Deep Dive into the Perpetual Virginity of Mary

We went into the historical argumentation regarding the perpetual virginity of Mary as it was presented in this video ( • The Perpetual Virginit... ) demonstrating that, in essence, anything can be proven by using this form of argumentation. Instead, we went into the Scriptures, started at the foundation, and moved up from there. Hopefully will be helpful in identifying other specious forms of argumentation as well.
All Dividing Line Highlights' video productions and credit belong to Alpha and Omega Ministries®. If this video interested you, please visit aomin.org/ or www.sermonaudio.com/go/336785 for more of A&O ministry's content

[@MrClawson99]

I dont understand this idea that she is somehow less awesome because she had sex with her husband. Mary is/was an amazing woman.

[@vaekkriinhart4347]

I don't get it either. I think there was a sect of people- even Christians- who had a type of belief system that anything in the natural realm of this world is not good; and this would include sex (even if married).. But as you basically said, it is not more honorable for a married woman to remain celibate. In fact, I would argue the opposite (if married). Shouldn't we worship Joseph for never having touched his own wife? No mere mortal is capable of such restraint!

[@with.the.y]

I argue if she withheld sex from Joseph it would be unkind of her and even scripture says to not withhold sex from your spouse. If anything, her being a virgin would make her more prone to lust, and certainly her husband as well. It makes no sense despite the fact that I’ve tried to bend over backwards in mental gymnastics to try to consider the Catholics view of a Virgin Mary and a perpetually sinless Mary. I just can’t accept it, knowing what I know of the Bible. I’ve tried to argue on behalf of Catholics only to keep finding myself saying, this cannot be right.

[@thomassandoval8025]

On one oontz Oooo😊😊😊​@@vaekkriinhart4347

[@AgeDeo2009]

Mary was not less awesome because she had sexual relations with Joseph after giving birth to Jesus Christ (Matt. 1: 24-25). She was actually a very good example of humility and obedience to God. But this matter has to be pointed out because this has been used by the Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox Churches to mislead many people to a false doctrine, leading them to commit idolatry. Thank you, Dr. White, for this presentation.

[@cbtam4333]

I think you are on to something regarding a belief system that was anti-materialist to the point of discouraging sex within marriage. I believe there is historical evidence that such views had started to grow by the mid- to late 2nd century, which is when the first documents we have asserting the perpetual virginity of Mary appear in the historical record. It’s probably not a coincidence.

[@Abinitio777]

TY James - always appreciated.

[@deniemarie5010]

This is excellent. Thank you.✝️📖🙏🤍

[@ciaran13786]

‘adelph͡ós’, the Greek word for ‘brother’ etymologically means: ‘from the same womb’. From wiktionary: ‘equivalent to ἁ- (ha-, copulative prefix) +‎ δελφύς (delphús, “womb”).’ ‘delp͡hús’ in Greek means: womb. LSJ, the standard classical greek lexicon defines ‘adelp͡hós’ as primarily meaning: ‘a brother from the same mother’ as does the 3rd edition of BDAG, the standard New-Testament Koine lexicon.

[@sjappiyah4071]

Excellent, thanks for the source

[@duckymomo7935]

Also prototokos is first born implying there were other siblings If it had been first born + only child then monogenes should be used

[@saintejeannedarc9460]

No way. It still baffles me, that there are so many references to Jesus' siblings, yet the Catholics and Orthodox double down and just say, nope, we won't believe it. Mary was a perpetual virgin and we can't err, so we''ll just keep claiming that we don't err. How blind, and are they even being honest?

[@caldylangoss2287]

Nice work

[@glenn212now]

@@saintejeannedarc9460 If you were Joseph and an angel appeared to you and said it’s ok to marry Mary because she’s about to give birth to the Son of God, the Savior of all mankind, do you honestly believe that he would EVER even think about having sex with her???????? The Catholics have this one right. The references to brothers and sisters in the Bible are being incorrectly translated.

[@dylanmilks]

Great explanation. Thank you for addressing this issue.

[@blakeroy6797]

Annnnnddddd this is why I love James White. Bcuz he’s honest and sincere…. And that’s of God

[@mjramirez6008]

yes, if he doesn't know any better then good for him for being honest... but somehow I suspect he knows better... I like the guy though

[@Ineedtruth1]

He’s not being honest though, because he’s not telling you that the same word for brothers is also used in Matt 5:22-24 and Matthew 7:3-5 where nobody believes that the text is only referring to brothers who were born from the same womb.. So he’s telling you that the ONLY valid interpretation is that they’re half brothers FROM HIS MOTHER (as opposed to step brothers from Joseph from a former marriage) when the word is used to refer to multiple different types of “brothers” who don’t even necessarily need to be biological relatives in other places in Scripture. His argument is dishonest at its core.

[@KnightFel]

@@Ineedtruth1not at all. It all depends on the context. Why is it such an insane inconcebible idea that Mary had sexual relations after giving birth to Christ and had more children? Man Catholics are crazy lost. It says Jesus had brothers and sisters. It says she was a virgin until Christ was born. What’s the big deal? She’s not allowed to have more children? Being married and staying virgin isn’t some super holy thing. Sex is holy too in marriage. The dogma of her perpetual virginity is a fundamental denial of the gospel anyway. These dogmas are insane.

[@Ineedtruth1]

@@KnightFel It’s not insane or inconceivable, it’s just not true either. Mary made a vow of virginity before she married Joseph. This is why when the angel Gabriel told her she would conceive and bear a son, as a woman who was betrothed, she asked “How can this be, as I do not know man?” Kinda a strange question for a woman who is betrothed to ask unless she has no intention of consummating the marriage.

[@Fassnight]

Lol what? ​@@Ineedtruth1 She was a virgin, that's why she said she hadn't known man. Goodness

[@MATEO22.31]

thanks Dr. James White 🙏

[@caldylangoss2287]

I am so grateful for this presentation

[@pluto4847]

I am thankful for God;s truth and He uses James White to reveal that truth. I just don't understand Catholics. They get so defensive when the truth is shown to them and sometimes even aggressive. Why can't people just accept truth as truth?

[@danielchery2911]

Thank God for men like James White. I have learned a lot with his debates and by listening to his shows.

[@Weissguys6]

Thank you, Sir. So important. 🙏

[@isaacleillhikar4566]

Well, I'm not a believer in the doctrine, (its for other reasons though) but, its not first found in the gnostic gospels. Hippolytus said it. Even though it seems to me he's saying "ever in the past, virgin". Because of how he says "Holy pure ever Virgin" that sounds like "she was not a whore and was alwayse a Virgin when pregnant with Jesus before being together with Joseph.

[@BornAgainRN]

Those who believe in the PVM will counter that Jesus being Mary's "firstborn" (prototokos) in Luke 2:7 simply means "first out of the womb," not "first among others." Yet, he doesn't use "firstborn" in passages like Luke 7:12; 8:42, or 9:38 when speaking about only sons & daughters, who would also be "first out of the womb." Instead, Luke uses "monogenes" which means "single of its kind," which is also used in John 3:16 to refer to Jesus being the "only begotten Son" of God: "Now as He approached the gate of the city, a dead man was being carried out, the only [monogenes] son of his mother" (Luke 7:12) "for he had an only [monogenes] daughter" (Luke 8:42) "And a man from the crowd shouted, saying, 'Teacher, I beg You to look at my son, for he is my only [monogenes] boy"" (Luke 9:38) In Luke 2:7, he could have wrote, "And she gave birth to her only [monogenes] son," but instead wrote, "And she gave birth to her firstborn [prototokos]" indicating that Jesus was not her "only [monogenes] son," but simply the first out of her womb to mean "first among others" just as the writer of Hebrews 11:28 uses the term & not as "first & only child." If Luke meant "only child," he would have been consistent with the rest of his gospel & used "monogenes" in 2:7, but instead chose "prototokos" so there would no confusion what he meant.

[@billyr9162]

The reason they would use prototokon It's because a Jewish woman is normally expected to have many children. That was part of their culture. It was a standard part of many cultures at that time.

[@BornAgainRN]

@@billyr9162 excellent point!

[@BornAgainRN]

@@billyr9162 I would also add, for people who believe in the perpetual virginity of Mary, if they can demonstrate from scripture, either in the Old or New Testament where prototokos is used to describe an only child. As far as I know, I don’t think it’s ever use that way in the Bible.

[@billyr9162]

@@BornAgainRN It could be that way in Greek literature though.

[@BornAgainRN]

@@billyr9162 but the context is its use in the OT and NT. And there is not a single use of prototokos to describe an only child in Scripture.

[@jvlp2046]

I do not believe in FAITH ALONE (Sola Fide)... However, I agreed this time with James White on this matter of Blessed Mary's R.C.C. Dogmas that ANATHEMATIZE (Curse/Condemn) those who do not believe in it (reject it)... I concur with that... The "Perpetual Virginity" Dogma of Blessed Mary by the R.C.C. was a total denial of the ACTUAL NORMAL BIRTH of the Infant Christ Jesus in Bethlehem... "Blessed is the WOMB that bore THEE (Savior/Messiah)."... (ref. Luke 11:27-28)... The Bible never said, "Blessed is the WOMB that MIRACULOUSLY bore THEE (Savior)." Praise be to God in Christ Jesus...Amen.

