Mary’s children?

  • 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!

Behold

Well-Known Member
Apr 11, 2020
15,647
6,441
113
Netanya or Pensacola
Faith
Christian
Country
Israel
[QUOTE="theefaith, post: 963965, member: 9099"
gen 3:15 And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel.
total war between Mary and Satan[/QUOTE]

Reading Your water cult theology is like watching some episode of Iron Man or The Avengers, with Mary and her crown in the movie..... riding a rocket made of beads toward the Devil.

Really, fella, can we just get real?

The SEED of Mary bruises Satan's Head, not Mary.
The Seed is JESUS.
So, that is one more water cult scripture Twist you are tangled up within, having confused Mary with God's seed.

Honestly, if you were as on fire about Jesus and THE CROSS as you are about water and Mary, you'd be really helpful to someone.
But as it is, all you have is water and mary, as that is your obsession.
And that's not much to obsess on.
Paul didn't.
Jesus didnt.
Peter didnt.


= wake up.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Wrangler

theefaith

Well-Known Member
Aug 25, 2020
20,070
1,354
113
63
Dallas
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Only Jesus can be a child of Mary!

gen 3:15 And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel.

only her child conquered Satan!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Behold

Wrangler

Well-Known Member
Feb 14, 2021
13,303
4,966
113
55
Shining City on a Hill
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Only Jesus can be a child of Mary!

gen 3:15 And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel.

only her child conquered Satan!

The demonstrations of tortured logic on this forum are astounding.
 

theefaith

Well-Known Member
Aug 25, 2020
20,070
1,354
113
63
Dallas
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
[QUOTE="theefaith, post: 963965, member: 9099"
gen 3:15 And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel.
total war between Mary and Satan

Reading Your water cult theology is like watching some episode of Iron Man or The Avengers, with Mary and her crown in the movie..... riding a rocket made of beads toward the Devil.

Really, fella, can we just get real?

The SEED of Mary bruises Satan's Head, not Mary.
The Seed is JESUS.
So, that is one more water cult scripture Twist you are tangled up within, having confused Mary with God's seed.

Honestly, if you were as on fire about Jesus and THE CROSS as you are about water and Mary, you'd be really helpful to someone.
But as it is, all you have is water and mary, as that is your obsession.
And that's not much to obsess on.
Paul didn't.
Jesus didnt.
Peter didnt.


= wake up.[/QUOTE]

so only Jesus can be a child of Mary! Ok
 

Taken

Well-Known Member
Staff member
Encounter Team
Feb 6, 2018
24,556
12,974
113
United States
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
The point was, just because x is not mentioned in the Bible it does not mean x should automatically be dismissed merely because it is mentioned outside of it,
especially if one understands not everything there is to know is mentioned in the Bible. Do you agree or disagree?

Disagree.

You are not obligated to agree with any extra-biblical tidbits surrounding persons or events in the Bible.

Correct.

However, you agree not everything there is to know is in the Bible, so there is true information not mentioned in the Bible that exists.


How would you verify whether or not extra-biblical information is from God? The same way you verify what is in the Bible came from God?

No.

There are certain extra-biblical texts that came from God and thus I refer to them in addition to the Bible.

Okay. You have extra-Biblical reference texts.

I also know that the eternal living God is not confined to the pages of any book.

Well, Scripture itself, Notifies the student, much more could have been written...
But wasn't.

Your point is...some (unknown person or persons) took the task upon themselves, to write extra-Biblical Texts, and you have elected to rely upon, (some unnamed author of such extra-Biblical texts).

You are trying to make a Case for your Belief...by talking in generalities.

You have failed, to identify, any Biblical Texts..."that says TO WRITE or RELY on Extra-Biblical Texts".....
and
"Rely on such texts"...
For What?
Rely on such extra-Biblical texts FOR:
ADDITIONAL knowledge?
and / or FOR
UNDERSTANDING?
and WHAT
UNDERSTANDING?
an other man's or Gods?
 

Taken

Well-Known Member
Staff member
Encounter Team
Feb 6, 2018
24,556
12,974
113
United States
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
"Is not this the carpenter's son? Is not his mother called Mary, and his brethren James, and Joseph, and Simon, and Jude?" (Matt. 13:55)

"Is not this the carpenter, the son of Mary, the brother of James, and Joseph, and Jude, and Simon? are not also his sisters here with us?" (Mk. 6:3)

"James, the brother of the Lord." (Gal. 1:19)

The word "brother" has a range of meanings. Why do these verses in themselves prove the meaning "born of the same father and/or mother" applies?

