Biblical Mary

[BreadOfLife]

IF what the church of darkness says is true . THEN the scripture would have read this ,
and never knew her at all . BUT IT SAYS TILL AFTER she brought forth her firstborn child .
Its obvious what it means . LEST ONE is and has been sucked under the R double C .
Not one mention of all this mary stuff is made in the scriptures , that rome makes .
She was a virgin who brought forth a child IS RIGHT . her staying a virgin after his birth is NOT TRUE .
OR it would have said so . it said and he knew her not , UNTIL , TILL , AFTER THE CHILD WAS BORN .

Bread of death is no scholar of the bible . HE is only a scholar of ROME .
Yet accuses all others . Let no man , no woman , not even a child go in the direction of that catholic church .
And let me be put on record for saying it .

Ummmmm, NOWHERE does this verse say "AFTER".
ONLY the word "Until" (Heos) is used - and if you missed the "Until" symposium I gave your fellow ignorant anti-Catholic @Ronald Nolette - just visit post #1128.

From your KJV:
And knew her not till she had brought forth her firstborn son: and he called his name JESUS.

As for your "Bread of Death" remark - have fun saying that to Jesus's face when He is judging you.
Good luck with that . . .

 

[Illuminator]

No. It is a False Alternative that the original Reformers fully addressed all the man made traditions in violation of Scripture.

The original reformers were quite explicit on their Marian viewpoints. Biblical Mary | Page 56 | Christian Forums @ Christianity Board Post #1105. Sources were given, something you never do. Instead you ran from it.

Predictable that you cannot admit the Marian doctrine is not found in Scripture. And no, Luke 1:28 does NOT explicitly teach what is the Marian doctrine.

"Full of grace" is explicit. "Sola scriptura" is nowhere to be found in Scripture, yet you base everything on a non-existing premise and expect everyone to follow your rules. You read out of scripture what should be obvious.
According to you, the reformers were wrong, the ECF were wrong, and all of Christendom was wrong until the 18th century. You are defending a false paradigm, opposing what the whole church believed to be true from the beginning.

 

[Wrangler]

The original reformers

Non- Sequitor. The original reformers are irrelevant to this thread.

 

[Wrangler]

"Full of grace" is explicit.

And you think that justifies the entirety of the Marian doctrine?

 

[Illuminator]

Non- Sequitor. The original reformers are irrelevant to this thread.

They are relevant to the bizarre flip flop that infected segments of Protestantism, and the cover up of the reformers beliefs about Mary continue to this day.

And you think that justifies the entirety of the Marian doctrine?

They are the divine words of God delivered by an angel, thus it is doctrinal. You refuse to unpack them for fear of what you might find. It certainly justifies Mary's sinlessness indirectly and you haven't offered a plausible interpretation of "Full of Grace". You just argue in circles and ignore my posts, specifically 1080, 1081 that demolishes your objections.

 

[BreadOfLife]

Non- Sequitor. The original reformers are irrelevant to this thread.

WRONG,

The original "Reformers" are essential to this conversation. They ALL believed in Mary's perpetual virginity - so the onus in on YOU to tell us when this 1500 year-old belief was abandoned.
They are ALWAYS essential in a conversation about the ever-changing and ever-splintering world of Protestantism.

 

[Ronald Nolette]

But other of the apostles saw I none, save James the Lord's brother. - Galatians 1:19

Yes, you already said that in post #1123 - and I already corrected you in post #1126 . . .

In Jewish culture - "firstborn" does NOT imply more children afterward.
It simply means, "the one who opened his mother's womb" (Exod. 13:12, 12, Luke 2:23).

As for the word "until" - that was also covered in post #1128 and others . . .

Yes, you already said that in post #1123 - and I already corrected you in post #1126 . . .

In Jewish culture - "firstborn" does NOT imply more children afterward.
It simply means, "the one who opened his mother's womb" (Exod. 13:12, 12, Luke 2:23).

As for the word "until" - that was also covered in post #1128 and others . . .

You really love being wrong don't you!

teh strict definition of firstborn is the first to split the womb , yes. but like every other culture in teh world when someone uses firstborn, it means the oldest of at least two!

And your defense of until is laughable. first off, I showed you that "until" has many definitions in the Hebrew (where you loved to quote. Until always connotes a change of condition and for poor Michal, death was the change of condition, and only someone bereft of human biology would attempt to try to argue does that mean Michal had children after death. YOu try to defend the indefensible by asking people to toss out normal understandsing of word usage.

Yes it does not demand that Mary had sex, but it is the norm. what you need to do is defend with evidence that they had no sex and o further children in contradistinction to their culture and how the passages were written and normally understood by the people of the day!

 

[Ronald Nolette]

But other of the apostles saw I none, save James the Lord's brother. - Galatians 1:19

SSHH! BOL is going to give you all his phony "scholarship" telling you its a cousin, nephew, uncle etc.

 

[Ronald Nolette]

That’s an idiotic challenge because you are placing the onus on ME to provide a negative – because YOU failed to prove your point Mary had “a lot of sex” with Joseph.
It’s as stupid as asking me to “prove” that Paul wasn’t taken up in a spaceship and probed.

As for the Scriptural examples that I gave you that use the word "Until" - your explanations are nothing more than a continuance of your denial. Those verses say what they say - whether YOU like it or not.
When you take the CONTEXT of everything said about Mary in Scripture - whether in the NT or as an OT Type - and NOT just Matt. 1:23 - it is crystal-clear that she had no other children than Jesus.

Simply taking teh Word of God at its normal usual grammatical, historical reading, Mary has sex with Joseph and had at least 6 other kids. Despite your grammatically correct, but linguistically and culturally and translatory incorrect defense of until and adelphos.

It is the Catholic church that has pronounced Mary ever virgin- so those who wish to be an apologist for romanism need to supply the evidence that causes them to draw that conclusion. YOu believe ti to be true- so present teh empirical evidence to show why we should accept it is true. don't hide behind a false use of logic.

Well if you claimed Paul wasn't taken up in a spaceship- you would need to present your evidence why. Otherwise your whole line of reasioning is stupid.

You gave three potential examples which correctly use the word because until is used to show a change (in Michals case - death which ends any potential child bearing) As for trhe tomb, unto is th ebetter word as many translations use, for th ewriter was simply saying that even to the present th etomb was still unknown.. C'mon you should be embarrassed trying to use such lame defenses.

OT typology is very subjective because of the corruption of that blessed woman from Romanism. so give the evidence that causes you to believe Mary had not sex.

And as for further children. Remember this when the Jews who wrote the septuigant actually penned it, they were not Greek scholars. They were 70 Jews who sought to translate to koine greek for the Jews who lost the ability to read Hebrew. There were no dictionaries, concordances or thesauruses. they also thought like Jews for that is what they were. For all we know they may not have even known of the word synegenes, or if it was even a viable word in their day. We don't know. But as Jews accepted all Jews as "brtethren " in the broad sense, it would have been natural for themn to use adelphios in the generic sense of the term for other kin. But we do know by the NT times synenges was a viable word and appears where it should in teh NT to describe relatives outside of immediate familyu.

Once again other than three OT verses that are very very questionable in their structure (as for your defense) you need to show why these borthers and sisters werew synenges and not actual adelphos and adelphi. YOu are making the claim. And while ytou use instances that are grammatically correct- you need to show that those rare exceptions apply to the verses we are in disagreement about. Get specific son and stop just throwing out generic things.

 

[Ronald Nolette]

WOW.

What a childish understanding of grammar and linguistics.
In BOTH cases - the Hebrew 'ad and the Greek heos do NOT have one meaning and do NOT always connote a subsequent action.

As to James, Joses, etc. - I have already shown you on SEVERAL posts now that they were the children of the "other" Mary standing near the cross at the crucifixion.
a. She is called the "adelphe" (sister/relation) of Mary, mother of Jesus.
b. She is called the wife of Alphaeus/Clopas.
c. She is called the mother of James the Less (Apostle/"Brother" of Jesus, Gal. 1:19)

ONE more time, Einstein . . .
Matt. 27:56 says, "…among whom were Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James and Joseph (Joses), and the mother of the sons of Zebedee".

Mark 15:40 states, "There were also women looking on from afar, among whom were Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James the younger and of Joses, and Salome".

