Which is more pertinent. Tradition or the Bible?

Question

I am accusing you all of getting tradition mixed up with what the Bible actually says. Where does it say that Jesus' mother did not have intercourse.

Answer 1

Bible.

As the questioner notes, Catholicism pretends that Mary was 'forever virgin'. Sadly, they apparently ignore the fact that Mary had other sons and daughters after Jesus was born.

The bible teaches quite clearly that Jesus had literal brothers and sisters in connection with his human mother Mary. There is no reason to think that these ordinary men and women were also the result of divine conception, rather than from normal marital relations between Mary and Joseph.

(Matthew 13:54-56) And after coming into his home territory [Jesus] began to teach them in their synagogue, so that they were astounded and said: "Where did this man get this wisdom and these powerful works? 55 Is this not the carpenter's son? Is not his mother called Mary, and his brothers James and Joseph and Simon and Judas? 56 And his sisters, are they not all with us? Where, then, did this man get all these things?"

While some Catholics pretend that the terms "brothers" and "sisters" do not mean literal siblings, the plain meaning of this Scripture is actually acknowledged by Catholic authorities.

The New Catholic Encyclopedia (1967, Vol. IX, p. 337) admits regarding the Greek words "adelphoi" ["brothers"] and "adelphai" ["sisters"], used at Matthew 13:55, 56, that these "have the meaning of full blood brother and sister in the Greek-speaking world of the Evangelist's time and would naturally be taken by his Greek reader in this sense. Toward the end of the 4th century (c. 380) Helvidius in a work now lost pressed this fact in order to attribute to Mary other children besides Jesus so as to make her a model for mothers of larger families. St. Jerome, motivated by the Church's traditional faith in Mary's perpetual virginity, wrote a tract against Helvidius (A.D. 383) in which he developed an explanation . . . that is still in vogue among Catholic scholars."


In addition, Bible students note that Jesus himself made a clear distinction between his literal brothers and sisters and his spiritual brothers and sisters:

(Mark 3:31-35) Now his mother and his brothers came, and, as they were standing on the outside, they sent in to [Jesus] to call him. 32 As it was, a crowd was sitting around him, so they said to him: "Look! Your mother and your brothers outside are seeking you." 33 But in reply he said to them: "Who are my mother and my brothers?" 34 And having looked about upon those sitting around him in a circle, he said: "See, my mother and my brothers! 35 Whoever does the will of God, this one is my brother and sister and mother."


Learn more:
http://watchtower.org/e/20050908a/
http://watchtower.org/e/20031215/

Answer 2

Do you mean before Jesus was born or after?

It is very plain about her being "with child" without "knowing a man". This is the language used during this time for pregnant without intercourse. Read the story for yourself in the first part of the gospels of Matthew and Luke. Also, why would there have been all the fuss about putting her away privily and the angel appearing to Joseph telling her the child she was carrying was from the Holy Spirit.

After Jesus was born, Mary and Joseph consummated their marriage and she had other children, so she is clearly not still "The Virgin Mother" as venerated by some denominations.

You either have to take the Bible by what it says or think that Mary was a lying **** and the Bible covered up for her. But if that's the case then Jesus could not be the perfect sinless Lamb needed for the sacrifice of sins, since He would have inherited sin from the seed of the man. Only the "seed of the woman" through the Virgin Birth could fulfill this role and be 100% God and 100% Man. So the whole idea of salvation hangs on the Virgin Birth. You either take it by faith with the rest of the gospel or you don't.

Answer 3

Jesus’ brothers are mentioned in several Bible verses. Matthew 12:46, Luke 8:19, and Mark 3:31 say that Jesus’ mother and brothers came to see Him. The Bible tells us that Jesus had four brothers: James, Joseph, Simon, and Judas (Matthew 13:55). The Bible also tells us that Jesus had sisters, but they are not named or numbered (Matthew 13:56). In John 7:1-10, His brothers go on to the festival while Jesus stays behind. In Acts 1:14, His brothers and mother are described as praying with the disciples. In Galatians 1:19, it mentions that James was Jesus’ brother.
They would be half brothers and sisters, since Joseph would be the father of those siblings, and of course, God being the father of Jesus, having the same mother but different fathers.

Mary the mother of Jesus was a virgin at the time of the conception of Jesus. After that, there was no reason for her to not have other children, and to have relations with her husband, Joseph.

Answer 4

The Bible itself rejects the idea of Bible only.
John 20:30
30 Therefore many other signs Jesus also performed in the presence of the disciples, which are not written in this book


The Bible also states that Apostolic teaching is equal to scripture.
2 Thessalonians 2:15
15 So then, brethren, stand firm and hold to the traditions which you were taught, whether by word of mouth or by letter from us.

Answer 5

Why should it say that? Where in the Bible does it say "everything is written down in the scripture?" Where does it say the Bible is the only authority?

Sacred tradition is just as valid as sacred scripture. The Christian Church was functioning and growing before the gospels were written and before St. Paul wrote his letters. The things that the new Christians were doing and understood to be the truth is sacred tradition. Why is this invalid? Who makes it so?

The early Christians believed in Mary's perpetual virginity. This was something that was "always' known and believed by those who knew Christ and knew his Mother. Just because someone didn't write it down, doesn't make it less true.

Answer 6

The bible got here from a compilation of early church writers. The previous testomony became into written via Jewish pupils and the recent testomony became into written via a community who have been practising the ideals of Math LUKE. Mark and John.First,they translated to Greek and Latin,the commonly used language of persons on the time.

Answer 7

The original christian church (the universal church) believed in two forms of tradition oral, and written (that would be the bible). Catholics, and EO their descendants believe in those two forms of traditions, the bible being tradition can't be compared to oral tradition as it supposedly booth comes from Jesus mouth (even though J boy didn't teach any of the **** which is written in the bible). Here's a star dumb *** fundie.

Answer 8

God's revelation to us comes in the form of both Scripture and Sacred Tradition. They have equal importance and together, they make up a whole.

Answer 9

Tradition is more "pertinent," of course. The Bible is only one part of Christian tradition.

Answer 10

The Bible, especially when tradition actually VIOLATES what the Bible says.

Scriptural Support: Matt 15:9 - "It is in vain that they keep worshipping me because they teach the commands of men as doctrine."