mark 3:21 and the virgin birth

[doubting thomas]

That gives a great insight into the the minds and heart of mankind.

but not the mind and hearts of jesus' own mother and brothers

 

[doubting thomas]

The Scripture doesn't state His mother thought He was mad. The Scripture simply states "family" that could mean anyone. For all we know it was His uncles or cousins.

except that mark 3 has his mother and brothers waiting outside for him. and would these uncles and cousins include the parents of john the baptist? do you not trust your mother? would she let you call your brother mad, knowing she gave birth to him a virgin? or would she stand up for the son of god?

 

[Alabaster]

i think mark 3:31-35 can be read as disrespecting your mother. of course i understand the point jesus is making (in fact i think it one of the most beautiful things about his message, echoing galatians 3:28), but yes, i think it dishonors his mother and her special role to equate her as no different than anyone who does the will of god. i think it dishonors her to have mary come and get him, only to have jesus tell her to go away, i do not care to see you, that this is my new family.

when this is coupled with the tone he takes with her ("why do you involve me) at the wedding, one gets the sense that jesus does not, in fact, honor his mother.

He had reason to be strong with her, but He wasn't disrespectful. He was Messiah, just about to come into His ministry, and she was putting a demand on His anointing.

of course this is a digression from the topic, which is why mary would think her son mad when she knows of the miraculous circumstances surrounding his birth

There is no scripture that says that, nor does it say His brothers and sisters said it either, seeing as His brothers were also disciples later on.

 

[doubting thomas]

perhaps the question should be better stated as:

why would jesus' family think him mad, and why would his mother and father not defend him -- especially to their family -- knowing the miraculous nature of jesus' birth? something here does not add up. if the virgin birth happened his family has no reason not to think jesus very special. yet his own family does not.

 

[theLords]

i think mark 3:31-35 can be read as disrespecting your mother. of course i understand the point jesus is making (in fact i think it one of the most beautiful things about his message, echoing galatians 3:28), but yes, i think it dishonors his mother and her special role to equate her as no different than anyone who does the will of god. i think it dishonors her to have mary come and get him, only to have jesus tell her to go away, i do not care to see you, that this is my new family.

when this is coupled with the tone he takes with her ("why do you involve me) at the wedding, one gets the sense that jesus does not, in fact, honor his mother.

of course this is a digression from the topic, which is why mary would think her son mad when she knows of the miraculous circumstances surrounding his birth

Are you a Christian? I'm having trouble understanding how a Christian would think it possible for Jesus to sin against the Law of the 10 Commandments. It undermines Christianity at it's core.

Luke 2 (NIV)
34 Then Simeon blessed them and said to Mary, his mother: “This child is destined to cause the falling and rising of many in Israel, and to be a sign that will be spoken against, 35 so that the thoughts of many hearts will be revealed. And a sword will pierce your own soul too.â€

Mary was not sinless or perfect by any means. She sinned and needed to be saved just like everyone else.

Mark 3
30 He said this because they were saying, “He has an impure spirit.â€

31 Then Jesus’ mother and brothers arrived. Standing outside, they sent someone in to call him. 32 A crowd was sitting around him, and they told him, “Your mother and brothers are outside looking for you.â€

33 “Who are my mother and my brothers?†he asked.

34 Then he looked at those seated in a circle around him and said, “Here are my mother and my brothers! 35 Whoever does God’s will is my brother and sister and mother.â€

How many preachers do you know who have their mother and family come and interrupt them in the middle of their sermons?

John 2:4 (NIV)
“Woman, why do you involve me?†Jesus replied. “My hour has not yet come.â€

These passages clearly show that it was Mary who was in the wrong and not the Lord.

 

[doubting thomas]

He had reason to be strong with her, but He wasn't disrespectful. He was Messiah, just about to come into His ministry, and she was putting a demand on His anointing.

strong vs disrespectful seems to be a bit of semantics. as i said, it was the tone which dishonors her.

and if she is so keen on his anointing, why is she letting her other children call jesus mad?

There is no scripture that says that.

no, mark 3:21 is not specific. but 3:31 mentions his mother and brothers, and i believe this what "family" refers to in 3:21.

and did not james convert after seeing the resurrected body/spirit of jesus?

 

[theLords]

no, mark 3:21 is not specific. but 3:31 mentions his mother and brothers, and i believe this what "family" refers to in 3:21.

and did not james convert after seeing the resurrected body/spirit of jesus?

Who's to say that the "family" in Mark 3:21 didn't go and summon His mother and brothers in Mark 3:31? If it was His mother and brothers who called Him mad why would they go and summon Him?

 

[doubting thomas]

Are you a Christian? I'm having trouble understanding how a Christian would think it possible for Jesus to sin against the Law of the 10 Commandments. It undermines Christianity at it's core.

