Jump to content

The Protestant Community

Christian and Theologically Protestant? Or, sincerely inquiring about the Protestant faith? Welcome to Christforums the Christian Protestant community. You'll first need to register in order to join our community. Create or respond to threads on your favorite topics and subjects. Registration takes less than a minute, it's simple, fast, and free! Enjoy the fellowship! God bless, Christforums' Staff
Register now

Fenced Community

Christforums is a Protestant Christian forum, open to Bible-believing Christians such as Presbyterians, Lutherans, Reformed, Baptists, Church of Christ members, Pentecostals, Anglicans. Methodists, Charismatics, or any other conservative, Nicene- derived Christian Church. We do not solicit cultists of any kind, including Mormons, Jehovah's Witnesses, Eastern Lightning, Falun Gong, Unification Church, Aum Shinrikyo, Christian Scientists or any other non-Nicene, non-Biblical heresy.
Register now

Christian Fellowship

John Calvin puts forward a very simple reason why love is the greatest gift: “Because faith and hope are our own: love is diffused among others.” In other words, faith and hope benefit the possessor, but love always benefits another. In John 13:34–35 Jesus says, “A new command I give you: Love one another. As I have loved you, so you must love one another. By this everyone will know that you are my disciples, if you love one another.” Love always requires an “other” as an object; love cannot remain within itself, and that is part of what makes love the greatest gift.
Sign in to follow this  
wincam

Mary's children ?

Recommended Posts

It is not in the Bible that Mary had children other than Jesus - so why antagonise and agonise - any comments - wincam

Share this post


Link to post

Hi Wincam, first off, WELCOME TO CF :)

 

As for the "ever-virgin" issue, the reason it exists is due to the fact that the Bible tells us that the Lord had both brothers and sisters. Here is one such passage:

 

1 Jesus went out from there and *came into His hometown; and His disciples *followed Him.

2 When the Sabbath came, He began to teach in the synagogue; and the many listeners were astonished, saying, “Where did this man get these things, and what is this wisdom given to Him, and such miracles as these performed by His hands?

3
“Is not this the carpenter, the son of Mary, and
brother
of James and Joses and Judas and Simon? Are not His
sisters
here with us?”
And they took offense at Him.

4 Jesus said to them, “A prophet is not without honor except in his hometown and among his own relatives and in his own household.”

5 And He could do no miracle there except that He laid His hands on a few sick people and healed them.

6 And He wondered at their unbelief.

And He was going around the villages teaching. ~Mark 6

 

Those on the "ever-virgin" side typically say that the Greek words that St. Mark used for "brother" ἀδελφός [adelphos] and "sister" ἀδελφή [adelphe] in this passage can mean "cousin", but:

1) that is hardly a typical use of either word and

2) if that's what he meant, why not use one of the two common words for "cousin" instead (he, in fact, uses both of the words for "cousin" in other places in his Gospel).

 

The Bible is clear that Mary remained a virgin until she gave birth to her firstborn Son, but is silent concerning her virginity after that (save the teaching that she at least appears to have had other sons and daughters, the brothers and sisters of Jesus).

 

Thus the controversy with those who believed she was "ever-virgin".

 

Yours and His,

David

p.s. - this subject was broached and discussed at great length here only a month ago or so. I believe that every argument for both sides was debated at length in those two threads, so I would recommend that you find them and read through them.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Staff
Hi Wincam, first off, WELCOME TO CF :)

 

As for the "ever-virgin" issue, the reason it exists is due to the fact that the Bible tells us that the Lord had both brothers and sisters. Here is one such passage:

 

 

 

Those on the "ever-virgin" side typically say that the Greek words that St. Mark used for "brother" ἀδελφός [adelphos] and "sister" ἀδελφή [adelphe] in this passage can mean "cousin", but:

1) that is hardly a typical use of either word and

2) if that's what he meant, why not use one of the two common words for "cousin" instead (he, in fact, uses both of the words for "cousin" in other places in his Gospel).

 

 

 

The Bible is clear that Mary remained a virgin until she gave birth to her firstborn Son, but is silent concerning her virginity after that (save the teaching that she at least appears to have had other sons and daughters, the brothers and sisters of Jesus).

 

Thus the controversy with those who believed she was "ever-virgin".

 

Yours and His,

David

p.s. - this subject was broached and discussed at great length here only a month ago or so. I believe that every argument for both sides was debated at length in those two threads, so I would recommend that you find them and read through them.

