Mary.

[Guest Berkana]

You ask why don't ALL people believe it if the Scripture's so clear on an issue?

Let me ask you the same. . .

. . .then why don't ALL people believe in the Trinity since it is so CLEAR from scripture?  Why do Mormons believe quite differently?  And JWs?  What about the early Arians?  Why wasn't it SO CLEAR to them? 

It's called denial.

Why don't Catholics believe Mary had lawful sexual relations with Joseph, her husband? This is very clearly stated in scripture, yet the Catholic church teaches that Mary remained a perpetual virgin (something that wasn't believed until a few centuries after Christ's ascention). My goodness. . . if Mary witheld her marital duty to Joseph, poor Joseph! Mary would not have been a dutiful wife if this had been the case:

Ephesians 5:22-25

Wives, submit to your husbands as to the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church, his body, of which he is the Savior. Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit to their husbands in everything.

    Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her. . .

[This is re-iterated by Paul in Colossians 3:18-19 ]

1 Corinthians 7:3-4

The husband should fulfill his marital duty to his wife, and likewise the wife to her husband. The wife's body does not belong to her alone but also to her husband. In the same way, the husband's body does not belong to him alone but also to his wife.

Fortunately, we know Joseph didn't have a wife who refused to lawfully consumate their marriage, because the Bible implies that Joseph did have lawful physical union with Mary, his wife, but only after Jesus had been born:

Matthew 1:24-25

When Joseph woke up, he did what the angel of the Lord had commanded him and took Mary home as his wife. But he had no union with her until she gave birth to a son. And he gave him the name Jesus.

The Bible explicitly says that Jesus had brothers:

Acts 1:14

They all joined together constantly in prayer, along with the women and Mary the mother of Jesus, and with his brothers.

[BTW, notice how Mary is never called "the mother of God"]

1 Corinthians 9:5

Don't we have the right to take a believing wife along with us, as do the other apostles and the Lord's brothers and Cephas?

[Cephas (with a hard C--"Kephas") was Peter's name in Aramaic.]

Galatians 1:19

I saw none of the other apostles--only James, the Lord's brother.

And no, they weren't Jesus' cousins; Paul wrote all of the above epistles, and he distinctly used the term "cousin" (anepsios) and "brother" (adelphos) differently. Paul mentioned Jesus' brothers because that's who they were.

Matthew 15:53-56

When Jesus had finished these parables, he moved on from there. Coming to his hometown, he began teaching the people in their synagogue, and they were amazed. "Where did this man get this wisdom and these miraculous powers?" they asked. "Isn't this the carpenter's son? [They were mistake on this point: See Luke 3:23] Isn't his mother's name Mary, and aren't his brothers James, Joseph, Simon and Judas? Aren't all his sisters with us? Where then did this man get all these things?"

So why don't Catholics believe Jesus had brothers and sisters "since it is so CLEAR from scripture?"

Pre-emptive Question Answering

What about the "Protevangelium of James"? Doesn't that document say that Jesus' brothers were Joseph's children from a previous marriage?

There is indeed a document that Catholics invoke to explain the mention of Jesus' brothers and sisters; the Protevangelium of James, which claims that Jospeh was a widower who had children from a prior marriage before he married Mary. Unfortunately, this document is acknowledged to be apocryphal even by Catholic scholars; it didn't appear until the mid 200's A.D., two hundred years after the facts, and is very inconsistent with what the gospels document about Jesus' childhood. There was no mention of any children of Jospeh in his trek to Bethlehem with Mary for the Roman census. Furthermore, the church father Eusebius of Caesaria records a detailed history regarding the lineage of Jesus and who married whom in his Church Histories (book 1, chapter 7) and there simply no documentary evidence thereof that the brothers of Jesus mentioned in the Bible were from a prior marriage.

Even if the brothers and sisters mentioned in the verses above were Joseph's children from a prior marriage, this is not enough to establish that Joseph did not have lawful sexual relations with his wife Mary; Matthew 1:25 (see the scripture quote above) clearly implies that Mary did not remain a virgin after the birth of Jesus.

Pre-emptive Question Answering

If Jesus had younger brothers, why did Jesus entrust Mary to John's care as He died on the cross rather than leaving her with his brothers?

Jesus can do what He wants to; we may only speculate about His motivations. One possibility would have been that Jesus wanted to entrust Mary to the care of a believer at this time which would have been incredibly stressful and grief filled for Mary--in this case, to the care of John, the beloved disciple, who followed and witnessed Jesus throughout the ordeal of His crucifixion as everyone else fled and hid. Don't forget; even during Jesus' ministry, Jesus' brothers were not believers (Mark 3:20-21, 31-35), and may not have been believers as Jesus was seemingly defeated by His enemies when He was crucified. In John 20, Jesus appeared to his disciples, among the first of His appearances after the resurrection; by having Mary with John, she might have been privledged to witness Jesus' appearing to His disciples.

In any case, the scripture is clear that Jesus had brothers and sisters, and that Mary did not remain a perpetual virgin. So why don't Catholics believe it, while resorting to known apocryphal documents such as the "Protevangelium of James" to back up their refusal to believe? This is no better than the Mormons invoking the apocrypha "Book of Mormon" in their refusal to believe what the scripture clearly implies.

[ServingHim]

`Brother Saul, receive your sight.' Acts 22:13 ... so then Saul MUST have been Annaia's sibling?

Paul, an apostle of Christ Jesus by the will of God, and Timothy our brother. 2 Cor 1:1 ... and Timothy is Paul's brother?

but my mind could not rest because I did not find my brother Titus there. 2 Cor 2:13 ... and so Paul has another brother Titus?

I have thought it necessary to send to you Epaphrodi'tus my brother Phil 2:25 ... wow, Paul has a lot of brothers!

For I have derived much joy and comfort from your love, my brother, Philem 1:7 ... wow, Paul sure has a lot of brothers.

So also our beloved brother Paul wrote to you according to the wisdom given him, 2 Peter 3:15 ... and I guess this means that Peter and Paul are ALSO brothers...wow, what an amazing family! All Apostles...ALL RELATED :oww:

[Guest LadyC]

see what we mean by devisive? you know VERY well that those references are not speaking of biological kinship, but of spiritual brotherhood, and all your little smiley faces are evidence to that. you are intentionally mocking scripture and the steadfastness by which we stand by the Bible as the final authority.

and this is why i said i would attempt to stay out of any future conversations with you.... they always come back to the same thing. but, i just could not let this one slide without rebuke, so here it is. you're making a huge mistake mocking God and His word.

[BobTriez]

but, i just could not let this one slide without rebuke, so here it is. you're making a huge mistake mocking God and His word.

Yes, and I've read enough too. I'm closing this thread due to trampling of the Word of God. I love Jesus and He is all I need; and truth be told ? He is all anyone needs! Not a Church, not Mary, not tradition....JESUS! :il:

God bless,

Bob