[@shaulkramer7425]

Thank you James White... your arguments have convinced me that despite the failings of the human beings in it, the Catholic Church is still the true Apostolic Church. You have convinced me that the Marian Dogmas are not just myth, but rather an expression of God's grace to the Ark of the New Covenant. Thank you for helping me find my way home. I hope one day, your pride in your intellectual stance, and stubborn disobedience, will be pierced by the Holy Spirit, and you'll find your way Home as well. God bless you.

[@craigime]

How exactly did he convince you of that?

[@Nolongeraslave]

​@@craigime That is the stubbornness you find with these people. He cannot interact with what is being discussed but find a way to shame a Bible teacher and boast about a Church that allows serious, actually spiritual dangerous errors to thrive in the Church.

[@MrKnowitall934]

God bless you brother. I’m entering RCIA classes this fall. I still have questions, but I definitely have more respect to the Catholic Church than I had before. May your journey get you closer to the triune God, and may the Holy Mary, Queen of Heaven, pray for you and your spiritual journey. God bless.

[@Nolongeraslave]

@@MrKnowitall934 I did not know that I was interacting with someone who has already swam the Tiber! It was useless. But I have a question for you, what gospel did the Apostles preach by which we are saved?

[@MrKnowitall934]

@@Nolongeraslave lol how about you respond to the perpetual virginity? 😂 Anyway, I’m a little thrown off by the question. I would say the four gospels, especially the endings of Matthew and Mark where they were baptizing new followers to help them with salvation.

[@bobthebuildest6828]

it most certainly can when augustine argues that they do not mean what you assert the english means, because the english assumptions do not apply in the greek, agustine reading the original text understood this

[@thirdplace3973]

Ummm, Augustine could not read Greek bro. He was a Latinist. 🤦‍♂️

[@MilitantThomist]

Response coming soon. Thank you for this, I appreciate that you put time and effort into giving me push back. I am Anglican by the way, was a Reformed Baptist and have been listening to your show for years. -Christian B. Wagner

[@mjramirez6008]

link please

[@jotink1]

As Protestants we could say Mary remained a virgin and remain a Protestant but as a Catholicyou can not say she she did not remain a virgin and remain Catholic. When debating Catholics or Orthodox it is good to remember they have a lot more baggage to overcome. There whole tradition is part of scripture which is why the plain reading of scripture doesn't have the weight it should.

[@lhinton281]

@jotink1 What about these plain readings: “baptism now saves you,” “unless you eat my flesh and drink my blood,” “I give you the keys of the kingdom,” “you have fallen from grace,” “it seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us,” etc?

[@jotink1]

@@lhinton281 There is the plain reading within a context then there is taking scripture out of context and being overly literal which is what unitarians do with Jesus words to deny his deity. You mentioned Christ's words regarding eating his flesh. This is an example of taking something litetally and missing the context. . Out of interest if you are Orthodox can you deny the bread is Christ actual body and remain Orthodox?

[@lhinton281]

@@jotink1 so if Jesus said it is his body and blood, Paul said it was koinonia with his body and blood, and the church unanimously believed it became that, how can we deny the Teaching of Jesus through His Church?

[@jotink1]

@@lhinton281 You would need to prove that the Church unanimously believed it which is nearly impossible to prove. The idea that Jesus actually meant to eat his fkesh is not in scripturs from context. The idea that he actually thought the bread became his body in a literal sense is rediculous. Whatever the church saw the bread and wine to be if you think they unanimously thought it literally became his, body then you are reading your own tradition back into the Father's,. I can believe Jesus words that the bread is his body without actually believing it becomes his actual flesh.

[@jotink1]

What Jesus said and what those who heard him taught is found in scripture. These are the primary sources for and meaning of Jesus words and there is absolutely nothing within the context to suggest that the bread and wine became the literal body and blood of Christ. If you think the Church Fathers from the earliest thought that then you are reading them from your tradition. This is tradition which has sadly over the centuries not been corrected until after the reformation which even the first generation reformers didn't correct.

[@jacoboburke5821]

Very powerful stuff here. The inconsistency and error of the Catholic church must be brought into the light.

[@JonAdamsMinistries]

Totally agree!

[@ydocc3374]

It was believed before RCC.

[@courag1]

@@ydocc3374 Lots of things were believed before the RCC, but if you look at a Strong’s Concordance and compare the number of entries of Mary the Mother of Jesus and compare just to the word “Jesus”, “Mary”, appears about 20 times when it is specified as there were many women named “Mary”. “Jesus” is mentioned around 900 times, but include in that number these words “Lamb of God, Redeemer, Mediator, Lord, Savior, Son of God, Son of Man, Christ, Messiah, First and the Last … “ and I am sure I have not listed all possible, that number of references to Jesus would then be certainly, well over 1,000 times. The mother goddess was the most favorite goddess or god of the ancient world. When certain paganism was adopted into the church by Constantine, in came loads of pagan practices. So obviously Mary should be more honored than Semiramis, mother of Tammuz, wife of Nimrod, aka Osiris, Gilgamesh and loads of other names. Look in the Old Testament, you have Genesis 3:15 where the woman will bear the promised seed, which it is the seed which bruises the serpent’s head, not the woman, and you have Isaiah “behold a virgin shall conceive and bear a son”. But the promises about the coming of Messiah are many, these number in at least the 100s. Why is Mary more important than Jesus? If you look at the Rosary prayers, who is that prayer to? Whether Mary was a virgin forever or just until as the New Testament suggests, that she and Joseph had waited to consummate their marriage UNTIL the birth of Jesus, her first born son, then “FIRST BORN” has no meaning if He was her “only son”.

[@mrpsquared01]

Indeed there existed some corruption in the Church because it is made up of humans but it doesn't mean the doctrine was false. Are we to suppose that God is a liar when he said "the gates of hell shall not prevail against it"? Are we to suppose that God thought to Himself "oh these sinful people, I'm gonna start over. Here you go Martin Luther, you're gonna be my emissary for all time and you'll teach people what's what"?

[@bogiuliani553]

@@mrpsquared01 the church that wouldn’t have evil prevail over it is the entire body of those who believe in Jesus as Lord. Not the Roman Catholic Church. Don’t read you doctrine and theology into text.

[@marlusands4554]

Hey James White! WHEN ARE YOU GOING TO DEBATE SAM SHAMOUN???

[@annodomini7250]

A rude and ignorant man...not a chance. Tell Sam to clean up his language.

[@CRoadwarrior]

@@annodomini7250 Better yet, get his heart cleaned by Jesus, and the rest should follow.

[@annodomini7250]

@@CRoadwarrior I can't argue with that.

[@tophatt5706]

Another thing they believe is the resurrection is proof He beamed out. They'll say he left the tomb without moving the bolder the same way he left the womb. 😑

[@allisvanity...9161]

But the rock was rolled away?!

[@tophatt5706]

@@allisvanity...9161 The angel was witnessed moving it in mathew 28:2, after he had already left.

[@allisvanity...9161]

@@tophatt5706 I just checked, your right. When the Catholic goes to that, remind him that that was after Christ's body was glorified. Prior to the Resurrection, He had a normal human body.

[@tophatt5706]

@@allisvanity...9161 Bingo!!!

[@user-vj9qz3br6l]

That’s not official teaching and anyone who says so is wrong

[@hondotheology]

there's no reason for them to cling to this doctrine unless like some gnostic they want to keep Mary unstained by fleshly appetites and thereby worship her

[@fredrolinners8903]

Great point. Absolute holiness/purity is one of the reasons why God alone is to be worshiped (Revelation 15:4). The more certain people attribute holiness/puirty unto Mary the more reason they have to worship her.

[@JonAdamsMinistries]

@@fredrolinners8903 I like the human version of Mary more, gives a sinner more hope that God uses broken people!

[@firingallcylinders2949]

They will usually tell you they don't worship Mary. I work at a Catholic School and can confirm they do.

[@AndrewofVirginia]

Actually they think that it would've been inappropriate for Joseph to have sexual relations with the woman who had given birth to the God incarnate.

[@franciscoscaramanga9396]

@@AndrewofVirginia Wouldn't that also mean that it would be inappropriate to have sexual intercourse with a woman who has the indwelling Holy Spirit?

[@alexsantana3588]

Why doesn’t James White deal with my video on Luke 1:34?

[@Fassnight]

Who are you?

[@throwawaypt2throwawaypt2-xp8nx]

homie where did u come from

[@no3339]

This argument was also in the video he is responding to. Seems he skipped over it? Haven't watched all this yet so not sure, but....

