Mary not a Virgin

[KathleenElsie]

OK logic tells me the bible says it for us. When Jesus spoke from the cross and told the disciple “behold your mother” it proves to me that Mary had no other children. Why you ask? Well if Mary had other children they would have been the ones to care for Mary not a friend or stranger. So in my simple way this proves Mary had no child but Jesus.

 

[hoosierdaddy]

OK logic tells me the bible says it for us. When Jesus spoke from the cross and told the disciple “behold your mother” it proves to me that Mary had no other children. Why you ask? Well if Mary had other children they would have been the ones to care for Mary not a friend or stranger. So in my simple way this proves Mary had no child but Jesus.

Or they could have been dead? Or they might not have been there? Or they’re not even mentioned and Jesus is just telling John, “Behold your mother”. Maybe John’s mother was dead. I’m sorry, but it doesn’t prove anything.

Respectfully, how come you can argue from silence but Protestants can’t?

 

[Randy_Carson]

Or they could have been dead? Or they might not have been there? Or they’re not even mentioned and Jesus is just telling John, “Behold your mother”. Maybe John’s mother was dead. I’m sorry, but it doesn’t prove anything.

Respectfully, how come you can argue from silence but Protestants can’t?

Did you follow the logic of post #46?

 

[SAHM02]

Or they could have been dead? Or they might not have been there? Or they’re not even mentioned and Jesus is just telling John, “Behold your mother”. Maybe John’s mother was dead. I’m sorry, but it doesn’t prove anything.

Respectfully, how come you can argue from silence but Protestants can’t?

That’s just it! At best the only thing we can say is this is MY interpretation of scripture and this is YOUR interpretation of scripture.

I don’t agree with YOUR interpretation and you don’t agree with MINE.

Although; I don’t know about you, but I have hard time accepting 2 very different interpretation.

So I have to look at it and see who has the RIGHT interpretation, the one from the Holy Spirit.

Of course to do that one has to accept that my ways and understanding my not be God’s ways and understandings. It just leaves me wondering who has it right.

It’s those moments I turn to God and say “Lord, help me, who is right on this one”

 

[KathleenElsie]

Or they could have been dead? Well do you honestly think that the burial sites would not be exploited if there were dead brothers of Jesus? Or they might not have been there? Do you think that all this time the identifies of these children could have stayed hidden? Or they’re not even mentioned detractors of the faith and doctrine of Mary’s virginity would turn over rocks in H much less not shout from the roof tops where this “children” are buried *and Jesus is just telling John, “Behold your mother”. Maybe John’s mother was dead maybe she was dead but adult children are not given to another woman to mother. Elderly mothers are given to trusted adults to be cared for when no relatives are able to do so. I’m sorry, but it doesn’t prove anything. My belief is just as viable as your unbelief.

Respectfully, how come you can argue from silence but Protestants can’t? As far as I am concerned you can argue all you want. But some protestants have come to CA to “learn” (their words) and not to argue. Besides faith would not be faith if it can be proven,

 

[VociMike]

Or they could have been dead? Or they might not have been there? Or they’re not even mentioned and Jesus is just telling John, “Behold your mother”. Maybe John’s mother was dead. I’m sorry, but it doesn’t prove anything.

You are ignoring the fact that Mary went to live in John’s house from that hour on. So cross off “might not have been there” and “not even mentioned”.

Thus you are reduced to asserting, without any evidence, that all four of Mary’s other sons (who were younger than Jesus, who Himself was a young 33) were dead.

 

[hoosierdaddy]

No, I’m ignoring anyone who wants to do nothing but mock me and start an argument.

I don’t agree with you guys on the issue of Mary. Deal with it.

 

[The_Catholic]

hoosierdaddy:
The writings of the Fathers are not scripture. Why do you make these statements? Who is mocking who here? Do we know anything about the early church from the pages of history?

You’re the ones who say the writings are not Scripture because when I talk about Scripture you all say “look at the early church writings”. Uh…you were mocking me. I’m certain of it. Do we know anything about the early church from history? I don’t know. I’m of the mind to believe that if the Catholic church dates back to the beginning that they have been deceiving us from the beginning. I’d like to give examples why to back up my assertion but that’s not allowed. Only you guys can do that; I’d be told to start another thread.

Please, show me the verse that says Mary was not a virgin all her life.

Please show me the verse that says Mary was a virgin all her life.

