Freethought & Rationalism Archive

godfry n. glad · 08-09-2002, 01:23 PM

Intensity did post:

Quote:

From The Catholic Encyclopaedia, the following List indicates the early church fathers who embraced the doctrine of Mary's perpetual virginity

St. Irenaeus (III, 21; see Eusebius, H.E., V, viii),
Origen (Adv. Cels., I, 35),
Tertullian (Adv. Marcion., III, 13; Adv. Jud�os, IX),
St. Justin (Dial. con. Tryph., 84),
St. John Chrysostom (Hom. v in Matth., n. 3; in Isa., VII, n. 5);
St. Epiphanius (H�r., xxviii, n. 7),
Eusebius (Demonstrat. ev., VIII, i),
Rufinus (Lib. fid., 43),
St. Basil (in Isa., vii, 14; Hom. in S. Generat. Christi, n. 4, if St. Basil be the author of these two passages),
St. Jerome and Theodoretus (in Isa., vii, 14),
St. Isidore (Adv. Jud�os, I, x, n. 3),
St. Ildefonsus (De perpetua virginit. s. Mari�, iii).

Its no wonder the Antiquities 20 reference has been largely ignored.

Hmmm...Yet it seems that each and every one of them ignored the even earlier sources (reputedly) in the gospels. See:

Mark 3
Matthew 12:16
Luke 8:19-21
John 2:12
John 7:3
Acts 1:14

I guess it must be another miracle to maintain one's virginity after repeatedly bearing children.
It seems the early church fathers were not so far from our present believers in selecting what scripture they chose to believe and what dogma to perpetuate, regardless of what any other documents might say.

I also was of the understanding that Origen refers to the "called the Christ" reference in Josephus' _Antiquities of the Jews_. What you are saying is either Origen did not believe what Josephus had written (assuming what we have in modern translations is an accurate rendering) or the meaning of the term "brother" in the cite meant something other than "male sibling". Is that right?

godfry n. glad

godfry n. glad · 08-09-2002, 01:33 PM

Tristan Scott did write:

Quote:

Why would anything about Jesus, during his lifetime, have been on anyone's radar screen. For all we know he was strictly small potatoes during his lifetime. He may have had a few hundred followers at most, probably more like dozens, and those were from the relatively "backwater" area of Galilee. I think it is also important to realize that, unlike modern times, written word was a rarity, and in a place like Galilee it was doubly so.

No, I think if Jesus existed at all, it shouldn't be surprising that there was nothing written about him except what was written by his followers.

Well, Josephus wrote a fair amount about some fairly obscure actors on the Judean stage during those times...why wouldn't he have mentioned some itinerant healer who had crowds of followers?

So, I guess you're saying that the gospels are basically unreliable pieces of religious literature that have embellished the putative teaching career of some piddling unknown faith healer with all sorts of outrageous fabrications, right? That's if they didn't invent him from whole cloth.

godfry n. glad

Tristan Scott · 08-09-2002, 02:41 PM

Quote:

I guess it must be another miracle to maintain one's virginity after repeatedly bearing children.

It could also be a metaphorical term. I've read that among some 1st c. Jewish sects that it was a tradition to call the bride a virgin until the marriage was consumated whether she was a virgin or not. According to this tradition the longer the couple held out, the longer the bride held on to her "virginity" the better.

Tristan Scott · 08-09-2002, 02:54 PM

Quote:

Well, Josephus wrote a fair amount about some fairly obscure actors on the Judean stage during those times...why wouldn't he have mentioned some itinerant healer who had crowds of followers?

Maybe he did. Isn't that the topic?

Quote:

So, I guess you're saying that the gospels are basically unreliable pieces of religious literature that have embellished the putative teaching career of some piddling unknown faith healer with all sorts of outrageous fabrications, right? That's if they didn't invent him from whole cloth.

