Question to Christians about Jesus's family

2456

Comments

  • chopitdownchopitdown Posts: 2,222
    it sets precedent for a church where priests cannot marry and power within the church is restricted to men and men alone. it ensures that sex is carefully controlled and less pure than not having sex like jesus (apparently) didnt. it subtly preserves the idea that women are impure and that resisting their seductive and sinful charms is admirable (adam's apple and jesus refusing to stick it in one).

    I guess I approach it from a non-catholic view whereas, if memory serves you have a catholic background where that is much more prevalent.

    I think priests should marry and power shouldn't be soley in the hands of males, but I'm not catholic so my opinion doesn't really mean a whole lot.
    make sure the fortune that you seek...is the fortune that you need
  • catefrancescatefrances Posts: 29,003
    i dont think they had artificial insemination perfected in jesus' time. perhaps im wrong though.

    i never said they did. just pointing out that it is possible to become pregnant without sexual intercourse.
    hear my name
    take a good look
    this could be the day
    hold my hand
    lie beside me
    i just need to say
  • soulsingingsoulsinging Posts: 13,202
    chopitdown wrote:
    I guess I approach it from a non-catholic view whereas, if memory serves you have a catholic background where that is much more prevalent.

    I think priests should marry and power shouldn't be soley in the hands of males, but I'm not catholic so my opinion doesn't really mean a whole lot.

    what denomination are you? do you have female priests?
  • fanch75fanch75 Posts: 3,734
    surferdude wrote:
    You have asked many different questions and some very confusing ones.

    My understanding is that Jesus is the son of God. Mary was his earth mom but in a DNA type way Jesus was not related to Mary at all. Mary was the vessel chosen to carry God's child, a surrogate mother in a way.

    Given this, I don't think Jesus had any blood brothers. He may have had step brothers, birthed by Mary and fathered by Joseph. This would not alter my faith in any way. If this indeed happened and was covered up it would not alter my faith. However it would be another instance where I think the people involved in the cover up made poor choices.

    Any cover up that may have (or may not have) occured is immaterial to Jesus and God.

    Perfect. Well said.
    Do you remember Rock & Roll Radio?
  • KannKann Posts: 1,146
    On the brother thing, I disagree with Jesus having brothers, step or blood. Catholic prayers are dedicated to virgin Mary :
    1 - That doesn't make sense if she had children "the normal way" later on.
    2 - If I'm not mistaken christian faith stipulates giving birth is a reminder of the original sin. So if a woman gives birth (again "the normal way") she taints herself with a sin and this is incoherent with the "pure" nature of Mary.
    (then again this is true for catholics, I have no idea for other confessions).
    I think James was a metaphorical brother, perhaps a cousin?
  • Solat13Solat13 Posts: 6,996
    it sets precedent for a church where priests cannot marry and power within the church is restricted to men and men alone. it ensures that sex is carefully controlled and less pure than not having sex like jesus (apparently) didnt. it subtly preserves the idea that women are impure and that resisting their seductive and sinful charms is admirable (adam's apple and jesus refusing to stick it in one).

    Uh, St. Peter the first Pope and the "Rock upon which I will build my church on Earth" was married. So why would the Church leave out the part about Jesus being married, but leave in the part about Peter being married. Many of the apostles were married and the whole priests being forced to be celibate didn't come around until the Middle Ages.
    - Busted down the pretext
    - 8/28/98
    - 9/2/00
    - 4/28/03, 5/3/03, 7/3/03, 7/5/03, 7/6/03, 7/9/03, 7/11/03, 7/12/03, 7/14/03
    - 9/28/04, 9/29/04, 10/1/04, 10/2/04
    - 9/11/05, 9/12/05, 9/13/05, 9/30/05, 10/1/05, 10/3/05
    - 5/12/06, 5/13/06, 5/27/06, 5/28/06, 5/30/06, 6/1/06, 6/3/06, 6/23/06, 7/22/06, 7/23/06, 12/2/06, 12/9/06
    - 8/2/07, 8/5/07
    - 6/19/08, 6/20/08, 6/22/08, 6/24/08, 6/25/08, 6/27/08, 6/28/08, 6/30/08, 7/1/08
    - 8/23/09, 8/24/09, 9/21/09, 9/22/09, 10/27/09, 10/28/09, 10/30/09, 10/31/09
    - 5/15/10, 5/17/10, 5/18/10, 5/20/10, 5/21/10, 10/23/10, 10/24/10
    - 9/11/11, 9/12/11
    - 10/18/13, 10/21/13, 10/22/13, 11/30/13, 12/4/13
  • THCTHC Posts: 525
    this thread kinda reminds me of what i don't like about organized religion.

