Did Mary & Joseph have children?

  • Thread starter Thread starter BornAgainRN
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
How about this theory?Mary and Joseph,realizing the enormity of their responsibility,in raising and caring for Jesus,Mary,in particular, being involved with Christ through. mostof His mission,would not have other children,as this would serve as a distraction to their primary duty.
 
This is totally wrong as I show in the following blog article. The Perpetual Virginity of the Blessed Virgin Mary.
Sending me to a Catholic link in order to ‘prove’ a Catholic belief is circular reasoning. Of course it’s going to attempt to persuade a person that the ‘perpetual virginity of Mary’ is Biblical. That’s not objective. What I have been attempting to do is NOT try to convince people of ‘my interpretation’ of Scripture. Rather, if everyone here is honest, I am using the only thing that we can all agree on - Scripture, which we can rely on to tell us whether or not Jesus did or did not have half-brothers & half-sisters. And, what we can agree on, even if we hold to Catholic tradition, if we look to the Bible verses about the ‘brother & sisters’ of Jesus & put them together properly (which is why I posted the verses to make it simple), it is clear that they were indeed Jesus’ half-brothers & half-sisters. Yet, no one seems to be doing this, & by not doing this, is why people are still holding to this false belief in the ‘perpetual virginity of Mary.’
 
Sending me to a Catholic link in order to ‘prove’ a Catholic belief is circular reasoning. Of course it’s going to attempt to persuade a person that the ‘perpetual virginity of Mary’ is Biblical. That’s not objective. What I have been attempting to do is NOT try to convince people of ‘my interpretation’ of Scripture. Rather, if everyone here is honest, I am using the only thing that we can all agree on - Scripture, which we can rely on to tell us whether or not Jesus did or did not have half-brothers & half-sisters. And, what we can agree on, even if we hold to Catholic tradition, if we look to the Bible verses about the ‘brother & sisters’ of Jesus & put them together properly (which is why I posted the verses to make it simple), it is clear that they were indeed Jesus’ half-brothers & half-sisters. Yet, no one seems to be doing this, & by not doing this, is why people are still holding to this false belief in the ‘perpetual virginity of Mary.’
You just don’t want to actually face the fact that I have supplied strong evidence that you are dead wrong.

Moreover, by your own reasoning we would have to accept any writing that claims inspiration just because you accept the Bible’s inspiration based upon its own assertion of inspiration. That’s crazy…and unscriptural. It’s not just circular reasoning on your part but requires a person to engage in intellectual gymnastics http://i66.photobucket.com/albums/h244/corona_stellarum/Smilies/flip_emoticon_jfo.gif that makes Christianity look stupid to non-believers and believers alike.

The only brothers and sisters that Jesus had were the step siblings that Joseph had before he was widowed. I suppose that you accept no history except that which is in the Bible? If that were true then I further suppose that you reject all history since the end of the first century? No? But that is the only logical path of your fallacious reasoning.

It is grossly intellectually dishonest for you to allege circular reasoning by our citations of Catholic sources especially since the Catholic Church has better knowledge of the Bible and its history as well as what the early Christians documented as their beliefs than anyone else in Christianity.

Again…since your Sola Scriptura position is itself unscriptural , not being found in the Bible, then your whole argument becomes a collapsing house of cards based upon the modern new winds of doctrines of men.
 
Rather, if everyone here is honest,
Are you saying we aren’t honest but you are? :rolleyes:
I am using the only thing that we can all agree on - Scripture, which we can rely on to tell us whether or not Jesus did or did not have half-brothers & half-sisters. And, what we can agree on, even if we hold to Catholic tradition, if we look to the Bible verses about the ‘brother & sisters’ of Jesus & **put them together properly **(
That mean what? The way you see it. You are hardly putting it together properly. You have ignored every post which shows you that they are not siblings.
which is why I posted the verses to make it simple), it is clear that they were indeed Jesus’ half-brothers & half-sisters. Yet, no one seems to be doing this, & by not doing this, is why people are still holding to this false belief in the ‘perpetual virginity of Mary.’
They were not for the following reasons from scripture
  1. They talk to Jesus in a manner that would not be acceptable in their culture if He were older which shows Jesus was younger than those talking to Him
  2. It would not be acceptable for a younger sibling to advise an older one as these brethern do when they tell Jesus not to go to Jeruslem.
  3. It would be an insult to siblings to give the care of their mother over to a person who was not family.
Now if you are honest you will admit that scripture shows that Jesus was an only child.

Have you figures out what the Immaculate Conception is yet?
 
BornAgainRN,

I encourage you to write the so-called tree, and we can discuss the strength of the branches.
 
I agree with Martin Luther, John Calvin, and Ulrich Zwingli in this matter of the perpetual virginity of Mary.
 
