Did Mary and Joseph Have other Children?

I agree with John Calvin.

 

The historical evidance tends to point strongly in the direction of no, they did not. However, whatever you choose to believe, must be done so on faith.

I'm sure that there is about to be a vicious debate to ensue though so our anti-Catholics can tell everyone that anything Catholic is evil.

 

G'day tamborine lady

Long technical answer is: Yes

Matthew 13:55-56, John 7:1-10, Acts 1:14, Galatians 1:19, Matthew 12:46-50.

 

Hey, Harley4Him, could you give me a oneliner as to what calvin said, with a yes or no?

Does it really matter?

 

He believe in perpetual virginity.

And no, it doesn't matter.

 

http://www.catholic.com/library/Mary_Ever_Virgin.asp

God bless,

PAX

Bill+†+

My soul proclaims the greatness of the Lord; my spirit rejoices in God my savior.
For he has looked upon his handmaid's lowliness; behold, from now on will all ages
call me blessed. (Luke 1:46-48)

 

If Calvin was so wrong about something so obvious, how can you trust his word on anything subtle?

 

Thank you Pete for being the only one to use the Bible in your reply. It's amazing how Catholics can believe such wicked things when the clear testimony of Scripture teaches otherwise.

Allow me to elaborate on just one of the references mentioned by Pete: John 7: 3, 5. The Greek word translated "brothers" in both verse is adelphos , and the only suitable translation for the word is "brothers." Need an example: how about Philadelphia. Did you see the Greek in there? Phil adelphia is the city of " brotherly love." As the Scriptures Pete listed also point out, Christ had sisters too (half-siblings though they were).

Be ready for the objections of the Catholics though, which are a plenty.

1. The Pope and the church have always affirmed perpetual virginity. First, Catholics have not always affirmed perpetual virginity - in fact, it was not even written into the Cathecism until many centuries after Jesus' death. Further, what the Pope and the RCC church believe about perpetual virginity coupled with 50 cents will get you a cup of coffee at the Waffle House.

2. Joseph could have had children by another woman. Not only is that ridiculous, but it is substantiated nowhere in the Bible or church history.

3. John (and the other Gospel writers) were only speaking of these individuals in a spiritual sort of way. Jesus couldn't have had brothers and sisters because that would discount their view of perpetual virginity - thus, we must explain away the biblical references to Christ's brothers and sisters as spiritual only.

T-Lady, these are but a few of the objections you will receive from Catholics arguing for perpetual virginity, but as you can see they are all bankrupt attempts at blind adherance to Catholic dogmas. Just accept the simple testimony of the Bible and you will be spared from any false doctrines about the Virgin Mary and her son, Christ.

 

Harley, Calvin also never wrote a commentary for several of the later NT books because he thought they were "curious" in nature, so does that mean we should not accept any proper interpretations that he may have come to with the rest of the Bible books?

No one individual is the sole arbiter of truth - couldn't it have been possible for Calvin to have been (dare I say) wrong about perpetual virginity while still getting the substitutionary atonement and the blood sacrifice of Christ right? Your argument holds no water. Do you have to be right about everything in order for someone to believe anything you say? Of course not.

 

The Catholic Dogma of the Perpetual Virginity of Mary is a Catholic fantasy with not one shred of scripture to support it.

Here is what the scripture says.

"Is not this the carpenter's son? is not his mother called Mary? and his brethren, James, and Joses, and Simon, and Judas? Matthew 13:55

"Is not this the carpenter, the son of Mary, the brother of James, and Joses, and of Juda, and Simon? and are not his sisters here with us? And they were offended at him." Mark 6:3

"But other of the apostles saw I none, save James the Lord's brother." Galatians 1:19

As clearly as Matthew proclaims Mary’s virginity when JESUS was born, so clearly Matthew also declares her ‘motherhood’ (Matt. 1:25), and that Mary was the birth-mother of four boys, James and Joses, Simon and Judas (Matt. 13:55), and of at least two girls as well (Mark 6:3), who lived and were known to the early church.

Mary was a virgin until the nativity, but not afterwards. Joseph was the physical husband of Mary in the real life sense, but Jesus was conceived of the Holy Ghost "before they {Joseph and Mary} came together;" and he (Joseph) "knew her not till she had brought forth her first-born Son."

That Jesus is her first-born Son indicates that she brought forth other sons. And in fact, the names of Mary and Joseph’s four other sons are given by Matthew.

Jesus was the first-born, or eldest son of Mary, but "the only-begotten son" of God (John 3:16). Other children were born to Mary and Joseph by natural process of birth and this is expressly stated in the Holy Scriptures quoted above.

 

Can someone please point out the vrese for me that says "son of Mary and Joseph". I don't see one. I do know that the Hebrew/Aramic language does not distinguish between brother and cousin. I also know that the James, Joses, and Simon men mentioned in I believe it is Mark 6:3 could not have been children of Mary and Joseph as can be traced to have another Mary and Alpheus or Clophas as parents. The brethern of the Lord likely were cousins.

