Posted on 06/11/2017 10:27:59 AM PDT by NKP_Vet
The point of origin of the Christian faith is Jesus Christ.
This page reviews the transmission of the Christian faith from Jesus Christ and the Apostles through the Traditions of the early Christian Church and the formation of the Canon of the New Testament of the Bible.
God has revealed himself to man through Divine Revelation, by sending us his beloved Son, our Lord Jesus Christ, and the Holy Spirit. God chose to reveal himself to us so that we may become partakers of his divine nature (2 Peter 1:4). God first made himself known by creating our first parents, Adam and Eve, in his image and likeness (Genesis 1:26-28). Following the Fall of Adam and Eve through original sin, God's promise of Redemption gave them the hope of salvation (Genesis 3:15). In preparing for the redemption of the human race, God made covenants with Noah, Abraham, Moses and the people and prophets of Israel. Salvation history is fulfilled through the Incarnation of Jesus Christ, the Son of God, the Word made Flesh.
Our appropriate personal response in our relationship with Christ Jesus is what St. Paul calls "the obedience of faith" (Romans 1:5, 16:26)!
There were three stages in the formation of the Gospels: the Life and Teachings of Jesus Christ, the Oral Tradition of the Apostles, and the Written Word.
(Excerpt) Read more at jesuschristsavior.net ...
So Elizabeth is a cousin, but the brothers and sisters that Jesus Christ was so vastly superior to, can’t be brothers and sisters. As though that does resume damage to Mary.
Well, if she has to maintain the Diana-Artemis (sp) tradition, then that would explain it to me.
You set aside argument and content yourself by saying I'm gullible --- and this exempts you from considering my reasons. This kind of response is not an argument: it is just a refusal to evaluate evidence.
Yet the Christian community much closer to Biblical times, including both scholars and people who spoke Hebrew or Greek as their native languages, didn't think it was a stretch at all to say that Jesus' adelphoi (Gr.) were not his siblings born of Mary, but rather that they were half-brothers from His foster-father Joseph, or other close kindred, as the words can indicate in context.
Jesus Himself uses "brethren" is a very wide sense, e.g. in Matthew 25:40.
If you ignore the actual usage, you open yourself to mistaking the specificity of "sons of Mary" where this specificity is not stated or intended. It is just as likely that they were close kinsmen in the Aramaic usage, even sons of Joseph by a previous marriage. A near-universal conviction of Mary's ever-virginity is the documentable belief of the churches of Christ from the earliest recorded evidence.
Jerome (4th century) referred to the theory that Mary had children other than Jesus, as "novel, wicked, and a daring affront to the faith of the whole world" (Jerome, Against Helvetius, 21). This indicates that Jerome, one of the most eminent scholars and translators of his age, had not heard of such a notion previous to its promotion by Helvetius, and thought it an innovation.
The evidence of this is strong, since all the liturgies of the earliest churches -- not just Roman (the Latin West) but Jerusalemic (Liturgy of St. James), Antiochian, Constantinopolitan, Alexandrian, Coptic, Armenian, Assyrian, etc --- ALL refer to Mary as Ever-Virgin, which is strong evidence of its going back to the era when these churches were founded, i.e. the Apostolic Era.
The question doesn't even arise again until 1000 years later.
But here's a challenge for you. Any specific counter examples -— especially anybody from before Jerome's time who debated Mary's ever-virginity or asserted that Jesus' brethren in the NT were sons of Mary, or anything like a public liturgical reference to Mary’s purported other children -— would be telling evidence against Mary's "ever-virginity."
Does any such evidence exist? Anywhere? At any time? in the first millennium-and--a-half of Christianity?
Thanks.
With all due respect, this is not the issue that I was addressing. But for the matter I was commenting on, there were solid Scriptural foundations.
As far as debates over Marys perpetual virginity in ancient times would be impossible to tell. They probably didn't give such a ridiculous notion any thought. It wasn't until Catholics sought to elevate her status to demi-goddess that the Mary myths started manifesting itself.
Many cultures refer to cousins as brothers and sisters, why is that so hard to grasp?
If we refer to each other as brothers ans sisters in Christ does it mean I have to send you a birthday card every year?
Bad Hermeneutics.
Bad Hermeneutics.
(1) his influence on the development of the Canon, which is always an ecclesial, not an individual, determination; and
(2)his evidence of what the faithful believed in the early centuries of Christianity.
