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!
Thank you.
Thank you. You make some good points Bible study Nancy....
The Holy Spirit is Mary’s spouse but Joseph was her spouse and protector on this earth for two obvious reasons. Matthew points out in his genealogy in chapter 1, Joseph was in line to be a successor of David as King of Israel. If Jesus was to be the true “son of David” and king of Israel (see 2 Sm 7:14, Heb 1:5, Rv 19:16, 22:16), he needed to be the "son" of Joseph. As the only son of Joseph, even though adopted, he would have been in line for the throne.
According to Luke 1:27 Mary and Joseph were already “espoused”. Mary and Joseph already have what would be akin to a ratified marriage in the New Covenant. They were married. That would mean Joseph would have had the right to the marriage bed. Normally, after the espousal the husband would go off and prepare a home for his new bride and then come and receive her into his home where the union would be consummated. This is precisely why Joseph intended to “divorce her quietly” (Mt 1:19) when he later discovered she was pregnant. In a culture that did not take too kindly to espoused women getting pregnant by someone other than their spouse, Mary would have been in mortal danger. So Joseph became Mary’s earthly spouse and protector as well as the protector of the child Jesus.
I presume the point you are trying to make is that in Matthew 13:55 and other texts they would have used anepsios instead of adelphos if James and the others were Jesus’ cousins and not his uterine brothers. Your point lacks merit because adelphos can have a wider meaning than uterine brother. Also we should not suppose that adelphos means precisely “cousin.” Anepsios (cousin) is rather too precise a word for Jesus’ adelphoi. Anepsios means “first cousin” or sometimes merely “cousin.” Now every cousin is a kinsman, but not every kinsman is a cousin. Therefore, adelphos, not anepsios, was the appropriate word to use in Matthew 13:55 and elsewhere to describe Jesus’ relatives. The same goes for “sister” (adelphe).
The earliest teaching of our Christian forefathers and the men of the Reformation taught that Mary did not have other children. The teaching that she had other children began with the men who disagreed with the Reformers.
Bible, history and linguistics teacher Mary
Yes, of course. The catholic dogma I believe are true, I believe to the fullest.
Hi Nancy,Ha, well you KNOW I am not as well educated as yourself but, I do my best
I understand that "adelphos" can be used in several descriptions, a close relation whether blood or not. So, yes that is pretty wide sweeping but then, why be specific in one area and not another if referring to the same meaning?
I don't have the time right now but, I do remember reading something pertaining to the fact that Josephs genealogy in Luke, is actually Mary's as, the genealogy in Luke, when speaking of Joseph - does not have the definite article "the" before his name which would have been the proper way back then - UNLESS it pertains to a woman and, no woman's names were mentioned in the genealogies, ever. So, Joseph was the only name mentioned without the word "the" coming first, could this be Mary's geneology and not Josephs?. I know none of this has to do with salvation but, interesting nonetheless
What say you about this?
Please don't drown me in too much, PLEASE?! My brain is tired and, it takes me much longer than some to wade through some of this stuff, lol.
Kink of Curious, tired, nancy Lol.
Hi GG,
Oh Mary Mary quite contrary..must you write things like this" "Thank you for the question. I will sprinkle you with information so you don't drownHi Nancy,
Thank you for the question. I will sprinkle you with information so you don't drown
Luke 2:4 makes it clear that Joseph, not Mary, is a descendant of David.
Matthew stresses Christ as the successor of David and follows the line of kings. Luke stresses Christ as the Son of God and traces the line back
to “Adam, the son of God” (Luke 3:38).
Scripture NEVER states that Mary belonged to the tribe of David.
Hope that helps.....Mary
?
Wow.....I sincerely don't know what to think. I don't think anything I said was "mean" or "sarcastic". Would you please let me know what I said that fit that was mean and sarcastic so I don't do it again?Oh Mary Mary quite contrary..must you write things like this" "Thank you for the question. I will sprinkle you with information so you don't drown
Why don't you just come on out and call me a moron. You might be book smart but, I'm thinking that Jesus could care LESS how MUCH you (think) you know...I would say He is more concerned about how we treat one another.
As far as Mary or Joseph's genealogy, I was only wondering about it because Joseph had no blood line with Jesus, no need to be so mean and sarcastic. I'm learning okay? I can say when I'm wrong, can you?
Oh. This is easy...to explain I mean.
Nancy,Oh Mary Mary quite contrary..must you write things like this" "Thank you for the question. I will sprinkle you with information so you don't drown
Why don't you just come on out and call me a moron. You might be book smart but, I'm thinking that Jesus could care LESS how MUCH you (think) you know...I would say He is more concerned about how we treat one another.
As far as Mary or Joseph's genealogy, I was only wondering about it because Joseph had no blood line with Jesus, no need to be so mean and sarcastic. I'm learning okay? I can say when I'm wrong, can you?
Hi Nancy...Oh Mary Mary quite contrary..must you write things like this" "Thank you for the question. I will sprinkle you with information so you don't drown
Why don't you just come on out and call me a moron. You might be book smart but, I'm thinking that Jesus could care LESS how MUCH you (think) you know...I would say He is more concerned about how we treat one another.
As far as Mary or Joseph's genealogy, I was only wondering about it because Joseph had no blood line with Jesus, no need to be so mean and sarcastic. I'm learning okay? I can say when I'm wrong, can you?
Hmmm. Who are you and WHAT did you do with Marymog??!
Hi GG,
When did Jesus say His mother was assumed into heaven?
LOL....I'm serious. You made a good point and one that I have never considered. There is no "blood" line from Joseph to Jesus. I am going to have to research apologetics as to why that was not important. I know that ancient Jewish laws allowed an adopted person to be considered part of the adoptive families bloodline after adoption. I will follow up with you with my research results....Hmmm. Who are you and WHAT did you do with Marymog??!
LOL....I'm serious. You made a good point and one that I have never considered. There is no "blood" line from Joseph to Jesus. I am going to have to research apologetics as to why that was not important. I know that ancient Jewish laws allowed an adopted person to be considered part of the adoptive families bloodline after adoption. I will follow up with you with my research results....
Hi GG,
Mary's geneology had to go back to David.LOL....I'm serious. You made a good point and one that I have never considered. There is no "blood" line from Joseph to Jesus. I am going to have to research apologetics as to why that was not important. I know that ancient Jewish laws allowed an adopted person to be considered part of the adoptive families bloodline after adoption. I will follow up with you with my research results....
I'm not familiar with either church.
