Need a wee bit of help

[thessalonian]

These verses are interesting. The bolded have to be equivanent. Let's think about this.

Math 13:
54: and coming to his own country he taught them in their synagogue, so that they were astonished, and said, "Where did this man get this wisdom and these mighty works?
[b]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?[/b] Where then did this man get all this?"
57: And they took offense at him. But Jesus said to them,[b] "A prophet is not without honor except in his own country and in his own house."[/b]

Mark 6
[b]3: Is not this the carpenter, the son of Mary and brother of James and Joses and Judas and Simon, and are not his sisters here with us?"[/b] And they took offense at him.
4: And Jesus said to them, [b]"A prophet is not without honor, except in his own country, and among his own kin, and in his own house."[/b]
5: And he could do no mighty work there, except that he laid his hands upon a few sick people and healed them.

[thessalonian]

I'm just thinking out loud here tonight. I think I see the problem for them. If suggenes is not a subset of adelphos, then in the Mattean account of the passage Jesus does not speak of cousins at all, which makes the two passages contradictory. If suggenes is a subset of adelphos, it is not contradictory for Mark to break it out in v. 6:4. There is nothing missing bettween the Matthean version and the Markian version if Adelphos includes suggenes is my point.

Agreed?

[StColette]

And if you read through every verse that concerns Mary. Not once is another person referred to as her son or daughter. They are always identified as brothers or sisters of Christ. The only person identfied as the son of Mary, is Jesus.

[thessalonian]

[quote name='StColette' date='Aug 4 2005, 10:29 PM']And if you read through every verse that concerns Mary. Not once is another person referred to as her son or daughter. They are always identified as brothers or sisters of Christ. The only person identfied as the son of Mary, is Jesus.
[right][snapback]672645[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

The more I thought about this overnight the more the two accounts I think put them in a corner. First of all it has to be a translation from the Hebrew or Matthew and Mark are having Jesus say two different things (if adelphos is brother and suggenes is cousin). Matt says he did not include cousin in the discourse (if it is not the broader term) and Mark translates it such that he did. Was Mark mistaken? or was Matthew. I would rather have it be a translation in to a greek that allows adelphos as the broader term myself. Lets go see if they resonded overnight. Shall we.

Edited August 5, 2005 by thessalonian

[phatcatholic]

hehe, u get way too much enjoyment out of this

[thessalonian]

[quote name='phatcatholic' date='Aug 5 2005, 06:16 AM']hehe, u get way too much enjoyment out of this
[right][snapback]672896[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]


Yes, at times it's a fault. But in general it gives me great joy when they lead me down blind pathways and I know that on the other side the Catholic Church will still be standing.

Am I missing something in all of this?

By the way she dug her heals in as expected.

[phatcatholic]

hey, can you map out ur train of thought w/ a syllogism? that would help me see what exactly you are setting out to prove and if you have missed anything. i'm having a little bit of trouble following along just by going off of what you have posted here

[thessalonian]

[quote name='phatcatholic' date='Aug 5 2005, 06:30 AM']hey, can you map out ur train of thought w/ a syllogism? that would help me see what exactly you are setting out to prove and if you have missed anything. i'm having a little bit of trouble following along just by going off of what you have posted here
[right][snapback]672898[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]


Well here it is.

Mark 6:4 as she states correctly uses suggenes which we agree is cousin.
Mark 6:3 uses adelphos.
Here claim is that Marks use of the word cousin shows that Jesus was not talking about cousins in 6:3. I say it shows the opposite if you take Matt in to account.

Mark 6 and Matt 13 are giving an account of the same even.

Matt uses adelphos in v. 56. He only speaks of those in his household in v. 67. No suggenes anywhere. So where are the suggenes? i.e. cousins? in the Matthean account? They must be a part of adelphos (evidently the broader term) in both accounts and Mark mearly separates them out in 6:4. Not overly problematic since this all is clearly a translation of Hebrew to Greek.

Does that help?

They have been trying to isolate verses throughout this debate. I want to see them isolate these two.

[phatcatholic]

so, the fact that suggenes are a part of adelphos proves that adelphos can be used in a broad sense to refer to cousins. why would this be important to prove? we already know from the definition of adelphos given in the popular greek lexicons that adelphos is not used solely for the strict sense of the word "brother."

is she claiming that, since the specific relationship of cousin is mentioned in Mark 6:4 that the adelphos from Mark 6:3 must, by necessity, be blood brothers? this doesn't work for two reasons. for one, adelphos doesn't refer to either your cousin or your blood brother, so that pulling out the cousins would necessitate adelphos referencing blood brothers. adelphos also refers to step-brothers, countrymen, co-workers, or any fellow man. so, her logic is flawed

secondly, suggenes does not technically mean "cousin." instead, it means "of the same kin, akin to, related by blood" and the writers use the word to refer to cousins b/c a cousin would fit under such a group. from all appearances, suggenes is just as vague as adelphos, so its not like Mark is splicing out a specific subset of adelphos. to me, Jesus seems to be speaking rather generally: "a prophet will be shunned by everyone he knows, by any person he calls a brother."

does that help?

