Was Mary's only child really Jesus?

  • Thread starter Thread starter PMV
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
P

PMV

Guest
DOCTRINE: Mary’s only child was Jesus.
(Catechism #499-501)

**BIBLE: Mary had other children. (Luke 8:19-21) Many Catholics argue that when the Bilbe referes to brothers of Jesus, that these are spiritual brothers and not blood relatives. Luke 8:19-21 makes a clear distinction between spiritual and blood brothers and proves that Mary did in fact have other children.

**
 
**
BIBLE: Mary had other children. (Luke 8:19-21) Many Catholics argue that when the Bilbe referes to brothers of Jesus, that these are spiritual brothers and not blood relatives. Luke 8:19-21 makes a clear distinction between spiritual and blood brothers and proves that Mary did in fact have other children.
Click to expand...
**
**In Acts 1:12-15, there is a gathering of about 120 “brothers” of Jesus. I’m sure you would agree for Mary to give birth to that many would be absurd, as it would take 90 years for that many consecutive pregnancies to come to term. Which leaves us to examine the Greek word for “brothers”, and compare it to the Greek word “cousin”. **
The following is taken from http://www.catholic.com/library/Brethren_of_the_Lord.asp

Please read the whole thing.

When trying to understand these verses, note that the term “brother” (Greek: adelphos) has a wide meaning in the Bible. It is not restricted to the literal meaning of a full brother or half-brother. The same goes for “sister” (adelphe) and the plural form “brothers” (adelphoi). The Old Testament shows that “brother” had a wide semantic range of meaning and could refer to any male relative from whom you are not descended (male relatives from whom you are descended are known as “fathers”) and who are not descended from you (your male descendants, regardless of the number of generations removed, are your “sons”), as well as kinsmen such as cousins, those who are members of the family by marriage or by law rather than by blood, and even friends or mere political allies (2 Sam. 1:26; Amos 1:9).

See also http://www.catholic.com/library/Burial_Box_of_St_James_Found.asp

http://www.catholic.com/library/Bad_Aramaic_Made_Easy.asp

“It is an article of faith that Mary is Mother of the Lord and still a Virgin.” Martin Luther, op. cit., Volume 11, 319-320.

John Calvin: “Helvidius has shown himself too ignorant, in saying that Mary had several sons, because mention is made in some passages of the brothers of Christ.”* Calvin translated “brothers” in this context to mean cousins or relatives.
Bernard Leeming, “Protestants and Our Lady”, Marian Library Studies, January 1967, p.9.
“I firmly believe that Mary, according to the words of the gospel as a pure Virgin brought forth for us the Son of God and in childbirth and after childbirth forever remained a pure, intact Virgin.” Ulrich Zwingli, Zwingli Opera, Corpus Reformatorum, Volume 1, 424.
 
This has been covered on several other threads. Mary does indeed have other children, there are billions of us. But she only bore in her womb one, our Lord, Jesus the Christ.
40.png
PMV:
DOCTRINE: Mary’s only child was Jesus.
(Catechism #499-501)
BIBLE: Mary had other children. (Luke 8:19-21) Many Catholics argue that when the Bilbe referes to brothers of Jesus, that these are spiritual brothers and not blood relatives. Luke 8:19-21 makes a clear distinction between spiritual and blood brothers and proves that Mary did in fact have other children.
Click to expand...
Where in the Bible does it say Mary had other children? Luke 8, 19-21 says no such thing.
Luke 8,

19 Then his mother and his brothers came to him but were unable to join him because of the crowd.

20 He was told, “Your mother and your brothers are standing outside and they wish to see you.”

21 He said to them in reply, “My mother and my brothers are those who hear the word of God and act on it.”

3 [3] Is he not the carpenter?: no other gospel calls Jesus a carpenter. Some witnesses have “the carpenter’s son,” as in Matthew 13:55. Son of Mary: contrary to Jewish custom, which calls a man the son of his father, this expression may reflect Mark’s own faith that God is the Father of Jesus (Mark 1:1, 11; 8:38; 13:32; 14:36). The brother of James . . . Simon: in Semitic usage, the terms “brother,” “sister” are applied not only to children of the same parents, but to nephews, nieces, cousins, half-brothers, and half-sisters; cf Genesis 14:16; 29:15; Lev 10:4. While one cannot suppose that the meaning of a Greek word should be sought in the first place from Semitic usage, the Septuagint often translates the Hebrew ah by the Greek word adelphos, “brother,” as in the cited passages, a fact that may argue for a similar breadth of meaning in some New Testament passages. For instance, there is no doubt that in v 17, “brother” is used of Philip, who was actually the half-brother of Herod Antipas. On the other hand, Mark may have understood the terms literally; see also Mark 3:31-32; Matthew 12:46; 13:55-56; Luke 8:19; John 7:3, 5. The question of meaning here would not have arisen but for the faith of the church in Mary’s perpetual virginity.

Read your KJV Bible, is Lot really Abram’s “brother” in Gn 14, 14? No, of course not, Lot is Abrams nephew, not his brother. The term “brother” in Scripture does not mean sibling of the same parents.
 
