The "Brothers" of Jesus: A Fresh Look at the Evidence (no background music)
Вставка
- Опубліковано 9 жов 2016
- blog.catholicproductions.com/t...
Dr. Brant Pitre discusses the "Brothers of Jesus" as found in the Gospels.
Find all of Dr. Pitre's Bible studies at store.catholicproductions.com...
God bless you. I'm a first year convert to Catholicism. Your book (The Case For Jesus) helped me so much with my faith and these videos continue to help me day to day. Please never stop making these. 🙏
You should do more of these. Not only Sunday Gospels. Great explanation Mr. Pitre! Never fail to share your knowledge.
Thank you, Dr.. Pitre for a wonderful study on this subject which has puzzled me. I know I will need to listen to it again and take more notes, but it sets the record straight. I love your videos and your teaching style. May the LORD richly bless you and your family.
Plus...The Gospel of John. After the Reserection, JESUS appeared to Mary Magdalene, and told HER, to go and give this NEWS, to his BROTHERS...and Mary Magdalene went and told the APOSTLES of what JESUS told her to say.....If he had brother's she would have gone to them first, as Jesus said, go to my BROTHERS.God bless all......and a Big thanks to you Dr Pitre.
+Kevin Mifsud...that passage that refers to Jesus' disciples as His "brothers" is just an example that the Greek word "adelphos" can refer to non-uterine relationships. But it really doesn't disprove that Jesus had younger half-siblings. For example, in John's gospel after Jesus performed His first miracles at the wedding of Cana in John 2, John makes a distinction between Jesus' disciples vs. His brothers. Also, in John 7:3-5, John says Jesus' brothers did "not" believe in Him, which could not be referring to His disciples, since they "did" believe in Him. I wrote a more detailed explanation below this video if you want to read it.
@@catholicanswers8867 another thing is that its clear that not ONCE do you see anyone called the Sons of Mary - only Jesus..also when Jesus went with his parents to do the census at 12 to he would have then has other siblings but they are nowhere to be found. Next outside of just the bible you would have found I'm very early Church history IF they - the Apostolic Succesors - knew of this and its NOWHERE to be found..its clear that they weren't children of Mary at least..
@Rich Lo there are several people who are referred to being “the” son of someone, but we know they had biological siblings. Peter is referred to as “the” son of Jonas, but Scripture states Andrew was his brother. In fact, NewAdvent.org (a Catholic online encyclopedia) uses this verse as evidence that Jonas was Andrew’s son. James “the” son of Alphaeus had a brother named Joseph. The use of the word “the” does not imply “only” when it says Jesus “the” son of Mary. When Jesus was found missing among the caravan at age 12, it states they were among His “relatives.” His siblings would have been included among theses relatives, along with His other relatives such as Jesus’ mother’s sister who is also not mentioned. The specific omission of someone does not mean they don’t exist. Matthew does not mention Salome at the empty tomb, but Mark mentions her. Matthew not mentioning her does not mean Salome didn’t exist. It just means Matthew elected not to name her. If Jesus was an only child, it would be odd that Joseph and Mary would have taken three whole days to notice He was missing. If He had multiple younger brothers and sisters they had to look after, it is more understandable that it took longer for them to notice He was missing, figuring He was with another relative. The earliest known extra-biblical writing on the PVM isn’t until the mid-to-late second century by an anonymous false “gospel” - the Protoevangelium of James. Prior to this, the earliest extrabiblical writings refer to Jesus’ brothers as “of the flesh,” which means biological and uterine. BornAgainRN has a brief 14 minute video that goes into more detail on this.
@@catholicanswers8867 I agree that being called "the son of X" doesn't make someone an only son. It was their legal patronym. However "the son of Mary" is not comparable as this mentions the mother and not the father. Jesus never was legally called "Jesus son of Mary" but "Jesus son of Joseph". Still, I don't think the expression "son of Mary" necessitates Jesus being her only son.
However, that's not the other commenter's argument. He says that there is no occurrences of "sons of Mary" - in contradistinction to e.g. the sons of Zebedee.
No extrabiblical writing prior to the Protoevangelium speaks of the "brother of the Lord" as being sons of Mary. Nor a single one.
One more question: I have never heard of James son of Alphaeus having a brother called Joseph. Where did you get this from?
Thanks Dr. Pitre!
In Philippines, people call each other brother, sister, mom, dad, grandma and grandpa even though they are not related by blood - as a sign of respect.
Us took, indigenous and ancient cultures had this practice. I would introduce my cousins as my brothers and sisters because we had no word for cousins. Even my parents introduce my cousins as their children if they were out with us.
Thank you for this great teaching! Cleared that all up.
No one I have ever heard can explain and make a case for the truth like you dr. Brant pitre I'm just overwhelmed by the information and by the comparisons that you do amazing
Thank you, Dr. Pitre.
Wow! THANK YOU! I’ve been trying to counter the argument that Mary had other children, and I found some helpful material with a quick search on the internet and also Catholic Bible notes. But nothing had this wealth of information explained so clearly.
Great message
Thank you brother!
Well done Dr Pitre. For those hung up on "adelphoi" as meaning brothers alone - ask the residents of Philadelphia if they are incestuous. OBVIOUSLY NOT SO. It is the city of "brotherly love". That is - love for everybody. I have often been addressed in sermons as dear brethren without having to check out the whereabouts of my father 9 months before my friends' birthday. In the same way "man" can refer to men and women and even all of humankind. Here again we see the action of uninformed reading of the Bible - the failure of Sola Scriptura in the absence of Tradition and A Christ Created Magisterium for interpretation of the word of God. Dr. Pitre is well researched and well backed by the Apostles' successors. No doubt if ever he goes into error, he will be informed of this by Apostolic authority, as ordained by Christ himself.
So, do we assume that this applies to the brother Judas and the sisters of Jesus which were mentioned?
And then God said, “When I struck down all the firstborn in the land of Egypt, I consecrated to me every firstborn in Israel, human being and beast alike. They belong to me; I am the LORD”. (Num. 3:13)
This would be done by a ritual that God established whereby the firstborn son of every couple would need to be “redeemed” (dedicated) to God; hence the name of this ritual, The Redemption of the First Born Son…or Pidyon Haben as it is called by today’s Jews. This ceremony is strictly for the firstborn son who also opens the womb and is done at age 30 days. If the firstborn out of the womb is not a male the ceremony is not performed: “Consecrate to me every firstborn; whatever opens the womb among the Israelites whether of human being or beast, belongs to me…Every human firstborn of your sons you must ransom”. (Ex. 13:2, 13)
Because Jesus was thus dedicated to God at the age of 30 days we know for certain that he had neither older sisters or brothers: “When the days were completed for their purification according to the law of Moses, they took him up to Jerusalem to present him to the Lord, just as it is written in the law of the Lord, “Every male that opens the womb shall be consecrated to the Lord”! (Lk 2:22-23)
During the ceremony the father attests: “This is my first born son, the first born of his mother”.
As for younger siblings that doesn’t work, either. As Jesus was on the cross dying and “saw his mother and the disciple there whom he loved, he said to his mother, ‘Woman, behold, your son.Then he said to the disciple, ‘Behold, your mother.’ And from that hour the disciple took her into his home” (Jn 19:26-27). Jewish law demands that younger siblings are the ones to care for their parents after the older ones are gone.
But because Jesus had no younger siblings he gave the care of his mother over to John. Why John? Perhaps he was the youngest of the apostles. Perhaps he was the “one whom Jesus loved” (Jn 13:23). More than likely John was the only one of the apostles there.
there must be a significance that Jesus chose to show Himself to Clopas on the very first day of His Resurrection, and reveal Himself at the Breaking of he Bread. Clopas wasn't even at the Upper Room, and thus would have had no idea what Jesus was doing.
