Jesus Christ is the only Begotten Son of God

[Guest Guest]

The Bible uses brothers and sisters in a wide sense, not always referring to actual brothers and sisters, in fact there is no word for cousin in Aramaic. It is also believed by some (No one knows for sure whether its true) that St. Joseph was married earlier and had children from his other marriage. We also know that St. Joseph was much older than St. Mary as he was not present at the Crucifixion.

But that would be a considerable stretch. There is no scriptural reason to suppose that Mary was a perpetual virgin. Every time that his brothers(and sisters) are mentioned they are referred to as if the were immediate relatives...

Here is another passage:
"1 Corinthians 9:5 Have we not power to lead about a sister, a wife, as well as other apostles, and as the brethren of the Lord , and Cephas?"

Since you wish to speak of Aramaic the Greek word for "brethren" is a reference to the womb. It can be literal or figurative, but since Paul here makes a distinction between himself, Peter, and the "brethren of the Lord" it is reasonable to take it a literal reference.

[Jerry]

Mark was Barnabas' cousin - and the passages make it very clear that he was Barnabas' sister's son. If these were Jesus' cousins, the Bible would use similar wording to indicate that as well. Let's face it, you won't accept the Bible here because it contradicts your RC theology. Simple as that. However, we are a Bible believing board and would rather correct our doctrines than correct the Bible or believe falsehoods.

[Guest Guest]

Mark was Barnabas' cousin - and the passages make it very clear that he was Barnabas' sister's son. If these were Jesus' cousins' date=' the Bible would use similar wording to indicate that as well. Let's face it, you won't accept the Bible here because it contradicts your RC theology. Simple as that. However, we are a Bible believing board and would rather correct our doctrines than correct the Bible or believe falsehoods.[/quote']

I accept everything that the Bible teaches, and always use it first as an authority. I can see how it would be hard for you to understand this. However please bear with me. How do you interpret this line?

"You will be with child and give birth to a son, and you are to give him the name Jesus." (Luke 1:31)

"How will this be, Mary asked the angel. since I am a virgin?" (Luke 1:34)

The early Church taught that St. Mary had taken a vow of celibacy for God. St. Mary certainly knows how someone has a child, so why would she ask? She asked because she wondered how she could have a child and still keep her vow of celibacy.

[John81]

Don't Catholics have their own forums to discuss unbiblical stuff on?

[Guest Guest]

Don't Catholics have their own forums to discuss unbiblical stuff on?

We have forums, however we don't discuss un-Biblical things on them. I joined this forum not because I wanted to be a troll or convert people, I joined here because I enjoy talking with other Christians as well. Although you might not agree, I think we are all united in our Christian faith and these differences shouldn't separate us. The fact that you can't answer my question as well shows that you can't accept the Truth. This doesn't challenge anything in the Baptist doctrine, does it? So why should it be important to you?

[zealyouthguy]

Ah, see, that's where you went off track. Neither of those verses claim any such thing that she was a perpetual virgin. But you try to link the bible to some ancient catholic tradition with a simple transition of your paragraph.

See Paul said it was a sin for married folks to withhold sex from each other, except when they were in agreement and for a limited time. Otherwise it's defrauding the other partner of the fulfillment of the marriage commitment. Another reason, besides the obvious statement of the texts to illustrate that Jesus did in fact have brothers and sisters.

Now see on the issue of Joseph being his father... the bible ALWAYS is clear to call Mary his mother and to use Joseph's name... never any misunderstanding or slight innuendo by the scripture. God is specific with important doctrines like the virgin birth. He would have made sure to note if these brothers and sisters were other-than-flesh-and-blood.

In fact, that is why it was astounding that he said "who is my mother and my brethren".

Matthew 12:47-50 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.

Unless you of course somehow think that it wasn't really Mary there also, that it was a "spiritual" mother. It's really plain in scripture that Jesus had brother's and sister's and that Mary wasn't a perpetual virgin. Neither was she co-redemtrix. Those are simple heresies that Catholicism teaches in their worship of Mary.

Another difference is this: You always use the bible "first" as "AN" authority, where we believe the Bible is the One and Only FINAL AUTHORITY on all issues of life.

[Guest Guest]

Ah' date=' see, that's where you went off track. Neither of those verses claim any such thing that she was a perpetual virgin. But you try to link the bible to some ancient catholic tradition with a simple transition of your paragraph.[/quote']

Your right it is an ancient Tradition, it goes back to the very start of Christianity.



No he didn't, I know what passage you are talking, about I will discuss it if you want.



Did you listen to the other thing I said about there being no word for cousin in Aramaic? Also does the Bible not often refer to people as brothers and sisters who are not related.



God didn't write the Gospel of Luke. St. Luke did.

In fact, that is why it was astounding that he said "who is my mother and my brethren".



Catholics don't worship St. Mary, who told you that? Not all Catholics believe in the Co-Redemptrix either. Some do, some don't. How do you think that Christ would have been Incarnated if it was not for St. Mary?



