J
justasking4
Guest
Would Jesus have the authority to absolve His own brothers from actively caring for Mary if He already commanded John to take take care of under his own roof?
Hey, is there anybody here at CAF, who believes that Jesus Christ had biological brothers and can you prove it?
- Status
J
justasking4
Guest
Good questions. I wish the Scriptures said something. All we can at this point is to speculate. Doctrines and practices should never be grounded on speculations even though the Catholic church does.
Huh? You are just embarrassing yourself when you write these kinds of crude comments.
Quote:
This shows your lack of understanding of the Scriptures.
J
justasking4
Guest
M
maryj
Guest
I “wish” the Scriptures said something. You ignore, or twist to suit, I have given you direct quotes from Holy Scripture. You choose to not open your ears to what our Lord said. HONOR thy Mother and Father.
J
justasking4
Guest
Where do the Scriptures say anything about where James, Joseph and Simon and Judas were on the day Christ died?
M
maryj
Guest
J
justasking4
Guest
These are the brothers of Jesus.
C
CapIV
Guest
There really needs to be an option for “step-brothers” here.
J
justasking4
Guest
The Scriptures don’t use such words for Jesus in relations to His brothers via His family. The NT does have words for cousin and relative.
These are Greek words for cousin—anepsios as in Colossians 4:10
kinsman = sungenis which is used in Luke 1:36.
These words are not used in these passages the mention His brothers:
Matthew 13:55-56, Mark 3:31-32; Mark 6:3; John 2:12; Galatians 1:19
G
guanophore
Guest
Indeed. The question has to be, if He had siblings, why would this be necessary, and what would be His goal in insulting them by replacing them during His last words. Especially when He knew they would come to believe in Him later?
After preaching so strongly on the value of children taking care of their parents (not doing so is “robbing” them) under what ethic would He reverse one of the 10 commandments?
No, ja4. What we can do is accept the authority that Jesus appointed, so that we do not have to speculate. However, I respect your right to reject those whom the Lord appointed. It is within God’s permissive will for all adherants of SS to do what is right in their own eyes.
I am sure that it seems like speculation to you, since you have not received the Apostolic Teachings, and do not believe they exist.
All of these things have been implied by you in previous threads about Mary. That she did not know how women get pregnant, that she was too dense to understand what Gabriel was saying, that she popped babies at the rate of about two a year, so that the total could reach 120 by Pentecost…Huh? You are just embarrassing yourself when you write these kinds of crude comments.
Or perhaps you think she had a genetic predisposition to multiple births? If she had several sets of quintuplets she could produce a crowd that size…
I note you never answered my question about where the “mothers’ were to come from that Jesus promised us if we followed him. You also never responded to my noting that the mother of Rufus’ of Rome is described by Paul as " a mother to me also”.
This you have done in the course of rejecting that, as adopted children of the Father, we are brothers of Christ, and therefore, His mother is our mother.
G
guanophore
Guest
No, but the scriptures do state that they were children of another Mary, the wife of Clopas, who is referred to as HIs mothers “sister”.
R
rinnie
Guest
Justasking4 Just do one thing for me okay. Go to acts 8:26-40. Now tell me what you get out of that scripture.
G
guanophore
Guest
This verse was originally written in Aramaic, and there is no word for stepbrother or cousin.
G
guanophore
Guest
I am amazed that you are still using Galatians as a “proof text”. I thought you got at least through the first two verses of post # 778? I guess not…
J
justasking4
Guest
Again all we can do is speculate. Jesus was not all-knowing during His incarnation and He may not have had this information at hand.
i have no reason to think He reversed it. Rather He fulfilled it in a way that He saw fit.
What do you think your “authority” is doing here? Do they have access to facts you don’t? If so, what are they? If they cannot be produced then what you are relying on is their speculations.
Actually it is you and your church that is doing this. I go by what the Scriptures say and no further. Remember 2 John 9—Anyone who goes too far and does not abide in the teaching of Christ, does not have God; the one who abides in the teaching, he has both the Father and the Son.
You have a choice. Do you follow your church or the inspired-inerrant Word of God?
J
justasking4
Guest
And where is this original Gospel that was written in Armaic that shows this?
J
justasking4
Guest
Philip is explaining what Isaiah is saying and from this preached the gospel to the eunuch. Correct?
G
guanophore
Guest
It is one of the reasons I suggested some study. I learned about it in a Protestant Seminary, not in RCIA. If you knew more basic things about bible history, perhaps your mind would be more open, and you would not have to argue ridiculous things. That way, you could focus your arguements on what actually exists, instead of things you made up, because you don’t know any better.
Matthew has a great deal of internal evidence that it was written in ARamaic, as well as historical evidence, if you know what you are looking for, and are open minded. I am sure you would be more open minded to learn about this from a fellow anti-Catholic, would you not?
In any case, you will have no credibility at all on this issue until you can accept the internal testimony of the scriptures themselves. It has been shown to you that these children that are called “his brothers and…sisters here with us” belong to different parents. Unless and until you can “see” this in your bible, there is not much use trying to go further.
J
justasking4
Guest
Not in Matthew 13:55-56. There is no mention of a Clopas in this passage.
55 “Is not this the carpenter’s son? Is not His mother called Mary, and His brothers, James and Joseph and Simon and Judas?
56 “And His sisters, are they not all with us? Where then did this man get all these things?”
J
justasking4
Guest
This is the same kind of reasoning with here with the “Q” document. It sounds so reasonable that the gospel writers appeal to such a source but there is no evidence for it. Until we have in our hands a original gospel in Aramaic then all you are doing is speculating.It is one of the reasons I suggested some study. I learned about it in a Protestant Seminary, not in RCIA. If you knew more basic things about bible history, perhaps your mind would be more open, and you would not have to argue ridiculous things. That way, you could focus your arguements on what actually exists, instead of things you made up, because you don’t know any better.
Matthew has a great deal of internal evidence that it was written in ARamaic, as well as historical evidence, if you know what you are looking for, and are open minded. I am sure you would be more open minded to learn about this from a fellow anti-Catholic, would you not?
In any case, you will have no credibility at all on this issue until you can accept the internal testimony of the scriptures themselves. It has been shown to you that these children that are called “his brothers and…sisters here with us” belong to different parents. Unless and until you can “see” this in your bible, there is not much use trying to go further.
- Status