 |
| Open Theism Discussion Board > Public Forums > Theological Q&A > Happy Birthday Mary! | Forum Quick Jump
|
| 
Leviathan
Registered Member
Date Joined Sep 2004
Total Posts : 82
| Posted 9/13/2004 7:18 AM (GMT -6) |   | JCF...
quote:
My understanding is that Joseph was an older man and widower. Being married at least once before Mary, would it not be conceivable that Jesus had older stepbrothers and stepsisters?
What book and verse is that?
And where were the 'step' kids on the trek to Bethleham...
Berry,
quote:
I had no clue that many protestants believed Mary a life-long virgin.
How do you know who is a protestant and who's in NOT?
| | Back to Top | | |
 |
JCF
Registered Member
Date Joined Sep 2004
Total Posts : 10
| Posted 9/13/2004 7:25 AM (GMT -6) | | quote:
Originally posted by Leviathan
JCF...
quote:
My understanding is that Joseph was an older man and widower. Being married at least once before Mary, would it not be conceivable that Jesus had older stepbrothers and stepsisters?
What book and verse is that?
And where were the 'step' kids on the trek to Bethleham...
I thought it was common knowledge, maybe I’m mistaken. I don’t know where I read it from; I'm curious and will have to look it up. | | Back to Top | | |
|
Leviathan
Registered Member
Date Joined Sep 2004
Total Posts : 82
| Posted 9/13/2004 7:28 AM (GMT -6) | | KK,
My 'understanding' is Mary and Joseph had five kids;
Jesus- oldest
James-#2
sister-unnamed #3
and the twins #4 and #5!! a boy and girl
Don't believe watch the passion of the Christ ....you have to look fast but on one of the flash backs there is a family portrait on the wall!!
| | Back to Top | | |
|
Tom
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 10353
| Posted 9/13/2004 7:42 AM (GMT -6) | | Kublai-
Cool name. May the fleas of a thousand camels infest your…
On to more important matters.
The problem with appealing to the lone phrase “Jesus’ brothers” to make a case for believing Mary had other children besides Jesus is that the word “brothers” (as you know I’m sure and as POW has reminded us) isn’t limited to siblings who share the same birth mother. It can also take in more distant relatives, like cousins. Surely Jesus had cousins. All Middle Easterners have cousins! So we can make sense of references to Jesus’ Mother and brothers as a reference to Mary and Jesus’ cousins.
The problem is that though this is strictly speaking possible, the manner in which reference is made to Jesus’ brothers leads one to think direct siblings are more likely identified. Naming them for instance, the way the residents of Nazareth do. When residents refer to father, mother, and specific brothers by name (as opposed to just “his cousins”), the default understanding, I think, ought to be that these brothers are siblings. Is it likely that Jesus only had four cousins? Unlikely. Why not just say “We know Joseph his father, his mother Mary, and his brothers”? See? Naming them gives every evidence of being a quite natural way of referring to Mom, Dad, and siblings. One would have to already believe Jesus had no siblings not to take in a straightforward manner what otherwise appears to be a very normal naming of family members known first-hand by others. I’m not saying it’s absolutely impossible that these four named brothers are Jesus’ cousins. I am saying that the burden of proof is on those who want to argue that this is what is in fact intended. But apart from the already existing belief (on theological grounds) that Mary didn’t give birth to other siblings, there’s nothing in the text to point in this direction. Nothing at all. So arguments from the text that Mary chose to remain a virgin end up assuming what they argue—that Mary chose to remain a virgin.
Oh yeah, then there’s the suggestion that Jesus’ brothers were siblings of Joseph’s through a previous marriage. You know, I don’t play these games. If someone wants to believe Mary remained a virgin, there are ways to drum up reasons why this must be true which, even if they aren’t required by the text (and none of them are), aren’t specifically ruled out by the text. Yeah, I admit that no relevant text makes it unambiguously clear that Jesus’ “brothers” were in fact siblings of Jesus’ and offspring of Mary. But if we read with default settings at all (and surely we do if meaning is ever possible [cf. Wolterstorff]), then surely the default understanding of such texts is the most normal reading. James, Joseph, Simon, and Judas were younger siblings of Jesus, Mary’s offspring. Those who believe in Mary’s perpetual virginity do so for theological and other reasons, but not as a RESPONSE TO textual claims, nor in line with what ought to be the default, normal reading. So it can hardly be a show of disrespect for Mary or her devotion to believe that the text means what it almost certainly means.
Same goes for the reference to Jesus as Mary’s “firstborn” son. You’ll never squeeze an admission of this out of those who believe in Mary’s life-long virginity. One can theologize “firstborn” and just say all that’s meant here is that Jesus occupies the highest place of superiority and honor in God’s house (as I just finished reading on one site). That’s fine when firstborn is used in some Pauline text making a theological point. But in gospel narratives? In the simple telling of a story? Where Mary brings forth her firstborn son? THIS is a theologically loaded reference to “firstborn”? Again, not likely. In all honesty (if it’s relevant at all), as far as I can tell, Middle Easterners (Arabs at least, don’t know about Jews), will congratulate the parents of a first child on the birth of their “firstborn” (IF it’s a boy!) even though there are obviously no other children. But it’s clearly linked to the hope and intention that others will come. It’s a way of saying, “We expect you to do this more often!” But where no hope of having children exists (like older couples), only children are never referred to as the “bikr” or “firstborn.” They are the “wahid,” the “only” son or daughter. But again, this is 2000 years later and so not at all conclusive. But a lot about the Middle East has changed very little in 2000 years!
I have Catholic and Orthodox friends back in Lebanon who like to bring this up. Again, THEY bring it up. They often ask, "What do you do with Mary? Why do you dishonor her by denying her perpetual virginity?" See the issue (at the popular level at least)? I don't engage the issue with them unless pushed to do so. It's not worth it. God doesn't care what people believe about whether Mary had sex or not after Jesus was born. What bothers my friends who believe she remained a virgin was not so much that I didn't agree. It was that I didn't see that it was important. Neither view "honors" or "dishonors" Mary. My goodness. How off can you get to insist that honoring someone's devotion to God hinges on believing they don't have sex? Discussions usually ended up taking us to OTHER issues that they felt were inseparablly linked to Mary's continued virginity, like attributes some give her which I think are way inappropriate and, in my view, constitute blasphemy. There's the dishonor to Mary! Not something you want to say to a Maronite Catholic in Beirut, believe me!
Tom  | | Back to Top | | |
|
Tom
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 10353
| Posted 9/13/2004 7:52 AM (GMT -6) | | Right. Multiple passages. One and same phrase: "brothers of Jesus." Defenders of Mary's life-long virginity deal with the lone phrase "brothers of Jesus" and apply it accross the board.
Tom | | Back to Top | | |
|
Tom
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 10353
| Posted 9/13/2004 8:02 AM (GMT -6) | | Right. No problem here. I just gave up purusing this with Catholics, since I don't think salvation, devotion, worship, or growth in the Spirit has anything to do with my believing something one way or the other regarding something that's Joseph's and Mary's private business. And that it is believed to have anything at all to do with these more important matters does bother me. So while I don't think God cares what people believe about Mary's sex life, I do think God cares about beliefs that grow out of and birth inappropriate affections.
Tom | | Back to Top | | |
|
Leviathan
Registered Member
Date Joined Sep 2004
Total Posts : 82
| Posted 9/13/2004 8:09 AM (GMT -6) | | TGB,
quote:
But other attributes some give to Mary are way inappropriate and, in my view, constitute blasphemy
Isn't that the bottom line rub...PoW and others 'wish' to attribute stuff that just never happened to Mary;
quote:
1.Mary is called the Mother of God 431 A.D
2.Prayers offered to Mary 600 A.D
3.Immaculate Conception (that she was sinless) 1854 A.D
4.Assumption of Mary 1950 A.D
5.Mary Proclaimed Mother of the Church 1965 A.
If Pow and others want to spout catholic dogma and what Augustine or some Council said...fine go ahead, knock yourself out. like I said before...to quote ME;
"I'm a 'Sola Scriptura' kind of guy. And don't really give a rip what the Roman church, Pope, Tom, Dick or Harry says"!!!
Some of us excaped the burden and bonds of the catholic church and are basking in the 'freedom of Christ'
| | Back to Top | | |
|
Tom
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 10353
| Posted 9/13/2004 8:24 AM (GMT -6) | | Leviathan: Isn't that the bottom line rub...PoW and others 'wish' to attribute stuff that just never happened to Mary:
quote:
1.Mary is called the Mother of God 431 A.D
2.Prayers offered to Mary 600 A.D
3.Immaculate Conception (that she was sinless) 1854 A.D
4.Assumption of Mary 1950 A.D
5.Mary Proclaimed Mother of the Church 1965 A.
Tom: Can we be honest here? I personally think 1-5 is a bunch of bunk. And I honestly believe it eventuated from getting our eyes off of Jesus and on his Mom. Depending on what one precisely means with "theotokos," I can affirm that. Mary was just the human vehicle for the incarnation. There's no need to go beyond that.
Add a sixth to your list. In 1923, Pope Pius XI sanctioned Pope Benedict XV's pronouncement that Mary suffered with Christ, and that with Him, she redeemed the human race. So...
6. Mary dubbed the "Co-Redemptrix" (or "Co-redemptress"), having shared in the atoning work of God in Christ on the Cross.
Or you might add a seventh:
7. The Rosary has ten prayers to Mary for each two directed to God. That's balanced devotion I guess.
Leviathan: If Pow and others want to spout catholic dogma and what Augustine or some Council said...fine go ahead, knock yourself out.
Tom: Like I said, I don't think God cares what anybody believes about Mary's sex life after Jesus. I certainly don't care. But it's never JUST about whether Mary had sex or not. It's the belief that believing this is a part of Christian devotion and that not believing it makes one either not devout at all or at least less devout than others who do believe it. I categorically reject such a notion of Christian devotion.
Tom | | Back to Top | | |
|
JCF
Registered Member
Date Joined Sep 2004
Total Posts : 10
| Posted 9/13/2004 8:48 AM (GMT -6) | | quote:
Originally posted by Leviathan
"I'm a 'Sola Scriptura' kind of guy. And don't really give a rip what the Roman church, Pope, Tom, Dick or Harry says"!!!
Some of us excaped the burden and bonds of the catholic church and are basking in the 'freedom of Christ'
Boy I did not know all of this, what heretics. I’m taking the Pope of my Christmas list. I will never eat at the same table with a Catholic again. Maybe they should have to ride in the back of the bus so we can easily identify them, just in case you can’t identify them by their rosary. | | Back to Top | | |
|
Tom
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 10353
| Posted 9/13/2004 9:28 AM (GMT -6) | | JCF-
I at least haven't suggested THAT kind of approach to others (Catholic or not) who I disagree with on this issue. Quite the opposite. Because I don't think Mary's sexuality is a matter for Christian devotion, I have no problems riding alongside Catholics on the bus!
I don't think prayer to Mary or the Saints is sin. Here's how I look at it. If my youngest (who is 12) wanted to make a request of me and instead of coming directly to his father went to his older sister and asked her to present his request to me, I wouldn't chide or discipline my son. Neither would I necessarily NOT grant his request. I just might grant it! It's not a thing to be punished. It's a thing to be corrected. A relationship to be improved upon. What I'd do is bring my son in and say, "Son, I'm your father. You don't have to go through your sister to talk to me. You're my child. You can come straight to me and tell me what you need." It's about understanding who we are in Christ. I think prayer offered to Mary and the Saints betrays a misunderstanding somewhere along the line of God's love and approachability.
It's like the Catholic who said to his Protestant friend, "Would you barge right into the presence of a King? Surely not. Surely you'd arrange for someone close to the king, some counselor or confidant, to approach the King for you. Is this not so?" The Protestant replied, "True enough. But suppose the King was my father. Suppose I lived in the palace and ate at the King's talbe every day and had every opportunity to make my needs known to him. Suppose he called me to his lap often and told me how much he loved me. Would you then expect me to arrange a third party representative to make my issues known to the King?"