Please show me where in the Bible that it says the KJV Bible is the only authority for teaching about God?

[zealyouthguy]

We can discuss I Corinthians 7 anytime you want, just start a thread.

God DID in fact inspire Luke to write every single word of Luke. All of the Bible is God's Words (literally)

As far as a sinless Mary and Sola Scriptura, you've been answered and refuted on those on other threads, so there is no real use rehashing those.

[Guest Guest]

We can discuss I Corinthians 7 anytime you want' date=' just start a thread.[/quote'] Maybe I will.



I didn't imply this, of course the Holy Spirit inspired St. Luke to right the Gospel of Luke, and Acts. My point was God did not say here St. Luke right this. St. Luke did his research, wrote about what he knew about and that's it. He evening says this himself.



I don't think there is. Unless you want to get into the meaning of the original Greed text, I won't argue St. Mary with you, however the Early Church Fathers didn't agree with you. Please show me one place where the Bible says the exact words "Bible Alone" or "Sola Scriptura".

[Jerry]

I didn't imply this' date=' of course the Holy Spirit inspired St. Luke to right the Gospel of Luke, and Acts. My point was God did not say here St. Luke right this. St. Luke did his research, wrote about what he knew about and that's it. He evening says this himself.[/quote']

The Bible teaches God inspired ALL of Scripture - He moved the Bible writers to write exactly what He wanted them to write.

2 Peter 1:21 For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.



Gladly:

2 Timothy 3:16-17 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.

If the Word of God makes us perfect (which means complete) and throughly (thoroughly) furnished, then that is all we need.

2 Peter 1:3-4 According as his divine power hath given unto us all things that pertain unto life and godliness, through the knowledge of him that hath called us to glory and virtue: Whereby are given unto us exceeding great and precious promises: that by these ye might be partakers of the divine nature, having escaped the corruption that is in the world through lust.

If the promises in the Bible are ALL we need for life and godliness, there certainly isn't any need for anything else.

These verses also teach that all our beliefs must line up with GOd's Word, or they must be rejected.

Acts 17:11 These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so.

Isaiah 8:20 To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them.

There are others.

[Guest Guest]

The Bible teaches God inspired ALL of Scripture - He moved the Bible writers to write exactly what He wanted them to write.

That was my point.

2 Timothy 3:16-17 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.

St. Paul merely says that all Scripture is good. However how do you know what Scripture is good? I meant where do you find the exact words "Bible Alone"? Because based on the "Sola Scriptura" doctrine, interpreting St. Paul's words like this is not just using the Bible.

2 Peter 1:3-4 According as his divine power hath given unto us all things that pertain unto life and godliness, through the knowledge of him that hath called us to glory and virtue: Whereby are given unto us exceeding great and precious promises: that by these ye might be partakers of the divine nature, having escaped the corruption that is in the world through lust.

If the promises in the Bible are ALL we need for life and godliness, there certainly isn't any need for anything else.

These verses also teach that all our beliefs must line up with GOd's Word, or they must be rejected.

Acts 17:11 These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so.

Isaiah 8:20 To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them.

There are others.

You act like I said the Bible shouldn't be used for teaching. Of course it should be used for teaching. I wanted to know where it said that nothing other than the KJV Bible is and should be used for teaching?

[John81]

If our Bible is the true, perfect Word of God (and it is), then anything that contradicts what is written within the Bible can't be true or from God.

[Guest Guest]

If our Bible is the true' date=' perfect Word of God (and it is), then anything that contradicts what is written within the Bible can't be true or from God.[/quote']

Yes, I know I agree with you. Could you please tell me why you use the KJV Bible? I honestly have nothing wrong with it, I just use others for reading. I really like the eloquence in the way it sounds.

[John81]

Early on I read several different Bible translations but it wasn't until I began to read the KJB that the Holy Ghost really opened my eyes and understanding and I experienced growth in the Lord in an amazing way.

Another amazing thing was how I couldn't manage to memorize Scripture using the various other versions but when I tried to memorize verses in the KJB it came very naturally.

Of course there are other reasons why the KJB is the Bible to use, but my personal experience was enough for me. I didn't really find out about those other things until later.

[Amaryllis]

Ok. I'm sorry to write on this thread but I didn't want to create another topic for this subject because this title already refers to Christ as the Son of God. I heard recently from a Baptist pastor that believing women can see Christ as their husband. I know that Christ is the groom and the Church is the bride, not individuals. To me, this seems a little blasphemous, please correct me if I'm wrong but I see Christ as God, my Saviour, Redeemer, Master, I see Him in a position of authority as the Creator. There are many aspects in which I see Him, but this 'husband' role never occured to me and I feel this is highly disrespectful to God, to think of Him in such a way.

Please, point me to some Scripture verses relating to this subject because I do not know if this statement would be acceptablet i.e. Christ being considered as a husband to a Christian woman.