A Tradition of Men: Jesus had Siblings. Mary is NOT a Perpetual Virgin.


images-1

If you click on the image to the left and then make it larger you can read an explanation of the relationships of Jesus’ brothers.

Steve: never are His siblings referred to as anything else to lend credence to them being cousins, like “sister’s son” for example. Or, children from Joseph’s previous marriage, which has no standing in Scripture whatsoever. How is it possible to at the same time justify a belief in Joseph having a previous marriage without historical evidence, or even a single Bible verse to back it up? It is an indefensible argument.

BFHU:In the semitic languages there is no word for aunt, uncle, cousin etc b/c in the small communities in which language developed everyone knew what you meant when you called a particular person your brother or sister. They knew they were a sibling or other relative and they knew the relationship. To be precise they could certainly have used “sister’s son” but that is cumbersome and required more analysis than saying “brother” Please see this post–>Who Were the Brothers & Sisters of Jesus?
Brothers and Sisters of Jesus
The Protoevangelium of James
has Joseph being widowed and older; having children from a previous marriage.

This is one possibility: that the brothers and sisters were step-brothers and step-sisters. The other possibility is that the words brothers and sisters refer to kinsman rather than siblings. Just like it does elsewhere in Scripture.

Steve: Whereas, believing what the Bible says offers all of the knowledge and understanding we need on the subject.

BFHU: We believe what the Bible says but we interpret it differently based on historical information from the ancient Church and history.Protestants pretty much ignore Christian History after the Book of Acts until the Protestant Reformation era.

Steve:  This dogma has done nothing more than cause countless people to worship Mary

BFHU: We do not worship Mary. Adam and Eve were also created immaculate. Sinlessness does not equal deity.

Steve: Claiming it as a “tradition” is not proof, and it does not lend historical evidence.

BFHU: When we talk about tradition we can mean two things. First of all there is what we call TRADITION which is not folksy or something that evolved over time to be a practice of the Catholic Faith. When we talk about Scripture and TRADITION with a capital “T” for instance, we mean nothing less than the TEACHING OF THE APOSTLES.

Scripture is the TEACHING OF THE APOSTLES and

Tradition is the TEACHING OF THE APOSTLES.

That is why we hold both of them sacred. We have other traditions of our Faith that are not Apostolic teaching. The Immaculate Conception and Perpetual Virginity of Mary are TEACHING OF THE APOSTLES or what we call, for short, TRADITION. The Traditions that are also TEACHINGS OF THE APOSTLES are also called DOGMA. So if you come across a tradition that is not a dogma, it is NOT Apostolic teaching but tradition with a lower case “t”.

Steve: I won’t bother quoting Scripture from Exodus 20 about idols and bowing before them.

BFHU: Regarding the worship of idols please see this post—>Protestant Tradition of Men: Catholics worship Idols.
Regarding Mary Co-Redemptrix

Steve:  Many Catholics wish to see her raised to the status of co-redeemer. As if to say, “the job was just too much for Jesus alone, Mary had to have helped him.”

BFHU: First, we are not “raising” her  status. She already is a cooperator or coredemptrix. There is simply debate about whether to officially give her this title. Secondly, are you aware that Muslims vehemently reject that God begot a son because that would mean He needed help and it takes away from the sovereignty and power of Allah!

We both believe no such thing about Jesus, Son of God. And Catholics believe no such thing about Mary being  needed by Jesus. He certainly did NOT need  Mary. But, throughout Biblical history God has chosen to accomplish His purposes through faithful men and women. God could have just zapped a Man-God baby or man to earth and carried on from there but He chose to be incarnate with the help and seed of Mary. I don’t pretend to know why God insists on having people help Him. But it is undeniable that He has people help Him throughout history.

 Steve: But it seems strange to me, that we should both claim the Bible as our base for a foundation,

BFHU: Yes. And this is true of all the Protestant denominations as well. Despite using the same Bible, people interpret scriptures differently when their faith is unhinged from 1500 years of Christian history. The Catholic Faith however, is the Church founded by Jesus Christ Himself and has existed continuously for nearly 2000 years.

Steve:  …..yet one of these beliefs has no grounds to stand on in the Bible to even begin to prove it.

BFHU: Neither view of the “brothers of Jesus” can be proved from Scripture alone. We must therefore, look to historical evidence to settle the question.

Steve: Nor Biblical wording to account for such behavior and thinking.

BFHU: And yet, nothing we believe contradicts Scripture. It only contradicts Protestant interpretations, which is not the same thing.

Advertisements

2 Responses

  1. The way you talk, it seems that catholic faith is united and all around the world the same teaching is offered. WRONG!!! I live in Quebec, Canada. In my parish, the priest who recently retired was openly teaching that homosexuality was an acceptable way to live in the eyes of God. One famous priest in my province became a deputy and was openly gay. Just an example, there are many more!!!

    My point is this: maybe in theory, catholic faith is infallible( i do not think so), but in practice, the corruption, the false teachings, and the bad teachers are so numerous, and in such a majority, that we forget the theory. The gap between theory and reality is just too big to call the catholic church the one founded 2000 years ago.

  2. Dear Karine,
    You are correct. But no individual, be they a priest or a even a bishop can be trusted to be infallible and to teach the faith without error. Even if they are trying….I have had my own experience with heterodox priests. It was very disappointing but it did not shake my faith in the Church Jesus founded because I am a Catechism Catholic. That is what I trust and Scripture, read with the Church, of course.

    There are whacko Catholics all over the place. But the Teaching of the Catholic Church…the official TEACHING i.e. Catechism, is unified all over the world.

    No one claims that there is no corruption due to the sin of individuals in the Catholic Church. But the Catholic Faith does NOT teach people to be corrupt of approve of corruption.

    Neither does the Catholic Faith encourage bad teachers or desire “numerous bad teachers”. Satan is after the goal of getting priest and laypeople to teach heresy. Some priests are not dynamic teachers but that is b/c that is not a qualification for being a priest. It would be nice if every Catholic Church had a dynamic, charismatic, brilliant priest. Sigh. But, it is not necessary to feed us with Bread from Heaven. There is a gap between the beautiful teachings and sublime goals for us humans that the Catholic Faith holds out to us. But is the gap the fault of the teachings or the fault of frail, weak and sinful people?

    Satan is very busy, and has been practicing on us for thousands of years to jumble it all up as much as possible and get people to leave the Church founded by Jesus. he has been successful with so many souls….

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: