Mother of James?

[Pearl]

they both were chaste and sacrificed a lower good (sex) for a higher good bringing salvation to the world

again it is bound in heaven by the teaching authority of the apostles Matt 16:18 18:18

But peter was married.

 

[Pearl]

Where do you get authority to “discover the truth for yourself “???

you and I must be taught Matt 28:19 Lk 1:1-4
If there is no need for repentance then it’s not required

They can believe,
Matthew 18:6
But whoso shall offend one of these little ones which believe in me,

and the parents vow to teach them the faith as they grow up

 

[Pearl]

Therefore, the Blessed Virgin Mary leaving Her parents, Joachim of David, and Anne of Aaron, by becoming a virgin of the Temple at age three was an uncommon custom, but She trusted in God. When She became of age, the High Priest informed Her She shall follow the commandment of the aforementioned Law, that God would give Her a holy husband, because She had entrusted Herself to God, and advised Her to pray he would agree to Her vow.

Will you quote bible verses for that please as I don't remember that part.

 

[Pearl]

"This major work of Maria Valtorta, The Poem of the Man-God, is the Gospel expanded, and with her other writings, is in perfect consonance with the canonical Gospels, with the traditions and the magisterium of the Catholic Church". — Bishop Roman Danylak 2001

Oh, so it's not scripture, just a poem which has no real substance. There are plenty of books in our christian bookshops which also expand the gospel. This seems to have been adopted by the Catholic church as fact but without biblical backup.

 

[DNB]

sex is more important than the salvation the whole world?

No, nothing is. But, Mary & Joseph's understanding was not at the level, at the point of the annunciation. As it is written, the pondered over the words of the dream, of Gabriel's message, of the magi's exaltation, of Jesus' absence on the return to Nazareth. They were wed and consummated the marriage, long before their understanding of Jesus' Messiaship came to a full fruition.

 

[DNB]

and still a condemned heretic

by whose standard, ...the orchestrators of the inquisition.

 

[DNB]

Where are these sins of Mary at the cross, if Jesus has brothers according to the law He could not give his mother to John

Interesting point, but not conclusive. Some say that the sons of Zebedee were cousins to Jesus. Either way, no one is dogmatic according to speculation.

 

[DNB]

WRONG.

First off - recognizing both "viable" interpretations is ONE thing.
Reading them in their proper context is quite another.

The laundry list of Scriptural evidence for Mary's Perpetual Virginity that I gave you simply does not allow for YOUR insistence that she and Joseph had relations and bore "other" children. Not only have I shown you the true identity of the mother of the "named adelphoi" of Jesus - I obliterated your "Until" argument and statistically-torpedoed your "brethren" (Adelphoi) position.

Finally - your comment above regarding my reliance on "esoteric data" is rubbish. I Scripturally annihilated your position.
That aside - 2000 years of Tradition also tells us that Mary had no other children - and YOU haven't been able to produce ONE single extrabiblical account that refutes this.

In a court of Law - you'd have been thrown out LONG ago . . .

Your exegesis is weak, which is why i dismiss your claim to 'abundant proof-text'. Very few come to the conclusion that Mary and Joseph did not have sexual relations. This is the over-arching principle of the Biblical account of their relationship. In order to deny this fact, one must base their argument on silence. And this is what you have exploited in order to draw your conclusion.

 

[DNB]

good morning DNB,

Yup.....According to Scripture Joses and James mother was named Mary ALSO....That is made clear in Mark 15:40!! You are repeating the heretical teaching of Helvidius that was picked up 1,200 years later by men who were radicals in the Reformation!

Mary didn't have a "vow and duty as a wife" to have intercourse. Your theory is opposite of what the bible says. Here is what the bible teaches about it: It is good to abstain from sexual relations. I wish that all were as I myself am. But each has his own gift from God. There are eunuchs who have made themselves eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. It is these who have not defiled themselves with women, for they are virgins. It is these who follow the Lamb wherever he goes. These have been redeemed from mankind as first fruits for God and the Lamb, and in their mouth no lie was found, for they are blameless.

Sooooo I have a very simple question for you DNB: Paul calls virginity (abstaining from sex) a "gift from God". Do you believe that God would give Paul that gift and not give Mary, the mother of His child, that gift?

According to your theory having children is a normal part of a married life!! Putting your theory into practice that means that Mary was the wife of God since she bore His child. AND the wife of Joseph since....according to your theory.....she bore the children of Joseph also.

Scripture permits abstention from marital rights by mutual consent. Would it be fair to say if both Mary and Joseph agreed that since she gave birth to the child of God, or that she was in effect the spouse of God, that they would agree NOT to have sexual relations? Do you believe Mary and Joseph did not have enough will power to fulfill that teaching of God?

Scripture makes it clear that celibacy is a higher state than marriage! Is it possible that Mary and Joseph were able to obtain that higher state by not giving into sexual desires?

Mary

1 Corinthians 7:1-5
7:1. Now concerning the things about which you wrote, it is good for a man not to touch a woman. 2. But because of immoralities, each man is to have his own wife, and each woman is to have her own husband. 3. The husband must fulfill his duty to his wife, and likewise also the wife to her husband. 4. The wife does not have authority over her own body, but the husband does; and likewise also the husband does not have authority over his own body, but the wife does. 5. Stop depriving one another, except by agreement for a time, so that you may devote yourselves to prayer, and come together again so that Satan will not tempt you because of your lack of self-control.

Genesis 1:28
1:28. God blessed them; and God said to them, "Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth, and subdue it; and rule over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the sky and over every living thing that moves on the earth."

 

[Pearl]

To be honest all this debating about whether or not Joseph and Mary had other children together or whether she remained a perpetual virgin is completely immaterial to our Salvation or our Christian lives. But it seems to be topic that keeps re-occurring on every Christian site I've ever been on. Why is it so important to people that they get all heated up about it? To discuss things such as this is divisive.

 

[Marymog]

1 Corinthians 7:1-5
7:1. Now concerning the things about which you wrote, it is good for a man not to touch a woman. 2. But because of immoralities, each man is to have his own wife, and each woman is to have her own husband. 3. The husband must fulfill his duty to his wife, and likewise also the wife to her husband. 4. The wife does not have authority over her own body, but the husband does; and likewise also the husband does not have authority over his own body, but the wife does. 5. Stop depriving one another, except by agreement for a time, so that you may devote yourselves to prayer, and come together again so that Satan will not tempt you because of your lack of self-control.

Genesis 1:28
1:28. God blessed them; and God said to them, "Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth, and subdue it; and rule over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the sky and over every living thing that moves on the earth."

Soooooo are you going to at least TRY to answer my questions??? Or do my questions reveal the fallacy of your beliefs that is why you can't answer them? Partially quoting Scripture is not an answer.

Paul calls virginity (abstaining from sex) a "gift from God". Do you believe that God would give Paul that gift and not give Mary, the mother of His child, that gift? Would it be fair to say if both Mary and Joseph agreed that since she gave birth to the child of God, or that she was in effect the spouse of God, that they would agree NOT to have sexual relations? Do you believe Mary and Joseph did not have enough will power to fulfill that teaching of God?

Scripture makes it clear that celibacy is a higher state than marriage! Is it possible that Mary and Joseph were able to obtain that higher state by not giving into sexual desires?

 

[Marymog]

To be honest all this debating about whether or not Joseph and Mary had other children together or whether she remained a perpetual virgin is completely immaterial to our Salvation or our Christian lives. But it seems to be topic that keeps re-occurring on every Christian site I've ever been on. Why is it so important to people that they get all heated up about it? To discuss things such as this is divisive.

Hi Pearl,

Those of us that adhere to the perpetual virginity doctrine believe that Mary was in effect the spouse of God due to her bearing His child. She would not, for a lack of better words, "cheat" on God with Joseph. The womb that God came out of is Holy and would not be defiled by another man. Scripture makes it clear that celibacy is a higher state than marriage and we believe that Mary had the will power to remain celibate! Paul calls virginity (abstaining from sex) a "gift from God" and that Mary was given that gift just like Paul was. The earliest Christian historical writing we have concerning this matter says she was a perpetual virgin. I could go on and on but you get my point....

You ask why do we get all heated up about it? I can speak for me personally: I get "heated up" because I don't understand why the anti-perpetual virginity have such little faith in the Mother of God that they think she couldn't or didn't have the will power to abstain from sex. That's the main thing for me. Here are some others:

I get heated up because the anti-perpetual virginity believers accept the teaching of men from 500 years ago but reject the teaching of men from 2,000 years ago who lived closest to the time of Christ. That's not a logical decision it is a personal decision.

I get heated up because they can't show me anywhere in the bible where it says that Mary had other children but then say Mary had other children.

I get heated up because they reject the linguistics FACT that brother/sister could have meant cousin or half brother/sister.

I get heated up because when some of those "brothers" are accounted for as children of other women in other bible verses they still insist they are right and I am wrong.

 

[Pearl]

@Marymog we believe different things. You don't accept the verses that mention Jesus brothers and I do.

But it makes no difference to our salvation if she remained a virgin or not; if she had other children or not. Why it keeps getting brought up is a mystery to me unless it is to cause division.

She was important to all of us in that she was the young girl chosen to carry the precious burden of God's son. She was not God's wife, that is pure Catholic thinking. She was married to Joseph and for all intents and purposes Jesus was Joseph the carpenter's son as it says in the bible.

She is not the Queen of Heaven apart from in the minds of Catholics. She does not pray for sinners. We are not told in the bible to pray to her. But Catholics have made a big thing out of all these issues until it almost seems that Mary is more important than her Son.

Whatever you may believe and can justify by writings not in the bible the Catholic church has made a cult out of Mary which denies people the truth. Catholicism is a mix and God does not like mixture.

 

[BreadOfLife]

Your exegesis is weak, which is why i dismiss your claim to 'abundant proof-text'. Very few come to the conclusion that Mary and Joseph did not have sexual relations. This is the over-arching principle of the Biblical account of their relationship. In order to deny this fact, one must base their argument on silence. And this is what you have exploited in order to draw your conclusion.

Sure - MY exegesis is "weak" - yet YOU offer nothing to refute it.

I illustrated to you that your arguments fall flat in the face of ALL of the elements I presented.
They include:
- Prophetic Type and Fulfiollment (2 Sam. 6:9, Luke 1:43, 2 Sam. 6:14, Luke 2:38, 2 Sam. 6:11, Luke 1:56, 1 Sam. 4:11, 1 Sam 6:13, Matt. 2:14)
- The identification of the TRUE parents of the "named brethren" of Jesus (Matt. 27:56, Mark 15:40, John 19:25)
- The use of the word "Until" in Scripture (2 Sam. 6:23, Deut. 34:6, Psalm 110:1, Matt 22:44, Acts 2:34-35)
- Mary's intention to REMAIN a virgin (Luke 1:34)
AND the silence of Scripture about Mary having other children.

Gee - that doesn't look like a mere "argument on silence" to me . . .

 

[Marymog]

@Marymog we believe different things. You don't accept the verses that mention Jesus brothers and I do.

But it makes no difference to our salvation if she remained a virgin or not; if she had other children or not. Why it keeps getting brought up is a mystery to me unless it is to cause division.

She was important to all of us in that she was the young girl chosen to carry the precious burden of God's son. She was not God's wife, that is pure Catholic thinking. She was married to Joseph and for all intents and purposes Jesus was Joseph the carpenter's son as it says in the bible.

She is not the Queen of Heaven apart from in the minds of Catholics. She does not pray for sinners. We are not told in the bible to pray to her. But Catholics have made a big thing out of all these issues until it almost seems that Mary is more important than her Son.

Whatever you may believe and can justify by writings not in the bible the Catholic church has made a cult out of Mary which denies people the truth. Catholicism is a mix and God does not like mixture.

Hi Pearl,

I accept that linguistically "brothers" could be cousins or half brothers (children of Joseph).

I accept that some of those "brothers" have been accounted for in Scripture to have a mother other than Mary.

I accept that the earliest historical Christian writings suggest that to be true.

I accept that whether you believe Mary remained a virgin does not effect your salvation.

I accept that the division started about 500 years ago when certain men who rejected 1,500 years of Church teaching started that division. It was not The Church that divided away from this teaching it was men that disagreed with The Church that started the division and you have joined those men. Therefor those of us that believe this teaching did not start the divisiveness.

I accept that according to Scripture to have the strength to be a virgin is a gift from God and that Mary was given that gift. You reject that she had the strength or the gift.

I think you would agree that to bare ones child you, without committing a sin, must be the spouse of the one who impregnated you. Since Mary bore the child of God does that not make her in effect the wife of God?

Protestantism is a mix of different beliefs and God does not like mixture. So which Protestant belief should I accept? The ones that teach she was a perpetual virgin or the ones who reject this teaching?

I accept that you hold to the teachings of men from the reformation and I accept the teachings of the men who lived closest to the time of Christ.

To be a person that loves, respects and honors the mother of God and believes that she had enough faith and strength to not have sex with a man after she bore Gods child does not make one a member of a cult. If that were true then Jesus and the Apostles would be cult members since they loved, honored and respected her.

According to Protestantism one can read Scripture and interpret any way they feel the Holy Spirit is guiding them to interpret it. Why does that hold true for Protestants but not Catholics?

I wish that we could fulfill Jesus prayer of unity. How do we get there Pearl if each individual Christian is allowed to accept or reject any teaching they do not agree with?

Curious Mary

 

[Pearl]

Hi Pearl,

I accept that linguistically "brothers" could be cousins or half brothers (children of Joseph).

I accept that some of those "brothers" have been accounted for in Scripture to have a mother other than Mary.

I accept that the earliest historical Christian writings suggest that to be true.

I accept that whether you believe Mary remained a virgin does not effect your salvation.

I accept that the division started about 500 years ago when certain men who rejected 1,500 years of Church teaching started that division. It was not The Church that divided away from this teaching it was men that disagreed with The Church that started the division and you have joined those men. Therefor those of us that believe this teaching did not start the divisiveness.

I accept that according to Scripture to have the strength to be a virgin is a gift from God and that Mary was given that gift. You reject that she had the strength or the gift.

I think you would agree that to bare ones child you, without committing a sin, must be the spouse of the one who impregnated you. Since Mary bore the child of God does that not make her in effect the wife of God?

Protestantism is a mix of different beliefs and God does not like mixture. So which Protestant belief should I accept? The ones that teach she was a perpetual virgin or the ones who reject this teaching?

I accept that you hold to the teachings of men from the reformation and I accept the teachings of the men who lived closest to the time of Christ.

To be a person that loves, respects and honors the mother of God and believes that she had enough faith and strength to not have sex with a man after she bore Gods child does not make one a member of a cult. If that were true then Jesus and the Apostles would be cult members since they loved, honored and respected her.

According to Protestantism one can read Scripture and interpret any way they feel the Holy Spirit is guiding them to interpret it. Why does that hold true for Protestants but not Catholics?

I wish that we could fulfill Jesus prayer of unity. How do we get there Pearl if each individual Christian is allowed to accept or reject any teaching they do not agree with?

Curious Mary

But do you accept that whether she was or wasn't doesn't affect our Salvation?

Do you accept that Jesus is the only source of Salvation?

Do you accept that Jesus name is above all names even that of Mary?

 

[Marymog]

But do you accept that whether she was or wasn't doesn't affect our Salvation?

Sentence #4 addresses that.

 

[Marymog]

Do you accept that Jesus is the only source of Salvation?

Do you accept that Jesus name is above all names even that of Mary?

The teaching that Mary is a perpetual virgin has absolutely nothing to do with those two questions.

 

[Pearl]

The teaching that Mary is a perpetual virgin has absolutely nothing to do with those two questions.

Perhaps not but I'd be really interested in your answers.

 

[Pearl]

Sentence #4 addresses that.

Sorry, yes it does. And I'm glad we can agree on something.