Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: blackpacific

Apart from the FACT that the NT was written in GREEK, I ought to point out that Aramaic also has a word for cousin. Find an Aramaic lexicon and look it up.

As I pointed out, Luke used cousin (and kin) - he knew the words, he just didn’t use them when discussing the brothers of Jesus.

Also, as I pointed out, the NT never says X the brother of Y unless he is.

Nor did Mary plan on being a perpetual virgin in some sort of weird vow - “18 Now the birth of Jesus Christ was as follows: when His mother Mary had been betrothed to Joseph, before they came together she was found to be with child by the Holy Spirit. 19 And Joseph her husband, being a righteous man and not wanting to disgrace her, planned to send her away secretly. 20 But when he had considered this, behold, an angel of the Lord appeared to him in a dream, saying, “Joseph, son of David, do not be afraid to take Mary as your wife; for the Child who has been conceived in her is of the Holy Spirit.”

That is not a description of some sort of perpetual virginity vow, for Joseph planned on taking her as his wife, until he found out she was already pregnant.

But those facts don’t match your doctrine, so wish them away if you will. But please don’t pat yourself on the back, and claim to be a Christian and call me a heathen (”Your rule of faith is your human interpretation of a sacred text you do not understand. My rule of faith is a gift from God, given in Baptism”) when you use doctrine to determine what scripture says, instead of using scripture to determine what your doctrine should be.

Those who demote the word of God below the teachings of the men who run their church deserve any deception they fall in to...


336 posted on 08/17/2009 5:32:30 PM PDT by Mr Rogers (I loathe the ground he slithers on!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 334 | View Replies ]


To: Mr Rogers
Also, as I pointed out, the NT never says X the brother of Y unless he is.

Circular logic, as Jesus had no blood brothers yet Scripture seems to refer to them.

343 posted on 08/17/2009 5:58:27 PM PDT by Petronski (In Germany they came first for the Communists, And I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Communist...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 336 | View Replies ]

To: Mr Rogers

“Also, as I pointed out, the NT never says X the brother of Y unless he is.” This is a lie, and you know it.

I was wrong about the Aramaic, there was no word for cousin in Hebrew. When translated to Greek “adelphos” was used, which could mean either brother or relative.

Luke 1:34 still stands, the Blessed Virgin was concerned about her vow, just as any good Carmelite would.

You are insulting St. Joseph, not me. I would not do that to the last of the Patriarchs. And I certainly would not insult the Queen of Heaven.

Faith precedes scriptural interpretation, which allows Catholics to learn and grow in wisdom and grace every time they read the inspired books of the Old and New testament, while their protestant brethren struggle with numerous artifacts left behind by a fallible reason being used as an infallible rule of faith.


353 posted on 08/17/2009 7:05:21 PM PDT by blackpacific
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 336 | View Replies ]

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