Mother of James?

theefaith · Nov 23, 2020

DNB said:
Yes, Mary is the mother of James, Joses, Jude, Simon, and more than one daughter. And in order to give birth to these children she had to have intercourse with Joseph, conceive the children in her womb, and then deliver them at the time of gestation.

Mary had vowed to marry Joseph, so that it was already settled in her mind that she would be betrothed to someone other than the Lord. And, was prepared to become unchaste in doing so, to someone other than the Lord. This is where her heart was at, at the time of the annunciation. And thus, the duty of bearing the Son of God did not circumvent her plans with Joseph, but rather, postponed them. Nowhere did Gabriel ever impose this charge upon her, that both her and Joseph must remain virgins until death. Yes, such an injunction directed towards Mary, evidently would have affected Joseph also, but God neither demanded celibacy between them, nor even the annulment of the marriage and all the duties required of husband and wife (1 Corinthians 7:3). All the appellations that were ascribed to Mary, that you quoted, are speaking of the purity of her heart and faith, not her undivided spiritual and physical devotion to God.

No they are not Mary’s children!

Is 7:14 shall bear a son (singular)
Same as Matt 1:23

James is the son of zebedee, and the other James is the son of Alpheus not Joseph!
Matt 10:2-3

In Hebrew culture any close relative can be called brother or sister, lot was called Abraham’s brother but was his nephew.

Gen 12:5 and Abram took Sarai his wife, and Lot his brother's son..

Gen 13:8 And Abram said unto Lot, Let there be no strife, I pray thee, between me and thee, and between my herdsmen and thy herdsmen; for we are Brothers.

The 12 sons of Jacob are brothers but all are not the children of Leah and all are not the children of Rachel! They may be brothers and sisters but they are simply not the children of Blessed Mary ever Virgin mother of God!

Jose’s, Simon Salome are children of another Mary!

Mk 15:40 There were also women looking on afar off: among whom was Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James the less and of Joses, and Salome; (NOT Mary the mother of Jesus)
Her one and only son is God! Lk 1:35

this verse is absolute! Inviolable!
Mary does not know (have sex) with any man!
Lk 1:34 Then said Mary unto the angel, How shall this be, seeing I know not a man?
(This verse imply’s a vow of perpetual virginity, She refuses even the exalted dignity of mother of God and mother of our savior if it means violating Her vow of perpetual virginity)

2nd Timothy Group · Nov 23, 2020

theefaith said:
Would you have sex with your wife if you heard that God had conceived in her? Joseph was full of fear at Mary’s immaculate purity!

Matt 19:29

I am sooooper confused. What does Matt 19:29 have to do with having sex with Mary, and Joseph being afraid?

Matthew 19:29 CSB - "And everyone who has left houses or brothers or sisters or father or mother or children or fields because of my name will receive a hundred times more and will inherit eternal life."

Sir . . . I am deeply worried for you. The passages that you use to support Pure, 100% speculation are in the likes of the Jolly Green Giant. For the life of me, I cannot understand anything that you're saying. Oh . . . man.

theefaith · Nov 23, 2020

Marymog said:
Good morning.

I don't recall every communicating with you so I am not sure how you have decided to interpret Gods words.

If, according to you, works are useless then how do you interpret these passages?

What does it profit, my brethren, if someone says he has faith but does not have works? Can faith save him? You have faith, and I have works.” Show me your faith without your works and I will show you my faith by my works. You believe that there is one God. You do well. Even the demons believe—and tremble! But do you want to know, O foolish man, that faith without works is dead?

Bible study Mary!

BTW....I agree with you....I am curious also....Why is this (the OP) important

St Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica, III.28.3 (13th century):

"Without any hesitation we must abhor the error of Helvidius, who dared to assert that Christ's Mother, after His Birth, was carnally known by Joseph, and bore other children.
Advertising
For, in the first place, this is derogatory to Christ's perfection: for as He is in His Godhead the Only-Begotten of the Father, being thus His Son in every respect perfect, so it was becoming that He should be the Only-begotten son of His Mother, as being her perfect offspring.

theefaith · Nov 23, 2020

Pearl said:
@Marymog Hi Mary, I'm good thanks. Lockdown isn't bothering me as I have hobbies and read a lot. How about you?

I agree that it is good for single men and women to abstain from sexual relations. If more people did that there wouldn't be so many women clamouring for abortions.
However, I don't think it is right for a married woman, specially not a newly-married one, to keep away from her husband. The bible tells wives to submit to their husbands, and then there is this verse:

1 Corinthians 7:5 Do not deprive each other of sexual relations, unless you both agree to refrain from sexual intimacy for a limited time so you can give yourselves more completely to prayer. Afterward, you should come together again so that Satan won’t be able to tempt you because of your lack of self-control.