Of course Mary, the Mother of Jesus, did not have any other children after giving birth to Jesus. St. Augustine said "The Old Testament is the New Testament concealed and the New Testament is the Old Testament revealed." Refer to Ezekial 44:1,2 "Then he (God) brought me back to the outer gate of the sanctuary facing east, but it was closed. And the Lord said to me: This gate shall be shut, it shall not be opened, and no man shall pass thru it because the Lord, the God of Israel has entered in by it, and it shall remain shut."
If no man can pass thru a gate in the sanctuary because God passed thru it, the same wud apply to Mary's womb, which is the gate thru which God entered the world in the flesh. And God does not change (Mal 3:6)
Veritas Saecula That is very interesting, and I really like St Augustine. One problem would be that Joseph was commanded by the angel to take Mary as his wife. In Jewish law there would be no marriage if there is no consummation. Joseph would actually be disobeying the angels Gabriels orders, and the marriage covenant.
Sean Thompson, in the Old Testament God asked married couples to refrain from intercourse for various reasons. For example, the priests of the temple had to refrain from intimacy with their wives during the time of their service. Likewise, Moses had the Israelites abstain from intercourse as he ascended Mount Sinai (Ex. 19:15). There is a theme here of refraining from marital rights because of the presence of something very holy.
In Jewish custom, as in our custom today, the minister announces that the couple has become man and wife. They exchanged vows, and so they are married-without having consummated the marriage yet. When the marriage is consummated, the marriage-which was already valid-becomes indissoluble. So Joseph and Mary’s marriage was a valid marriage, even if it was never consummated.
According to Jewish law, if a man was betrothed to a woman and she became pregnant from another, he could never have relations with her. The man had to put her away privately or condemn her in public and put her to death. Joseph chose the more merciful option.
The angel told Joseph to lead Mary into his house as a wife (paralabein gunaika), but the language that describes marital relations is not used here. It was used, however, in Luke 1:35: “The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you.” To “overshadow” a woman was a euphemism for having a marital relationship, as was the phrase “to lay one’s power” over a woman. The Holy Spirit had espoused Mary, and she had been consecrated, set apart for God.
Also, it appears that Mary had made a vow of virginity. When the angel said that she would conceive and bear a son, she asked, “How can this be, since I do not know man?” She knew how babies were made, and she was about to be married. “How can this be?” would seem like a pretty silly question unless she had made a prior vow of virginity.
You can ask “Why is she betrothed to Joseph if she made a vow of virginity?”
Consecrated virginity was not common among first century Jews, but it did exist. According to some early Christian documents, such as the Protoevangelium of James (written around 120 A.D.), Mary was a consecrated virgin. As such, when she reached puberty, her monthly cycle would render her ceremonially unclean and thus unable to dwell in the temple without defiling it under the Mosaic Law. At this time, she would be entrusted to a male guardian. However, since it was forbidden for a man to live with a woman he was not married or related to, the virgin would be wed to the guardian, and they would have no marital relations.
One more piece of evidence: only from Matthew, we cannot with any certainty say that the "James and Joseph" mentioned along Jesus's brothers are the sane as the sons of "the other Mary". The names are just too common.
However, if we look at the parallel passages in Mark, we will see one small difference. Mark speaks of "James and Joses" in both instances. Joses is a much less common variation, making it clear that both sets of brothers refer to the same two people.
What about Psalm 69: 8-9? This is definitely a reference to the Messiah and John quotes it in John 2:17, as referring to Jesus. In Psalm 69:8-9 it says, " I am a stranger to my brothers, an alien to my own mother's sons,. for zeal for your house consumes me, and the insults of those who insult you fall on me."
John 2: 17 says they remembered Psalm 69: 9 (not 8-9). "Zeal for your house will consume me.”
Regardless, the Psalm is a choral ode and "of David". It simply can't be all about Jesus. Just look at 5-8...
