That website is a very dangerous place for Catholics to be getting information on the faith. They are classic fundamentalist/Baptist theology which teaches much error. I wouldn’t touch that website with the proverbial ten foot pole.
I’m glad someone finally brought this up. Just as when Jesus is called Mary’s firstborn son, it does not all all mean he is the oldest son or first of multiple children. The title had special meaning to the relevant culture.
I understand what you mean Tim, but sometimes using Protestant apologetics to fight erroneous Protestant doctrines is very useful.
It makes sense. I have friends who are non-Catholic and some of them are very knowledgeable. I understand. For those who might read this thread however, the site is not good.I understand what you mean Tim, but sometimes using Protestant apologetics to fight erroneous Protestant doctrines is very useful.
I myself collect certain Protestant books on Baptism because they are so cogent and hit their mark so effectively when dealing with sects like the Baptists and their fundamentalist offshoots.
Hope that makes sense.
Thank you, and I think your addition is a wonderful illustration. I will add it to my arsenal.Excellent post!I will add this to my arsenal when that door bell rings again!
The truth of that statement might be illustrated in the Bible when Jacob acquires the birthright and the blessing from his father Isaac, despite being younger than Esau. We know that Esau gave up his birth right (being the first-born) voluntarily to Jacob, so it seems to strengthen your explanation that it does not (necessarily) refer to chronological birth, but rather authority and inheritance.
In Colossians, I want to make a few points.
Tim, generally, I stay away from Protestant Websites, but I didn’t see anything wrong in that particular explanation. In fact, i thought the author did a good job of explaining why Christ was the “first-born” of creation. For safety’s sake, I will keep away from them now.
Since Mary was a Virgin, I think Jesus was her first born in every way, but that’s not to say that Joseph wasn’t a widower and didn’t have older children from an earlier marriage, although James, who is always referred to as Jesus’ brother was younger than Jesus. Of course cousins, etc. were referred to as brother and sister in first century Palestine. Jesus’ extended family could have been quite large. We just don’t know.
Wonderful post!
When the issue of brotherhood arises it is useful to remember Genesis Chapter 12 and 13
And there you have it, uncle and nephew are called “Brothers” and this is not the only instance of this custom.
Thank you for providing a quote. I agree with you completely on this. I’m not sure if I was not clear in my post or if you wanted to provide a scripture passage (which I should have done, of course), but I do agree 100% with what you wrote.
This good reference material to save, in case the subject comes up within our own circles or on the web, to refute those who are not well informed about the term “brother.” Thanks, Jerry.
Sometimes the response you get to your post has nothing to do with your post but everything to do with Catholicity. This bit of information may have been meant for someone following this thread. God Bless you.
What do you mean by Catholicity?
But did Matthew the apostle write the Gospel of Matthew? It’s debatable. Modern dating seems to place it too late to have been written by an eyewitness, nowhere in the gospel does the author claim to have been an eyewitness as in John, nor does Matthew’s Greek, which is much smoother than Mark’s, bear marks of translation from either Aramaic or Hebrew.
Most biblical scholars today do not believe the Gospel of John was written by John bar Zebedee, if that is, indeed, who you meant, but by another who was an eyewitness. Gerald O’Collins, SJ, a great biblical scholar believes that the Gospel of John was set down by someone who was setting down the words of the “Beloved Disciple,” and of course scholars debate constantly about his identity. Some have ascribed his identity to Lazarus, some even to Mary Magdalene! To me, Mary Magdalene seems impossible simply because the “Beloved Disciple” is always referred to as “he.” I’m of the opinion that Mary Magdalene’s discipleship is overstated by some anyway. Certainly she loved and followed the Lord, but I believe more as a companion of the Blessed Mother and her sister, who is often identified as “Jesus’ sister,” when in reality she is his aunt. It is explicitly stated in the Gospel of John, of course, that the testimony is that of an eyewitness. With regard to O’Collins, who I like and respect greatly, I have my doubts about the “Beloved Disciple.” He was present at the Last Supper, and I’ve always been taught that only thirteen persons were at the Last Supper. If the Beloved Disciple was among them, he would have to have been one of the Twelve, yet O’Collins does not believe him to have been one of the Twelve. And, strangely, there is no, and I mean no, “Zebedee” material in the Gospel of John, which would be strange if he was the author.I stand corrected!my apologies:thumbsup:
…
Unless it’s personal opinion, people should provide a citation or link. So, what Website do you recommend? What Website gets your seal of approval?INDEED.