Are you unaware, of Biblical text that reveals...
•Mary was only mentioned being married to Joseph?
•Mary's Children, and Joseph's Children ARE LEGALLY, brothers and sisters?
•ANY Children of Joseph and Mary, ARE Legally Children of Joseph, and Joseph was identified as being a carpenter ?
•ANY Legal "male son" of Joseph and Mary, at any time, could Legally be called...
Mary's son;
Joseph's son.

•IF Mary and Joseph's "legal children", are confusing to you....Do you have that same confusion in your own "family unit" of who your own legal brothers and sisters Are?
 

Taken

Well-Known Member
Staff member
Encounter Team
Feb 6, 2018
24,556
12,974
113
United States
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
The word "brother" has a range of meanings. Why do these verses in themselves prove the meaning "born of the same father and/or mother" applies?

I have nothing to "prove" to you.
What I have, is "my reliance" on Biblical Text, that "verifies MY belief"...
•Joseph only is revealed, being a husband of Mary.
•Mary only is revealed, being a wife of Joseph.
•Mary was a virgin and Supernaturally pregnant when Joseph and Mary "married".
•Both Mary and Joseph were "informed" of her Supernatural pregnancy.
•Joseph was instructed to Not lay with his wife, until After the birth of the child, also revealed, the child, Born would be a son.
•Every indication of Scriptural study, informs the student, this child, is Mary's Firstborn.
•Every indication of Scriptural study, informs the student, both Joseph and Mary, man and wife.... DID NOT engage in intercourse...
Pryor...OR During Mary's FIRST (and Supernatural) pregnancy.

•Every indication of Scriptural study, informs the student...God instructed "husbands and wives" to multiply.
•Every indication of Scriptural study, informs the student, Mary was:
A believer, godly woman, obedient, a wife and capable of being pregnant, and giving birth.
•Every indication of Scriptural study, informs the student, Joseph agreed to NOT have intercourse with Mary Before or During her First Pregancy.
•Nothing in The Scriptural Text informs the student, Mary and Joseph did NOT engage in intercourse AFTER the birth of Jesus.
•Every indication of Scriptural study, informs the student...They can Trust what the Scriptures teach.

•You have extra-Biblical teachings, that "you choose to rely on"...
Very ODD, you attempt to convince me, your "reliance" (on extra-Biblical texts)...is something "I SHOULD "NOT DISMISS"...

Do you NOT comprehend how obsurd your point...(I should not dismiss)...IS?

You have NOT identified...
•One Source text...of your supposed "extra-Biblical texts."
Or
•One Author of such "extra-Biblical" texts.


Very ODD.
 

Taken

Well-Known Member
Staff member
Encounter Team
Feb 6, 2018
24,556
12,974
113
United States
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Does scripture mention the births of "Simon," "Joseph," "James," and "Jude" and/or that their births occurred after Jesus's?

Do you require an elementary toddler Bible, with simple language to tell you what you wonder and ask?

The Precise dates...of Mary and Joseph's children's birth is Irrelevant.
The precise numerical date...of Mary and Joseph's Firstborns birth is Irrelevant.

The ORDER, of the FIRSTBORN, is the HIGHLIGHT!

Mary being a Virgin, Before and during her FIRST pregnancy is the HIGHLIGHT!

There is no highlight, of "How many" children
Mary and Joseph had "After Jesus'" birth!
It's irrelevant....the HIGHLIGHT focus in The Big Picture...IS ON Jesus!

OF all the "other" legal children of Joseph and Mary "James", is identified, as having strong Jewish Faith.

Can we "guess" the other children of Mary and Joseph DID NOT, have Faith?

Sure...but the guesswork is irrelevant.

What we KNOW...is Jesus came among His own, and many believed him NOT.

What we KNOW...is Mary had knowledge given her, from an Angel, and Scripture reveals Mary only shared that knowledge with Elizabeth, and other than Elizabeth, Mary kept her knowledge private unto herself.

OF Mary's identified sons, "legal brothers of Jesus", only James is identified, as Jesus' legal brother, as having Faith, and openly speaking about his Faith.

IF you have "extra-Biblical texts", why are you elusive to IDENTIFY those "sources" and "authors"?