1. does it matter
2. my name is doubting thomas for a reason
3. john 3:16 is all i think is needed to be a "christian"

Mary was not sinless or perfect by any means. She sinned and needed to be saved just like everyone else.

there are about a billion catholics who would disagree with you (and for the first 1400 or so years of christianity, that quote would be heresy in most places). i think they might be asking if you're really a christian

How many preachers do you know who have their mother and family come and interrupt them in the middle of their sermons?

are you comparing preachers to the son of god? matthew 15:8 is all i have to say.

These passages clearly show that it was Mary who was in the wrong and not the Lord.

my mother is often in the wrong. but i dont scold her in public. i honor her.

 

[doubting thomas]

Who's to say that the "family" in Mark 3:21 didn't go and summon His mother and brothers in Mark 3:31? If it was His mother and brothers who called Him mad why would they go and summon Him?

to stop him from further embarrassing himself. the question is if it wasn't his mother or brothers (and we can reasonably infer it was not his father), who, exactly, is this family then that is calling him mad?

does it not make more sense that his family thought him mad because there was no virgin birth and that they didn't understand what was going on with their son? again, this in no way would invalidate the teachings of paul or jesus.

 

[doubting thomas]

Who's to say that the "family" in Mark 3:21 didn't go and summon His mother and brothers in Mark 3:31? If it was His mother and brothers who called Him mad why would they go and summon Him?

can i ask you a seperate question: why call jesus the prince of peace when jesus said he came here not to bring peace but a sword (even if that sword is metaphorical). does it mean prince of peace in the kingdom of god, which is yet to come (since his kingdom is not of this world)? cause that would obviously make more sense

 

[theLords]

1. does it matter
2. my name is doubting thomas for a reason
3. john 3:16 is all i think is needed to be a "christian"

1. Yes
2. Is that a yes or a no?
3. Amen

there are about a billion catholics who would disagree with you (and if this was few hundred years ago, that quote would be heresy in many places). it think they might be asking if you're really a christian

The RCC also approved of the Spanish Inquisition. Clearly, they are not perfect in their thinking are they?

are you comparing preachers to the son of god? matthew 15:8 is all i have to say.

Jesus was preaching to the Lost and is interrupted by His mother. Who was in the wrong? Yes, I am comparing the preaching of Jesus the Rabbi to Joe Smith who preaches the Word of God. And?

The fact that Jesus is the Son of God gives more insight into Mary's thinking. Perhaps she thought that because she gave birth to the Son of God she had special privileges, like interrupting her Son who was preaching to the lost. Perhaps not.

my mother is often in the wrong. but i dont scold her in public. i honor her.

God is the only One capable of correcting sin. Peter was rebuked in public and so were the Pharisees.

The highest honor He could have shown His mother was correcting her of her sin and showing her the path to Salvation.

 

[Free]

if mary had an angel tell her she was going to have god's child, and joseph had a dream confirming this, why do we get in mark 3:21 that jesus' family thought he was crazy? surely they would believe their son/brother, considering the circumstances surrounding his birth

thanks

There are many different renderings of this passage based on differences between texts. It could be friends, immediate family, or cousins (relations).

Even if it is family it is of little consequence. Look at how many times Jesus told his disciples things and they didn't get it until he died and rose again. Look at when Jesus, as a young boy, was found in the Temple and said he was in his father's house and his family didn't get it.

I don't really see what the problem is here.

 

[theLords]

to stop him from further embarrassing himself. the question is if it wasn't his mother or brothers (and we can reasonably infer it was not his father), who, exactly, is this family then that is calling him mad?

How do you know this? This is simply speculation. The Bible doesn't specify who it was that called Him mad.

does it not make more sense that his family thought him mad because there was no virgin birth and that they didn't understand what was going on with their son? again, this in no way would invalidate the teachings of paul or jesus.

Doesn't it seem mad that the ancient Israelites saw the Egyptians go through plague after plague and then see the mighty miracles of God and then be fed supernaturally and be privilged enough to see the Lord and still sin against Him so easily and quickly? Moses was on Mt. Sinai and the Israelites were having an idol orgy party at the foot of the mountain. Crazy, no?

Adam and Eve lived in complete sinless perfection in holy fellowship with the Lord and they threw it all away.

Why then do you expect Jesus' own family to believe in Him when even the only 2 sinless humans couldn't even believe the Lord's command to not eat of the fruit?

 

[Alabaster]

strong vs disrespectful seems to be a bit of semantics. as i said, it was the tone which dishonors her.

How on earth would you know the tone of Jesus' voice? If you believe in Jesus Christ, then you will believe He never sinned. Therefore, He would NEVER disrespect His mother due to the fact that the Ten Commandments prohibits it! THEREFORE, your understanding needs correction to align with Scriptural truth.

and if she is so keen on his anointing, why is she letting her other children call jesus mad?

I was referring to the Cana story, so, my apologies there. There is nothing in the record that any of Jesus' siblings called Him mad. You are reading into the story.

no, mark 3:21 is not specific. but 3:31 mentions his mother and brothers, and i believe this what "family" refers to in 3:21.

and did not james convert after seeing the resurrected body/spirit of jesus?

Nazareth was a small town. Other relatives would be included...those who didm't share His household. It doesn't mean that His siblings weren't suffering a bit of shame or concern over Jesus, but it really doesn't say who the family members are. In fact in the Amplified, verse 21, it calls them 'kinsmen' which includes friends, close companions also.

 

[theLords]

can i ask you a seperate question: why call jesus the prince of peace when jesus said he came here not to bring peace but a sword (even if that sword is metaphorical). does it mean prince of peace in the kingdom of god, which is yet to come (since his kingdom is not of this world)? cause that would obviously make more sense

Didn't Jesus bring a "sword"? Look at ex-Muslims turned Christians. Their very own families try to kill them for their belief in the Lord. These families become divided, but that new Christian has the "peace that surpasses all understanding" sustaining them throughout those painful ordeals.

John 16:33 (KJV)
These things I have spoken unto you, that in me ye might have peace. In the world ye shall have tribulation: but be of good cheer; I have overcome the world.

 

[doubting thomas]

like i said, my name is doubting thomas for a reason. i have my doubts. my background is in catholicism. personally, the church's position on the inquisitions does nothing to affect my views on the immaculate conception. nor do i think the actions of man have any bearing of the legitimacy of the church as an institution. priests rape boys. that doesn't mean the pope is therefore not god's true representative on earth.

what matters, at least to this thread, is if jesus was born to a virgin or not (clearly i lean no), and why his family thought him mad (and, of secondary importance, as the thread has evolved on its own, as to whether jesus can be said to have dishonored his mother, to which i clearly lean yes). neither questions, ultimately, have any bearing for me on whether or not jesus was the son of god. i don't think the bible is inerrant (nor do i think i have to in order to be considered a christian.)

personally, i think it somewhat blasphemous to compare joe the preacher with jesus the rabbi and son of god (or even paul). too many preachers honor jesus with their mouths, but not their hearts. your mother is your mother, and you do not scold her in public. it is disrespectful, full stop. that said, it doesnt undermine my faith. as i said, i think jesus' family did not understand who he was, and i think jesus was very frustrated at times. and i do think mary has special privileges. of course mary is special. you cant compare mary to the pharisees. it's not like mary is questioning jesus' views on OT law.

 

[doubting thomas]

There are many different renderings of this passage based on differences between texts. It could be friends, immediate family, or cousins (relations).

Even if it is family it is of little consequence. Look at how many times Jesus told his disciples things and they didn't get it until he died and rose again. Look at when Jesus, as a young boy, was found in the Temple and said he was in his father's house and his family didn't get it.

I don't really see what the problem is here.

i personally find the jesus leaving his family at passover a little troubling as well. if mary was visited by an angel and gave birth a virgin, surely she understands what jesus means by "fathers house". does she forget what the angel told her?

 

[doubting thomas]

Why then do you expect Jesus' own family to believe in Him when even the only 2 sinless humans couldn't even believe the Lord's command to not eat of the fruit?

because mary was witness to the miraculous birth of her son, and surely mary would tell her family about it. they would call HER mad before they called jesus mad. who knows, maybe they did.

 

[theLords]

like i said, my name is doubting thomas for a reason. i have my doubts. my background is in catholicism. personally, the church's position on the inquisitions does nothing to affect my views on the immaculate conception. nor do i think the actions of man have any bearing of the legitimacy of the church as an institution. priests rape boys. that doesn't mean the pope is therefore not god's true representative on earth.

what matters, at least to this thread, is if jesus was born to a virgin or not (clearly i lean no), and why his family thought him mad (and, of secondary importance, as the thread has evolved on its own, as to whether jesus can be said to have dishonored his mother, to which i clearly lean yes). neither questions, ultimately, have any bearing for me on whether or not jesus was the son of god. i don't think the bible is inerrant (nor do i think i have to in order to be considered a christian.)

personally, i think it somewhat blasphemous to compare joe the preacher with jesus the rabbi and son of god (or even paul). too many preachers honor jesus with their mouths, but not their hearts. your mother is your mother, and you do not scold her in public. it is disrespectful, full stop. that said, it doesnt undermine my faith. as i said, i think jesus' family did not understand who he was, and i think jesus was very frustrated at times. and i do think mary has special privileges. of course mary is special. you cant compare mary to the pharisees. it's not like mary is questioning jesus' views on OT law.

Blasphemous to compare Jesus to a preacher? Really?

If, Joe Smith the Preacher, can preach without being interrupted by his family, then the Son of God should even more so be able to preach without being interrupted by His family.

I think your post says it all.

God bless you.

 

[Alabaster]

i personally find the jesus leaving his family at passover a little troubling as well. if mary was visited by an angel and gave birth a virgin, surely she understands what jesus means by "fathers house". does she forget what the angel told her?

Are you talking about when He was twelve years old? He was caught up in sitting at the Rabbi's feet!

There would have come a time, no matter how unwelcome it would be to a mother who loved her firstborn dearly, when Jesus, the Son of God would begin to assert Himself. He was thirsty for the Torah! Can you blame Him? We have the perfection of hindsight. Mary didn't. Her heart was always full and vulnerable about this Son.