Redemption ?

CONCLUSION

So, with all this evidence in mind, I hold that:

(1) John's 'Mary the wife of Clopas ' is the same person as the Synoptics' 'Mary the mother of James and Joseph/Jose' (the Mary of the cross/tomb accounts).

(2) This Mary is in turn the 'sister' (i.e., close tribal relative) of Jesus' mother Mary.

(3) This is how Jesus is 'brothers' with James and Joseph (Jose).

(4) His other 'brothers' (Judas and Simon), as well as his 'sisters,' and the 'brothers' who don't believe in Him in John 7:5 are from other branches of His extended tribal family.

But, let's play devil's advocate.

If James, Joseph (Jose), Simon, and Judas ARE INDEED Jesus' fraternal brothers, then the Synoptics' Mary of the cross/tomb (i.e., the mother of James and Joseph/Jose) MUST be Jesus' mother as well.

And, after all, there ARE certain seemingly-logical arguments to support this:

-- James and Joseph (Jose) ARE called Jesus' brothers.

-- And, their mother IS named Mary (the same as Jesus')

-- And, one must admit, it's also possible that the comma between 'His mother's sister' and 'Mary the wife of Clopas' in John 19:25 may be distinguishing two different women instead of identifying Clopas' wife as the Virgin Mary's sister.

So, therefore, Mary the wife of Clopas may NOT be a relative at all NOR is she necessarily the same woman as 'Mary the mother of James and Joseph/Jose' in the Synoptics.

So, can 'Mary (Clopas) the mother of James and Joseph/Jose' be Jesus' mother as well?

Well, if this is the case, then

(A) Why is she never called the mother of Jesus in the cross/tomb accounts? (Wouldn't that be easier than constantly 'switching' between James and Jose?)

(B) Why is she never called the mother of the other brothers, Simon and Judas?

(C) Why isn't she simply called the wife of Joseph?

(D) Why is she always listed second (and in Luke, third) after Mary Magdalene?

(E) Why does Matthew refer to her as merely 'the other Mary' in 28:1?

(F) Why does John cite a second Mary at the cross: Mary the wife of Clopas? (A character who doesn't appear in the Synoptics, unless she's the mother of James and Joseph.)

(G) If John is calling his 'Mary the wife of Clopas' the virgin Mary's sister, how can the word 'adelphos' (or 'adelphe' in the feminine) be taken literally? Two sisters both named Mary?!

It therefore must be admitted that, if 'Mary the mother of James and Joseph/Jose' and Jesus' mother are one and the same, then

-- The three Synoptics (Matthew, Mark, and Luke) are INTENTIONALLY neglecting to call her Jesus' mother in their cross/tomb accounts (as if she's not Jesus' mother anymore.)

-- The Synoptics are also INTENTIONALLY depicting her as a minor character, less important than Mary Magdalene. And, in the case of Matthew, she's reduced to merely 'the other Mary' in 28:1.

Still playing devil's advocate, I can imagine only one reason why the Synoptics would 'demote' Jesus' mother like this; since ALL THREE refer to her as 'his mother' earlier in their Gospels. Perhaps, as some have argued, the Synoptics are UNDERLINING their accounts in Matt 12:46, Mark 3:35, and Luke 8:19-21, in which Jesus refuses to go out to meet His mother and brothers, but tells His disciples, 'Whoever does the will of God is my brother, and sister, and mother.' Perhaps they're making a 'theological point' by calling her only 'the mother of James and Joseph/Jose' in their later, cross/tomb accounts.

Well, although quite flimsy to begin with, this possibility is totally shattered, when one considers that in Acts 1:14 she is again called 'the mother of Jesus.' Since Acts is the companion volume to Luke (produced by the same author), it doesn't make much sense for Luke to call her 'Mary the mother of James' in 24:10, and then re-bestow the title 'mother of Jesus' in Acts 1:14 if he's trying to make such a 'theological point'.

Therefore, my whole 'devil's advocate' position is undone, and it is proved conclusively that the Synoptics' 'Mary the mother of James and Joseph/Jose' is NOT Jesus' mother.

And, since this Mary is certainly the mother of the same James and Joseph/Jose who are also called Jesus' 'brothers,' then it's equally proven that they COULD NOT have been the Lord's brothers in a fraternal sense.

