No I'm saying the Holy Spirit would figure people were astute enough to know that Mary, the of Jesus would be referred to always as such.
SD
You can’t use scripture to make a point, so now your telling me what the Holy Spirit was thinking? Lol
Enough of this nonsense, the first hurtle you have to get over if you intend to give your belief any serious weight by us NC’s, is to show us another family who would have been among the close followers of Christ, (possibly less then 200 of them near the cross), who had a mother named Mary, who’s husband was a carpenter, and a Son named Jesus who had at least two brothers named James and Joses.
Statistician may tell us that in the Jerusalem area at the time of Christ, their may have been hundreds of men named Jesus, and fifty of them with a father named Joseph, and 10 with a mother named Mary, and one or two percent with a next to the oldest brother named James, and, and, on and on.
But what happens to those odds, when you realize this combination of names have to come from a group of under a thousand people (very liberal figure) who would have been close enough to Jesus to be at the cross, and to be mentioned in scripture?
If you can’t, …then a person would have to be foolish, to think that when the scripture mentions a woman by the name of Mary, who had sons named James and Joses, that it was referring to anyone other then the family of Jesus.
You can claim we’re too literal, and too wrapped up in scripture, but then we can make the opposite claim about you.
All I want Catholics to admit is that if people only follow the scripture for all there doctrines and beliefs, then you can understand why we believe as we do.
And I am willing to admit that if my belief came from a Church that had been building on man made traditions for at least a thousand years, then I would probably believe the same thing.
JH :-)