And I can't find any verse in the bible that tells us Mary didn't go on to have a normal married life with her husband. But we have spoken of these things before Mary and we'll have to disagree but we can still be friends I hope.

I can!!!

lk 1:34 Then said Mary unto the angel, How shall this be, seeing I know not a man? (Does not have sex)

(This verse imply’s a vow of perpetual virginity, She refuses even the exalted dignity of mother of God and mother of our savior if it means violating Her vow)

Marymog · Nov 23, 2020

DNB said:
Yes, Mary is the mother of James, Joses, Jude, Simon, and more than one daughter. And in order to give birth to these children she had to have intercourse with Joseph, conceive the children in her womb, and then deliver them at the time of gestation.

Mary had vowed to marry Joseph, so that it was already settled in her mind that she would be betrothed to someone other than the Lord. And, was prepared to become unchaste in doing so, to someone other than the Lord. This is where her heart was at, at the time of the annunciation. And thus, the duty of bearing the Son of God did not circumvent her plans with Joseph, but rather, postponed them. Nowhere did Gabriel ever impose this charge upon her, that both her and Joseph must remain virgins until death. Yes, such an injunction directed towards Mary, evidently would have affected Joseph also, but God neither demanded celibacy between them, nor even the annulment of the marriage and all the duties required of husband and wife (1 Corinthians 7:3). All the appellations that were ascribed to Mary, that you quoted, are speaking of the purity of her heart and faith, not her undivided spiritual and physical devotion to God.

Hi DNB,

It is true that Mary was betrothed to Joseph when Gabriel visited her and Joseph! The problem with your theory is that when the angel Gabriel tells Mary that she will bear a son, Mary asked Gabriel “How shall this be, since I have no husband?”. As stated earlier at this point Mary was already betrothed to Joseph sooooooo why would she then be so surprised at being told she would conceive a child(ren) if she were planning on having children with Joseph in the usual way???? It doesn't make sense for her to ask HOW she was going to have a child if she planned on having sexual relations and it only makes sense if Mary was planning to remain virgin.

Here are some interesting 1st century quotes from writings I have read concerning virginity:

It is good to abstain from sexual relations. I wish that all were as I myself am. But each has his own gift from God. There are eunuchs who have made themselves eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. It is these who have not defiled themselves with women, for they are virgins. It is these who follow the Lamb wherever he goes. These have been redeemed from mankind as first fruits for God and the Lamb, and in their mouth no lie was found, for they are blameless.

Mary

theefaith · Nov 23, 2020

Pearl said:
I don't go along with that, but then I'm not Catholic.

then your not in the new covenant not in communion with God thru the mediator thru faith and baptism and the sacraments

theefaith · Nov 23, 2020

2nd Timothy Group said:
I am sooooper confused. What does Matt 19:29 have to do with having sex with Mary, and Joseph being afraid?

Matthew 19:29 CSB - "And everyone who has left houses or brothers or sisters or father or mother or children or fields because of my name will receive a hundred times more and will inherit eternal life."

Sir . . . I am deeply worried for you. The passages that you use to support Pure, 100% speculation are in the likes of the Jolly Green Giant. For the life of me, I cannot understand anything that you're saying. Oh . . . man.

it refers to sacrificing a lower good for a higher good, Mary and Joseph sacrificed the lower good of marital sex for the sake of bringing salvation to all men!

Marymog · Nov 23, 2020

Pearl said:
@Marymog Hi Mary, I'm good thanks. Lockdown isn't bothering me as I have hobbies and read a lot. How about you?

This pandemic has increased my stress level but I will get thru it with His help. I miss traveling which is my biggest hobby.

Marymog · Nov 23, 2020

2nd Timothy Group said:
I don't recall ever communicating with you, either. Thus, what you've written is particularly confusing. But, that's ok.

Hi,

I quoted Scripture soooooo are you saying that you find Scripture particularly confusing? Help me out here!!!

Mary

Marymog · Nov 23, 2020

theefaith said:
St Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica, III.28.3 (13th century):

"Without any hesitation we must abhor the error of Helvidius, who dared to assert that Christ's Mother, after His Birth, was carnally known by Joseph, and bore other children.
Advertising
For, in the first place, this is derogatory to Christ's perfection: for as He is in His Godhead the Only-Begotten of the Father, being thus His Son in every respect perfect, so it was becoming that He should be the Only-begotten son of His Mother, as being her perfect offspring.

Thank you theefaith. I figured there was more to this than my surface understanding. It makes sense now that I read the Aquinas quote you provided.