So, who are these 'brothers' of Jesus? I hold that the term 'brothers' refers to His entire tribal group: the boys He grew up with, and with whom He was somehow related.

But if these men were 'cousins' or 'blood relatives,' some argue, why not simply use the word 'kinsman' or 'relative' as found in Luke 1:36? e.g. in which Elizabeth is described as Mary's 'relative.'

I answer this quite simply. First of all, I claim that His 'brothers' and 'sisters' were members of His extended family WITH WHOM JESUS WAS RAISED. Elizabeth's son, John the Baptist, on the other hand, would not have been referred to in this sense, because Jesus was not raised with him, although they were of the same blood.

Also, I argue that the term 'brother' is used in the Gospels because these particular men were known BY THIS TITLE in the early Church. I give you: 1 Corinthians 9:4-5, in which Paul is defending his right to be called an apostle:

'Do we not have the right to take along a Christian wife, as do the rest of the apostles, AND THE BROTHERS OF THE LORD, and Kephas

Since Paul is writing to Corinthians: citizens of a city in far off Greece, it is obvious that the distinguishing TITLE of 'brother' was well known to the universal Church, a Church which also knew very well what the title meant.

Also, even assuming (as the early Church writers Clement and Origen did) that Jesus' 'brothers' were the children of Joseph by a wife previous to Mary, Mark 6:3 clearly refers to Jesus as 'the carpenter.' Since the family profession was passed on from father to son, how many carpenters could a little town like Nazareth support? Certainly not five!

However, if the term 'brothers' refers instead to Jesus' extended tribal-family group (as I believe I've shown it does), we are left with the image of five young boys (among others) playing in the streets of Nazareth.

These were the Lord's childhood friends, with whom He grew to manhood; and given the scope of first century village life, with whom He was almost certainly related.
Jesus Brothers and Mary's Perpetual Virginity -- Catholic Apologetics, Philosophy, Spirituality

There is no biblical basis for Jesus having biological siblings, it's a false tradition of men that began some 150 years ago, around the same time cults were formed.

kepha31 said:

CONCLUSION

So, with all this evidence in mind, I hold that:

(1) John's 'Mary the wife of Clopas ' is the same person as the Synoptics' 'Mary the mother of James and Joseph/Jose' (the Mary of the cross/tomb accounts).

(2) This Mary is in turn the 'sister' (i.e., close tribal relative) of Jesus' mother Mary.

(3) This is how Jesus is 'brothers' with James and Joseph (Jose).

(4) His other 'brothers' (Judas and Simon), as well as his 'sisters,' and the 'brothers' who don't believe in Him in John 7:5 are from other branches of His extended tribal family.

But, let's play devil's advocate.

If James, Joseph (Jose), Simon, and Judas ARE INDEED Jesus' fraternal brothers, then the Synoptics' Mary of the cross/tomb (i.e., the mother of James and Joseph/Jose) MUST be Jesus' mother as well.

And, after all, there ARE certain seemingly-logical arguments to support this:

-- James and Joseph (Jose) ARE called Jesus' brothers.

-- And, their mother IS named Mary (the same as Jesus')

-- And, one must admit, it's also possible that the comma between 'His mother's sister' and 'Mary the wife of Clopas' in John 19:25 may be distinguishing two different women instead of identifying Clopas' wife as the Virgin Mary's sister.

So, therefore, Mary the wife of Clopas may NOT be a relative at all NOR is she necessarily the same woman as 'Mary the mother of James and Joseph/Jose' in the Synoptics.

So, can 'Mary (Clopas) the mother of James and Joseph/Jose' be Jesus' mother as well?

Well, if this is the case, then

(A) Why is she never called the mother of Jesus in the cross/tomb accounts? (Wouldn't that be easier than constantly 'switching' between James and Jose?)

(B) Why is she never called the mother of the other brothers, Simon and Judas?

(C) Why isn't she simply called the wife of Joseph?

(D) Why is she always listed second (and in Luke, third) after Mary Magdalene?

(E) Why does Matthew refer to her as merely 'the other Mary' in 28:1?

(F) Why does John cite a second Mary at the cross: Mary the wife of Clopas? (A character who doesn't appear in the Synoptics, unless she's the mother of James and Joseph.)

(G) If John is calling his 'Mary the wife of Clopas' the virgin Mary's sister, how can the word 'adelphos' (or 'adelphe' in the feminine) be taken literally? Two sisters both named Mary?!

It therefore must be admitted that, if 'Mary the mother of James and Joseph/Jose' and Jesus' mother are one and the same, then

-- The three Synoptics (Matthew, Mark, and Luke) are INTENTIONALLY neglecting to call her Jesus' mother in their cross/tomb accounts (as if she's not Jesus' mother anymore.)

-- The Synoptics are also INTENTIONALLY depicting her as a minor character, less important than Mary Magdalene. And, in the case of Matthew, she's reduced to merely 'the other Mary' in 28:1.

Click to expand...

Thats a lot of why thens, maybes and why nots. Its much easier just to believe the scripture says.

This is what happens when you put church developed doctrine equal with the Bible. To make them both work you have to make the Bible say something else than what it really says.

Thus... You make church doctrine100% the authority and despise the Bible.

There's your Bible support... Maybe, what ifs and it doesn't mean what it says and by the way... You need not worry about ignoring me. I no longer care what you have to say anyway.

FHII said:

Thats a lot of why thens, maybes and why nots. Its much easier just to believe the scripture says.

Click to expand...

I showed you clearly and explicitly what scripture says, it doesn't fit with your preconceptions. You should try refuting my post with scripture instead of crying about it.

This is what happens when you put church developed doctrine equal with the Bible. To make them both work you have to make the Bible say something else than what it really says.

Click to expand...

You have it backwards. The Church has always relied on the Bible as as primary source for doctrine. You haven't said anything about what "this is what happens". What is "this"??Instead you make cheap shots.

Thus... You make church doctrine100% the authority and despise the Bible.

Click to expand...

That is a LIE and can only be "proven" by ignorant anti-Catholic hate cults. They number in the millions on the internet.

There's your Bible support... Maybe, what ifs and it doesn't mean what it says and by the way... You need not worry about ignoring me. I no longer care what you have to say anyway.

Click to expand...

Because your nonsense is constantly refuted? Where is your biblical support for your man made tradition?

FHII said:

No one. I actually believed the Catholic Church taught that for years before I figured out through research that it wasn't the case. I sensed that is where things were going in this conversation. Appearently I wasn't the only one.

Click to expand...

I'm glad you actually took the time to learn the truth about what the Catholic Church teaches instead of simply proliferating lies like so many others here.

Thank you for that . . .

EndTimeWine said:

No I know the Catholic teaching you do NOT know scripture: Matthew 1:24-25
.
24Then Joseph being raised from sleep did as the angel of the Lord had bidden him, and took unto him his wife: 25And knew her not till she had brought forth her firstborn son: and he called his name JESUS.
From the use of know in the Bible. Some Bible translations, such as the King James Bible, translate the Hebrew word יָדַע‏ (yādaʿ) as know even in sexual contexts, giving rise to lines like "And Adam knew Eve his wife; and she conceived."
know someone in the biblical sense - Wiktionary
know someone in the biblical sense - Wiktionary

Catholic revised" Matthew 1:24-25 when Joseph woke from sleep ,he did as the angel of the Lord commanded him;he took his wife, but knew her not until she had borne her Son; and he called His name Jesus.

Click to expand...

FHII said:

The Bible says Joseph didn't know (have sexual relations) until after Jesus was born. Somehow people claim she never did, but it is a cleat inference that she did. Its by a lot of mental gymnastics and inference they get around this verse and the verses where Jesus's half brothers are named and that he also had sisters.

They go about it yet they themselves would not put up with such shenanigans that they themselves perform.

Click to expand...

NONSENSE.

Matt. 1:25 says: "but kept her a virgin until she gave birth to a Son; and he called His name Jesus."

Did Mary have other children after Jesus? The Bible does NOT support this idea. Let’s see what the Scriptures say about the use of the word, “until”.

2 Samuel 6:23 tells us: Therefore Michal the daughter of Saul had no child until the day of her death.
Are we to assume that Michal had children after she died?