I have been saying there is a range. I just do not agree with the type of brotherly relationship you are applying in certain verses.

Sure, I see your disagreement...but I see nothing to validate your disagreement.
 

theefaith

Well-Known Member
Aug 25, 2020
20,070
1,354
113
63
Dallas
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
The point was, just because x is not mentioned in the Bible it does not mean x should automatically be dismissed merely because it is mentioned outside of it, especially if one understands not everything there is to know is mentioned in the Bible. Do you agree or disagree?



You are not obligated to agree with any extra-biblical tidbits surrounding persons or events in the Bible. However, you agree not everything there is to know is in the Bible, so there is true information not mentioned in the Bible that exists. How would you verify whether or not extra-biblical information is from God? The same way you verify what is in the Bible came from God?



There are certain extra-biblical texts that came from God and thus I refer to them in addition to the Bible. I also know that the eternal living God is not confined to the pages of any book.



The words "brought forth her firstborn son" in Matt. 1:25 in the original language Koine Greek say, "ἔτεκεν (eteken) υἱόν (huion)," meaning "brought forth a son."



"Is not this the carpenter's son? Is not his mother called Mary, and his brethren James, and Joseph, and Simon, and Jude?" (Matt. 13:55)

"Is not this the carpenter, the son of Mary, the brother of James, and Joseph, and Jude, and Simon? are not also his sisters here with us?" (Mk. 6:3)

"James, the brother of the Lord." (Gal. 1:19)

The word "brother" has a range of meanings. Why do these verses in themselves prove the meaning "born of the same father and/or mother" applies? Does scripture mention the births of "Simon," "Joseph," "James," and "Jude" and/or that their births occurred after Jesus's?



I have been saying there is a range. I just do not agree with the type of brotherly relationship you are applying in certain verses.

mary has only one child
Gen 3:15 her seed crushes his proud head


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;

Is Mary the mother of James?
If you mean the Blessed Virgin Mary then no. Her sister-in-law, Mary of Clopas, was the wife of Alphaeus (St. Joseph's brother), and mother of Simon, Joseph, and the apostles Judas Thaddeus, and James (the Less, brother of the Lord): Jesus' cousins.
 

theefaith

Well-Known Member
Aug 25, 2020
20,070
1,354
113
63
Dallas
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
That answer does not align with your belief that not everything there is to know is mentioned in the Bible, but ok.



I know.



How do you verify scripture came from God?



You are referring to Jn. 21:25, correct? If so, John is acknowledging, as I have, not everything there is to know is mentioned in the Bible.



There are English translations of Matt. 1:25 that says, "brought forth her firstborn son," and there are people who say the word "firstborn" is evidence the Blessed Virgin Mary had additional children. However, Matt. 1:25 in the original language, Koine Greek, says, "ἔτεκεν (eteken) υἱόν (huion)," meaning "brought forth a son."



"Is not this the carpenter's son? Is not his mother called Mary, and his brethren James, and Joseph, and Simon, and Jude?" (Matt. 13:55)

"Is not this the carpenter, the son of Mary, the brother of James, and Joseph, and Jude, and Simon? are not also his sisters here with us?" (Mk. 6:3)

"James, the brother of the Lord." (Gal. 1:19)

It appears you are claiming [St.] Joseph and the Blessed Virgin are biological parents of "Simon," "Joseph," "James," and "Jude" merely because they are called "brothers" of Jesus. However, the words "brother" (ἀδελφός [adelphos]) and "sister" (ἀδελφή [adelphé]) have a range of meanings. What in verses Matt. 12:46, Mk. 6:3, and Gal. 1:19 supports the meaning "born of the same father and/or mother" applies to the words "brother" and/or "sister," beyond the words themselves, and your assumption of how it was being used? Also, does scripture mention the births of "Simon," "Joseph," "James," and "Jude?"



The word "until" (heos hou/heos) at times appears when there is a change in condition. However, it is also used in instances when there is no such change, e.g., Act. 25:21, which refutes the claim that it demonstrates any such thing. As such, Matt. 1:25 cannot be taken as a refutation of the perpetual virginity of the Blessed Virgin Mary.

first born is according to the law
And only refers to the first born male child
Even John the Baptist was first born and also only born

John the Baptist
Winnie the Pooh
Kermit the frog
Hmmmm they all had the same middle name lol!
 

