Jesus had brothers??????

[Tom]

If you go on to read verse 35 which says:
35 The angel answered and said to her, “The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you; and for that reason the holy Child shall be called the Son of God.
This is clear evidence that this was not going to be the normal way.
Would you agree?

No, we don’t agree. These verses are in the order they were spoken. When she asks this question she had no reason to believe her conception would have been from the Holy Spirit, that’s the point you refuse to acknowledge. She’s asking a question about something the angel HASN’T said. You know about it because you know what happened next, she didn’t know before it happened! If you would only follow the Scripture the way we suggest you’d see. Why do you refuse? This “clear evidence” wasn’t mentioned until AFTER she asked the question, NOT prior to her asking! This clear evidence is a response to her question not the reason for it.
Luke 1,

1. Behold thou shalt conceive in thy womb (No surprise)
2. and shalt bring forth a son (great news)
3. and thou shalt call his name Jesus. 32 (o.k., no real news)
4. He shall be great, (why?)
5. and shall be called the Son of the most High; (title for a king!)
6. and the Lord God shall give unto him the throne of David his father; (he will be a king!!, wow do I have questions!)
7. and he shall reign in the house of Jacob for ever. 33 (this is the king we’ve been waiting for! A great military leader to put our enemies beneath us!!!)
8. And of his kingdom there shall be no end. (finally the vindication of Isreal!!!)
   Notice up until this point the angel has said nothing to indicate that this child would be anything other than from a normal conception between Joseph and Mary? She would never have asked how this child was going to be conceived if she were planning a normal sexual relationship with Joseph. She asks the question and makes a statement about her future virginity, not her current state of virginity. Mary in the future you’re going to conceive! Mary wouldn’t answer but I’m a virgin today. The angel is speaking of the future, Mary responds to her future state of virginity, not her current state of virginity!

 

[Tom]

Anyone else here having problems following or understanding her vow of virginity? Perhaps if we explain it to someone else, and Justasking doesn’t have to defend, he will see.

 

[guanophore]

No, we don’t agree. These verses are in the order they were spoken. When she asks this question she had no reason to believe her conception would have been from the Holy Spirit, that’s the point you refuse to acknowledge.

Even to admit the possiblity that this could be the case would be allowing a chink in the armor. It would prevent him from reciting his favorite refrain “there is no evidence in scripture”. He cannot acknowledge this, as it demonstrates that Catholics have a basis in scripture for this Marian doctrine.

 

[Tom]

That still does not mean Mary took such a vow. Please answer my question where in the passage Mary is supposedly taking a vow that she would be a virgin all her life?

Easy! When Gabriel tells her what “shall” happen, he’s referring to the future. A future, which holds for Mary a marriage to Joseph.
When Mary answers she’s answering in this same context, the future, not her present state, but her future virginity. When she says: “I know not man”, she isn’t referring to her current state of virginity, that would be out of context to the angels proclamation, she’s answering about her future. It’s a state of being which will not change in the future, when the angel is referring to.
Think about it, tonight an angel tells justasking “You shall fly a helicopter across the Jordan”, now we know he’s not planning on becoming a helicopter pilot, so he might ask “how shall this be since I’m not a pilot?” He’s not referring to the fact that today he isn’t a pilot; he’s referring to the fact that he never plans to be a pilot.
If on the other hand he had always dreamed of being a pilot, and his training was to begin soon, say within a year, when the angel tells him he “shall fly a helicopter across the Jordan”, it would make perfect sense. The angel was talking about the future, when he’d be a pilot, no need to ask how it shall be, in fact asking would make no sense at all.
There is where she reveals her vow of virginity. It isn’t a vow she’s taking then it was already a vow which Joseph already knows about.

 

[Tom]

If you go on to read verse 35 which says:
35 The angel answered and said to her, “The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you; and for that reason the holy Child shall be called the Son of God.
This is clear evidence that this was not going to be the normal way.
Would you agree?

If you go on to understand this, there is no reason for the question! It’s already been answered, in fact that’s something I was going to bring up. Why did the angel stop short of telling Mary whom the real Father would be? Why would Gabriel explain all of these things and stop prior to the most important fact? Had he continued there would have been no question. No need to state her virginity, we already knew that. No need to ask how the child would be conceived, we already knew that. No need for any of this. So why? Because God wants us to know Mary was a virgin forever.
Why I have no idea why, I mean what difference does it really make, and if it doesn’t make any difference why is it such a huge block for some people?

 

[Tom]

For a married women not to have sexual relations with her husband was totally unheard of.