Let’s also examine Acts 2:34-35 (also see Psalm 110:1, Matt 22:44): For David did not go up into heaven, but he himself said: 'The Lord said to my Lord, "Sit at my right hand until I make your enemies your footstool."'
Are we to surmise that Jesus will cease to sit at the right hand of the Father after his enemies are made his footstool?

The problem here is that the anti-Catholic attempts to apply 21st century English to Hebrew and Greek from a culture thousands of years ago.

BreadOfLife said:

NONSENSE.

Matt. 1:25 says: "but kept her a virgin until she gave birth to a Son; and he called His name Jesus."

Did Mary have other children after Jesus? The Bible does NOT support this idea. Let’s see what the Scriptures say about the use of the word, “until”.

2 Samuel 6:23 tells us: Therefore Michal the daughter of Saul had no child until the day of her death.
Are we to assume that Michal had children after she died?

Let’s also examine Acts 2:34-35 (also see Psalm 110:1, Matt 22:44): For David did not go up into heaven, but he himself said: 'The Lord said to my Lord, "Sit at my right hand until I make your enemies your footstool."'
Are we to surmise that Jesus will cease to sit at the right hand of the Father after his enemies are made his footstool?

The problem here is that the anti-Catholic attempts to apply 21st century English to Hebrew and Greek from a culture thousands of years ago.

Click to expand...

Twist and lie all you want, Micah is NOT Mary. Matthew 1:25 is very clear:
Matthew 1:25King James Version (KJV)
25 And knew her not till she had brought forth her firstborn son: and he called his name Jesus.
Catholic revised version Matt.1:24-25 , When Joseph woke from sleep , he did as the angel of the Lord commanded him; he Took his wife, BUT KNEW HER NOT UNTIL SHE HAD BORNE A SON; and he called his name Jesus. As you said this is the 21st century, and the scriptures have not been altered or changed. This, because the Hebrew to Greek to English text are correct. And you speak neither Greek nor Hebrew and MOST English speaking persons do NOT. Nor have you present any Hebrew or Greek text refuting the translation. You reinvent scripture for your own lie. Let no one remove or change one letter of scripture or prophecy from its original stated accounts, or he shall be cut OFF and all the plagues mentioned in scripture shall be his lot.

BreadOfLife said:

NONSENSE.

Matt. 1:25 says: "but kept her a virgin until she gave birth to a Son; and he called His name Jesus."

Did Mary have other children after Jesus? The Bible does NOT support this idea. Let’s see what the Scriptures say about the use of the word, “until”.

2 Samuel 6:23 tells us: Therefore Michal the daughter of Saul had no child until the day of her death.
Are we to assume that Michal had children after she died?

Let’s also examine Acts 2:34-35 (also see Psalm 110:1, Matt 22:44): For David did not go up into heaven, but he himself said: 'The Lord said to my Lord, "Sit at my right hand until I make your enemies your footstool."'
Are we to surmise that Jesus will cease to sit at the right hand of the Father after his enemies are made his footstool?

The problem here is that the anti-Catholic attempts to apply 21st century English to Hebrew and Greek from a culture thousands of years ago.

Click to expand...

The enemy here is you! The enemy of the Gospel! And as for her having other children, that is not the discussion. Did she have a husband? YES!

EndTimeWine said:

Twist and lie all you want, Micah is NOT Mary. Matthew 1:25 is very clear:
Matthew 1:25King James Version (KJV)
25 And knew her not till she had brought forth her firstborn son: and he called his name Jesus.
Catholic revised version Matt.1:24-25 , When Joseph woke from sleep , he did as the angel of the Lord commanded him; he Took his wife, BUT KNEW HER NOT UNTIL SHE HAD BORNE A SON; and he called his name Jesus. As you said this is the 21st century, and the scriptures have not been altered or changed. This, because the Hebrew to Greek to English text are correct. And you speak neither Greek nor Hebrew and MOST English speaking persons do NOT. Nor have you present any Hebrew or Greek text refuting the translation. You reinvent scripture for your own lie. Let no one remove or change one letter of scripture or prophecy from its original stated accounts, or he shall be cut OFF and all the plagues mentioned in scripture shall be his lot.

Click to expand...

"Twist and lie"??