The point I am trying to make is that it really isn't important to the average Christian who is dedicated to doing good works, trying their best to live like Christ, showing Christ love to everyone etc. I hope that clarifies my stance. From a theological perspective your point is important. Most Christians are no theologians.

Respectfully, Mary

PS....You and @BreadOfLife post very fruitful stuff. I have learned much from the both of you....Thank you.

2nd Timothy Group · Nov 23, 2020

theefaith said:
it refers to sacrificing a lower good for a higher good, Mary and Joseph sacrificed the lower good of marital sex for the sake of bringing salvation to all men!

What in the world? You are imposing ideas into Scripture that are completely unsubstantiated. If you can do that, and you want us all to believe you, when and if we do the same thing . . . why do you not believe us? It seems to me that you are enjoying a one-way street, here, and at what point does this one-way thinking stop? Can we just begin to assume anything we want, thus rewriting Scripture altogether?

I would be very, very careful if I were you. I do all that I can to ensure that what I teach is accurate. And if it isn't, I clean it up FAST!

Revelation 22:18-19 KJV - "For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book: 19 And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and [from] the things which are written in this book."

theefaith . . . I beg of you to please reconsider what you are teaching people. What you are doing is extremely dangerous, not only to your soul, but you may be leading many, many people astray. I beg of you to please reconsider. Please!

2nd Timothy Group · Nov 23, 2020

Marymog said:
Hi,

I quoted Scripture soooooo are you saying that you find Scripture particularly confusing? Help me out here!!!

Mary

No, I find Scriptures to be fairly clear. It is you that is writing to me when I never wrote to you, but instead I wrote to "theefaith." I think you thought I was writing to you, but I wasn't. The end.

2nd Timothy Group · Nov 23, 2020

Marymog said:
From a theological perspective your point is important. Most Christians are no theologians.

I can't even hold a rational set of correspondence with theefaith, and thus cannot ever get to the bottom of one teaching (I'd really like to, but find that resolving those teachings is virtually impossible. Communication is a requirement for resolution). If a person cannot back up what they're saying, how can these teachings be important?

Marymog · Nov 23, 2020

Pearl said:
I agree that it is good for single men and women to abstain from sexual relations. If more people did that there wouldn't be so many women clamouring for abortions.
However, I don't think it is right for a married woman, specially not a newly-married one, to keep away from her husband. The bible tells wives to submit to their husbands, and then there is this verse:

[SIZE=4]1 Corinthians 7:5 [/SIZE] Do not deprive each other of sexual relations, unless you both agree to refrain from sexual intimacy for a limited time so you can give yourselves more completely to prayer. Afterward, you should come together again so that Satan won’t be able to tempt you because of your lack of self-control.

And I can't find any verse in the bible that tells us Mary didn't go on to have a normal married life with her husband. But we have spoken of these things before Mary and we'll have to disagree but we can still be friends I hope.

Hi Pearl,

Uggg....abortion!!! You touched on a subject that get's under my skin. How can anyone ESSPICALLY people that call themselves Christian support it???? Baffling to me!!

Scripture (the passage that I quoted) does not say it is good for single men/women to abstain from sexual relations. It says....without equivocation....It is good for a man to abstain from sexual relations or another translation says not to touch a woman. That verse is not directed to single people who desire a relationship with the opposite sex. It just flat out says it is good not to do it and later passages suggest it is good if you can handle it. If you can't handle, get married. Paul even calls it (remaining a virgin) a "gift from God". Do you believe that God would give Paul that gift and not give Mary, the mother of His child, that gift?

Paul permits abstention from marital rights by mutual consent in passage 7:5 that you quoted. Would it be fair to say if both Mary and Joseph agreed that since she gave birth to the child of God, or that she was in effect the spouse of God, that they would agree NOT to have sexual relations? Wouldn't they then fulfill that "mutual consent" passage?

Absence of passages from Scripture that tells us Mary didn't go on to have a normal married life is not proof she did go on to have a normal married life. Logically Mary and Joseph DID NOT have a "normal married life" since she gave birth to Gods son after she was betrothed to Joseph! If, according to your theory, having children is a normal part of a married life then putting your theory into practice Mary was married to God since she had his child. A life of complete abstinence is not the recommended way for ordinary married couples to interact. But Mary and Joseph were not an ordinary married couple since they were entrusted with raising the Son of God. This circumstance was so unusual that their marriage could not have been an ordinary one, because the child they nurtured was no ordinary child.

Scripture makes it clear that celibacy is a higher state than marriage! Is it possible that Mary and Joseph were able to obtain that higher state by not giving into sexual desires?

In a true friendship both can disagree with each other and still remain friends.