Nancy

Well-Known Member
Apr 30, 2018
16,814
25,460
113
Buffalo, Ny
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
On the topic of whether Mary had other children: I believe she did. Of course everyone knows Matthew 13:55 and Mark 6:3... Those who disagree that Mary had other children are quick to point out that "brothren" or "brother" can have other meanings. Yes, that's true, but they also can include an actual "brother", meaning: a sibling.

However, the Bible seems to make it clear (especially in the OT with multiple accounts) when a brother is really a cousin: the Bible clarifies itself. This is not done with James, Joses, Simon and Judas.

Furthermore, it mentions sisters. There may be incidences where female cousins were called sisters, but I haven't found any. The best I can find is that elder women should treat younger women as sisters.

In short, it really doesn't matter to me. Whether Jesus had half brothers and sisters does not affect my trust in him. Soes it affect my trust in Mary? No! I have no trust in her! I love Mary. But my trust is in her son.

I do winder why some are so offended at the idea that she may have had other children.

Hi @FHII
Logic has left the building. I wonder why some are so offended at that too. She was married, having marital sexual relations is the norm and is also blessed of God so, why would one think she suddenly became "impure" if she had marital relations with her own husband! And, I was also about to bring up the sisters as well when I read your post.
I love logic :)
 
  • Like
Reactions: Taken and FHII

theefaith

Well-Known Member
Aug 25, 2020
20,070
1,354
113
63
Dallas
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Hi @FHII
Logic has left the building. I wonder why some are so offended at that too. She was married, having marital sexual relations is the norm and is also blessed of God so, why would one think she suddenly became "impure" if she had marital relations with her own husband! And, I was also about to bring up the sisters as well when I read your post.
I love logic :)

they were called to sacrifice the lower good of relations for the higher good of bringing the savior into the world

The Bible never says anyone is a biological child of Mary accept for Jesus Christ!

And the Bible says Her child is holy! And Her child is God!

Is 7:14 God provides a sign, a Virgin shall conceive and bear a son! (Singular, one son)

Ezekiel 44:2 “This gate shall remain shut; it shall not be opened, and no one shall enter by it; for the Lord, the God of Israel, has entered by it; therefore it shall remain shut.”

Song of Solomon 4:12 A garden inclosed is my sister, my spouse; a spring shut up, a fountain sealed.
 

Taken

Well-Known Member
Staff member
Encounter Team
Feb 6, 2018
24,556
12,974
113
United States
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
That answer does not align with your belief that not everything there is to know is mentioned in the Bible, but ok.

No. I disagreed, because Your choice of words do not align with what I believe.

How do you verify scripture came from God?

Choosing to Trust Scripture is God inspired.

The word "until" (heos hou/heos) at times appears when there is a change in condition.

Yes. and the "condition" was established:
Virgin condition (NOT KNOW her) was to remain, till after her first born son was born.

Matt 1:
[25] And knew her not till she had brought forth her firstborn son: and he called his name JESUS.

However, it is also used in instances when there is no such change, e.g., Act. 25:21, which refutes the claim that it demonstrates any such thing.

Acts 25:21
[21] But when Paul had appealed to be reserved unto the hearing of Augustus, I commanded him to be kept till I might send him to Caesar.

Confounding a clear matter, of a single word, incomparison to a trial hearing is nonsense.
You have not demonstrated, step by step every character in Acts 25, that lead to the "condition" of Paul being "kept till"; arrangements could be made for Paul to plead his case before the proper authority.

As such, the words "And he knew her not till" in Matt. 1:25 cannot be taken as a refutation of the perpetual virginity of the Blessed Virgin Mary.

Scripture is clear. Mary's virginity was to remain intact until after her firstborn was born.

Nothing in Scripture Even hints, Mary was commanded to remain a Virgin after Jesus' birth.
As a matter of Fact, IF Mary had refused to "KNOW" her husband After Jesus' birth...
She would have been disobedient to God, Jewish Marriage Laws, and Not a good wife in obedience to Jewish customs.

I don't have to prove Mary remained a Virgin for life. Nothing in Scripture says she did remain a Virgin. Personally I find Preaching Mary "remained" a Married woman Virgin, after the birth of Jesus, an utter Lie, and tarnishing TO her Reputation as A Good woman faithful to God and a woman who was a good wife to her husband.


...there are people who say the word "firstborn" is evidence the Blessed Virgin Mary had additional children.

