

This is a deliberately deceptive statement. Paul normally uses ‘brother’ to mean the spiritual brother, and that in turn does not mean the spiritual cousin. Here is a sample of his use of brother:

Rom 14:10
But you, why do you judge your brother? Or you again, why do you regard your brother with contempt? For we will all stand before the judgment seat of God.

Rom 14:15
For if because of food your brother is hurt, you are no longer walking according to love. Do not destroy with your food him for whom Christ died.

Rom 14:21
It is good not to eat meat or to drink wine, or to do anything by which your brother stumbles.

Rom 16:23
Gaius, host to me and to the whole church, greets you. Erastus, the city treasurer greets you, and Quartus, the brother.

1Co 1:1
Paul, called as an apostle of Jesus Christ by the will of God, and Sosthenes our brother,

When discussing our brothers in Christ, Paul was a monotheist. In John we read, “ But to all who did receive him, who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God...”

It is in this sense Paul usually uses “brother”. If we have ONE father, then we are “brothers”. If we have multiple fathers but are related, we are “cousins”. Thus Paul’s use is that of brother, not cousin - the sons of one father!

Dave Armstrong’s statement is deliberately misleading. If you want to know the truth, seek it in scripture rather than getting it second hand from someone who does not honor the truth.


48 posted on 05/31/2014 6:17:05 PM PDT by Mr Rogers (I sooooo miss America!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: winodog

Since Psalm 69:5 reads:

“5 O God, thou knowest my foolishness; and my sins are not hid from thee”

Are you also contending that Jesus sinned?


49 posted on 05/31/2014 6:23:52 PM PDT by BeadCounter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: GGpaX4DumpedTea

So it wasn’t a big deal that Mary bore the Sacred Son of God and Salvation to all mankind?


50 posted on 05/31/2014 6:25:11 PM PDT by BeadCounter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: SkyDancer

From the article:

Jude is called the Lord’s “brother” in Matthew 13:55 and Mark 6:3. If this is the same Jude who wrote the epistle bearing that name (as many think), he calls himself “a servant of Jesus Christ and brother of James” (Jude 1:1). Now, suppose for a moment that he was Jesus’ blood brother. In that case, he refrains from referring to himself as the Lord’s own sibling (while we are told that such a phraseology occurs several times in the New Testament, referring to a sibling relationship) and chooses instead to identify himself as James‘ brother. This is far too strange and implausible to believe.

Moreover, James also refrains from calling himself Jesus’ brother, in his epistle (James 1:1: “servant of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ”)...


51 posted on 05/31/2014 6:25:21 PM PDT by D-fendr (Deus non alligatur sacramentis sed nos alligamur.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: BeadCounter

Of course not. He took the sins of humanity upon himself to free us from the curse of sin that Adam subjected us to.


52 posted on 05/31/2014 6:27:51 PM PDT by winodog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: dcwusmc
From the viewpoint of one who reads Scripture and has a reasonable amount of good sense and curiosity, such things as praying to Mary or anyone else but God Himself, or not KNOWING FOR SURE THAT YOU ARE SAVED, SACTIFIED AND SURE OF YOUR PLACE IN HEAVEN WHEN GOD CALLS YOUR NAME run absolutely COUNTER to God’s Own, sure Words. I have yet to find these things in my 3-4 favorite English translations, but I have another 35 to go through yet. If anyone can point me to book, chapter and verse, as well as version, I would be ever so grateful.

Come on now...you know you can't read and understand the clear teachings of the Bible without someone to tell you what it means....:)

53 posted on 05/31/2014 6:28:32 PM PDT by ealgeone (obama, borderof)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: narses
Matthew 1:24-25 (KJV)

24 Then Joseph being raised from sleep did as the angel of the Lord had bidden him, and took unto him his wife: 25 And knew her not till she had brought forth her firstborn son: and he called his name JESUS.

She "knew" her husband after Jesus was born. "Know" is a euphemism for carnal knowledge/sexual intercourse.