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.” 🙂
 
40.png
PMV:
DOCTRINE: Mary’s only child was Jesus.
(Catechism #499-501)

BIBLE: Mary had other children. (Luke 8:19-21) Many Catholics argue that when the Bilbe referes to brothers of Jesus, that these are spiritual brothers and not blood relatives. Luke 8:19-21 makes a clear distinction between spiritual and blood brothers and proves that Mary did in fact have other children.
Click to expand...
Hi PMV!

I’m unclear on just how this passage “proves” that Mary bore other children. Could you help me out on that? Thanks!

In Christ,
Nancy 🙂
 
40.png
PMV:
DOCTRINE: Mary’s only child was Jesus.
(Catechism #499-501)

**BIBLE: Mary had other children. (Luke 8:19-21) Many Catholics argue that when the Bilbe referes to brothers of Jesus, that these are spiritual brothers and not blood relatives. Luke 8:19-21 makes a clear distinction between spiritual and blood brothers and proves that Mary did in fact have other children.

**
Click to expand...
No, it doesn’t, but it indicates that Joseph had other children. The writings of the Early Church Fathers make very clear that the earliest Christians understood this:

Clement of Alexandria (195 A.D.): ‘Jude, who wrote the catholic Epistle, was the brother of the sons of Joseph. And he was very religious. Although experiencing the near relationship of the Lord, yet he did not say that he himself was His brother. But what did he say? “Jude, a servant of Jesus Christ” - of Him as Lord; but “the brother of James.” For this was true. Jude was his brother, through Joseph.’

Origen (245 A.D.): 'It is true that Jude wrote only a letter of a few lines. However, it is filled with the healthful words of heavenly grace. He said in the preface, “Jude, the servant of Jesus Christ and the brother of James.”

Personally, I have never heard the “spiritual brother” argument. I was always taught that the brethren of the Lord were the children of Joseph from his late wife.
Paul
 
Originally Posted by PMV

*DOCTRINE: Mary’s only child was Jesus.
(Catechism #499-501)

**BIBLE: Mary had other children. (Luke 8:19-21) Many Catholics argue that when the Bilbe referes to brothers of Jesus, that these are spiritual brothers and not blood relatives. Luke 8:19-21 makes a clear distinction between spiritual and blood brothers and proves that Mary did in fact have other children.
40.png
PaulDupre:
No, it doesn’t, but it indicates that Joseph had other children.
Click to expand...
This is a good point. While scripture refers to “brothers of Jesus” it never refers to thems as “sons of Mary”. This is a Protestant tradition.

In Christ,
Nancy 🙂
 
40.png
PaulDupre:
No, it doesn’t, but it indicates that Joseph had other children…

…I was always taught that the brethren of the Lord were the children of Joseph from his late wife.
Paul
Click to expand...
I had never heard this before - Joseph possibly having other children but it sounds quite plausable and a great response for the tired old “Jesus had brothers agrument.” Thanks!
CM
 
This is a good point. While scripture refers to “brothers of Jesus” it never refers to thems as “sons of Mary”. This is a Protestant tradition.

In Christ,
Nancy 🙂
Click to expand...
You mean Protestants have traditions? 😃
 
kepha1 said:
**In Acts 1:12-15, there is a gathering of about 120 “brothers” of Jesus. I’m sure you would agree for Mary to give birth to that many would be absurd, as it would take 90 years for that many consecutive pregnancies to come to term. **
Click to expand...

As Catholics, we honor “Mary Ever Virgin,” not “Mary Ever Pregnant”
 
<< “Mary Ever Pregnant” >>

That’s Mormonism 😛

Just wanted to add that the children by Joseph understanding was the prevailing interpretation in the early Church before St. Jerome (Contra Helvidius) who solidified the brothers = cousins interpretation held by both Catholics and the original Protestant Reformers. Some Orthodox I understand still hold to the children by previous marriage of Joseph idea. A quote from Max Thurian who was at the time a Calvinist/Reformed scholar:

“A very ancient tradition of the Church affirms a perpetual virginity of Mary; and the Reformers of the sixteenth century themselves confessed ‘Mariam semper virginem’ [Mary ever-Virgin]…The entire tradition of the Church has held to the perpetual virginity of Mary as a sign of her dedication and of the fullness of God’s gift of which she was the object. The Reformers themselves respected this belief…For Calvin and the other Reformers accept the traditional view that Mary had only one son, the Son of God, who had been to her the fullness of grace and joy…In regard to the Marian doctrine of the Reformers, we have already seen how UNANIMOUS they are in all that concerns Mary’s holiness and perpetual virginity.” (Max Thurian, Mary: Mother of All Christians [1963], pages 37-40, 89, 197)

Phil P
 
I would also recommend a look at Mary as the New Ark of the Covenant, as described by (I think) Tim Staples. Anway it is intriguing, rich in scripture, and would add to the knowlege of Mary’s Perpetual Vriginity because if we understand Mary as Ark of the Covenant, it is very understandable that Joseph wouldn’t think of marital relations with Mary. Tim Staples has a great audio series called “All Generations Will Call Me Blessed”…it will answer your questions about Marian Doctrines.
 