What sort of prayer makes best sense of God's loving us equally as a Father and inviting us as children into his presence?
Tom | | Back to Top | | |
|
JCF
Registered Member
Date Joined Sep 2004
Total Posts : 10
| Posted 9/13/2004 10:00 AM (GMT -6) | | quote:
Originally posted by TGB
It's like the Catholic who said to his Protestant friend, "Would you barge right into the presence of a King? Surely not. Surely you'd arrange for someone close to the king, some counselor or confidant, to approach the King for you. Is this not so?" The Protestant replied, "True enough. But suppose the King was my father. Suppose I lived in the palace and ate at the King's talbe every day and had every opportunity to make my needs known to him. Suppose he called me to his lap often and told me how much he loved me. Would you then expect me to arrange a third party representative to make my issues known to the King?"
God had quite the reputation for his anger and wrath until Jesus came along. It might just be that people (children of God) were just a little afraid of approaching Dad. So, I don’t think they were content by sending their sister to talk to old grumpy dad, but Mom herself. The virgin Mother seemed to have won Dad’s favor by doing Him one, certainly she could approach him. Hey I don’t know, I’m just guessing how it all started by tweaking your analogy. For the most part I agree with you Tom, unity in the essentials.
In essentials, unity;
in non-essentials, liberty;
in all things, love.
| | Back to Top | | |
|
Leviathan
Registered Member
Date Joined Sep 2004
Total Posts : 82
| Posted 9/13/2004 10:12 AM (GMT -6) | | JCF-
What bus are talking about, the short bus you ride...the 'special' person bus?
Oh I'm sorry I should have know by come of your comments...like;
quote:
Boy I did not know all of this, what heretics. I’m taking the Pope of my Christmas list. I will never eat at the same table with a Catholic again. Maybe they should have to ride in the back of the bus so we can easily identify them, just in case you can’t identify them by their rosary
or
quote:
God had quite the reputation for his anger and wrath until Jesus came along. It might just be that people (children of God) were just a little afraid of approaching Dad. So, I don’t think they were content by sending their sister to talk to old grumpy dad, but Mom herself. The virgin Mother seemed to have won Dad’s favor by doing Him one, certainly she could approach him. Hey I don’t know, I’m just guessing how it all started by tweaking your analogy. For the most part I agree with you Tom, unity in the essentials.
quote:
The virgin Mother seemed to have won Dad’s favor by doing Him one,
Didn't she do herself a favor by having the savor to SAVE HER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I NEVER said anything about eating with catholic's...or the rest of your nosence!
Heretics...thats the debate. | | Back to Top | | |
|
JCF
Registered Member
Date Joined Sep 2004
Total Posts : 10
| Posted 9/13/2004 10:20 AM (GMT -6) | | quote:
Originally posted by Leviathan
JCF-
What bus are talking about, the short bus you ride...the 'special' person bus?
Oh I'm sorry I should have know by come of your comments...like;
quote:
Boy I did not know all of this, what heretics. I’m taking the Pope of my Christmas list. I will never eat at the same table with a Catholic again. Maybe they should have to ride in the back of the bus so we can easily identify them, just in case you can’t identify them by their rosary
or
quote:
God had quite the reputation for his anger and wrath until Jesus came along. It might just be that people (children of God) were just a little afraid of approaching Dad. So, I don’t think they were content by sending their sister to talk to old grumpy dad, but Mom herself. The virgin Mother seemed to have won Dad’s favor by doing Him one, certainly she could approach him. Hey I don’t know, I’m just guessing how it all started by tweaking your analogy. For the most part I agree with you Tom, unity in the essentials.
quote:
The virgin Mother seemed to have won Dad’s favor by doing Him one,
Didn't she do herself a favor by having the savor to SAVE HER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I NEVER said anything about eating with catholic's...or the rest of your nosence!
Heretics...thats the debate.
Maybe you should seek some anger management help. You don't drive with such rage I hope. My little bus could be in danger. | | Back to Top | | |
|
Leviathan
Registered Member
Date Joined Sep 2004
Total Posts : 82
| Posted 9/13/2004 11:32 AM (GMT -6) | | JCF,
You are mistaking 'anger' for 'making fun of you'.
'Anger' would be a sin seeing it would not be exactly a rightous anger...
And 'making fun of you'...I do not thing that is a sin but just in case I'll talk to my priest and say a few hail Marys. LOL
What does it matter that Mary (heaven forbid) had sex with her HUSBAND? | | Back to Top | | |
|
Leviathan
Registered Member
Date Joined Sep 2004
Total Posts : 82
| Posted 9/13/2004 12:46 PM (GMT -6) | | Moon,
Well, I think of sex as being one of the most beautiful gift GOD gave us to share between a husband and a wife. And I'm sure Jesus smiles at the thought of his mom and dad being able love each other in such a intimate way... but that just me!
| | Back to Top | | |
|
PotOnWheel
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 9890
| Posted 9/13/2004 2:09 PM (GMT -6) | | Tom, good posts.
Also: Calvin didn't deny that saints in heaven prayed.
And I love the line that Church worship is joining a service "now in progress."
quote:
Byz. Vespers: "Commemorating our all-holy, pure, most blessed and glorious Lady, Mother of God and Ever-Virgin Mary, with all the Saints, let us entrust ourselves and one another and our whole life to Christ our God.")
AND
quote:
Come, all you faithful, let us praise in psalms and hymn and spiritual songs the all-glorious memory of all the Saints: the Baptist of the Saviour, Apostles, Prophets and Martyrs, Hierarchs, Teachers, Holy Ones, Ascetics and Righteous, and the God-loving company of holy Women, as with reverence we call them blessed in harmony let us cry out: Christ our God, supremely good, at their prayers grant peace to your Churches, victories over enemies to our Christ-loving Sovereign, and to our souls your great mercy.
Come, let us rejoice in spirit at the memorial of the Saints; for see, it has come bringing us gifts of grace in rich abundance; and so with a voice of gladness and a pure conscience let us cry out and say: Hail, company of Prophets, who proclaimed the coming of Christ to the world and foresaw near at hand things far off. Hail, choir of Apostles, who caught the nations in a net, and who are the fishers of mankind. Hail, race of Martyrs, who were gathered from the ends of the into one faith, endured for it fierce torments and finally received the crown of your contest. Hail, swarm of Fathers, who trampled down your own bodies by ascetic struggle, and when you had slain the passions of the flesh you gave wings to your mind with divine love and took flight to heaven, and as you rejoice with the Angels, you enjoy eternal blessings. But, O Prophets, Apostles and Martyrs with Ascetics, insistently implore the one who crowned you that those who celebrate with faith and love your ever-revered memorial may be rescued from enemies visible and invisible.
(SUNDAY OF ALL SAINTS - ON SATURDAY EVENING)
| | Back to Top | | |
|
JCF
Registered Member
Date Joined Sep 2004
Total Posts : 10
| Posted 9/13/2004 5:21 PM (GMT -6) | | quote:
Originally posted by moon_river_j
quote:
Originally posted by Leviathan
Moon,
Well, I think of sex as being one of the most beautiful gift GOD gave us to share between a husband and a wife. And I'm sure Jesus smiles at the thought of his mom and dad being able love each other in such a intimate way... but that just me!
How very true. He created us. He inspired the Song of Songs! Yup...think He'd understand!
Jo-Anne
I’m sorry but I can’t imagine Jesus enjoying your sense of humor. No, I can’t picture Jesus smirking as He daydreams about His parents having sex. In fact, most people don’t like to envision the thought of their parents having sex. I think the people who do are a little odd. But then again, most people show respect to Mothers. | | Back to Top | | |
|
JEE
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2004
Total Posts : 1466
| Posted 9/13/2004 7:15 PM (GMT -6) | | | | |
| 146 posts in this thread.
Viewing Page : 1 2 3 4 5 6 |
| Forum Information | Currently it is Monday, November 09, 2026 5:04 PM (GMT -6)
There are a total of 97,718 posts in 6,040 threads.
In the last 3 days there were 0 new threads and 0 reply posts. View Active Threads
|
Forum powered by dotNetBB v2.42EC SP3
dotNetBB © 2000-2026 |
|
|