Finally, John 19:25 states, "But standing by the cross of Jesus were his mother, and his mother’s sister *adelphe), Mary the wife of Clopas (Alphaeus)*, and Mary Magdalene".

*Luke 6:15 - Matthew, Thomas, James son of Alphaeus (Clopas), Simon who was called the Zealot,


YOUR insistence that they are the children of Mary, mother of Jesus is not only Biblically bankrupt - it is a desperate and stupid. attempt to change the Word of God.
You are ILL-equipped to debate on just about EVERY subject that we have touched on. This is why I keep having to admonish you to do your homework . . .

Both always connote a change or a conclusion. Until is a prepositon or cunjunction and it connects on eevent with another in time. Learn English son.

YOur assumption of Gal. 1:19 still fails. If James the lesser is Gal. 1:19 He is called the Lords brother. Now you are blaming God for lousy inspiration!

MARY THE SISTER OF MARY WAS HER SISTER IN LAW (THEY DID NOT HAVE A WORD FOR IN LAW)

there were three Mary's at the cross. YOu are just making an assumption because of Romanistic false doctrine that Joses and Simon were of Mar the wife of Cleophas.

But going back to culture again we have Mary and 2 of Jesus sisters and four of HIs brethren (one named after his Father which was custom)

James the less was named for one of 2 reasons, either He was shorter than th eother James or younger, doesn't bother me either way.

And James the son of Alpheus is not the James of of Mark 6:3 or Matt. 13:55. remember His brothers di dnot follow him, they had not yet believed He was Messiah!

No, my argument is the bible and your ad-hominems cannot change that simple fact. You throw out generic uses of words without proving that those generic uses actually apply to the verses we are discussing. That is what is bankrupt. Well I think that the only homework you would accept from me is my bowing the knee to the teachings of Romanism on these issues, which I did once and will never do again!

 

[BreadOfLife]

You really love being wrong don't you!

teh strict definition of firstborn is the first to split the womb , yes. but like every other culture in teh world when someone uses firstborn, it means the oldest of at least two!

And your defense of until is laughable. first off, I showed you that "until" has many definitions in the Hebrew (where you loved to quote. Until always connotes a change of condition and for poor Michal, death was the change of condition, and only someone bereft of human biology would attempt to try to argue does that mean Michal had children after death. YOu try to defend the indefensible by asking people to toss out normal understandsing of word usage.

Yes it does not demand that Mary had sex, but it is the norm. what you need to do is defend with evidence that they had no sex and o further children in contradistinction to their culture and how the passages were written and normally understood by the people of the day!

And therein lies your confusion . . .

Rirst of all - we're NOT talking about "every other culture". We're talking about the JEWISH culture of the 1st century. - and the term "firstborn" soimply refers to the one who opens the mother's womb(Exod. 13:12, 12, Luke 2:23).

As for the word "Until" having "many definitions" - that was my whole point to YOU. The CONTEXT of Scripture simply doesn't support the idea that Mary had other kids. You MIGHT have a point if Matt. 1:25 was the ONLY reference - but it's NOT.
Let's review:
- Mary is the fulfillment of the OT Ark - which was NOT to be touched by man.
- Mary askes the Angel HOIW she is to become pregnant because she does not know man.
She doesn't say, "I have not known man". she says, "I DO NOT know man" (Luke 1:34)
- The named "brethren of Jesus" are later identified to be the children of Mary's kinswoman (Matt. 27:56, Mark 15:40, John 19:25).

Soooo - WHERE do YOU get the idea that Mary had "other" children??
Please share the CONTEXT with me.

 

[BreadOfLife]

Both always connote a change or a conclusion. Until is a prepositon or cunjunction and it connects on eevent with another in time. Learn English son.

YOur assumption of Gal. 1:19 still fails. If James the lesser is Gal. 1:19 He is called the Lords brother. Now you are blaming God for lousy inspiration!

MARY THE SISTER OF MARY WAS HER SISTER IN LAW (THEY DID NOT HAVE A WORD FOR IN LAW)

there were three Mary's at the cross. YOu are just making an assumption because of Romanistic false doctrine that Joses and Simon were of Mar the wife of Cleophas.

But going back to culture again we have Mary and 2 of Jesus sisters and four of HIs brethren (one named after his Father which was custom)

James the less was named for one of 2 reasons, either He was shorter than th eother James or younger, doesn't bother me either way.