No, I don't think I said that, but, yes I do think they are embellished. The virgin birth and the raising from the dead, not to mention all the magic and miracles; they are exactly what one would expect from a 1st century messiah. I think there was a man, maybe called Yeshua maybe something else, who was a preacher, or maybe just a stand-up sage, in Galilee. I think he developed a modest, but fervent following. I think after he died he became the mythical person that we now know as Jesus H. Christ.

Ted Hoffman · 08-12-2002, 05:36 AM

God fried gladly
It seems the early church fathers were not so far from our present believers in selecting what scripture they chose to believe and what dogma to perpetuate, regardless of what any other documents might say.
In retrospect, no - I have explained below.

I also was of the understanding that Origen refers to the "called the Christ" reference in Josephus' _Antiquities of the Jews_. What you are saying is either Origen did not believe what Josephus had written (assuming what we have in modern translations is an accurate rendering) or the meaning of the term "brother" in the cite meant something other than "male sibling". Is that right?
The main reason is that they reasoned that if Joseph married another woman after Mary's alleged pregrancy, his children would be christs "brothers".
Thus Mary would still remain a virgin. Even as Jesus' brothers multiplied.

So, I guess you're saying that the gospels are basically unreliable pieces of religious literature that have embellished the putative teaching career of some piddling unknown faith healer with all sorts of outrageous fabrications, right? That's if they didn't invent him from whole cloth.
Why did Jesus have to walk on water?

Peter Kirby · 08-12-2002, 05:59 AM

Why did Jesus have to walk on water?

To get to the other side!

best,
Peter Kirby

godfry n. glad · 08-12-2002, 07:26 AM

gng:
I also was of the understanding that Origen refers to the "called the Christ" reference in Josephus' _Antiquities of the Jews_. What you are saying is either Origen did not believe what Josephus had written (assuming what we have in modern translations is an accurate rendering) or the meaning of the term "brother" in the cite meant something other than "male sibling". Is that right?

In Density:
The main reason is that they reasoned that if Joseph married another woman after Mary's alleged pregrancy, his children would be christs "brothers".
Thus Mary would still remain a virgin. Even as Jesus' brothers multiplied.

gng:

So, are you suggesting that Joseph and Mary were not married? That Jesus was a bastard? Or, that Joseph divorced Mary and married someone else? Or, that Joseph took a second wife? Or, third wife?

Please provide the source citation supporting the second wife for Joseph.

godfry n. glad

Ted Hoffman · 08-12-2002, 07:57 AM

Peter Kirby
Intensity Why did Jesus have to walk on water?
Kirby To get to the other side!

The other side of what?

God Fry n glad
So, are you suggesting that Joseph and Mary were not married? That Jesus was a bastard? Or, that Joseph divorced Mary and married someone else? Or, that Joseph took a second wife? Or, third wife?

Please provide the source citation supporting the second wife for Joseph.
Calm down. I dont appreciate your tone.
First second wife of Joseph theory seems a rather common, though not very popular concept for example: <a href="http://www.cathtruth.com/catholicbible/evervirg.htm" target="_blank">This catholic site</a> says:

Quote:

According to the apocryphal Gospels of James, Matthew and Peter, and according to some Greek Fathers, the "brethren" were the children of Joseph from a previous marriage

Others have suggested that they were kids of Marys sister:
St. Jeromes assertion was:

Quote:

"Suppose that the Brethren of the Lord were Joseph’s sons by another wife. But we understand the Brethren of the Lord to be not the sons of Joseph, but cousins of the Saviour, the sons of Mary, his mother’s sister."

from Catholic Scripture Manuals

You can check. <a href="http://www.theworkofgod.org/Library/Apologtc/R_Haddad/4dgmMary.htm" target="_blank">The Four Dogmas of the Blessed Virgin Mary</a> for more information.

For the record, I really dont give a rats ass what the church fathers thought about the virgin Mary and James brother of Jesus.

[ August 12, 2002: Message edited by: Intensity ]</p>

godfry n. glad · 08-12-2002, 01:33 PM

gng (posted earlier):
Please provide the source citation supporting the second wife for Joseph.

Intenshitty:
"Calm down. I dont appreciate your tone."

gng:
I'm calm. It just seems that you're confused.
In your earlier post, you asserted:

Quote:

The main reason is that they reasoned that if Joseph married another woman after Mary's alleged pregrancy, his children would be christs "brothers". Thus Mary would still remain a virgin. Even as Jesus' brothers multiplied.

You then responded with all this dreck about the "brothers" of Jesus being half-siblings because Joseph had children by an _earlier_ wife, or that those "brothers" were actually cousins.

In other words, you really don't know what you're blathering on about, do you?

Please note that in your earlier post that "Joseph married another woman AFTER Mary's alleged pregnancy..." That's what engendered my questions.

Once you get your story straight, stick to it....

As for not appreciating my tone...well, just consider it mutual.

godfry n. glad

Peter Kirby · 08-12-2002, 02:02 PM

Intensity Why did Jesus have to walk on water?
Kirby To get to the other side!
Intensity The other side of what?

The other side of the water? Hey, why not?

Maybe we need some UBB code for marking attempts at levity. I will discuss it with the other moderators and produce a 50-page analysis with histograph and cost-benefit ratios along with documentation of the many sad trajedies throughout history that have stemmed from bad puns and poorly conceived punchlines.

best,
Peter Kirby

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

08-12-2002, 05:36 AM	#25
Ted Hoffman Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2001 Location: "" Posts: 3,863	God fried gladly It seems the early church fathers were not so far from our present believers in selecting what scripture they chose to believe and what dogma to perpetuate, regardless of what any other documents might say. In retrospect, no - I have explained below. I also was of the understanding that Origen refers to the "called the Christ" reference in Josephus' _Antiquities of the Jews_. What you are saying is either Origen did not believe what Josephus had written (assuming what we have in modern translations is an accurate rendering) or the meaning of the term "brother" in the cite meant something other than "male sibling". Is that right? The main reason is that they reasoned that if Joseph married another woman after Mary's alleged pregrancy, his children would be christs "brothers". Thus Mary would still remain a virgin. Even as Jesus' brothers multiplied. So, I guess you're saying that the gospels are basically unreliable pieces of religious literature that have embellished the putative teaching career of some piddling unknown faith healer with all sorts of outrageous fabrications, right? That's if they didn't invent him from whole cloth. Why did Jesus have to walk on water?

08-12-2002, 05:59 AM	#26
Peter Kirby Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: the reliquary of Ockham's razor Posts: 4,035	Why did Jesus have to walk on water? To get to the other side! best, Peter Kirby

08-12-2002, 07:26 AM	#27
godfry n. glad Banned Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: portland, oregon, usa Posts: 1,190	gng: I also was of the understanding that Origen refers to the "called the Christ" reference in Josephus' _Antiquities of the Jews_. What you are saying is either Origen did not believe what Josephus had written (assuming what we have in modern translations is an accurate rendering) or the meaning of the term "brother" in the cite meant something other than "male sibling". Is that right? In Density: The main reason is that they reasoned that if Joseph married another woman after Mary's alleged pregrancy, his children would be christs "brothers". Thus Mary would still remain a virgin. Even as Jesus' brothers multiplied. gng: So, are you suggesting that Joseph and Mary were not married? That Jesus was a bastard? Or, that Joseph divorced Mary and married someone else? Or, that Joseph took a second wife? Or, third wife? Please provide the source citation supporting the second wife for Joseph. godfry n. glad

08-12-2002, 02:02 PM	#30
Peter Kirby Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: the reliquary of Ockham's razor Posts: 4,035	Intensity Why did Jesus have to walk on water? Kirby To get to the other side! Intensity The other side of what? The other side of the water? Hey, why not? Maybe we need some UBB code for marking attempts at levity. I will discuss it with the other moderators and produce a 50-page analysis with histograph and cost-benefit ratios along with documentation of the many sad trajedies throughout history that have stemmed from bad puns and poorly conceived punchlines. best, Peter Kirby

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.