Virgin Mary Had Other Children After Jesus

[Enoch111]

You haven't shown ONE SHRED of evidence about Jesus having brothers and sisters.

This is called wilful blindness, which has no cure.

 

[friend of]

How does this prove that Mary had other children??

Jesus didn't have a stepmother did He?

 

[BreadOfLife]

This is called wilful blindness, which has no cure.

No - it's called, "Biblical Fact."

There is simply ZERO evidence of Mary having other children in Scripture - OR in any other extrabilical writing.

 

[BreadOfLife]

Jesus didn't have a stepmother did He?

Nope.
Mary didn't have any other kids, either.

I challenge ALL of you to show me where the Bible makes this claim or ANY writing from the Early Church does.
Happy hunting . . .

 

[friend of]

Matthew 12:47-49

The answer to your question is starting you in the face. The reason what Jesus said had so much weight to it in these verses is because he was contrasting His biological family with His spiritual family. Those that do the will of God are His family and in greater moreso communion with Him than his immediate blood relations.

 

[Paul Christensen]

Mary did not have any children other than Jesus and there is not a single verse in the bible that says she did.
And nobody has produced one.

Quoting verses that do not say she had other children is not evidence that she did.

So Paul was lying when he wrote Galatians 1:19 referring to James as the lord's brother? And don't tell me that Paul meant "brother in Christ" because that was not what Paul meant, otherwise he would have said so.

So Luke, in 18:19-20, was also lying or mistaken when he wrote about Jesus' mother and brothers?

Matthew 13:54-56 also refers to Jesus' brothers and sisters.

And you are saying that there are no verses in the Bible that say that Jesus had brothers and sisters? What version of the Bible are you using?

 

[Paul Christensen]

Those indoctrinated to see otherwise what scripture plainly testifies of, may not see it, or rather, may care not to see it.

Some of the children of Mary were named when Jesus came into His own country & at the cross.

Matthew 13:54 And when he was come into his own country, he taught them in their synagogue, insomuch that they were astonished, and said, Whence hath this man this wisdom, and these mighty works?55 Is not this the carpenter's son? is not his mother called Mary? and his brethren, James, and Joses, and Simon, and Judas? 56 And his sisters, are they not all with us? Whence then hath this man all these things?57 And they were offended in him. But Jesus said unto them, A prophet is not without honour, save in his own country, and in his own house.58 And he did not many mighty works there because of their unbelief.

Now some may take the above verses as saying that it did not really say that Jesus's mother was the mother of His brethren & sisters, but we go to the cross for that confirmation.

Matthew 27:55 And many women were there beholding afar off, which followed Jesus from Galilee, ministering unto him. 56 Among which was Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James and Joses, and the mother of Zebedees children.

Mark 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;

So Matthew 27:56 & Mark 15:40 proves that Mary was the mother of James & Joses and other children and not just Jesus in Matthew 13:54.

I wonder if the guy is trolling just to stir up contention?

 

[101G]

At the moment we are discussing po9int 2 in post #27. I haven't even attempted to discuss points 1 & 3.
Can we settle this point before we dive off into other points, or are you accepti9ng nopw that the "brothers" of Jesus are not Mary's children?

but before we go any further are you accepting that Mary is not a virgin according to Matthew 1:25.

PICJAG.

 

[Paul Christensen]

but before we go any further are you accepting that Mary is not a virgin according to Matthew 1:25.

PICJAG.

In support of your post:

I have never previously heard of the notion that Joseph was previously married and had children. Origen said that, but Origen has been viewed by other sound church fathers as being somewhat off-beam in his views. It seems that other early references are from those who were already infected with the false perpetual virginity of Mary.

"The earliest witness to the perpetual virginity of Mary seems to appear in the apocryphal Protogospel of James (circa 150). Tertullian (d, circa 220) denied the virginity of Mary after Jesus' birth. Origen (d 254), by contrast, taught Mary's perpetual virginity. In the East."