5 O God, you know my folly; the wrongs I have done are not hidden from you.
6 Let not those who hope in you be put to shame through me, O Lord GOD of hosts; let not those who seek you be brought to dishonor through me, O God of Israel.
7 For it is for your sake that I have borne reproach, that dishonor has covered my face.
8 I have become a stranger to my brothers, an alien to my mother’s sons.
Do you think "shame" and "dishonor" could be brought from Jesus by his "folly" and "wrongs"? NO WAY!
Jesus may have embodied and fulfilled many things written, but not all things written were in reference to Jesus.
Hope that helps you.
Matthew 12:47-50 KJVS
[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.
Galatians 1:18-19 KJVS
[18] Then after three years I went up to Jerusalem to see Peter, and abode with him fifteen days. [19] But other of the apostles saw I none, save James the Lord's brother.
Luke Wagner The word for brother sister and cousin is the same word in hebrew, in the Old Testament the word for cousin is the same word for brother and sister.
Luke Wagner Jesus chose to come to us through Mary who had to be Immaculately Holy because of the Holiness of God, God can not be born from sinful flesh it would be blasphemy to say he could. As the Ark of the Covenant is honoured and called in Holy Scripture " The Holy of Holies" in the Old Testament because the Word of God was within it and the Presence of God was on it, and it held the Manna Bread from Heaven in it, so too is Mary the New Ark of the Covenant Honoured in the same way, who the Angel Gabriel says in the message from God in Holy Scripture "Hail Full of Grace the Lord is with thee." Mary held the Word of God made flesh God himself within her, Jesus says in Scripture is "I am The Living Bread which came down from Heaven". Mary held the Living Bread from Heaven within her. That is not replacing Jesus as Saviour that is honouring the Word of God and the will of God himself who's will it is to be born of Mary."
Vv
MATT 13:55,”IS THIS NOT THE CARPENTERS SON ?ISN’T HIS MOTHERS NAME MARY ?
AND HIS BROTHERS JAMES ,JOSEPH,AND SIMON AND JUDAS ?AND HIS SISTERS ARE THEY NOT ALL WITH US ?
Dominic A The word used by jews for brother and sister is the same word that is used for cousins.
Dominic A Jesus chose to come to us through Mary who had to be Immaculately Holy because of the Holiness of God, God can not be born from sinful flesh it would be blasphemy to say he could. As the Ark of the Covenant is honoured and called in Holy Scripture " The Holy of Holies" in the Old Testament because the Word of God was within it and the Presence of God was on it, and it held the Manna Bread from Heaven in it, so too is Mary the New Ark of the Covenant Honoured in the same way, who the Angel Gabriel says in the message from God in Holy Scripture "Hail Full of Grace the Lord is with thee." Mary held the Word of God made flesh God himself within her, Jesus says in Scripture is "I am The Living Bread which came down from Heaven". Mary held the Living Bread from Heaven within her. That is not replacing Jesus as Saviour that is honouring the Word of God and the will of God himself who's will it is to be born of Mary."
It's as if you didn't even watch/listen to the video. ?!
Pride and ego are the biggest hurdles for learning and understanding. Honestly and patiently attempting to learn another's point of view is necessary to have a dialog or debate.
Typing in the textual version of screaming (all caps) is not persuasive, nor is it inviting to your brothers in Christ to discuss and discover the truth.
Its been 2 years. Did you watch the video yet?
Thank you for restating the title of the talk. Now listen or read the article.
Wait, she was already married? I thought she was only betrothed when the Angel appeared to her. ???
She was betrothed. I had to stop there too.
@@boldorbroken We need to stop interpreting the Gospel through "modern white western cultural" lens. That's not the setting for the Gospels. Jesus belonged to an ancient indigenous middle eastern culture.
