SPLIT: Did Jesus have brothers? The perpetual virginity debate.

[Cat_Herder]

So, did the Holy spirit lead to the division between Orthodox and Arian, between Orthodox and Copts, between Orthodox and Monothelites, between Iconoclasts and Iconodules, between East and West, and between Rome and the Reformation?

In each case the Holy Spirit prevented the Catholic Church from falling into the heresy or schism. Thus the heretics/schismatics went their own way.

Here you are dealing with a matter of historical fact. Each of the other sees has fallen into heresy at one point or another. Only Rome has not.

http://forums.catholic-questions.org/picture.php?albumid=1087&pictureid=8419

 

[pablope]

Now there’s a good explanation. Thanks!!!

I have really never given much though to Mary except that she was an honorable woman and wondered why the belief of her perpetual virginity was so important. I guess I thought people held her in high regard partly because of their belief that she was a virgin after Christ’s birth (which didn’t make sense to me)…but, it sounds like that is not true. From what you say, it sounds like the importance of this belief is tied to the fulfillment of prophecy. Makes sense!

Mary’s obedience, devotion to God…her love for her Son…and her choice to remain a perpetutal virgin…endears her to her Son.

There is an unknown anecdote about Mary shared by our Eastern Church brethen. It is said that the only time Jesus refused any of Mary’s request was at the foot of the cross.

Mary was at the foot of the cross as Jesus there hang dying…drenched with the dripping blood…Mary asked her Son to let her die with Him…Jesus refused…and this is said to be the only time He refused His mother.

 

[po18guy]

So, did the Holy spirit lead to the division between Orthodox and Arian, between Orthodox and Copts, between Orthodox and Monothelites, between Iconoclasts and Iconodules, between East and West, and between Rome and the Reformation?

If not, then how does Rome have any superior claim?
If she ought not to have excommunicated the Protestants …
IF she ought not to have excommunicated the EOs
IF she ought not to have excommunicated the Monothelites
IF she ought not to have excommunicated the Copts …
IF she ought not to have excommunicated the Arians …
Then there would be less division - more unity, right?

So, was the Holy Spirit behind that or not?

No! It was the spirit of division!

 

[ATA]

Hi

In the gospels there is a clear mention that Jesus had brothers and sisters. James etc.

Also if Joseph did not have sexual relations with Mary until she gave birth to Jesus, would he not have any after either also?

 

[Trevor_Stamm]

Welcome to the forum

Hi

In the gospels there is a clear mention that Jesus had brothers and sisters. James etc.

James, Joseph, Judas (Jude), and Salome (sister of these three) were sons and daughter of Mary the wife of Cleophas. Simon was a Cananaean, not a Nazarene thus would be impossible for him to be Christ’s brother. What clear mention was Sacred Scripture referring too again?

Also if Joseph did not have sexual relations with Mary until she gave birth to Jesus, would he not have any after either also?

Argument has been defeated, read the last 2 or 3 pages of this thread.

 

[po18guy]

So, did the Holy spirit lead to the division between Orthodox and Arian, between Orthodox and Copts, between Orthodox and Monothelites, between Iconoclasts and Iconodules, between East and West, and between Rome and the Reformation?

If not, then how does Rome have any superior claim?
If she ought not to have excommunicated the Protestants …
IF she ought not to have excommunicated the EOs
IF she ought not to have excommunicated the Monothelites
IF she ought not to have excommunicated the Copts …
IF she ought not to have excommunicated the Arians …
Then there would be less division - more unity, right?

So, was the Holy Spirit behind that or not?

Of course not! The Holy Spirit leads always to humility and unity. No, the Holy Spirit did not lead to any of those things. Who or what did? The spirit of antichrist. I cannot say it nearly as well as did John in 1 John 4:3 “And every spirit that dissolveth Jesus, is not of God: and this is Antichrist, of whom you have heard that he cometh, and he is now already in the world.” The Church is Christ’s Body on earth, with Jesus being its head. The spirit of antichrist seeks to dissolve the Body through division, and it has. Evil triumphs when the Body of Christ is divided, and suffers when it is united.

Do you think that the Holy Spirit is the only spirit on earth? We are surrounded by spirits each day of our life. One third of the angels, an innumerable number, fell from grace and became demons. They roam this earth, seeking to please their master through the destruction of souls. They tempt us. They stalk us. They harass us. Rarely, they even possess us. They are always here with us.

The scripture writers clearly warn against the spirits. Look at Ephesians 6:12 and 1 Timothy 4:1. We are counseled to test the spirits in 1 Corinthians 12:10 and 1 John 4:1-3. Notice that John identifies spirits with the false prophets that have gone forth. Flesh does not move without a spirit. Everything that is done on this earth by the flesh is motivated by a spirit. All that is good, such as humility and unity, is the product of the Holy Spirit. But, all evil and division comes from the demons who serve the evil one.

The divisions that you speak of cannot be of the Holy Spirit, as a house divided against itself will not stand (Matthew 12:25, Mark 3:25, Luke 11:17).

Your answer is: the spirit of antichrist.

 

[po18guy]

Hi

In the gospels there is a clear mention that Jesus had brothers and sisters. James etc.

Also if Joseph did not have sexual relations with Mary until she gave birth to Jesus, would he not have any after either also?

Mary declared herself to the the “bond slave” of the Lord (Luke 1:38). What do you think that means?

 

[HOLY_POOH_FAN]

To repeat a simple Catholic Christian Church teaching. T, capital Tradiiton for us has a very specific meaning. It means that when the Pope defines something from the Chair ( ex cathedra) he is simply announcing that the Church already belieives, , not what he decides it must from now on believe. Gabriel’s FULL OF GRACE in Greek to Mary, the reflections of the Fathers, mostly bishop-saints-scholars of ancient Churches, names of parish/city cathedrals and churches, decisions of Councils which the Popes approved, and the universal state of that teaching today allows him, after that wide research and contemporaneous, to say that this is what we aleady believe. Compare to the fourth century Council that accepted 27 NT books and dumped the "Dan Brown"trexts as fake. They were guided by the same HOLY SPIRIT Who inspired them and kept them ffree from doctrinal error from the beginning.

 

[ATA]

Welcome to the forum

James, Joseph, Judas (Jude), and Salome (sister of these three) were sons and daughter of Mary the wife of Cleophas. Simon was a Cananaean, not a Nazarene thus would be impossible for him to be Christ’s brother. What clear mention was Sacred Scripture referring too again?

Yeah, I have read that here (didn’t read all) but didn’t see an explanation. Could you please explain it.

 

[ATA]

Mary declared herself to the the “bond slave” of the Lord (Luke 1:38). What do you think that means?

Does that mean she would therefore not give birth to another apart form Christ?

The word there handmadien is the same translated when the Apostle Peter spoke in Acts 2:18.

So please tell me what it means…

 

[po18guy]

Trevor Stamm;8642928:

Welcome to the forum

James, Joseph, Judas (Jude), and Salome (sister of these three) were sons and daughter of Mary the wife of Cleophas. Simon was a Cananaean, not a Nazarene thus would be impossible for him to be Christ’s brother. What clear mention was Sacred Scripture referring too again?

Yeah, I have read that here (didn’t read all) but didn’t see an explanation. Could you please explain it.

Luke 22:32 Jesus told Peter to strengthen his brothers. But, Peter had only one brother, Andrew. Here, brothers meant the Apostles.

Acts 1:13-15
Douay-Rheims 1899 American Edition (DRA)
13And when they were come in, they went up into an upper room, where abode Peter and John, James and Andrew, Philip and Thomas, Bartholomew and Matthew, James of Alpheus, and Simon Zelotes, and Jude the brother of James. 14All these were persevering with one mind in prayer with the women, and Mary the mother of Jesus, and with his brethren. 15In those days Peter rising up in the midst of the brethren, said: (now the number of persons together was about an hundred and twenty

120 “brothers”? If Mary was not perpetually virgin, she would have been in perpetual labor!

 

[ATA]

ATA;8647139:

Luke 22:32

Jesus told Peter to strengthen his brothers. But, Peter had only one brother, Andrew. Here, brothers meant the Apostles.

Acts 1:13-15
Douay-Rheims 1899 American Edition (DRA)
13And when they were come in, they went up into an upper room, where abode Peter and John, James and Andrew, Philip and Thomas, Bartholomew and Matthew, James of Alpheus, and Simon Zelotes, and Jude the brother of James. 14All these were persevering with one mind in prayer with the women, and Mary the mother of Jesus, and with his brethren. 15In those days Peter rising up in the midst of the brethren, said: (now the number of persons together was about an hundred and twenty

120 “brothers”? If Mary was not perpetually virgin, she would have been in perpetual labor!

Lool, I don’t think that’s even possible for any woman to go through that.

I understand brother’s doesn’t always mean actual brother and here it refers to the brothers of Christ as He said they that do the will of God.

But

The scripture in Mark 6:3…(as I understand) these people are saying we know where Your (Christ) from and Your family how are You doing these things. (The wisdom He spoke with and the works He did).

That being said what about Matthew 12:46-47?

 

[HOLY_POOH_FAN]

QUOTE=po18guy;8642882]No! It was the spirit of division!
**** The Holy Spirit cannot force us. If we decide the Pope is a heretic and Vat11 was designed by freemasons as SSPX does they are stuck in their ignorant schism and libel and slander the Church. Same with the Orthodox split and Revolt-amation in the 16th c. There was sin, stubbornness, not listening on both sides and that will go on to the end. our role is to ask the Holy Spirit to clean out the basement of our sinful attitudes and take on the mind of Christ Jesus

 

[inkaneer]

Here’s a possible explanation. Jesus’ own family did not believe that He was a prophet, much less the Messiah. (Mark 6:4 - Jesus said to them, “Only in his hometown, among his relatives and in his own house is a prophet without honor.”) His own family had rejected Him.

Jesus’ family lived in Nazareth but only Mary His mother is named as being present at His crucifixion outside of Jerusalem. At this time, since no brothers believed nor were present, and Mary, being away from home and needing care and a place to stay, was assigned by Jesus to be cared for by John.

Mary remained in Jerusalem with John and the disciples at least until Pentecost. She is mentioned as being present in the upper room with them after Jesus’ resurrection. Interestingly, Jesus’ brothers are listed as being in attendance there also. Perhaps, the resurrection convinced them as to who Jesus really was.

This whole idea of Jesus having brothers is based on a strict interpretation of the Greek word adelphos or adelphoi (pl) as meaning only a sibling brother. The question is therefore is such a strict interpretation warranted under the circumstances. It would be if *adelphos/ adelphoi *is consistently interpreted as a sibling brother/ brothers. However, if that is not the case then to force a strict interpretation onto the word when the word is not used consistently in the strict sense is to induce error into the scriptures. The fact is Jesus calls all of the apostles his brothers. The fact is Jesus calls all of the apostles Peter’s brothers. The fact is Paul calls James [an apostle] Jesus’ brother. We know that the apostles were not Jesus’ siblings. We know that only one of the apostles [Andrew] was Peter’s sibling. We know that of the two apostles named James neither was a son of Joseph. The claim of sibling brothers and/or sisters of Jesus is heresy pure and simple and I would think that those who claim scripture to be their final authority would preserve it as it was written and not make changes to suit their whims [present day beliefs].

 

[ATA]

Perpetual virginity means that Mary did not have sexual relations ever until she died.

I personally don’t think this is important to the point where someone is called heretic (correct me if I’m wrong), I think this is how there’s so much problems in the body of Christ, we argue in a way that bring division where it is not always neccessary. Although if it is important that she was a perpetual virgin please tell me why?

That being said, proving Mary had no children after OUR Lord does not prove or disprove perpetual virginity. Only proof of there being sons/daughters of Joseph and Mary would result in ending this debate, (Not to say I have proof, just stating the obvious conclusion from the sentence before).

That also being said your point is true the greek word is used in places where it doesn’t mean sibling brother/sister as the apostle are called Peter’s brothers. YET, it is also used in places where it does mean sibling brother/sister (Matt 4:21 Mark 3:17 Luke 3:19 John 11:21). This means therefore that in other to understand which is meant in that scripture we need to look at the context.

As far as I understand the context here is that the people of Nazareth are saying we know Your (Christ) family. We know Your brothers and sisters why are You like this, we know them yet Your different to them. Jesus spoke with unfathomable wisdom and did mighty works, so that if you knew His family you would wonder how is it You do this?

I personally haven’t heard of this debate until yesterday, that’s why I have been asking for explanations, if you prove 100% there were no brothers it still does not prove perpetual virginity. What is your evidence from scripture for perpetual virginity?

Lastly Matthew 1:25

“And [Joseph] knew her not till she had brought forth her firstborn son: and he called his name JESUS”

This does in not imply that after he did not, if any implication may be drawn, it may imply that until the birth he did not know her after which he did. That is to say he did not know her until she had given birth.

 

[Algo1]

This whole idea of Jesus having brothers is based on a strict interpretation of the Greek word adelphos or adelphoi (pl) as meaning only a sibling brother. The question is therefore is such a strict interpretation warranted under the circumstances. It would be if *adelphos/ adelphoi *is consistently interpreted as a sibling brother/ brothers. However, if that is not the case then to force a strict interpretation onto the word when the word is not used consistently in the strict sense is to induce error into the scriptures. The fact is Jesus calls all of the apostles his brothers. The fact is Jesus calls all of the apostles Peter’s brothers. The fact is Paul calls James [an apostle] Jesus’ brother. We know that the apostles were not Jesus’ siblings. We know that only one of the apostles [Andrew] was Peter’s sibling. We know that of the two apostles named James neither was a son of Joseph. The claim of sibling brothers and/or sisters of Jesus is heresy pure and simple and I would think that those who claim scripture to be their final authority would preserve it as it was written and not make changes to suit their whims [present day beliefs].

Hail Holy Queen Scott Hahn:

the Greek word for “brother,” *adelphos *literally means “from the same womb”.

pp.66-67

We know only our brothers and sisters in Jesus Christ- our adelphoi, from the same womb.

p. 152

I’ll say it again: adelphosliterally means from the same womb.

p.135

See also the audio file of:

Eric Svendsen vs Gerry Matatics - Perpetual Virginity.mp3

LINK

 

[Cat_Herder]

Perpetual virginity means that Mary did not have sexual relations ever until she died. I personally don’t think this is important to the point where someone is called heretic (correct me if I’m wrong), I think this is how there’s so much problems in the body of Christ, we argue in a way that bring division where it is not always neccessary. Although if it is important that she was a perpetual virgin please tell me why?

Actually it is that important, because Ezekiel prophesied that the Messiah would pass through a Gate reserved to God alone. The only way that Jesus could have fulfilled that prophecy is if the Gate is Mary’s womb. To attack the perpetual divinity of Mary is to attack the divinity of Christ.

 

[Pure_and_Simple]

Some members have mentioned references to OT Marian prophecies. Those raise questions:

1. Re: Genesis 3:15. …“your (Satan’s) offspring and hers (the woman’s), (h)e will crush your head…” Who crushes Satan’s head? Catholic Bibles have translated this verse as “she will crush…”, “it will crush…”, and “he will crush…” The reference is to Jesus, the seed of the woman and not to the woman herself as the one who does the crushing.
2. Re: OT queen mothers – Some say that because the names of the kings’ mothers are given in Scripture, that that means they reigned with their sons. Thinking of the throne of David which eternally belongs to King Jesus, where is mention given to David’s mother? Also, in the example of queen mother Bathsheba who intervened on behalf of Adonijah, it did not go well for him. Finally, in the examples of the kings of Israel and Judah who “did evil in the sight of the Lord,” could one say that those queen mothers were partly responsible for leading the people into idolatry? Are these queen mothers in the OT the source of this prophecy? If not, what is the source?
3. Re: Ark of the Covenant – in referring to Mary as the NT Ark of the Covenant, how far is it to be taken? For example, the poles which carried the OT Ark and were never separated from it. What do these poles refer to in regards to Mary the NT Ark? Are the events surrounding the OT Ark part of the prophecy too? How do these events parallel events in the life of Mary: the Ark taken captive and placed in Dagon’s temple, that anyone who touched the Ark died, that the glory left the Ark, that no one today seems to know where it is? Or is Mary as the NT Ark meant to be just a general idea not really designed to be a complete example?
4. Re: Mary as the gate – If Mary is the gate, then is she also the sanctuary? If not, then what is the sancturay? Who are the foreigners that came into the sanctuary? Who are the Levites that followed idols? Who are the priests who enter the sanctuary? Who are the other gates? In Ezekiel 45, who are “my princes” who oppressed the people? What is the significance of the land being precisely measured? In Ezekiel 46, what is the land that the prince gives to his sons? Why do priests continue to offer bulls, rams, goats and grain? Why are exact measurements of the temple given? What is the significance of the outer court? Do these chapters of Ezekiel refer only to spiritual things or can anything in them be interpreted to have real, physical significance? If
   conclusions are drawn from Scriptures to indicate particular prophecies, then shouldn’t they be examined in their entirety?

 

[Cat_Herder]

Some members have mentioned references to OT Marian prophecies. Those raise questions:

1. Re: Genesis 3:15. …“your (Satan’s) offspring and hers (the woman’s), (h)e will crush your head…” Who crushes Satan’s head? Catholic Bibles have translated this verse as “she will crush…”, “it will crush…”, and “he will crush…” The reference is to Jesus, the seed of the woman and not to the woman herself as the one who does the crushing.

Most modern Catholic translations have “he” at the point you indicate. Both the RSV and the NAB have “he.” But anyway, this is a red herring because the point is who is at total enmity with the devil (both the Woman [Mary] and Her Seed [Jesus]) and not who does the crushing.

1. Re: OT queen mothers – Some say that because the names of the kings’ mothers are given in Scripture, that that means they reigned with their sons. Thinking of the throne of David which eternally belongs to King Jesus, where is mention given to David’s mother? Also, in the example of queen mother Bathsheba who intervened on behalf of Adonijah, it did not go well for him. Finally, in the examples of the kings of Israel and Judah who “did evil in the sight of the Lord,” could one say that those queen mothers were partly responsible for leading the people into idolatry? Are these queen mothers in the OT the source of this prophecy? If not, what is the source?

You could say the same thing about the kings. Applying your reasoning, you would have to conclude that because David did bad things then whoever sits on his throne is a bad man. Seeing as the One Who is on that throne now is Perfect Good, I think your reasoning is invalid.

1. Re: Ark of the Covenant – in referring to Mary as the NT Ark of the Covenant, how far is it to be taken? For example, the poles which carried the OT Ark and were never separated from it. What do these poles refer to in regards to Mary the NT Ark?

The poles were analogous to the veil on the Holy of Holies. Both served to separate men from God and both become unnecessary once the Lord had come.

Are the events surrounding the OT Ark part of the prophecy too? How do these events parallel events in the life of Mary: the Ark taken captive and placed in Dagon’s temple,

The flight from Herod.

that anyone who touched the Ark died,

No one touched Mary which is why She is ever-virgin.

that the glory left the Ark,

That never happened in the sense you are alluding to.

that no one today seems to know where it is?

The Assumption.

1. Re: Mary as the gate – If Mary is the gate, then is she also the sanctuary?

Yes, but unlike the earthly sanctuary, She encompasses He who dwelt in Her and so She is not constrained by the earthly laws. She will never be defiled, fall, or need purification, so that answers the rest of your questions.

Do these chapters of Ezekiel refer only to spiritual things or can anything in them be interpreted to have real, physical significance?

Your mistake is in taking the spiritual to be less real or less important than the physical. In this you do greatly err.

 

[po18guy]

Perpetual virginity means that Mary did not have sexual relations ever until she died. (did she have sex AFTER she died?)

I personally don’t think this is important to the point where someone is called heretic (correct me if I’m wrong), I think this is how there’s so much problems in the body of Christ, we argue in a way that bring division where it is not always neccessary. Although if it is important that she was a perpetual virgin please tell me why?

That being said, proving Mary had no children after OUR Lord does not prove or disprove perpetual virginity. Only proof of there being sons/daughters of Joseph and Mary would result in ending this debate, (Not to say I have proof, just stating the obvious conclusion from the sentence before).

That also being said your point is true the greek word is used in places where it doesn’t mean sibling brother/sister as the apostle are called Peter’s brothers. YET, it is also used in places where it does mean sibling brother/sister (Matt 4:21 Mark 3:17 Luke 3:19 John 11:21). This means therefore that in other to understand which is meant in that scripture we need to look at the context.

As far as I understand the context here is that the people of Nazareth are saying we know Your (Christ) family. We know Your brothers and sisters why are You like this, we know them yet Your different to them. Jesus spoke with unfathomable wisdom and did mighty works, so that if you knew His family you would wonder how is it You do this?

I personally haven’t heard of this debate until yesterday, that’s why I have been asking for explanations, if you prove 100% there were no brothers it still does not prove perpetual virginity. What is your evidence from scripture for perpetual virginity?

Lastly Matthew 1:25

“And [Joseph] knew her not till she had brought forth her firstborn son: and he called his name JESUS”

This does in not imply that after he did not, if any implication may be drawn, it may imply that until the birth he did not know her after which he did. That is to say he did not know her until she had given birth.

Hello? Are you even listening? Are you even considering the responses? It appears that you have an agenda - a forum rule violation.

If you believe the bible, then logically, you should believe that Mary is ever virgin. The same God-given authority declared both to be true.

Practically speaking, I know two mature women that are virgin. One is in her 70s and the other is 50 and MARRIED. Now, if two average, sinful women can do this, by choice, don’t you think that the woman chosen and createed by Jesus to be His mother, and who vowed that she was the bond slave of the Lord (to an angel) could do the same? I mean, really!

This focus on sex tells us a lot more about those who claim it than it does about Mary.