And James the son of Alpheus is not the James of of Mark 6:3 or Matt. 13:55. remember His brothers di dnot follow him, they had not yet believed He was Messiah!

No, my argument is the bible and your ad-hominems cannot change that simple fact. You throw out generic uses of words without proving that those generic uses actually apply to the verses we are discussing. That is what is bankrupt. Well I think that the only homework you would accept from me is my bowing the knee to the teachings of Romanism on these issues, which I did once and will never do again!

Your statement above in RED is shockingly stupid.

I showed you the Scriptural PROOF that Mary's kinswoman (adelphe) and wife of Clopas/Alphaeus is the mother of James and Joses - and YOU call is a "Romanist false doctrine".

At this point - I truly believe that you have reached a point where you simply CANNOT stop LYING.
And until you decide to start being truthful - don't bother responding.

Your UN-Christian behavior is despicable . . .

Rev. 22:14-15
Blessed are those who wash their robes, so that they may have the right to the tree of life and that they may enter the city by the gates. Outside are the dogs and sorcerers and the sexually immoral and murderers and idolaters, and everyone who loves and practices falsehood.

 

[Ronald Nolette]

See this thread: Who is "James?"

YOu misdefine adelphos as kinsmen (uncle cousin nephew etc.) it does not mean that. Phillips, Strongs, Vines , wuset, Zodhiates all agree the BLB definition of adelphos

1. a brother, whether born of the same two parents or only of the same father or mother
   
   
2. having the same national ancestor, belonging to the same people, or countryman
   
   
3. any fellow or man
   
   
4. a fellow believer, united to another by the bond of affection
   
   
5. an associate in employment or office
   
   
6. brethren in Christ
   
   
   1. his brothers by blood
      
      
   2. all men
      
      
   3. apostles
      
      
   4. Christians, as those who are exalted to the same heavenly place
      

Now this definition further fails as this was Jewish Pharisees speaking, so they would not have specifically named four men as fellow Jews, or simply just people, fellow workers (not at all th econtext) nor Christians.

This argument also fails because they use the female form of brother, adelphe:

1. a full, own sister
   
   
2. one connected by the tie of the Christian religion

Now in the OT times when the septuigant was being written adelphos was used of fellow Jews and of relations.

But in NT times when one spoke of a cousin, uncle, nephew etc. the word synenges was used.

Also they would not have used adelphe is speaking of just fellow Jews. Given the context and location and specificity of the talk- we can only conclude thatr James, Joses, Simon and Judah was Jesus half brothers and he had at least 2 half sisters. This is the normal read of this passage. to get an alternative reading, the rule of grammar is the text itself requires an alternative reading and simple relative is not an option linguistically here.

 

[Ronald Nolette]

And therein lies your confusion . . .

Rirst of all - we're NOT talking about "every other culture". We're talking about the JEWISH culture of the 1st century. - and the term "firstborn" soimply refers to the one who opens the mother's womb(Exod. 13:12, 12, Luke 2:23).

As for the word "Until" having "many definitions" - that was my whole point to YOU. The CONTEXT of Scripture simply doesn't support the idea that Mary had other kids. You MIGHT have a point if Matt. 1:25 was the ONLY reference - but it's NOT.
Let's review:
- Mary is the fulfillment of the OT Ark - which was NOT to be touched by man.
- Mary askes the Angel HOIW she is to become pregnant because she does not know man.
She doesn't say, "I have not known man". she says, "I DO NOT know man" (Luke 1:34)
- The named "brethren of Jesus" are later identified to be the children of Mary's kinswoman (Matt. 27:56, Mark 15:40, John 19:25).

Soooo - WHERE do YOU get the idea that Mary had "other" children??
Please share the CONTEXT with me.

You love to show ignorance as your forte. Every other culture includes first century Judaism einstein! The clu7e is the simple word other- which means Jews and all other cultures, but thanks for playing. Don Pardo has your consolation prize at the door.