[thessalonian]

[quote name='phatcatholic' date='Aug 5 2005, 07:14 AM']so, the fact that suggenes are a part of adelphos proves that adelphos can be used in a broad sense to refer to cousins. why would this be important to prove? we already know from the definition of adelphos given in the popular greek lexicons that adelphos is not used solely for the strict sense of the word "brother."[/quote]

They insist over there that adelphos, while it can be used on a very broad level and a very narrow level, does not include the intermediate level that is handled with suggenese is my understanding. I think this arguement of hers shows this to be wrong.

[quote]is she claiming that, since the specific relationship of cousin is mentioned in Mark 6:4 that the adelphos from Mark 6:3 must, by necessity, be blood brothers? [/quote]

Yep. That's why I am having trouble with pride this morning. It obviously as you so nicely state below does not work.


[quote]this doesn't work for two reasons. for one, adelphos doesn't refer to either your cousin or your blood brother, so that pulling out the cousins would necessitate adelphos referencing blood brothers. adelphos also refers to step-brothers, countrymen, co-workers, or any fellow man. so, her logic is flawed[/quote]

Thank you.

[quote]secondly, suggenes does not technically mean "cousin." instead, it means "of the same kin, akin to, related by blood" and the writers use the word to refer to cousins b/c a cousin would fit under such a group. from all appearances, suggenes is just as vague as adelphos, so its not like Mark is splicing out a specific subset of adelphos. to me, Jesus seems to be speaking rather generally: "a prophet will be shunned by everyone he knows, by any person he calls a brother." [/quote]

Agreed. When it gets down to it I think there is some leaway with both words.

She may try to go the direction now of saying that Mark is breaking suggenes out of the household. Looking at it from the context of v. 6:4 alone. Something I would not entirely disagree with. But I will have to examine this further. The hebrews would have had a broad meaning for house or household. But I am not sure that the greeks did. This would seem to be to bring them back to the hypocrisy problem where they say that "it doesn't matter how the hebrews spoke or thought. The greeks used adelphos in only a limited sense."

[quote]does that help?
[right][snapback]672908[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

Yes. Very much. Thanks. And I think you are understanding where I am coming from on this. I feel more confident in what I have posted. I am no expert in Greek by any means. But it seems she has some issues. I am trying to consider as many angles as possible. Thanks again.

Edited August 5, 2005 by thessalonian

[goldenchild17]

[quote name='phatcatholic' date='Aug 2 2005, 10:14 PM']the [b][url="http://bible.crosswalk.com/Dictionaries/EastonsBibleDictionary/ebd.cgi?number=T655"]entry for brother[/url][/b] in Easton's Bible Dictionary lists as one of its definitions for brother "a near relation, a cousin" and gives as an example of this [b][url="http://bible.crosswalk.com/OnlineStudyBible/bible.cgi?word=Matthew+12%3A46§ion=0&version=str&new=1&oq=&NavBook=mt&NavGo=12&NavCurrentChapter=12"]Mat 12:46[/url][/b], in which the greek word for brother here is [i]adelphos[/i].
[right][snapback]669270[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

Sweet. I've been looking forever for something like this. I use these for lexicons most of the time. [url="http://bible.crosswalk.com/Lexicons/"]http://bible.crosswalk.com/Lexicons/[/url]

[goldenchild17]

[quote name='thessalonian' date='Aug 4 2005, 09:42 PM']The Books of Proverbs, chapter 18

17: He who states his case first seems right, until the other comes and examines him.

I love that verse.
[right][snapback]672572[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

Me too, that is so going in my sig over there.

[thessalonian]

[quote name='goldenchild17' date='Aug 5 2005, 10:54 AM']Sweet.  I've been looking forever for something like this.  I use these for lexicons most of the time.  [url="http://bible.crosswalk.com/Lexicons/"]http://bible.crosswalk.com/Lexicons/[/url]
[right][snapback]673200[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]


Looks like there's more than one from this article.

[url="http://mercifulredeemer.org/foretelling2.htm"]http://mercifulredeemer.org/foretelling2.htm[/url]

"Scriptural Evidence: The Perpetual Virginity of Mary

The Greek word for "brother" in the New Testament is adelphos. The [b]well-known Protestant [/b]linguistic reference An [b]Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words, by W.E. Vine[/b], defines it as follows: It is used of:

Male children of the same parents;

Male descendants of the same parents, Acts 7:23,26; Hebrews 7:5;

People of the same nationality, Acts 3:17,22; Romans 9:3;

Any man, a neighbour, Luke 10:29; Matthew 5:22, 7:3;

Persons united by a common interest, Matthew 5:47;

Persons united by a common calling, Revelation 22:9;

Mankind, Matthew 25:40; Hebrews 2:17;

The disciples, and so, by implication, all believers, Matthew 28:10; John 20:17;

Believers, apart from sex, Matthew 23:8; Acts 1:15; Romans 1:13; 1 Thessalonians 1:4; Revelation 19:10 (the word ‘sisters’ is used of believers, only in 1 Timothy 5:2). (29)

[b]Use of "brother" or "brethren" for mere kinsmen: Deuteronomy 23:7, 2 Samuel 1:26 1 Kings 9:13, 20:32, 2 Kings 10:13-4, Jeremiah 34:9, Amos 1:9.[/b] "

I also wonder about the Anchor Bible Dictionary since he refs it.