The only one "twisting" here is YOU. You are assuming and adding things to Scripture that simply are not there. I have you no less than FOUR examples from the Word of God that show the use of the word "until" that does NOT indicate anything afterward.

Also - there is not ONE verse of Scripture that says Mary was anybody's mother but Jesus'.
If you can show us ONE verse that says Mary had other children - please present it.

Chapter and Verse, please . . .

EndTimeWine said:

The enemy here is you! The enemy of the Gospel! And as for her having other children, that is not the discussion. Did she have a husband? YES!

Click to expand...

And not ONE verse of Scripture tells us that she lost her virginity.

Mary’s question to the Angel Gabriel is very telling about her intention to remain a virgin:

Luke 1:34: Then Mary said to the angel, “How can this be, since I do not know a man?”
Mary was a betrothed girl who knew about marital relations. She didn’t say “How can this be, since I have not known a man?” She said “How can this be, since I do not know a man?”
She was stating her intention to remain a virgin and was puzzled by Gabriel’s announcement that she was to have a child.

She knew that God was aware of her intentions. Her bewilderment and the words “I do not know”, as opposed to “I have not known”, is clear evidence that she had no intention of having marital relations.

The only enemy of the Gospel here is the YOU who tries to inject his own understanding onto the Gospel and pass it off as "truth."

He can't. post 260, 261, 262 all based on sola scriptura, destroys the 19th century myth. He is forced to ignore the multitude of scriptures.

BreadOfLife said:

And not ONE verse of Scripture tells us that she lost her virginity.

Mary’s question to the Angel Gabriel is very telling about her intention to remain a virgin:

Luke 1:34: Then Mary said to the angel, “How can this be, since I do not know a man?”
Mary was a betrothed girl who knew about marital relations. She didn’t say “How can this be, since I have not known a man?” She said “How can this be, since I do not know a man?”
She was stating her intention to remain a virgin and was puzzled by Gabriel’s announcement that she was to have a child.

She knew that God was aware of her intentions. Her bewilderment and the words “I do not know”, as opposed to “I have not known”, is clear evidence that she had no intention of having marital relations.

The only enemy of the Gospel here is the YOU who tries to inject his own understanding onto the Gospel and pass it off as "truth."

Click to expand...

The Birth of Jesus Foretold

26And in the sixth month the angel Gabriel was sent from God unto a city of Galilee, named Nazareth, 27To a virgin espoused to a man whose name was Joseph, of the house of David; and the virgin's name was Mary. 28And the angel came in unto her, and said, Hail, thou that art highly favoured, the Lord is with thee: blessed art thou among women. 29And when she saw him, she was troubled at his saying, and cast in her mind what manner of salutation this should be. 30And the angel said unto her, Fear not, Mary: for thou hast found favour with God. 31And, behold, thou shalt conceive in thy womb, and bring forth a son, and shalt call his name JESUS. 32He shall be great, and shall be called the Son of the Highest: and the Lord God shall give unto him the throne of his father David: 33And he shall reign over the house of Jacob for ever; and of his kingdom there shall be no end. 34Then said Mary unto the angel, How shall this be, seeing I know not a man? 35And the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God. 36And, behold, thy cousin Elisabeth, she hath also conceived a son in her old age: and this is the sixth month with her, who was called barren. 37For with God nothing shall be impossible. 38And Mary said, Behold the handmaid of the Lord; be it unto me according to thy word. And the angel departed from her.

WOW! You are twisted. This she said before Joseph took Mary as his wife . This was stated ate the ANNUNCIATION. You do not know Mary's intentions. And She was young and had not Married as of yet. She was betrothed:
be·trothed
bəˈtrōT͟Hd,bəˈtrôTHd/
noun
noun: betrothed
the person to whom one is engaged.
"how long have you known your betrothed?"
synonyms: engaged (to be married), promised/pledged in marriage; More
literaryaffianced;
archaicplighted, espoused
"she is betrothed to a man of her parents' choosing"
antonyms: unattached
Luke1:27
Gabriel Foretells Jesus' Birth
26In the sixth month, God sent the angel Gabriel to a town in Galilee called Nazareth, 27to a virgin pledged in marriage to a man named Joseph, who was of the house of David. And the virgin’s name was Mary. 28The angel appeared to her and said, “Greetings, you who are highly favored! The Lord is with you.”…
Mary had every intention of following through with her wifely duty according to the Hebrew custom of marriage. What took place in her was before any man knew her. And this in itself further proves that the word 'KNOWN", "KNEW" or "KNOW" refers to the consummating of a marriage. And Matthew1:24-25
Matthew 1:24-25King James Version (KJV)
24 Then Joseph being raised from sleep did as the angel of the Lord had bidden him, and took unto him his wife:

25 And knew her not till she had brought forth her firstborn son: and he called his name Jesus.

Joseph knew her not, until she brought forth her firstborn son.

From the use of know in the Bible. Some Bible translations, such as the King James Bible, translate the Hebrew word יָדַע‏ (yādaʿ) as know even in sexual contexts, giving rise to lines like "And Adam knew Eve his wife; and she conceived."
know someone in the biblical sense - Wiktionary

Again, rejecting the gospel for the doctrine of men, not a good idea!

FHII said:

Thats a lot of why thens, maybes and why nots. Its much easier just to believe the scripture says.

This is what happens when you put church developed doctrine equal with the Bible. To make them both work you have to make the Bible say something else than what it really says.

Thus... You make church doctrine100% the authority and despise the Bible.

There's your Bible support... Maybe, what ifs and it doesn't mean what it says and by the way... You need not worry about ignoring me. I no longer care what you have to say anyway.

Click to expand...

i notice a lot more bolding and other whatnot lately, too lol. Channelling BoL in 3, 2, 1...

EndTimeWine said:

The Birth of Jesus Foretold

26And in the sixth month the angel Gabriel was sent from God unto a city of Galilee, named Nazareth, 27To a virgin espoused to a man whose name was Joseph, of the house of David; and the virgin's name was Mary. 28And the angel came in unto her, and said, Hail, thou that art highly favoured, the Lord is with thee: blessed art thou among women. 29And when she saw him, she was troubled at his saying, and cast in her mind what manner of salutation this should be. 30And the angel said unto her, Fear not, Mary: for thou hast found favour with God. 31And, behold, thou shalt conceive in thy womb, and bring forth a son, and shalt call his name JESUS. 32He shall be great, and shall be called the Son of the Highest: and the Lord God shall give unto him the throne of his father David: 33And he shall reign over the house of Jacob for ever; and of his kingdom there shall be no end. 34Then said Mary unto the angel, How shall this be, seeing I know not a man? 35And the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God. 36And, behold, thy cousin Elisabeth, she hath also conceived a son in her old age: and this is the sixth month with her, who was called barren. 37For with God nothing shall be impossible. 38And Mary said, Behold the handmaid of the Lord; be it unto me according to thy word. And the angel departed from her.

WOW! You are twisted. This she said before Joseph took Mary as his wife . This was stated ate the ANNUNCIATION. You do not know Mary's intentions. And She was young and had not Married as of yet. She was betrothed:
be·trothed
bəˈtrōT͟Hd,bəˈtrôTHd/
noun
noun: betrothed
the person to whom one is engaged.
"how long have you known your betrothed?"
synonyms: engaged (to be married), promised/pledged in marriage; More
literaryaffianced;
archaicplighted, espoused
"she is betrothed to a man of her parents' choosing"
antonyms: unattached
Luke1:27
Gabriel Foretells Jesus' Birth
26In the sixth month, God sent the angel Gabriel to a town in Galilee called Nazareth, 27to a virgin pledged in marriage to a man named Joseph, who was of the house of David. And the virgin’s name was Mary. 28The angel appeared to her and said, “Greetings, you who are highly favored! The Lord is with you.”…
Mary had every intention of following through with her wifely duty according to the Hebrew custom of marriage. What took place in her was before any man knew her. And this in itself further proves that the word 'KNOWN", "KNEW" or "KNOW" refers to the consummating of a marriage. And Matthew1:24-25
Matthew 1:24-25King James Version (KJV)
24 Then Joseph being raised from sleep did as the angel of the Lord had bidden him, and took unto him his wife:

25 And knew her not till she had brought forth her firstborn son: and he called his name Jesus.

Joseph knew her not, until she brought for her firstborn son.

