mary, the eternal virgin?

  • Thread starter Thread starter wanderingbaptis
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
cruisin said:
So your implication is that a first century Jewish betrrothed couple would be having intercourse during the betrothal period, which is before the wedding day?

interesting…

where does it say that she never planned to have intercouse and have children. you are unable to definativly proove this from the text. above.you are adding your own interpretation into what Mary said.

remember they where engaged before the Angel came. Did they plan to have kids then not plan to have more kids? did they some how know that this was going to happen?

Why wouldn’t Luke report these ideas of yours to Theophilus, if what you are saying was believed from the very beiginning. Didn’t he wish to reinforce his charges beliefs… ??

Again, In view of the relationship between Luke and Theophilus, and Lukes intent, why didn’t Luke report these things as you say?
Click to expand...
The Blessed Mother’s question “how can this be since I know no man” ONLY makes sense in the context of her virginal consecration to God — She’s not some “dumb” girl that doesn’t know the story of the birds and the bees as some may paint her to be.

I think its fair to say that the only reasonable interpretation of why Mary asked that question to the Angel Gabriel is because if she were to interpret the words of the Angel in the normal sense, the sense of a non-consecrated person, the natural conclusion of would be that Mary and St. Joseph would have to have engage in the Marital Act (the Liturgy of the Body). But because Mary is wise and would like to keep her vow to God (her total consecration) she is prudent and asked the angel for clarification, lest she go back on her word.

And the fathers of the Church agree to this.
 
elvisman said:
And Acts 1:15 uses the very same Greek word for Brother when it tells us that there were 120 Adelphoi gathered in one place.
**Do you *honestly ***believe that they are all uterine brothers?

“Adelphos”** and “adelphoi**” were used much more liberally than the normal meaning. It was applied to cousins, uncles, nephews and kinsmen alike. The Aramaic word, “ach”, encompasses the meanings for* brother of same parents, half-brother (same father), relative, kinship, same tribe, and even a fellow countryman*.
Furthermore, there was no term for the word “cousin” in the Aramaic language that Jesus spoke. When the Old Testament was translated into Greek in the centuries before the birth of Christ (the Septuagint), the words “adelphos” and “adelphoi” were used in places where “ach” was.
Click to expand...
Are they 120 cousins?

All who are adopted into the Family of God are brothers and sisters.

That does not get to the issue: were Andrew an Peter (Simon) brothers? What about James and John???
 
Dokimas said:
Are they 120 cousins?

All who are adopted into the Family of God are brothers and sisters.

That does not get to the issue: were Andrew an Peter (Simon) brothers? What about James and John???
Click to expand...
There were probably cousins, kinsmen, neighbors, and fellow countrymen included in the 120 believers.
Like I told you before Adephos encompasses ALL of those meanings.

Peter and Andrew were uterine brothers because NOT only the Bible says they were - but tradition and writings of the Early Church says it as well.
There is NO Church Tradition that says Jesus had uterine siblings.

**James and John were CLEARLY uterine brothers because they are called sons of Zebedee (Mark 10:35) and his wife Salome (Matt. 27:56). However, the supposed “Brethren of the Lord” are called the sons of Clopas and the OTHER Mary at the foot of the cross (**Mark 15:40, ****Matt. 27:56, John 19:25). This woman is called the “sister” (Adelphe) of Mary.

Tell me something - do you honestly believe that Mary had a uterine sister named Mary?? That goes against Jewish tradition to have 2 children with the exact same name. It was probably a cousin or other kinswoman of Mary, mother of Jesus but definitely not her uterine sister. This is the exact same way Adelphos(oi) is used to describe the “brethren of the Lord”, sons of Clopas and the other Mary.

Case closed.
 
I found this to be a very good explanation (from wiki):
Cousin
Click to expand...
James could also have been cousin to Jesus, along with the other named “brethren”. This is justified by the claim that cousins were also called “brothers” and “sisters” in Jesus’ postulated native language, Aramaic; it and Hebrew do not contain a word for “cousin”. Furthermore, the Greek words adelphos and adelphe were not restricted to their literal meaning of a full brother or sister in the Bible; nor were their plurals. This use is still common in Greece and other Balkan cultures. This assumes, naturally that the Middle Eastern authors’ usage of Greek reflects their way of speaking. The tradition of considering cousins as brothers or sisters is still evident in most Eastern cultures; in some languages the term “cousin” does not even exist.
Click to expand...
Eusebius of Caesarea (c. 275 – 339) reports the tradition that James the Just was the son of Joseph’s brother Clopas, and therefore was of the “brethren” (which he interprets as “cousin”) of Jesus described in the New Testament.
Click to expand...
This is echoed by Jerome (c. 342 – 419) in De Viris Illustribus (“On Illustrious Men”) - James is said to be the son of another Mary, wife of Clopas and the “sister” of Mary, the mother of Jesus - in the following manner:
Click to expand...
Code: 
James, who is called the brother of the Lord, surnamed the Just, the son of Joseph by another wife, as some think, but, as appears to me, the son of Mary, sister of the mother of our Lord of whom John makes mention in his book...
Click to expand...
Jerome refers to the scene of the Crucifixion in John 19:25, where three Marys - the mother of Jesus, Mary of Clopas, and Mary Magdalene - are said to be witnesses. John also mentions the “sister” of the mother of Jesus, often identified with Mary of Clopas due to grammar. Mary “of Clopas” is often interpreted as Mary “wife of Clopas”. Mary of Nazareth and Mary of Clopas also need not be literally sisters, in light of the usage of the said words in Greek, Hebrew and Aramaic.
Click to expand...
 
elvisman said:
There were probably cousins, kinsmen, neighbors, and fellow countrymen included in the 120 believers.
Like I told you before Adephos encompasses ALL of those meanings.

Peter and Andrew were uterine brothers because NOT only the Bible says they were - but tradition and writings of the Early Church says it as well.
There is NO Church Tradition that says Jesus had uterine siblings.

James and John were CLEARLY uterine brothers because they are called sons of Zebedee (Mark 10:35) and his wife Salome (Matt. 27:56). However, the supposed “Brethren of the Lord” are called the sons of Clopas and the OTHER Mary at the foot of the cross (**Mark 15:40, ****Matt. 27:56, **John 19:25). This woman is called the “sister” (Adelphe) of Mary.

Tell me something - do you honestly believe that Mary had a uterine sister named Mary?? That goes against Jewish tradition to have 2 children with the exact same name. It was probably a cousin or other kinswoman of Mary, mother of Jesus but definitely not her uterine sister. This is the exact same way Adelphos(oi) is used to describe the “brethren of the Lord”, sons of Clopas and the other Mary.

Case closed.
Click to expand...
Let’s not close it so quickly.

Were does the Bible say Andrew and Peter were uterine brothers?

As for Mary having a sister named Mary, I never gave it a thought. It’s of no consequense to me. George Forman named many if not all his sons George. So what?
 
Dokimas said:
Let’s not close it so quickly.

Were does the Bible say Andrew and Peter were uterine brothers?

As for Mary having a sister named Mary, I never gave it a thought. It’s of no consequense to me. George Forman named many if not all his sons George. So what?
Click to expand...
**And George Foreman *isn’t *a Jew, is he? However, Mary was. George Foreman could have 700 kids with the same name and that wouldn’**t bolster your argument one iota.

The fact is that not only do Jewish people NOT name their children with the same first name - they usually name them after deceased relatives. The plain fact is that Mary would not and COULD not have had a sister with the same name as hers. The Greek word for sister (Adelphe) was used here in a broader sense, which means she could have been any other relation (cousin, distant relative, kinswoman, aunt).

As for Peter and Andrew - we DON’T know solely from Scripture that they were uterine brothers. Matthew 4:18 tells us that they were brothers (Adelphos(oi). Church tradition tells us that they were uterine brothers. This is why Sola Scriptura doesn’t work. You guys adhere only to the written word of God and reject the spoken word of God (2 Thess 2:15).

**As I have already pointed out to you – there is not one single Church tradition that says Mary had other children – not ONE.

Your argument is weak and baseless.
Case REALLY closed.
 
elvisman said:
**And George Foreman ***isn’t *a Jew, is he? However, Mary was. George Foreman could have 700 kids with the same name and that wouldn’**t **bolster your argument one iota.

The fact is that not only do Jewish people NOT name their children with the same first name - they usually name them after deceased relatives. The plain fact is that Mary would not and COULD not have had a sister with the same name as hers. The Greek word for sister (Adelphe) was used here in a broader sense, which means she could have been any other relation (cousin, distant relative, kinswoman, aunt).

As for Peter and Andrew - we DON’T know solely from Scripture that they were uterine brothers. Matthew 4:18 tells us that they were brothers (Adelphos(oi). Church tradition tells us that they were uterine brothers. This is why Sola Scriptura doesn’t work. You guys adhere only to the written word of God and reject the spoken word of God (2 Thess 2:15).

**As I have already pointed out to you – there is not one single Church tradition that says Mary had *other ***children – not ONE.

Your argument is weak and baseless.
**Case **REALLY closed.
Click to expand...
It could be that your mind is what is closed.

Mt 10:2 Now the names of the twelve apostles are these: first, Simon, who is called Peter, and Andrew his brother <80>; James the son of Zebedee, and John his brother <80>;

Mt 12:46 While He was still talking to the multitudes, behold, His mother and brothers <80> stood outside, seeking to speak with Him.

Mt 13:55 "Is this not the carpenter’s son? Is not His mother called Mary? And His brothers <80> James, Joses, Simon, and Judas?

Same Greek word, adelphos.

Context: specificly named people - biological or adopted brothers; used generically - not necessarily brothers by family ties (except the family of humans or the Family of God).
 
V. Jesus’ “Brothers” (adelphoi)) = Cousins or Kinsmen

Luke 1:36 - Elizabeth is Mary’s kinswoman. Some Bibles translate kinswoman as “cousin,” but this is an improper translation because in Hebrew and Aramaic, there is no word for “cousin.”

Luke 22:32 - Jesus tells Peter to strengthen his “brethren.” In this case, we clearly see Jesus using “brethren” to refer to the other apostles, not his biological brothers.

Acts 1:12-15 - the gathering of Jesus’ “brothers” amounts to about 120. That is a lot of “brothers.” Brother means kinsmen in Hebrew.

Acts 7:26; 11:1; 13:15,38; 15:3,23,32; 28:17,21 - these are some of many other examples where “brethren” does not mean blood relations.

Rom. 9:3 - Paul uses “brethren” and “kinsmen” interchangeably. “Brothers” of Jesus does not prove Mary had other children.

Gen. 11:26-28 - Lot is Abraham’s nephew (“anepsios”) / Gen. 13:8; 14:14,16 - Lot is still called Abraham’s brother (adelphos") . This proves that, although a Greek word for cousin is “anepsios,” Scripture also uses “adelphos” to describe a cousin.

Gen. 29:15 - Laban calls Jacob is “brother” even though Jacob is his nephew. Again, this proves that brother means kinsmen or cousin.

Deut. 23:7; 1 Chron. 15:5-18; Jer. 34:9; Neh. 5:7 -“brethren” means kinsmen. Hebrew and Aramaic have no word for “cousin.”

2 Sam. 1:26; 1 Kings 9:13, 20:32 - here we see that “brethren” can even be one who is unrelated (no bloodline), such as a friend.

2 Kings 10:13-14 - King Ahaziah’s 42 “brethren” were really his kinsmen.

1 Chron. 23:21-22 - Eleazar’s daughters married their “brethren” who were really their cousins.

Neh. 4:14; 5:1,5,8,10,14 - these are more examples of “brothers” meaning “cousins” or “kinsmen.”

Tobit 5:11 - Tobit asks Azarias to identify himself and his people, but still calls him “brother.”

Amos 1: 9 - brotherhood can also mean an ally (where there is no bloodline).

 
Dokimas said:
It could be that your mind is what is closed.

Mt 10:2 Now the names of the twelve apostles are these: first, Simon, who is called Peter, and Andrew his brother <80>; James the son of Zebedee, and John his brother <80>;

Mt 12:46 While He was still talking to the multitudes, behold, His mother and brothers <80> stood outside, seeking to speak with Him.

Mt 13:55 "Is this not the carpenter’s son? Is not His mother called Mary? And His brothers <80> James, Joses, Simon, and Judas?

Same Greek word, adelphos.

Context: specificly named people - biological or adopted brothers; used generically - not necessarily brothers by family ties (except the family of humans or the Family of God).
Click to expand...
Oh, Dokimas - again, you read but you do not understand.

I have already pointed out several times that adelphos is not restricted to uterine brother. Your refusal to accept this does not bolster your position - it simply weakens it. Whereas ignorance can sometimes be an excuse - pridefulness never is.

Often times in the NT, people are named specifically because they are known followers of Christ. One glaring example of this is when Simon of Cyrene is referred to as the father of Alexander and Rufus (Mark 15:21). The Bible says nothing more about these men but tradition fills in the gaps.

Just as I did on another thread about Mary’s perpetual virginity - I issued a challenge to ALL Protestants who deny her virginity:
**Show me one, single solitary verse in Scripture OR in Church Tradition that says Mary bore other children. **
You’ll never find it, so once again:
CASE CLOSED.

Just as with ALL Protestant inventions and relatively new beliefs - the onus is on all of you to disprove a long-held Tradition of the Church.
 
Dokimas said:
It could be that your mind is what is closed.

Mt 10:2 Now the names of the twelve apostles are these: first, Simon, who is called Peter, and Andrew his brother <80>; James the son of Zebedee, and John his brother <80>;

Mt 12:46 While He was still talking to the multitudes, behold, His mother and brothers <80> stood outside, seeking to speak with Him.

Mt 13:55 "Is this not the carpenter’s son? Is not His mother called Mary? And His brothers <80> James, Joses, Simon, and Judas?

Same Greek word, adelphos.

Context: specificly named people - biological or adopted brothers; used generically - not necessarily brothers by family ties (except the family of humans or the Family of God).
Click to expand...
Actually, the context of the book of Matt. is that it was written first in Aramaic, then translated to Gk. In Aramaic, there are no words for “cousin, stepbrother, adopted brother, uncle, nephew” etc. Everyone in the clan who is too close in relation for marriage is considered a brother and sister. Therefore, the translation of Matt. does not “prove” that Mary had other children.

This does prove, however, how easy it is to misunderstand the context of the scriptures when they are removed from the Sacred Tradition that produced them.
 
guanophore said:
Everyone in the clan who is too close in relation for marriage is considered a brother and sister. Therefore, the translation of Matt. does not “prove” that Mary had other children.
Click to expand...
Perhaps this is part of tribal culture.

I have a friend from Camaroon who refers to his cousin as his brother and his nephew as his son.
 
mark_a said:
Perhaps this is part of tribal culture.

I have a friend from Camaroon who refers to his cousin as his brother and his nephew as his son.
Click to expand...
Exactly.
I have friends from Israel who refer to their cousins and other relations as brother. This sort of this still goes on.
 
wanderingbaptis said:
not trying to challenge, but if they were joseph’s children from another marriage, wouldn’t they have been mentioned on the trip to the census around the time of Jesus’ birth?
Click to expand...
This is a very good point! And in the Eastern tradition, Joseph was elderly, had already raised his family, and was taking Mary for protection and custody, not for the marital embrace. He accepted her vows of celibacy. One of the oldest depictions we have is of the Holy Family escaping to Egypt, where James, the “brother” of the Lord is depicted as a teenager.

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
wanderingbaptis said:
and i am reading the Bible, which is just breeding more questions. :confused:
Click to expand...
Good for you! You came to the right place for questions. :clapping:
 
cruisin said:
Where ther is no evidence there is evidence… go figure? I wouldn’t want to take any of these arguements into a court of law… 🤷

I was really hoping someone would come up with something better…
Click to expand...
Fortunately, the deposit of faith is handed down from those who were entrusted with it, and God has preserved it infallibly because His Word always accomplishes that for which it was sent.

We are not subject to a court of law, and neither was the NT expected to be a full compendium of the faith. Evidence was asked for, and we have shown where it is.

For what it is worth, I don’t find sufficient evidence in any of the Scripture to “prove” any of the Marian doctrines. I find the evidence of them in scripture because I have first accepted the gospel as it was committed to the Church.
 
Men often stumble upon the Truth, but dust themselves off and hurry away.

The Blessed Mother appeared here on EARTH. And thousands witnessed this Holy event. They were not Catholics but those of all religion including atheist.

Though “you” may not have been there or heard of this event. That doesn’t make it any less so.

Becasue you were not there when man landed on the moon. You could easly reach the conclusion as many have that this also didn’t happen. Yet it doesn’t make it any less so.

So often man has asked for Miracles. yet they refuse to believe even those Miracles. They choose to rationalize, dismiss, and simply explain away as natural occuring events.

If you don’t want to believe than you simply won’t and will find numerous reasons to do so. Mind you…This will not save your Soul. This life is but a drop in the ocean of time. Don’t be foolish with your Soul.
 
cruisin said:
Now, Please answer my question.

Luke is writing to a non-Jew. His purpose is to confirm in a letter to Theophilus all that he was taught. If it was understood from the git go that Jesus had no siblings and Mary was to stay a virgin, why did Luke use a word that could be understood as brother? Wouldn’t this have been confusing, to Theophilus, since he wasn’t a Jew?

If you want to start on the old testament prophesies go write ahead.👍

it’s :cool: with me.

I’ve read most of the comments about the Mary/ Ark thing. sounds like someones practicing eisegesis.
Click to expand...
If you do just a little research, you’ll find that most scholars agree that Theophilus means “Friend of God” and is not an official Roman title like some in the minority believe.
If this is the case – then Theophilus could have been a Jew – thus, rendering your argument impotent.
Coptic Tradition says that he was a Jew of Alexandria.
As for Mary and the Ark - this is not eisegesis but a direct Scriptural connection. Sure, you can choose not to see the connection, by burying your head in the sand, but that doesn’t make it any less accurate.
See for yourself:
2 Sam. 6:9/Luke 1:43**
2 Sam. 6:14**/Luke 2:38**
2 Sam. 6:11**/Luke 1:56**
1 Sam 4:11, 1 Sam 6:13**/Matt. 2:14****
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top