J
joe370
Guest
Are you referring to sacred tradition in addition to sacred scripture, possibly, with the exception of that one gospel?
- Status
You were once a Lutheran. Do you see this as substantially different from the Lutheran approach? That being, we rely on the Church for hermeunetics?
Jon
R
Randy_Carson
Guest
CARM?
Really? There are few websites that are more anti-catholic than CARM. Quoting ANYTHING from that site diminishes your stature immediately because any Protestant who is fair-minded and objective about Catholicism would reject the bigotry, prejudice and ignorance on display there.
Surely you don’t mean to sully yourself by keeping company with that crowd, do you?
J
joe370
Guest
How does the teaching office of the CC make sacred tradition superior to sacred scripture? The CC does not tech that, as I am sure you know!
“Sacred Tradition and Sacred Scripture, then, are bound closely together, and communicate one with the other. For both of them, flowing out from the same divine well-spring, come together in some fashion to form one thing, and move towards the same goal.” Each of them makes present and fruitful in the Church the mystery of Christ, who promised to remain with his own “always, to the close of the age”.
This is a protestant lie that I was often fed so many many times as a former protestant. Please stop promulgating the lie. We would all be so grateful.
Praying to Mary is not worship. It’s merely asking Mary and the saints in heaven to pray for us. So I can ask you to pray for me but not the saints in heaven, who are perfectly conformed to God. OK…
Mere words used to define the fact that Mary is full of grace. I did a lot of research on the Greek language used, as a former protestant; pretty cool stuff…Of course, my final analysis in no way proves anything, which is why I defer to the teaching office of Jesus’ church, forever guided by the Holy Spirit.
Even if it was not found in scripture (which it is) - see how Sacred Tradition and Sacred Scripture flow from the same divine wellspring, as per the teachings…
Penance not in the bible?
If I cannot trust the CC regarding their interpretation, then give me a reason why I can trust your interpretation, and I am not being flip either.
Since you have ruled out the CC in terms of a correct interpretation or understanding of doctrinal truth, then perhaps you could point me in the general direction of the person or church leadership that can be trusted with the correct interpretation and understanding; please be specific? Again, no sarcasm; just open and amiable dialogue!
J
joe370
Guest
You are so right Randy! I was given the boot from that place the minute it seemed I even mentioned the word catholic, so long ago…CARM?
Really? There are few websites that are more anti-catholic than CARM. Quoting ANYTHING from that site diminishes your stature immediately because any Protestant who is fair-minded and objective about Catholicism would reject the bigotry, prejudice and ignorance on display there.
Surely you don’t mean to sully yourself by keeping company with that crowd, do you?
J
joe370
Guest
LOL…Hey Jon, actually, an answer along those lines would be a pretty good answer in my book. Of course, any one church making that claim, in my humble opinion, would have to be able to trace its lineage all the way back to the time when Jesus’ church received the divine charism on Pentecost. However, JR will not commit to any one church, in terms of doctrinal truth being knowable. Like most non-catholics, he seems to believe that Christendom possesses an inerrant bible with no way to discern doctrinal truth, at least I think that this is his take on it…The Lutheran Confessions!!!
Oops! Sorry, Joe. You adressed that question to JR.
Jon
It seems, that folks like JR are only interested in proving, somehow that the CC has no means, no divine charism, to preserve truth in terms of doctrine, and of course he would be spot-on if in fact the CC was not the church of Pentecost which of course would be a good reason not to believe that God somehow ineffably continues to preserve truth within the CC. For example, for me anyway, if the CC was founded by some dude in the 6th century, as opposed to Jesus on Pentecost, my search for Jesus’ church would still be underway; perhaps the EOC.
P
Porknpie
Guest
Don’t forget the use of reading and quoting Boettner too… thank you Karl Keating for taking him to task. Boettner was a very poor scholar and did not understand and/or explain the Catholic faith per the teaching of the Church.CARM?
Really? There are few websites that are more anti-catholic than CARM. Quoting ANYTHING from that site diminishes your stature immediately because any Protestant who is fair-minded and objective about Catholicism would reject the bigotry, prejudice and ignorance on display there.
Surely you don’t mean to sully yourself by keeping company with that crowd, do you?
JR, as you read Boettner…you need to read Keating as he exposes Boettner’s falsehoods (I’m being charitable in my word “falsehoods”)
J
joe370
Guest
Always a good idea to view things from both sides of the argument.
J
joe370
Guest
Radical, regarding the siblings of Jesus, as per the OP: is it safe to say that knowing with certainty, is not possible, when one is limited to using the NT alone as one’s guide i.e. you and I can prove nothing definitively one way or the other? We speculate at best.
R
Randy_Carson
Guest
R
Randy_Carson
Guest
Your two posts are nicely presented. Was this original material or did you find it online somewhere? Just curious.
