Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: annalex; presently no screen name
I just made a post on that.

We know that Mary of Cleophas was the mother of James and Joses from John 19:25: "there stood by the cross of Jesus, his mother, and his mother's sister, Mary of Cleophas, and Mary Magdalen". That proves that at least James and Joseph were not children of Mary the Mother of God, but raqther of that other Mary.

How in the world do you make the leap to "Mary of Cleophas" being the mother of James, Joses, etc.?

The other gospels indeed do not mention Mary the Mother of God at the cross. But note that St. John was there, and he mentions all three Marys.

On the contrary, the other Gospels do name Mary, the mother of Jesus, James, and Joseph.

Mary the Mother of God was not among the women bringing myrrh on the next day.

You would have her washing her hands of Jesus after His crucifiction. Certainly she wouldn't be that callous. She certainly was there.

Mark 16:1 And when the sabbath was past, Mary Mag'dalene, and Mary the mother of James, and Salo'me, bought spices, so that they might go and anoint him.

*********************************************************

The Gospels are unanimous in describibing Mary, the mother of Jesus, as being present despite your efforts to ignore plain Scripture in order to deny Jesus had blood brothers (and sisters).

Further evidence from Scripture:

Acts 1:
18 Then after three years I went up to Jerusalem to visit Cephas, and remained with him fifteen days.
19 But I saw none of the other apostles except James the Lord's brother

Acts 1:
13* and when they had entered, they went up to the upper room, where they were staying, Peter and John and James and Andrew, Philip and Thomas, Bartholomew and Matthew, James the son of Alphaeus and Simon the Zealot and Judas the son of James.
14 All these with one accord devoted themselves to prayer, together with the women and Mary the mother of Jesus, and with his brothers.
15 In those days Peter stood up among the brethren (the company of persons was in all about a hundred and twenty), and said,


Acts 1:14 is clear to define His mother, Mary and His brothers as distinct from the company of about 120 brethren.

3,349 posted on 11/27/2010 2:22:32 PM PST by OLD REGGIE (I am a Biblical Unitarian?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3256 | View Replies ]


To: OLD REGGIE; presently no screen name
How in the world do you make the leap to "Mary of Cleophas" being the mother of James, Joses

John 19:25 says "there stood by the cross of Jesus, his mother, and his mother's sister, Mary of Cleophas" and Mark 15:40 says "there were also women looking on afar off: among whom was Mary Magdalen, and Mary the mother of James the less and of Joseph, and Salome". It is of course possible that there were four Marys and not three: Mary the Virgin Mother of God, Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James et al, and Mary of Cleophas. I think it is natural to assume tha the latter two were the same Mary, bu you are correct that it is not exactly in the text.

the other Gospels do name Mary, the mother of Jesus, James, and Joseph.

I am not aware of any gospel naming "Mary, the mother of Jesus, James, and Joseph". Mark 15 mentions Mary, the mother of James, and Joseph, and John mentions Mary, the mother of Jesus, but no gospel identifies the two as the same woman. Further, it is clear from Mark 15:40 that Mary the motehr of James et al was not the mother of Jesus because Evangelist Mark would not indentify the Mother of Jesus in the scene where Jesus is dying as a mother of some obscure characters James et al without also identifying her as the mother of the main character on the scene, Jesus.

You would have her {Mary the Virgin Mother of God]washing her hands of Jesus after His crucifiction. Certainly she wouldn't be that callous. She certainly was there

It is a nice feeling on your part, but she wasn't. Again, Mark 16:1 is identifying the woman as a mother of some insignificant for the narrative figures and not as mother of Jesus precisely because Mary the Virgin Mother of God was not there.

Many minds wondered why did Mary not go. The answer is rather clear: she knew He won't be there.

Acts 1:14 is clear to define His mother, Mary and His brothers as distinct from the company of about 120 brethren.

Mary the Virgin Mother of God was certainly in the Upper room, the text identifies her. Whether Mary of Cleophas or any other Mary was in the room with them we don't know, as St. Luke simply writes "the women". James the Just, the brother of the Lord was indeed there as well. In all 120 people are called "brothers". Were thay all literal brothers, that would have kept Mary busy giving birth non-stop, -- strange no one mentions that in any of the Bible.

4,728 posted on 12/04/2010 3:22:35 PM PST by annalex (http://www.catecheticsonline.com/CatenaAurea.php)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3349 | 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