Did Mother Mary have other children?

[Bill_Pick]

Don’t look now, Bill, but in post #87 you already did answer Jericho.

Thank you for your help

 

[Good_Fella]

Hi Bill,

Mt 12:46, Mk 3:31, Lk 8:19, Jn 7:5. Wow I missed those, those are great! I would say that further strengthens the argument that Jesus had had flesh and blood siblings because 4 more times the writers had the oppourtunity to clarify they were not actual siblings but more of a cousin and did not. We have a total of 8 verses that specifically say Jesus had real brothers and sisters. Every time they are mentioned in conjunction with Jesus they are specifically called brothers and sisters. There are 0 verses in the bible that mention Jesus’ brothers and sisters as relatives. The bible only refers to John the Baptist as his cousin. Why didn’t they just call them relatives ( Luke 1:36)if they were nothing more than that?

In Matthew 12:46, Mk 3: 31, and Lk 8:19, the brothers of Jesus are the apostles who were also cousins of his. In Jn 7:5, the brothers are male relatives of Jesus who finally came to believe in him after his resurrection, but nonetheless sometimes accompanied Mary and our Lord’s disciples during his ministry (Jn 2:12; Acts 1:14). Mt 13:55 and Mk 6:3 give the names of four of Jesus’ male relatives who were apostles, save his cousin Joseph. They do not necessarily have to be called relatives. The Semitic idiomatic usage is sufficient. Even if these male relatives actually were uterine brothers of Jesus, they would not necessarily have to be referred to as “relatives”. John the Baptist was a relative and second cousin of Jesus. Elizabeth was Mary’s cousin and relative. The two terms can be used interchangeably. There’s no linguistic rule preventing this.

I go back to what I said earlier “I take it you’re referring to the usage of the words brothers and sisters. Are you thinking it is more of a relative sort of thing not as siblings. That would be a pretty vague interpretation. The writers chose the words carefully and correctly. The context bears this out. In Luke 1:36 Even Elizabeth your relative is going to have a child in her old age, and she who was said to be barren is in her sixth month. If Luke had called Elizabeth Marys sister would you say it meant relative in the sense you want it to mean. I don’t think so. The word usage is appropriate.”

A garden enclosed is my sister (achoth), my spouse; a spring dried up, a fountain sealed.
Songs 4:12

The word “sister” does have a wider usage in the Semitic languages. It is not confined to siblings.I wouldn’t rely on any contextual presupposition if I were you. Nice try but no cigar! :hey_bud:

Elizabeth is the only relative of Mary in the Bible and she had only one son. So which relative are they from. It seems like they are always around. Don’t they have their own place to live? Elizabeth did not live close either she lived a distance away.

St. John the Baptist, James, Judas, Simon, Joseph, Salome, and the other Mary are also relatives of Mary. These male relatives were always around with Mary because they were also disciples of her Son.

PAX :heaven:

 

[Bill_Pick]

In Matthew 12:46, Mk 3: 31, and Lk 8:19, the brothers of Jesus are the apostles who were also cousins of his. In Jn 7:5, the brothers are male relatives of Jesus who finally came to believe in him after his resurrection, but nonetheless sometimes accompanied Mary and our Lord’s disciples during his ministry (Jn 2:12; Acts 1:14). Mt 13:55 and Mk 6:3 give the names of four of Jesus’ male relatives who were apostles, save his cousin Joseph. They do not necessarily have to be called relatives. The Semitic idiomatic usage is sufficient. Even if these male relatives actually were uterine brothers of Jesus, they would not necessarily have to be referred to as “relatives”. John the Baptist was a relative and second cousin of Jesus. Elizabeth was Mary’s cousin and relative. The two terms can be used interchangeably. There’s no linguistic rule preventing this.

A garden enclosed is my sister (achoth), my spouse; a spring dried up, a fountain sealed.
Songs 4:12

The word “sister” does have a wider usage in the Semitic languages. It is not confined to siblings.I wouldn’t rely on any contextual presupposition if I were you. Nice try but no cigar! :hey_bud:

St. John the Baptist, James, Judas, Simon, Joseph, Salome, and the other Mary are also relatives of Mary. These male relatives were always around with Mary because they were also disciples of her Son.