1. Mary being the ark of the covenant is supposition unsupported by evidence.
2. And she was right, up to that point she was still a virgin. that just shows she hadn't had sex up to that point, as any 1st grader could show you.
3. And Einstein th eword do is added in the translation of only 2 of 40 English translations. And the word know is th epresent active indicative. that simply means Mary had not had sex yet. If it meant she would never have sex at all it would have been insprired to be written in a whole different way! NIce try but FAIL FAIL FAIL.
4. No James and Joss are mentioned as the children of Mary, in case you didn't know, James and Joseph were very common names in 1st cewntury Judaism. Kind of like John and Mary were in America. I am surethere were quite a few James and Joses following Jesus. two if His apostles were James so they came up with greater and lesser to distinguish.

Now it is up to you to prove your claim that these James and Joses are the very same James and Joses (why not Simon and Judah- why are they excluded) mentioned in Matt. 13. See you can come up with all these similarities in names but that don't mean they are the same people mentioned elsewhere without some form of that pesky little thing called EVIDENCE!!!!! And ocne again you will not find in the New TEstament th eword adephos used of cousins- synenges is used! Except of course those indoctrinated by Romansim.

 

[Ronald Nolette]

Your statement above in RED is shockingly stupid.

I showed you the Scriptural PROOF that Mary's kinswoman (adelphe) and wife of Clopas/Alphaeus is the mother of James and Joses - and YOU call is a "Romanist false doctrine".

At this point - I truly believe that you have reached a point where you simply CANNOT stop LYING.
And until you decide to start being truthful - don't bother responding.

Your UN-Christian behavior is despicable . . .

Rev. 22:14-15
Blessed are those who wash their robes, so that they may have the right to the tree of life and that they may enter the city by the gates. Outside are the dogs and sorcerers and the sexually immoral and murderers and idolaters, and everyone who loves and practices falsehood.

And yet here is another sword in your straw man!

Strong's Concordance
anepsios: a cousin
Original Word: ἀνεψιός, οῦ, ὁ
Part of Speech: Noun, Masculine
Transliteration: anepsios
Phonetic Spelling: (an-eps'-ee-os)
Definition: a cousin
Usage: a cousin, nephew.


NOw you are saying that Paul was inspired byu God well, but Matthew had a bad day and didn't listen well to God when He wrote chapter 13 of His gospel.

See all your arguments come up lame when we consider who is the real Author of the Bible. He would not be so unsure of HImself seeing He is the creator of all languages and it is HIs Will we know His word.

Did you get your latest defenses from this website? It sure sounds like you did!

Does the use of this Greek word for sibling indicate that Jesus had brothers? | Catholic Answers

Cuz this guy uses the same lame half truths as you do!

"Question:
Since coming back to the Catholic Church after attending Calvary Chapel for nearly ten years, I’ve learned how to refute all the arguments used to attack Mary’s perpetual virginity. But recently I was stumped by my former pastor by an argument I’ve never heard before. He said Mary definitely had other children besides Jesus because the New Testament uses the Greek word for brother in Matthew 13:55-56. He said the Greek words for cousin or nephew could have been used instead if that was in fact the relationship. He insisted this Greek word is never used in the New Testament to mean anything else except sibling.
Answer:
The pastor is half right and half wrong. He’s right about the fact that the Greek word for brother (adelphos; plural adelphoi) does mean sibling and about the fact that Greek has precise words for cousin, nephew, and other close relations. He’s also correct in pointing out that adelphos is the word used whenever there’s a mention of Jesus’ “brothers” (Mt 12:46; 13:55-56; Mk 6:3; Jn 7:5; Acts 1:14; 1 Cor 9:5).

He’s wrong, though, to infer from that bit of grammatical truth that Mary had children other than Jesus, mainly because he’s wrong in claiming that adelphos can only mean sibling in the New Testament. In Matthew 13:55-56 four men are named as brothers (adelphoi) of the Lord: James, Joseph, Simon, and Jude. Your former pastor concludes wrongly that these are at least some of Mary’s other children. The New Testament proves otherwise.

In John 19:25 we read, “Standing by the foot of the cross of Jesus were his mother and his mother’s sister, Mary the wife of Cleophas, and Mary of Magdala.” Cross reference this with Matthew 27:56: “Among them [at the cross] were Mary Magdalene and Mary the mother of James and Joseph, and the mother of the sons of Zebedee.” We see that at least two of the men mentioned in Matthew 13 were definitely not siblings of Jesus (although they’re called adelphoi); they were Jesus’ cousins–sons of their mother’s sister.


