This is the problem. You think that everything has to come from Scripture. It is not clear at all that there was never another family with these names. You must look to history, not Scripture.
What would you say the odds are, of two familys having these four names in it, and to make it even more interesting, the father has to be a carpenter.
Who said the father was a carpenter?
The truth is, Mary was there every time. The first time identified as the mother of Jesus, then as the mother of James and Joses, then as the other Mary, and finally in Acts again as the mother of Jesus, who was then risen.
This is simply insane to believe that a character is referred to in this way. Sorry.
Why is it that after Jesus died, Mary was no longer referred to as the mother of Jesus?
Because it's a different Mary.
Why did Mary Magdalene take precedence over her for a while in scripture?
She didn't.
You are so intent to downgrade Mary, the Mother of God, that you assign her this schizophrenic name-shifting role. What other character in Scripture is referred to in this haphazard and contradictory manner? Where else in Scripture or in Jewish tradition is a person's mother no longer his mother after he dies?
Why do you strive so hard to believe that the mother of Jesus (her firstborn, by all accounts) is referred to as the mother of her (presumably) 2nd and 3rd children only?
SD
Theres no problem, only a difference of what you and I consider important when it comes to knowing Gods will.
If there had been other familys with these same names, then the Holy Spirit would have separated them in some other way, and if history has the answer to this, please enlighten us.
Who said the father was a carpenter?
Matthew 13:55 Is not this the carpenter's son? is not his mother called Mary? and his brethren, James, and Joses, and Simon, and Judas?
Both accounts are true, Joseph and Jesus were both carpenters. Mark 3:16
This is simply insane to believe that a character is referred to in this way. Sorry.
Because its a different Mary.
No problem, but Im still waiting for you to tell me that Mary left her only begotten Son at the cross, while everyone else stayed. If not, why wasnt she ever mentioned again until Acts.
What does your history tell you about this?
You are so intent to downgrade Mary, the Mother of God, that you assign her this schizophrenic name-shifting role. What other character in Scripture is referred to in this haphazard and contradictory manner?
Why do you strive so hard to believe that the mother of Jesus (her firstborn, by all accounts) is referred to as the mother of her (presumably) 2nd and 3rd children only?
Mary has absolutely nothing to do with our different concepts of her place in the church.
She knew nothing about what man would do with her memory, and would have been to first to object. Its me who claims she loved her Son so much she would be the last to leave Him, and its you, who are either saying she left the scene early on, or the writers didnt consider her important enough to follow up on where she was all this time.
Where else in Scripture or in Jewish tradition is a person's mother no longer his mother after he dies?
There is no other circumstance in the bible where a man is crucified while his mother looks on, so unless some expert on Jewish history has the answer as to why the names and their mentioning in order of importance keep changing, then we will just have to wait to see.
I have the names of her children, James and Joses, that support her as being the mother of Jesus. Until you give an example of another woman named Mary who also has sons named James and Joses, then you have no biblical proof of your belief what so ever.
If the scripture fails to distinguish between these (supposed) two different women, that have the same names, and two sons with the same names, who were all part of the small group of people who would be at the cross, then it was done so on purpose to confuse, and Id never believe that.
JH :-)