BornAgainRN said:
I guess what I can’t understand is why people refuse to write out the ‘family tree’ using Scripture verses? If a person is so confident that their church’s position is true, then why the resistance? Write it out & see what you’ll find…unless you’re concerned that what you’ll find contradicts the ‘perpetual virginity of Mary,’ which would mean that this Catholic belief about Mary is wrong.
Friend,

Please provide the tree. Let us know what you know with such certainty. 🙂
 
BornAgainRN said:
I guess what I can’t understand is why people refuse to write out the ‘family tree’ using Scripture verses? If a person is so confident that their church’s position is true, then why the resistance? Write it out & see what you’ll find…unless you’re concerned that what you’ll find contradicts the ‘perpetual virginity of Mary,’ which would mean that this Catholic belief about Mary is wrong.
I did in a previous post and showed that you made assumptions not in the scripture.

You are relying on your understanding of todays society and not on the society then. As I have shown and other have shown numerous times.

The verse you are relying on is from the perspective of the people. According to that verse, Joseph is Jesus’ father no mention is made of adoptive. Do you believe that Joseph is the natural father of Jesus?
**All Scripture **is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness." - 2 Timothy 3:16
Not just the one you are relying on. It has been shown that when ALL is considered Jesus must have been an only child.
 
BornAgainRN,

Why do you continue to sidestep? Please provide the tree.
 
If it’s so obvious then you provide it. If it’s such hot stuff why haven’t you provided it yet? Or do you lack confidence in your case?
I DID!!! GO…TO…MY…ORIGINAL…POST…AND…WRITE…OUT…THE…FAMILY…TREE…OF…JESUS…USING…THE…BIBLE…PASSAGES…I…PROVIDED…IN…MY…ORIGINAL…POST.

I don’t know how much more simple I can say this. I can’t very well write out a family tree. That requires DRAWING PICTURES with links from husband to wife to children, which includes sons & daughters, then linking one family unit to another. In order to do that YOU have to do it…I can’t do it for you using this type of forum.
 
Ok…WAY too many posts to read through.

My first thought on reading the OP’s post was: “This is not really the point of the Gospels…is it?”

Second…there is no word for cousin…so the same word could mean brother (literal) or cousin(literal)…How does one know? Answer: ORAL TRADITION and the teaching of the the Church instituted by Christ. period

*2 Peter1:20

First of all you must understand this, that no prophecy of scripture is a matter of one’s own interpretation,*
 
I DID!!! GO…TO…MY…ORIGINAL…POST…AND…WRITE…OUT…THE…FAMILY…TREE…OF…JESUS…USING…THE…BIBLE…PASSAGES…I…PROVIDED…IN…MY…ORIGINAL…POST.

I don’t know how much more simple I can say this. I can’t very well write out a family tree. That requires DRAWING PICTURES with links from husband to wife to children, which includes sons & daughters, then linking one family unit to another. In order to do that YOU have to do it…I can’t do it for you using this type of forum.
Friend,

Please relax. Your writing seems quite emotional. When you have some time, you can provide the tree, if you cannot then where is your argument then?

Be Blessed.
 
IMHO, it seems BornAgainRN has an agenda. And just has a hard time understanding why the wonderful folks here on a Catholic forum just don’t blink and become enlightened “My God! He’s right! Wow, where have you been all my life!” 🤷

Check YouTube if you’d like to see a Catholicism vs Protestant Denomination X videos.

Can the mods please close this topic? It’s not going to be going anywhere.
 
I DID!!! GO…TO…MY…ORIGINAL…POST…AND…WRITE…OUT…THE…FAMILY…TREE…OF…JESUS…USING…THE…BIBLE…PASSAGES…I…PROVIDED…IN…MY…ORIGINAL…POST.

I don’t know how much more simple I can say this. I can’t very well write out a family tree. That requires DRAWING PICTURES with links from husband to wife to children, which includes sons & daughters, then linking one family unit to another. In order to do that YOU have to do it…I can’t do it for you using this type of forum.
Steve,

There is a lot of GREAT info on these forums concerning your question. The only thing the you must do is allow the Holy Spirit to dwell within in you and for you to completely open yourself up. It tends to be hard to accept teaching when one is already approaching with a closed and misconstrued way of thinking. God bless you Steve and hope you find what God is willing for you to look for.
 