The Bible is simply silent on the exact relationship between Jesus and the other two men, Simon and Jude, mentioned in Matthew 13. This proves two important things. First, it proves that the Greek word for brother is sometimes used to mean something other than sibling, and it proves that Matthew 13:55-56 in no way demonstrates that Mary had other children."

No proofs. No research to show his conclusion. Only conjecture unsupported by any Greek linguistic scholars.

 

[Illuminator]

You love to show ignorance as your forte. Every other culture includes first century Judaism einstein! The clu7e is the simple word other- which means Jews and all other cultures, but thanks for playing. Don Pardo has your consolation prize at the door.

1. Mary being the ark of the covenant is supposition unsupported by evidence.

No, Mary is the Ark of the New Covenant, supported by OT typology, which you reject. Rank antinomianism.

2. And she was right, up to that point she was still a virgin. that just shows she hadn't had sex up to that point, as any 1st grader could show you.

"Heos" (Gk. until) always refers to the past. My Greek scholars can beat up your Greek scholars

Matt. 28:29 – I am with you “until the end of the world.” This does not mean Jesus is not with us after the end of the world, as any 1st grader will tell you.

Matt. 1:25 – this verse says Joseph knew her “not until (“heos”, in Greek)” she bore a son. Some Protestants argue that this proves Joseph had relations with Mary after she bore a son. This is an erroneous reading of the text because “not until” does not mean “did not…until after.” “Heos” references the past, never the future. Instead, “not until” she bore a son means “not up to the point that” she bore a son. This confirms that Mary was a virgin when she bore Jesus. Here are other texts that prove “not until” means “not up to the point that”:

Matt. 28:29 – I am with you “until the end of the world.” This does not mean Jesus is not with us after the end of the world, as any 1st grader will tell you.

Luke 1:80 – John was in the desert “up to the point of his manifestation to Israel.” Not John “was in the desert until after” his manifestation, as any 1st grader will tell you.

Luke 2:37 – Anna was a widow “up to the point that” she was eighty-four years old. She was not a widow after eighty-four years old, as any 1st grader will tell you.

Luke 20:43 – Jesus says, “take your seat at my hand until I have made your enemies your footstool.” Jesus is not going to require the apostles to sit at His left hand after their enemies are their footstool, as any 1st grader will tell you.

1 Tim. 4:13 – “up to the point that I come,” attend to teaching and preaching. It does not mean do nothing “until after” I come, as any 1st grader will tell you.

Gen. 8:7 – the raven flew back and forth “up to the point that” [until] the waters dried from the earth. The raven did not start flying after the waters dried, as any 1st grader will tell you.

Gen. 28:15 – the Lord won’t leave Jacob “up to the point that” he does His promise. This does not mean the Lord will leave Jacob afterward, as any 1st grader will tell you.

Deut. 34:6 – but “up to the point of today” no one knows Moses’ burial place. This does not mean that “they did not know place until today.”

2 Sam. 6:23 – Saul’s daughter Micah was childless “up to the point” [until] her death. She was not with child after her death, as any 1st grader will tell you.

 

[BreadOfLife]

You love to show ignorance as your forte. Every other culture includes first century Judaism einstein! The clu7e is the simple word other- which means Jews and all other cultures, but thanks for playing. Don Pardo has your consolation prize at the door.

1. Mary being the ark of the covenant is supposition unsupported by evidence.
2. And she was right, up to that point she was still a virgin. that just shows she hadn't had sex up to that point, as any 1st grader could show you.
3. And Einstein th eword do is added in the translation of only 2 of 40 English translations. And the word know is th epresent active indicative. that simply means Mary had not had sex yet. If it meant she would never have sex at all it would have been insprired to be written in a whole different way! NIce try but FAIL FAIL FAIL.
4. No James and Joss are mentioned as the children of Mary, in case you didn't know, James and Joseph were very common names in 1st cewntury Judaism. Kind of like John and Mary were in America. I am surethere were quite a few James and Joses following Jesus. two if His apostles were James so they came up with greater and lesser to distinguish.