There was no such thing as engagement (as it is understood in modern Western culture) in ancient Israel. The text says Mary was “betrothed” or “espoused” (Gr.-emnesteumene), not engaged. Betrothal, in ancient Israel, would be akin to the ratification of a marriage officially with a witness. That ratified marriage is then consummated-in due course-on the couple’s wedding night. So when Luke 1:27 says Mary was betrothed, it means they were already married at the time of the annunciation. If this were an ordinary marriage, St. Joseph would then have had a husband’s right to the marriage bed-the consummation.
(above was from Catholic Answers)
@@SaintCharbelMiracleworker Yes, I'm well aware that Jesus was a Jew. Bible states it plainly. Engagement is similar because the couple is "engaged" to be married, but the marriage has neither taken place yet, nor been consummate. Therefore, if betrothal was somehow meant to imply they were already married, why not simply say so.
@@boldorbroken He was a first century Jew not a modern Jew. Again you're using white modern terms to describe an ancient indigenous culture with its own social norms. Engagement as we know it did not exist in ancient Judaism. It does say they were "married" as it was known in their time and according to ancient Judaism. You can't force it to your own understanding and your own culture. The people weren't Westerners, they didn't speak English and they didn't practice our social norns. Try to understand the ancient social and cultural norms of Jesus time and his people.
@@SaintCharbelMiracleworker I didn't say He was a "modern" Jew. I didn't say he spoke English, and I never claimed to know how light or dark His skin was. I've done a lot of studies on Judaism and I invite you to look up the dictionary definition of betrothal. If it doesn't agree with your interpretation, I suggest you inform the people who print English Bibles so they can insert a more culturally appropriate word so as to prevent confusion. At this point it looks like we're just splitting hairs anyway, and I'm not sure what your point was to begin with. It says she was betrothed. The fact you said it would be consummated on the wedding night means there would have to be a wedding.
So when the angel came to her; she was already married??. I thought she was like the girlfriend of Joseph, like they were not married yet. In my ethnicity customs we use to do the same, first you have like an appointed wife but you cant touche her till you are married. So I thought that was the case, that mary was not married yet, she only was appointed to be the wife of Joseph in the future
I totally agree with Miguel Castellon. Dr.Pitre made a basic error which should not have happened.
josefrancis, North Parur, North of Cochin
Miguel Jesus chose to come to us through Mary who had to be Immaculately Holy because of the Holiness of God, God can not be born from sinful flesh it would be blasphemy to say he could. As the Ark of the Covenant is honoured and called in Holy Scripture " The Holy of Holies" in the Old Testament because the Word of God was within it and the Presence of God was on it, and it held the Manna Bread from Heaven in it, so too is Mary the New Ark of the Covenant Honoured in the same way, who the Angel Gabriel says in the message from God in Holy Scripture "Hail Full of Grace the Lord is with thee." Mary held the Word of God made flesh God himself within her, Jesus says in Scripture is "I am The Living Bread which came down from Heaven". Mary held the Living Bread from Heaven within her. That is not replacing Jesus as Saviour that is honouring the Word of God and the will of God himself who's will it is to be born of Mary."
The marriage process for Jews involved 2 stages - Betrothal which was the stage that Mary and Joseph were in - and then wedding (and thus bedding). Joseph and Mary were custom husband and wife but they did not consummate the marriage. If they did where were the other children when M & J lost Jesus at age 12? That would require a Nazareth creche willing to take on 5-8 children. So unlikely as to constitute hilarity.
The verse I struggle with is Matthew 1:25: Joseph took his wife, but they did not have sexual relations until she had borne a son..
The phrase ("heôs hou") translated to the English word "until" is shown by other uses in the bible to not necessitate that the situation changed.
Example:
Psalm 112 says
"His heart is strengthened. He shall not be moved *until* He looks over his enemies."
(The phrase "shall not be moved" is used several times in the bible, and means something along the lines of "courage/faith is not shaken")
so "until" here does not mean that He is courageous but then looks over his enemies and loses courage.
It means closer to "and then" or "when also".
i.e. "He shall not be moved and then/when also He looks over his enemies."
So the same phrase in Matthew 1:25 quite likely means that "he knew her not, *and then/when also* she bore a son.."
big ol' Most translations has Psalm 112:8 as showing the situation seems to transition, from not fearing ill reports, and enemies, until, at last, triumph over enemies in verse 8.
@@seanthompson5077
If you assume it to imply his state changed with the word "until" then you are saying that he was not afraid until after his enemies were defeated, at which point he then became afraid.
This makes no sense.
big ol' His situation changed. St Joseph NAB version: “ His heart is tranquil, without fear, till at last he looks down on his foes.” It’s finality.
@@seanthompson5077
Either you're saying that after his enemies' defeat he became fearful, or you are saying that the only change in situation was not his fear, but merely his circumstance, yet he remained unfearful.
Which would only support the interpretation that Joseph did not "know" his wife sexually, then what changed is that she bore Jesus, and Joseph remained unsexual with her.
Seems Jesus already taught John that his Mother which he called woman and how Jesus act as GOD to Mama Mary since he was 12 preaching in Temple.. This seem GOd wanted to let us not focus that Jesus was son of Human instead GOD higher than A Man.. Because as He said dont worship anyone except him.. He knew How people will worshkp Mama Mary instead of HIM in this times.. This must be precise teaching of GOD dont worshil Man insteaf Him alone.. Wrong teachings or misleading to some of Catholic as we observe that they pray more to Mama mary instead to Jesus.. God is full of Wisdom He let his disciples write about him not making Mama Mary became center of his life story.. In some ways human Family of Jesus were not main chatacter of his gospel.. They were likr his disciples became witness that he truly exist.
Yes, it's wrong to worship Mary. Catholicism does NOT promote or advocate for this. If a Catholic does this, they contradict Catholicism.
Praying to the saints to ask for their intercession is not worship. God is the God of the Living! Surely the martyrs and anyone in God's Heavenly Kingdom are not dead, but more alive than you or I. Surely they are closer to God than we are here on earth. We ask for their prayers as we ask our earthly brothers and sisters in Christ to pray for us.
All devotion to Mary is devotion to Jesus. Jesus is our one mediator to the Father. Mary brings us closer to Jesus.
As we are all sons of God, she is also a daughter of the Father. She is mother of the Son, and she is spouse to the Holy Spirit.
To worship her is wrong. To disrespect her is wrong. Who could have suffered more than her with Jesus at the cross?
Not convincing ... need to study harder ... try again ...
Seriously? Mary wasn’t married yet and Joseph was going to quietly halt the wedding plans and ceremony, so that is 100% incorrect and a bad assumption. Also, do more research on the context about the verbiage used for brother, they used the word for cousin many times in the Bible properly and this is just an excuse and a bad one. The list goes on because you can’t believe Jesus was 100% man (while also 100% God) and could have had siblings like us! Jesus went back to Nazareth during His ministry and even His hometown wouldn’t accept Him as the Son of Man…
after JESUS was born ,Joseph and Mary had at least 6 more children which would have been the norm for a young Jewish family at that time.they had these children by the normal way ,intercourse.
MATT.1:25,”AND HE KNEW HER NOT UNTIL SHE BROUGHT FORTH HER FIRSTBORN SON AND CALLED HIS
NAME JESUS”
When the Bible says a man knows a woman it is always sexual.
GENESIS 4:1,”AND ADAM KNEW EVE HIS WIFE AND SHE BORE CAIN”
GENESIS 4:25,”AND ADAM KNEW EVE AGAIN AND SHE BORE SETH”.
GALATIANS 1:19,”AND NONE OF THE OTHER APOSTLES SAW I NONE EXCEPT JAMES THE LORDS BROTHER.”
Not step brother but brother.
Anepsios Greek for cousin.
Adelphos Greek for brother.
Dominic A Jesus chose to come to us through Mary who had to be Immaculately Holy because of the Holiness of God, God can not be born from sinful flesh it would be blasphemy to say he could. As the Ark of the Covenant is honoured and called in Holy Scripture " The Holy of Holies" in the Old Testament because the Word of God was within it and the Presence of God was on it, and it held the Manna Bread from Heaven in it, so too is Mary the New Ark of the Covenant Honoured in the same way, who the Angel Gabriel says in the message from God in Holy Scripture "Hail Full of Grace the Lord is with thee." Mary held the Word of God made flesh God himself within her, Jesus says in Scripture is "I am The Living Bread which came down from Heaven". Mary held the Living Bread from Heaven within her. That is not replacing Jesus as Saviour that is honouring the Word of God and the will of God himself who's will it is to be born of Mary."
Dominic A In Hebrew and Aramaic, the languages of most of the original Old Testament texts and of Christ. In these languages, no special word existed for cousin, nephew, half-brother, or step-brother; so they used the word brother, such as “The son of Paul’s sister” (Acts 23:16) which is obviously Paul’s nephew. Mary is the woman who God willed to be the Ark of the New Covenant, Immaculately Holy Mother of God.
So where were the 6 plus kids when Mary and Joseph took Jesus to Jerusalem. Going to the Temple once a year was a Jewish religious requirement and for the whole family. Either the kids were there or not. If they were, why weren't they mentioned. Surely they would have to leave the young'uns with someone else and that would be remarkable. Do you propose a Nazareth childminding centre? - or could they just have abandoned the flock to look for the lost sheep. You are proposing an abuse of the other children that will not stand scrutiny.
Blasphemy
What?! What's blasphemous in this
Binyamin A Jesus chose to come to us through Mary who had to be Immaculately Holy because of the Holiness of God, God can not be born from sinful flesh it would be blasphemy to say he could. As the Ark of the Covenant is honoured and called in Holy Scripture " The Holy of Holies" in the Old Testament because the Word of God was within it and the Presence of God was on it, and it held the Manna Bread from Heaven in it, so too is Mary the New Ark of the Covenant Honoured in the same way, who the Angel Gabriel says in the message from God in Holy Scripture "Hail Full of Grace the Lord is with thee." Mary held the Word of God made flesh God himself within her, Jesus says in Scripture is "I am The Living Bread which came down from Heaven". Mary held the Living Bread from Heaven within her. That is not replacing Jesus as Saviour that is honouring the Word of God and the will of God himself who's will it is to be born of Mary."
Binyamin A In Hebrew and Aramaic, the languages of most of the original Old Testament texts and of Christ. In these languages, no special word existed for cousin, nephew, half-brother, or step-brother; so they used the word brother, such as “The son of Paul’s sister” (Acts 23:16) which is obviously Paul’s nephew. Mary is the woman who God willed to be the Ark of the New Covenant, Immaculately Holy Mother of God.
Er..Mary had OTHER children exactly as the scriptures say. She took no "vow"..Sorry Pitre..how you turned her reply into a 'vow' is interesting and creative imagination ..when all she said was in some awe regarding that conception...and who wouldn't be??
At the time Gabriel appeared she was merely betrothed...and Joseph was instructed to take her as his wife...regardless of her pregnancy. She was a virgin at Jesus conception. After that she was a wife to Joseph as we're other wives to husbands.
Lol..the other Mary?? What an effort to defy the simple truth, and falsely deify Mary wayyyyyyy beyond the task she fulfilled in humility.
Jesus had a lonely life. His own family were not 'close' for obvious reasons. Only those from heaven understand such matters.
Even the entire fairytale of Mary becoming the "Mother of the Church " are all fairytales that detract from the reality of Jesus. .God..and HIS being the ONE MEDIATOR.
From what I actually mentioned, I find your inferences on Mary quite amusing.
Nevi Gabriel Jesus chose to come to us through Mary who had to be Immaculately Holy because of the Holiness of God, God can not be born from sinful flesh it would be blasphemy to say he could. As the Ark of the Covenant is honoured and called in Holy Scripture " The Holy of Holies" in the Old Testament because the Word of God was within it and the Presence of God was on it, and it held the Manna Bread from Heaven in it, so too is Mary the New Ark of the Covenant Honoured in the same way, who the Angel Gabriel says in the message from God in Holy Scripture "Hail Full of Grace the Lord is with thee." Mary held the Word of God made flesh God himself within her, Jesus says in Scripture is "I am The Living Bread which came down from Heaven". Mary held the Living Bread from Heaven within her. That is not replacing Jesus as Saviour that is honouring the Word of God and the will of God himself who's will it is to be born of Mary."
Nevi Gabriel The Apostles worked Miracles and converted people to Jesus by Gods power working through them, other people converting people to follow Jesus and other people performing Miracles through Gods power and Grace working through them did not and does not replace Jesus as the One Mediator between God and man. God has always worked his power through people from the Prophets of the Old Testament to the Apostles in the New Testament and in the Saints. The Rosary is our gift from God where he works his power and Grace through Mary to Convert sinners back to her son Our Lord Jesus Christ. It does not replace Jesus it brings sinners back to Jesus, by Gods Grace of conversion through the Blessed Virgin Mary, just as God gave the Grace of conversion through the Miracles and words of the Prophets, the Apostles and the Saints. So God also does the same in these times through Mary whos "Soul Magnifies the Lord" she does not point to herself she points us towards her son Our Lord Jesus.
Nevi Gabriel In Hebrew and Aramaic, the languages of most of the original Old Testament texts and of Christ. In these languages, no special word existed for cousin, nephew, half-brother, or step-brother; so they used the word brother, such as “The son of Paul’s sister” (Acts 23:16) which is obviously Paul’s nephew. Mary is the woman who God willed to be the Ark of the New Covenant, Immaculately Holy Mother of God.
@True Food True Drink My friend. .Gabriel told Joseph to take Mary as his WIFE.
Have you taken a wife? If so then perhaps you'll know what that entails or why you marry. It wasn't different from Jesus day.
In any ordinary circumstances she'd have been stoned to death for that pregnancy...but it was explained divinely. She remained untouched until Jesus birth. After that Mary was a wife to Joseph in every sense of the word.
These Maryan perpetual virginity doctrines etc are all fabrications to create deity where there is none really. God ordained Mary for that time and conferred the honor on her..yes..And she will always be the blessed mother of Jesus.
"For neither did his brethren believe in him."
So some like to say that refers just to general people around him...yet its false.
Galatians (1:19) mentions distinctly seeing James, "the Lord's brother". The only apostle there was Peter...but scripture distinctly designates James as Jesus BROTHER.
In your fabrications of scripture all the apostles were 'brothers'..isn't that so?
Anything to suit a fake doctrine and skew what the scripture says.
The reason you pipe 'unsupported by any scripture' is because you never really read the scriptures under guidance of the Holy Spirit. .but you do read regurgitations of people who misinterpreted it for you.
So..youll deny even that and fabricate around it..to deny Mary had other children.
That doesn't lessen the "Immaculate Conception"..its merely part of her life AFTER that. It too piercing for your psyche that "Mary slept with Joseph"? It probably is.
Besides that..Whats any of the above to do with "Belief in Jesus as the ONLY intercessor between God and man"
Mary isn't any "Mediatrix". You can imagine it..but you must deny the scriptures to make that true. Do you DENY that Jesus is the ONLY mediator between the Father and mankind? Just curious.
@@nevig6557 if James was Jesus' brother why did Jesus gave Mary mother to John an Apostle to live with him? It would be a disgrace to make your mom live with anyone else but her son, furthermore early christians believed in the perpetual virginity of Mary but you think you know better than the people who were actually taught by the apostles?