"Brothers" of Jesus

  • Thread starter Thread starter In_Hoc_Signo312
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
JB_Brother_4446 said:
Note, “what he saw as the truth.”
Click to expand...


Yes, and we know that the Church that Jesus founded, whom the Holy Spirit will be with til the end of time, clearly views what St. Jerome saw as the truth as scripture with the very highest regard.

It matters to me to not take the high regard lightly, especially in view of St. Joseph. Sometime I wonder why you, or maybe others, persist with asserting your theory. I mean, you already explained it once, twice, three times, lots of times, and you seem still very connected to keeping this topic open.

And why am I interested in this topic so much? Because St. Joseph is a dear patron Saint of my husband and I. First, I was a single Mom for a long time and felt unprotected and alone in the world as a single Mom who did not have a boyfriend, as so many of the other successful, happy single moms seemed to. So I took on St. Joseph, Protector of Families, for protecting my little family and for being the head of my home for all those practical things I just did not know how to solve. And he was an ever present help in trouble.

And then when I met my husband and unexpectedly fell very much in love, it seemed we had so many impossible practical obstacles to ever being together. And when it was clear we both felt the same, we began to pray everyday, over the long distance by phone and now that we are together, married, we still pray it: the prayer to St. Joseph, over 1900 years old:

O St. Joseph,
whose protection is so great, so strong, so prompt
before the Throne of God,
I place in you all my interests and desires.

O St. Joseph,
do assist me by your powerful intercession
and obtain for me from your Divine Son all spiritual blessings
through Jesus Christ, Our Lord;
so that having engaged here below your Heavenly power
I may offer my thanksgiving and homage to the most loving of Fathers.

O St. Joseph,
I never weary contemplating you and Jesus asleep in your arms.
I dare not approach while He reposes near your heart.
Press him in my name and kiss His fine Head for me, and ask Him to return the Kiss when I draw my dying breath.

St. Joseph,
Patron of departing souls, pray for us. Amen.
.
.

My husband and I change “I” and “me” to "we and “us” when we pray this and we pray it every single day. That and The Angelus and the Memorare, every single day, together. Not only do we pray it, but we have entrusted thing after thing to them, and put our hearts at rest over worrisome things, after entrusting them to St. Joseph and/or Our Lady, and we do so with confidence because so much prayer has been answered when we do. So we do take the most blessed Holy Family as our very own special patron Saints, as we entrust our lives to their intercession every single day, and we think about them a lot.

So the dearness of St. Joseph to me is what draws me to expressing here that I do not accept the “Bi-Vocation Theory”. That is, I think St. Joseph was the Most Chaste Spouse, and that he was Most Chaste in the way compatible with the Chaste Blessed Virgin Mary. Not two kinds of chaste - that is, first, prior to his call to his alleged “second” vocation, as the kind of chaste of a married spouse engaged in loving intimate relations, which would NOT be compatible to practice with the Blessed Mother, PLUS the *different *kind of chastity he practiced with the Blessed Virgin Mother of Our Lord. Two completely different kinds of chaste vocations. Hmm. I definitely don’t think so. And I don’t believe the the Holy Family we know and love was, instead, a “Big Blended Family”. I just don’t buy it.

This is not news to you or anyone following this thread because I have repeated it too often in these threads. You, too, have repeated yourself very, very often. I am just taking this opportunity to explain more fully my personal motive for my interest that has kept me sticking with this same topic, for probably too long. But, I do not know what yours is.
…The Catholic Church regards St. Jerome as the GREATEST of all the DOCTORS in clarifying the Divine Word.
.
.
.
 
Eliza10 said:
https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/236x/01/06/54/010654714767907e2d563d1500fcd13b.jpg

Yes, and we know that the Church that Jesus founded, whom the Holy Spirit will be with til the end of time, clearly views what St. Jerome saw as the truth as scripture with the very highest regard.

It matters to me to not take the high regard lightly, especially in view of St. Joseph. Sometime I wonder why you, or maybe others, persist with asserting your theory. I mean, you already explained it once, twice, three times, lots of times, and you seem still very connected to keeping this topic open.

And why am I interested in this topic so much? Because St. Joseph is a dear patron Saint of my husband and I. First, I was a single Mom for a long time and felt unprotected and alone in the world as a single Mom who did not have a boyfriend, as so many of the other successful, happy single moms seemed to. So I took on St. Joseph, Protector of Families, for protecting my little family and for being the head of my home for all those practical things I just did not know how to solve. And he was an ever present help in trouble.

And then when I met my husband and unexpectedly fell very much in love, it seemed we had so many impossible practical obstacles to ever being together. And when it was clear we both felt the same, we began to pray everyday, over the long distance by phone and now that we are together, married, we still pray it: the prayer to St. Joseph, over 1900 years old:

O St. Joseph,
whose protection is so great, so strong, so prompt
before the Throne of God,
I place in you all my interests and desires.

O St. Joseph,
do assist me by your powerful intercession
and obtain for me from your Divine Son all spiritual blessings
through Jesus Christ, Our Lord;
so that having engaged here below your Heavenly power
I may offer my thanksgiving and homage to the most loving of Fathers.

O St. Joseph,
I never weary contemplating you and Jesus asleep in your arms.
I dare not approach while He reposes near your heart.
Press him in my name and kiss His fine Head for me, and ask Him to return the Kiss when I draw my dying breath.

St. Joseph,
Patron of departing souls, pray for us. Amen.
.
.

My husband and I change “I” and “me” to "we and “us” when we pray this and we pray it every single day. That and The Angelus and the Memorare, every single day, together. Not only do we pray it, but we have entrusted thing after thing to them, and put our hearts at rest over worrisome things, after entrusting them to St. Joseph and/or Our Lady, and we do so with confidence because so much prayer has been answered when we do. So we do take the most blessed Holy Family as our very own special patron Saints, as we entrust our lives to their intercession every single day, and we think about them a lot.

So the dearness of St. Joseph to me is what draws me to expressing here that I do not accept the “Bi-Vocation Theory”. That is, I think St. Joseph was the Most Chaste Spouse, and that he was Most Chaste in the way compatible with the Chaste Blessed Virgin Mary. Not two kinds of chaste - that is, first, prior to his call to his alleged “second” vocation, as the kind of chaste of a married spouse engaged in loving intimate relations, which would NOT be compatible to practice with the Blessed Mother, PLUS the *different *kind of chastity he practiced with the Blessed Virgin Mother of Our Lord. Two completely different kinds of chaste vocations. Hmm. I definitely don’t think so. And I don’t believe the the Holy Family we know and love was, instead, a “Big Blended Family”. I just don’t buy it.

This is not news to you or anyone following this thread because I have repeated it too often in these threads. You, too, have repeated yourself very, very often. I am just taking this opportunity to explain more fully my personal motive for my interest that has kept me sticking with this same topic, for probably too long. But, I do not know what yours is.

…The Catholic Church regards St. Jerome as the GREATEST of all the DOCTORS in clarifying the Divine Word.
Click to expand...
Which brings me to the next question: Will it have a less impact on your faith if Joseph was not a perpetual virgin, and there were 3 James instead of two?
 
JB_Brother_4446 said:
Which brings me to the next question: Will it have a less impact on your faith if Joseph was not a perpetual virgin, and there were 3 James instead of two?
Click to expand...
LOL, JB, your *other *theory again!

I think before I answer that, you should first answer my question at the end of the post. Why are these theories so important to you? So much so that you keep starting threads on them, and bringing the theories into all the threads. And keep on and on asserting it, and repeating and repeating the same point. (I am guilty of the same. Usually it’s in response to your repetitions, but, that’s not an excuse).

So: Why? Its not just because you want to argue a lot, right? There must be something else behind it. Illuminate me, please.
The Catholic Church regards St. Jerome as the GREATEST of all the DOCTORS in clarifying the Divine Word.
.
.
.
 
Eliza10 said:
LOL, JB, your *other *theory again!

I think before I answer that, you should first answer my question at the end of the post. Why are these theories so important to you? So much so that you keep starting threads on them, and bringing the theories into all the threads. And keep on and on asserting it, and repeating and repeating the same point. (I am guilty of the same. Usually it’s in response to your repetitions, but, that’s not an excuse).