You’ve never heard of the Essenes? They lived as a group for about 3 centuries. They married but took vows of celibacy. They adopted the poor and homeless children as their own. They were devoted to the work of God. They existed so, your claim of it being “totally unheard of” is incorrect.

 

[Tom]

Let’s look at the clear evidence.
Luke 1,

1. Behold thou shalt conceive in thy womb
   Any reason to question the conception here?
2. and shalt bring forth a son
   Any reason to question the conception here?
3. and thou shalt call his name Jesus. 32
   Here?
4. He shall be great,
   How about here?
5. and shall be called the Son of the most High;
   Conception questions anyone?
6. and the Lord God shall give unto him the throne of David his father;
   Hmmm, Joseph is of the house of David, as is Mary, no question here.
7. and he shall reign in the house of Jacob for ever. 33
   Yeah, any conception questions?
8. And of his kingdom there shall be no end
   Whole lot of question, but not about the conception!

So, here we are, we’ve been told so many mind boggling things, I mean really, do I have questions!!!
But why would I be confused about the conception?
I’m engaged to Joseph. He’s of the house of David, so all of the prophecies would fit.
There’s no prophecy we understand as saying the Father would be God, that’s blasphemy.
Surely the angel is referring to when I’m married to Joseph, he surely doesn’t intend for me to fornicate with anyone other than my betrothed.
So where’s her confusion on who the father would be?
Why her question?
What has the angel told her, so far, that could possibly have confused her?

 

[Tom]

Justasking, ask yourself what led up to Mary asking her question, not what followed her question, but what led to it. What was the reason for her asking? It can’t be in the reply, the reply was the response to her question, not the cause of it.

 

[justasking4]

No, we don’t agree. These verses are in the order they were spoken. When she asks this question she had no reason to believe her conception would have been from the Holy Spirit, that’s the point you refuse to acknowledge. She’s asking a question about something the angel HASN’T said. You know about it because you know what happened next, she didn’t know before it happened! If you would only follow the Scripture the way we suggest you’d see. Why do you refuse? This “clear evidence” wasn’t mentioned until AFTER she asked the question, NOT prior to her asking! This clear evidence is a response to her question not the reason for it.
Luke 1,

1. Behold thou shalt conceive in thy womb (No surprise)
2. and shalt bring forth a son (great news)
3. and thou shalt call his name Jesus. 32 (o.k., no real news)
4. He shall be great, (why?)
5. and shall be called the Son of the most High; (title for a king!)
6. and the Lord God shall give unto him the throne of David his father; (he will be a king!!, wow do I have questions!)
7. and he shall reign in the house of Jacob for ever. 33 (this is the king we’ve been waiting for! A great military leader to put our enemies beneath us!!!)
8. And of his kingdom there shall be no end. (finally the vindication of Isreal!!!)
   Notice up until this point the angel has said nothing to indicate that this child would be anything other than from a normal conception between Joseph and Mary? She would never have asked how this child was going to be conceived if she were planning a normal sexual relationship with Joseph. She asks the question and makes a statement about her future virginity, not her current state of virginity. Mary in the future you’re going to conceive! Mary wouldn’t answer but I’m a virgin today. The angel is speaking of the future, Mary responds to her future state of virginity, not her current state of virginity!

Lets assume you are correct here. Mary must be a virgin until the conception of Christ in her body. Correct?

 

[justasking4]

Originally Posted by justasking4
For a married women not to have sexual relations with her husband was totally unheard of.

Tom
You’ve never heard of the Essenes? They lived as a group for about 3 centuries. They married but took vows of celibacy. They adopted the poor and homeless children as their own. They were devoted to the work of God. They existed so, your claim of it being “totally unheard of” is incorrect.

Couple of questions:
1- was this group basing their beliefs on the OT?

2- do you have any info to think that she was part of this group?

 

[davidv]

Couple of questions:
1- was this group basing their beliefs on the OT?

2- do you have any info to think that she was part of this group?

It really doesn’t matter. It is an example to show that celibate marriages where not as far-fetched as you imagine.

 

[justasking4]

Originally Posted by justasking4
Couple of questions:
1- was this group basing their beliefs on the OT?

2- do you have any info to think that she was part of this group?

davidv
It really doesn’t matter. It is an example to show that celibate marriages where not as far-fetched as you imagine.

Of course it matters. Do you think that she had in mind this group in supposedly being a virgin after she was married? Do you think they somehow influenced her thinking rather than the OT Scriptures that do in fact promote having your own children when you are married?