[@jvlp2046]

God is ORDERLY and not confusion/chaos... God would not allow Blessed Mary and St. Joseph to commit the Vow of Celibacy freely while they are under OATH to God by the Sacrament of Matrimony or Marriage Vow... it would be UNHOLY to do the ACT of Celibacy while under their Marriage Vow... Take Note: ... before Angel Gabriel visited her to do the task offered to her voluntarily, she was already BETHROTAL (Jewish Pre-nuptial marriage) to St. Joseph... In his dream, the Angel told St. Joseph not to be afraid to TAKE (marry) Mary to be her lawful wife... and he ABIDED and did what he was told... Both of them have marriage duties to consummate their marriage vows and have children of their own... Only when Blessed Mary became the WIDOW of St. Joseph could she FREELY accept the Vow of Celibacy for she was already a FREE woman... and I believe, that was the right TIME that God had RESTORED her VIRGINITY before she died... to remind us ALL that a "VIRGIN MAIDEN" (Almah Betulah) gave birth to the Son of God/Christ Jesus in Bethlehem and not just a "Young Maiden/ Woman (Ha Almah) as prophesied by Prophet Isaiah... Facts and Truth, Biblically and logically speaking... Praise be to God in Christ ... Amen and Amen.

[@kolab5620]

I think that if they were cousins it would make sense for them to be there since extended family did stick together a lot in those days.

[@Fassnight]

Not like that.

[@jvlp2046]

I firmly believe that AFTER the birth of Christ Jesus in Bethlehem, the couple had their marital relationship consummated bearing their own biological children (Jesus' siblings)... When her husband Joseph died, that was the time God restored her VIRGINITY and she accepted the Vow of Celibacy freely until her death since she was no longer under the Marriage Vows. Why need to RESTORE her Virginity Eternally?... to remind Heaven and Earth (Humans and Angels), that not just A YOUNG MAIDEN (Ha Almah) Prophesied by Isaiah but A VIRGIN MAIDEN gave birth to the PREPARED BODY made by God for HIS Son, Christ Jesus in Bethlehem... (ref. Hebrews 10:5)... Amen.

[@jmathewkane5923]

Where were the siblings of Jesus when he was 12 years old in the temple ? Did Mary leave the 6 siblings at home? If they came afterward they would still be children during the ministry

[@Earthtime3978]

What did Jesus do in the missing years, from 12 years old in the temple till age 30? Same stuff.

[@glenn212now]

There were no siblings.

[@icemanred]

@@glenn212now The only reason you all are afraid of the truth is because it would call into question everything else you have believed and you can't handle that. It is what it is. Jesus had siblings. The context of the scriptures validate this. You hold to the tradition of men and not the truth of scriptures. The context of the scriptures do not make sense if it were talking about extended family. If it were talking about brothers as in kinsmen sharing the same national ancestry, those men would have called them brothers also. But they didn't. They specifically referred to them as Jesus's Mother and brothers (by name eve further establishing the same direct connection to their parents).

[@glenn212now]

@@icemanred Notnimg you can ever say will change my beliefs. I once went to the site of a Marian apparition and had a spiritual experience that cemented my beliefs forever.

[@anhgiangho]

@@Earthtime3978not same stuff. I don’t think Mary or Joseph alive to tell the teenage story. And obviously no siblings to tell either. So nope, He has no brothers and sisters

[@Fassnight]

Whenever I've gone over Maryology stuff with someone for the first time they think im making stuff up because it just seems so ridiculous 😅

[@Kevin-kc1xg]

I don't understand Scripture Alone. Isn't that unwittingly giving authority to the Catholic Church? Where did the Bible even come from?

[@deus_vult8111]

The Bible came from the holy men of God as they were inspired by the Holy Spirit. First part the Jews through the Old Testament and the recognition of the New Testament

[@14soccerplayer1]

Heres why scripture alone. Its God breathed. All other doctrine is not to be trusted the same way.

[@AndrewofVirginia]

@@14soccerplayer1 So, the issue here is knowing which books ARE Scripture and which AREN'T. How can this be determined with any degree of confidence by someone who, not only appeals to Scripture alone for ALL matters of faith and doctrine, but also it's a devoted presuppositionalist?

[@14soccerplayer1]

@@AndrewofVirginia simple. You look and see which fit and which dont.

[@drewmann856]

@@14soccerplayer1 How would you even know? You could just say “Church tradition”, but that would necessitate recognizing the legitimacy of the organized Church of the the 4-5th centuries.

[@karincampbell9289]

Is the word brother (when explaining Jesus' brothers) derived from either the Greek or Hebrew translation of blood brother, as opposed to spiritual brother?

[@thirdplace3973]

The unregenerate crowds speak of Christ’s brothers and sisters that they know. They aren’t believers and wouldn’t be using the word in a spiritual connotation.

[@icemanred]

I would add that if they were referred to in the spiritual sense, then Paul would not have separated them as "the Lord's brother" in Galatians 1:18-19. The context of the scriptures do not make sense if they are referencing spiritual brothers or even brothers as in having the same nationalistic ancestry.

[@Ineedtruth1]

No. It’s the same word that’s used when Peter asked Jesus “How many times must I forgive my brother, 7 times?” And it’s the same word that’s used when Jesus says “Why do you take the speck out of your brother’s eye when there’s a plank in your own eye?” And it’s the same word that’s used when Jesus taught that “If you are leaving your gift at the altar and remember that your brother has something against you, leave your gift at the altar and be reconciled to your brother and then come and offer your gift.” And when Jesus said, “Whoever does the will of my Father in Heaven, he is my brother and my sister and my mother.” Unsurprisingly, Protestants never insist that these verses can only refer to biological brothers from the same womb…. Only when we’re discussing the “brothers” of Jesus is that the only interpretation they allow for. It’s almost like heresy, when taking to its logical conclusion, destroys the whole faith and not just one part.

[@Ineedtruth1]

@@icemanred James, the Lord’s brother that Paul refers to is Jesus’ cousin. And we know this because of early writings of Church fathers that identify him as such. It makes a lot of sense for him to be referred to as the Lord’s “adelphos” when the word can also mean someone who shares a common ancestor.

[@thirdplace3973]

@@Ineedtruth1 Same word in English too. Because words only have meaning in the context in which they’ appear.

[@lupelo8819]

Matthew 1:16..And Jacob begat Joseph the 'HUSBAND OF MARY'.Vs.20..Behold,the angel of the Lord appeared unto Joseph in a dream,saying, Joseph, thou son of David, fear not to take unto thee Mary 'THY WIFE':Vs.24..Then Joseph being raised from sleep did as the angel of the Lord had bidden him, and took unto him 'HIS WIFE': And 'KNEW' ('SEXUAL INTERCOURSE') her not till she had brought forth her firstborn son:JOSEPH AND 'HIS WIFE' MARY WENT ON THEIR HONEYMOON!!

[@clinttrinity9862]

Mr white here says ( 8:30 ) Christians don’t use “brother and sister” (as we do with brothers in the faith) in the same way when mentioning other familial relations like father and mother, and don’t refer to non-parents as father or mother…. But Christ does. Using the same words as the passages White quotes in fact. After recalling the presence of Mary and the other women at the Lord's cross, St John relates: "When Jesus saw his mother, and the disciple whom he loved standing near, he said to his mother, 'Woman, behold, your son!' . Then he said to the disciple, 'Behold, your mother! '" (Jn 19:26-27). Mr white also apologizes for 1st generation reformers not taking on this issue for reasons at ( 23:00 or so). But he must forget that Martin Luther not just believed in the perpetual virgin,he wrote and used the defense of the syntactical use of “till” which white discusses. … so much for not making waves. Luther’s waves not enough? White’s own beloved Calvin said the following when refuting the 4th century heretic helvidius … (yes 4th century!) who held the view that Mary bore Jesus brothers … just as White believes… Calvin says of the heretic helvidius in “harmony of Matthew mark luke and John” (p107 of Pringle translation) “The inference helvidius drew is that Mary remained a virgin no longer than till her first birth, then afterward had more children by her husband Joseph, but NO JUST AMD WELL ROUNDED INFERENCE CAN BE MADE FEOM THESE WORDS AS TO WHAT TOOK OLACE AFTER CHRIST’s BIRTH.” Strong words for someone busy not making waves as a first generation reformer.

[@forgivemylaughterihaveacon2556]

The same word for brothers was used for lot and Abraham abs guess what James they were uncle and nephew.

[@dannymcmullan9375]

Nope. One is Hebrew. The other Greek. And the word for brother is used in distinction from the word relatives. That's how we know the scriptures are talking about actual brothers and not just cousins.

[@courag1]

At the most 20 verses that we can be sure refer to Mary the mother of Jesus. That certainly does not make Mary the main character in the Bible. Mary beats out Judas Iscariot by 4 verses. Perhaps he takes the overflow when Mary is too busy to hear Catholic prayers!

[@glenn212now]

Have you ever wondered what Jesus thinks when you write insults about his mother? I don’t think it’s a stretch to believe that the son of God loved his mother and would be hurt by so-called Christians who spend so much time trying to belittle Mary. Just something to think about.

[@icemanred]

@@glenn212now There is a difference in belittling Mary and rightly understanding her role in Christianity. You all have elevated Mary beyond what God ever did. You can call it veneration to make yourselves feel better, but it actually closer to worship. You pray to her to ask for intercession, which are only reserved for Jesus and the Holy Spirit. The praying the rosary is the repetitive prayers that Jesus said we should not do.

[@glenn212now]

Protestants always claim Catholics are worshipping Mary by praying the Rosary. It’s just not true. We pray the Rosary asking Mary to intercede for us. Just like when we all ask our friends to pray for us during tough times. As we say the prayers, it’s not just vein repetition, we are focusing on Christ’s life, his battles, his death and ultimate resurrection. Jesus himself learned and repeated the psalms. That certainly wasn’t vain repetition. If you choose to view Mary in a lesser way than we do, that’s your right. But just know that the majority of Catholics would never change their views on the Blessed Mother due to the criticism of Protestants. No way. I honestly think you guys should really focus your criticism and vitriol at the MAGA cult that is currently a serious threat to our democracy, our futures and our religious freedoms.

[@voyager7]

The passages contrasting brothers and disciples are impossible to take any other way than biological brothers. Catholics argue that "brothers" means a figure or metaphor for believers or disciples, but the contrast in these passages is plain and unambiguous.

[@annapennrose1158]

JESUS DID NOT HAVE BROTHERS - HERE IS WHY Matthew 13:55 Is he not the carpenter’s son? Is not His mother named Mary and His brothers James, Joseph, Simon, and Judas? BUT the 4 brothers are NOT uterine brothers. James the Lesser & Joseph are sons of Mary and Clopas also called Alphaeus. Matthew 27:56 Among them were Mary Magdalene and Mary the mother of James and Joseph, and the mother of the sons of Zebedee. Galatians 1:19 But I did not see any other of the Apostles, EXCEPT James the brother of the Lord. There are only 2 Apostles named James. 1) James the Greater who’s father is Zebedee - Matt 27:56 2) James the Lesser who’s father is Alphaeus also called Clopas - Luke 6:15 BINGO! The "other Mary" is the mother of James the Lesser AND Joseph and she is the wife of Clopas also called Alphaeus.

[@thedude4594]

The Bible says Jesus is the ONLY sinless person.

[@bman5257]

Umm, no it doesn’t.

[@bman5257]

And you yourself don’t believe that. Do aborted fetuses sin before they die?

[@jkdbuck7670]

@@bman5257 No. But as descendents of Adam, they have a sinful nature. It's like having muscles, but not using them yet.

[@bman5257]

@@jkdbuck7670 True, but the commenter above is still wrong under both conditions, the Bible never says Jesus was the only person to not sin nor does it say he was the only one without original sin.

[@tophatt5706]

@@jkdbuck7670 if I remember correctly, isn't that why him not having a natural conception so important?

[@jvlp2046]

Matthew 1:25... narrates that "he (Joseph - husband of Blessed Mary) KNEW (had marital sex) her not until she brought forth a SON and he (Joseph) called/named Him Jesus." The English word "KNEW or KNOWN" in the context of the Holy Scripture (Word of God) is a modest way to say "had Marital Sex."... nothing is CLEARER than this Biblical passage... However, since God took her VIRGINITY with her consent at a younger age (perhaps not even of legal age of 18 years old in our time), I firmly believe that God Almighty had RESTORED (gave back) Blessed Mary's Virginity before she died even after having other Biological Children from her husband Joseph... Nothing is Impossible with God if God wills it... When God takes something, God also gives it back... When God closed the Door, God also opened another Door... When God allowed the 1st Temple to be destroyed, God also allowed the 2nd Temple to be restored... This "VIRGINITY RESTORATION" of Blessed Mary falls under the SPOKEN/ORAL TRADITION of the early CHURCHES in Asia Minor of the 1st Century A.D. and not under the written/epistle Tradition taught by the Apostles of Christ... Blessed Mary is Spiritually Married to God, just like the CHURCH (male/female), but her literal body/flesh was not, that was why the Angel said to Joseph in his dream, not to be afraid to "TAKE" Mary his wife (flesh/body), and he obeyed God and TOOK her... and KNEW her only after she gave birth to a Son, which he named him Jesus (Yeshua)... This became the Roman Catholic Doctrine of "Perpetual Virginity of Blessed Mary," which I firmly believe is God's sole doing and not Blessed Mary's self-doing alone... Glory, Praise, and Thanks be to God in Christ Jesus... Amen and Amen...

[@icemanred]

Exegete the entirety of Matthew 1:25. You stopped at KNEW but left out the next words "UNTIL she brought forth a son...." If Matthew had stopped at "knew her not", then you might have a case for what you followed up with. However, the word "until" implies that "knew her not" was not the end and that something followed. For example, if I were to say "I'm not going to the store", that would be definitive and one would be right in assuming that I did not go to the store. However, if I were to say "I'm not going to the store until it stops raining", one would be right in assuming that I went to the store after the rain stopped.

[@jvlp2046]

​@@icemanred I firmly believe that AFTER the birth of Christ Jesus in Bethlehem, the couple had their marital relationship consummated bearing their own biological children (Jesus' siblings) when her husband Joseph died, that was the time God had restored her VIRGINITY and she accepted the Vow of Celibacy freely until her death since she was no longer under the Vows of Marriage... Why need to RESTORE her Virginity Eternally?... to remind Heaven and Earth (Humans and Angels), that not just A YOUNG MAIDEN (Ha Almah) Prophesied by Isaiah but A VIRGIN MAIDEN gave birth to the PREPARED BODY made by God for HIS Son, Christ Jesus in Bethlehem... (ref. Hebrews 10:5)... Amen.

[@icemanred]

@@jvlp2046 The prophecy about Mary was that the Messiah would be born of a virgin. Not that the virgin would remain a virgin or that her virginity would be restored. There is no text or scripture that supports this. Your statement goes against what Catholic dogma states and that is that Mary was a virgin before, during and after the birth of Jesus. This is wrong and is not supported by what we see in scripture.

[@shawnglass108]

James White is a hero of the faith. Brilliant and Fearless. Hopefully one day I’ll get to shake his hand and thank him for defending the truths of Christianity and for teaching me so much. So that I can defend these truths.

[@glenn212now]

Why do you feel like you have to "defend" anything? Leave people alone. If Catholics want to believe Mary was a perpetual virgin, how on Earth does that affect you? Jesus. Leave each other alone. We get to believe whatever we damn well want.

[@shawnglass108]

@@glenn212now, Why are you afraid to have your beliefs challenged? Better yet, why are you afraid of someone else having their beliefs challenged? How can anyone get to truth if they take the childish view “I can believe whatever I want!”. Take your ball and go home if you can’t handle it. I didn’t like having my beliefs challenged either…back when I was 7 years old. I used the same excuse too “I can believe whatever I want!”

[@shawnglass108]

I’m hoping that was a kid who made that comment and not an adult.

[@glenn212now]

@@shawnglass108 Dude, I grew up as a Catholic in Jonesboro, Georgia in the 1960s. Believe me, I know what it's like to have my beliefs challenged!! We lived next door to a KKK leader who convinced everyone in our neighborhood that my family was Satanic because we had a painting of Mary holding the Baby Jesus in our living room. So, I just don't see the point of criticizing other people's religious beliefs. It's something that I hold dear and am never going to change regardless of anything anyone says. But hey, if you like fighting over religion, knock yourself out.

[@popsharrison5431]

"we have made a goddess of the Virgin Mary" - Archbishop Georg Strossmayer:. 1870

[@glenn212now]

The woman gave birth to the Son of God. I think that makes her a seriously important historical figure. But if you want to hate her, go ahead. Doesn't matter a damn to me.

[@annodomini7250]

@@glenn212now Who are you angry at? the person who quoted one of your Bishops or the Bishop. If it did not matter a damn to you you would not have commented. The comment was not hate just a true quote from this Bishop. My opinion the Bishop would know.

[@glenn212now]

@@annodomini7250 Oh, give me a break. That bishop's remark is used by countless Protestant preachers, podcasters and authors as they try to demean the importance of Mary. I've watched dozens of videos here on KZbin where they blab on and on about how Mary is basically useless in a historical sense. I don't worship Mary in any way. I don't think she's divine. I don't think she's more important that Jesus. All of these things are thrown out by the Mary critics. If you don't believe me, just watch a couple of the videos. I do, however, believe that Mary is the mother of God and should be revered for the way she devoted her entire life to Him. I see absolutely nothing wrong with that.

[@KnightFel]

@@glenn212nowthe problem is is that none of the apostles ever spoke about Mary in this way. The NT is so hyper focused on Christ it would be utter foolishness to really try and argue for all these Marian dogmas from scripture. They don’t exist. Never have. You guys take a few verses and stretch out the meaning based off assumptions to an insane length. Mary was the mother of God. Theotokos. Exactly right. By the way, theotokos means “God bearer.” The point of the term actually exalts Jesus and protects the hypostatic union. The term is NOT to exalt Mary or point to her. The term points to Christ and glorifies Him. To take the focus from Him is utter insanity. Im glad you don’t believe in those things you stated about Mary. It’s too bad Rome officially does. Have you read Alphonsus Liguori’s work on Mary? Pure idolatry. He’s a doctor of the church. Rome says you have to believe in these Marian dogmas, you have zero choice or your anathematized. Moreover there is no biblical distinction between Latria, hyper-dulia, and dulia. Worship and service go hand in hand. God literally killed people because although they worshipped the God of Israel, they served other gods. You cannot claim you worship God but offer dulia to the saints and hyper dulia to Mary. It is all considered idolatry. You may not think you are, but that’s what you’re doing. Can you worship God and offer dulia (service, reverence, whatever you want to call it), to demons or other men? No. To saints? No. By the way, all believers are saints in the eyes of God. There is also no distinction. This is what happens when scripture isn’t your final authority but the church is, you end up being forced to believe all kinds of whacky things.