So: Why? Its not just because you want to argue a lot, right? There must be something else behind it. Illuminate me, please.
The Catholic Church regards St. Jerome as the GREATEST of all the DOCTORS in clarifying the Divine Word.
.
.
.
Click to expand...
Because I want not only to promote my understanding, but I also want to promote Scripture
and the Fathers as well?

I repeat myself.
 
Why not consult the book of Tobit for a clue as to ancient Jewish language and familial relationships? From the RSV-CE:

Tobit the elder advises young Tobit to take a wife from the descendants of their fathers. Tobit 4:12-13

Being told that Raphael is of their same tribe of Naphtali, the elder Tobit calls Raphael “brother” four times. Tobit 5:10-13

Raguel asks young Tobit and Raphael if they know his “brother” Tobit the elder. Tobit 7:4

Raguel calls his wife Edna “sister” Tobit 7:16

Young Tobias prays to the Lord that he does not take Sarah, his “sister” to wife out of lust. Tobit 8:9

None of these was a brother or sister as we moderns think of the term. Neither of the wives was a uterine “sister” according to 21st century western use. In all cases, the “brothers” and “sisters” were members of the same Hebrew tribe of Naphtali, cousins or second cousins. At that time, brothers and sisters included extended family, those of your own tribe and even those from your geographical area if you encountered them elsewhere, such as in Jerusalem.

Bottom line: No sons or daughters of Mary are named anywhere in the bible - other than Jesus. The Church that Christ founded, and gave all authority to, teaches that Mary had no other children. This has been handed on since the Apostolic age by those who fear God - just as the scriptures have been.
 
po18guy said:
Why not consult the book of Tobit for a clue as to ancient Jewish language and familial relationships? From the RSV-CE:

Tobit the elder advises young Tobit to take a wife from the descendants of their fathers. Tobit 4:12-13

Being told that Raphael is of their same tribe of Naphtali, the elder Tobit calls Raphael “brother” four times. Tobit 5:10-13

Raguel asks young Tobit and Raphael if they know his “brother” Tobit the elder. Tobit 7:4

Raguel calls his wife Edna “sister” Tobit 7:16

Young Tobias prays to the Lord that he does not take Sarah, his “sister” to wife out of lust. Tobit 8:9

None of these was a brother or sister as we moderns think of the term. Neither of the wives was a uterine “sister” according to 21st century western use. In all cases, the “brothers” and “sisters” were members of the same Hebrew tribe of Naphtali, cousins or second cousins. At that time, brothers and sisters included extended family, those of your own tribe and even those from your geographical area if you encountered them elsewhere, such as in Jerusalem.

Bottom line: No sons or daughters of Mary are named anywhere in the bible - other than Jesus. The Church that Christ founded, and gave all authority to, teaches that Mary had no other children. This has been handed on since the Apostolic age by those who fear God - just as the scriptures have been.
Click to expand...
Great answer,Jim.
Glad to see you back. God bless
 
BartholomewB said:
That’s very interesting, and it’s something I’d never heard about until now. But I have a couple of questions. If, as you say, akris can mean both a locust and an edible plant of some kind, how can we know for certain which meaning it has in the Gospels?
Click to expand...
🙂

See the law of Moses, see Leviticus 11:22.
Moses gave the people clear instructions to eat bugs, including the locust ακριδ-α (akridas) and grasshopper/akrides (ακριδ-ες).

The only place where it might mean “plant” is in Hosea 13:3 as in "chaff’, but I think Hosea is probably referring to the wings of the locusts as making the “wind” that winnows the chaff out.

There are dozens of instances of locust/grasshoper (akrid-*) in the LXX OT that are not found in the Hebrew, but none of them indicate a plant.

Pottage is also found dozens of times in the LXX as well, but it is spelled εψεμα (ePsema.) It would be pretty hard to mistake pottage for grasshopper… ?!

