by greendawn 30 Replies latest jw friends
Hi!
<< I should point out that Luther and Calvin and the other reformers never questioned Mary's perpetual virginity. The idea that Mary had relations with Joseph after Jesus was born and gave birth to other children is a recent innovation.
Jeff S. >>
..."a recent innovation"? Now, there was this man called Helvetius... :)
Best regards
Augustin
Book of Wake the Hell Up 5:7
"7: And Mary was a cheap little tramp who got in the family way, but she was smart for all that. 8: And she said unto herself "Everyone is obsessed with the Messiah at the moment, I'll avoid the stoning by telling my bethroed god knocked me up as they love that supernatural shit". 9: Thus she said unto her betrothed; "Lo, god came up me and I am great with child". And Joseph spoke unto her 10: "Damn! Verily is god a dirty old deity as he is way older than you and you are but 14 and even I was gonna wait until next birthday before playing hide the saucege". 11: But on the whole her family and that of her betrothed decided to believe her and stone her not was the best action as they didn't want to give a refund on the dowery even if Mary was a dirty little slut as they had already made a down-payment on a new family donkey. 12: And it came to pass when she bore a son, he was a little bit dense but very idealistic. 13: Thus with his mother's insistance that god was his daddy 14: Jesus believed it with all his heart too.
There is nothing in the bible to even hint that Mary was considered to be 'ever-virgin', so it mustn't have seemed very important to the early Christians, and the bible specifically speaks of Jesus having brothers without even bothering to try to explain that they weren't Mary's children.
Add to that the fact that the idea of virgin birth comes from pagan beliefs, and that it is known that pagan Roman beliefs were indeed introduced into the early 'Church', it is not a great stretch of the imagination to see it for what it is.
Joseph did not have children prior to Jesus. There is nothing in the bible that says that. Jesus clearly had brothers and sisters who were born to Joseph and Mary.
For those who are quoting the "early church fathers", are you saying you are a follower of them?
Or do you follow Christ and the bible? Because in the bible it names Jesus' brothers and Nowhere does it state that Mary was never to have sex with her husband. Do you think Joseph stayed married to a women who would never consumate the marriage? First of all, woman back then had a duty to consumate their marriage and the Catholic church even today would annul any marriage that was not cunsumated.
And on top of that are some trying to say Jospeh had affairs and fathered other children?
The whole idea of the perpetutal virgin is so that the Catholics can venerate Mary, this is a pagan belief and is not based on scripture at all. And is not a biblical teaching as your only mediator is Jesus and only HE can make intercession for your sins and grant your prayers.
Even if Martin Luther and some others had this wrong belief, it was merely based on traditions of the Catholic church and not the bible. And, frankly, they were wrong. Its as simple as that.
Christians are to be followers of Christ and obey his words regardless of what the churches say as these are man made institutions only and every single one of them has deviated from the bible and added thier own teachings, creeds and traditions to God's word.
And it is useless to go to a Catholic website or source to find out the origins of their teachings. Just like the WT will not give you information that shows their religion in a negative light. If anyone would like some information contrary to the Catholics claims which shows the origin of all the practices that are unique to them including "the perpetual virgin" here is a good book:
The Two Babylons - by Alexander Hislop- Chick Publications
on top of that are some trying to say Jospeh had affairs and fathered other children?
Not "affairs". One ancient view, especially prevalent among the Greek Fathers (from Epiphanius onward, and based on the Protevangelium of James), is that they were children of Joseph's previous marriage.
For a catholic view, see http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/02767a.htm
For a critical view, http://www.geocities.com/paulntobin/jamesbrother.html
Btw, beware of A. Hislop.
Augustin, did you mean Helvidius?
Narkissos,
Thanks for those links I bookmarked both to look at later today. I wonder though if Joseph had all these other children prior to meeting Mary, (at least 6 according to the scriptures we have available) why was this fact not mentioned in the bible anywhere?
Do you know of any other early writings that this view comes from? Or, do you think it was the opinion and scriptural interpretation of some early church fathers?
Lovelylil,
I think the earliest extant evidence for that view is the Protevangelium of James (mid 2nd century):
http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/text/infancyjames-roberts.html
Aside from the NT, the view that the "brothers of the Lord" were biological siblings (or "half-brothers and sisters" as you seem to hold) is only attested later: Helvidius is from the late 4th century. Prior to him the Ebionites ("Jewish Christians") held a similar view but also denied Jesus' virgin birth (making them full siblings).
From a critical perspective, it is also possible that the "brothers of the Lord" were artificially made natural siblings as a result of an early church power struggle: meaning that the "Twelve," not the "Brothers," were the true spiritual heirs of Jesus -- the "brothers" did not belong to the inner circle of disciples and even, according to John 7, "did not believe in him" -- leaving the position of James as the head of the Jerusalem "church" in Acts unexplained.
Thank you Narkissos,
I read the information and then I looked at my library and I actually have that book as part of my lost books of the bible collection. There is a footnote that shows that some early church fathers do not agree with what is written but some do accept this accound as authentic. I find it interesting to think that Joseph was a widower with about six other children. It certainly is possible as most of the evidence shows that this book is authentic. And it was a very early writing so I see no reason to discredit it at all.
This could also explain another view as to why Jesus did not entrust his mother to these brothers from Joseph but rather to Saint John. Although I personally believe that it was for spiritual reasons also.
The only information I do not find in this account is anything saying that Joseph never comsumated his marriage to Mary after Jesus birth.And that she was to remain a perpetual virgin.
It is too bad that the early church fathers did not include more of the books that were in circulation during early Christianity but I suppose that they included the books they thought would back up the teachings that they chose to teach?
Anyway, thanks again. I think I should read more of the lost books I have collecting dust.
Did Mary the mother of Jesus remain a virgin all her life?
No
The catholic/orthodox believe that she never had sex with her husband.
True statement but untrue belief.
Mary and Joseph did have children together after Jesus was born through the Holy Spirit.
blessedstar
I've never understood why the Catholic Church places so much emphasis on Mary so-called 'eternal virginity'. The bible states that she got pregnant with Jesus by means of Holy Spirit and that Joseph refrained from sleeping with her until she gave birth to a son," Jesus. (Matthew 1:25).
There's absolutely nothing that would indicate that Joseph and Mary didn't have normal sexual relations (after Jesus was born) and the bible is clear that Jesus had half siblings: "Is not this the carpenter, the son of Mary and brother of James and Joses and Judas and Simon, and are not his sisters here with us?"—Mark 6:2, 3
