mtr01:
Perhaps, but why would one use the cicumlocution “the son of my father’s brother” when “brother” is a perfectly acceptable alternative?
Then perhaps you could explain why the word “adelphos” is used in the Septuagint translation of Gen 14:14:
Obviously, the translators were aware of Lot and Abraham’s true relationship, and the Greek had the proper word, so why use “adelphos”? Perhaps they were staying true to the use of the word in the original language. Patristic evidence also suggests that Matthew’s Gospel was originally written in Hebrew or Aramaic, so the same could be said there as well. Fact is, the weight of evidence does not support your assertion.
Your argument falls short again, as the argument from silence is extremely unconvincing. It is well known that the Church has never been in the practice of defining issues unless there is a specific threat to a traditionally held belief. Fact is, no one questioned the perpetual virginity of Mary until Helvidius (unless you can prove otherwise), therefore the Church had no reason to defend the belief. It is no wonder then, that we start to see writings defending Mary’s perpetual virginity during Jerome’s time, as a response to Helvidius’ writings.
Les, I hope for your sake that you have been playing devil’s advocate on this thread (and also recently on the thread concerning infallibility). It is one thing to take a position for the sake of argument. It is quite another to believe in the positions that you have been posting. If the latter is the case, then in all Chrisitan charity I have to point out that you are guilty of obstinately denying truths as declared by the Church. As a result you have excommunicated yourself *latae sententiae, *and are no longer in communion with the Catholic Church. If you are not willing to repent of your views, then I would ask you to update your profile to reflect your status lest you scandalize others on this forum, or even lead them astray.
Thank you.
Perhaps for the same reason that the Hebrew word “almah” or young woman was incorrectly translated as the Greek “parthanos” or “virgin” leading to Matthew’s misinterpretation of Is 7:14 and his claim of a virgin birth?
In Timothy, Paul referes to him as “adelphos.” While this word can rarely refer to someone not an actual brother, is it really to be supposed that Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, and Josephus ALWAYS meant a non-brother when using the term “adelphos?”
Of course not!
And until the third century, no one had any need to defend a belief that had yet to be created.
Do you see any reference to Mary’s perpetual virginity in scripture, or do you only read of Jesus brothers and sisters?
LittleLes
) and so if it thought this Scripture contradicted its own teachings it would not have been approved as the Word of God and would have been discarded. Therefore either the Mary in the instance is not the Mother of Jesus, or there is a misinterpretation of her being another child’s mother. Unfortunately I do not have the answers to this, but there are more knowledgeable people than I here who will happily help.
