Well, I believe the Gospels because they contain the life and teachings of Jesus?
Yeah, I accept it would be quite strange that Jesus left Mary to the care of John if he had siblings (though, Jesus’ request is only mentioned in John)
Says who? Popular vote? Who or what makes that which we call the bible a genuine document? Who guarantees it?
John’s Gospel has a different purpose than the synoptic Gospels. Remember that Jesus said that the truth was established by two or three witnesses under Jewish law? The three parallel synoptic Gospels established the truth of the Gospel message. John’s Gospel was written some 30-50 years later, at the request of others in the Church. It reflects doctrinal development - ideas that were not expressed in the three synoptic Gospels. Is it any less genuine because of the passage of time and doctrinal development?
What you might be missing is that the same Church - the exact same continuous authority whose members wrote the new testament under inspiration; which three hundred years later tested all available writings that claimed to be scripture; which excluded many writings while including others in the canon; which then assembled and declared them to be the “bible” - is the exact same authority that has declared Mary to be ever virgin. The same living authority. So, why, I wonder, do you give greater credit to the bible than to later Church teachings? You admit that they are not contrary to scripture. If you doubt Church teaching on Mary, you must also doubt Church teaching that the bible is true and accurate. Both come from the same source. Remember that the bible is not based on even one original document. Not one. All of Matthew’s, Mark’s and Luke’s handwritten copies are long gone. We have only the word of those who handed the “copies of copies” down that they are genuine.
There are things that a Catholic is free to believe or not to believe and still be in union with the Church but this isn’t one of them.
Since the documents alleged as the Gospels are not by the original writers, and since they are copies of copies, examined hundreds of years later, how can you know they are genuine?
I’d argue, but I rather give you all the links I have regarding the issue and let you do the research. I tried attacking it, not because I didn’t believe in the ever virginity of Blessed Mary but to test it to see if it held water, the evidence and arguments are too strong and I couldn’t find a way to rebuke it.Not necessarily, like other things, these beliefs develop over time and would not have been present or widely held in the early Church.
While the fact that Jesus entrusted Mary to John on the cross could imply that he had no other siblings, he could also have just preferred that John take care of her and not his siblings.
Then there’s the fact that the brothers accompanied Jesus & Mary to Capernaum after the wedding at Cana (John 2:12 ) which implies them all being children of Mary (or possibly step-children from an earlier marriage of Joseph’s).
But it definitely is not a clear cut issueWe don’t have enough evidence to know either way.
James the Just wasn’t an Apostle. Jesus words from the Cross aren’t in indication of one person being less worthy than another. He has His reasons, one of which is very likely for us to understand Mary was given to us all as our own Mother, and also, given into our care.
Because the NT is based on eyewitness accounts wheras the later Church teachings seem to be extrapolated from the Bible and developed over centuries of theological speculation - rather than any new revelation or primary sources.
Actually, I was raised in a staunchly Catholic family (one with strong devotion to Mary too) -but yes it don’t think that everything the Church has ever taught is always true, nor to me is it necessary that it should.
Well if you believe the Bible is based on eyewitness accounts and that is good enough for you, then you have to believe the promises Jesus made to His Church as recorded in the Bible. He told His apostles He would be with them until the end of time, send the Holy Spirit to them into all truth, and He would never abandon them (us).
Plausible? I can drive you to the house of a man and wife, married for 30 years, and both still virgin. Odd, I know, but if sinful humans can achieve this - without vowing before God - why do you suffer from self-imposed incredulity?
The bible is meaningless without the Catholic Church telling you that it has meaning! There is not a single original document left. Not one signature. Antiques Road Show® would devalue the bible due to its lack of provenance! Yet, you remain credulous.
If truth does not matter, you are in the wrong faith.
My bad on the wrong James.
Excellent link. Thank you for posting it!
Thanks for posting the link, lots of interesting stuff, esp. this.
Hey, I said it’s plausible - I don’t have to believe it’s true unless the evidence is more conclusive (if the evidence was conclusive, the Protestants would believe it too).
Hardly, do your homework - the books of the Bible have been copied and passed down quite faithfully through the centuries, the Bible is by far the best attested of any writings of antiquity.
Or rather, the Church says one thing, supported by reason and evidence - I believe itThe Church says one thing - you believe it.
The Church says another - you doubt.
I can assure you that to me the truth matters, indeed it matters enough for me to investigate claims for myself rather than rely on other people telling me what to believe.
It’s not: there are many (devotional) symbolic references to Jesus as the “sun”.
Yes, but be careful how you take this: does this mean that Mary is the cause of Jesus Christ, or simply the vehicle through which He is born? The latter, for sure! But, that doesn’t mean that she’s like a literal vehicle: we toss cars into the dump once they get rusty and unable to perform; Mary, though, is a person, and the person who God chose for the birth of his son, at that! So, we praise her, since she’s the person through whom our salvation, Jesus, came into the world!
You have to ask yourself what the purpose of the Bible is. Is it to give a history of “the Jesus family”? Is it to tell a story or write down history in the way we do, these days? No – it’s to tell the story of Salvation History, and the birth, ministry, death, and resurrection of Jesus is part of that tale! (But what happened at the end of Mary’s life is not part of that tale.) Does that mean that this info isn’t important? No – just that it’s not part of the main story…
That’s just it – Catholics aren’t adding to Scripture here: there’s no attempt to add these beliefs to Scripture! But, that doesn’t mean that the totality of our belief is words in a book! Jesus didn’t say, “you are Peter, and on this rock I’m gonna write a book”! He said, “an on this rock I will build my church”… and this Church is a living, breathing entity (since it’s made up of living, breathing people!). The Church has its own memory, and it holds onto its memories as preciously as a mother holds onto her memories of her children. Part of that memory is the remembrance that Mary was a virgin all her life, and that, at the time of the end of her life, she was taken up to heaven.
You claim Catholic, but speak Protestant. Quite a dichotomy…
Catholicism is broader than you think. I don’t see how I closer to Protestantism than Catholicism, I don’t believe sola fide or sola scriptura and accept the Catholic Church as the one, true, apostolic church founded by Christ.
Instead of doubting, why not begin studying? Read into the doctrine. Pray over it. Go before our Lord in the Blessed Sacrament and ask Him to grant you peace regarding Church teaching on His mother. If we do not constantly seek the truth, we do not serve the truth.