 

[Tom]

Lets assume you are correct here. Mary must be a virgin until the conception of Christ in her body. Correct?

No, that’s not what we’re discussing. Of course she was a virgin prior to the conception. No one argues that do they? We’re discussing after her conception.

 

[Tom]

Couple of questions:
1- was this group basing their beliefs on the OT?
2- do you have any info to think that she was part of this group?

1. Yes it was a Jewish sect. 2. I’m not saying she was a member of this group, you made the statement that “For a married women not to have sexual relations with her husband was totally unheard of.”, and no, it was not totally unheard of, in fact as someone already pointed out Numbers chapter 30 even gives rules to be applied in such cases, it was obviously prevalent enough to set rules for. If you think it’s unthinkable you should read 1 Corinthians carefully.

 

[justasking4]

Originally Posted by justasking4
Lets assume you are correct here. Mary must be a virgin until the conception of Christ in her body. Correct?

Tom
No, that’s not what we’re discussing. Of course she was a virgin prior to the conception. No one argues that do they? We’re discussing after her conception.

Now this is where you are losing me.

Secondly, did Mary have time to think deeply about her question to the angel—“how can this be since I am a virgin?”

 

[Tom]

Let me ask again, where exactly would she get the idea that the conception would not be from her marriage to Joseph?
Luke 1,

1. Behold thou shalt conceive in thy womb
   Any reason to question the conception here?
2. and shalt bring forth a son
   Any reason to question the conception here?
3. and thou shalt call his name Jesus. 32
   Here?
4. He shall be great,
   How about here?
5. and shall be called the Son of the most High;
   Conception questions anyone?
6. and the Lord God shall give unto him the throne of David his father;
   Hmmm, Joseph is of the house of David, as is Mary, no question here.
7. and he shall reign in the house of Jacob for ever. 33
   Yeah, any conception questions?
8. And of his kingdom there shall be no end
   Whole lot of question, but not about the conception!

So, here we are, we’ve been told so many mind boggling things, I mean really, do I have questions!!!
But why would I be confused about the conception?
I’m engaged to Joseph. He’s of the house of David, so all of the prophecies would fit.
There’s no prophecy we understand as saying the Father would be God, that’s blasphemy.
Surely the angel is referring to when I’m married to Joseph, he surely doesn’t intend for me to fornicate with anyone other than my betrothed.
So where’s her confusion on who the father would be?
Why her question?
What has the angel told her, so far, that could possibly have confused her?

 

[Tom]

Now this is where you are losing me.

Secondly, did Mary have time to think deeply about her question to the angel—“how can this be since I am a virgin?”

Please, she was soon to be married, was she thinking about anything else? You’re grabbing at straws here.

 

[justasking4]

Please, she was soon to be married, was she thinking about anything else? You’re grabbing at straws here.

How could she be giving much deep thought if this conversation with the angel certainly gives the impression that it went quite quickly and she was not able to stop and think deeply after she asked the angel. Once she asked the question the angel answered her question. Tha’ts the context.

Are you considering this?

 

[Tom]

The point is there is nothing in the angels statements which would have led her to believe the conception of her son would be anything other than normal sexual intercourse with her husband after they had wed. There is no reason for any woman, who is planning on a normal sexual relationship with her husband, to ask how she was going to conceive. If you can think of a valid reason please show me where it’s from, because there’s nothing in what Gabriel says to make her question who the father would be, until she asks. Why did she ask? She had no idea the Holy Spirit would overshadow her, if she did, again she wouldn’t have asked!
Now, if she was not planning on having a normal sexual relationship with Joseph, then her question mkes perfect sense. In fact tell me ANY other situation, based on Scripture alone, (LOL) that would explain her ridiculous question

 

[justasking4]

The point is there is nothing in the angels statements which would have led her to believe the conception of her son would be anything other than normal sexual intercourse with her husband after they had wed. There is no reason for any woman, who is planning on a normal sexual relationship with her husband, to ask how she was going to conceive. If you can think of a valid reason please show me where it’s from, because there’s nothing in what Gabriel says to make her question who the father would be, until she asks. Why did she ask? She had no idea the Holy Spirit would overshadow her, if she did, again she wouldn’t have asked!
Now, if she was not planning on having a normal sexual relationship with Joseph, then her question mkes perfect sense. In fact tell me ANY other situation, based on Scripture alone, (LOL) that would explain her ridiculous question

This is where you are failing to the entire context into your conclusion. Even though she may not have had any idea before the question she certainly did after the angel answered her. There was no doubt that it was not to be by her husband but by the Holy Spirit.