One of friends on the thread is being a little deceptive in purporting that the brothers and sisters of Jesus were step-siblings of Joseph from a previous marriage comes from the canonical Book of James, rather than actually coming from a book named James not accepted at all in the canon of Holy Scripture, and therefore unreliable.

But then, after the fourth century, as the church began to be ruled from Rome, and the influence of Constantine brought many pagan notions and practices into the church, any of the official church "fathers" doctrine would be unreliable, being skewed toward heretical doctrines that were invading the mainstream church. The church was so riddled with heresy and pagan doctrine that one had to be very discerning in order to maintain sound Biblical doctrine, and as time went on, those faithful to sound Scriptural doctrine either died out or were pushed out by those who maintained the official church teaching which included many doctrines which are totally missing from the New Testament. Consequently, the authority for doctrine shifted from Sola Scriptura to the authority of the church through its councils and popes.

So, if we apply the instructions of Paul to test all things and hold fast to that which is good, then we will find that much of the writings of the Catholic church fathers could very well fail the test - if we use Sola Scriptura as the basis of the testing.

So applying the Sola Scriptura test to the doctrine of Mary's perpetual virginity, we discover that it is a false doctrine influenced by the paganism that invaded the church at the time when the teaching was first introduced.

 

[Enow]

I wonder if the guy is trolling just to stir up contention?

Or he may just don't want to believe he has been misled by Catholic teachings that is not found in the Bible and yet there are ample scripture to reprove that false teaching.

 

[Paul Christensen]

Or he may just don't want to believe he has been misled by Catholic teachings that is not found in the Bible and yet there are ample scripture to reprove that false teaching.

I think so. Maybe I was being a bit unkind there.

 

[BreadOfLife]

I have never previously heard of the notion that Joseph was previously married and had children. Origen said that, but Origen has been viewed by other sound church fathers as being somewhat off-beam in his views. It seems that other early references are from those who were already infected with the false perpetual virginity of Mary.

"The earliest witness to the perpetual virginity of Mary seems to appear in the apocryphal Protogospel of James (circa 150). Tertullian (d, circa 220) denied the virginity of Mary after Jesus' birth. Origen (d 254), by contrast, taught Mary's perpetual virginity. In the East."

First of all Origen wasn't the only one who wrote about an older Joseph being a widower and having had children from a previous marriage. T
his is also attested to by the 2nd century document, the Protoevangelium of James.

As for Tertullian - he never flatly denied the Perpetual Virginity of Mary - although his writings are ambiguous as to his actual position. These comments are mostly from his debate with Marcion, the heretic.
Coincidentally, Tertullian eventually went into heresy (Montanism) not long after.

 

[BreadOfLife]

Or he may just don't want to believe he has been misled by Catholic teachings that is not found in the Bible and yet there are ample scripture to reprove that false teaching.

Yet you haven't been able to produce even ONE verse that says Mary had other children, have you?

 

[Paul Christensen]

Yet you haven't been able to produce even ONE verse that says Mary had other children, have you?

I'll be with the Lord in a few years, so I will know one way or the other; but sorry, I will not be able to come back and let you know!

 

[BreadOfLife]

I'll be with the Lord in a few years, so I will know one way or the other; but sorry, I will not be able to come back and let you know!

I already know since it is taught by Christ's Church - which is the pillar and foundation of truth (1 Tim. 3:15) . . .

 

[Stan B]

In support of your post:

I have never previously heard of the notion that Joseph was previously married and had children. Origen said that, but Origen has been viewed by other sound church fathers as being somewhat off-beam in his views. It seems that other early references are from those who were already infected with the false perpetual virginity of Mary.

"The earliest witness to the perpetual virginity of Mary seems to appear in the apocryphal Protogospel of James (circa 150). Tertullian (d, circa 220) denied the virginity of Mary after Jesus' birth. Origen (d 254), by contrast, taught Mary's perpetual virginity. In the East."