PAX :heaven:

A+

 

[jericho777]

First let’s compare two verses.
Mat 10:2 These are the names of the twelve apostles: first, Simon (who is called Peter) and his brother Andrew; James son of Zebedee, and his brother John;

Mat 13:55“Isn’t this the carpenter’s son? Isn’t his mother’s name Mary, and aren’t his brothers James, Joseph, Simon and Judas?

These are similar in structure and context. I agree the word “brother” can have other meanings. That’s why we look at context , position and sentence structure to determine meaning. Why is it you have no problem calling Andrew, Simon’s brother but when it comes to Jesus it can not be? I believe there is a prejudice to the latter. If people would compare the 8 verses that mention Jesus’ brothers to the 6 verses below they would see the implausibility of your position. You are denying the most obvious and logical interpretation.

I have found eight verses saying Jesus had brothers. The writers did not use the ambiguous Greek word sungenis to mean relative. They chose the more definitive word brothers Greek adelphi. Lk 1:36 Even Elizabeth your relative is going to have a child in her old age, and she who was said to be barren is in her sixth month. Notice she is not referred to as sister but is rightly described.

Please note there are five separate authors that used the word brother/s and not relative. This is compelling in it self

Jn 7:3 Jesus’ brothers said to him, “You ought to leave here and go to Judea, so that your disciples may see the miracles you do.

Mt 12:46-47 While Jesus was still talking to the crowd, his mother and brothers stood outside, wanting to speak to him. 47Someone told him, “Your mother and brothers are standing outside, wanting to speak to you.”

Mk 3:31 Then Jesus’ mother and brothers arrived. Standing outside, they sent someone in to call him.

Lk 8:19-20 Now Jesus’ mother and brothers came to see him, but they were not able to get near him because of the crowd. 20Someone told him, “Your mother and brothers are standing outside, wanting to see you.”

Mat 13:55 Mk 6:3 “Isn’t this the carpenter’s son? Isn’t his mother’s name Mary, and aren’t his brothers James, Joseph, Simon and Judas?

Gal 1:19 I saw none of the other apostles—only James, the Lord’s brother. (James was head of the church in Jerusalem)

John 7:2-55 But when the Jewish Feast of Tabernacles was near, 3Jesus’ brothers said to him, “You ought to leave here and go to Judea, so that your disciples may see the miracles you do. 4No one who wants to become a public figure acts in secret. Since you are doing these things, show yourself to the world.” 5For even his own brothers did not believe in him

I have also found six verses calling Andrew, Peter’s brother. Buy your logic how do we know they weren’t just relatives? I have never that position espoused before. Why not?

Mk 1:16 As Jesus walked beside the Sea of Galilee, he saw Simon and his brother Andrew casting a net into the lake, for they were fishermen.

Jn 6:8 Another of his disciples, Andrew, Simon Peter’s brother, spoke up,

Jn 1:41 The first thing Andrew did was to find his brother Simon and tell him, “We have found the Messiah” (that is, the Christ).

Mt 10:2 These are the names of the twelve apostles: first, Simon (who is called Peter) and his brother Andrew; James son of Zebedee, and his brother John;

Mt 4:18 As Jesus was walking beside the Sea of Galilee, he saw two brothers, Simon called Peter and his brother Andrew. They were casting a net into the lake, for they were fishermen.

Lk 6:14 Simon (whom he named Peter), his brother Andrew, James, John, Philip, Bartholomew,

.
I will end with this last exegesis of Mat 1:25But he had no union with her until she gave birth to a son. And he gave him the name Jesus. Controversy arises form the word until which is in the original Greek and is (Of uncertain affinity; a conjunction, preposition and adverb of continuance, until (of time and place) – even (until, unto), (as) far (as), how long, (un-)til(-l), (hither-, un-, up) to, while(-s). ) Means exactly what it says and infers. After Jesus was born they were joined as husband and wife in the biblical sense. The implication is clear. If we were talking about anyone else there would be no question.

As far as language goes the NT was written in Greek and not Semitic languages.

 

[Dokimas]

Thank you for your help

Not a problem. You’re welcome.

 

[Good_Fella]

First let’s compare two verses.
Mat 10:2 These are the names of the twelve apostles: first, Simon (who is called Peter) and his brother Andrew; James son of Zebedee, and his brother John;

True. Simon Peter and Andrew were uterine brothers. But when Jesus tells Peter to strengthen the other apostles in their faith (Lk 22:32), he calls them “brothers”. The evangelist wrote his gospel in the Greek (adelphos), but Jesus spoke the Aramaic word akhona when idiomatically referring to the apostles as brothers. Our Lord was a Jew.

Mat 13:55“Isn’t this the carpenter’s son? Isn’t his mother’s name Mary, and aren’t his brothers James, Joseph, Simon and Judas?

… I agree the word “brother” can have other meanings. That’s why we look at context , position and sentence structure to determine meaning… You are denying the most obvious and logical interpretation.

Jesus was in his native place, Nazareth, and preaching in the synogogue on this occasion. So his mother and the three apostles, who were cousins of his as well along with Joseph, were naturally there while Jesus was teaching. Some proud and highminded people objected to what Jesus had to say and questioned his integrity as a rabbi in astonishment, since he was known to be only the son of a carpenter. Meanwhile they noticed our Lord’s mother, cousins, and other female relatives, whose presence they exploited as a public reminder to undermine Jesus’ credibility as a teacher of the Torah, for our Lord’s kinfolk in Nazareth belonged to a low station in society.

If you check the list of the apostles in the Synoptic Gospels, you will find the names James, Simon, and Judas included among the twelve (Mt 10:4; Mk 3:13-19; Lk 6:12-16). Scripture also records James and Joseph as being cousins of Jesus: the sons of Mary of Clopas (Mt 27:56; Mk 15:47). According to tradition, Simon the Zealous (gana) was a distant cousin of Jesus from Cana, where our Lord performed his first miracle together with Mary at the family wedding feast. Mark calls him the “Cananean”. If Simon were a sibling of Jesus, he would have been called a Nazorean.

… Lk 1:36 Even Elizabeth your relative is going to have a child in her old age, and she who was said to be barren is in her sixth month. Notice she is not referred to as sister but is rightly described.

The angel Gabriel isn’t Hebrew, notwithstanding, but I see no reason why he would indulge in using idiomatic expressions when communicating a very important message from God not only to Mary, but to the entire world through the forthcoming Gospel. Elizabeth was Mary’s cousin, so the term “relative” or “kinswoman” is formally appropriate.

Lk 8:19-20 Now Jesus’ mother and brothers came to see him, but they were not able to get near him because of the crowd. 20Someone told him, “Your mother and brothers are standing outside, wanting to see you.”

Mary and our Lord’s disciples, including those who were his cousins, came to hear him when he was preaching at the temple in his native place and was rejected by the townspeople (Mt 13: 54:58).

Gal 1:19 I saw none of the other apostles—only James, the Lord’s brother. (James was head of the church in Jerusalem)

Paul saw none of the other apostles save James, the son of Alpheus (Clopas), cousin of our Lord. He is in the list of the apostles.

I have also found six verses calling Andrew, Peter’s brother. Buy your logic how do we know they weren’t just relatives?

Setting oral tradition aside, we may know by reading the Gospel of John as it is written in the original Greek. In 1: 40 the Greek word for “brother” is *adelphos *. If Simon Peter and Andrew had been cousins, for instance, the author would have used the word anepsios or sungenis, meaning “relative”, since he had a wider audience in mind when he wrote his gospel near Ephesus and would have avoided using a Semitic idiomatic term in the voice of the narrator.

As far as language goes the NT was written in Greek and not Semitic languages.

But the characters in the Gospels spoke Aramaic. And Matthew addressed the Jews in Palestine when he wrote his gospel - not a wider audience in the Greek speaking world. Matthew wrote his gospel in Hebrew.

PAX :heaven:

 

[AmericanJosiah]

According to some posters on other forums, they say Mother mary did have other children. Ok, so if Mother mary had more children, than why did Jesus say the above words when Mother Mary’s other children could very well have taken care of her? Does it also mean that the other children were black sheep and not capable of taking care of their mother, or does it also mean that Mother Mary was not a good mother to them, but only to Jesus?

1. I know of NO denomination - Protestant or otherwise - that has a dogma of “Mary Had Lotsa Kids.” Yes, I think there are Protestants who have an opinion that she DID have other children - but such is simply their opinions. Some Protestants believe that Obama is a great president, too - they are entitled to their opinions.
2. I know of nothing in Scripture or from the earliest church that says anything dogmatic on this. There’s nothing I know of that clearly states, “Jesus was an only child!” and nothing that says, “MARY had _____ children in addition to Jesus.” Thus, MY reply would be that we simply don’t know.
3. I’m hard pressed to think of anything less relevant and more moot. To be blunt: who cares? What color hair did She have? How tall was She? Was She a good cook? How old was She when Jesus was born? I guess we can theorize about all this, but I’m left wondering why…

Thank you.

Pax

• Josiah

.

 

[Gabriel_of_12]

Your question is, Did Mother Mary have other children?

My answer…drum roll please…

Amen; anyone who obeys God’s commandments and give witness of Jesus are children of Mary;

Revelation 12:1
1** A great sign appeared in the sky, a woman 2 clothed with the sun, with the moon under her feet, and on her head a crown of twelve stars. **13
When the dragon saw that it had been thrown down to the earth, it pursued the woman who had given birth to the male child.
17
Then the dragon became angry with the woman and went off to wage war against the rest of her offspring, those who keep God’s commandments and bear witness to Jesus./B]

 

[jericho777]

True. Simon Peter and Andrew were uterine brothers. But when Jesus tells Peter to strengthen the other apostles in their faith (Lk 22:32), he calls them “brothers”. The evangelist wrote his gospel in the Greek (adelphos), but Jesus spoke the Aramaic word akhona when idiomatically referring to the apostles as brothers. Our Lord was a Jew.

Jesus was in his native place, Nazareth, and preaching in the synogogue on this occasion. So his mother and the three apostles, who were cousins of his as well along with Joseph, were naturally there while Jesus was teaching. Some proud and highminded people objected to what Jesus had to say and questioned his integrity as a rabbi in astonishment, since he was known to be only the son of a carpenter. Meanwhile they noticed our Lord’s mother, cousins, and other female relatives, whose presence they exploited as a public reminder to undermine Jesus’ credibility as a teacher of the Torah, for our Lord’s kinfolk in Nazareth belonged to a low station in society.

If you check the list of the apostles in the Synoptic Gospels, you will find the names James, Simon, and Judas included among the twelve (Mt 10:4; Mk 3:13-19; Lk 6:12-16). Scripture also records James and Joseph as being cousins of Jesus: the sons of Mary of Clopas (Mt 27:56; Mk 15:47). According to tradition, Simon the Zealous (gana) was a distant cousin of Jesus from Cana, where our Lord performed his first miracle together with Mary at the family wedding feast. Mark calls him the “Cananean”. If Simon were a sibling of Jesus, he would have been called a Nazorean.

The angel Gabriel isn’t Hebrew, notwithstanding, but I see no reason why he would indulge in using idiomatic expressions when communicating a very important message from God not only to Mary, but to the entire world through the forthcoming Gospel. Elizabeth was Mary’s cousin, so the term “relative” or “kinswoman” is formally appropriate.

Mary and our Lord’s disciples, including those who were his cousins, came to hear him when he was preaching at the temple in his native place and was rejected by the townspeople (Mt 13: 54:58).

Paul saw none of the other apostles save James, the son of Alpheus (Clopas), cousin of our Lord. He is in the list of the apostles.

Setting oral tradition aside, we may know by reading the Gospel of John as it is written in the original Greek. In 1: 40 the Greek word for “brother” is *adelphos *. If Simon Peter and Andrew had been cousins, for instance, the author would have used the word anepsios or sungenis, meaning “relative”, since he had a wider audience in mind when he wrote his gospel near Ephesus and would have avoided using a Semitic idiomatic term in the voice of the narrator.

But the characters in the Gospels spoke Aramaic. And Matthew addressed the Jews in Palestine when he wrote his gospel - not a wider audience in the Greek speaking world. Matthew wrote his gospel in Hebrew.

PAX :heaven:

In a previous post you said brothers can be a relative or a sibling I agree. Yet in the context presented it could very well be the later. You keep referring to the Semitic language but the text is in Greek. The five writers had many opportunities to use the word relative as in Lk 1:36 but did not. You would think at least in one instance a more definitive description would be used.

If you were to read these scriptures for the first time not knowing what they were about you would conclude Jesus had siblings. It’s the normal logical conclusion and does not violate the word usage. It seems like you all are doing some pretty serious twisting to deny the obvious. Just as in the six verses about Peter and Andrew. There is a pretense present that is not found in the bible.

I go back to this text Mat 1:25But he had no union with her until she gave birth to a son. And he gave him the name Jesus. because people keep saying it does not mean what is says. If I said “I had no union with my wife until she gave birth” you know that after she gave birth we would have a marital union. You all know what the word until means and are being intellectually dishonest if you think otherwise.

I will believe what the text reveals.

 

[Randy_Carson]

Brothers of Jesus, Not Sons of Mary**
**
Many non-Catholics deny the Perpetual Virginity of Mary by referring to passages of scripture that mention the “brothers” of Jesus. A rigorous analysis of scripture, however, proves their position is false. Consider the following:

1. Jesus had a “brother” named James.

---

"Isn’t this the carpenter’s son? Isn’t his mother’s name Mary, and aren’t his brothers James, Joseph, Simon and Judas?”(Matthew 13:55)
2. James, the Lord’s “brother”, is an apostle.

---

“Then, after three years I went up to Jerusalem to visit Cephas, and remained with him fifteen days. But I saw none of the other apostles except James, the Lord’s brother. (Galatians 1:18-19)

3. There are two apostles named James.

---

“When morning came, he called his disciples to him and chose twelve of them, whom he also designated apostles: Simon (whom he named Peter), his brother Andrew, James, John, Philip, Bartholomew, Matthew, Thomas, James son of Alphaeus, Simon who was called the Zealot, Judas son of James, and Judas Iscariot, who became a traitor.”(Luke 6:13-16)
4. One James (the brother of John) is not the uterine brother of Jesus; his father is Zebedee.

---

“James son of Zebedee and his brother John (to them he gave the name Boanerges, which means Sons of Thunder)” (Mark 3:17)
5**. The other apostle named James is not the uterine brother of Jesus; his father is Alpheus.**

---

“And when it was day, he called his disciples, and chose from them twelve, whom he called apostles: Simon, whom he named Peter and Andrew his brother, and James and John and Philip and Bartholomew, and Matthew and James the son of Alpheus, and Simon who was called the Zealot, and Judas the son of James and Judas Iscariot, who became a traitor.” (Luke 6:13-16)

6. Therefore, neither apostle named James was a uterine brother of Jesus.

7. The man named Joseph (or Joses) is not the uterine brother of Jesus; his mother is Mary and his brother is James. Therefore, this Mary is the wife of Alphaeus.

---

“Many women were there, watching from a distance. They had followed Jesus from Galilee to care for his needs. Among them were Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James and Joses, and the mother of Zebedee’s sons.” (Matthew 27:55-56)

8. Judas is not a uterine brother of Jesus because he is the son of James.

---

“When they arrived, they went upstairs to the room where they were staying. Those present were Peter, John, James and Andrew; Philip and Thomas, Bartholomew and Matthew; James son of Alphaeus and Simon the Zealot, and Judas son of James.” (Acts 1:13)

1. While Matthew 15:35 declares James, Joseph and Judas to be the “brothers” of Jesus, it has been demonstrated from scripture that they are NOT uterine brothers of the Lord. From this, it is apparent that scripture must be using the term “brothers” to mean relatives other than sons of Mary.

 

[Randy_Carson]

Bible Family Connections

Mary
Daughter of Joachim and Anne
Wife of Joseph
Mother of Jesus
** Aunt of Apostle James the Greater** and** Apostle John**

**Salome of Zebedee **
“Sister” of Mary, mother of Jesus
Wife of Zebedee
Mother of Apostles James the Greater and John
Aunt of Jesus

Mary of Clopas
Wife of Clopas/Alpheus
Mother of James the Lesser/Younger, Joses/Joseph, Simon and Jude

**Mary Magdalene **
Sister of Lazarus and Martha

James the Greater
Son of Zebedee and Salome
** Brother of Apostle John**
A “son of thunder”
Martyred in 42 AD by Herod (Acts 12)

James the Lesser/Younger
Son of Alpheus/Clopas and** Mary**
Brother of Joseph, Jude, Simon
“Brother of the Lord” (Mt 13:55, Mk 6:3, Gal. 2:19)
Bishop of Jerusalem

James
Author of the Book of James

 

[jpaul1953]

I realize Catholics and many Protestants do not believe she had other children. I do believe she dis…I do not believe she and Joseph remained chaste. The idea of her being a “Temple virgin” is a nice theory and belief…I just do not believe it adequately honors the marriage bond and commitment two people who are married share with one another.

She and Joseph were married…I believe from what I read in scripture that Jesus had brothers and sisters. I believe James, the Lord’s brother, was the leader of the Jerusalem church.

Jesus family came to him early on in his ministry to ask him to come home as they believed he “was beside himself”…aka “mad” or suffering delusions. His family came to know him by his words and deeds and were among those who came to believe in him. Mary was part of the upper room group on Pentacost…James served as leader of the church.

Whether Mary had more children has no bearing on what I believe about Christ and his life. It does not effect my “salvation”…for those who feel it is necessary to have Mary continue as a virgin after his birth…I have no problem with your belief…I simply do not share it…my focus is on Christ…not his mother and her status as a wife and mother.

I believe God blessed the marriage of Joseph and Mary fully, with children and sanctified it by incarnating into a family and blessed the world by doing so.

Dear Publisher,

I am Catholic and when the bible states Jesus had brothers and sisters I will state that as the Church says there was no word for uncle, nephew, cousin, etc in both hebrew and aramaic.

But, I must say I never saw anywhere in the bible that the bible states that Mary had other children or that other children had Mary as a mother. It always and only says that Jesus had brothers and sisters. So what does it really mean, my brother (pun intended).

Remember Paul called Titus and Timothy his sons in Christ. Does that mean that Paul had illegitimate children. One could pose that point. I guess if the Catholic Church said
Paul had no sons no matter what anyone says, there would be congregations claiming the Church to be wrong and paul had sons since it says that in the bible.
And if you want to bring up Matthew 1-25. The point made was that Joseph had nothing to do with Mary’s conception. The word until did not carry the same definition as it does today.

You believe what you want, but the more regular you make Jesus, the less divine He appears to become. You tend to make him just like you and me. I don’t believe this is the correct methodology.

jpaul1953

 

[Randy_Carson]

1. I know of NO denomination - Protestant or otherwise - that has a dogma of “Mary Had Lotsa Kids.” Yes, I think there are Protestants who have an opinion that she DID have other children - but such is simply their opinions. Some Protestants believe that Obama is a great president, too - they are entitled to their opinions.
2. I know of nothing in Scripture or from the earliest church that says anything dogmatic on this. There’s nothing I know of that clearly states, “Jesus was an only child!” and nothing that says, “MARY had _____ children in addition to Jesus.” Thus, MY reply would be that we simply don’t know.
3. I’m hard pressed to think of anything less relevant and more moot. To be blunt: who cares? What color hair did She have? How tall was She? Was She a good cook? How old was She when Jesus was born? I guess we can theorize about all this, but I’m left wondering why…

One reason - perhaps the main reason - we seek to accept and understand the Marian dogmas is because of our love for our Savior, Jesus Christ.

Think about this for a moment…when you first fell in love with your husband, wife or current “significant other”, weren’t you completely fascinated by him or her? Didn’t you want to know all the details you could possibly learn about him or her?

Where she grew up? What kind of music he liked to listen to? Favorite restaurants, foods, books? Didn’t you want to know where (s)he went to school or where (s)he worked, lived and hung out on the weekends?

Didn’t you want to know what he/she thought about politics, religion and the local sports teams? Did you want to learn about his or her family background?

Loving Jesus is a lot like that. We study the scriptures to learn what He said. We read commentaries to get background information on the geography of Israel and the religious climate of the day. What and where are the Sheep Gate and Pool of Siloam? Why were the Romans in Jerusalem? Who were the Sadducees and what made them different from the Pharisees? What was life like for Jesus growing up, and what may have happened during those silent years before his public ministry began? We want to know these things because we love Him.

We look at Mary because we love her son, and we want to know everything we can about Him. Mary loves Him, too, and by her excellent example, she leads us right back to Him: “Do whatever He tells you.”

 

[AmericanJosiah]

One reason - perhaps the main reason - we seek to accept and understand the Marian dogmas is because of our love for our Savior, Jesus Christ.

Accepted, but there is no Catholic dogma of “Mary Had Only One Child.” Just as there is no Protestant dogma in any Protestant denomination that “Mary Had Lotsa Kids.”

Yes, it is the only application of the Catholic Dogma of the Perpetual Virginity of Mary. I realize that, but that is an application of a dogma, not a dogma per se (at least as my Catholic teachers taught me). I disagree with you that Catholics believe that Our Lady was a “PERPETUAL virgin” because they love Her. From my experience, Catholics do not “love” childless women more than mothers. The adoration of virgins is a Roman, pagan thing NOT a part of Catholicism.

But we are WAY off topic, the question here is not if Our Lady ever had sex, the question is did She have other children. I gave my perspective on that. We don’t know. It doesn’t matter.

.

 

[SingleMomMonica]

Bible Family Connections

Mary
Daughter of Joachim and Anne
Wife of Joseph
Mother of Jesus
** Aunt of Apostle James the Greater** and** Apostle John**

**Salome of Zebedee **
“Sister” of Mary, mother of Jesus
Wife of Zebedee
Mother of Apostles James the Greater and John
Aunt of Jesus

Mary of Clopas
Wife of Clopas/Alpheus
Mother of James the Lesser/Younger, Joses/Joseph, Simon and Jude

**Mary Magdalene **
Sister of Lazarus and Martha

James the Greater
Son of Zebedee and Salome
** Brother of Apostle John**
A “son of thunder”
Martyred in 42 AD by Herod (Acts 12)

James the Lesser/Younger
Son of Alpheus/Clopas and** Mary**
Brother of Joseph, Jude, Simon
“Brother of the Lord” (Mt 13:55, Mk 6:3, Gal. 2:19)
Bishop of Jerusalem

James
Author of the Book of James

Salome couldn’t have been Mary’s sister because the Panagia was an only child. Neither of Mary’s parents had been married to another spouse, so there’s not even the possibility of her having any step-siblings. Perhaps Salome a cousin of the Theotokos? But there is no way she was a sister in the sense that we use that word today in the West.

 

[Teneas]

1. I know of no denomination - protestant or otherwise - that has a dogma of “mary had lotsa kids.” yes, i think there are protestants who have an opinion that she did have other children - but such is simply their opinions. Some protestants believe that obama is a great president, too - they are entitled to their opinions.
2. I know of nothing in scripture or from the earliest church that says anything dogmatic on this. There’s nothing i know of that clearly states, “jesus was an only child!” and nothing that says, “mary had _____ children in addition to jesus.” thus, my reply would be that we simply don’t know.
3. I’m hard pressed to think of anything less relevant and more moot. To be blunt: Who cares? What color hair did she have? How tall was she? Was she a good cook? How old was she when jesus was born? I guess we can theorize about all this, but i’m left wondering why…

Thank you.

Pax

• josiah

.

rofl @ #1

 

[Tomster]

1. I know of NO denomination - Protestant or otherwise - that has a dogma of “Mary Had Lotsa Kids.” Yes, I think there are Protestants who have an opinion that she DID have other children - but such is simply their opinions. Some Protestants believe that Obama is a great president, too - they are entitled to their opinions.
2. I know of nothing in Scripture or from the earliest church that says anything dogmatic on this. There’s nothing I know of that clearly states, “Jesus was an only child!” and nothing that says, “MARY had _____ children in addition to Jesus.” Thus, MY reply would be that we simply don’t know.
3. I’m hard pressed to think of anything less relevant and more moot. To be blunt: who cares? What color hair did She have? How tall was She? Was She a good cook? How old was She when Jesus was born? I guess we can theorize about all this, but I’m left wondering why…

Thank you.

Pax

• Josiah

.

It is difficult for us in the present day to imagine the horror and indignation which in the 5th century was evoked by the news that certain heretics, Helvidious and Jovinian by name, had set themselves against the universal tradition of Christianity, which had been handed down from the beginning, and dared to assert that our Blessed Lady had other children after the birth of her Divine Son.

They based their heresy on certain passages of the Gospel and were answered at once conclusively by St. Jerome, so that no more was heard of any doubt as to our Lady’s virginity until the time of the Reformation.

 

[jericho777]

One reason - perhaps the main reason - we seek to accept and understand the Marian dogmas is because of our love for our Savior, Jesus Christ.

Think about this for a moment…when you first fell in love with your husband, wife or current “significant other”, weren’t you completely fascinated by him or her? Didn’t you want to know all the details you could possibly learn about him or her?

Where she grew up? What kind of music he liked to listen to? Favorite restaurants, foods, books? Didn’t you want to know where (s)he went to school or where (s)he worked, lived and hung out on the weekends?

Didn’t you want to know what he/she thought about politics, religion and the local sports teams? Did you want to learn about his or her family background?

Loving Jesus is a lot like that. We study the scriptures to learn what He said. We read commentaries to get background information on the geography of Israel and the religious climate of the day. What and where are the Sheep Gate and Pool of Siloam? Why were the Romans in Jerusalem? Who were the Sadducees and what made them different from the Pharisees? What was life like for Jesus growing up, and what may have happened during those silent years before his public ministry began? We want to know these things because we love Him.

We look at Mary because we love her son, and we want to know everything we can about Him. Mary loves Him, too, and by her excellent example, she leads us right back to Him: “Do whatever He tells you.”

Hello Randy I mean no disrespect but personally don’t care if Mary was or was not …take your pick fill in the blank. I have no personal agenda to that end. I don’t care.

I do care what the bible clearly says. I care unbiblical doctrines are put on people under the guise of “authority”. In this thread people are turning themselves inside out do deny the plain and simple reading of scripture and making excuses. They are being intellectually dishonest with the written word by denying universally accepted rules of interpretation. Mt 1:35 is a great example of this. The word until "preposition; used as a function word to indicate continuance (as of an action or condition) to a specified time " But he had no union with her until she gave birth to a son. And he gave him the name Jesus.

This is clearly saying Mary and Joseph enjoyed normal marital relations. To say otherwise is being untruthful. You all clearly have an agenda and why I don’t know. We should be more interested with what scripture actually says and not what you want it to say.

I understand your passion over this issue and empathize with you over this. But this does not accurately reflect the truth of scripture. You are denying something the text accurately describes.

Thank you

 

[Zooey]

The Theotokos never had any other children besides Jesus! How could she? She’s Ever-Virgin!

Besides what God-fearing man would ever dare to enter her after God Himself opened her womb? St. Joseph was not God’s enemy.
.

:sad_yes:

The Gospel says that they were Betrothed…this is the first of the two marriage ceremonies.

If you ever attend an Eastern Catholic or an Orthodox Wedding you will see both ceremonies preformed - in the US, it’s common that both are preformed at the same day/time period. In other countries they can still be seperated by days, weeks, months or even years.

The first part you will recognize as it’s the only ceremony done nowadays by Western Christians…the exchanging of the rings or betrothal.

The second part is the coronation.

When in the New Testament it says that it’s better for a man to keep his virgin is best, but that if he sleeps with her he has not committed a sin…the reason it’s not a sin is because the Gospel writer is refering to those who have been betrothed but have not yet completed the final marriage ceremony…but even so they are already married. Otherwise the Gospel writer could not have said it was not a sin to sleep with her.

And it’s why Joseph would have had to “divorce” her quietly, should he have left her as he’d intended to after finding out about her pregnancy and before he had the dream telling him to keep her.

:sad_yes:

 

[Zooey]

I do care what the bible clearly says. I care unbiblical doctrines are put on people under the guise of “authority”. In this thread people are turning themselves inside out do deny the plain and simple reading of scripture and making excuses. They are being intellectually dishonest with the written word by denying universally accepted rules of interpretation. Mt 1:35 is a great example of this. The word until "preposition; used as a function word to indicate continuance (as of an action or condition) to a specified time " But he had no union with her until she gave birth to a son. And he gave him the name Jesus.

This is clearly saying Mary and Joseph enjoyed normal marital relations. To say otherwise is being untruthful. You all clearly have an agenda and why I don’t know. We should be more interested with what scripture actually says and not what you want it to say.

I understand your passion over this issue and empathize with you over this. But this does not accurately reflect the truth of scripture. You are denying something the text accurately describes.

Thank you

I’m sorry, but **you **are the one who is reading into Scripture something that simply is not there.
You begin with the presupposition that the Catholic/Orthodox position is wrong, and that the Bible must support you against them, and then you read into Matthew 1:35 what is not there!!

Scripture says that David’s wife Michal “had no children until the day she died”; does that mean that, once she was dead, she had them? No, and it does not say that she gave birth to sextuplets or something as she was dying. It says she had no children. Period. End of discussion.
In the same way, Scripture tells us that Joseph did not “know his wife” until she gave birth to Jesus.
You only want to make the verse say something because that is a point that you want to make. When what it says, is what Christians (excepting a small group of early heretics) have believed since the very beginning of the church.
Please stop accusing others of doing what you are actually doing yourself!!