Blessings

 

Textual evidence for the scriptural FACT that Mary was NOT a perpetual virigin.

The Greek word ‘adelphos’ used by Matthew literally means “out of the same womb”.

In the New Testament, ‘adelphos’ is never used for “cousin.” The Greek word ‘anepsioi’ signifies that relationship (cf. Col. 4:10).

Moreover, Jesus is said to have had “sisters” Mt. 13:56 - ’adelphe’ = out of the same womb. .

Why should it be assumed that Matthew’s use of “mother” was literal when dealing with Jesus, but that the terms “brothers” and “sisters” were used figuratively?

If “sister” - ‘adelphe’ = out of the same womb is literal in Acts 23:16, speaking of Paul’s sister, consistancy dictates that it means the same literal thing in Matthew 13:56.

The alleged perpetually celibate state of Joseph and Mary’s relationship is contrary to the divine ideal.
Marriage, as designed by God, was intended to bring a man and woman together as “one flesh” (Gen. 2:24; cf. Mt. 19:5-6).

Subsequent to the initial physical bonding is the responsibility to “render” to one another what is “due” – these terms expressing a sacred obligation (1 Cor. 7:3). If there is to be abstinence, it is to be by mutual consent and that only temporarily (I Cor 7:5).

You can believe the anti-scriptural “Protoevangelium of James”, as WPutnam does or you can believe the clear statements of Inspired Scripure.

 

"The Greek word ‘adelphos’ used by Matthew literally means “out of the same womb”. "

I wonder where you found this definition in scripture Rbent. I don't see these words anywhere in my Bible and my Greek experts say you lie. Likely you got them out of a Protestant dictionary that already has preconcieved notions about what the Bible says. Mr. Svedson has a beautiful little distortion in which he claims that until did in fact mean what the Catholics say it means, that is, that it describes actions until the event but does not neccessarily indicate what proceeds the event. A simple enough concept. He says at one point this was true but the 100 years around Jesus time it was not. Funny thing is that once Jesus and the Apostles leave the world once agian it can be shown to be true. So much nonsense so little time to refute it all.

Blessings

 

I don't know if anyone besides myself read the link that WPutnam gave, but its pretty good scholarship. Now if someone who disagrees is up to the task of providing a rebuttal that is at least half as well done, i'd be interested in reading that.

 

thessalonian - adelphos = a (from or out of) delphus (the womb) - check a Greek lexicon.

-------------------------------------------------------


Brother Adam - I too read Mr. Putnam’s hyperlinked article but did you notice that the "support" for Mary's Pertetual Virginity is taken from the opinions of men and from a source outside the scriptures.

Why it it you refuse to address what the scriptures so clearly say about Mary's Perpetual Virginity?

I quoted the scriptures in a previous post.

Do you disagree with what the scriptures so clearly say?

 

"Brother Adam - I too read Mr. Putnam’s hyperlinked article but did you notice that the "support" for Mary's Pertetual Virginity is taken from the opinions of men and from a source outside the scriptures.

Why it it you refuse to address what the scriptures so clearly say about Mary's Perpetual Virginity?

I quoted the scriptures in a previous post.

Do you disagree with what the scriptures so clearly say?"


I'll take that as a "I don't have a good response for it". Like I said earlier, you aren't interested in learning, only in pushing your biased and rather poor scholarship of what scripture "really says", so I'm not really interested in rbrents "private interpretation" of the scriptures.

Your private interpretation may be "clear" of what you think the "scriptures clearly say", but the scriptures "clearly" don't support your "view" like you would like them to and your "abuse" of a lexion is something not to be desired.

Did you know that there is only one word for brother. When refering to Jesus' brothers it could refer to:


a brother, whether born of the same two parents or only of the same father or mother

having the same national ancestor, belonging to the same people, or countryman

any fellow or man

a fellow believer, united to another by the bond of affection

an associate in employment or office


brethren in Christ
his brothers by blood
all men
apostles
Christians, as those who are exalted to the same heavenly place


So certianly this puzzle can't be solved through word usage.

 

rbent,

The scripture actually proves you are wrong about adelphos.

"The Greek word ‘adelphos’ used by Matthew literally means “out of the same womb”. "

Your words imply that it can only be used to mean "from the womb" yet the word is used for the relationship between Lot and Abraham who were not literal brothers from the same womb but in fact cousins. So your informatoin is bogus.

 

I have the book "Mary and the Fathers of the Church" by Luigi gambero. Throughout the Christian world through the first 8 centeries only heretics the likes of Helvecius and perhaps Tertullian can be shown to not believe that Mary was a perpetual virgin. The belief that she was a perpetucal virgin was held by all who wrote in this regard which was not a small number. Now how did this supposed untruth get spread so far and wide without email, snail mail, or even the Pony express to spread it. Protestants on the same block can't come to an agreement and yet essentially the whole Christian world believed that Mary was perpetually a virgin.

Blessings