Paul C, an excellent post. While Origen was the most shallow windbag of all the Fathers, Tertullian, a Roman lawyer, who in my opinion, was the greatest in summarizing the tenants of the faith; and probably the first Holy Roller! <giggle>

Roman Catholicism, is merely a continuation of pagan worship of the goddess, "Queen of Heaven" to whom the pope kneels before her graven image!! This evil Queen of Heaven cult was known to prophet Jeremiah. They were so evil and beyond redemption that God instructed the prophet: "Do not pray for this people, and do not lift up cry or prayer for them, and do not intercede with Me; for I do not hear you." Jeremiah 7:18

"The children gather wood, and the fathers kindle the fire, and the women knead dough to make cakes for the Queen of Heaven; and they pour out drink offerings to other gods in order to spite Me." Jeremiah 7:18

BreadofLife in his picture shows what one of these cakes looks like, a round cake in honour of her vigin born Sun God, Tamuz.

They still worship this Queen of Heaven, only by a different name.

Roman Catholicism has carried on this "Queen of Heaven" cult under a new name, of the Ever-Virgin of the Immaculate Conception.

 

[Paul Christensen]

I already know since it is taught by Christ's Church - which is the pillar and foundation of truth (1 Tim. 3:15) . . .

Can't argue with that!

 

[Paul Christensen]

Paul C, an excellent post. While Origen was the most shallow windbag of all the Fathers, Tertullian, a Roman lawyer, who in my opinion, was the greatest in summarizing the tenants of the faith; and probably the first Holy Roller! <giggle>

Roman Catholicism, is merely a continuation of pagan worship of the goddess, "Queen of Heaven" to whom the pope kneels before her graven image!! This evil Queen of Heaven cult was known to prophet Jeremiah. They were so evil and beyond redemption that God instructed the prophet: "Do not pray for this people, and do not lift up cry or prayer for them, and do not intercede with Me; for I do not hear you." Jeremiah 7:18

"The children gather wood, and the fathers kindle the fire, and the women knead dough to make cakes for the Queen of Heaven; and they pour out drink offerings to other gods in order to spite Me." Jeremiah 7:18

BreadofLife in his picture shows what one of these cakes looks like, a round cake in honour of her vigin born Sun God, Tamuz.

They still worship this Queen of Heaven, only by a different name.

Roman Catholicism has carried on this "Queen of Heaven" cult under a new name, of the Ever-Virgin of the Immaculate Conception.

I agree with you but I have to do it quietly, because if I became too loud about it, my Catholic-educated wife might divorce me!

 

[Stan B]

in order to maintain sound Biblical doctrine, and as time went on, those faithful to sound Scriptural doctrine either died out or were pushed out by those who maintained the official church teaching which included many doctrines which are totally missing from the New Testament. Consequently, the authority for doctrine shifted from Sola Scriptura to the authority of the church through its councils and popes.

So, if we apply the instructions of Paul to test all things and hold fast to that which is good, then we will find that much of the writings of the Catholic church fathers could very well fail the test - if we use Sola Scriptura as the basis of the testing.

So applying the Sola Scriptura test to the doctrine of Mary's perpetual virginity, we discover that it is a false doctrine influenced by the paganism that invaded the church at the time when the teaching was first introduced.

Indeed, Sola Scriptura was the gold/God standard that has been the belief of the church since the very beginning, as revealed by Eusebius AD 325, in his Second Book against Sabellius, he expressly declares that if a word is not found in Scripture, it is satisfactory to him: "As to not inquiring into truths which submit to investigation, it is indolent, so prying into others where scrutiny is expedient, is audacity. Into what truths should ought we then search? Those which we find recorded in Scriptures. But what we do not find recorded there, let us not search after. For had the knowledge of them been incumbent on us, the Holy Spirit would doubtless placed them there . . . Speak that which is written, and strife will be abandoned."

Amen!!

 

[Stan B]

I'll be with the Lord in a few years, so I will know one way or the other; but sorry, I will not be able to come back and let you know!

I know the feeling. I have a 5 year head start on you. I am 77! <giggle>