Posted on 06/14/2006 8:05:55 AM PDT by NYer
I beg to differ. Jesus had a brother named James. The epistle James is the same. See Galatians 1:19.
Arrowhead>>>----->
Nowhere in his epistle does James identify himself as a brother of our Lord, or the son of Mary or Joseph.
It is interesting to note that in his epistle, Jude identifies himself as the brother of James.
The term brother and sister was used very loosely in Jewish culture, that is why for formal recognition, the term "son of" (bar) was always used and no person other than our Lord is called the son of Mary or Joseph.
Adam and Eve had free will before the Fall, they just never exercised it. So, yes, Mary had free will, but she never acted upon it. And the Lord did save her from sin, at the moment of her conception, that's what the term Immaculate Conception means.
Please note that the genealogy says: "Jacob the father of Joseph, the husband of Mary. Of her was born Jesus who is called the Messiah."
Exactly. Which meant that in order for Jesus to be heir to the throne of David he had to be the firstborn son of Joseph. And if Joseph had any other children after that, then Mary had to have been their mother. So the conclusion is that if Jesus had any brothers or sisters (as the scriptures clearly state he did) then unless they were all immaculately conceived, then Mary obviously was not a perpetual virgin.
Except that it all get a little tricky when you consider the unquestionable fact that Jesus was not actually the son of Joseph.
then unless they were all immaculately conceived, then Mary obviously was not a perpetual virgin.
I meant to add that the term Immaculate Conception has nothing to do with Mary being conceived in a nonsexual matter.
Also, please show me where any person in the Bible other than Jesus is called a son or daughter of Mary or Joseph, or any person who calls themself a brother of Jesus. And why does Jude call himself a brother of James?
Speculation again. Note if you go through the genealogy, you see that all are the father of so-and-so or became the father of so-and-so. Except with Jesus. The genealogy only says "of her was born Jesus who is called the Messiah".
A woman without brothers can inherit forever if I believe a curse was placed on the line from David Y'shua will inherit David's throne only through Miriam
b"shem Y'shua
based on the exception made for daughters of Zelophehad.
see Numbers 27. Joseph was of the house of David
she marries a man from the same tribe as her own.
through Joseph.
Is not in the Holy Word of G-d!
b'shem Y'shua
Legally he was. Matthew's gospel presents Jesus as King. His birthright for that position came through the line of Joseph.
Since the dawn of time there has been a conclusive presumption that any child born during a marriage is the legitimate and rightful son of the Husband (whether he actually is or not).
Matthew's geneaolgy establishes Jesus' legal and legitimate right to the throne of David. If Joseph was a widower and had children from a prior marriage, then Jesus would not have been the rightful heir to the throne of David and hence he could not be the legitimate Messiah of Israel.
There are some who suggest that Joseph was not actually married to Mary at the time of Jesus birth (that they were only engaged). That would have made Jesus an illegitimate child and thus would have made him ineligible to ascend to the throne of David. Jesus was the legitimate son of Joseph and Mary. Joseph could not have had any children before that or they would have owned the birthright to Christ's position on the Throne of David.
Can you locate for me the posts where Catholics (or Orthodox) have put forth this notion that sex is "icky" and that's why Mary is a perpetual virgin?
Building strawmen and then knocking them down doesn't make of one a great scholar.
SD
You should study Catholicism sometime.
Joseph is often lauded for his chastity.
SD
Because James was also Jesus' brother.
Is not this the carpenter, the son of Mary, the brother of James, and Joses, and of Juda, and Simon? and are not his sisters here with us? And they were offended at him. (Mark 6:3 KJV)
Neither are any of these terms:
Trinity
Dispensationalism
Rapture
Sola Fide
Sola Scriptura
Is it not chastity to have no sex outside of marriage. Is it not chaste to only have sexual relations with your wife? Is not the marriage bed undefiled?
So you acknowledge that nowhere in scripture is anyone other than Jesus referred to as the son of either Mary or Joseph.
Further you acknowledge that two men who you claim were brothers of Jesus and later wrote epistles never said that they were brothers of Jesus.
And why is it that Jesus at the Crucifixion chose to dishonor his "brothers" by entrusting His Mother to the care of John?
Why don't you try answering the more serious phrasing I used in post #219:
Incidentally, the same Platonism that says that having sex within marriage would degrade Mary also gave rise to the various Gnostic heresies that said that Yeshua couldn't be fully God and fully Man all at once, for surely God, being a pure Spirit, would never degrade Himself enough to become flesh!Or post #197:
I don't deny her her due. She was the most blessed of women as the mother of the Messiah, of God Incarnate. A Roman Catholic, bound to the Platonism of his faith, might think that having normal marital relations with her proper husband is somehow a stain on Miryam's reputation, but the Jewish mind is under no such delusion. On the contrary, that she brought forth other children, brothers (like Ya'akov [James] and Y'hudah [Jude]) and sisters to the Messiah Yeshua who were righteous and honorable men and who, in fact, ran the Jerusalem Church for over a century is not a stain on her reputation, but a very great honor, second only to the honor of having given birth to the King Himself!When you can manage to come up with a serious counter-argument--like, say, providing the historical sources to prove that "virgin marriages" were a first-century Jewish convention, per my request in post #197, or explaining why even Roman Catholicism recognizes the incomplete status of a marriage without consumation in response to my argument in post #176--give me a ping. But don't waste my time or yours with such vain straining out a gnat of a logical fallacy in an instance where I'm obviously being purposefully trite while you swallow the camel of a Jewish marriage not involving sex.
If you have something that says "the other sons and daughters of Mary" or "the other sons and daughters of Joseph" I would be very interested in seeing it. The Church, both East and West, those that spoke Greek and even those that spoke Aramaic, continuously have taught that Mary was ever-virgin.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.