Jane_Doe22
Well-Known Member
Let's try to be respectful even when we disagree with people.It is creepy. It's like the Catholic fascination for dead bodies. They bury and rebury them and on and on and on. Ritual nonsense.
Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.
You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Let's try to be respectful even when we disagree with people.It is creepy. It's like the Catholic fascination for dead bodies. They bury and rebury them and on and on and on. Ritual nonsense.
Augustine, Calvin and Spurgeon were Gnostics. Spurgeon had a false "gospel."????? I don't believe that Paul was a gnostic either.!
I'm wondering why you're putting in so much effort when you know she's never going to see your position as being part of God's Truths of Sola Scriptura.
Augustine, Calvin and Spurgeon were Gnostics. Spurgeon had a false "gospel."
For the $0.02 it's worth, I really dislike the term "Biblical". I find it's much more productive to talk about "what's flat out stated in the Bible" and "what is in line with the Bible" as being two clearer topics.Because there may be people following this thread who are open to both biblical and extra-biblical arguments.
Incidentally, In post #312 I put forward several scriptural arguments, including one (point 8) which demonstrated from scripture, that James
& Joseph were not brothers of Jesus. But she ignored that.
Because there may be people following this thread who are open to both biblical and extra-biblical arguments.
Incidentally, In post #312 I put forward several scriptural arguments, including one (point 8) which demonstrated from scripture, that James
& Joseph were not brothers of Jesus. But she ignored that.
In post #386 I said I would ignore her in future.
BTW Spurgeon's Girl is only Sola Scriptura when it suits her.
And you cannot prove that Mary did have other children.
Because there may be people following this thread who are open to both biblical and extra-biblical arguments.
Incidentally, In post #312 I put forward several scriptural arguments, including one (point 8) which demonstrated from scripture, that James
& Joseph were not brothers of Jesus. But she ignored that.
In post #386 I said I would ignore her in future.
BTW Spurgeon's Girl is only Sola Scriptura when it suits her.
8. Finally there indications in scripture that the brothers and sisters referred to in Mt 13:55 (and the equivalent in other gospels) are not Jesus brothers in any genetic sense.
Mark says that at the foot of the cross was “Mary the mother of the younger James and of Joses [Joseph], and Salome” This was obviously not Mary the mother of Jesus, so there is another Mary with sons called James and Joseph.
Matthew similarly says of the women at the foot of the cross “Among them were Mary Magdalene and Mary the mother of James and Joseph” (Mt 26:56)
Luke says that at the tomb were “Mary Magdalene, Joanna, and Mary the mother of James” (Lk 24:10)
John says “Standing by the cross of Jesus were his mother and his mother’s sister, Mary the wife of Clopas, and Mary of Magdala.” (Jn 19:25). Now this could mean that Jesus’ mother’s sister was there (whatever is meant by “sister”) and Mary the wife of Clopas or they were the same person, but either way there were at least three Mary’s at the cross – Mary the mother of Jesus, Mary the wife of Clopas and Mary of Magdalene. Now Mary the mother of James and Joseph could have been a fourth or she could have been Mary wife of Clopas (let's call her Mary Clopas) Either way Mary the mother of Jesus was not the mother of James and Joseph mentioned as Jesus’ brothers. And since they were listed first, neither was Simon and Judas, since if the were they would hardly have been listed after non-brothers.
The Church historian Eusebius quoting from Hegesippus (110-180 AD) writes
After the martyrdom of James and the conquest of Jerusalem which immediately followed, it is said that those of the apostles and disciples of the Lord that were still living came together from all directions with those that were related to the Lord according to the flesh (for the majority of them also were still alive) to take counsel as to who was worthy to succeed James. They all with one consent pronounced Symeon, the son of Clopas, of whom the Gospel also makes mention; to be worthy of the episcopal throne of that parish. He was a cousin, as they say, of the Saviour. For Hegesippus records that Clopas was a brother of Joseph.
So Symeon (Simeon, Simon) was the cousin of Jesus, and Mary Clopas was therefore the sister-in-law of Mary the mother of Jesus. Again note the loose use of relationships. Mary Clopas is referred to as Mary’s “sister” in Jn 19:25 when she is actually her sister-in-law.
In the book of Jude he says “Jude, a slave of Jesus Christ and brother of James” (Jude 1:1) So Jude (or Judas) is probably the brother of James the son of Clopas.
Then also Luke when listing the apostles says James, son of Alpheus. But the Aramaic Alpheus can be rendered in Greek as either Alpheus or Clopas. So again James, the “brother” of the Lord is probably the son of Clopas.
Hi Candidus,
I have heard that term "Biblical Christianity" thrown around on this forum a whole lot but no one that preaches it agrees with what "it" is. Can you tell me what Christianity would look like today if we were all 'Biblical Christians'?
(Would there be no church buildings? No church hierarchy? If you believe baptism saves it's ok if you believe it doesn't save that's ok? Abortion and Gay marriage are acceptable? etc. etc.)
Curious Mary
1. Genealogies are not significant since the Birth of Jesus. the New Testament makes no ado about genealogy beyond the Birth of Christ. In Romans chapters 3-4, Paul writes that the only genealogy that matters is our spiritual connection to Abraham by faith. That we are not saved by genealogy of being born a Jew.Here are 8 points to consider.
1. There is no genealogy in the Bible that goes past Jesus.
2. Nowhere does the Bible say that Mary had other children.
3. There are different kinds of brothers (and sisters) - full blood brothers, half brothers, adoptive brothers. If a man and woman marry and both have children by a previous marriage they will be regarded as brothers and sisters even though they have no genetic relationship. The actual relationship of these “brothers” to Jesus cannot be established unless a genealogy is given, and it is not.
Secondly the word brother can be used in a very loose sense. In Aramaic there is no word for cousin and the word for brother (aha) would include cousin or even nephew. Whilst Greek does include a word for cousin but it is quite possible to translators/writers just used the Greek adelphos to replace the Aramaic aha. Moreover the Greek word for brother (adelphos) was also used very loosely for various degrees of kinship.
In the Greek translation of the Old Testament (the LXX) the word adelphos is used for Lot’s nephew (Gen 14:14). Other similar examples can be given.
Hi Candidus,May I ask for something on the flip-side?
Would a Biblical Church be a plush building of status and wealth, while the majority of those that give to support this luxury, live in poverty? Would it have a Fascist/Autocratic hierarchy? Would a Biblical Church gloss over homosexuality and pedophilia in their own ranks and sanction its continuance? Would a Biblical Church invent its own unique and unbiblical positions such as Popes and nuns? Sell indulgences? Persecute, imprison, torture and murder anyone who does not believe as their Fascist Leader orders?
What would a Biblical Christianity look like? It is not hard to identify what it wouldn't look like.
The last time i read it , in quite a few places , romans three , pslams fourteen , fifty three , ecclesiatics seven v twenty .Where EXACTLY does the Bible state that Mary was born without sin? Where oh where is it? You folks keep saying that, but no one has ever shown me that from the scripture. This is simply more 'made-up' doctrine without any scripture to back it up.
Ummm......You tell me. What did Jesus say about hierarchy? I don't see anywhere that he demolished hierarchy! I see where he SUPPORTED hierarchy!Jesus said what about the hierarchy? His teachings demolished the hierarchy.
IF JESUS was made in the same likeness of sinful flesh as was all mankind . As the author of hebrews clearly states ,Anything is possible. But... since the scriptures record the truth of the siblings of Jesus, I'm going with scripture instead of speculation.
Do you ever wonder WHY paul , john nor any other writer of the new testamentPerhaps the Catholic Church might want to invest in the genealogy records. Lacking that, the book known as the Holy Bible says this:
Mark 6:3
3 Is not this the carpenter, the son of Mary and brother of James and Joses and Judas and Simon? And are not his sisters here with us?” And they took offense at him.
Matthew 13:55-56
55 Is not this the carpenter's son? Is not his mother called Mary? And are not his brothers James and Joseph and Simon and Judas? 56 And are not all his sisters with us? Where then did this man get all these things?”
Mark 3:31-32
31 And his mother and his brothers came, and standing outside they sent to him and called him. 32 And a crowd was sitting around him, and they said to him, “Your mother and your brothers are outside, seeking you.”
Galatians 1:19
19 But I saw none of the other apostles except James the Lord's brother.
Yep Jesus had brothers, the Bible tells me so. Once again, the entire issue of Mary's perpetual virginity proves to be more "made-up" dogma without a scintilla of scripture to support it.
1 Peter 3:21 specifically says baptism does save you and other verses support that vs sooooo I will believe Scripture and not you.Baptism does not save as the thief on the cross proves. But I have no problem if you believe otherwise.
Well you got on part right . ANYONE who is able to get baptized , MUST DO SO . if the early church did it . WE DO IT .1 Peter 3:21 specifically says baptism does save you and other verses support that vs sooooo I will believe Scripture and not you.
The thief on the cross was saved thru grace which is ALSO what The Church and Scripture teaches. If one has an opportunity to be water baptized they should just like Scripture says (Acts 2:41, Acts 8:12, Acts 22:16 Acts 10;48 etc etc) They had time to do get baptized, the thief didn't. BIG DIFFERENCE!!
The Church teaches, practices and believes Scripture. Do you?