101G
Well-Known Member
it do, so no need to further this conversation. when scripture is clear as day, why argue with the blind.No. Scripture doesn't say that.
good day.
PICJAG.
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!
it do, so no need to further this conversation. when scripture is clear as day, why argue with the blind.No. Scripture doesn't say that.
Joseph was not Jesus' father so if he had sons from a previous relationship they would be only step brothers. And WHY would God choose a widower with other children to be the husband of this very godly young girl that he chose to be the earthly mother of his only son. The journey to Jerusalem was just two people - a man and his pregnant betrothed. No mention of other children tagging along on the journey - which they would have to in order to be counted in the census - or taking shelter in the stable.Not so.
Read post #27
it do, so no need to further this conversation. when scripture is clear as day, why argue with the blind.
good day.
PICJAG.
Joseph was not Jesus' father so if he had sons from a previous relationship they would be only step brothers. And WHY would God choose a widower with other children to be the husband of this very godly young girl that he chose to be the earthly mother of his only son.
Most Catholics I've come across do that. I pray for their eyes be opened to the truth so that they can see how they are being deceived. Most of them won't even ask God to enlighten them and just accept what they have been force fed with over the years.I agree! Waste of time discussing this with someone who has rejected truth in favour of blindness.
Matthew 10:2 "Now the names of the twelve apostles are these; The first, Simon, who is called Peter, and Andrew his brother; James the son of Zebedee, and John his brother;
Matthew 10:3 "Philip, and Bartholomew; Thomas, and Matthew the publican; James the son of Alphaeus, and Lebbaeus, whose surname was Thaddaeus;
Matthew 10:4 "Simon the Canaanite, and Judas Iscariot, who also betrayed him.
is there any where else in the bible that clearly states that this John here is Zebedee son.
PICJAG.
Oh? I just used 5th Grade English Comprehension. If I had given that verse to my elementary school children they would have instantly told me that they were Mary's children. But then the children wouldn't be reading something into the text that isn't there.Those verses didn't say they were Mary's children. You are (incorrectly) inferring that.
From vague memory from what I read somewhere, some Catholic theologian came up with the doctrine that although Mary and Joseph were truly married and shared the marriage bed with all the bells and whistles, and had more children between them, after Joseph died, God somehow by a miracle, restored Mary's virginity so she could become the perpetual virgin.first thanks the the reply, second I agree. giving anyone the benefit of the doubt, as you said we must hold fast to what the scriptures states. if our Lord had any brothers and sisters by the same birth mother or not, for the language used, one thing for sure she's no perpetual virgin.
but as said, all this conjecture about Joseph having children before marrying Mary, is just that, conjecture. as with the term "brother" it can be used as blood kindred near and far. and many time used symbolically also. but context of scripture usually point to the truth. I have read many books and articles on this subject, many are pro, and some are con as to who the Lord's brother James is. both had good arguments to support their positions, but both agree that there was no concrete answer. and just because one is identified with someone else at a given time and place do not necessary mean that they are Family, or relative to each other or not.
but as you said, go with what the scriptures says, and if any proof stated other wise then scriptures will support it … or not.
but until now I going with what the scriptures ststes, if I understand wrong, then the scriptures will correct me.
PICJAG
There are other alternatives -= see post #27
However the claim in the OP is that Mary had other children after Jesus. That is what has to be proved - not that she didn't. And no proof has been given, only claims based on (IMO) misreading of scripture.
Joseph was not Jesus' father so if he had sons from a previous relationship they would be only step brothers. And WHY would God choose a widower with other children to be the husband of this very godly young girl that he chose to be the earthly mother of his only son. The journey to Jerusalem was just two people - a man and his pregnant betrothed. No mention of other children tagging along on the journey - which they would have to in order to be counted in the census - or taking shelter in the stable.
No it isn't There is not a single verse in scripture that says Mary had other children.
Ok, thanks.
If a claim pertains to a Scriptural Topic, what would you say is the proof positive "Source" for evidence To verify that claim?
Glory to God,
Taken
From vague memory from what I read somewhere, some Catholic theologian came up with the doctrine that although Mary and Joseph were truly married and shared the marriage bed with all the bells and whistles, and had more children between them, after Joseph died, God somehow by a miracle, restored Mary's virginity so she could become the perpetual virgin.
Most Catholics I've come across do that. I pray for their eyes be opened to the truth so that they can see how they are being deceived. Most of them won't even ask God to enlighten them and just accept what they have been force fed with over the years.
A few years ago I had tea with Helen Shapiro who came to our church to talk about how as a Jew she eventually came to see the truth. She told me she won't go into Catholic churches for that very reason - that they are blind to the truth. And she called it a cult.
Manna Music | Helen Shapiro
Oh? I just used 5th Grade English Comprehension. If I had given that verse to my elementary school children they would have instantly told me that they were Mary's children. But then the children wouldn't be reading something into the text that isn't there.
Also, do you mean to tell me that Mary and Joseph never consummated their marriage? They were a married couple who did everything a couple in their marriage bed would do! Anyone who doesn't believe that would be living in cloud cuckoo land!
I got convicted - that I was not commenting consistently with the kindness fruit of the Spirit, seeing that it was the kindness of God that first led me to repentance.Since it was in a form of a question rather than an accusation as not in a format of a question lobbied at him directly, I don't see it that way.
Only God knows for sure the intentions of the heart of the poster on either side in the progress of the discussion in this thread.
We can judge the issue, but when it comes to rightly dividing the word of truth, it is hard not to be seen as proving that the other is wrong, without offending the brother in error who still refuses to see it that way no matter how well He helps walk thru the scripture in rightly dividing the word of truth.
For 1 the word until (heos in greek) does not imply the action concerned changed after the "until point". It is wrong to infer that it did.
The only proof positive concerning these brothers is if the scripture said that they were children of Mary. here is no such proof positive.
The other aspect which seems to be ignored are the reasons why Catholics (and Orthodox) believe that Mary remained a virgin. That is a big topic in itself.
From a Catholic (and Orthodox) perspective there are positive reasons for Mary remaining a virgin. Therefore there must be other explanations for these "brothers" - and there are.
There are other alternatives -= see post #27
However the claim in the OP is that Mary had other children after Jesus. That is what has to be proved - not that she didn't. And no proof has been given, only claims based on (IMO) misreading of scripture.