Your guess about the background of this belief is exactly wrong, historically speaking. The belief in the ever-virginity of Mary was the older universal belief; and the notion that she gave birth to other children was, at Jerome's time (fourth century) a shocking innovation.
And it’s not just the Roman church, if by that you mean the Latin West. Mary is honored as Ever-Virgin in all the earliest Apostolic patriarchal churches -— Jerusalem, Antioch, Rome, Constantinople, Alexandria -— as well as churches historically more independent of their direct influence, such as the Armenian, Assyrian, Coptic and Ethiopian churches.
These held the doctrine of "ever-virginity" centuries before the Sixth Ecumenical Council, which finally officially defined it as a doctrine. The 3th century Armenians, for instance, who were not even part of the Roman Empire, did not adopt this doctrine "because" a council in Cobstantinople(which they did not attend) defined it officially in the 7th century. Think.
In fact, the broader geographically, and deeper historically you go, the more it looks like “Ever-Virgin” is the authentic belief from the Apostolic Era, and divergence from that was an innovation. An unpersuasive one, too. It didn’t get any traction with any Christian churches anywhere, Roman or not. After Jerome refuted Helvetius' "innovation," controversy didn't arise again until millennium later.
It is pretty enlightening to look into the history, which is a rich field for the action of Divine Providence.
Bad argumentation.
You forgot the ™.
I think the reason so many polemicists are unconvinced by -— and even frankly uninterested in -— historic evidence, is that they think the promises of Christ failed and the Church in all Christian nations wandered abandoned for 1500 years. Then the Holy Spirit woke up to enlighten certain celebrity German theologians who wanted to break their vows and cut books out of the Bible.
You can perhaps see why I’m not convinced.
Convince us that James, Joseph, Judas, and Simon were not his Step-Brothers through Mary and that he at least had two Step-Sisters also by Mary according to this verse.
John 19
25 Now there stood by the cross of Jesus, his mother, and his mother’s sister, Mary of Cleophas, and Mary Magdalen.
26 When Jesus therefore had seen his mother and the disciple standing whom he loved, he saith to his mother: Woman, behold thy son.
27 After that, he saith to the disciple: Behold thy mother. And from that hour, the disciple took her to his own.
If Mary had other children this would make no sense at all.
Also notice.
40 And 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:
Mary was the wife of Cleopas who was the father of Joses and James.
These two were called Jesus`s brethren but it is plain they had a different mother and father.
There are many scriptures which show that the brethren of Jesus show no belief in him, that would be the attitude of older brethren not younger.
I see no absolute proof either way but the scriptures indicate to me that Jesus was Mary`s only child.
Actually it makes perfect sense. John was the Disciple closest to Jesus. He was the one that could be entrusted to His final familial duty. At this time there is no indication that any of Jesus' step brothers or sisters were followers of Him. Jesus had the ability to perceive the future and make this decision.
I see no absolute proof either way . . .
But you want to believe that the virgin Mary stayed a virgin? Correct?
Can't believe that since his step-brothers names were James, Joseph, Judas, and Simon and he had at least two sisters. And the Jews were criticizing him through his family (context) in the same verse.
The Bible says it. I believe it. That settles it.
Thanks for the reply CptnObvious. It was obvious I was posting to ravenwolf and you were courtesy pinged.
Make it consistent with context and with the overall theme of the Bible.
At Jesus' time when he appeared to be just another man--albeit and unusual one--that she did not give birth to other children would have been a shocking innovation. If she hadn't, and being so fundamental to doctrine, the Scriptures would have shown that she hadn't.
But, let's face it--it doesn't. To the contrary, it clearly says that she did, and other Scripture supports the idea the the general epistle of James (Iakob) and the letter of Jude were written by two of His brothers.
How much more plain can it be?......
God gave his ONLY begotten Son.
Joseph ‘knew’ not his wife until she had brought forth her FIRSTBORN son.
The argument that only older brothers would look down on Jesus is a weak one.
Extreme example: Children came out to mock Elisha ( which worked out pretty bad for the kids.)
Moses was 80 yrs old when he led Israel out of Egypt. A whole lot of folks didn’t have the respect they should have had for him. Of the 12 spies, only Caleb and Joshua showed respect to Moses (who was the prophet of God).
Samuel’s sons were not faithful like their father.
David had a son that sought to take his kingdom and his life.
Rehoboam and his young advisors wouldn’t listen to the older experienced men.
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.