The spelling, akrid-es, is the one found in Matthew 3:4. It’s spelled the same even in the oldest Greek I have available (Tishendorf, Codex sainaiticus):
codexsinaiticus.org/en/manuscript.aspx?book=33&chapter=3&lid=en&side=r&zoomSlider=0

The variant spelling, akris, is the same; it is always translated as “locust” from the LXX.
There is not a single instance of any variant spelling which is definitely a “plant.” in the whole of the Greek LXX.

So, I think Jerome has every right to translate it “grasshoppers” or “locusts”.

Jerome is not a perfect translator, he did make minor mistakes. However, I don’t think this is one of them. The phrase is “locusts” and “wild honey” in Matthew, which as a group indicate insects and “wild” fare. Farm products generally go with “milk”; so if he was eating pottage, I would have expected a phrase including another domestic food product – not a wild, uncultivated product.

I’d love to see an example where akris would definitely mean “pottage” or “pulse”. I’ve never seen it used like that…
 
prodromos said:
Orthodox Tradition states that Salome, the wife of Zebedee and mother of James and John, was one of the daughters of Joseph the betrothed. This makes perfect sense when reading Matt 20:20-21, as only an older sister would have the boldness to ask of Jesus what she did.
Click to expand...
As I mentioned, cross-referencing the lists from the synoptic gospels and John’s gospel of the women at the cross can logically result with Salome being Mary’s ‘sister’ and John being Jesus’ cousin.

Papias identified the sons of Zebedee as sons of an “aunt” of the Lord.
 
Huiou_Theou said:
🙂

See the law of Moses, see Leviticus 11:22.
Moses gave the people clear instructions to eat bugs, including the locust ακριδ-α (akridas) and grasshopper/akrides (ακριδ-ες).

The only place where it might mean “plant” is in Hosea 13:3 as in "chaff’, but I think Hosea is probably referring to the wings of the locusts as making the “wind” that winnows the chaff out.

There are dozens of instances of locust/grasshoper (akrid-*) in the LXX OT that are not found in the Hebrew, but none of them indicate a plant.

Pottage is also found dozens of times in the LXX as well, but it is spelled εψεμα (ePsema.) It would be pretty hard to mistake pottage for grasshopper… ?!

The spelling, akrid-es, is the one found in Matthew 3:4. It’s spelled the same even in the oldest Greek I have available (Tishendorf, Codex sainaiticus):
codexsinaiticus.org/en/manuscript.aspx?book=33&chapter=3&lid=en&side=r&zoomSlider=0

The variant spelling, akris, is the same; it is always translated as “locust” from the LXX.
There is not a single instance of any variant spelling which is definitely a “plant.” in the whole of the Greek LXX.

So, I think Jerome has every right to translate it “grasshoppers” or “locusts”.

Jerome is not a perfect translator, he did make minor mistakes. However, I don’t think this is one of them. The phrase is “locusts” and “wild honey” in Matthew, which as a group indicate insects and “wild” fare. Farm products generally go with “milk”; so if he was eating pottage, I would have expected a phrase including another domestic food product – not a wild, uncultivated product.

I’d love to see an example where akris would definitely mean “pottage” or “pulse”. I’ve never seen it used like that…
Click to expand...
Huiou Theou, thank you for that information. Let me ask you a favor: can you please point me to a website where I can look up words in the Septuagint, along the same lines as the Bible Hub site (link below) for the Hebrew OT and the Greek NT? (There are other sites as well, but Bible Hub is the one I have found easiest and quickest to use.)

Thanks
Bart

biblehub.com/greek/200.htm

By the way, I think we can safely disregard the distinction between locust and grasshopper. The locust, after all, is a kind of grasshopper, and there are languages that don’t have separate words for them. Here in Brazil, for instance, the Biblical word for locust in Portuguese is gafanhoto, which is just the everyday word for grasshopper.
 
JB_Brother_4446 said:
As I mentioned, cross-referencing the lists from the synoptic gospels and John’s gospel of the women at the cross can logically result with Salome being Mary’s ‘sister’ and John being Jesus’ cousin.

Papias identified the sons of Zebedee as sons of an “aunt” of the Lord.
Click to expand...
So, prodomos?
 
