Mary’s children?

[reformed1689]

To clarify, in my hypothetical scenario your opponent cites the following verses:

"53 And when Jesus had finished these parables, he went away from there, 54 and coming to his hometown he taught them in their synagogue, so that they were astonished, and said, “Where did this man get this wisdom and these mighty works? 55 Is not this the carpenter’s son? Is not his mother called Mary? And are not his brothers James and Joseph and Simon and Judas? 56 And are not all his sisters with us? Where then did this man get all these things?” 57 And they took offense at him. But Jesus said to them, “A prophet is not without honor except in his hometown and in his own household.” 58 And he did not do many mighty works there, because of their unbelief."

and then says, "See! Scripture plainly states Jesus did not have biological siblings, and there is no reason at all to think otherwise outside of certain biases that have been forced onto the text," merely because they read the words "brothers" and "sisters," and assume a meaning other than "born of the same father and/or mother" applies to them. Would you say there is nothing further required from your opponent to prove they are right?

I would say they don't know how to read.

 

[reformed1689]

That does not answer the question.

Actually it did, I guess you missed it.

 

[Wrangler]

Refer back to post #34.

Additionally, "James the brother of the Lord" in Gal. 1:19 is one of the apostle-Jameses. Why did you not identify which you believe it is when asked?

I’ve answered this several times. You will just have to accept it.

I do not care one iota which ‘Jameses’ is the brother of Jesus. I find your entire line of thinking absurd on it’s face! To be honest, I’m not sure the brother of James was an Apostle before the resurrection.

For me, ‘James, the brother of our Lord Jesus’ is sufficient. I care not how this brother may or may not have been referenced elsewhere.

 

[marksman]

Mary’s spiritual children!
The disciples of Jesus are Mary’s spiritual children!

John 19:26-27
When Jesus therefore saw his mother, and the disciple standing by, whom he loved, he saith unto his mother, Woman, behold thy son! Then saith he to the disciple, Behold thy mother! And from that hour that disciple took her unto his own home.

Rev 12:17 And the dragon was wroth with the woman, and went to make war with the remnant of her seed, which keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ.

What I would call fanciful hypothesising. Just because Jesus gave the care of his mother to John does not say that all the disciple's are Mary's spiritual children. It is an example of the typical nonsense that Catholics invent to mystify Christianity and help the priesthood to have an authority that they do not have.

 

[theefaith]

What I would call fanciful hypothesising. Just because Jesus gave the care of his mother to John does not say that all the disciple's are Mary's spiritual children. It is an example of the typical nonsense that Catholics invent to mystify Christianity and help the priesthood to have an authority that they do not have.

does giving her in care to John require her to be His mother?

the concept of spiritual mother is biblical

Rachel is spiritual mother of Israel!
A type of Mary as spiritual mother of Christians!

The 12 sons of Jacob have 4 biological mothers, but Rachel is the spiritual mother of all Israel!

Matt 2:18 In Rama was there a voice heard, lamentation, and weeping, and great mourning, Rachel weeping for her children, and would not be comforted, because they are no more.

 

[Wrangler]

False. You have not given an answer of either "James of Zebedee" or "James of Alphaeus."

Research logical fallacies, especially False Alternative.

I do not know why you are limiting the possible options to these James. As I said repeatedly now, ‘James, the brother of Jesus’ is sufficient for me. It matters not if Jesus brother is referred to elsewhere as either of the 2 you mentioned or not. That is, I’m OK with James who is Jesus brother mentioned no where else.

My study Bibles all explain the book of James is the Lord’s brother. If this is insufficient for you, go in peace.

QUOTE="soul, post: 960233, member: 9280"]That is admittance to being comfortable in your ignorance because you do not want to be challenged in your beliefs, which demonstrates to me insecurity in them.[/QUOTE]

You’ve got it 100% backwards. I am secure in knowing I do not have to know it all to be secure in my beliefs.

 

[Wrangler]

Their identity matters and you not caring about it is problematic.

It’s a problem for you, not me.

 

[Wrangler]

"You are Wrangler the brother of soul."

If a person, unknown to us, applied to that statement the same logic you apply to Gal. 1:19, does that make you and I biological siblings?

Yes. You are hanging your hat on Gal 1:19 for reasons that escape me. Jesus had siblings, which means Mary had other children. It’s really no big deal.

It would be odd if it were otherwise. My guess is, in the history of marriage, not too many remained virgins.

 

[Grunt Hemlock]

I think Levi = Matthew and Nathaniel = Bartholomew.

I think James and the other 3 brothers of Jesus mentioned, as well as His sisters, are from an earlier marriage of Joseph, who was a widower before he married Mary.