[@glenn212now]

@@KnightFel I respect your beliefs and opinions. I just have a different perspective when it comes to Mary. While I don’t worship her, I do very highly revere her for being chosen by God to give birth to our Savior and to raise him. She also stood by Him throughout His life and adored Him. She was the one who nudged Him to perform His first public miracle at Canaan. And she was at the foot of the cross at Calvary as He was viciously murdered. I don’t see how holding this very special woman in high regard is equivalent to idolatry. Now if you want to talk about true idolatry, consider the MAGA cult members and the way they worship Donald Trump. He’s a blatant and constant liar, a sexual offender, a fraudster and probably destined to become a convicted federal felon. His followers adore and defend him even when they’re given clear evidence that he is guilty of these offenses. That is cultish idolatry. Give me the mother of Christ any day over that cretin.

[@hubertagamasu6283]

Psalm 69:8-9 The Messiah speaks about his mother's children.

[@ranospiteri5776]

Finding Mary in the Old Testament. Psalm 45 6 Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever: the sceptre of thy kingdom is a right sceptre. 7 Thou lovest righteousness, and hatest wickedness: therefore God, thy God, hath anointed thee with the oil of gladness above thy fellows. (We know this Psalm is about Jesus we can confirm this in Hebrews 1:8,9.) now read the rest of Psalm 45: 9 Kings' daughters were among thy honourable women: upon thy right hand did stand the queen in gold of Ophir. Revelation 11: 19 And the temple of God was opened in heaven, and there was seen in his temple the ark of his testament: and there were lightnings, and voices, and thunderings, and an earthquake, and great hail. 12:1 And there appeared a great wonder in heaven; a woman clothed with the sun, and the moon under her feet, and upon her head a crown of twelve stars: 1 John 5:7 For there are

[@glenn212now]

Just let everyone believe what they want. If someone likes the concept of the mother of God as a perpetual virgin, so be it. Especially so nice nobody knows if it’s true or not. There’s so much religious hate on KZbin. It’s so sad. And the only thing that’s really true is that no one walking the Earth today has any proof about anything that happened 2000+ years ago. There are many archaic writings, but again, there’s no way to prove if any of it is true. Christians want to believe the Bible is the word of God, but there’s no way to prove it. So why not let everyone believe what makes them happy? People like James White are purposely perpetuating all this religious hatred so he can cash in by making money online and selling books.

[@matthewbrown9029]

The Catholic boogeyman is an incredibly popular fallacy commonplace in protestantism. This is not to say that all Catholic doctrine is correct (they are heretics for very specific reasons), but not everything Catholic is wrong. Don't fall for the boogeyman. Just because something is Catholic doesn't mean it's wrong. The Orthodox also believe the perpetual virginity of Mary. Luther believed it *firmly*. Zwingli defended it *firmly.* Calvin denied *very firmly* an outright denial of perpetual virginity. So, when James White calls this a Catholic doctrine, he is attempting to use the boogeyman tactic and convince those who have been deceived into thinking all things Catholic are wrong. I'm never going to be Catholic, but i can see through his tactics so easily. If you want to deny this, deny it on the basis of actual error, not the name of Catholicism.

[@paulfairfield4514]

Could Joseph the Carpenter have had multiple wives?

[@duckymomo7935]

No, it would’ve been frowned upon and a major details the writers missed That’s still a more plausible theory than perpetual virginity however

[@mjramirez6008]

what? 🤣🤣🤣🤣 some say he was a widower and then married Blessed Mary... but there is scriptural evidence that he was not an old man but 30-40's, pious and just

[@jvlp2046]

The Greek word ADELFOI/ADELPHOI means brotherly love or ADELFAI/ADELPHAI means sisterly love... yes, indeed, the Greek word used does not necessarily mean BIOLOGICAL Brothers or Sisters (Blood-Related)... Why did the writer choose this Greek Word? I firmly believe that the Gospel writers knew that Christ Jesus was not the Biological Son of Blessed Mary and St. Joseph... HOW?... even St. Paul knew and revealed to the Hebrews (Hebrews 10:5) that the "PREPARED BODY" (Human Body/flesh) of Christ Jesus was Solely created/made by His Father God, which makes Blessed Mary, a modern-day terminology called "SURROGATE MOTHERHOOD."... "Bressed is the WOMB that bore the Son of God... (ref. Luke 11:27). Take note: The Scripture did not say Blessed is the PERSON who bore the Son of God... which means, that even if Blessed Mary turned down the TASK offered to her, God could still make another "HA ALMAH" and continue God's plan for nothing is impossible with God... Prophet John the Baptist claimed that God could make DESCENDANTS of Abraham out of the STONE/ROCK. Christ Jesus has the sole IMAGE and LIKENESS of God... complete 46 Chromosomes (complete DNA) that come solely from God, just like when God created ADAM (1st Man) from the dust... Blessed Mary and St. Joseph had their own biological children who were logically not "BLOOD-RELATED" to Christ Jesus... that was why the Greek word ADELFOI (brotherly love) was used... In conclusion, therefore, in reality, Christ Jesus does not have TRUE Biological (Blood-Related) Brothers or Sisters, not even Cousins, or Uncles/Aunties... however, Blessed Mary and St. Joseph had children of their own who were not blood-related to Christ Jesus but HE loved them as well ... In the real sense, Christ Jesus is the adopted SON of Joseph and Mary... for HE is God by/in Nature... Praise be to God in Christ Jesus... Amen and Amen...

[@anhgiangho]

All is from your interpretation though. Will be same your White and the Catholic Teaching. Just that all evidence from the scripture point toward Jesus has no siblings. Since the word brother or sister has many means, then look at the time when Joseph and Mary returns to Jerusalem to find Jesus or Jesus tell John to take Mary home…a lot evidences

[@jvlp2046]

@@anhgiangho God is ORDERLY and not confusion/chaos... God would not allow Blessed Mary and St. Joseph to commit the Vow of Celibacy freely while they are under OATH to God by the Sacrament of Matrimony or Marriage Vow... it would be UNHOLY to do the ACT of Celibacy while under their Marriage Vow... Take Note: ... before Angel Gabriel visited her to do the task offered to her voluntarily, she was already BETHROTAL (Jewish Pre-nuptial marriage) to St. Joseph... In his dream, the Angel told St. Joseph not to be afraid to TAKE (marry) Mary to be her lawful wife... and he ABIDED and did what he was told... Both of them have marriage duties to consummate their marriage vows and have children of their own... Only when Blessed Mary became the WIDOW of St. Joseph could she FREELY accept the Vow of Celibacy for she was already a FREE woman... and I believe, that was the right TIME that God had RESTORED her VIRGINITY before she died... to remind us ALL that a "VIRGIN MAIDEN" (Almah Betulah) gave birth to the Son of God/Christ Jesus in Bethlehem and not just a "Young Maiden/ Woman (Ha Almah) as prophesied by Prophet Isaiah... Facts and Truth, Biblically and logically speaking... Praise be to God in Christ ... Amen and Amen.

[@anhgiangho]

@@jvlp2046 never, two married person can vow to never have sex to just serve the Lord. And that is never an unholy at all. We only see that God says to united and be fruitful but never says it is unholy to be celibacy while married. And many couple done that before. Plus Mary during the renunciation, did say “ how thing is done since I have no relation to men” . She should know she is bethrothed so to say “ I have no relation to men” means she knew about it and it is allowed. And I believed when angel appeared to Joseph to tell him to take Mary in. He used the word that means “ to walk along side like parallel” (per Tim staples from Catholic answer, ex-Protestant). Verses in the Bible never exclusively mention if Joseph and Mary did have other children or engage in active sexual life. All the words have different meaning. So church fathers has to base on Old Testament vs New Testament to compares and I love the comparing Mary with the Ark of Covenant. If anyone touch the Ark, they die, so God of course doesn’t want his new Ark to be touched either. I think it make a lot of sense to think that way. But of course we don’t know the exact thing since it never be explained in the Bible. Well, that is why I love Catholic where pope can then invoke the infallibility to announce.