Now it is up to you to prove your claim that these James and Joses are the very same James and Joses (why not Simon and Judah- why are they excluded) mentioned in Matt. 13. See you can come up with all these similarities in names but that don't mean they are the same people mentioned elsewhere without some form of that pesky little thing called EVIDENCE!!!!! And ocne again you will not find in the New TEstament th eword adephos used of cousins- synenges is used! Except of course those indoctrinated by Romansim.

Your poor grammar and bad spelling aside - PROVE your claim above in RED - from Scripture.
An honest anti-Catholic would NEVER make this idiotic claim. They would simply say that Scripture ALLUDES to them being Mary's sons.

Please show me CHAPTER and VERSE that states explicitly that they are the sons of Mary, Mother of Jesus.
If you can't do that - then admit that you LIED.

As for Adelphos, cousins and sygenes - I have NEVER stated that James and Joses were "cousins" of Jesus.
I simply stated that they are the sons of Mary's kinswoman (adelphe), who is ALSO named "Mary" and who is the wife of Clopas/Alphaeus.

I guess the idea of you responding without LYING is hopeless . . .

 

[BreadOfLife]

1. Mary being the ark of the covenant is supposition unsupported by evidence.

Instead of your usual nonsense - give me a strong SCRIPTURAL refutation against the following Scriptural evidence about Mary being the fulfillment of the Ark of the Covenant.

Just as I am giving you Chapter and Verse - I expect the SAME from you in your rebuttal . . .

OT - The Tabernacle that housed the Ark was overshadowed by the cloud of glory of the Lord (Shekinah glory) filled the Tabernacle (2 Chron. 5:13-14).
NT - Mary was overshadowed by the power of the Most High (Luke 1:35).

OT - The Word was written by God on Tablets of Stone (Ex. 25:10) placed inside the Ark (Deut. 10:1)
NT - The Word of God became Flesh (John 1) conceived inside Mary (Luke 2:38) who carried the Word of God.

OT - "Who am I that the Ark of my Lord should come to me?" (2 Sam. 6:9)
NT - "Who am I that the mother of my Lord should come to me?" (Luke 1:43)

OT - The When the Ark carrying the Word of God returned “David was leaping and dancing before the Lord” (2 Sam. 6:14)
NT - When Mary came into Elizabeth's presence carrying the Word of God, the baby “leaped for joy” in Elizabeth's womb (Luke 2:38)

OT - The Ark carrying the Word of God is brought to the house of Obed-Edom in the hill country of Judea for 3 months, where it was a blessing. (2 Sam. 6:11)
NT - Mary (the new Ark) carrying the Word of God goes to Elizabeth's house in the hill country of Judea for 3 months, where she is a blessing (Luke 1:56)

OT - The Ark is captured (1 Sam 4:11) and brought to a foreign land and later returns (1 Sam 6:13)
NT - Mary (the new Ark) is exiled to a foreign land (Egypt) and later returns (Matt. 2:14)

OT - On the Day of the Dedication of the Temple which Solomon built, there were 120 priests present (2 Chron. 5:11). The Ark of the covenant was carried into the Temple (2 Chron. 5:7) and fire came down from Heaven to consume the burnt offering (2 Chron. 7:7).
NT - On the Day of Pentecost, there were 120 disciples of Jesus present in the Upper Room (Acts 1:15). Mary, the Mother of Jesus and the Ark of the NEW Covenant was also present while the Holy Spirit came down as tongues of fire (Acts 2:3).

In the Book of Revelation, we see the New Ark of the Covenant in Heaven being spoken of at the very end of Chapter 11, verse 19:
Then God's temple in heaven was opened, and the ark of his covenant could be seen in the temple. There were flashes of lightning, rumblings, and peals of thunder, an earthquake, and a violent hailstorm.

The very next verse is in Chapter 12 (Rev 12:1):
A great sign appeared in the sky, a woman clothed with the sun, with the moon under her feet, and on her head a crown of twelve stars.

Verse 2 says:
She was with child and wailed aloud in pain as she labored to give birth.

We know that this child is Jesus because in verse 4, we read:
She gave birth to a son, a male child, destined to rule all the nations with an iron rod.

There is simply NO getting around the fact that the "Woman" here in Revelation 12 is Mary.
YOUR turn.