Why did take you out the part about the word "cousin"? You were on to something. Greek does have a word for "cousin" (i.e.ἀνεψιός) and it is used in the N.T. but not in connection with Jesus' brothers and sisters. Since there is a Greek word for "cousin," and since that word can be found in the N.T., there is no reason why Mark, Matthew, or even Paul would not have used.
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Why did take you out the part about the word "cousin"? You were on to something. Greek does have a word for "cousin" (i.e.ἀνεψιός) and it is used in the N.T. but not in connection with Jesus' brothers and sisters. Since there is a Greek word for "cousin," and since that word can be found in the N.T., there is no reason why Mark, Matthew, or even Paul would not have used.

 

 

why diverge - this is the problem not the solution - I stated and here I stand "it is not in the bible that Mary had children other than Jesus" - this is a later day Protestant innovation and addition and as such should be rejected - wincam

Share this post


Link to post
Staff

 

 

why diverge - this is the problem not the solution - I stated and here I stand "it is not in the bible that Mary had children other than Jesus" - this is a later day Protestant innovation and addition and as such should be rejected - wincam

 

There are so many things wrong with this statement.... :confused:

 

You may be interested in this thread wincam: https://www.christforums.org/forum/c...ginity-of-mary

 

God bless,

William

Share this post


Link to post
Staff
why diverge - this is the problem not the solution - I and here I stand "it is not in the bible that Mary had children other than Jesus" - this is a later day Protestant innovation and addition and as such should be rejected - wincam
Since Jesus had brothers and sisters it is hardly unreasonable to believe that Mary had other children. Also your point is built upon a fallacy. You have already assumed that those brothers and sisters are not Mary's children.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Why did take you out the part about the word "cousin"? You were on to something. Greek does have a word for "cousin" (i.e.ἀνεψιός) and it is used in the N.T. but not in connection with Jesus' brothers and sisters. Since there is a Greek word for "cousin," and since that word can be found in the N.T., there is no reason why Mark, Matthew, or even Paul would not have used.

 

Hi Origen, that's what I was trying to say (see point #2 in my post). Sorry about the confusion. Also, I believe there are two words which could have and should have been used if "cousin" was what was intended by both St. Mark and St. Matthew (instead of the words which always translate "brother" ἀδελφός [adelphos] and "sister" ἀδελφή [adelphe]). Either one of these words for "cousin" (see below) would have been a better choice.

1) συγγενής, [suggenes] i.e. Luke 1:36

 

2) ἀνεψιός [anepsios] i.e. Colossians 4:10

 

 

--David

Share this post


Link to post
Since Jesus had brothers and sisters it is hardly unreasonable to believe that Mary had other children. Also your point is built upon a fallacy. You have already assumed that those brothers and sisters are not Mary's children.

 

 

it is you and others who have assumed and continue to assume what is not in the Bible - wincam

Share this post


Link to post

Hi Wincam, "brother" ἀδελφός [adelphos] and "sister" ἀδελφή [adelphe] are the words that are used in both Gospels. We aren't "assuming" that those words are used there because they 'are' there :)

Share this post


Link to post
Staff
it is you and others who have assumed and continue to assume what is not in the Bible - wincam
If you are not going to reply with evidence and cogent arguments, then there is simply no reason to take you seriously.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post

 

There are so many things wrong with this statement.... :confused:

 

You maybe interested in this thread wincam: https://www.christforums.org/forum/christian-community/apologetics-and-theology/26469-poll-question-perpetual-virginity-of-mary

 

God bless,

William

 

not at all interested - rubbish and gibberish mostly - heard it all before and many times too - wincam

Share this post


Link to post
Staff

 

not at all interested - rubbish and gibberish mostly - heard it all before and many times too - wincam

 

Right, and what then is the purpose of your thread here? To duplicate that rubbish and gibberish?

 

William

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Staff
not at all interested - rubbish and gibberish mostly - heard it all before and many times too - wincam
Then you are wasting your time and mine.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
If you are not going to reply with evidence and cogent arguments, then there is simply no reason to take you seriously.

 

 

seriously you must be joking - just show me where it states Mary had children other than Jesus - wincam

Share this post


Link to post
Staff
seriously you must be joking - just show me where it states Mary had children other than Jesus - wincam
Clearly you have not read what I have said. Since Jesus had brothers and sisters it is hardly unreasonable to believe that Mary had other children. Also your point is built upon a fallacy. You have already assumed that those brothers and sisters are not Mary's children.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Then you are wasting your time and mine.

 

 

hopefully not or that of all others also - it is as stated[fact] - wincam

Share this post


Link to post
...show me where it states Mary had children other than Jesus

 

Here again is the passage from St. Mark's Gospel that I quoted in my first reply to you. Notice, in particular, the part in bold.

1 Jesus went out from there and *came into His hometown; and His disciples *followed Him.

2 When the Sabbath came, He began to teach in the synagogue; and the many listeners were astonished, saying, “Where did this man get these things, and what is this wisdom given to Him, and such miracles as these performed by His hands?

3
“Is not this the carpenter, the son of Mary, and
brother
of James and Joses and Judas and Simon? Are not His
sisters
here with us?”
And they took offense at Him.

4 Jesus said to them, “A prophet is not without honor except in his hometown and among his own relatives and in his own household.”

5 And He could do no miracle there except that He laid His hands on a few sick people and healed them.

6 And He wondered at their unbelief.

And He was going around the villages teaching. ~Mark 6

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Staff

 

seriously you must be joking - just show me where it states Mary had children other than Jesus - wincam

 

Seriously, as you began this thread initially, why antagonize over those matters and peoples that Jesus had addressed:

 

Matthew 12:48-49

  • But he replied to the man who told him, “Who is my mother, and who are my brothers?” And stretching out his hand toward his disciples, he said, “Here are my mother and my brothers!

Jesus' brothers, sisters, and even Mary were found wanting.

 

God bless,

William

 

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Staff
Seriously, as you began this thread initially, why antagonize over those matters and peoples that Jesus had addressed:
lol Very inconsistent is it not?

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

I smell a catholic troll merely here to stir things up. We won't see any cogent argument to attempt to refute what has been presented here directly out of the bible. I foresee this thread not lasting long.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

There are other scriptures that many be use in this argument of whether Mary was a virgin until she died or not, but this one here should tell you what the Apostles knew about this issue, which is also supported by refences to brothers of Jesus in scripture.

 

Mat 1:23 Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God with us.

Mat 1:24 Then Joseph being raised from sleep did as the angel of the Lord had bidden him, and took unto him his wife:

Mat 1:25 And knew her not till she had brought forth her firstborn son: and he called his name JESUS.

And there is no scripture to support otherwise.

 

There is still, from what I understand, a struggle within the catholic church on this matter and whether or not she is the “queen of heaven” or not.

 

On the ewtn channel some time back, there was a series on how, in the history of the church, this “mother of God” theology was adopted by the authorities of the church in those days.

Ephesus is an ancient city in Turkey’s Central Aegean region, near modern-day Selçuk. Its excavated remains reflect centuries of history, from classical Greece to the Roman Empire – when it was the Mediterranean’s main commercial center – to the spread of Christianity. Southwest of Selçuk stands the House of the Virgin Mary, a pilgrimage site believed to be where Mary spent the last years of her life. Where Artemis was the goddess of chastity, virginity, the hunt, the moon, and the natural environment. She was the daughter of Zeus and Leto, twin sister of Apollo. ... As soon as Artemis was born, she helped her mother give birth to her twin brother, thereby becoming the protector of nature and the hunt; both wild and tame animals were under her protection. She also protected the agriculture and animal herding.

this isn't in the series but back in the 400's the church was the roman empire religion under the emperor, and they had to overcome other god's and religions within the empire. I suspect that if the church couldn't convert the population they would convert their religions. hence the counsel of Ephesus adopts in the town that had a, now still standing temple to Artemis, that was very important to the region.

 

Share this post


Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Similar Topics

    • Children's Ministry Handbook Just Well-Worn Copy Of 'Lord Of The Flies'

      BRENTSVILLE, AR—Sources within Horizon Community Church confirmed Thursday that the congregation's children's ministry handbook has been replaced by a well-worn copy of Lord of the Flies. The post Children's Ministry Handbook Just Well-Worn Copy Of 'Lord Of The Flies' appeared first on The Babylon Bee. View the original full article

      in Christian Satire

    • Breaking: Family With Young Children Manages To Stay Healthy For Full Day

      OPELIKA, AL—In a shocking development, every single member of the Stevens family managed to stay healthy for a full 24 hours, despite the family's four children constantly bringing germs, illness, and as-of-yet undiscovered diseases into the home, sources confirmed Tuesday. The post Breaking: Family With Young Children Manages To Stay Healthy For Full Day appeared first on The Babylon Bee. View the original full article