[StColette]

hmmm that's pretty interesting thess. definitely going to need that.

[StColette]

Have we used Smith's Bible Dictionary yet?

Smith's Bible Dictionary

Brother. [N] [B] [E]

The Hebrew word is used in various senses in the Old Testament, as,

Any kinsman, and not a mere brother; e.g. nephew, (Genesis 13:8; 14:16) husband, (Solomon 4:9)
One of the same tribe. (2 Samuel 19:13)
Of the same people, (Exodus 2:11) or even of a cognate people. (Numbers 20:14)
An ally. (Amos 1:9)
Any friend, (Job 5:15)
One of the same office. (1 Kings 9:13)
A fellow man. (Leviticus 19:17)
Metaphorically of any similarity, as in (Job 30:19)

The word adelphos has a similar range of meanings in the New Testament.

[url="http://www.biblestudytools.net/Dictionaries/SmithsBibleDictionary/"]http://www.biblestudytools.net/Dictionarie...ibleDictionary/[/url]

[StColette]

OPTASIA TOPICAL CONCORDANCE

[url="http://www.godrules.net/library/topics/topics.htm"]http://www.godrules.net/library/topics/topics.htm[/url]

Brother

-Signifies
.a relative,
GE 14:16; 29:12
.a neighbor
De 7 23:7; JUD 21:6; Neh 7 5:7
.any Israelite
JER 34:9; OB 1:10
.mankind
GE 9:5; MT 18:35; 1JO 3:15
.a companion
2SA 1:26; 1KI 13:30; 20:33

-Love of
PR 17:17; 18:24; SO 8:1

-Unfaithful
PR 27:10

-Reuben's love for Joseph
GE 37:21,22

-Joseph's, for his brethren
GE 43:30-34; 45:1-5; 50:19-25

-A fraternal epithet, especially among Christians.
.Instituted by Christ
MT 12:50; 25:40; HEB 2:11,12
.Used by disciples
AC 9:17; 21:20; RO 16:23; 1CO 7:12; 2CO 2:13
.by Peter
1PE 1:22
.Used among the Israelites
LE 19:17; DE 22:1-4

-Brother's widow.
.Law concerning Levirate marriage of
DE 25:5-10; MT 22:24; MR 12:19; LU 20:28

[phatcatholic]

[quote name='thessalonian' date='Aug 5 2005, 07:35 AM']This would seem to be to bring them back to the hypocrisy problem where they say that "it doesn't matter how the hebrews spoke or thought.  The greeks used adelphos in only a limited sense."[right][snapback]672912[/snapback][/right][/quote]
but it [i][b]does[/b][/i] matter how the hebrews spoke and thought! as i told jennie earlier in this thread:[list]actually, we have good reason to believe that they preferred the word adelphos over suggenes to describe kinfolk. there is no word in the hebrew for individuals of extended relation. they used "brother" therefore to describe a variety of relationships. the audience of the gospels (and especially matthew's) were hebrew (or aramaic) speaking people. many of the traditions the gospel writers (again, especially matthew) used to write their gospels came from hebrew/aramaic sources. so, when the writer saw the word "brother" he could have used one of the more technical greek words available to describe the exact nature of the relationship, but considering the writer's sources and his audience, it is easy to see why he would instead just use the greek word for brother. this was the word they were used to seeing and using to describe their relationships. plus, the sheer number of times that these words are used in the NT (adelphos-319 / suggenes-12) makes me wonder how we could or should possibly expect the author to choose the rare word over the much more common one.
[/list]its rather obvious to me that it matters. they must [i][b]prove[/b][/i] that it doesnt.

pax christi,
phatcatholic

[StColette]

Well, heck there's nothing like being accused of leaving something out of a source, in this case Easton's Dictionary, when in fact you didn't leave it out.

Makes me look like I'm trying to hide something.

[thessalonian]

[quote name='StColette' date='Aug 6 2005, 12:40 PM']Well, heck there's nothing like being accused of leaving something out of a source, in this case Easton's Dictionary, when in fact you didn't leave it out.

Makes me look like I'm trying to hide something.
[right][snapback]675087[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

Don't sweat it St. C. That's all they've been doing is accusing Catholics of various things. Most of which is their distortoins of what we have said and done. In your case it is so blatantly obvious that he has born false witness that it is not you who looks bad at all. My guess is you won't get an apology (which I have asked him to give you) but that he will lay low until the post gets burried. He has no real substance in his arguements and so he just tries to undermine ours. His tactics are very sad. He is one of those hard core anti-catholics from the PM's I have gotten from him. He calls me an RCCCultist. Keep up the good fight. Your doing great.

Edited August 6, 2005 by thessalonian

[StColette]

Thanks

You're doin awesome as well :