    Honestly..i'm a Christian...and I don't care where or how Christ came about...but i do know he changed history more then any man ever, and the only person who could raise people from the dead, heal the sick, make the blind see, etc. (if he did not do these things i can not imagine a man w/ a 3 year public life of no social rank, in an age of no tv or internet...how that man could become so famous...so fast.)
    He preached a message...a set of rules to live your life by...a way to think. That is the importance of the man. The dotting of the i's and the crossing of the t's has been what has distracted the masses from his message for far too long, and caused the churches to splinter.
    “Kept in a small bowl, the goldfish will remain small. With more space, the fish can grow double, triple, or quadruple its size.”
    -Big Fish
  • Solat13 wrote:
    Uh, St. Peter the first Pope and the "Rock upon which I will build my church on Earth" was married. So why would the Church leave out the part about Jesus being married, but leave in the part about Peter being married. Many of the apostles were married and the whole priests being forced to be celibate didn't come around until the Middle Ages.

    Because they didn't want to believe that Jesus could possibly have been a human being. It would spoil the whole story otherwise!
    "We have to change the concept of patriotism to one of “matriotism” — love of humanity that transcends war. A matriarch would never send her own children off to wars that kill other people’s children." Cindy Sheehan
    ---
    London, Brixton, 14 July 1993
    London, Wembley, 1996
    London, Wembley, 18 June 2007
    London, O2, 18 August 2009
    London, Hammersmith Apollo (Ed solo), 31 July 2012
    Milton Keynes Bowl, 11 July 2014
    London, Hammersmith Apollo (Ed solo), 06 June 2017
    London, O2, 18 June 2018
    London, O2, 17 July 2018
    Amsterdam, Afas Live (Ed solo), 09 June 2019
    Amsterdam, Afas Live (Ed solo), 10 June 2019



  • CollinCollin Posts: 4,931
    THC wrote:
    this thread kinda reminds me of what i don't like about organized religion.

    Honestly..i'm a Christian...and I don't care where or how Christ came about...but i do know he changed history more then any man ever, and the only person who could raise people from the dead, heal the sick, make the blind see, etc. (if he did not do these things i can not imagine a man w/ a 3 year public life of no social rank, in an age of no tv or internet...how that man could become so famous...so fast.)

    It has happened before.
    THANK YOU, LOSTDAWG!


    naděje umírá poslední
  • Solat13Solat13 Posts: 6,996
    Because they didn't want to believe that Jesus could possibly have been a human being. It would spoil the whole story otherwise!

    Catholics teach that Jesus is both human and God so if they didn't want to believe that he is human - they probably need to go back to the drawing board and rethink almost 2000 years of teaching that fundamental fact ... lol

    Jesus suffers through such human desires as being tempted by the devil in the desert and questioning his Father if he really has to go through with the plan as it is intended (the crucifixion). Being portrayed as someone who is tempted and wants to avoid pain and suffering seems pretty human in my opinion.
    - Busted down the pretext
    - 8/28/98
    - 9/2/00
    - 4/28/03, 5/3/03, 7/3/03, 7/5/03, 7/6/03, 7/9/03, 7/11/03, 7/12/03, 7/14/03
    - 9/28/04, 9/29/04, 10/1/04, 10/2/04
    - 9/11/05, 9/12/05, 9/13/05, 9/30/05, 10/1/05, 10/3/05
    - 5/12/06, 5/13/06, 5/27/06, 5/28/06, 5/30/06, 6/1/06, 6/3/06, 6/23/06, 7/22/06, 7/23/06, 12/2/06, 12/9/06
    - 8/2/07, 8/5/07
    - 6/19/08, 6/20/08, 6/22/08, 6/24/08, 6/25/08, 6/27/08, 6/28/08, 6/30/08, 7/1/08
    - 8/23/09, 8/24/09, 9/21/09, 9/22/09, 10/27/09, 10/28/09, 10/30/09, 10/31/09
    - 5/15/10, 5/17/10, 5/18/10, 5/20/10, 5/21/10, 10/23/10, 10/24/10
    - 9/11/11, 9/12/11
    - 10/18/13, 10/21/13, 10/22/13, 11/30/13, 12/4/13
  • cornnifercornnifer Posts: 2,130
    you mean evidence like the evidence that scientifically virgins don't have babies... that you've got to get laid to have kids? i suppose what you mean is you're not aware of any bible stories contradicting that. as far as revisionist history, the new testament is the greatest example of revisionist history ever written. and the great part is its devotees are willfully ignorant about it.

    Thanks for the "birds and bees" talk, Souls. You mean the Stork didn't drop me off? ;)
    As a Christian who has no problem with te idea of the virgin birth, and a father with three children, none of which were immaculately concieved, i know how babies are concieved. What you are doing though, is completely ruling out the possibility of the supernatural. Were talking about God, here. i know many here have no faith in God whatsoever, but that isn't the point. If in fact God designed and created the Universe and the people in it, then certainly that same God could will a woman pregnant with divine child. Naturally speaking, that doesn't happen. You're right. But we're talking about the supernatural. Furthermore. it is not intellectually valid to insist God does not exist because he is said to have done things supernaturally that don't happen naturally, because if God does exist, certainly he is capable of such things.
    "When all your friends and sedatives mean well but make it worse... better find yourself a place to level out."
  • sorry repeat post = deleted!
    "We have to change the concept of patriotism to one of “matriotism” — love of humanity that transcends war. A matriarch would never send her own children off to wars that kill other people’s children." Cindy Sheehan
    ---
    London, Brixton, 14 July 1993
    London, Wembley, 1996
    London, Wembley, 18 June 2007
    London, O2, 18 August 2009
    London, Hammersmith Apollo (Ed solo), 31 July 2012
    Milton Keynes Bowl, 11 July 2014
    London, Hammersmith Apollo (Ed solo), 06 June 2017
    London, O2, 18 June 2018
    London, O2, 17 July 2018
    Amsterdam, Afas Live (Ed solo), 09 June 2019
    Amsterdam, Afas Live (Ed solo), 10 June 2019



  • THCTHC Posts: 525
    Collin wrote:
    It has happened before.

    yeah? by who?
    “Kept in a small bowl, the goldfish will remain small. With more space, the fish can grow double, triple, or quadruple its size.”
    -Big Fish
  • CollinCollin Posts: 4,931
    THC wrote:
    yeah? by who?

    I don't know... Heracles? :)

    All I'm saying is it's not so surprising that somebody became famous fast. And it didn't happen all that fast either, it took a while before the Bible was written so lot's of time for exaggeration, wonderful stories... It doesn't mean it happened.

    I'm not saying it didn't happen, though, I just don't think it happened.
    THANK YOU, LOSTDAWG!


    naděje umírá poslední
  • soulsingingsoulsinging Posts: 13,202
    Solat13 wrote:
    Uh, St. Peter the first Pope and the "Rock upon which I will build my church on Earth" was married. So why would the Church leave out the part about Jesus being married, but leave in the part about Peter being married. Many of the apostles were married and the whole priests being forced to be celibate didn't come around until the Middle Ages.

    becos peter was already flawed and so were all the apostles. but jesus, the perfect one, didnt get his groove on and none of us are supposed to. but it's something the priests will forgive us for doing if we ask nicely and dont fuck anyone but our spouse.
  • fanch75fanch75 Posts: 3,734
    becos peter was already flawed and so were all the apostles. but jesus, the perfect one, didnt get his groove on and none of us are supposed to. but it's something the priests will forgive us for doing if we ask nicely and dont fuck anyone but our spouse.

    That's pretty harsh, bro
    Do you remember Rock & Roll Radio?
  • soulsingingsoulsinging Posts: 13,202
    cornnifer wrote:
    Thanks for the "birds and bees" talk, Souls. You mean the Stork didn't drop me off? ;)
    As a Christian who has no problem with te idea of the virgin birth, and a father with three children, none of which were immaculately concieved, i know how babies are concieved. What you are doing though, is completely ruling out the possibility of the supernatural. Were talking about God, here. i know many here have no faith in God whatsoever, but that isn't the point. If in fact God designed and created the Universe and the people in it, then certainly that same God could will a woman pregnant with divine child. Naturally speaking, that doesn't happen. You're right. But we're talking about the supernatural. Furthermore. it is not intellectually valid to insist God does not exist because he is said to have done things supernaturally that don't happen naturally, because if God does exist, certainly he is capable of such things.

    im not saying it isn't possible nor ruling out divine intervention. i happen to think it unlikely, but that's another matter. i was simply pointing out that him saying there is no "evidence" against it is a ridiculous statement becos there is plenty of evidence against it and the only evidence supporting it comes from the bible. it's just a logical and argumentative fallacy is all. i dont like people asserting biblical stories as scientific or historical fact. it does not mean they aren't true, or that belief in them is irrational, just that it's not grounds to say "see, no evidence!"
  • soulsingingsoulsinging Posts: 13,202
    fanch75 wrote:
    That's pretty harsh, bro

    how so? it's how the system operates. jesus resists all temptation. we can't, but they'll forgive us for having that dirty sex stuff becos we're only human and cant be as perfect and sexless as jesus or a priest.
  • THCTHC Posts: 525
    how so? it's how the system operates. jesus resists all temptation. we can't, but they'll forgive us for having that dirty sex stuff becos we're only human and cant be as perfect and sexless as jesus or a priest.

    don't forget soulsinging...that Jesus when he was on earth hung out w/ the lowly people of society (the people who were looked down on for their sins- prostitutes...tax collectors...leapers (who supposedly did something bad to get that disease).

    Jesus recognized human temptation...and forgave it. He did not expect us to all be as holy as he was. he did not think this life was easy...and that we did not have bodies w/ urges. He knew this...yet still forgave people. he did not judge them to be horrible. most of these people were his friends. he even forgave the man who betrayed him.

    the Jesus I believe in...is not the one who points the finger and condems (i believe that is the devil who tries to condem us). He is the one who is there to defend humans...in fact...one of his last words were..."Father...forgive them...for they know not what they do".

    I think the attitude of intolerance and judgement you talk about is what it has evolved into in many ways. Very similar to the way of intolerance and religious superiority that permeated in Jesus's age. that is the same hypocracy Jesus pointed out within the pharases. Jesus is a God of Love and forgiveness. His best human friend was Mary Magdalane...a supposed women of ill repute. He wants people to love one another. That is his main message. Not to Judge one another...but to Love one another.
    “Kept in a small bowl, the goldfish will remain small. With more space, the fish can grow double, triple, or quadruple its size.”
    -Big Fish
  • soulsingingsoulsinging Posts: 13,202
    THC wrote:
    don't forget soulsinging...that Jesus when he was on earth hung out w/ the lowly people of society (the people who were looked down on for their sins- prostitutes...tax collectors...leapers (who supposedly did something bad to get that disease).

    Jesus recognized human temptation...and forgave it. He did not expect us to all be as holy as he was. he did not think this life was easy...and that we did not have bodies w/ urges. He knew this...yet still forgave people. he did not judge them to be horrible. most of these people were his friends. he even forgave the man who betrayed him.

    the Jesus I believe in...is not the one who points the finger and condems (i believe that is the devil who tries to condem us). He is the one who is there to defend humans...in fact...one of his last words were..."Father...forgive them...for they know not what they do".

    I think the attitude of intolerance and judgement you talk about is what it has evolved into in many ways. Very similar to the way of intolerance and religious superiority that permeated in Jesus's age. that is the same hypocracy Jesus pointed out within the pharases. Jesus is a God of Love and forgiveness. His best human friend was Mary Magdalane...a supposed women of ill repute. He wants people to love one another. That is his main message. Not to Judge one another...but to Love one another.

    where did i fault jesus for it? i was simply pointing out how the church has abused it and why it is so important for them that jesus did not have a wife.
  • THCTHC Posts: 525
    you mean evidence like the evidence that scientifically virgins don't have babies... that you've got to get laid to have kids? i suppose what you mean is you're not aware of any bible stories contradicting that. as far as revisionist history, the new testament is the greatest example of revisionist history ever written. and the great part is its devotees are willfully ignorant about it.

    i don't know...maybe around this part...?