From the use of know in the Bible. Some Bible translations, such as the King James Bible, translate the Hebrew word יָדַע‏ (yādaʿ) as know even in sexual contexts, giving rise to lines like "And Adam knew Eve his wife; and she conceived."
know someone in the biblical sense - Wiktionary

Again, rejecting the gospel for the doctrine of men, not a good idea!

Click to expand...

You can bring a horse to the water, but you can't make him drink.

EndTimeWine said:

The Birth of Jesus Foretold

26And in the sixth month the angel Gabriel was sent from God unto a city of Galilee, named Nazareth, 27To a virgin espoused to a man whose name was Joseph, of the house of David; and the virgin's name was Mary. 28And the angel came in unto her, and said, Hail, thou that art highly favoured, the Lord is with thee: blessed art thou among women. 29And when she saw him, she was troubled at his saying, and cast in her mind what manner of salutation this should be. 30And the angel said unto her, Fear not, Mary: for thou hast found favour with God. 31And, behold, thou shalt conceive in thy womb, and bring forth a son, and shalt call his name JESUS. 32He shall be great, and shall be called the Son of the Highest: and the Lord God shall give unto him the throne of his father David: 33And he shall reign over the house of Jacob for ever; and of his kingdom there shall be no end. 34Then said Mary unto the angel, How shall this be, seeing I know not a man? 35And the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God. 36And, behold, thy cousin Elisabeth, she hath also conceived a son in her old age: and this is the sixth month with her, who was called barren. 37For with God nothing shall be impossible. 38And Mary said, Behold the handmaid of the Lord; be it unto me according to thy word. And the angel departed from her.

WOW! You are twisted. This she said before Joseph took Mary as his wife . This was stated ate the ANNUNCIATION. You do not know Mary's intentions. And She was young and had not Married as of yet. She was betrothed:
be·trothed
bəˈtrōT͟Hd,bəˈtrôTHd/
noun
noun: betrothed
the person to whom one is engaged.
"how long have you known your betrothed?"
synonyms: engaged (to be married), promised/pledged in marriage; More
literaryaffianced;
archaicplighted, espoused
"she is betrothed to a man of her parents' choosing"
antonyms: unattached
Luke1:27
Gabriel Foretells Jesus' Birth
26In the sixth month, God sent the angel Gabriel to a town in Galilee called Nazareth, 27to a virgin pledged in marriage to a man named Joseph, who was of the house of David. And the virgin’s name was Mary. 28The angel appeared to her and said, “Greetings, you who are highly favored! The Lord is with you.”…
Mary had every intention of following through with her wifely duty according to the Hebrew custom of marriage. What took place in her was before any man knew her. And this in itself further proves that the word 'KNOWN", "KNEW" or "KNOW" refers to the consummating of a marriage. And Matthew1:24-25
Matthew 1:24-25King James Version (KJV)
24 Then Joseph being raised from sleep did as the angel of the Lord had bidden him, and took unto him his wife:

25 And knew her not till she had brought forth her firstborn son: and he called his name Jesus.

Joseph knew her not, until she brought for her firstborn son.

From the use of know in the Bible. Some Bible translations, such as the King James Bible, translate the Hebrew word יָדַע‏ (yādaʿ) as know even in sexual contexts, giving rise to lines like "And Adam knew Eve his wife; and she conceived."
know someone in the biblical sense - Wiktionary

Again, rejecting the gospel for the doctrine of men, not a good idea!

Click to expand...

Which is precisely what YOU are guilty of.

NOWHERE in Scripture does it say that Mary had marital relations.
NOWHERE in Scripture does it say that she had other children.
As a matter of fact - the evidence against these fallacies is overwhelming, as shown by myself and Kepha31.

YOURS is a precept of MEN - not Sacred Scripture.

101G said:

You can bring a horse to the water, but you can't make him drink.

Click to expand...

And we can try to get anti-Catholics to stop spewing heresy after heresy and falsehood after falsehood - but only the Holy Spirit can change their minds . . .

BreadOfLife said:

And we can try to get anti-Catholics to stop spewing heresy after heresy and falsehood after falsehood - but only the Holy Spirit can change their minds . . .

Click to expand...

all been telling you the truth, scripture, 2 Timothy 3:7 "Ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth". ever Learning people can never accept the fact, Matthew 1:24 & 25 "Then Joseph being raised from sleep did as the angel of the Lord had bidden him, and took unto him his wife: And knew her not till she had brought forth her firstborn son: and he called his name JESUS”. oh yes, Mary got the penetration, by her HUSBAND. so he "KNEW" her, meaning he had sex with her. with that, that ended that virginity.... (smile), go Joseph, my man....., as Joseph ended that virginity, so is this conversation.....

Peace in Christ Jesus/Yeshua.

101G said:

all been telling you the truth, scripture, 2 Timothy 3:7 "Ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth". ever Learning people can never accept the fact, Matthew 1:24 & 25 "Then Joseph being raised from sleep did as the angel of the Lord had bidden him, and took unto him his wife: And knew her not till she had brought forth her firstborn son: and he called his name JESUS”. oh yes, Mary got the penetration, by her HUSBAND. so he "KNEW" her, meaning he had sex with her. with that, that ended that virginity.... (smile), go Joseph, my man....., as Joseph ended that virginity, so is this conversation....

Peace in Christ Jesus/Yeshua.

Click to expand...

While you're posting your disrespectful filth - why don't you try addressing post #266??
Here is it again, in case you missed it . . .

NONSENSE.

Matt. 1:25 says: "but kept her a virgin until she gave birth to a Son; and he called His name Jesus."

Did Mary have other children after Jesus? The Bible does NOT support this idea. Let’s see what the Scriptures say about the use of the word, “until”.

2 Samuel 6:23 tells us: Therefore Michal the daughter of Saul had no child UNTIL the day of her death.
Are we to assume that Michal had children after she died?

Let’s also examine Acts 2:34-35 (also see Psalm 110:1, Matt 22:44): For David did not go up into heaven, but he himself said: 'The Lord said to my Lord, "Sit at my right hand UNTIL I make your enemies your footstool."'
Are we to surmise that Jesus will cease to sit at the right hand of the Father after his enemies are made his footstool?

Regarding the burial of Moses - Deut. 3:4 tells us in no uncertain terms that "no one knows the place of his burial UNTIL this day.
Does this mean that somebody found out where he was buried AFTER this was written??

The problem here is that the anti-Catholics like YOU attempt to apply 21st century English to Hebrew and Greek from a culture thousands of years ago. This is what educated people refer to as "Linguistic Bankruptcy" . . .

BreadOfLife said:

While you're posting your disrespectful filth - why don't you try addressing post #266??
Here is it again, in case you missed it . . .

NONSENSE.

Matt. 1:25 says: "but kept her a virgin until she gave birth to a Son; and he called His name Jesus."

Did Mary have other children after Jesus? The Bible does NOT support this idea. Let’s see what the Scriptures say about the use of the word, “until”.

2 Samuel 6:23 tells us: Therefore Michal the daughter of Saul had no child UNTIL the day of her death.
Are we to assume that Michal had children after she died?

Let’s also examine Acts 2:34-35 (also see Psalm 110:1, Matt 22:44): For David did not go up into heaven, but he himself said: 'The Lord said to my Lord, "Sit at my right hand UNTIL I make your enemies your footstool."'
Are we to surmise that Jesus will cease to sit at the right hand of the Father after his enemies are made his footstool?

Regarding the burial of Moses - Deut. 3:4 tells us in no uncertain terms that "no one knows the place of his burial UNTIL this day.
Does this mean that somebody found out where he was buried AFTER this was written??

The problem here is that the anti-Catholics like YOU attempt to apply 21st century English to Hebrew and Greek from a culture thousands of years ago. This is what educated people refer to as "Linguistic Bankruptcy" . . .

Click to expand...

Haven't changed nothing. I suggest you read your bible instead of your POSTS. now that's strike 3 for you, and you're out.

Peace in Christ Jesus.

PS Just don't forget, Joseph is the man....... .

Oop’s I made a mistake…… yes, me. I told you to read “YOUR” bible. That’s the mistake. Let me correct myself, read a “REAL” bible, not YOUR bible. Shew…. almost lost it there……..

Peace in Yeshua the Christ.