False Teaching: Mary died a virgin. Biblical Proof Mary had children.

[Marvelloustime]

Do I . or is that your relgoin talking to ya saying i am the one twisting the scrips .
READ mr bread . READ and pray and pray and read that bible .
OR prepare to wail ON JESUS day . cause it is darn obvious that one of us IS DEcIEVED .
And you NEED to read that bible for you , testing all . READ mr bread .
READ as though your life depends upon it . CAUSE FROM WHAT I SEE , IT DOES . OPEN , and read that bible for YOU .

@amigo de christo

 

[Titus]

Post #528 Bread of Life explaining Joseph was married before he married Mary mother of Jesus.
According to this extra-biblical document, Joseph had children with his first wife.
Bread of Life explains passages like Matthew 13:55 to be children from Joseph's previous wife.

According to the 2nd century document, The Protoevangelium of James, these Adelphoi and Adelphe of the Lord were Joseph’s children from another marriage. This was written about 100 years after Jesus walked the earth – not 2000 years after. It explains that Joseph was an older widower who became Mary’s protector, as a consecrated virgin of the Temple

Now in post #556 Bread of Life denies he used the argument that Joseph had two wives.

The burden of proof is on you.
Your doctrine is based on Joseph having two wives.
Give scripture.
I've already asked once.
You have failed to support your doctrine with book, chapter and verse.
You have zero scriptural evidence.

Here he denies Joseph had children with another wife. After he already used this argument.

HUH??
What are you talking about??

I NEVER made this claim. I simply showed you an alternative source that makes this claim. I showd this to you as yet another proof that the Early Church UNANIMOUSLY taught that Mary had only ONE child - Jesus.

Bread of Life has contradicted his doctrine.

Either Bread of Life believes Joseph had children with his first wife,
Or
He believes Joseph was never married before marrying Mary mother of Jesus.

Bread of Life was arguing one doctrine: Joseph had children with his first wife and not his second wife Mary mother of Jesus.

Bread of Life is currently arguing another doctrine that Joseph does not have two wives.
He claims he never used this doctrine as what the scriptures teach.

But he did.
Now he claims he never supported this doctrine from the Protoevangelium of James document.

I've asked multiple times for Bread of Life to produce scriptural doctrine that Joseph was married more than once.
He has failed to do so.
Heres the reason why he has failed to do so,

Post #554 I never said Joseph had two wives. It's not in my argument, and it's not in Scripture.

Amen. truth John 17:17

The question remains for Bread of Life to answer,
Give Biblical scripture for Joseph having two wives?

His exegesis rests on this belief.
Without proof his catholic doctrine is shown to be a doctrine of denominational error.

Ephesians 5:13,
- but all things that are reproved are made manifest by the light for whatsoever doth make manifest is light

Reprove means to point out something that is wrong/error.

 

[Titus]

@BreadOfLife didn’t contradict himself. In post #528 he cited the Protoevangelium of James as an early historical explanation for the adelphoi — not as his own doctrinal position. In post #556 he clarified that he never claimed Joseph had two wives; he only referenced a source that contains that claim to show that early Christians did not believe Mary had other children.

Wrong, if you use a citation and dont believe it is Biblically accurate, then you are trying to deceive others.

Does Bread of Life believe the Protoevangelium of James is Biblical truth or not?

If not, then he has proven nothing other than he doesn't care about his sources being Biblically accurate.

Also what catholics and protestants believe to be true has nothing to do with what is truth, John 17:17.
The word is the authority on truth.

 

[Titus]

You’re responding only to the historical citation and ignoring @BreadOfLife's actual argument.

@BreadOfLife's structure was:

Wrong.

You’re responding only to the historical citation and ignoring @BreadOfLife's actual argument.

@BreadOfLife's structure was:

1. Historical example: He cited the Protoevangelium of James as one early explanation for the adelphoi. That is not a DOCTRINAL CLAIM ; it is a historical reference.
2. His doctrinal position: He immediately followed that citation by stating: “Not ONLY did the Early Church Fathers all agree on Mary’s Perpetual Virginity – MANY of your Protestant Fathers did as well.”

Wrong, basing a belief on what the majority of protestants and catholics think is not stating his doctrinal exegesis of the passages being discussed.
This is an appeal to popularity.
Holding a belief based on what is widely held does not establish it is as Biblical doctrine.

If you get enough catholics and protestants to believe homosexuality is acceptable.
That does not make it Biblical doctrine.

