[Shpout]

so i have a faith question i want to ask you about,
this guy is just going on bashing the church (on facebook), primarily about Mary having other children than Jesus,
here is what was said... what do i say to that? and why do we believe Mary didn't have other children?
Thanks for the help!!!

J L: Having been raised Catholic, I was always taught that Mary was a virgin for her entire life, which is ridiculous if you think about it. She was married after all. But after actually reading the Bible, Matthew 13:55,56 makes be giggle about this belief. (Speaking of Jesus) "Is this not the carpenter's son? Is not His mother called Mary? And His brothers James, Joses, Simon and Judas? And His sisters, are they not all with us?" -Matthew 13:55,56

my reply: cause i just couldn't shut up and let it go....
i must disagree... ;)
I can't imagine the woman who bore God inside of her ever having another child, plus there are many prophecies relating to Jesus and Mary that can apply to his being an only son and Mary being ever virgin.
It is quite fascinating I think! :)
http://www.scripture....html#the_bvm-V

his reply:
I disagree with you, Pauline.
http://www.bibleinfo...s-andor-sisters
http://www.gotquesti...s-siblings.html
I could site many other websites on the subject, but what's the point. The Catholic religion does it's best to twist things to fit their preconceived beliefs. I would expect no less from a religion that was, since it's inception, a compromise. Created with pagan rituals to convince pagans to follow, including the idolatrous worship of Mary.
The Bible is quite clear to those who don't try to twist it's words to mean what they want it to mean. Don't get me wrong, there are real Christians in the Catholic religion, but they are few and far between.... See More
Consider Luke 11:28 and Matthew 23:9

a random person in between
I agree that when you have a question, you should go to the bible, however, I prefer to go to a Hebrew bible that has the direct translation of English above each Hebrew word. Many things are lost in translation.
Also, being raised Catholic and going to mass and retreats for 27 years, I have never once seen anyone worship Mary. She is an amazing ... See Morewoman, but she's not to be worshiped. Many people have an incorrect notion that we pray "to" her, when the reality is that we ask her to pray for us. It would be like if I asked you as a friend to pray for me because I was having a tough time.
One last thing, the Catholic church is flawed. In fact all religions are flawed because man made them and now run them. Man is flawed so there can be no perfect religion. Regardless of this, I think if a person can find a religion that brings them closer to God, that is the perfect religion for them.

and me again
interesting, so what would be your view on the Eucharist? Jesus clearly said if you eat my body and drink my blood... not if you eat something that represents my body etc . . . ? I also do not agree with the notion that the Catholic church was created with pagan rituals... that's just silly, the early Christians (Catholics all of them) followed their Jewish faith but with Jesus at the center.


I would love some feedback, counsel, ideas, and to better understand it all!
Thanks guys!

[Winchester]

Quote

The Catholic religion does it's best to twist things to fit their preconceived beliefs. I would expect no less from a religion that was, since it's inception, a compromise.

Tell that idiot the word he's looking for is "its". Also, tell him he's deranged and probably not morally culpable for his asinine positions.

And that there's probably a few really nice people on here who will pray for his conversion.

[Shpout]

Winchester, on 09 March 2010 - 07:22 PM, said:

Tell that idiot the word he's looking for is "its". Also, tell him he's deranged and probably not morally culpable for his asinine positions.

And that there's probably a few really nice people on here who will pray for his conversion.

lol! no quite the response i expected, but thanks for making me smile and laugh! ;)

[Shpout]

and the rest of the conversation... now it just makes me mad

JL
I agree in looking at a Hebrew Bible, but a direct translation like that can really leave something to be desired in context. I think both should be used equally.
As far as the Hail Mary, I'll give you that, I hadn't looked at it that way. I still don't agree with the practice, but to each his own.
Pauline, you've shown through the things that you've said that you're not doing your research, you going on what the church has told you and feelings. Maybe these will help.
http://www.rapidnet....sm/catholic.htm
http://www.gotquesti...-church.html... See More
I agree that even the most cursory read-through of the New Testament reveals that the Catholic church is absolutely NOTHING like what Christ taught.
nd as far as communion goes, Jesus used parables in EVERY aspect of His teaching. You'd better hope that Jesus wasn't completely literal in all of His teachings, because otherwise we're screwed. Americans below the poverty level are richer than 97% of the world."It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God." (Matthew 19:24) Tried fitting a camel through the eye of a needle lately?

and my reply
wow, i m just going to drop this whole discussion, i thought it would be friendly but this isn't. I just wanted to share why the Catholic church believe Mary to be ever-virgin. I personally understand the literal translation, but i think there are other aspects to be taken into consideration (such as the culture of Jesus' time and where he lived and further revelation). I guess I shouldn't even have mentioned anything, sorry about that.
I am not judging your personal choice of 'religion' or your personal conversion and what makes you close to God, so I would appreciate if it was mutual.
I have done my research... from all sides (not just anti-Catholic sites) and I firmly believe in the Bible but also that God's work did not stop there. I choose to be Catholic, thanks
and I hope you are doing great by the way. :)

What do you guys think?!?!
how else can I reply?!