JB Brothers, To my question:
Why are these theories so important to you? So much so that you keep starting threads on them, and bringing the theories into all the threads. And keep on and on asserting it, and repeating and repeating the same point. (I am guilty of the same. Usually it’s in response to your repetitions, but, that’s not an excuse).
Click to expand...
So: Why? Its not just because you want to argue a lot, right? There must be something else behind it. Illuminate me, please.
Click to expand...
You answered:
JB_Brother_4446 said:
Because I want not only to promote my understanding, but I also want to promote Scripture
and the Fathers as well?
Click to expand...
Hmm. This did not illuminate me. Here is what you said is your reason:

-Promote your understanding,
-promote scripture, and
-promote the fathers.

I agree with the first, You seem avid to promote your understanding.
  • “Promote scripture” - I don’t see that. I see you wanting to promote your understanding of scripture, though. But you already said that.
  • “Promote the fathers” - I am not seeing that either. It seems you want to promote select differences of some of the fathers, and only when they support your understanding.
The Catholic Church regards St. Jerome as the GREATEST of all the DOCTORS in clarifying the Divine Word.
.
.
.
 
Eliza10 said:
JB Brothers, To my question:

You answered:

Hmm. This did not illuminate me. Here is what you said is your reason:

-Promote your understanding,
-promote scripture, and
-promote the fathers.

I agree with the first, You seem avid to promote your understanding.
  • “Promote scripture” - I don’t see that. I see you wanting to promote your understanding of scripture, though. But you already said that.
  • “Promote the fathers” - I am not seeing that either. It seems you want to promote select differences of some of the fathers, and only when they support your understanding.
The Catholic Church regards St. Jerome as the GREATEST of all the DOCTORS in clarifying the Divine Word.
.
.
.
Click to expand...
You clearly have done what you accuse me of.
 
JB_Brother_4446 said:
You still haven’t answered MY question, Eliza.
Click to expand...
Your question:
JB_Brother_4446 said:
Which brings me to the next question: Will it have a less impact on your faith if Joseph was not a perpetual virgin, and there were 3 James instead of two?
Click to expand...
I don’t understand why you are asking this, except that you do not seem to read my posts that you appear to be responding to. http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin/images/smilies/confused2.gif

I don’t quite understand what you mean by impact on my faith. My faith is solid. Maybe that is a difference in where we are coming from, and why we don’t seem to understand each other? I don’t know.:confused: You’ll have to tell me.

If St. Jerome is wrong, and your theories, instead, are right, then unlike you, God would give me very good reasons for all the questions I raised, for why and how St. Jerome erred and why and how His Holy Church promoted St.Jerome as a Doctor of the Church and the GREATEST at clarifying scripture, when, apparently, he messed up royally if he is wrong on this. And God would fully illuminate answers to all the questions I raised about your theories that definitely seem to me to be impossible to be true. He would explain why its possible in every instance.

I have given you a WHOLE LOT of good reasons why your theories don’t work, and suggested a whole lot of problems they create, that don’t make sense, and you have not responded at all to any of them. You just don’t seem to consider the very real problems inherent in your theories. Instead, you just want to keep promoting them (as you so truthfully admitted here). Versus discussing them.

And it seems to me that “promoting” is an inappropriate aim on a discussion forum.:sad_yes:
The Catholic Church regards St. Jerome as the GREATEST of all the DOCTORS in clarifying the Divine Word.
.
.
.
 
JB_Brother_4446 said:
You clearly have done what you accuse me of.
Click to expand...
Not accusing. In my effort to understand I am just describing what I see and explicitly qualifying all with * “I see”, “It seems”, “it looks like,” *etc.
The Catholic Church regards St. Jerome as the GREATEST of all the DOCTORS in clarifying the Divine Word.
.
.
.
 
JB_Brother_4446 said:
Did you read my previous post?
Click to expand...
Yes, I’m not sure what exactly you were expecting from me. I’ve already given what is the Tradition in the Eastern Orthodox Church. My own opinion is worth about a bag of salt in today’s market
 
prodromos said:
Yes, I’m not sure what exactly you were expecting from me. I’ve already given what is the Tradition in the Eastern Orthodox Church. My own opinion is worth about a bag of salt in today’s market
Click to expand...
But when you get evidence…
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top