54 posted on 05/31/2014 6:29:33 PM PDT by nonsporting
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Kandy Atz

Totally unrelated, but I have a friend whose first exposure to the Bible was reading the Song of Solomon. Obviously it worked, because today he is a very strong Christian.


55 posted on 05/31/2014 6:31:21 PM PDT by Hoodat (Democrats - Opposing Equal Protection since 1828)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: Hoodat
Might as well post the whole thing: Then Joseph her husband, being a just man, and not wanting to make her a public example, was minded to put her away secretly. But while he thought about these things, behold, an angel of the Lord appeared to him in a dream, saying, “Joseph, son of David, do not be afraid to take to you Mary your wife, for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Spirit. And she will bring forth a Son, and you shall call His name Jesus, for He will save His people from their sins.” So all this was done that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the Lord through the prophet, saying: “Behold, the virgin shall be with child, and bear a Son, and they shall call His name Immanuel,” which is translated, “God with us.” Then Joseph, being aroused from sleep, did as the angel of the Lord commanded him and took to him his wife, and did not know her till she had brought forth her firstborn Son. And he called His name Jesus. Matthew 1:19-25 Note also how it refers to Jesus specifically as Mary's "firstborn" - not 'only born'.

Come on now...you know you can't just rely on the Bible for these things. I mean, surely, some saint somewhere down the road heard this from someone else who thought that it meant something and so on and so on.

56 posted on 05/31/2014 6:32:40 PM PDT by ealgeone (obama, borderof)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: BeadCounter

What the hell does your post supposed to mean? And no, she was definitely a virgin when she was ‘implanted’ by the Holy Spirit with God’s seed to bear Jesus, the Christ, the Son of God.

Perpeually a virgin? All who espouse that are smoking something funny.


57 posted on 05/31/2014 6:32:49 PM PDT by GGpaX4DumpedTea (I am a Tea Party descendant...steeped in the Constitutional Republic given to us by the Founders)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: narses
In all but two of these occurrences, the authors were either Luke or Paul. Luke was a Greek Gentile. Paul, though Jewish, was raised in the very cosmopolitan, culturally Greek town of Tarsus. But even so, both still clearly used adelphos many times with the meaning of non-sibling (Lk 10:29; Acts 3:17; 7:23-26; Rom 1:7, 13; 9:3; 1 Thess 1:4). They understood what all these words meant, yet they continued to use adelphos even in those instances that had a non-sibling application.

I don't know if it's ignorance or deceit that compels these authors to try to trash the scriptures...

No one ever claimed adelphos only meant brother from the same womb...No one...

Adelphos means a brother, literally or figuratively...

If two men are Christians they are brothers in Christ...If a man belongs to a union he is a union brother...If a male is your blood brother??? Adelphos...

What adelphos does NOT mean is kin, kinfolk, cousin, relative, in-law or out-law...It means 'only' brother...

Doesn't matter what brother means in Hebrew or Aramaic...Doesn't matter if Jesus only spoke Aramaic...Jesus had the bible written to the entire world in Greek...And maybe it was because Greek had the language where brother and kinfolk could be distinguished from each other...

58 posted on 05/31/2014 6:40:34 PM PDT by Iscool
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GGpaX4DumpedTea

You have nothing to espouse but ad hominem attacks, you are 2000 years and 2 continents separated from the Israel Christ lived in. Thank you.


59 posted on 05/31/2014 6:41:26 PM PDT by BeadCounter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]

To: bike800
Woman, there is your son...son, there is your mother. And from then on, John took her into his care. Wouldn’t have been necessary if she had sons to take care her...

An argument that appears to be based on ignorance of scripture...It could be that Jesus' brother were all too you to care for his mother...One thing we do know is that none of them believed in Jesus at the time and Jesus would have wanted his mother to be cared for by a believer...

60 posted on 05/31/2014 6:44:07 PM PDT by Iscool
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 441-452 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson