Hey, is there anybody here at CAF, who believes that Jesus Christ had biological brothers and can you prove it?

[maryj]

What do you do with the warnings of Scripture that warn that false teachers will come into the church and decieve many? How are you on guard yourself in the Catholic church if it claims to be incapable of erring in matters of faith (this by the way contradicts the Scripture)?

This is a good example of where the facts of Scripture do not support the perpetual virginity doctrine. There are just to many places in Scripture where it is said Jesus had blood brothers via His mother Mary. To say that she did not have children requires some serious distortions of the Scriptures to support this.

Since the church is composed of fallen men who can and have erred would require all of us to be on guard on what any church may proclaim. Just because the church of the 4th century got the canon of the NT right does not mean automatically they got everything else right. We know they have not on this topic of discussion.

I’ve copied and pasted from what I’ve posted on another thread (lazy typing skills this morning)

Mathew 15 and John 19:27
In Mathew chpt 15, Jesus vehemently condemns the Pharisees because they had a procedure, the Korban rule, that allowed children to avoid taking care of their parents. In the OT, children had a solemn obligation to care for their elderly parents. This is why the Pharisees scheme to let people shirk this responsibility made Jesus so angry.
John 19:26-27 the scene at the cross. Jesus is about to die. Apparently, Joseph had alredy died because he is no longer mentioned after Jesus begins His ministry. Mary is in danger of being left alone, so He entrusts her to John the Apostle, Zebedee’s son, who is not a sibling of our Lord. If Jesus had younger siblings, as Protestants claim, His behavior makes no sense. JESUS HAD CONDEMNED THE PHARISEES FOR DISPENSING PEOPLE FROM THE RESPONSIBILITY OF CARING FOR THEIR PARENTS. Why would he dispense His own siblings from this important obligation? Such inconsistency is INCONCEIVABLE.
After the Ascension, the followers of Jesus- including Mary, John the Apostle with whom Mary now lived, and the brothers of Jesus gathered in the upper room Acts 1:13-14
If these brothers of Jesus were also Mary’s sons, Mary would be praying togethar with her son’s who were faithful followers of Jesus, and yet going home with John. In her jewish culture, such a situation would simply NOT HAPPEN.

Jesus Christ is not inconsistent.

Did anyone read this? Wow, dispute this please if you can.

 

[rinnie]

I cant lie to you, i dont even know a protestant they would agree with you alone Catholics. And why Authority, what is this world without Authority.

If Authority was not necessary why did Jesus make a point to give it to his Apostles. Why didnt he just say, Now here is a book, hand it to people and let them fend for themself.

Why do we have a judge in a court of law, Why dont we just judge ourself. Who needs authority, Like you said why do we need to have authority. Because without authority there would be no right and wrong. we would all be right. How can you be right, and i be right, and ten other people be right, You can take a piece of scripture and get 20 different peoples OPINION on it, And have 20 different opinions. Then where would there be truth, and what good would truth be then, Then who do we follow, And dont say God because how can you follow what God says if you dont know what WHO to believe. So then what we just say ok im going to do it my way, Then what good is scripture at all then, and what was it written for, if we just turn it to be the way we want anyway.

Do you see what i mean, Please no disrespect and im not trying to be mean, i just cant see you logic is all. We must have someone who God has left to tell us what he wants us to know. That is why he left the Church. And the Apostles if he did not think we needed them, why did he choose them. to continue his work, until he comes again in Glory thats why.

I mean see what im saying you and I can go on for days weeks years, and both believe we are right, But then how could God get the truth out if this is the right way. He promised he would not leave us orphans. We have the Church. The first church and the last Church. The CC he promised us that.

 

[justasking4]

maryj;4165060]I’ve copied and pasted from what I’ve posted on another thread (lazy typing skills this morning)

Mathew 15 and John 19:27
In Mathew chpt 15, Jesus vehemently condemns the Pharisees because they had a procedure, the Korban rule, that allowed children to avoid taking care of their parents. In the OT, children had a solemn obligation to care for their elderly parents. This is why the Pharisees scheme to let people shirk this responsibility made Jesus so angry.
John 19:26-27 the scene at the cross. Jesus is about to die. Apparently, Joseph had alredy died because he is no longer mentioned after Jesus begins His ministry. Mary is in danger of being left alone, so He entrusts her to John the Apostle, Zebedee’s son, who is not a sibling of our Lord. If Jesus had younger siblings, as Protestants claim, His behavior makes no sense.

Actually what makes the best sense is that His brothers were either unaware of what was going or they were not in the city at the time. Remember His trial and crucifixion happened quite quickly.

JESUS HAD CONDEMNED THE PHARISEES FOR DISPENSING PEOPLE FROM THE RESPONSIBILITY OF CARING FOR THEIR PARENTS. Why would he dispense His own siblings from this important obligation? Such inconsistency is INCONCEIVABLE.

Not under these kinds of circumstances especially if His brothers were not even in the city.

After the Ascension, the followers of Jesus- including Mary, John the Apostle with whom Mary now lived, and the brothers of Jesus gathered in the upper room Acts 1:13-14
If these brothers of Jesus were also Mary’s sons, Mary would be praying togethar with her son’s who were faithful followers of Jesus, and yet going home with John. In her jewish culture, such a situation would simply NOT HAPPEN.

Perhaps His brothers were incapable at this time to care for her or Jesus decided that John was the best choice for this since he was a member of His new spiritual family.

Jesus Christ is not inconsistent

.
I agree.

 

[maryj]

Actually what makes the best sense is that His brothers were either unaware of what was going or they were not in the city at the time. Remember His trial and crucifixion happened quite quickly.

Not under these kinds of circumstances especially if His brothers were not even in the city.

Perhaps His brothers were incapable at this time to care for her or Jesus decided that John was the best choice for this since he was a member of His new spiritual family.

.
I agree.

Kinda flying by the seat of your pants here!! Just what kind of excuses do you think the Pharisees tried to give for ignoring the needs of their parents? I believe there is a commandment in the 10 that says to honor your mother and father. What do you think that means? So Jesus is being inconsistent by thinking that John would be more capable of taking care of His mother than His brothers and sisters. Jesus condemned the Pharisees, but the rules changed for His own flesh and blood? INCONCEIVABLE!!

 

[justasking4]

maryj;4166338]Kinda flying by the seat of your pants here!! Just what kind of excuses do you think the Pharisees tried to give for ignoring the needs of their parents?

It was the corban rule if i’m not mistaken. Matthew 15:4-6. This rule was about simply affirming a gift to God which means that gift could only be used for God and not anything else. It also made it possible for them to keep these gifts in their homes. Jesus as you rebuked them soundly for this.

I believe there is a commandment in the 10 that says to honor your mother and father. What do you think that means?

i think we all have a pretty good idea. Its respect etc.

So Jesus is being inconsistent by thinking that John would be more capable of taking care of His mother than His brothers and sisters. Jesus condemned the Pharisees, but the rules changed for His own flesh and blood? INCONCEIVABLE!!

The commandment does not command a person who has parents that they themselves have to take care of their parents specifically. If they had the means etc for someone else to do it then that would not mean they are breaking the law. Jesus certainly abided by the principle and spirit of the Law by allowing John to do so. By doing so we should not infer that Jesus has no other siblings.

 

[sola_scriptura]

SS To day some ancient guy a thousand years ago may have been wrong, are you then indeed saying that the Gospel are not the inspired words of Christ? Or are you saying that they did not have the gift of the Holy Spirit to interpret them. I dont understand what you mean here?

The authors of scripture were divinely inspired & as such scripture is infallible. However, no man or collection of men are inspired in this way with regard to interpreting scripture. Indeed the Spirit inspires all the saints – however, are we all full of grace or are we each given a different measure of faith?

 

[maryj]

Korban rule jimmyakin.typepad.com/defensor_fidei/2006/06/korban_sola_scr.html

 

[maryj]

Oh and…

There were some man-made traditions that were concocted by the Pharisees to avoid following God’s laws. The best example of this was the one quoted above. There was the “Korban Rule”, under which Jews could dedicate all their money to the Temple treasury as an act of thanksgiving. This gave them an excuse of not having any money to help their parents who might come to them in need of help. Callously to ignore your parents’ plea for financial help would be to break God’s commandment to “honour your father and your mother”. However, the reality was that those who used this “Korban Rule” actually had full access to their money, even though it was officially Temple property. It is easy to see why Christ condemned that tradition as corrupt and contrary to God’s justice.
Fr. Francis Jameison

 

[maryj]

The commandment does not command a person who has parents that they themselves have to take care of their parents specifically. If they had the means etc for someone else to do it then that would not mean they are breaking the law. Jesus certainly abided by the principle and spirit of the Law by allowing John to do so. By doing so we should not infer that Jesus has no other siblings.

Source?

 

[rinnie]

Justasking4 Here it is just for you. AUTHORITY

Romans 13:1-3 Let every person be subordinate to the HIGHER AUTHORITIES, for there is no AUTHORITY except FROM GOD, and those that EXIST have been ESTABLISHED BY GOD. Therefore whoever RESISTS authority OPPOSES what God has appointed and those who oppose it will bring judgement on themselves.

 

[Jimmy_B]

:knight1:

 

[KenEOTE]

Justasking4 Here it is just for you. AUTHORITY

Romans 13:1-3 Let every person be subordinate to the HIGHER AUTHORITIES, for there is no AUTHORITY except FROM GOD, and those that EXIST have been ESTABLISHED BY GOD. Therefore whoever RESISTS authority OPPOSES what God has appointed and those who oppose it will bring judgement on themselves.

1Everyone must submit himself to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God. 2Consequently, he who rebels against the authority is rebelling against what God has instituted, and those who do so will bring judgment on themselves. 3For rulers hold no terror for those who do right, but for those who do wrong. Do you want to be free from fear of the one in authority? Then do what is right and he will commend you. 4For he is God’s servant to do you good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword for nothing. He is God’s servant, an agent of wrath to bring punishment on the wrongdoer. 5Therefore, it is necessary to submit to the authorities, not only because of possible punishment but also because of conscience. 6This is also why you pay taxes, for the authorities are God’s servants, who give their full time to governing. 7Give everyone what you owe him: If you owe taxes, pay taxes; if revenue, then revenue; if respect, then respect; if honor, then honor

Its talking about Goverment.

 

[rinnie]

It is not just saying goverment. It is saying why God gave authority. That was my point that someone has to have authority. God gave the goverment authority correct, but God also gave the Apostles Authority over His Church by the Power of the Holy Spirit. But my point was Authority, she wanted to know why does anyone have to have authority. And WHO says it. ANd that was my answer God says it.

 

[KenEOTE]

It is not just saying goverment. It is saying why God gave authority. That was my point that someone has to have authority. God gave the goverment authority correct, but God also gave the Apostles Authority over His Church by the Power of the Holy Spirit. But my point was Authority, she wanted to know why does anyone have to have authority. And WHO says it. ANd that was my answer God says it.

Is this how the Church interprets this passage?

 

[guanophore]

What do you do with the warnings of Scripture that warn that false teachers will come into the church and decieve many?

I watch you very close, ja4, and search your posts so I know exactly where you are, and what you are saying. Don’t worry, we are on guard against deceptions here! :knight2:

How are you on guard yourself in the Catholic church if it claims to be incapable of erring in matters of faith (this by the way contradicts the Scripture)?

No, ja4, false teachers and deceivers cannot penetrate God, who is stronger than all errors. In Christ, the fullness of the Godhead dwells bodily. He is the Head of the Church, and the Holy Spirit is the Soul of the Church. It is these divine elements of the church that make her infallible, not the humans who are prone to deception.

If you think that a Church teaching contradicts the Scripture, that is because you don’t understand one or the other. IN this case, you have a deficient conception of “church”. YOu erroneously seem to believe that “church” has no Divine elements that preserve the Church from error.

This is a good example of where the facts of Scripture do not support the perpetual virginity doctrine. There are just to many places in Scripture where it is said Jesus had blood brothers via His mother Mary. To say that she did not have children requires some serious distortions of the Scriptures to support this.

I know it seems this way to you because you are reading scripture through the lens of your anti-catholic religious formation (those Chick Tracts again ). There are not any places in scripture that say Jesus had blood brothers via his mother Mary. In fact, all the children listed can be show to belong to the “other Mary” who is called her sister. Probably a sister in law, since she is married to Clopas. We don’t know if Clopas is a brother of Joseph, or Mary, but in either case, that makes their offspring Jesus’ brethren.

There is no “serious distortion of scripture”. All the Apostles knew Mary personally, and they knew that Jesus was an only child.

Since the church is composed of fallen men who can and have erred would require all of us to be on guard on what any church may proclaim.

We should certainly be on guard, especially against those such as yourself that are bringing " a different gospel" than the one which was handed down to us by the Apostles. However, here again you reveal a deficient understanding of “church”. The Church is much more htan just fallible men.

Even so, somehow you can trust God to enable those fallible ment to produce an inspired-inerrant Scripture, but not to fulfill the mission Jesus gave them to teach.

Just because the church of the 4th century got the canon of the NT right does not mean automatically they got everything else right. We know they have not on this topic of discussion.

You are free to reject the decisions of the infallible councils. Everyone has the freedom to reject those Christ has sent. Just be aware that rejecting those He sent He equates to rejecting HImself.

 

[guanophore]

I would think most catholics here would not disagree with me on this.

No, ja4. CAtholics believe that Jesus kept HIs promise to the Apostles to send His Spirit, and that His Spirit continues to guide them into all truth. Catholics will affirm that one of these guidances was the canon of Scripture, but so are all the other decisions of the infallible councils.

The Lord Jesus used fallen men. He appointed them His apostles and used them as the foundation for the church. See Ephesians 2:20.

Which goes to prove that something infallible can be created out of people who are not.

I know you disagree with me. However you are not able to refute the passages i have used to show clearly Mary had her own children. Rather your defense is that the church says she did not have children and no amount of facts will change your mind.

What you have given are not “facts”, ja4, but your own erroneous interpretation of the scriptures. You will never have any credibility on this point, since you can’t work your way through post # 778.

Why is an appeal to authority necessary here if we know what the verses of Scripture show that she did indeed have her own children?

Obviously we read them differently…have you not noticed that? All persons who have received the Apostolic Teaching understand that these scriptures do not refer to anyone from the womb from whence Jesus came.

I believe it for a number of reasons. In regards to fallen men writing it that would be a problem if they were truly its source. However, the inspiration of the Scriptures is rooted in the character of God Himself. That is more than sufficent to overcome any of man’s limitations.

Now, if you can also grasp that the Church also finds her Source in Christ, andthat it is the character of God Himself that keeps her holy, blameless, and pure. Then there will be a foundation upon which to build.

 

[guanophore]

Actually what makes the best sense is that His brothers were either unaware of what was going or they were not in the city at the time. Remember His trial and crucifixion happened quite quickly.

Ok, so for the sake of arguement, let’s say this is true. We don’t believe it is, because we believe that every faithful Jew was in the city according to the law. However, how long do you suppose it took them to find out? Why did they never go collect their mother? Why did she live out the rest of her days with John? If they became believers later, why did they not follow Jesus’ teaching to care for their parent?

Not under these kinds of circumstances especially if His brothers were not even in the city.

So, not only is Mary ignorant, naive, and breeding like a rabbit, but her other offspring are faithless disobedient Jews?

Perhaps His brothers were incapable at this time to care for her or Jesus decided that John was the best choice for this since he was a member of His new spiritual family.

Wait, there is a “spiritual family”? I thought no one was allowed any spiritual family?

 

[guanophore]

It was the corban rule if i’m not mistaken. Matthew 15:4-6. This rule was about simply affirming a gift to God which means that gift could only be used for God and not anything else. It also made it possible for them to keep these gifts in their homes. Jesus as you rebuked them soundly for this.

i think we all have a pretty good idea. Its respect etc.

The commandment does not command a person who has parents that they themselves have to take care of their parents specifically. If they had the means etc for someone else to do it then that would not mean they are breaking the law. Jesus certainly abided by the principle and spirit of the Law by allowing John to do so.** By doing so we should not infer that Jesus has no other siblings.**

Really, and why not? How is it that he specifically and strongly taught that it is the children’s duty to care for the parents, then absolve his own siblings from that duty?

 

[rinnie]

Her question was why we need authority, and where it says it in the bible. But the way I was taught Paul has to explain Roman Authority but Paul also builds on traditional instruction exhibited in wis 6 1-3. according to which kings and magistrates rule by consent of God. From this perspective then believers who render Obedience to the governing authorities are obeying who is highest in command (GOD). But its also saying Caesar has the reponsibility to make just ordinances. That is the Catholic stance. But my point is you must have authority, and goverment authority and authority in God ties into together. Which without God you would have no goverment authority either. And without Apostolic authority how would we know the truth. Again like the law someone must have a final say.

 

[justasking4]

Justasking4 Here it is just for you. AUTHORITY

Romans 13:1-3 Let every person be subordinate to the HIGHER AUTHORITIES, for there is no AUTHORITY except FROM GOD, and those that EXIST have been ESTABLISHED BY GOD. Therefore whoever RESISTS authority OPPOSES what God has appointed and those who oppose it will bring judgement on themselves.

The context is not about church authority but secular authorities.