There are no verses that clearly say that Mary was “ever Virgin.” But niether are there any verses that say she “wasn’t.”

The reason us Catholics usually quote the early Church Fathers is because they were people who lived SHORTLY after New Testament times. St. Polycarp was an actual disciple of St. John of the New Testament. We have writings on St. Polycarp too and then there was St. Irenaeus who was a disciple of St. Polycarp. There is also St. Ignatius, another DISCIPLE OF THE APOSTLES of the New Testament. There are writings on all of these great Godly men and many, many others as the sucsession continued from one “well entrusted man” to another. Their writings are orthodox to the Bible, and they speak more clearly about other issues, such as the Ever Virginity of Mother Mary. Obvisoulsy these teachings were talked about and discussed among the apostles themselves and as time went on more and more Truth emerged from The Holy Spirit’s Revelations.

Perhaps some of this were the “many things” Christ speaks of in John 16:12. Also read Mark 4:33, Mark 6:34, John 20:30, John 21:25 and Acts 1:2-3. To me these verses show that Jesus talked about much more things and doctrines other than what is found in Holy Scripture. But Holy Scripture does have everything we need to know about God and salvation, the essentials!

Nevertheless, it is good to show what the early christians believed, especialy to those who protest against the Catholic Church, saying it’s unBiblical and unhistorical. Such coments are laughable and completly ridiculous! Everything the Catholic Church teaches can be found in the Bible. Most doctrines are well within Scripture, a few, such as Mother Mary as Ever Virgin, and her Assumption, are grounded in Scripture. And the Churches doctrines are also heavily found among the early Church Fathers.

Check out the doctrines on Mary yourself at this website, it is a wonderful site!
ic.net/%7Eerasmus/RAZ153.HTM

Or check out the Catholic Answers Library on Marian doctrines.

Look at writtings yourself. If you accept it, praise God! If not, then fine. But at least you’ll have a deeper understanding on what the Church believes about her and why.

Blessings in Christ my friend.

 

[hoosierdaddy]

Thank you. Will do.

I grant the possibility that many of those things were included in the “many things that were not written” passage. I also believe that maybe they weren’t. But I could accept that much easier than I can accept that those doctrines you listed were grounded in Scripture. I just don’t see it. So, maybe a bit of headway but not too much. Thanks again and God bless you.

 

[San_Patricio]

Doesn’t the term “brothers of Jesus” qualify as proof that Mary had other children?

With all due respect everyone, what harm is done if Mary had other children? Would that be some sort of evil? (Edited by Moderator as unneccesary) What say you?

Please show us the verse, any verse, anywhere in the Bible, that refers to a son/daughter/child of Mary as anyone other than Jesus. Don’t give me “brothers of the Lord”. Even if he did have them, show me a verse that supports the idea that they were children of Mary.

Non-Catholics frequently accuse us of holding Traditions that aren’t scriprural. Well, the suggestion that Mary had any other children is not scriptural!

 

[hoosierdaddy]

Please show us the verse, any verse, anywhere in the Bible, that refers to a son/daughter/child of Mary as anyone other than Jesus. Don’t give me “brothers of the Lord”. Even if he did have them, show me a verse that supports the idea that they were children of Mary.

Non-Catholics frequently accuse us of holding Traditions that aren’t scriprural. Well, the suggestion that Mary had any other children is not scriptural!

And I could say please stop badgering me. What makes you think you are going to get any more than the responses I have given to others? I was hoping to relax on here before going to bed but if you want to have at it, feel free. Please show me where in Scripture it says that Mary was a perpetual virgin. Thank you.

 

[jacobaer]

John 19:25-27

---

Near the cross of Jesus stood his mother, his mother’s sister, Mary the wife of Clopas, and Mary Magdalene. When Jesus saw his mother there, and the disciple whom he loved standing nearby, he said to his mother, “Dear woman, here is your son,” and to the disciple, “Here is your mother.” From that time on, this disciple took her into his home.

---

1 Timothy 5:3-4

---

Give proper recognition to those widows who are really in need. But if a widow has children or grandchildren, these should learn first of all to put their religion into practice by caring for their own family and so repaying their parents and grandparents, for this is pleasing to God.

---

Question: If Mary had given birth to other children, and it pleases God when children take care of their own parents, remembering that Jesus is God, wouldn’t He be violating His own Word by giving care of His mother to a non-family member?

---

Waiting,

Jacobaer