[MENTION=333]Snerfle[/MENTION]
Hi all. I was away for a brief moment, sorry. Actually thought I should delete the acct, it's been so long, I forget how to navigate the site.
Good to have you back.
Snerfle said:
Thought I'd add a comment if that's ok. The bible clearly states that Jesus had 4 brothers and at least 2 sisters. God bless.
Yup. But the Bible does not say these were children of Mary. And of course, the words used for "brother" and "sister" are VERY broad and generic, they can mean a step or half sibling, a cousin, anyone living under the same roof, even one with whom we have a spiritual and emotional connection. You are my brother in Christ but that doesn't mean we came out of the same womb.
SOME try to be dogmatic - insisting "THE BIBLE states" that Mary had other kids or did not have other kids. Actually, this verse proves neither of those positions, it's simply too general. Never does the Bible specifically address if Mary had other children. This verse says Mary bore Jesus but not that she did or did not birth these others.
But very early tradition - coming from the First Century when perhaps Mary was still alive and probably other children of hers would still be alive - is the view that she had no other children; but that Joseph had children from an earlier marriage and these half- brothers and sisters are here referenced (there is no word for half-sibling in Greek or Hebrew). This view was universal until the 18th Century when a few liberal Protestants (insisting Mary was not a virgin and Jesus was not born of a virgin) challenged this view. So the Bible is SILENT. Tradition is very clear. My own view? We don't know.... it doesn't matter.
[MENTION=509]RichWh1[/MENTION]
RichWh1 said:
Was the marriage consummated?
1. Let's pretend the Bible states it was. Okay. Unless one can prove that every act of marital intimacies results in the woman giving birth to a child (specifically named in the pages of the Bible), then this reality would NOT mandate that ergo Mary had other children. Do you agree? I know LOTS of married couples who have no children (even not mentioned in the Bible), and I think it would be unwise to dogmatically insist that ERGO their marriage is unconsummated. Heck, my wife and I were married for over two years and didn't have any children but (not to get too personal or violate the "G" rating of this site), um.... it was consummated quite some time before that.
2. Actually, you ask an interesting question that Christianity has NEVER OFFICIALLY ANSWERED. Simply because the Bible does not. In the East, this is still an open question although many Orthodox PERSONALLY hold that they never were married: God PERMITTED Joseph to marry her (God didn't order it) but that he never did, simply being a caretaker ("caretaker" marriage was common; the Book of Ruth is sometimes seen as suggesting this). In the West, during the Middle Ages, Catholics PERSONALLY held that they were in a legal sense married but not in the sense you speak of (by this time, the pov of the Perpetual Virginity of Mary had been adopted).
BTW, the view that Mary had no other children PREDATES the view that she was a perpetual virgin by centuries. Having nothing to prove their position, some TRY to change the topic from "The Bible states Mary had lotsa kids" or "The Bible states Mary had No Other Kids" to "Mary was or was not a perpetual virgin." They are two DIFFERENT views and topics (there are already threads here at CH about the PVM). Unless one can prove that EVERY woman who has not born a child mentioned in the Bible is THEREFORE a perpetual virgin, it does not follow (at all) that one without children is ergo a perpetual virgin. Of course, it works the other way around but it is not necessary to insist that the only reason why a woman has no children is that they are a perpetual virgin.
Follow me?
- Josiah
.