People use Scripture to "support" their Belief of a particular incident.

Your Belief is Mary was a wife for years, of a man she never "knew".
Where is your Biblical Textual Support for such a notion?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Nancy

Taken

Well-Known Member
Staff member
Encounter Team
Feb 6, 2018
24,556
12,974
113
United States
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
The belief of yours I was referring to is the one where you agreed not everything there is to know is mentioned in the Bible. If you truly believed not everything there is to know is mentioned in the Bible, then you would not have disagreed with the idea that just because x is not mentioned in the Bible it does not mean x should automatically be dismissed merely because it is mentioned outside of it.

Sidelining.
I was clear in precisely what I disagreed with you about.
 

Taken

Well-Known Member
Staff member
Encounter Team
Feb 6, 2018
24,556
12,974
113
United States
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
How does trusting Scripture came from God verify it came from God?

Do you comprehend, TRUST, is a personal individual Choice?

The HOW, is: I personally, individually, Chose to TRUST God, and Gods Written Word, inspired by God, called Scripture.

in-SPIRIT-ed... words, direction, effects,
From the SPIRIT of God, to men, to pen and paper...I chose to Trust.

2 Tim 3:
[16] All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:

You can make your own choice...to Trust God, Trust Scripture is The written Inspiration of God, effected, via Pen and Paper, via servants of God...or Not.
Neither of us has an obligation to the other, to VERIFY our personal choices.
 

Taken

Well-Known Member
Staff member
Encounter Team
Feb 6, 2018
24,556
12,974
113
United States
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
"But Paul appealing to be reserved unto the hearing of Augustus, I commanded him to be kept, till [heos hou/heos] I might send him to Caesar" (Act. 25:21). According to your logic, as soon as [St.] Paul was sent to Rome, he was released from custody!

According to Scripture...
Paul, was challenging his Lawful right to be before the proper authorities for a hearing, pursuant, to charges leveled against him.
There "was" a clear "until" Waiting condition established.

The point is, the word "until" (heos hou/heos) at times appears when there is and is not a change in condition.

Your deflection from Mary to Paul is inconsequential.
"Until- Till"...notifies the reader, there is an expectation of a "condition" to change.
KEEP Reading, LEARN, "WHEN" the "CONDITION", changes.

Paul's "condition", was an Accusation Against him, by the Jews.
Paul's "condition", was the Jews, wanted Paul "Dead", for Jewish Law violation claims.
•Fact is: Jewish "Death Laws", could not be carried out BY JEWS (under Roman control).
•Fact is: only a Roman Caesar could Legally Authorize a Death Sentence upon Paul.
•Fact is: If Paul had not appealed and insisted TO BE Handed over to Caesar, he would have likely been found NOT guilty, by the Romans, ignoring the Jews plea, to kill Paul.
•Fact is: at Paul's insistence to go to Rome... Paul was Kept under guard of a Roman Centurian, UNTIL arrangements were made for a ship to sail Paul to Rome....(and during the entire sailing trip to Rome, Paul was guarded)
•Fact is: the sailing Trip, was long, ship wrecked, delays, months passing, securing a ship, UNTIL the travelers finally reached Rome.
•Once IN Rome...the Ceasar...(at the time was... Nero Claudis.
•Fact is: The "trial of Paul Before Caesar" is not recorded in Scripture.
•Fact is: There is NO Scriptural record of Caesar pronouncing an Accusation Against Paul.
•Fact is: There is NO Scriptural record of Paul pleading A Case before Caesar.
•IOW- the Actual HEARING, (Caesar said/Paul said Verbage was NOT necessary to record in Scripture.
•Fact IS: The Outcome...WAS the Highlight and Recorded in Scripture.
Fact is: Paul WAS Not killed.
Fact is: Paul was Released from being guarded and inprisoned!

And you may be "wondering"...without the "Hearing Verbage being Recorded in Scripture"....How is one to KNOW, such a Hearing took place...
Paul...Waiting UNTIL he could be taken to Rome.
Paul...Under guard, inprisoned UNTIL coming Before Caesar.
Paul's ..."Waiting Condition changed" AFTER, coming Before Caesar.
•The Changed condition...Paul sent to Rome. Paul set Free. No threat of his Death, No longer in Prison.
•The waiting UNTIL came to pass.

•Did a hearing of Paul Before Caesar in Rome TAKE Place?

