St. Mary . . .

[Walpole]

The 'other' mothers would have had children of their own. There was the other Mary, the mother of James the younger and Joses, and there was the mother of the sons of Zebedee, John and James. And there was Mary's sister, apparently also named Mary, the wife of Clopas. Jn. 19:25

Apparently Mary was a common name and John and James and Judas and Simon.

Does this rule out the possibility that Mary, the mother of our Lord Jesus, had children by Joseph? Isn't that why people marry? Or Jesus had brothers and sisters? No.

For even his brothers did not believe in him. John 5:7 Who did not believe in him?

Who went up to the feast without him? John 7:8-10

Your difficulty stems from failing to recognize that Joseph and Mary's marriage was not ordinary in that its teleological end was not procreation, but rather to point to the Kingdom of God. Since they were in the presence of the Most High as the parents of the Incarnate Son of God, their life of continence, like that of their Son's, points to the heavenly Kingdom, as opposed to an earthly and carnal one.

Once again, there is no Scripture supporting this idea that Jesus had uterine siblings.

 

[ezra]

It seems strange that He would refer to Mary as "woman" rather than "mother." Woman is far less intimate than mother.

https://www.gotquestions.org/Jesus-Mary-woman.html
What Jesus says to His mother in John 2:4 sounds almost rude in English. However, in the original language, and in that culture, Mary would not have interpreted Jesus’ words that way. The term woman was used like we use the term ma’am. By addressing Mary this way, Jesus does distance Himself from His mother somewhat—He was exerting His independence from her wishes—but in no way was it a rude manner of speaking. Jesus lovingly uses the same word from the cross when He tells Mary that He is entrusting her to John’s care (John 19:26).

The question Jesus asks His mother isn’t rude, either. It may sound rude in the KJV: “What have I to do with thee?” (John 2:4), but it was a common idiom. In the Greek, Jesus’ question is “Ti emoi kai soi?” The phrase was used to ask of the connection between two people. The question could be translated as “What business do we have with each other?” Or, in less formal terms, “What does this have to do with me?” (ESV) or “Why do you involve me?” (NIV). Again, Jesus is expressing the fact that He is independent of His mother; as eager as Mary was to see Jesus do a miracle, she had no right to determine the time or the manner in which Jesus publicly revealed His glory. Jesus makes His point gently and without being rude, however.

 

[JosephT]

The 'other' mothers would have had children of their own. There was the other Mary, the mother of James the younger and Joses, and there was the mother of the sons of Zebedee, John and James. And there was Mary's sister, apparently also named Mary, the wife of Clopas. Jn. 19:25

Apparently Mary was a common name and John and James and Judas and Simon.

Does this rule out the possibility that Mary, the mother of our Lord Jesus, had children by Joseph? Isn't that why people marry? Or Jesus had brothers and sisters? No.

Nor does it rule it in. Yes?

Apparent it was indeed a poplar name, but no more so than "joe"(English, German, French), "Giuseppe" (Italian), "José" (Spanish), "Iosíf" (Greek). There are a kajillion of us. I was on a conference call the other day with 5 other individuals only one of which wasn't called 'Joe'. Confusion reigned.

But, then there may be the translation problem, from Aramaic, to Greek - several dialects, to Latin - at least two dialects, to Old English, then more current dialect of English. There may have been varying nuances in the name of these women that through the ages lost their significance and eventually found its way to 'Mary', 'Myriam', or Maria.

That makes it all the more difficult doesn't it? So, to avoid speculation you need to come up with a verse that gives the name of one of the brothers as the son of Mary and Joseph. This isn't the first time I've asked, you've avoided doing so across several posts.

For even his brothers did not believe in him. John 5:7 Who did not believe in him?

Who went up to the feast without him? John 7:8-10

His spiritual brothers or clansmen. I lean to the former rather than the latter.