 

[BreadOfLife]

And yet here is another sword in your straw man!

Strong's Concordance
anepsios: a cousin
Original Word: ἀνεψιός, οῦ, ὁ
Part of Speech: Noun, Masculine
Transliteration: anepsios
Phonetic Spelling: (an-eps'-ee-os)
Definition: a cousin
Usage: a cousin, nephew.

NOw you are saying that Paul was inspired byu God well, but Matthew had a bad day and didn't listen well to God when He wrote chapter 13 of His gospel.

See all your arguments come up lame when we consider who is the real Author of the Bible. He would not be so unsure of HImself seeing He is the creator of all languages and it is HIs Will we know His word.

Did you get your latest defenses from this website? It sure sounds like you did!

Does the use of this Greek word for sibling indicate that Jesus had brothers? | Catholic Answers

Cuz this guy uses the same lame half truths as you do!

"Question:
Since coming back to the Catholic Church after attending Calvary Chapel for nearly ten years, I’ve learned how to refute all the arguments used to attack Mary’s perpetual virginity. But recently I was stumped by my former pastor by an argument I’ve never heard before. He said Mary definitely had other children besides Jesus because the New Testament uses the Greek word for brother in Matthew 13:55-56. He said the Greek words for cousin or nephew could have been used instead if that was in fact the relationship. He insisted this Greek word is never used in the New Testament to mean anything else except sibling.
Answer:
The pastor is half right and half wrong. He’s right about the fact that the Greek word for brother (adelphos; plural adelphoi) does mean sibling and about the fact that Greek has precise words for cousin, nephew, and other close relations. He’s also correct in pointing out that adelphos is the word used whenever there’s a mention of Jesus’ “brothers” (Mt 12:46; 13:55-56; Mk 6:3; Jn 7:5; Acts 1:14; 1 Cor 9:5).

He’s wrong, though, to infer from that bit of grammatical truth that Mary had children other than Jesus, mainly because he’s wrong in claiming that adelphos can only mean sibling in the New Testament. In Matthew 13:55-56 four men are named as brothers (adelphoi) of the Lord: James, Joseph, Simon, and Jude. Your former pastor concludes wrongly that these are at least some of Mary’s other children. The New Testament proves otherwise.

In John 19:25 we read, “Standing by the foot of the cross of Jesus were his mother and his mother’s sister, Mary the wife of Cleophas, and Mary of Magdala.” Cross reference this with Matthew 27:56: “Among them [at the cross] were Mary Magdalene and Mary the mother of James and Joseph, and the mother of the sons of Zebedee.” We see that at least two of the men mentioned in Matthew 13 were definitely not siblings of Jesus (although they’re called adelphoi); they were Jesus’ cousins–sons of their mother’s sister.

The Bible is simply silent on the exact relationship between Jesus and the other two men, Simon and Jude, mentioned in Matthew 13. This proves two important things. First, it proves that the Greek word for brother is sometimes used to mean something other than sibling, and it proves that Matthew 13:55-56 in no way demonstrates that Mary had other children."

No proofs. No research to show his conclusion. Only conjecture unsupported by any Greek linguistic scholars.

Your ENTIRE argument goes down the drain because of the original verses I presented from the Septuagint.

Just because Hebrew had no word for "cousin" does NOT mean that Greek didn't. As YOU pointed out - the Greek word for "cousin" is "anepsios". WHY wasn't "anepsios" used in 1 Chr. 23:21–22, where they are CLEARLY cousins - but the word "Adelphoi" is used??
It's because although there are linguistic equivalents - the CULTURES were different. Greek was used in the Septuagint - but written by JEWISH scholars who spoke both languages.

This is the SAME reason why men who are obviously some other relation to Jesus are called "Adelphoi" in the NT.
Language and culture are NOT always the same thing, Einstein. Ask ANYBODY living in the USA.

This is a PRIME example of why I always tell you to do your homework. You make nonsensical and childish arguments that would get you ejected from ANY intellectual argument. Why I have wasted so much time on you even puzzles ME . . .

 

[rockytopva]

I have no command in scripture to worship any other than God the Father. And I come to him in Jesus name. Regarding the worship of Mary I see no access to the Heavenly Father through her.