Mary

theefaith · Nov 23, 2020

Marymog said:
Thank you theefaith. I figured there was more to this than my surface understanding. It makes sense now that I read the Aquinas quote you provided.

The point I am trying to make is that it really isn't important to the average Christian who is dedicated to doing good works, trying their best to live like Christ, showing Christ love to everyone etc. I hope that clarifies my stance. From a theological perspective your point is important. Most Christians are no theologians.

Respectfully, Mary

PS....You and @BreadOfLife post very fruitful stuff. I have learned much from the both of you....Thank you.

my pleasure

theefaith · Nov 23, 2020

2nd Timothy Group said:
What in the world? You are imposing ideas into Scripture that are completely unsubstantiated. If you can do that, and you want us all to believe you, when and if we do the same thing . . . why do you not believe us? It seems to me that you are enjoying a one-way street, here, and at what point does this one-way thinking stop? Can we just begin to assume anything we want, thus rewriting Scripture altogether?

I would be very, very careful if I were you. I do all that I can to ensure that what I teach is accurate. And if it isn't, I clean it up FAST!

Revelation 22:18-19 KJV - "For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book: 19 And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and [from] the things which are written in this book."

theefaith . . . I beg of you to please reconsider what you are teaching people. What you are doing is extremely dangerous, not only to your soul, but you may be leading many, many people astray. I beg of you to please reconsider. Please!

which one? Sacrifice a lower good for higher one or the fact that they brought salvation into the world?

Marymog · Nov 23, 2020

2nd Timothy Group said:
No, I find Scriptures to be fairly clear. It is you that is writing to me when I never wrote to you, but instead I wrote to "theefaith." I think you thought I was writing to you, but I wasn't. The end.

Ummmm......I knew you were not writing to me but you do realize you are on a community forum of which all members are able to view and reply to your post? That is why there is a "reply" and "quote" button at the bottom of each post. Did you know if you wanted to have a private conversation with theefaith there is an option for that?

Scripture is not "fairly clear" on this matter..... It is very clear: Faith without works is dead AND faith and actions work together AND actions make faith complete AND the foolish can’t see that faith without good deeds is useless!!!

The End...Mary

PS....I wonder if I went back thru your 150+ posts if I would find you interjecting yourself into others conversations????? OH WAIT.....I can go back!!! Hold on....what did I find.....YOU HAVE INTERJECTED....OMG!!!

Marymog · Nov 23, 2020

2nd Timothy Group said:
I can't even hold a rational set of correspondence with theefaith, and thus cannot ever get to the bottom of one teaching (I'd really like to, but find that resolving those teachings is virtually impossible. Communication is a requirement for resolution). If a person cannot back up what they're saying, how can these teachings be important?

Hi 2nd TG<

Why are you writing to me when I never wrote to you? I wrote to "theefaith." I think you thought I was writing to you, but I wasn't.

None the less I am a kind person and will engage in a convo with you. You have been unable to "back up" with scripture your theory on works=faith and faith=works sooooooo how can your teaching be important on that matter?

Curious Mary

Pearl · Nov 23, 2020

theefaith said:
I can!!!

lk 1:34 Then said Mary unto the angel, How shall this be, seeing I know not a man? (Does not have sex)

(This verse imply’s a vow of perpetual virginity, She refuses even the exalted dignity of mother of God and mother of our savior if it means violating Her vow)

That's just clutching at straws. Just means that like my young grandaughter she has NOT YET had sex. And how does it imply a vow of perpetual virginity? You need to really understand that Mary was an ordinary girl who had an extraordinary and supernatural experience. That experience must have affected her for the rest of her life (and Joseph's) but where does God tell her not to be a loving wife? But she had a husband and Jesus was her FIRST BORN son not her only son.

theefaith · Nov 23, 2020

Pearl said:
That's just clutching at straws. Just means that like my young grandaughter she has NOT YET had sex. And how does it imply a vow of perpetual virginity? You need to really understand that Mary was an ordinary girl who had an extraordinary and supernatural experience. That experience must have affected her for the rest of her life (and Joseph's) but where does God tell her not to be a loving wife? But she had a husband and Jesus was her FIRST BORN son not her only son.

sorry a loving wife does not require sex, what if you get married and have an accident and your wife or husband is a paralyzed from the waste down for life, you be a beautiful marriage with love,

Mary and Joseph sacrificed a lower good (marital sex) for the higher good of bring our salvation!

fisrt born is a legal term referring to the child who opened the womb, I have a first born son and he is an only child!

The Bible says Mary’s child is God Lk 1:35

No where does the Bible say anyone is a child of Mary except Jesus!

Mother of James?

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Similar threads