Your argument seems to boil down to this: In Galatians 1:19, Paul refers to “James, the Lord’s brother”, and this James was not a member of the Twelve, but was an apostle in the sense that Paul, Barnabas and others were apostles. Since this James was not one of the Twelve, the argument presented by me previously that the two James identified as members of the Twelve were sons of men not married to Mary and thus not “brothers” is specious.
In response, I’ll quote a length from the Wikipedia article on James the Just:
Eusebius of Caesarea (c. 275 – 339) reports the tradition that James the Just was the son of Joseph’s brother Clopas and therefore was of the “brethren” (which he interprets as “cousin”) of Jesus described in the New Testament.
This is echoed by Jerome (c. 342 – 419) in De Viris Illustribus (On Illustrious Men) – James is said to be the son of another Mary, wife of Clopas and the “sister” of Mary, the mother of Jesus – in the following manner:
James, who is called the brother of the Lord, surnamed the Just, the son of Joseph by another wife, as some think, but, as appears to me, the son of Mary, sister of the mother of our Lord of whom John makes mention in his book…
Jerome refers to the scene of the crucifixion in John 19:25, where three Marys – the mother of Jesus, Mary of Clopas, and Mary Magdalene – are said to be witnesses. John also mentions the “sister” of the mother of Jesus, often identified with Mary of Clopas due to grammar. Mary “of Clopas” is often interpreted as Mary, “wife of Clopas”. Mary of Nazareth and Mary of Clopas also need not be literally sisters, in light of the usage of the said words in Greek, Hebrew and Aramaic.
Mary of Clopas is suggested to be the same as “Mary, the mother of James the younger and Joses”, “Mary the mother of James and Joseph” and the “other Mary” in Jesus’ crucifixion and post-resurrection accounts in the Synoptic Gospels. Proponents of this identification argue that the writers of the Synoptics would have called this Mary, simply, “the mother of Jesus” if she was indeed meant to be the mother of Jesus, given the importance of her son’s crucifixion and resurrection: they also note that the mother of James and Joses is called “Maria”, whereas the mother of Jesus is “Mariam” or “Marias” in Greek. These proponents find it unlikely that Mary would be referred to by her biological children other than Jesus at such a significant time (James happens to be the brother of one Joses, as spelled in Mark, or Joseph, as in Matthew).
Jerome’s opinion suggests an identification of James the Just with the Apostle James, son of Alphaeus; Clopas and Alphaeus are thought to be different Greek renderings of the Aramaic name Halpai.[35] Despite this, some biblical scholars tend to distinguish them; this is also not Roman Catholic dogma, though a traditional teaching.
Since this Clopas is, according to Eusebius, Joseph of Nazareth’s brother (see above) and this Mary is said to be Mary of Nazareth’s sister, James could be related to Jesus by blood and law.
Jerome refers to the scene of the crucifixion in John 19:25, where three Marys – the mother of Jesus, Mary of Clopas, and Mary Magdalene – are said to be witnesses. John also mentions the “sister” of the mother of Jesus, often identified with Mary of Clopas due to grammar. Mary “of Clopas” is often interpreted as Mary, “wife of Clopas”. Mary of Nazareth and Mary of Clopas also need not be literally sisters, in light of the usage of the said words in Greek, Hebrew and Aramaic.
Mary of Clopas is suggested to be the same as “Mary, the mother of James the younger and Joses”, “Mary the mother of James and Joseph” and the “other Mary” in Jesus’ crucifixion and post-resurrection accounts in the Synoptic Gospels. Proponents of this identification argue that the writers of the Synoptics would have called this Mary, simply, “the mother of Jesus” if she was indeed meant to be the mother of Jesus, given the importance of her son’s crucifixion and resurrection: they also note that the mother of James and Joses is called “Maria”, whereas the mother of Jesus is “Mariam” or “Marias” in Greek. These proponents find it unlikely that Mary would be referred to by her biological children other than Jesus at such a significant time (James happens to be the brother of one Joses, as spelled in Mark, or Joseph, as in Matthew).
Jerome’s opinion suggests an identification of James the Just with the Apostle James, son of Alphaeus; Clopas and Alphaeus are thought to be different Greek renderings of the Aramaic name Halpai.[35] Despite this, some biblical scholars tend to distinguish them; this is also not Roman Catholic dogma, though a traditional teaching.
Since this Clopas is, according to Eusebius, Joseph of Nazareth’s brother (see above) and this Mary is said to be Mary of Nazareth’s sister, James could be related to Jesus by blood and law.
My question is this: Is it your belief that this James (known as the Just) was elevated to the position of leader of the Church in Jerusalem after being an unbeliever throughout most if not all of the Gospel narrative? That’s quite a turnaround, don’t you think? No one else who had been a believer from the beginning was available to take the job? It’s possible, I suppose, but there doesn’t appear to be much support for your position from the annals of history. I certainly understand why this is so crucial for you, though.