I’m glad that someone finally brought up the ‘Protoevangelium of James,’ or the Infancy ‘gospel’ of James. THAT is where the belief of the ‘perpetual virginity of Mary’ gained steam, not the Bible. It was actually written sometime between 140-170 A.D., & in addition to teaching the ‘perpetual virginity of Mary,’ it also states that its author was the son of Joseph from a previous marriage (which it couldn’t have been, because by this time, ALL the James’ in Scripture would have been dead), that Mary was 16 at the Annuniciation, that Joseph was elderly when Jesus was born, & that Gabriel was an archangel (even though the only archangel mentioned in Scripture is Michael), among other things. What all these things have in common, including the ‘perpetual virginity of Mary,’ is that ‘none’ of these beliefs are in the Bible. Yet, Origen (185-254 AD), an early church father, was aware of this false ‘gospel’ & rebuked it. So, I’m glad that you confirm where these Catholic beliefs are actually from. Again, if you write out a ‘family tree’ of Jesus using the Bible passages from the original post, even if you don’t believe ‘my interpretation’ :rolleyes: you’ll see if you allow SCRIPTURE to speak for itself, you’ll see that the ‘brothers & sisters’ of Jesus in Matthew 12 & 13 are Jesus’ actual half-brothers & half-sisters. Just give it a try. That’s all I’m asking. 🙂
According to the 1917 Catholic Encyclopedia, the Protoevangelium of James is considered Catholic apocrypha. It is considered ‘Catholic’ because it contains nothing contrary to Catholic teaching; it does not contain heresy. It is considered ‘apocrypha’ because, despite the claim that it was written by James, the brother of the Lord, it was actually written by some anonymous Christian writer in the early second century. Therefore, its contents may not be 100% factual.
Factual or not in every detail, the Protoevangelium of James is a witness that certain notions were at least being considered by early second century Christians, including:
  1. Mary’s parents were named Joakim and Anne.
  2. Mary was a consecrated virgin.
  3. Jesus had step-brothers and step-sisters, including James.
  4. Mary’s virginity was miraculously preserved during the birth of Jesus.
    The false charge is sometimes made that these notions were invented by the Catholic Church during the Middle Ages. What the Protoevangelium of James proves is that, if they were invented, these notions were invented no later than the early second century, when men taught by the Apostles were still living.
    What you are forgetting young man, in your new found zeal is that we Catholics have ORAL traditions too that have never been written down. Again, the early church knew a LOT about Jesus and his family. His “Brethren” were active members, one was even Bishop of Jerusalem, and his mother lived with St. John the Apostle. The church did not condemn the Protoevangelium over issues of Jesus’s family. What that simply means is that the info about Joseph being a widower , etc.,squared with the Oral Tradition of the Church at the time the work was written.
 
Sending me to a Catholic link in order to ‘prove’ a Catholic belief is circular reasoning. Of course it’s going to attempt to persuade a person that the ‘perpetual virginity of Mary’ is Biblical. That’s not objective. What I have been attempting to do is NOT try to convince people of ‘my interpretation’ of Scripture. Rather, if everyone here is honest, I am using the only thing that we can all agree on - Scripture, which we can rely on to tell us whether or not Jesus did or did not have half-brothers & half-sisters. And, what we can agree on, even if we hold to Catholic tradition, if we look to the Bible verses about the ‘brother & sisters’ of Jesus & put them together properly (which is why I posted the verses to make it simple), it is clear that they were indeed Jesus’ half-brothers & half-sisters. Yet, no one seems to be doing this, & by not doing this, is why people are still holding to this false belief in the ‘perpetual virginity of Mary.’
IV. Mary is Ever Virgin
Exodus 13:2,12 - Jesus is sometimes referred to as the “first-born” son of Mary. But “first-born” is a common Jewish expression meaning the first child to open the womb. It has nothing to do the mother having future children.

Exodus 34:20 - under the Mosaic law, the “first-born” son had to be sanctified. “First-born” status does not require a “second” born.

Ezek. 44:2 - Ezekiel prophesies that no man shall pass through the gate by which the Lord entered the world. This is a prophecy of Mary’s perpetual virginity. Mary remained a virgin before, during and after the birth of Jesus.

Mark 6:3 - Jesus was always referred to as “the” son of Mary, not “a” son of Mary. Also “brothers” could have theoretically been Joseph’s children from a former marriage that was dissolved by death. However, it is most likely, perhaps most certainly, that Joseph was a virgin, just as were Jesus and Mary. As such, they embodied the true Holy Family, fully consecrated to God.

Luke 1:31,34 - the angel tells Mary that you “will” conceive (using the future tense). Mary responds by saying, “How shall this be?” Mary’s response demonstrates that she had taken a vow of lifelong virginity by having no intention to have relations with a man. If Mary did not take such a vow of lifelong virginity, her question would make no sense at all (for we can assume she knew how a child is conceived). She was a consecrated Temple virgin as was an acceptable custom of the times.

Luke 2:41-51 - in searching for Jesus and finding Him in the temple, there is never any mention of other siblings.

John 7:3-4; Mark 3:21 - we see that younger “brothers” were advising Jesus. But this would have been extremely disrespectful for devout Jews if these were Jesus’ biological brothers.

John 19:26-27 - it would have been unthinkable for Jesus to commit the care of his mother to a friend if he had brothers.

John 19:25 - the following verses prove that James and Joseph are Jesus’ cousins and not his brothers: Mary the wife of Clopas is the sister of the Virgin Mary.

Matt. 27:61, 28:1 - Matthew even refers to Mary the wife of Clopas as “the other Mary.”

Matt. 27:56; Mark 15:47 - Mary the wife of Clopas is the mother of James and Joseph.

Mark 6:3 - James and Joseph are called the “brothers” of Jesus. So James and Joseph are Jesus’ cousins.

Matt. 10:3 - James is also called the son of “Alpheus.” This does not disprove that James is the son of Clopas. The name Alpheus may be Aramaic for Clopas, or James took a Greek name like Saul (Paul), or Mary remarried a man named Alpheus.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top