English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

The angel told Joseph not to take Mary into his bed, until AFTER the child, Christ, was born.
There existed no prohibition for the whole of their marriage.
Even in the Bible, it was recognized by Christ, that he had brothers from his mother Mary.

HOw can this doctrine be, and what purpose does it serve, seeing as how it matters not anything about Mary, but Christ?

We are told that God did not need her, that he could have raised Christ up from a stone.

2006-07-09 12:12:13 · 18 answers · asked by athorgarak 4 in Society & Culture Religion & Spirituality

For those who CAN"T understand or chose to NOT read everything I wrote, I am asking Catholics to back up their doctrinal claims!

2006-07-09 18:00:51 · update #1

18 answers

Matthew 1:25
But he had no union with her until she gave birth to a son. And he gave him the name Jesus.

The fact that this is recorded implies she had sex later, the writer is mentioning this so that it was known that Jesus was of a virgin birth.

Matthew 12 (also recorded in Mark 3 and Luke 8)
46While Jesus was still talking to the crowd, his mother and brothers stood outside, wanting to speak to him. 47Someone told him, "Your mother and brothers are standing outside, wanting to speak to you." 48He replied to him, "Who is my mother, and who are my brothers?" 49Pointing to his disciples, he said, "Here are my mother and my brothers. 50For whoever does the will of my Father in heaven is my brother and sister and mother."

Note verse 47 is not in some texts, not that it matters

Matthew 13
55"Isn't this the carpenter's son? Isn't his mother's name Mary, and aren't his brothers James, Joseph, Simon and Judas? 56Aren't all his sisters with us? Where then did this man get all these things?"

Matthew 13 is pretty convincing evidence. James the brother of Jesus wrote the epistle of James in the New Testament.

The word used for brothers (adelphoi in Greek) typically refers to siblings in a family and can mean brothers and sisters. It can also mean brothers and sisters in God's family. I certainly doubt they were referring to God's Family in Matthew 13 if they rebuked him.

2006-07-09 12:49:08 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0 1

You know too many catholics. There exists no such doctrine in christianity except in the catholic church, the same church that launched the crusades and the Spanish inquisition. The catholic curch has done alot of things that don't make sense, and nobody knows why. Catholics aren't so bad nowadays though, but they still say some pretty weird stuff. Most normal christians know that Mary was only a virgin until she gave birth to Jesus, after which she and Joseph got busy and gave Jesus some siblings(matthew12:46-47,mark3:31-32,luke8:19-20 all mention Jesus' mother and brothers.)

2006-07-09 12:27:15 · answer #2 · answered by unexpectedbill3 2 · 0 0

No where in the Bible does it say Mary had other children Joseph on the other hand had been married before Mary as he was older than her. These are the brothers and sisters of Christ you have heard about. Brethren can also mean any male relatives i.e. cousins. Ask yourself as a man could you see yourself having sexual relations with the woman whom your Almighty God created and chose to bare His Son? Talk about your Madonna complex. I think most God fearing men would have a problem with that. As for the stone theory I have never heard it and it would never work because God sent the prophesy that Woman would redeem herself.Sin entered the world through a woman and so to would our redemption come.

2006-07-09 12:20:45 · answer #3 · answered by Debra M. Wishing Peace To All 7 · 0 0

She was a virgin before, then after Jesus, Mary and Joseph I am sure enjoyed the marriage bed. Mary did not forever remain a virgin. I know that the catholics pray to the virgin Mary, but the bible obviously talks about other children so therefore goes to show she isn't a virgin hah I dont know where that "forever virgin" story came from but dont believe everything you hear.

2006-07-09 12:19:12 · answer #4 · answered by AlwaysLaughing 3 · 0 0

Mary was not a virgin before Jesus was born, we know that. What the bible means is that Jesus was not a product of a man and a woman. ALthough God could have made Jesus from a stone, he made her from Mary because Jesus needed to be human, and based from humanity in order to be part of humanity and in touch with being human.

An all powerful, Omniscient god wanted to experience life from the limited perspective that is being human, rather than from the perspective of knowing everything. It was her method of trying to experience what life is like being human, in order to gain compassion and understanding of the human condition.

It is at this point in the bible where god starts loving mankind, instead of puniishing mankind. It is the point where she came to understand why we humans were disobedient, difficult, and did not appreciate and worhsip her as she thought we should.

2006-07-09 12:20:34 · answer #5 · answered by Atom 3 · 0 0

Mary did have other children. The idea that she's "forever virgin" is not true. Not a lot of time is spent on the other children of Mary and Joseph because they were normal children of a normal family.

2006-07-09 12:18:00 · answer #6 · answered by puppyraiser8 4 · 0 0

None of those as against tutor Mary had added children. Jesus did certainly have brothers and sisters, and this had confounded scholars for decades. There are non-Biblical debts that say Joseph became a widower, with children, and took Mary to be his spouse even as she became very youthful - possibly 14. this can were completely conventional in that subculture. So, those brothers and sisters ought to were Jesus' a million/2 siblings. this theory is customary by employing Catholic, and the Orthodox church homes, so, maximum of Christianity. regardless of the indisputable fact that, Jewish subculture also dictated that a lady must be having children, and for Mary to no longer have extra ought to were seen as unusual. my personal wondering is that she ought to have had different children - it ought to were conventional in that subculture. regardless of the indisputable fact that, the Catholic and Orthodox human beings on the seminary I went to really disagreed with this! And, the non-canonical books to look to help their wondering. For me although, it makes no large difference no matter if she had added children, or no longer. it ought to replace no longer something, both way.

2016-11-06 02:53:43 · answer #7 · answered by ? 4 · 0 0

Yeah, she was special, that Mary. You know Jesus was called the son of Mary, not the son of Joseph, which would have been more common (Ie. the son of Abraham.)

But seriously, a boy needs a mother's love. The whole point was to live as a human.

2006-07-09 12:18:16 · answer #8 · answered by mithril 6 · 0 0

Yeah I find this so called "doctrine" far fetched too MOST Branches of Christianity DO NOT BELIEVE that Mary was Devine. Assumed or A perpetual Virgin.

2006-07-09 12:16:28 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

A virgin would have a baby A part of prophecy that had to come true. I beleive that Jesus was Given birth the natural way.Joseph lost his first wife he had children by her. Mary was no longer a virgin thru the birth of Jesus. none of our bussiness how much sex they had after that.

2006-07-09 12:26:16 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers