Virgin Mary Had Other Children After Jesus

[Stan B]

Roman Catholicism, is merely a continuation of pagan worship of the goddess, "Queen of Heaven" to whom the pope kneels before her graven image!!

 

[BreadOfLife]

Paul C, an excellent post. While Origen was the most shallow windbag of all the Fathers, Tertullian, a Roman lawyer, who in my opinion, was the greatest in summarizing the tenants of the faith; and probably the first Holy Roller! <giggle>

Roman Catholicism, is merely a continuation of pagan worship of the goddess, "Queen of Heaven" to whom the pope kneels before her graven image!! This evil Queen of Heaven cult was known to prophet Jeremiah. They were so evil and beyond redemption that God instructed the prophet: "Do not pray for this people, and do not lift up cry or prayer for them, and do not intercede with Me; for I do not hear you." Jeremiah 7:18

"The children gather wood, and the fathers kindle the fire, and the women knead dough to make cakes for the Queen of Heaven; and they pour out drink offerings to other gods in order to spite Me." Jeremiah 7:18

BreadofLife in his picture shows what one of these cakes looks like, a round cake in honour of her vigin born Sun God, Tamuz.

They still worship this Queen of Heaven, only by a different name.

Roman Catholicism has carried on this "Queen of Heaven" cult under a new name, of the Ever-Virgin of the Immaculate Conception.

Uhhhh, speaking of "shallow windbags" . . .

But, I guess you could add angry and ignorant to that as well.

 

[Pearl]

Matthew 12:46-50

"Who is my mother and brothers"

Not sure what that's supposed to prove.

 

[Taken]

Virgin Mary Had Other Children After Jesus
^ OP

Whether or not Mary birthed only Jesus, had subsequent children of Joseph's seed after Jesus' birth, or was the legal mother of Joseph's children from his former marriage...is irrelevant.

Mary was a Virgin, before her Pregnancy, during her Pregnancy, UP UNTIL After the Birth of Jesus.

What day, how many times, how often Joseph and Mary engaged in intercourse, WAS not necessary or relevant to disclose, in order to Glorify God.

Nothing whatsoever, says Mary herself was conceive or naturally born without Sin or was a perpetual Virgin...

In fact Scripture expressly teaches...
Earthly mankind
IS: conceived in Sin,
IS: naturally born IN Sin,
IS: sentenced TO Mortally Die, because of their Sin.

Mary IS no exception.

Scripture Expressly reveals:
God IS: Eternal Without Beginning or Ending.
God HAS: neither Mother or Father.

Mary IS NOT the Mother of God.

Glory to God,
Taken

 

[Mungo]

You were trying to say that all references to brothers of Jesus was just to spiritual brothers, and not natural brothers; but that is not the case below.

Matthew 12:47 Then one said unto him, Behold, thy mother and thy brethren stand without, desiring to speak with thee. 48 But he answered and said unto him that told him, Who is my mother? and who are my brethren? 49 And he stretched forth his hand toward his disciples, and said, Behold my mother and my brethren! 50 For whosoever shall do the will of my Father which is in heaven, the same is my brother, and sister, and mother.

Jesus was in a building when someone told Him that His mother and brothers were outside wishing to inquire of Him. Jesus deferred from His natural mother and His natural brothers by citing who His spiritual mothers and brothers are; He stretched forth His hands towards His disciples and sai those who do the will of my Father in Heaven is His brother, sister, and mother.

That is how Jesus deferred from His natural mother and His natural brothers by referring to who His actual spiritual mothers and brothers and sisters are.

I wasn't and didn't day that at all.

Try reading my post

 

[Mungo]

Well if the bible says Jesus had brothers who would be their mother if it wasn't Mary?

I answered that.
Try reading the post

 

[Mungo]

Scripture does not have to use that terminology. What we have already shown is that Jesus had brother and sisters. But even if Scripture used those exact words, you would deny the truth and claim that that was inserted there by someone.

Let's face it. Catholics have substituted Mary for Christ, and that my friend is a very serious matter. Mary herself would condemn that as sacrilege and idolatry, since she recognized that her son was also her Savior. Maryolatry is idolatry, and her idols (images and statues) are in every Catholic church, and many Catholic homes.

Your lies about Catholics are a very serious matter.
As usual you cannot keep to the topic but divert off into Catholic bashing.

What next?
"Call no man father"
"Jesus was the rock not Peter"
"Purgatory is not in the Bible

 

[Mungo]

I already answered this in post #42.

For that matter I already answered it in post #27.

 

[Mungo]

So Paul was lying when he wrote Galatians 1:19 referring to James as the lord's brother? And don't tell me that Paul meant "brother in Christ" because that was not what Paul meant, otherwise he would have said so.

So Luke, in 18:19-20, was also lying or mistaken when he wrote about Jesus' mother and brothers?

Matthew 13:54-56 also refers to Jesus' brothers and sisters.

And you are saying that there are no verses in the Bible that say that Jesus had brothers and sisters? What version of the Bible are you using?

Those verses didn't say they were Mary's children. You are (incorrectly) inferring that.

 

[Mungo]

but before we go any further are you accepting that Mary is not a virgin according to Matthew 1:25.

PICJAG.

You are trying to divert off again.
We are discussing the "brothers of Jesus" not Mt 1:25

If you accept that the "brothers" mentioned in the Bible are not Mary's children then we can move on.
If not then why do you not accept that?

 

[Mungo]

Paul C, an excellent post. While Origen was the most shallow windbag of all the Fathers, Tertullian, a Roman lawyer, who in my opinion, was the greatest in summarizing the tenants of the faith; and probably the first Holy Roller! <giggle>

Roman Catholicism, is merely a continuation of pagan worship of the goddess, "Queen of Heaven" to whom the pope kneels before her graven image!! This evil Queen of Heaven cult was known to prophet Jeremiah. They were so evil and beyond redemption that God instructed the prophet: "Do not pray for this people, and do not lift up cry or prayer for them, and do not intercede with Me; for I do not hear you." Jeremiah 7:18

"The children gather wood, and the fathers kindle the fire, and the women knead dough to make cakes for the Queen of Heaven; and they pour out drink offerings to other gods in order to spite Me." Jeremiah 7:18

BreadofLife in his picture shows what one of these cakes looks like, a round cake in honour of her vigin born Sun God, Tamuz.

They still worship this Queen of Heaven, only by a different name.

Roman Catholicism has carried on this "Queen of Heaven" cult under a new name, of the Ever-Virgin of the Immaculate Conception.

More lies about the Catholic Church and another attempt to divert off the topic.

 

[Mungo]

Paul C, an excellent post. While Origen was the most shallow windbag of all the Fathers, Tertullian, a Roman lawyer, who in my opinion, was the greatest in summarizing the tenants of the faith; and probably the first Holy Roller! <giggle>

Roman Catholicism, is merely a continuation of pagan worship of the goddess, "Queen of Heaven" to whom the pope kneels before her graven image!! This evil Queen of Heaven cult was known to prophet Jeremiah. They were so evil and beyond redemption that God instructed the prophet: "Do not pray for this people, and do not lift up cry or prayer for them, and do not intercede with Me; for I do not hear you." Jeremiah 7:18

"The children gather wood, and the fathers kindle the fire, and the women knead dough to make cakes for the Queen of Heaven; and they pour out drink offerings to other gods in order to spite Me." Jeremiah 7:18

BreadofLife in his picture shows what one of these cakes looks like, a round cake in honour of her vigin born Sun God, Tamuz.

They still worship this Queen of Heaven, only by a different name.

Roman Catholicism has carried on this "Queen of Heaven" cult under a new name, of the Ever-Virgin of the Immaculate Conception.

I don't know why there sort of posts are tolerated on this forum.

They are blatantly against the rules.

I've reported it, but nothing will be done.

Nothing ever is.

This is not a Christian Forum any more. More like an anti-Catholic hatefest

 

[Grailhunter]

I don't know why there sort of posts are tolerated on this forum.

They are blatantly against the rules.

I've reported it, but nothing will be done.

Nothing ever is.

This is not a Christian Forum any more. More like an anti-Catholic hatefest

Hail Mary, full of grace. The Lord is with thee.
Blessed art thou amongst women,
and blessed is the fruit of thy womb, Jesus.
Holy Mary, Mother of God,
pray for us sinners,
now and at the hour of our death. Amen.

How 'bout that Mungo! I love Christians. Who are we suppose to hate? Who are we suppose to love? If you cannot love the members of the Body of Christ, you have a crippled faith. We have 2000 years of Christian history to prove that hate is lack of faith, the lack of understanding, and the work of the devil. How many scriptures do you have to line out to believe in hate?

 

[Illuminator]

You were trying to say that all references to brothers of Jesus was just to spiritual brothers, and not natural brothers; but that is not the case below.

Matthew 12:47 Then one said unto him, Behold, thy mother and thy brethren stand without, desiring to speak with thee. 48 But he answered and said unto him that told him, Who is my mother? and who are my brethren? 49 And he stretched forth his hand toward his disciples, and said, Behold my mother and my brethren! 50 For whosoever shall do the will of my Father which is in heaven, the same is my brother, and sister, and mother.

Jesus was in a building when someone told Him that His mother and brothers were outside wishing to inquire of Him. Jesus deferred from His natural mother and His natural brothers by citing who His spiritual mothers and brothers are; He stretched forth His hands towards His disciples and sai those who do the will of my Father in Heaven is His brother, sister, and mother.

That is how Jesus deferred from His natural mother and His natural brothers by referring to who His actual spiritual mothers and brothers and sisters are.

Yes, but Jesus is not lowering His mothers status to our level, He is elevating the status of those who do the will of God to her level, because His mother did the will of God perfectly, or Jesus would not have been born. If Jesus is lowering the status of His mother, He would be violating the 4rth commandment (honor your parents), making Jesus a sinner, which is absurd. Jesus is using His mother as an example of those who do the will of God; it's not the "gotcha" verse you think it is. All authentic Marian devotion leads to Jesus, a point the anti-Mary Protestants cannot comprehend.

 

[101G]

In support of your post: :)

I have never previously heard of the notion that Joseph was previously married and had children. Origen said that, but Origen has been viewed by other sound church fathers as being somewhat off-beam in his views. It seems that other early references are from those who were already infected with the false perpetual virginity of Mary.

"The earliest witness to the perpetual virginity of Mary seems to appear in the apocryphal Protogospel of James (circa 150). Tertullian (d, circa 220) denied the virginity of Mary after Jesus' birth. Origen (d 254), by contrast, taught Mary's perpetual virginity. In the East."

One of friends on the thread is being a little deceptive in purporting that the brothers and sisters of Jesus were step-siblings of Joseph from a previous marriage comes from the canonical Book of James, rather than actually coming from a book named James not accepted at all in the canon of Holy Scripture, and therefore unreliable.

But then, after the fourth century, as the church began to be ruled from Rome, and the influence of Constantine brought many pagan notions and practices into the church, any of the official church "fathers" doctrine would be unreliable, being skewed toward heretical doctrines that were invading the mainstream church. The church was so riddled with heresy and pagan doctrine that one had to be very discerning in order to maintain sound Biblical doctrine, and as time went on, those faithful to sound Scriptural doctrine either died out or were pushed out by those who maintained the official church teaching which included many doctrines which are totally missing from the New Testament. Consequently, the authority for doctrine shifted from Sola Scriptura to the authority of the church through its councils and popes.

So, if we apply the instructions of Paul to test all things and hold fast to that which is good, then we will find that much of the writings of the Catholic church fathers could very well fail the test - if we use Sola Scriptura as the basis of the testing.

So applying the Sola Scriptura test to the doctrine of Mary's perpetual virginity, we discover that it is a false doctrine influenced by the paganism that invaded the church at the time when the teaching was first introduced.

first thanks the the reply, second I agree. giving anyone the benefit of the doubt, as you said we must hold fast to what the scriptures states. if our Lord had any brothers and sisters by the same birth mother or not, for the language used, one thing for sure she's no perpetual virgin.

but as said, all this conjecture about Joseph having children before marrying Mary, is just that, conjecture. as with the term "brother" it can be used as blood kindred near and far. and many time used symbolically also. but context of scripture usually point to the truth. I have read many books and articles on this subject, many are pro, and some are con as to who the Lord's brother James is. both had good arguments to support their positions, but both agree that there was no concrete answer. and just because one is identified with someone else at a given time and place do not necessary mean that they are Family, or relative to each other or not.
but as you said, go with what the scriptures says, and if any proof stated other wise then scriptures will support it … or not.

but until now I going with what the scriptures ststes, if I understand wrong, then the scriptures will correct me.

PICJAG

 

[101G]

You are trying to divert off again.
We are discussing the "brothers of Jesus" not Mt 1:25

If you accept that the "brothers" mentioned in the Bible are not Mary's children then we can move on.
If not then why do you not accept that?

first thanks for the reply, second, no is it you who is trying to divert, because the very first question that was asked and discudded is was may a virgin. and I said NO.

and as to our Lord having brothers to the flesh as in birth of the same birth mother I do so.

now your answer please.

PICJAG.

 

[Illuminator]

I have read your third point but the scriptures are clear, Matthew 1:24 "Then Joseph being raised from sleep did as the angel of the Lord had bidden him, and took unto him his wife:
Matthew 1:25 "And knew her not till she had brought forth her firstborn son: and he called his name JESUS". she is no virgin period.

so are you saying that the scriptures are in error?

PICJAG.

No, your interpretation is in error.

Matt. 1:25 – this verse says Joseph knew her “not until (“heos”, in Greek)” she bore a son. Some Protestants argue that this proves Joseph had relations with Mary after she bore a son. This is an erroneous reading of the text because “not until” does not mean “did not…until after.” “Heos” references the past, never the future. Instead, “not until” she bore a son means “not up to the point that” she bore a son. This confirms that Mary was a virgin when she bore Jesus. Here are other texts that prove “not until” means “not up to the point that”:

Matt. 28:29 – I am with you “until the end of the world.” This does not mean Jesus is not with us after the end of the world.

Luke 1:80 – John was in the desert “up to the point of his manifestation to Israel.” Not John “was in the desert until after” his manifestation.

Luke 2:37 – Anna was a widow “up to the point that” she was eighty-four years old. She was not a widow after eighty-four years old.

Luke 20:43 – Jesus says, “take your seat at my hand until I have made your enemies your footstool.” Jesus is not going to require the apostles to sit at His left hand after their enemies are their footstool.
THE BLESSED VIRGIN MARY - Scripture Catholic

All of the early Protestant Founders accepted the truth of the perpetual virginity of Mary. How could this be, if it is merely “tradition” with no scriptural basis? Why was its supposed violation of Scripture not so obvious to them, as it is to the Protestants of the last 150 years or so (since the onset of theological liberalism) who have ditched this previously held opinion? Yet it has become fashionable to believe that Jesus had blood brothers (I suspect, because this contradicts Catholic teaching), contrary to the original consensus of the early Protestants.
Perpetual Virginity of Mary: Held by All Protestant Reformers

 

[101G]

No, your interpretation is in error.

Matt. 1:25 – this verse says Joseph knew her “not until (“heos”, in Greek)” she bore a son. Some Protestants argue that this proves Joseph had relations with Mary after she bore a son. This is an erroneous reading of the text because “not until” does not mean “did not…until after.” “Heos” references the past, never the future. Instead, “not until” she bore a son means “not up to the point that” she bore a son. This confirms that Mary was a virgin when she bore Jesus. Here are other texts that prove “not until” means “not up to the point that”:

Matt. 28:29 – I am with you “until the end of the world.” This does not mean Jesus is not with us after the end of the world.

Luke 1:80 – John was in the desert “up to the point of his manifestation to Israel.” Not John “was in the desert until after” his manifestation.

Luke 2:37 – Anna was a widow “up to the point that” she was eighty-four years old. She was not a widow after eighty-four years old.

Luke 20:43 – Jesus says, “take your seat at my hand until I have made your enemies your footstool.” Jesus is not going to require the apostles to sit at His left hand after their enemies are their footstool.
THE BLESSED VIRGIN MARY - Scripture Catholic

All of the early Protestant Founders accepted the truth of the perpetual virginity of Mary. How could this be, if it is merely “tradition” with no scriptural basis? Why was its supposed violation of Scripture not so obvious to them, as it is to the Protestants of the last 150 years or so (since the onset of theological liberalism) who have ditched this previously held opinion? Yet it has become fashionable to believe that Jesus had blood brothers (I suspect, because this contradicts Catholic teaching), contrary to the original consensus of the early Protestants.
Perpetual Virginity of Mary: Held by All Protestant Reformers

First thanks for the reply, and second you ERROR, for it was past tense, for the word had confirm this,listen, Matthew 1:25 "And knew her not till she had brought forth her firstborn son: and he called his name JESUS".

had make it sure that "AFTER" she bore our LORD they was sexual active.

so try again.

PICJAG.

 

[Pearl]

I answered that.
Try reading the post

I've looked for your reply and can't find it.

 

[Mungo]

first thanks for the reply, second, no is it you who is trying to divert, because the very first question that was asked and discudded is was may a virgin. and I said NO.

and as to our Lord having brothers to the flesh as in birth of the same birth mother I do so.

now your answer please.

PICJAG.

In my post to Rennicks )post #27) I noted three major arguments that Protestnts use relating to ther topic. I said I would iscuss point 2 and t6hat is what I am doing. If you want to join in that witjh me then do so. Others are arguing on Mt 1:25 with you.