| This thread has been locked, it will not receive new replies. |
|
Locked on 05/22/2017 3:39:19 PM PDT by Jim Robinson, reason:
childishness |
Posted on 05/13/2017 6:28:38 AM PDT by Salvation
Q. I know that the Church believes in Mary’s perpetual virginity, but what are we to make of the passages in the Gospel that refer to Jesus’ brothers and sisters?
Rose, via email
A. There are a number of places in the New Testament (see Mk 3:31-34; 6:3; Mt 12:46; 13:55; Lk 8:19-20; Jn 2:12; 7:3-10; Acts 1:14; and 1 Cor 9:5) where Jesus’ kinsfolk are mentioned using terms such as “brother” (adelphos), “sister” (adelphe) or “brethren” (adelphoi). But “brother” has a wider meaning both in the Scriptures and at the time they were written. It is not restricted to our literal meaning of a full brother or half-brother in the sense of sibling.
Even in the Old Testament “brother” had a wide range of meaning. In the Book of Genesis, for example, Lot is called Abraham’s brother (see 14:14), but his father was Haran — Abraham’s brother (Gn 11:26-28). So, Lot was actually a nephew of Abraham.
The term “brother” could also refer widely to friends or mere political allies (see 2 Sm 1:26; Am 1:9). Thus, in family relationships, “brother” could refer to any male relative from whom you are not descended. We use words like kinsmen and cousins today, but the ancient Jews did not.
In fact, neither Hebrew nor Aramaic had a word meaning “cousin.” They used terms such as “brother,” “sister” or, more rarely, “kin” or “kinsfolk” (syngenis) — sometimes translated as “relative” in English.
James, for example, whom St. Paul called the “brother of the Lord” (Gal 1:19), is identified by Paul as an apostle and is usually understood to be James the Younger. But James the Younger is elsewhere identified as the son of Alphaeus (also called Clopas) and his wife, Mary (see Mt 10:3; Jn 19:25). Even if James the Greater were meant by St. Paul, it is clear that he is from the Zebedee family, and not a son of Mary or a brother of Jesus (in the strict modern sense) at all.
The early Church was aware of the references to Jesus’ brethren, but was not troubled by them, teaching and handing on the doctrine of Mary’s perpetual virginity. This is because the terms referring to Jesus’ brethren were understood in the wider, more ancient sense. Widespread confusion about this began to occur after the 16th century with the rise of Protestantism and the loss of understanding the semantic nuances of ancient family terminology.
And yet she entered a marriage contract with Joseph.
What did the angel say?
Second Adam I believe is the term.
And Eve was his wife not his mother.
Mary's contact with, and responsibility for, the Word of God is far more intimate and far more extensive. Isaiah was to speak the word of God with his mouth; Mary was to enflesh the Word of God in her body. Isaiah was to give human words to the Word; Mary was to give a human nature to the Word.
Each of them --- Isaiah and Mary --- was purified, not for their own vainglory but only in order to make them suitable instruments for their role in God's plan. Isaiah was purified in his mouth. Mary was purified in her nature.
When the Angel Gabriel comes to Mary, he doesn't offer to get a burning ember from heaven to purify her of sin. No, he simply tells her what she has already been prepared, by God's grace, to be: Kecharitomene.
If you google key words
you'll find a lot of articles which delve into the unique, richly indicative status of this word. It was never used as a form of address of any kind in all of Greek literature, sacred or secular, previous to this usage, and never used subsequently either. It is (from the point of view literary investigation) a one-off grammatical coinage, unique.
Gabriel is telling Mary she is already prepared. He says she is uniquely so: Kecharitomene, she who has (already) been filled (completely) with grace. She is so in her nature, only because that makes her fitly prepared for her role: to pass a perfect human nature on to Jesus Christ. It has to be from Mary because she was His bio-mom.
Mary was 'blessed' and 'favored' before the conception of Christ in her womb, even before the angelic visit. Due to what we know about the effect of sin on human nature, we can reason that this gift goes back to the point of Marys own conception, because that was when Mary's human nature was transmitted to her from her natural parents. (It's the same way for us: every one of us has a nature is transmitted to us by our own parents.)
Either Mary was, by Divine grace, preserved from sin, or Jesus was sinfully depraved in His humanity, the heir of her fallen flesh.
And for the same reason:
Baby Jesus was a sinner?
It’s insteuctions from Jesus to not use the title of Father for religious leaders.
Not amount of “ interpretation”, excuses, rationalizations, justifications, and absurd hyperbole will get Catholics any excuse for disobeying a clear, concise, unequivocal command of Jesus.
.
>> “I’m well aware that the liturgies of the Jews and the Catholics have common origins and that those who tend to despise the Catholics also tend to despise the Jews.” <<
Total miss!
The Pharisees have no “litergies.”
They have their false enactments of Yehova’s Appointed Times, and their man made collection Takanot and Ma’assim. (false laws intended to keep the sheep subservient to false religions ‘leaders.’)
Are you admitting that the catholic church does that too?
.
Well, e-s, it would seem the burden is on you to prove that Michael Rood, a cultist, is actually one of Yehova's "called servants."
Other than his own claims, I don't see any proof.I do see him trying to portray himself as a Levitical priest, which he is not.
I do see him pretending to be a rabbi, which he is not.
Explained away by the apologist as they entered into a pact for Mary’s protection knowing they both knew Mary would be ‘wifed’ by God. The layers of foolishness get deeper the more you press the false assertions.
It appears that you are wrong.
Luke 1:42 Douay-Rheims 1899 American Edition (DRA)
And she cried out with a loud voice, and said: Blessed art thou among women, and blessed is the fruit of thy womb.
Among - not ABOVE.
Judges 5:24
Blessed above women shall Jael the wife of Heber the Kenite be, blessed shall she be above women in the tent.
ONLY if God minds the Catholic ‘tradition’ claim that He had to, actually HAD TO use an ovum from Mary. But then, all ‘things’ are accepted if the institutional leadership declares it so.
What do CATHOLICS do with RAHAB's sin??
.
You continue to make a fool of yourself by posting insane nonsense.
Michael’s ministry is constantly visited with the visible work of the Holy Spirit.
The Chronological Gospels, and the restoration of the Biblical Calendar are some glaring examples of that.
Not things that would interest you, judging by your ghastly posting history.
You would have to actually be seeking truth to find that out, so not likely any chance of that.
.
Why Els, they don’t have to do anything with it! Magic Thinking allows such a range of thoughts, that it allows two or even three opposing facts to be held valid simultaneously. Remember, with the catholic god, in their religion, their god can do anything, including contradict himself repeatedly.
Well; that sure explains...
Five lines ok; but you’ve stretched the rhyming a wee bit.
I was going to grade him; but I think encouragement is what is needed at this point.
.
>> “I do see him trying to portray himself as a Levitical priest, which he is not.
I do see him pretending to be a rabbi, which he is not.” <<
Two glaring, deliberately false statements!
You must be getting help from your ‘father’ to come up with such absurd nonsense.
.
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.