•As I spoke adamantly, saying I believe and trust Scripture... my answer IS Yes...Paul was sent to Rome, was before Caesar, Paul kept his life, Paul was set free.

Acts 27:
[23] For there stood by me this night the angel of God, whose I am, and whom I serve,
[24] Saying, Fear not, Paul; thou must be brought before Caesar: and, lo, God hath given thee all them that sail with thee.
[25] Wherefore, sirs, be of good cheer: for I believe God, that it shall be even as it was told me.

That there are instances in which it is used when there is no such change refutes the claim that it demonstrates any such thing. As such, Matt. 1:25 cannot be taken as a refutation of the perpetual virginity of the Blessed Virgin Mary.

• Your deflection and lack of comprehension and lack of following through... reveals your argument MOOT.

•A reasonable understanding of UNTIL/TILL, is an expectation, of one thing being Accomplished, BEFORE another thing shall be accomplished.

•Mary Accomplished maintaining her Virginity, TILL After the birth of Jesus.
•Mary's Husband, kept his word to maintain his wife's Virginity TILL After the birth of Jesus.

•Yes, there ARE "UNTILS", that have "NOT Yet come to pass...
•They simply do not "Apply" to the "Topic at hand" regarding Mary's Temporary Virginity.
•Nor do they Apply to the "reflective Topic of Paul's situation.
 

Taken

Well-Known Member
Staff member
Encounter Team
Feb 6, 2018
24,556
12,974
113
United States
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
I asked if you agree or disagree with the idea that just because x is not mentioned in the Bible it does not mean x should automatically be dismissed merely because it is mentioned outside of it and you said, "Disagree." If you truly believed not everything there is to know is mentioned in the Bible, then you would not have disagreed with that.

Please Stop sidelining.
Do you NOT comprehend we Disagree?
Do you NOT comprehend you "speaking For me, in your words, saying WHAT I BELIEVE", is not "MY words", "I Choose" to Express what "I Believe"?

Don't speak FOR me, with "your words"
Get it?

I trust God and Scripture.

Okay. Your words, your belief. Period.

I also do not confine God,

Good to know! I don't Confine God...hardly think that remotely possible!

nor the person/events in the Bible, to the pages of the Bible,

LOL- I do not remotely believe Scripture revealed every detail about ever person mentioned by Name or Position...
What a long, unnecessary, boring Book that would be.
"Mary woke up, washed her face, walked in a meadow, saw a neighbor, picked some flowers, stepped on a pebble... yawn!"

meaning I understand Scripture does not contain everything there is to know, nor does any book,

Uh huh, on that we agree.

and that God does continue to choose and instruct people

In my words, I would say God continues "calling" people. And Gods instructions, "have been" recorded in Scripture....OT and NT.

to write down what He says/shows to them, then share with others, even to this day.

where is Gods instruction, to Continue "writing"....
And? Your Claim is Puzzling. Share these "writings"...as WHAT? Additional "Words of God" ? Continual "Scripture"?


Therefore, there are certain extra-biblical texts from God I trust as well, and, again, that does not mean I lack trust in God or Scripture.

Please expound, WHAT "extra-Biblical texts"?
Are they "texts", Willy nilly, from whoever "authors"?
Are they a book of "bound texts", of particular "authors"?
If a particular bound book, what is that book called?
 

Taken

Well-Known Member
Staff member
Encounter Team
Feb 6, 2018
24,556
12,974
113
United States
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
"And he knew not her until she brought forth a son: and he called his name Jesus" (Matt. 1:25). You argue that the action of the first clause "knew not her" did not continue with "until” (ἕως οὗ [heos hou]).

Mary remained a virgin TILL after her first born was born.

Not a mystery, to be changed to fit a false narrative.

However, consider the following verse: "But Paul appealing to be reserved unto the hearing of Augustus, I commanded him to be kept, until (ἕως οὗ [heos hou]) I might send him to Caesar." (Act. 25:21). Does this text mean that [St.] Paul would not be held in custody after he was “sent” to Caesar? Not according to the biblical record. He would be held in custody while in transit (Act. 27:1) and after he arrived in Rome for a time (Act. 29:16). The action of the main clause did not cease with "until" (ἕως οὗ [heos hou]).

Paul remained in custody of Augustus, UNTIL, he was sent to Rome.
Not a mystery.

The mystery you have not addressed, is your extra-Biblical texts, and authors.