F
FiveLinden
Guest
His arguments are easy to find. They convince me.
- Status
C
catholicray
Guest
Before you’re sold on Bart Ehrman you should check out Dan Wallace who is basically his equal in textual criticism.
F
FiveLinden
Guest
Foe example, Ehrman
What does he say about the meaning of ‘brother of the Lord’?
T
thistle
Guest
ALL the founders of Protestantism believed in the perpetual virginity of Mary and they documented this.
F
Fraevo63
Guest
The Catholic Church has had the TRUTH about this for centuries. Believe it and be at peace.
D
Dovekin
Guest
This is from one of the relevant passages. The natural reading is that brothers and sisters means brothers and sisters. I can understand why most readers would read that and think brothers and sisters means brothers and sisters. It is not a mistranslation.
The meaning is plain enough that asking why Ehrman accepts it, or why people who read the text think that way, is unfair. How do we know it means something else? We do because we believe in the perpetaul virginity of Mary. Personally I do not like discussing other people’s sex lives, and that applies more strongly to the NT people than to anyone, so I would just leave it alone. But the issue is not that some group decided to be disobedient and believe they were actual brothers and sisters, but that we reject the ordinary sense of the text because of what we believe about Mary.
F
FiveLinden
Guest
Exactly my point. Faith determines the way the words are read. You are perfectly entitled to do this but it makes no sense to anyone who does not share your faith as the meaning of the words says the opposite of what you believe. By the way, did the writer of this gospel not know that Mary remained a virgin? Or that she was a virgin at the time of Jesus" conception? Surely that would be worth a mention if he knew this to be the case?
J
John_Martin
Guest
We have the Greek OT to show full proof that adelphos means Both brother and male relative.
Open your Septuagint to Genesis14.
A quick review of the Septuagint shows Lot’s relationship to Abraham in Gen 14:12 as the son of Abraham’s brother with adelphos and again in Gen 14:14 using adelphos as nephew (but better would be “kin”, however we know from the earlier verse the parentage of Lot, which matches our use of the word “nephew”, so in English we say “nephew”, but ONLY because we saw that parentage. Otherwise we would say, “kin”, not “brother”.):
(By the way, it is the same in Hebrew and Aramaic - a single word for brother and male relative)
John Martin
Open your Septuagint to Genesis14.
A quick review of the Septuagint shows Lot’s relationship to Abraham in Gen 14:12 as the son of Abraham’s brother with adelphos and again in Gen 14:14 using adelphos as nephew (but better would be “kin”, however we know from the earlier verse the parentage of Lot, which matches our use of the word “nephew”, so in English we say “nephew”, but ONLY because we saw that parentage. Otherwise we would say, “kin”, not “brother”.):
So, the use of adelphos does not say more than “male relative”, and if you are on very close friendship with the family, you know the exact relationship. We know Abraham and Lot, so we know adelphos means “nephew” in English. And we are extremely close to Mary and Jesus, so we know adelphos does not mean brother, but “kin” - we know she remains virgin.
(By the way, it is the same in Hebrew and Aramaic - a single word for brother and male relative)
John Martin
Last edited:
G
Gorgias
Guest
There’s your problem right there.
- Status