JoephT

 

[MarkT]

Your difficulty stems from failing to recognize that Joseph and Mary's marriage was not ordinary in that its teleological end was not procreation, but rather to point to the Kingdom of God. Since they were in the presence of the Most High as the parents of the Incarnate Son of God, their life of continence, like that of their Son's, points to the heavenly Kingdom, as opposed to an earthly and carnal one.

Once again, there is no Scripture supporting this idea that Jesus had uterine siblings.

It was God's will that Joseph should marry Mary and they should raise the child Jesus. Anything more than that is just your imagining.

 

[Walpole]

It was God's will that Joseph should marry Mary and they should raise the child Jesus. Anything more than that is just your imagining.

Agreed.

I haven’t seen anyone arguing in this thread that Joseph and Mary were not married.

 

[JosephT]

We have the book Isa. prophesied. We have the word of God. Why are you trying to explain what the Bible says? Are you free of the book or are you chained to it yourself?

He prophesied the Kingdom of God, the Church [Isaias 2:2-4], Mary the Mother of God, [Isaias 7:13-14]Jesus Christ, the Emmanuel [Isaias 9:6], but, I've yet to read the prophesy of a Scripture to be read alone. Where might I find it in the Book of Isaias.

JosephT

 

[JosephT]

It was God's will that Joseph should marry Mary and they should raise the child Jesus. Anything more than that is just your imagining.

Images are reflections of reality.

And what was it Joseph and Mary raised, God? Man? Or the Person Jesus Christ who was wholly God and wholly man? If the latter, then shouldn't you acknowledge Mary as Mother of God? If it is a man they raised, then do we worship man, because it is a man raised by Joseph and Mary that we worship? And if it was God, explain how God bleeds for the atonement of man's sins, how do you raise a God anyway? How do you get the nails to support when driven into hands and feet of a spiritual being?

JosephT

 

[WIP]

It was God's will that Joseph should marry Mary and they should raise the child Jesus. Anything more than that is just your imagining.

Anything less is also imagination if we can't see what is stated in Scripture. I believe the Scriptures definitely express that Mary and Joseph came together again and had more children after Jesus was born. Others don't. One of us is not seeing the truth of Scripture.

 

[Walpole]

Anything less is also imagination if we can't see what is stated in Scripture. I believe the Scriptures definitely express that Mary and Joseph came together again and had more children after Jesus was born. Others don't. One of us is not seeing the truth of Scripture.

If you have verses stating Mary's multiple subsequent pregnancies and thus can identify uterine siblings of Jesus, by all means please post them. Otherwise, you are the one doing the imagining.

 

[ezra]

If you have verses stating Mary's multiple subsequent pregnancies and thus can identify uterine siblings of Jesus, by all means please post them. Otherwise, you are the one doing the imagining.

on the other hand how about you post scriptures she remained a virgin all her life ..

 

[stovebolts]

Imagine this...
What if everyone allowed for their brothers view?

We all know that some will be dead set on Mary only having on child, Jesus and others will believe firmly that Jesus had siblings from His mother Mary. We're not going to debate this because nobody wins.

 

[Walpole]

on the other hand how about you post scriptures she remained a virgin all her life ..

It's implicit throughout the Gospels, like the life of Jesus. For Mary and Joseph's marriage was the most unique in all of human history. As such, it was ordered toward the heavenly kingdom, as opposed to an earthly and carnal one.

If you would like concrete proof from Scripture, we need simply look at St. Luke's annunciation narrative, where Gabriel appears to Mary, who is already betrothed to Joseph. (Luke 1:27) Gabriel tells Mary that she will conceive and bear a son. Mary's question to Gabriel is, "How will this be"? (future tense - Luke 1:34)

Why would Mary ask how will it be that she will become pregnant - in the future - if she is already betrothed to Joseph? If you called your mother to tell her you just got engaged, and your mother said to you in excitement, "Congratulations Ezra. I am so happy for you and now I will finally be a grandmother!" Would it be logical to reply to her statement with, "How will this be?"

The reason for Mary's puzzlement to Gabriel is because her life was ordered toward something greater.

 

[Walpole]

Imagine this...
What if everyone allowed for their brothers view?

We all know that some will be dead set on Mary only having on child, Jesus and others will believe firmly that Jesus had siblings from His mother Mary. We're not going to debate this because nobody wins.

It's a discussion Stove. Why not let us discuss this civilly? We might learn something from one another and in turn come to a deeper respect of one another.

I can't think of a more appropriate topic for discussion during this last day of Advent than that of Mary. For Advent is truly Mary's season, as no one in human history has anticipated his coming more intimately than did Mary, from the moment of Gabriel's appearance to her until she brought Him forth nine months later.

 

[stovebolts]

It's a discussion Stove. Why not let us discuss this civilly? We might learn something from one another and in turn come to a deeper respect of one another.

I can't think of a more appropriate topic for discussion during this last day of Advent than that of Mary.

Please do discuss.
What I was trying to convey is that some folks are set in their way and will not change their mind. So it really comes down to respecting each other's views without turning it into an I'm right, your wrong debate.

I trust everyone can do that, especially on Christmas Eve.

Be blessed.

 

[Walpole]

Please do discuss.
What I was trying to convey is that some folks are set in their way and will not change their mind. So it really comes down to respecting each other's views without turning it into an I'm right, your wrong debate.

I trust everyone can do that, especially on Christmas Eve.

Be blessed.

Understood. I hope you have a blessed Christmas season.

 

[ezra]

If you would like concrete proof from Scripture, we need simply look at St. Luke's annunciation narrative, where Gabriel appears to Mary, who is already betrothed to Joseph. (Luke 1:27) Gabriel tells Mary that she will conceive and bear a son. Mary's question to Gabriel is, "How will this be"? (future tense - Luke 1:34)

that says/shows nothing of her remaining a virgin the rest of her life .yes she was a virgin at the time of conception . but nothing in scripture shows her staying the virgin of your claim Matthew 1: 25 And knew her not till she had brought forth her firstborn son: and he called his name Jesus. Knew her not till after she gave birth ( they was sexual after the birth of Christ )

 

[ezra]

I'm right, your wrong debate.

this goes on all the time for instance the tower of the flock post went south.life goes on agree disagree it makes things tick ..except in politics lol

 

[stovebolts]

Understood. I hope you have a blessed Christmas season.

And you as well

You know, JosephT is the first member in years to bring real theology to our site, and I appreciate it. He has opened the hood and provided supporting bits of exegesis where the real work is done.

I can't say I agree fully, but what I can say is I know the work that went into it, and I better understand his reasoning. But more importantly, I see that it draws himself closer to our Savior and for that, it brings me joy.

 

[Walpole]

that says/shows nothing of her remaining a virgin the rest of her life .yes she was a virgin at the time of conception . but nothing in scripture shows her staying the virgin of your claim Matthew 1: 25 And knew her not till she had brought forth her firstborn son: and he called his name Jesus. Knew her not till after she gave birth ( they was sexual after the birth of Christ )

Matthew 1:25 and his use of "until" has been addressed in this thread...

Here ---> https://christianforums.net/Fellowship/index.php?threads/st-mary.78460/page-3#post-1496733

And Here ---> https://christianforums.net/Fellowship/index.php?threads/st-mary.78460/page-3#post-1496744


You did not address St. Luke's annunciation narrative which I introduced as evidence of Mary's perpetual virginity. Why did Mary, who was betrothed to Joseph, ask Gabriel how it will be (future tense) that she will have a child?

It would be illogical to ask how it is you would have a child in the future if you were already betrothed, unless you were planning to live a conjugal life ordered not toward procreation, but toward heaven.

There is a reason Scripture does not record Mary having any other children. The idea that Mary had multiple subsequent maternities and thus Jesus had uterine siblings is completely alien to Scripture and the regula fidei.

 

[stovebolts]

this goes on all the time for instance the tower of the flock post went south.life goes on agree disagree it makes things tick ..except in politics lol

It does, and we are trying to mature our members so this occurs less often.