Bread of Life needs to be transparent and state if Joseph had children with another wife or not.
Only then can his doctrine be made clear of who are these brothers and sisters of Christ.

 

[Titus]

Clarification.
Bread of Life and other Roman papist(followers of the pope), have repeatedly misrepresented me on my thread.
I want to make it known that I reject all reformation theology.
Therefore I cannot be a protestant nor would I ever choose to be a protestant.

Simply, I'm not catholic, eastern orthodox or protestant.
I'm simply a Christian with no hyphen.
I am a new testament Christian.

 

[BreadOfLife]

OPEN BIBLE and READ BIBLE for you . or prepare to wail ON JESUS day .

I already KNOW the apostels wrote it . And i already know they passed that knowledge not knpwledge , and faith unto their successors
who also passed it on to their successors . AND MANY TWISTED it as well .

SO , oh yeah , OPEN BIBLE and READ BIBLE for YOU .

OH and , YES HURRY and let us open BIBLE and actaully
DO SOME reading for ourselves . OR PREPARE TO WAIL MANY SURELY WILL ON JESUS DAY .

Your idiotic and arrogant condemnations aside – please tell me WHAT happened to the Christians in the first THREE centuries of the Church, who had NO BIBLES.

Did they get condemned to Hell by Jesus to “wail” in torment??
What about the illiterate who CAN’T read the Bible for “Themselves”? Up until the 19th century – at least HALF of ALL people were functionally illiterate. Will THEY burn in Hall for eternity because they didn’t “Bible Up”, as YOU say?

Your salvation has ZERO to do with whether you READ the Bible or NOT.

It has to do with whether or not you acknowledge that Christ died for your sins - and IF you will cooperate with God’s grace of FAITH and perseverance.

 

[BreadOfLife]

Post #528 Bread of Life explaining Joseph was married before he married Mary mother of Jesus.

Now in post #556 Bread of Life denies he used the argument that Joseph had two wives.

Bread of Life has contradicted his doctrine.

Either Bread of Life believes Joseph had children with his first wife,
Or
He believes Joseph was never married before marrying Mary mother of Jesus.

Bread of Life is currently arguing another doctrine that Joseph does not have two wives.

Soooo, you ARE aware that bearing FALSE witness is a violation of God's Commandments, aren't you??

You’re NOT very bright, are you? Either that or you just like to vomit out falsehoods against anyone who disagrees with you.
I believe BOTH to be true . . .

Go back and R*E*A*D my posts. I NEVER stated that the Protoevangelium was FACT. I presented it as HISTORICAL evidence that the UNANIMUS opinion of the Early Church – AND your Protestant Fathers believed in Mary‘s Perpetual Virginity.

That said - I realize that you are desperately lashing out at whatever you can do to detract from the fact that you have LOST this argument Biblically and Historically . . .

 

[Titus]

Your salvation has ZERO to do with whether you READ the Bible or NOT. Post #649

2 Timothy 3:15,
- and that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus

 

[BreadOfLife]

sorry bud but not you or an entire army gonna convince me
THE RCC is THE ONE TRUE CHURCH .

SOMETHING HAD WENT LONG WRONG . As far as your popes an dfacny garbs and l oving long titles like MOST HOLY FATHER and kiss my ring .

YOUR gripes are based in your abject ignorance of Scripture and Early Church History.

You claim to have been Catholic – yet you don’t have the foggiest CLUE as to WHY people kiss the Pope’s ring. with has absolutely NOTHING to do with the man. It has to do with JESUS and the AUTHORITY He gave to Peter (Matt. 16:18-19).

THIS is why I told you that you abandoned the Church because of ignorance, like so many others . . .

 

[Titus]

You’re NOT very bright, are you? Post #650

Ad hominem.

Go back and R*E*A*D my posts. I NEVER stated that the Protoevangelium was FACT. I presented it as HISTORICAL evidence that the UNANIMUS opinion of the Early Church

No,
You presented it as your evidence for your belief that Mary never had children.

Come out in the open and state your true belief.
Did Joseph have children with another wife?
Did Joseph have two wives?

 

[Titus]

THIS is why I told you that you abandoned the Church because of ignorance, like so many others . . .

Proud of Amigo de Christo for realizing the catholic church is counterfeit.

 

[Titus]

We agree Jesus’s adelphoi in Matthew 13:55 and Mark 6:3 are His family. But the familial definition of adelphos is “brother, a near kinsman, or relative,” so the word itself doesn’t tell us which specific relationship applies.