      in Christian Satire

    • Homeschooling Parents in Germany Lose Right to Educate Their Children

      The Story: A European court ruled that German authorities are allowed to forcibly remove children from their home if the parents homeschool. Could that happen in the United States? The Background: On Thursday, the European Court of Human Rights ruled that Germany’s ban on homeschooling did not violate a family’s fundamental rights. Germany is one of the few European countries that penalizes families who want to homeschool. According to Alliance Defending Freedom International, more than 30 police officers and social workers stormed the home of the Wunderlich family in August 2013. The authorities brutally removed the children from their parents and their home, leaving the family traumatized. The children were ultimately returned to their parents, but their legal status remained unclear. After courts in Germany ruled in favor of the government, the European Court of Human Rights agreed to take up the case in August 2016. The family still has the option of bringing the case to the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights, the highest level of the court. “This ruling ignores the fact that Germany’s policy on homeschooling violates the rights of parents to educate their children and direct their upbringing. It is alarming to see that this was not recognized by the most influential human rights court in Europe. This ruling is a step in the wrong direction and should concern anyone who cares about freedom,” said Paul Coleman, executive director of ADF International. “This judgement is a huge setback, but we will not give up the fight to protect the fundamental right of parents to homeschool their children in Germany and across Europe,” added Mike Donnelly, international homeschooling expert and director of global outreach for the Home School Legal Defense Association. The Wunderlichs have only been given partial custody and must send their children to a government-approved education program. Why It Matters: Although this case is in Europe, it’s a reminder of how fragile parental rights are in America. In 2010, a U.S. immigration judge granted political asylum to a German family who fled to America because, like the Wunderlichs, they were unable to homeschool their children. The judge ruled they had a reasonable fear of persecution for their beliefs if they returned to their homeland. The judge also denounced the German policy, saying it was, “utterly repellent to everything we believe as Americans.” President Obama’s Justice Department disagreed, and argued that the family should be denied asylum based on their contention that governments may legitimately use its authority to force parents to send their kids to government-sanctioned schools. On appeal the the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals agreed with the Justice Department and denied the asylum: The German law does not on its face single out any protected group, and the Romeikes have not provided sufficient evidence to show that the law’s application turns on prohibited classifications or animus based on any prohibited ground. For these reasons, we deny the Romeikes’ petition. As many Western nations have made clear, parents are not a “protected group.” Our duties and rights as parents are circumscribed by the cultural norms of the secular public. This is true even in the United States, as late U.S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia repeatedly warned us. For example, in November 2015 Justice Scalia told an audience at Georgetown University Law Center that there is no U.S. constitutional right of parents to direct the education and upbringing of their children. Although Scalia believed the right of parents to direct the upbringing of their children is among the “unalienable rights” mentioned in the Declaration of Independence, it is not a right necessarily protected by the Constitution, since many “important rights are not contained there.” “For example, my right to raise my children the way I want,” Scalia said. “To teach them what I want them taught, not what Big Brother says. That is not there.” As I noted last year, a proposed amendment to the Constitution of the United States last year relating to parental rights is pending in the U.S. Senate Subcommittee on the Constitution and Civil Justice. Most Christian parents have not even heard of this bill, much less asked their legislators to advance its passage. Because so few of us know about it, the legislation will likely continue to languish and be forgotten—only to be dusted off after a Supreme Court ruling further jeopardizes parental rights. Unfortunately, by then it may be too late. A Supreme Court ruling undermining parental rights would make it nearly impossible to pass such an amendment in the future. We didn’t heed Justice Scalia’s warning before his death. But we still have an opportunity to protect the rights of parents before the court decides the state, rather than parents, should decide what’s best for our children. View the full article

      in Christian Current Events

    • Family With 3 Adopted Children Surprised To Learn They Only Care About The Unborn

      FORT WORTH, TX—Because of their Christian beliefs and consistent pro-life convictions, Brent and Lydia Larson have adopted three children and so were surprised to learn Wednesday that they only care about the unborn. The post Family With 3 Adopted Children Surprised To Learn They Only Care About The Unborn appeared first on The Babylon Bee. View the original full article

      in Christian Satire

    • 5 Children Killed in Fiery Church Van Crash While Heading to Disney World

      Tragedy struck a Louisiana town this weekend when several vehicles struck a Louisiana church van headed to Disney World, killing 5 of its passengers, all of whom were children. View the full article

      in Christian Current Events

×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.