[Shpout]

http://www.gotquesti...lic- church.html
one of the sites...
i hate sites like that that give me doubt! help plz?

[afrojohn]

These tired arguments tend to come from those who may "think" they know the Bible, but really only have a limited view of the sacred scriptures.

1. A point to consider is this: the gospels were written in the Greek language which has many nuances and phrases that cannot ever be aptly translated into English. The word which is used for Jesus' "brothers" actually can take three different meanings: A. blood siblings B. cousins C. fellow countrymen. It's commonly translated as "brothers" into the English translation of the Bible, but a more appropriate translation would be "cousins."

2. If one were to actually truly dive into what the sacred authors are affirming one would see that Mary most likely took a perpetual vow of virginity to God. When reading Luke's gospel the narrative goes like this:

'Then the angel said to her, "Do not be afraid, Mary, for you have found favor with God. Behold, you will conceive in your womb and bear a son, and you shall name him Jesus. He will be great and will be called Son of the Most High, and the Lord God will give him the throne of David his father, and he will rule over the house of Jacob forever, and of his kingdom there will be no end." But Mary said to the angel, "How can this be, since I have no relations with a man?" And the angel said to her in reply, "The holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you. Therefore the child to be born will be called holy, the Son of God."' -Luke 1:30-35

It is stated earlier in the chapter that Mary was betrothed to Joseph, which is not an equivalent of modern-day engagement, but rather it was seen in Judaism as the first step of marriage, so they were actually married. Now when the angel Gabriel said to Mary, "You will conceive in your womb and bear a son." If Mary was expecting to have a regular marriage and conceive children, then her response to the angel is inexplicable in verse 34, "How can this be, since I have no relations with a man?" Gabriel gave no time line for the conception of the child, so if Mary had intended to enter into marriage with Joseph and bear children, this response does not make any sense at all. It implies that Mary had some prior commitment to virginity.

3. For her to phrase it, "I have no relations with a man" is similar to other examples of a permanence in using the present tense. For example, if one were to approach an avid non-smoker and ask them, "Do you want a cigarette?" and they were to answer, "I don't smoke" that phrase in the present tense implies a permanence. Same concept here.

4. The tradition holds that Mary was perpetually a virgin. Gregory of Nyssa said, "If Joseph had taken Mary as his wife for the purpose of having children, why would she have wondered at the announcement of maternity?"

Hope this helps.

[cmotherofpirl]

If Mary HAD other children besides Jesus, Jesus would not have entrusted Mary to St John at the crucifixion, that would have been the job of brothers or sisters, not a non-family member.

[Ed Normile]

You get that talk a lot from baptists too, the funny thing is they always refer to each other as brothers and sisters while the whole congregation is not really brothers and sisters. this term for ones who are of common traits was common among the jewish, they were brothers to who they worked with and worshipped with and to who they they were related as what we would call cousins. I sometimes will reply when hit with this junk "our priest will call us to prayer and say we are brothers and sisters in Christ, and beleive it or not we are not even related."

ed

[afrojohn]

cmotherofpirl, on 09 March 2010 - 11:41 PM, said:

If Mary HAD other children besides Jesus, Jesus would not have entrusted Mary to St John at the crucifixion, that would have been the job of brothers or sisters, not a non-family member.

True, another excellent point.

[Archaeology cat]

To add to what afrojohn said, many try to argue that the Greek for "brother" - adelphos - must mean blood brothers and therefore must mean that they are Mary's children. However, from what I've read, adelphos is also the word used in Genesis to refer to the relationship between Abraham & Lot, but we know from the context that Lot is Abraham's nephew, not his brother. Thus, one cannot argue from the use of the word adelphos that the brothers mentioned must be sons of Mary.

[Brother Adam]

Archaeology cat, on 10 March 2010 - 02:52 AM, said:

To add to what afrojohn said, many try to argue that the Greek for "brother" - adelphos - must mean blood brothers and therefore must mean that they are Mary's children. However, from what I've read, adelphos is also the word used in Genesis to refer to the relationship between Abraham & Lot, but we know from the context that Lot is Abraham's nephew, not his brother. Thus, one cannot argue from the use of the word adelphos that the brothers mentioned must be sons of Mary.