    don't discount Jesus because you disagree w/ how men have abused his teachings after his death.
    “Kept in a small bowl, the goldfish will remain small. With more space, the fish can grow double, triple, or quadruple its size.”
    -Big Fish
  • markymark550markymark550 Columbia, SC Posts: 5,158
    Kann wrote:
    On the brother thing, I disagree with Jesus having brothers, step or blood. Catholic prayers are dedicated to virgin Mary :
    1 - That doesn't make sense if she had children "the normal way" later on.
    2 - If I'm not mistaken christian faith stipulates giving birth is a reminder of the original sin. So if a woman gives birth (again "the normal way") she taints herself with a sin and this is incoherent with the "pure" nature of Mary.
    (then again this is true for catholics, I have no idea for other confessions).
    I think James was a metaphorical brother, perhaps a cousin?
    1 - If Jesus was her oldest son and was a virgin when she conceived him, she could still have the title Virgin Mary. All that would matter is that she conceived Jesus as a virgin, any other children of hers is immaterial.
    2 - It's not childbirth itself that is the reminder of original sin, it's the pain felt during childbirth. This still doesn't mean having a child is a sin and that she is tainting herself with a sin; the pain felt by Mary, and all women who give birth naturally, is just the punishment for the original sin.
  • fanch75fanch75 Posts: 3,734
    This still doesn't mean having a child is a sin and that she is tainting herself with a sin; the pain felt by Mary, and all women who give birth naturally, is just the punishment for the original sin.

    I never knew this. Is it considered sin then for the mother giving birth to take the epideral (sp?) in order to eliminate the pain?
    Do you remember Rock & Roll Radio?
  • surferdudesurferdude Posts: 2,057
    fanch75 wrote:
    I never knew this. Is it considered sin then for the mother giving birth to take the epideral (sp?) in order to eliminate the pain?
    It's in Genesis. Taking painkillers during childbirth shouldn't be a sin. I couldn't find it in the rules laid out for Jewish people in the Old Testament, It's not part of the Ten Commandments, not part of the two rulees as laid out by Jesus in the New Testament.

    On a related note, I couldn't find anywhere where it says it's a sin to take my fine girl out tonight and get loaded like a freight train.
    “One good thing about music,
    when it hits you, you feel to pain.
    So brutalize me with music.”
    ~ Bob Marley
  • miller8966miller8966 Posts: 1,450
    surferdude wrote:
    It's in Genesis. Taking painkillers during childbirth shouldn't be a sin. I couldn't find it in the rules laid out for Jewish people in the Old Testament, It's not part of the Ten Commandments, not part of the two rulees as laid out by Jesus in the New Testament.

    On a related note, I couldn't find anywhere where it says it's a sin to take my fine girl out tonight and get loaded like a freight train.

    getting loaded is looked down upon to an extent.
    America...the greatest Country in the world.
  • fanch75fanch75 Posts: 3,734
    surferdude wrote:
    loaded like a freight train.

    Kick ass. Nice GNR Appetite for Destruction reference.
    Do you remember Rock & Roll Radio?
  • surferdudesurferdude Posts: 2,057
    fanch75 wrote:
    Kick ass. Nice GNR Appetite for Destruction reference.
    It's Friday. Let the Crue and Gunners ring loud.
    “One good thing about music,
    when it hits you, you feel to pain.
    So brutalize me with music.”
    ~ Bob Marley
  • markymark550markymark550 Columbia, SC Posts: 5,158
    surferdude wrote:
    On a related note, I couldn't find anywhere where it says it's a sin to take my fine girl out tonight and get loaded like a freight train.
    It's not a sin to drink alcohol. The sin in going out and getting drunk is overindulgance. Without a Bible handy here at work, I'm not sure where it's stated, but it is in there. However, since I believe that God is compassionate and forgiving, he will forgive you for drinking too much every now and then.
  • soulsingingsoulsinging Posts: 13,202
    THC wrote:
    i don't know...maybe around this part...?

    don't discount Jesus because you disagree w/ how men have abused his teachings after his death.

    where does that part deny anything about jesus being a great man or even a messiah? im just saying that just becos the bible says so doesnt mean mary was a virgin when she was knocked up. furthermore, what do you care if i discount jesus or worship him?
  • soulsingingsoulsinging Posts: 13,202
    It's not a sin to drink alcohol. The sin in going out and getting drunk is overindulgance. Without a Bible handy here at work, I'm not sure where it's stated, but it is in there. However, since I believe that God is compassionate and forgiving, he will forgive you for drinking too much every now and then.

    why that but not for having sex with a man, marrying a man, having a baby out of wedlock, having an abortion, cheating on my wife, etc...?
Sign In or Register to comment.