Thank you very much everyone. These reponses are very impressive. Fundamentalists have no idea what they’re up against!
I’ll look into these even more, and try to put an anti-Catholic in their place!
God bless all of you.
 
If I lifted, ”Jesus wept” from the Bible and nothing after or before then one would conclude that the only thing Jesus did was to weep! Ludicrous! It was a Jewish custom for young girls to have the duty of keeping the Temple in order and clean. As a child Mary was one of those girls. Ann, her mother was told that Mary had a very special duty in life. Also it was common for elderly men to be the keeper of these Temple girls, to give them shelter and food. Before Mary ever saw Joseph she knew her life would be special. Joseph was chosen from several old men one day. They were doing their duty. It is said that a dove flew to Joseph’s head and he was picked, this isn’t Biblical, it is extra-Biblical. It was understood by Joseph that he and Mary would live as brother and sister. The Jewish Priests condoned that. One may say that is unusual, but to be the mother of Jesus is infinitely more unusual! Joseph had children by his now dead first wife!

*Why when Jesus was on the cross did he say, ”Mother, behold your son”? It was Jewish custom for the son’s of a mother to take care of her. She had no other sons. So Jesus gave John the task of caring for Mary. See John XIX:26 – 27. Yes, Jesus said to John, “Son behold your Mother.

To begin with, the Protoevangelium records that when Mary’s birth was prophesied, her mother, St. Anne, vowed that she would devote the child to the service of the Lord, as Samuel had been by his mother (1 Sam. 1:11). Mary would thus serve the Lord at the Temple, as women had for centuries (1 Sam. 2:22), and as Anna the prophetess did at the time of Jesus’ birth (Luke 2:36–37). A life of continual, devoted service to the Lord at the Temple meant that Mary would not be able to live the ordinary life of a child-rearing mother. Rather, she was vowed to a life of perpetual virginity.

However, due to considerations of ceremonial cleanliness, it was eventually necessary for Mary, a consecrated “virgin of the Lord,” to have a guardian or protector who would respect her vow of virginity. Thus, according to the Protoevangelium, Joseph, an elderly *widower who already had children, was chosen to be her spouse. (This would also explain why Joseph was apparently dead by the time of Jesus’ adult ministry, since he does not appear during it in the gospels, and since Mary is entrusted to *John, rather than to her husband Joseph, at the crucifixion).

According to the Protoevangelium, Joseph was required to regard Mary’s vow of virginity with the utmost respect. The gravity of his responsibility as the guardian of a virgin was indicated by the fact that, when she was discovered to be with child, he had to answer to the Temple authorities, who thought him guilty of defiling a virgin of the Lord. Mary was also accused of having forsaken the Lord by breaking her vow. Keeping this in mind, it is an incredible insult to the Blessed Virgin to say that she broke her vow by bearing children other than her Lord and God, who was conceived through the power of the Holy Spirit.

The perpetual virginity of Mary has always been reconciled with the biblical references to Christ’s brethren through a proper understanding of the meaning of the term “brethren.” The understanding that the brethren of the Lord were Jesus’ stepbrothers (children of Joseph) rather than half-brothers (children of Mary) was the most common one until the time of Jerome (fourth century). It was Jerome who introduced the possibility that Christ’s brethren were actually his cousins, since in Jewish idiom cousins were also referred to as “brethren.” The Catholic Church allows the faithful to hold either view, since both are compatible with the reality of Mary’s perpetual virginity.
 
We have a foster daughter, whom my children refer to as a sister, and who participates in our family life along with all our other children, and we refer to her kids as our grandchildren, treating them the same as the others. We feel no need to explain the details of this relationship to casual acquaintences, but those who know us well also know the situation and her difficult birth family background. I have often spoken about my kids in these forums and referred to her as my daughter, although actually there is no biological relationship, only a moral one. (there was never a legal guardianship, just stepping in when we were needed in her life). From that would you make a doctrinal statement about the number of children I have?
 
In Luke 1, 28f, the angel told Mary she will conceive a son. Mary responded, “How shall this be since I know not man?” We know Mary was already engaged to be married, so this shouldn’t have come of great surprise, if she had intentions of consummating the marriage. The angel would just have been foretelling her married life. So why would Mary ask the question? Her response would more appropriately been “Oh, wonderful! What good news!” Or perhaps “When will I conceive the child?” But instead, Mary asked, “How shall this be?” Mary was obviously not planning to consummate the marriage. She had taken a vow of virginity.
 
The church allows us to believe either story: brothers as relatives or Joseph as elderly widower. This is because neither is contrary to Mary’s perpetual virgintiy.

from the Protoevangelium of James (c. A.D. 120):

“The stepbrother hypothesis was the most common until Jerome (the turn of the fifth century) popularized the idea that the brethren were cousins.”
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top