This is correct. Neither the Greek, nor the Hebrew Ah (pronounced "ack") restricts itself to a blood-only relationship. Here are some notes from a class with Dr. Miravalle:

a. “before” and “till” Matthew 1:18, 1:25
i. Proper meaning. There is nothing intrinsic in the words that lead to a taking place afterwards. We have other examples from scriptures to prove this.
1. Scripture proofing process – This can backfire. You don’t want to get down to differing opinions of a text, those are Protestant concepts to refer to our own authority of the scriptural text. Satan quotes scripture to the Word made flesh. Anyone can quote scripture to anything.
ii. 2 Samuel 6:23ff – Proof text of ‘till’
iii. Psalm 100 – Proof text of ‘till’
iv. Hiltler did not convert before his death. Does that mean he converted after his death?


i. Greek Adelphos, means brother, cousin, near relative, fellow kinsman (member of this persons tribe). In no sense would you mandate a literal translation of the word brother. Today we have fraternity (which means brotherhood). It is in endless usage.
ii. Hebrew Ah (pronounced “ack”) – It has even more an extended meaning. You can make reference to Ah to anyone even remotely associated to the tribe. (For those who claim Jesus spoke Aramaic and they wrote Hebrew). It does not mean blood brother.
iii. Proper meaning
iv. Genesis 13:8, - Lot is called Abraham’s Ah, brother.
v. Genesis 12:5, Lot and Abraham are actually cousins.
vi. Genesis 29:15 – Jacob is refered to as the Ah of Lebon, but the relationship is uncle and nephew. Not blood brother.

[Archaeology cat]

Brother Adam, on 10 March 2010 - 02:48 PM, said:

This is correct. Neither the Greek, nor the Hebrew Ah (pronounced "ack") restricts itself to a blood-only relationship. Here are some notes from a class with Dr. Miravalle:

a. “before” and “till” Matthew 1:18, 1:25
i. Proper meaning. There is nothing intrinsic in the words that lead to a taking place afterwards. We have other examples from scriptures to prove this.
1. Scripture proofing process – This can backfire. You don’t want to get down to differing opinions of a text, those are Protestant concepts to refer to our own authority of the scriptural text. Satan quotes scripture to the Word made flesh. Anyone can quote scripture to anything.
ii. 2 Samuel 6:23ff – Proof text of ‘till’
iii. Psalm 100 – Proof text of ‘till’
iv. Hiltler did not convert before his death. Does that mean he converted after his death?


i. Greek Adelphos, means brother, cousin, near relative, fellow kinsman (member of this persons tribe). In no sense would you mandate a literal translation of the word brother. Today we have fraternity (which means brotherhood). It is in endless usage.
ii. Hebrew Ah (pronounced “ack”) – It has even more an extended meaning. You can make reference to Ah to anyone even remotely associated to the tribe. (For those who claim Jesus spoke Aramaic and they wrote Hebrew). It does not mean blood brother.
iii. Proper meaning
iv. Genesis 13:8, - Lot is called Abraham’s Ah, brother.
v. Genesis 12:5, Lot and Abraham are actually cousins.
vi. Genesis 29:15 – Jacob is refered to as the Ah of Lebon, but the relationship is uncle and nephew. Not blood brother.

Thanks. :) I didn't know about the reference with Jacob & Laban, so now I have another example to use. :)

[afrojohn]

Brother Adam, on 10 March 2010 - 02:48 PM, said:

This is correct. Neither the Greek, nor the Hebrew Ah (pronounced "ack") restricts itself to a blood-only relationship. Here are some notes from a class with Dr. Miravalle:

a. “before” and “till” Matthew 1:18, 1:25
i. Proper meaning. There is nothing intrinsic in the words that lead to a taking place afterwards. We have other examples from scriptures to prove this.
1. Scripture proofing process – This can backfire. You don’t want to get down to differing opinions of a text, those are Protestant concepts to refer to our own authority of the scriptural text. Satan quotes scripture to the Word made flesh. Anyone can quote scripture to anything.
ii. 2 Samuel 6:23ff – Proof text of ‘till’
iii. Psalm 100 – Proof text of ‘till’
iv. Hiltler did not convert before his death. Does that mean he converted after his death?


i. Greek Adelphos, means brother, cousin, near relative, fellow kinsman (member of this persons tribe). In no sense would you mandate a literal translation of the word brother. Today we have fraternity (which means brotherhood). It is in endless usage.
ii. Hebrew Ah (pronounced “ack”) – It has even more an extended meaning. You can make reference to Ah to anyone even remotely associated to the tribe. (For those who claim Jesus spoke Aramaic and they wrote Hebrew). It does not mean blood brother.
iii. Proper meaning
iv. Genesis 13:8, - Lot is called Abraham’s Ah, brother.
v. Genesis 12:5, Lot and Abraham are actually cousins.
vi. Genesis 29:15 – Jacob is refered to as the Ah of Lebon, but the relationship is uncle and nephew. Not blood brother.

Thanks for adding that, it's always good to dive deeper into true biblical exegesis.

[KeenanParkerII]

Hey guys, on the phatmass homepage there's a link that says defense directory right beneath the forum link. If you click it and go to Mary >> Perpetual virginity, it'll provide a bunch of websites to set them prots straight. ;)

http://www.phatmass....ndex.php/cat/12

Some of the sites listed there are amazen.

[Servus_Mariae]

Does every Protestant on the internet share the belief that "well, look at this link!! HA!" is a good argument for everything?

[Shpout]

lol!
wow guys thanks for all the support!
I got over it pretty quick, the whole thing got annoying, but it did get me on a kick to learn more and more, and all your resources are super helpful!
I love the point cmotherofpirl made about if Mary had other children... that makes total sense!
aaaaaand i saw this link (HA! lol jk) about how Martin Luther (their hero) accepted Mary's perpetual virginity... interesting! http://www.davidmacd...her_on_mary.htm
oh boy I just love being Catholic! at least we have mysteries and do not need to understand everything or put it all to a 'human level'!
again thanks guys!

[Shpout]

KeenanParkerII, on 11 March 2010 - 12:25 PM, said:

Hey guys, on the phatmass homepage there's a link that says defense directory right beneath the forum link. If you click it and go to Mary >> Perpetual virginity, it'll provide a bunch of websites to set them prots straight. ;)

http://www.phatmass....ndex.php/cat/12

Some of the sites listed there are amazen.

sweet thanks!

[Veridicus]

http://www.bringyou....ogetics/ a27.htm

This webpage offers a great scriptural discussion of the Jesus's 'brothers. It's worth getting a bible out and following along. I found it quite useful in debunking my protestant friends in college.

[sacredheartandbloodofjesus]

This has been the best website for me on apologetics(or defending the faith). Please check it out, you will not be dissapointed at all! Scripture Catholic

[sacredheartandbloodofjesus]

From scripturecatholic.com


Mary is Ever Virgin

Exodus 13:2,12 - Jesus is sometimes referred to as the "first-born" son of Mary. But "first-born" is a common Jewish expression meaning the first child to open the womb. It has nothing to do the mother having future children.

Exodus 34:20 - under the Mosaic law, the "first-born" son had to be sanctified. "First-born" status does not require a "second" born.

Ezek. 44:2 - Ezekiel prophesies that no man shall pass through the gate by which the Lord entered the world. This is a prophecy of Mary's perpetual virginity. Mary remained a virgin before, during and after the birth of Jesus.

Mark 6:3 - Jesus was always referred to as "the" son of Mary, not "a" son of Mary. Also "brothers" could have theoretically been Joseph's children from a former marriage that was dissolved by death. However, it is most likely, perhaps most certainly, that Joseph was a virgin, just as were Jesus and Mary. As such, they embodied the true Holy Family, fully consecrated to God.

Luke 1:31,34 - the angel tells Mary that you "will" conceive (using the future tense). Mary responds by saying, "How shall this be?" Mary's response demonstrates that she had taken a vow of lifelong virginity by having no intention to have relations with a man. If Mary did not take such a vow of lifelong virginity, her question would make no sense at all (for we can assume she knew how a child is conceived). She was a consecrated Temple virgin as was an acceptable custom of the times.

Luke 2:41-51 - in searching for Jesus and finding Him in the temple, there is never any mention of other siblings.

John 7:3-4; Mark 3:21 - we see that younger "brothers" were advising Jesus. But this would have been extremely disrespectful for devout Jews if these were Jesus' biological brothers.

John 19:26-27 - it would have been unthinkable for Jesus to commit the care of his mother to a friend if he had brothers.

John 19:25 - the following verses prove that James and Joseph are Jesus' cousins and not his brothers: Mary the wife of Clopas is the sister of the Virgin Mary.

Matt. 27:61, 28:1 - Matthew even refers to Mary the wife of Clopas as "the other Mary."

Matt. 27:56; Mark 15:47 - Mary the wife of Clopas is the mother of James and Joseph.

Mark 6:3 - James and Joseph are called the "brothers" of Jesus. So James and Joseph are Jesus' cousins.

Matt. 10:3 - James is also called the son of "Alpheus." This does not disprove that James is the son of Clopas. The name Alpheus may be Aramaic for Clopas, or James took a Greek name like Saul (Paul), or Mary remarried a man named Alpheus.

This post has been edited by sacredheartandbloodofjesus: 12 March 2010 - 12:33 AM