The article from Wikipedia cited previously is chock full of theories from all sides; I think the Catholic position is presented well enough:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_the_Just
Hope this helps. :tiphat:
J
jrtrent
Guest
Sorry, I didn’t know anything about CARM. Rather than take time to look up and type out something from a book here at home I just did a quick search for sufficiency of scripture and that one came up. Didn’t mean to ruffle any feathers, and that “worship of Mary” line should have tipped me off–I know that isn’t true.CARM? . . . Surely you don’t mean to sully yourself by keeping company with that crowd, do you?
J
jrtrent
Guest
I don’t know if it was in this thread, but I mentioned recently that I do own The Essential Catholic Survival Guide and have read its short critique of “The Anti-Catholic Bible,” though I haven’t seen Keating’s full book on the subject. I’m aware of and agree with some of the points about Boettner’s scholarship, but I still think some of the views he holds are representative of Protestant thought, which is why I didn’t find him inappropriate to use in a thread asking if Protestants teach that Mary had siblings.
R
Randy_Carson
Guest
Apology accepted. No carm, er, harm done.
J
jrtrent
Guest
You know, that’s not a bad way to put it, but I do think some things are knowable–I know Mary was a virgin at least until Christ was born; what I don’t know with certainty is if she remained a virgin after that. But your point is well taken because, as I’ve mentioned in past posts, there are several other points of doctrine that I don’t think can be proved one way or the other from scripture, either.
It seems, that folks like JR are only interested in proving, somehow that the CC has no means, no divine charism, to preserve truth in terms of doctrine,
I have no interest in proving that the Catholic Church lacks that charism, but you do understand that if I believed it did, I would not be non-Catholic. On the threads in this forum I try to answer only as what I am, a confused Protestant. I’m not trying to prove that the Catholic Church is wrong, but you can’t expect a non-Catholic to agree with the perpetual virginity of Mary on the basis of a church authority that non-Catholics don’t accept as valid. On the issue of Christ having siblings, I agree with that “Mary in the New Testament” collaborative study that the issue can’t be proved one way or the other from scripture, so I don’t hold anyone as being in error no matter which position they take.
You and JohnNC have asked some good questions that I simply don’t have time to address right now as I need to fly out the door. I’ll try to address them tomorrow morning before church.
E
empantarhei
Guest
From Radical:To be quite honest, I absolutely do not think that there is any way to know, with any degree of certainty, one way or the other, if we are basing our conclusions strictly on scripture alone.
consider John 20:
30 And truly Jesus did many other signs in the presence of His disciples, which are not written in this book; 31 but these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that believing you may have life in His name.
From jrtrent:
That Mary was a virgin when she conceived and bore Christ can be read and proved in scripture; that she continued a virgin ever after that cannot be read or proved from scripture (rather, the opposite is indicated, though not provable), and thus is not an article of the Faith nor requisite or necessary for salvation.
Isn’t the bolded thought kinda the bottom line?
E
empantarhei
Guest
From Radical
consider John 20:
30 And truly Jesus did many other signs in the presence of His disciples, which are not written in this book; 31 but these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that believing you may have life in His name.
From jrtrent:
That Mary was a virgin when she conceived and bore Christ can be read and proved in scripture; that she continued a virgin ever after that cannot be read or proved from scripture (rather, the opposite is indicated, though not provable), and thus **is not an article of the Faith nor requisite or necessary for salvation.
Aren’t the words in bold the bottom line?
The subject of the Holy Mother Mary’s anatomy elicits 77 times 7 face palms. I mean, really?? Mentioning her hyman??? REALLY??!!!
**
consider John 20:
30 And truly Jesus did many other signs in the presence of His disciples, which are not written in this book; 31 but these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that believing you may have life in His name.
From jrtrent:
That Mary was a virgin when she conceived and bore Christ can be read and proved in scripture; that she continued a virgin ever after that cannot be read or proved from scripture (rather, the opposite is indicated, though not provable), and thus **is not an article of the Faith nor requisite or necessary for salvation.
Aren’t the words in bold the bottom line?
The subject of the Holy Mother Mary’s anatomy elicits 77 times 7 face palms. I mean, really?? Mentioning her hyman??? REALLY??!!!
**
P
Porknpie
Guest
JR, Boettner is representative of some Protestant thought but not all. Karl Keating took on Boettner frequently in his book Catholicism and Fundamentalism shop.catholic.com/catholicism-and-fundamentalism.html?___store=default. And folks like Boettner led Keating to start Catholic Answers.
One can not evaluate his scholarship without reading a critique from the other side.
J
joe370
Guest
- Status