So how do we establish their specific relationship to Jesus?

By the context.

Your conclusion rests entirely on an assumption: “They’re called ‘brothers’ and named near Jesus and Mary, so they must be Mary’s biological sons.”

You cannot come to the knowledge of the truth by assumption.
I never use assumption to exegete Gods word.

Jesus' brothers,
Matthew 13:55-56,
- Is this not the carpenters Son...
This is Joseph as his Son is Jesus.

- is not His mother called Mary...
Jesus' Mother Mary.

- and His brethren, James and Joses and Simon and Judas...
Jesus' brothers, James, Joses, Simon, Judas.

- And His sisters are they not all with us
Jesus' sisters.

No mention of cousins.
You must assume they are cousins because the passage says sisters.

Mark 6:3,
- is not this the carpenter, the Son of Mary the brother of James and Joses and of Juda and Simon and are not His sisters here with us

No mention of cousins. No mention of Mary's sister.

NOT ONE MENTION IN THE ENTIRE NEW TESTAMENT THAT MARY'S SISTER HAD DAUGHTERS.

Matthew 13:55-56 and Mark 6:3 both mention Joseph and Mary and Jesus and brothers and sisters.

It is an assumption that Mary the wife of Cleophas has daughters.

It is also an assumption that Mary the wife of Cleophas is Mary's sister.

Greek does not use punctuation therefore the text can be interpreted as Mary's sister and Mary the wife of Cleophas as two different women.

John 19:25,
- now there stood by the cross of Jesus His mother and His mothers sister Mary the wife of Cleophas and Mary Magdalene

Four women,
1. Mary, Jesus' mother.
2. His mothers sister.
3. Mary the wife of Cleophas.
4. Mary Magdalene.

Even if Mary's sister is Mary the wife of Cleophas there is no scriptural evidence that Mary's sister had daughters.

 

[Titus]

Mary's sister had children and therefore the brothers and sisters of Jesus are Mary's sisters children.
This interpretation is not based on scriptural evidence only assumption.

The argumentation used in this doctrinal belief is as follows:

1. John 19:25 says Jesus' mothers sister was Mary the wife of Cleophas.

2. Matthew 27:56/ Mark 15:40 mention  a Mary who was the mother of James and Joses.

3. Therefore some conclude that Mary the wife of Cleophas = Mary the mother of James and Joses, making James and Joses sons of Mary's sister.

The problem with this conclusion is the Bible never explicitly makes this distinction.
The Bible does not state Mary the wife of Cleophas was the mother of James and Joses, nor does the Bible state that Mary's sister had sons.

And this still does not establish that Jesus' brothers in Matthew 13:55 were cousins.
Matthew simply calls them adelphoì brothers.

 

[Titus]

But you did make an assumption the moment you treated adelphoi as if it meant “biological siblings only.”

I never made that assumption.
Maybe you hear what you want to hear ? I dont know.
I told you to understand any passage you must know the CONTEXT!!!

 

[Titus]

Your argument depends on treating adelphoi as if it meant “biological siblings only.”
But the word does not mean that.

Wrong.
Context is what I use 100% for all conclusions on scripture.

 

[Titus]

The genealogical data are explicit:

• Mary of Clopas/Cleophas is Mary’s adelphe (John 19:25).
• Mary of Clopas/Cleophas is the mother of James and Joseph (Matthew 27:56; Mark 15:40, 16:1; Luke 24:10)

Wrong,
Nowhere in any passage does the Bible explicitly state Mary the wife of Cleophas is the mother of James and Joses.
Also nowhere is it taught Mary the Mother of Cleophas has daughters.
The Bible does explicitly state Jesus has sisters.

 

[Titus]

You did make that assumption, because you treated adelphoi as if “biological siblings only

If you repeat this 100 × it will still be wrong.
I decide adelphos best use based on the context.

 

[Titus]

Matthew 27:56, Mark 15:40, Mark 16:1, and Luke 24:10 all explicitly identify a woman named Mary as “the mother of James and Joseph/Joses

I'm not denying anything.
These verses do not identify this women as Mary the wife of Cleophas!!!
That is the assumption made by your tradition.

 

[Titus]

John 19:25 is silent about Mary's sister having children.
That is the assumption from your doctrinal tradition.

 

[Titus]

The scriptures never tie together Mary's sister in John 19:25 to the women and her sons in Matt. 27:56 ; Mark 15:40 ; Mark 16:1 or Luke 24:10.

Only your doctrine assumes the two are the same.