"James the brother of the Lord" is neither of the 2 Jameses who were disciples; "James the brother of the Lord" became an apostle after Jesus' resurrection, and seemed to the leader of the Jerusalem Church - also seems a bit of a JUDAIZER (see who the book of James is addressed to). Jude simply addresses him self as brother of James - that Jude does not say he also was Brother of the Lord does not make it so - maybe Jude was being humble.

There is a non-canoncal book - ProtoEvangelium of James - which covers some of these things - but also eroneously places the Magi at the Manger; whereas the Bible says the Magi found child Jesus "in a house".

I am not Catholic, (or Orthodox) so I have no dog in this fight of "perpetual virginity". I am inclined to think when it says that Joseph had no relations with Mary til after Jesus was born = that the logical conclusion is that after Jesus was born, normal marital relations ensued. But I am not dogmatic about it, both Orthodox and Roman Catholic are quite dogmatic about perpetual virginity.

"No one got into the Guacamole Dip until Wrangler and Grunt Hemlock got to the party" would strike me as indicating that the Guacamole Dip was indeed "got into" after Grunt Hemlock and Wrangler arrived at the party.

To me, Mary only had the one child - Jesus - but what is wrong with Joseph and Mary having relations after Jesus is born?

I am not obligated to defend a man-made doctrine, but it does not shatter my faith if Mary was perpetually virgin.

 

[Grunt Hemlock]

Post #9 seems to make a big deal out of the assumption that James/brother of the Lord is an APOSTLE therefore that must mean a DISCIPLE. This is erroneous.

Quibbling over the difference between APOSTLE and DISCIPLE is gobbledeegook.

The term DISCIPLE can be limited to 12 - Matthias replacng Judas; but APOSTLES are many in the NT.

How Many Apostles in the NT -- 12 or 25?

 

[Grunt Hemlock]

I don't see that, don't believe it

 

[marksman]

does giving her in care to John require her to be His mother?

the concept of spiritual mother is biblical

Rachel is spiritual mother of Israel!
A type of Mary as spiritual mother of Christians!

The 12 sons of Jacob have 4 biological mothers, but Rachel is the spiritual mother of all Israel!

Matt 2:18 In Rama was there a voice heard, lamentation, and weeping, and great mourning, Rachel weeping for her children, and would not be comforted, because they are no more.

NO. And everything else you have said is irrelevant.

 

[Wrangler]

Think before you answer this time.

Nice!

You are in denial of verses that go against your doctrine.

There are numerous verses that State Jesus has siblings. It is clear from the text James was the brother of Jesus.

Your incessant questioning me of your interpretation of Scripture is unbecoming, I.e., if a person unknown to us applied that standard. I refuse to engage in “if” speculation as you do.

Let me suggest this IF for your consideration. If the story is told in an unfolding way, what is known now may not have been known at the time a particular verse was stated, such as whatever verse leads you to speculate the Apostles did not know James, the brother of Jesus, was an Apostle.

I’ve already repeatedly addressed your mental gymnastics in this. Are you even aware that James, the brother of Jesus, was not a follower before the resurrection?

 

[Wrangler]

I am not obligated to defend a man-made doctrine, but it does not shatter my faith if Mary was perpetually virgin.

The question is, would it shatter your faith if Mary was not a perpetual virgin?

 

[Grunt Hemlock]

no

 

[Wrangler]

No. I do not care to do laps on ground already repeatedly covered.

There are numerous verses that state Jesus has siblings, implying Mary had other children.

 

[theefaith]

NO. And everything else you have said is irrelevant.

then when Jesus said behold your mother it is our spiritual mother and the mother of our salvation

 

[Wrangler]

then when Jesus said behold your mother it is our spiritual mother and the mother of our salvation

Such projection onto text can only have theological doctrine motivations.

When the cop hands me a speeding ticket and says this is YOUR speeding ticket, he is not talking collectively, i.e., 'our.'

The notion of 'mother of our salvation' is man-made.

 

[Wrangler]

So, you have chosen to stand by your answer you and I are biological siblings in reality. Got it.

Such posts are unbecoming. I never gave this answer. You have created your Strawman for your purposes.

 

[theefaith]

Such projection onto text can only have theological doctrine motivations.

When the cop hands me a speeding ticket and says this is YOUR speeding ticket, he is not talking collectively, i.e., 'our.'

The notion of 'mother of our salvation' is man-made.

lk 2:30 says what? Jesus is our salvation Mary is His mother hence mother of our salvation and cos she found our salvation Lk 1:30 the salvation lost by Adam
And she consented to our salvation Lk 1:38