[@jvlp2046]

@@anhgiangho According to the Bible, under the Sacrament of Matrimony / Marriage Vows, the married couple are no longer 2 separate bodies, but with one Spiritual Soul, United as ONE, the Wife no longer owns or is the master of her own body but the Husband does, and vice versa... It would be UNHOLY in the Eyes of God for a married couple to freely allow to choose the Celibacy Vows while both are still alive... Both have duties and responsibilities under oath to God by their Marriage Vow to build a family of their own, to preserve the Human Cycle of Procreation... The Vows of Celibacy can only take effect if chosen freely when one of them dies or becomes WIDOW or WIDOWER... NUNS and PRIESTS are married to their Spiritual Vocation, not tied to anybody, so they can freely choose the Vow of Celibacy. If the couple intended to take the Vow of Celibacy, they should have NEVER taken their Marriage Vows in the first place and have chosen the LIFE of "Single Blessedness"... Remember, Mary and Joseph already had a Jewish PRE-NUPTIAL Agreement (Marriage Engagement/contract) before Angel Gabriel visited Mary to ask her freely by accepting the task of giving birth to the Messiah through the Holy Spirit... When Joseph knew about her pregnancy, not from him, being a Just-Man, he decided to secretly send her away, so as not to suffer the humiliation and death penalty, however, an Angel intervened and instructed Joseph not to be afraid of taking Mary as his lawful wife for her pregnancy comes from God through the Holy Spirit... and he did officially married her... After the Birth of Christ, that was the TIME Blessed Mary KNEW (had consummated their marital vows) her Husband, Joseph, according to the Bible... Joseph and Mary had biological children of their own and Christ Jesus had NO BLOOD relationship with the couple for the PREPARED BODY was created solely by God (ref. Hebrews 10:5) and the Holy Spirit placed the Prepared Body as a fertilized eggcell (Fetus) in the WOMB of Mary... "Blessed is the WOMB that gave birth to the Son of God." ... For Blessed Mary became the Modern Terminology of Motherhood called SURROGATION... The Whole 46 Chromosome (DNA) came from God's Image and Likeness just like the creation of Adam... Christ Jesus is the NEW ADAM... Take NOTE:... IMAGINE, if Mary and Joseph had only one child, (Christ Jesus) and lost Him at the age of 12 for 3 days and found him in the Temple, that was called NEGLIGENCE and UNRELIABLE Parenting... 2 parents looking after one child and losing him in the crowd? ... that was unacceptable parenting... while... On the other hand... if Christ Jesus at 12 years old had other younger siblings or perhaps a toddler or an infant to focus more on taking care of, then that was absolutely acceptable NORMS to lose in the Crowd, their eldest Son, Christ Jesus... so therefore, this was the best SCENARIO for both Mary and Joseph for they were both responsible and reliable parents, having with them other younger children of their own aside from Christ Jesus alone...logically speaking... Praise be to God in Christ... Amen and Amen...

[@rettrizzo1929]

I love james for the most part, but I had to giggle thinking about him talking about the natural meaning of words, but throws out the natural meaning of “whole world”

[@BrianJohnson-lx3zd]

The natural meaning of a word is modified by further teaching on the subject. For instance, 1 John 2:2 says Jesus is the propitiation for the sin of the “whole world.” The natural meaning there would be that he paid for all sins, so everyone is saved, but we know that can’t be the meaning because of verses like John 3:18. Likewise it can’t mean his sacrifice is available to the whole world, because of verses like John 6:35-40, which state it’s only those who God draws that come to Jesus, and those who God draws he does not lose. So the only meaning that remains is that “whole-world,” must mean “all nations,” which is not a unique use for the term.

[@rettrizzo1929]

@@BrianJohnson-lx3zd Yeah he died for the sins of the whole world in implication not application. If you reject or dont believe Jesus’s sacrifice, you are not saved. John 12:48 Mathew 10:33. Luke 10:16 So I hold that he was a propitiation for all of the world, but many just dont accept the gift. And with john 6, you are just assuming that drawn means the Calvinistic view of drawn. Thats a presupposition not found in the text. We would say the the gospel is enough of a drawing force to lead people to christ.

[@rettrizzo1929]

@Daniel Smith yeah we both have presuppositions about that phrase.

[@BrianJohnson-lx3zd]

@@rettrizzo1929 When you say the gospel is "enough of a drawing force," do you mean it draws everyone, though some will resist the draw and thus reject the gospel?

[@rettrizzo1929]

@@BrianJohnson-lx3zd draws people who here it at the very least. I think there is other drawing things as well. And yeah the bible is clear that some reject the gospel and christ

[@jmathewkane5923]

Why did Jesus give his mother to his friend at the cross rather than to the children of Mary as was Jewish tradition ? I always assumed Jesus was a faithful Jew.

[@glenn212now]

Because there weren’t any children.

[@clarkkent5442]

if Mary had other sons, why on earth would Jesus give His mother to Saint John the Beloved instead of her going to live with the other children she bore? unless of course she had no other children.

[@vaekkriinhart4347]

If all this Catholic dogma is true, then veneration should be given to Joseph!!! - for never touching his own wife! That's quite an acclomplishment that no mere mortal could ever do

[@delbert372]

If we don't isolate texts, but consider all texts and Biblical teachings when considering a topic, then we can believe in a strong and serious sovereignty and predestination while retaining Omnibenevolence, because we would have to do that.

[@Ineedtruth1]

4:44 it’s funny that you would use that verse which refers to Joseph as the father of Jesus, knowing that he cannot be Jesus’ BIOLOGICAL father, and evidence that his brothers and sisters mentioned IN THE SAME SENTENCE are Jesus’ BIOLOGICAL siblings through the womb of his mother, Mary. How do Protestants even take that argument seriously?

[@icemanred]

It makes sense because to the people who were speaking this did not know that Jesus was born of a virgin. They only knew the family dynamic as it was presented to them. So it made sense to reference Joseph to establish that the text is talking about the the nuclear family of Joseph and Mary and not the extended family.

[@matthewbrown9029]

@14:40 there is no word for "cousin" in that language. Don't be dishonest. There are enough decent arguments against this that you don't have to condescend to dishonesty.

[@TrveLatinCel]

Wagner W James L

[@Ryan-nv3dz]

It is wasn’t by just Jerome. It was Origen and HIPPOLYTUS as well. And HIPPOLYTUS wrote in 210 ad. “the Creator of all things incorporated with Himself a rational soul and a sensible body from the all-holy Mary, ever-virgin, by an undefiled conception, without conversion, and was made man in nature, but separate from wickedness. . . ” (Against Beron and Helix: Fragment VIII [A.D. 210]) I’m going to listen to early church over James White James white is the reason I became Catholic. All you have to do is look it up yourself and you always realize James white is full of crap. There are a lot of Protestants who did just that that became catholic because of James white. Keep it up James.

[@murattanyel1029]

Why a deep dive into this topic? Any casual reader of the Gospels will know that it is not true.

[@kellykempkilroy]

You did touch on the early reformers beliefs in the perpetual virginity of Mary. My question is, why would they have believed this throughout their lives if it wasn’t in the Text? I’m thinking of Martin Luther, Theodore Beza, Huldreich Zwingli, Heinrich Bullinger and even Francis Turretin. The Roman Catholic apologists point to these men to prove that the early reformers agreed with the Church.

[@CasualMysticUnionEnjoyer]

Because they were taught dogma as Roman Catholics. It may have been a presupposition they never questioned. The way some of the patristic fathers may have never questioned some of their own gnostic tendencies. You’re going to have the assumptions of the culture you grow up in unless you actively evaluate them.

[@kellykempkilroy]

@@CasualMysticUnionEnjoyer thank you for your comment.

[@Georgie2day]

13:28 this is not a good point to bring up. If they were disciples of Jesus and there families were not. Then Mary “traipsing” as you say with them would not be out of the question. The “traipsing” part yes but with whom no. You always mess up your arguments with that smug arrogant tone.

[@alexsantana3588]

Semitic culture used the word “brother” in a very broad sense which included cousins and uncles. Translating this word into Greek is like translating it into English, it’s still “brother”.

[@byronscherer5098]

Ok so how would you translate in Gal 1 that Paul says James the brother of our Lord Jesus Christ? Try as you might: it's called the trinity not the quadruple. Mary was just a virgin vessel until as Matthew 1 vs 25 said after the birth of Jesus when Joseph then knew Mary. To know means they had sex an a child was born. This is the Hebrew to English translation. God we are told is no respected of persons. So how do Catholics continue to elevate people to Godly comparisons stop it. It's a heresy. Any believer who has repented and is born again is a Saint. These people the Catholic church promotes in many cases were vile disgusting individuals. Others were treated inhumanely by catholicism but then they die an oh then its how great that person is. Bernadette was one such one who was treated badly by her priest and by the mean as snake nuns. How you charged children in the orphanages in Chicago a pew tax. Then because they did not have that dime the nuns punished them for a month by denying them supper each night. What a disgrace. I can not find in the word 1 time Jesus denied children a meal. I guess it wasn't bad enough that the church went into the homes and just took the kids to the orphanage not allowing the mom any Choice in the matter.

[@icemanred]

But the context of the scripture only makes sense if it refers to actual siblings that have at least one parent in common.

[@Fassnight]

Joseph, Mary, and His brothers... Almost like there is a clear pattern going on

[@byronscherer5098]

@icemanred mark chapter 6 really is weird if there are not brothers and sisters of Jesus. Nazareth was very small. It was the half way point from Galilee to Jerusalem. So for that not to have been true the neighbors in Nazareth would have been offended at what didn't exist per catholic doctrine. Now that takes alot more faith to believe that the people of Nazareth got it wrong by attributing many more children to the family than just Jesus. That's ludicrous. Do not elevate any human to the role of a diety. We serve a triune God not a quarterly God head.

[@with.the.y]

Along with what others have already brought to your attention, it also specifically says, “James, the brother of Jesus.” If the scripture was simply stating that James was a buddy of Jesus as you are trying to claim, then why would it even be necessary to say, “James the brother of Jesus.” Scripture would just read, “James…” The fact that the term brother is used infers good reason to believe this is the blood brother.

[@laffta6727]

Jesus did not venerate his mother read Matthew 12:46--50. 46While He was still talking to the multitudes, behold, His mother and brothers stood outside, seeking to speak with Him. 47Then one said to Him, “Look, Your mother and Your brothers are standing outside, seeking to speak with You.” 48But He answered and said to the one who told Him, “Who is My mother and who are My brothers?” 49And He stretched out His hand toward His disciples and 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.”

[@glenn212now]

For goodness sakes, you mean you seriously believe Jesus didn't venerate his own mother simply because of one sentence he said during a speech? You know, I think God doesn't mind if you use a little common sense now and then. Something doesn't have to be in the Bible to have been true. Geez.

[@laffta6727]

@@glenn212now let he Holy Spirit reveal to you the truth in the word not the traditions of man--it all there right in front of your eyes--wow what your are saying about god's one sentence it's really appalling --check yourself-in love

[@glenn212now]

@@laffta6727 I do not believe the Bible is the word of God. So your point is useless with me and many others. The Bible seems like a decent historical guide about the birth, life, death and resurrection of Jesus. That’s what I use it for. Otherwise, there’s far too much ridiculous and frankly insane writing in that text to be God’s word.

[@laffta6727]

@@glenn212now "I didn't vote" says a friend of mine but he loves to argue about the vote--and here we have someone that does not believe-and yet argues about biblical truths-smh

[@glenn212now]

@@laffta6727 I'm not arguing about 'Biblical truths' because, as I said, I don't believe the Bible is the true word of God. The book is nothing more than some historical stories that were passed down and put to paper by several men. That's not something I feel is worth basing my entire life on. Sorry. But as I always say, that's the beauty of freedom of religion. Believe whatever makes you happy.

[@JackHermanKikiraNyosy-oe9vo]

The thing am convinced with is that in Genesis, mentions someone who doesnt like the Woman. The woman then crushes his head with her heal. Then in Revelation, someone doesnt even like the woman who bores the man son who shall rule with iron rod. Hates her and chases her but God had her place prepared. Those someones are the serpent and the antichrist. Who then is here in the room speaking badly of the woman.

[@byronscherer5098]

Tell me how Paul identifies James in the book if Galatians. Whose brother does Paul say James is?

[@tiptupjr.9073]

What's funny is, Catholics insist Jesus's siblings are the children of another Mary, Jesus's mother's sister, Mary wife of Cleophas. Both this other Mary (at Calvary) and Cleophas (in Luke after Christ's resurrection) are alive during the gospel narrative. This makes it even more inexplicable as to why they would be traveling with Mary and the Jews would refer to them as Jesus's adelphoi.

[@no3339]

What's your argument? Speak with coherence please.

[@tiptupjr.9073]

@@no3339 The argument is plain. Catholics think Jesus's adelphoi are the children of another Mary and Cleophas. Both these people are alive during the gospel narrative, meaning the adelphoi can't even be *adopted* children of Mary and Joseph. This makes it even more nonsensical that the Jews would mention them in the same breath as Mary and Joseph.

[@tiptupjr.9073]

@@no3339 "Speak with coherence". I'm really sick of people being so needlessly rude in KZbin comment sections. I would like to know what in my original comment is not coherent.

[@no3339]

@@tiptupjr.9073 So your argument is that the James and Joseph mentioned as being the sons of Mary (of Cleophas) can’t be the same ones mentioned as being Jesus’ brothers? So why can’t they just be cousins and this is what “adelphoi” is referring to. There was no word for cousin in Hebrew/Aramaic, so adelphoi was sometimes used in its place

[@tiptupjr.9073]

@@no3339 I'm saying that if they were sons of Cleophas and another Mary, why would the Jews mention them in the same sentence as Mary and Joseph in Matthew 13 and Mark 6? They are constantly traveling with Mary (Jesus's mother). It is a very strange scenario if these people were actually Jesus's biological cousins. One would think they would have their own families to tend to. Also, the New Testament was written in Greek. I probably won't respond to further comments in this thread, as I made my original comment almost a year ago. Anyway, God bless.

[@bman5257]

As a Catholic, I’d like to say that I don’t like Suan’s argument that seems to denigrate the Proto-Gospel of James and blame Dr. White for bringing it up. Catholic apologists definitely use the protogospel of James (not because it’s scripture or factually true but because it shows insights into the opinions of early Christians). On the other hand, I happen to disagree with Dr. White that the Proto-Gospel of James is gnostic. I think it’s more of a Christian midrash if you will.

[@KristiLEvans1]

I’ve heard Trent Horn claim it, and a couple others defend those other ‘gospels’ as holy books - not Scripture - but holy, and worthy, apparently, to build doctrine.

[@bman5257]

You should understand that they don’t “build doctrine” but give insight into the mind of the early church and therefore the deposit of faith.

[@geelamar3542]

Just wondering, is there any scripture examples that someone prayed to Mary?

[@mjramirez6008]

there are examples of scripture of Christians praying for one another, and then there's tthe Communion of Saints. Besides those that died in Christ are not dead but very much alive!!! Glory to the Triune God!

[@geelamar3542]

Glory to God.

[@ma61king]

No

[@geelamar3542]

That’s true.

[@TheMasterTechie]

@@mjramirez6008 You did not answer the question being Did anyone pray to Mary? OR any of the biblical saints for this matter??Biblically speaking, we are to pray for one another here on earth in communion of saints, in secrecy of our rooms as to not be hypocrites and pray unto God like the Lord's prayer of Mathew 6:9-15!

[@vaughncj]

Calvin’s Commentary on Matthew 13:55 The word brothers, we have formerly mentioned, is employed, agreeably to the Hebrew idiom, to denote any relatives whatever; and, accordingly, Helvidius displayed excessive ignorance in concluding that Mary must have had many sons, because Christ's brothers are sometimes mentioned.

[@allisvanity...9161]

The New Testament was inspired in Greek, not Hebrew. Greek grammer holds.

[@oracleoftroy]

@@allisvanity...9161 Inspired in Greek... written by the Hebrew people. I'm pretty sure Calvin isn't talking about the language per se, but how the language is used. There are Hebrew idioms used in the NT Greek. (Not defending Calvin's view, I think he is wrong here, but I think you misunderstood what was being said.)

[@mjramirez6008]

@@oracleoftroy what about Luther was he wrong too? ''Christ...was the only Son of Mary, and the Virgin Mary bore no children besides Him...I am inclined to agree with those who declare that 'brothers' really mean 'cousins' here, *for Holy Writ and the Jews always call cousins brothers* ''. (Luther's Works, Pelikan, vol. 22: 214-215 / Sermons on John, chaps. 1-4, 1539)

[@ConciseCabbage]

how do protestants understand the “behold thy mother” statement from jesus on the cross?

[@BornAgainRN]

Jesus is addressing John just as the text says

[@zachdavenport8509]

Yes, Jesus was speaking to John hence why the text immediately after says that John took Mary into his house and cared for her as a son would his mother.

[@davidgooley8940]

Think of what the Messiah stated in Matthew 12:50 and Mark 3:35. Those who do the will of His Father in heaven are His brother, sister and mother.

[@zachdavenport8509]

@@davidgooley8940 I don't think that really is in view in this passage. He was speaking to John about Mary and John acted accordingly.

[@davidgooley8940]

@@zachdavenport8509 Roman Catholics distort who Mary (Miriam really) was. They effectively give worship adoration to her through turning Elizabeth's greeting into an idolatrous prayer. They spread a false doctrine that she never had any children beyond Jesus even though the New Testament clearly shows she was a mother to more than one child.

[@wadhahhammadi7266]

But according to tradtion also Joseph the carpenter was alled when he took Mary as a wife, couldn't it be right that he had children from a former wife? If so we can call them his brothers and sisters . And according to the Mosaïc law they will consider her as their mother, the same thing in Islam where the sons of her husband will be considered as MUREMs for her, they can't marry her for example. So they r not just relatives for Mary, they r living in thier fathers house, with her like her children. Does this contradict the verses u used in ur video?

[@iwonder7480]

😖 Oh bro' !! You forgot to run the video title past Mrs W, didn't you!? 🤔😲🤭

[@JonAdamsMinistries]

Just preached on her last week, she is such a confusing person to me. She experienced everything around the birth of Christ then later said that Jesus was out of his mind. It’s wild. Planning on doing a video about this soon. Good stuff!

[@brianmachuca5074]

?

[@Bigchickens]

Ask John Calvin that question

[@andys3035]

I believe he held to Mary's perpetual virginity did he not?

[@daome2012]

Mark 3:21-22 To the Romanists, Was Mary among those who thought that Jesus was out of his mind?

[@StAnthonyPaduaRadTrad]

No, the text says it was his “friends”. Plus, the holy mother of God knew his mission, she received word from the Angels Gabriel, she heard the story of St John the Baptist from St Elisabeth, gave birth to him and witnessed the Shepherds and wise men arrive, she heard the prophecy of Simeon. We could go on and on… So, no she knew who our Lord was would not think him crazy

[@daome2012]

@@StAnthonyPaduaRadTrad "No, the text says it was his “friends”. No, the text says relatives/family. "...We could go on and on…" How about you go *on and on* till verse 31 to 35.

[@StAnthonyPaduaRadTrad]

@@daome2012 I guess it depends on the translation. The Douay Rheims and KJV both have “friends”. Maybe your translation is not accurate All the things i mentioned about the Blessed Virgin Mary in the previous comment you think she would doubt her son? Seems incredible

[@daome2012]

@@StAnthonyPaduaRadTrad "Maybe your translation is not accurate" Surely *your beliefs* are the reason you prefer the "friends" translation. "All the things i mentioned about the Blessed Virgin Mary..." Mary' virginity wasn't established but assumed.

[@ManlyServant]

yes,some early church fathers believed that Mary is an unbeliever (doubting jesus) to jesus at some time

[@KristiLEvans1]

You don’t have to go to Mexico to see such processions. Go to NYC. They had them in my old neighborhood, routinely (her many feast days, I’d guess).

[@barbarian_bunny]

I like how he gets to the "until" argument and then it's all "blah blah blah" handwave, handwave. Lol Mary was and is still the ever virgin!

[@annodomini7250]

You can believe this because you will not examine any information that opposes your view because you are afraid that the truth may differ from what you believe.

[@1gumbah]

Again scripture proves scripture! You Roman’s choose to believe a lie thus God sends you strong delusion because you want t believe a damnable lie

[@iggyantioch]

John Calvin (1509-1564), the second most important Protestant “Reformer” after Martin Luther, and probably more historically influential than even Luther himself, believed in the perpetual virginity of Mary. Here are the usual proofs offered in favor of his beliefs: “Helvidius displayed excessive ignorance in concluding that Mary must have had many sons, because Christ’s ‘brothers’ are sometimes mentioned.” (Harmony of Matthew, Mark and Luke, on Matthew 13:55) “Under the word ‘brethren’ the Hebrews include all cousins and other relations, whatever may be the degree of affinity.” (Commentary on John 7:3) “The inference he [Helvidius] drew from it was, that Mary remained a virgin no longer than till her first birth, and that afterwards she had other children by her husband. ... No just and well-grounded inference can be drawn from these words … as to what took place after the birth of Christ. He is called ‘first-born’; but it is for the sole purpose of informing us that he was born of a virgin. ... What took place afterwards the historian does not inform us. ... No man will obstinately keep up the argument, except from an extreme fondness for disputation.” (Harmony on Matthew 1:25)Here are some key excerpts, from a translation by Gregory Fast: Certainly, it is said that he did not know the Virgin until she gave birth to her first Son. By this, the Evangelist means to signify that Joseph did not take his wife to live with him, but in obedience to God and to discharge his duty towards him. It was not then to be carnal love … But there were some crazy people who wanted to gather from this passage that the Virgin Mary had had other children than the Son of God, after Joseph had lived with her … [He] took no regard for himself because he was deprived of a woman. He could have married another, but he could not swear off the woman he had engaged. But better he leave his beloved rights and abstain from marriage (even though all the while he was married) … We also have further evidence in his writings that Calvin interpreted Jesus’ “brothers” in Scripture as his cousins. In his Harmony of the Gospels, Calvin is commenting on Luke 8:19 (“And his mother and his brethren came to him”), and casually mentions that the parallel passages (Matthew 12:46; Mark 3:31) of “the other two Evangelists ... represent Christ’s mother and cousins as having come ...”In another instance of Calvin interpreting a “brother of Jesus” as a cousin, we have his commentary on Galatians 1:19 (“But I saw none of the other apostles except James the Lord’s brother.”). He states that this James is “the son of Alpheus.” Footnote 35 in this edition of Calvin’s commentaries elaborates: This is fully consistent with the opinion commonly held, that Alpheus or Cleopas was the husband of the sister of Mary, the mother of our Lord, and consequently that James, the son of Alpheus, was our Lord’s cousin-german.

[@annodomini7250]

@@iggyantioch Then Calvin was wrong.

[@iggyantioch]

Read St Jerome vs Helvidius on this Calvin sides with Jerome

[@thirdplace3973]

Not sure why we need a 25 min video on this matter, the Bible says Jesus has brothers and sisters and they cannot only be the offspring of Joseph because he wasn’t Jesus’s father. This fact alone affirms Mary had other children.

[@iggyantioch]

Take it up with John Calvin and the rest of the bad batch😊 Certainly, it is said that he did not know the Virgin until she gave birth to her first Son. By this, the Evangelist means to signify that Joseph did not take his wife to live with him, but in obedience to God and to discharge his duty towards him. It was not then to be carnal love … But there were some crazy people who wanted to gather from this passage that the Virgin Mary had had other children than the Son of God, after Joseph had lived with her … [He] took no regard for himself because he was deprived of a woman. He could have married another, but he could not swear off the woman he had engaged. But better he leave his beloved rights and abstain from marriage (even though all the while he was married) … We also have further evidence in his writings that Calvin interpreted Jesus’ “brothers” in Scripture as his cousins. In his Harmony of the Gospels, Calvin is commenting on Luke 8:19 (“And his mother and his brethren came to him”), and casually mentions that the parallel passages (Matthew 12:46; Mark 3:31) of “the other two Evangelists ... represent Christ’s mother and cousins as having come ...”In another instance of Calvin interpreting a “brother of Jesus” as a cousin, we have his commentary on Galatians 1:19 (“But I saw none of the other apostles except James the Lord’s brother.”). He states that this James is “the son of Alpheus.” Footnote 35 in this edition of Calvin’s commentaries elaborates: This is fully consistent with the opinion commonly held, that Alpheus or Cleopas was the husband of the sister of Mary, the mother of our Lord, and consequently that James, the son of Alpheus, was our Lord’s cousin-german. Calvin in his writings habitually called Mary “the virgin” or “holy virgin” (as Calvin scholar T.H.L. Parker noted), which is further evidence of his belief in her perpetual virginity. Here are examples from his most famous and influential work, Institutes of the Christian Religion:John Calvin (1509-1564), the second most important Protestant “Reformer” after Martin Luther, and probably more historically influential than even Luther himself, believed in the perpetual virginity of Mary. Here are the usual proofs offered in favor of his beliefs: “Helvidius displayed excessive ignorance in concluding that Mary must have had many sons, because Christ’s ‘brothers’ are sometimes mentioned.” (Harmony of Matthew, Mark and Luke, on Matthew 13:55) “Under the word ‘brethren’ the Hebrews include all cousins and other relations, whatever may be the degree of affinity.” (Commentary on John 7:3) “The inference he [Helvidius] drew from it was, that Mary remained a virgin no longer than till her first birth, and that afterwards she had other children by her husband. ... No just and well-grounded inference can be drawn from these words … as to what took place after the birth of Christ. He is called ‘first-born’; but it is for the sole purpose of informing us that he was born of a virgin. ... What took place afterwards the historian does not inform us. ... No man will obstinately keep up the argument, except from an extreme fondness for disputation.” (Harmony on Matthew 1:25) You can run but you can't hide from the Dogmas of The Virgin Mary. Good luck

[@thirdplace3973]

@@iggyantioch Why should I give a flying rip what John Calvin or Martin Luther said, they didn’t author any scripture.

[@iggyantioch]

Idioms.

[@iggyantioch]

Flying flip👍 Because they were Sola Scriptura believers. As you may be by the context of your awesome comment.

[@thirdplace3973]

@@iggyantioch False. Jesus had several half-brothers and sisters. The Bible mentions them, and two of them wrote epistles in the Bible. This is a matter of scriptural authority. You either believe the Bible is true or doctrines of men are true.

[@lemmingkingyt5618]

The guy in this video wasn't even Roman Catholic afaik

[@vincentlimbrowski4471]

How can mary be a perpetual virgin when jesus had brothers n sisters

[@bridgefin]

Scripture never says that these were children of Mary. Everybody and your brother was considered your brother or sister in that culture.

[@drewmann856]

@@bridgefin And it’s still like that in that part of the world. I was just talking to a girl from Pakistan who was talking about her “brothers and sisters” as if she had ten or twelve siblings. I knew she had 2 siblings, so I asked who the hell was she talking. She was talking about 1st AND 2nd cousins. In her culture, there’s not enough of a significant distinction between your brother and your 1st cousin to even come up with a word that differentiates the two. The whole “Mary had other children because the Bible says Jesus had brothers and sisters” argument doesn’t hold water.

[@duckymomo7935]

@@drewmann856 Mary is not Pakistani

[@drewmann856]

@@duckymomo7935 Oh I thought she was my bad thanks for the correction I’m really appreciative.

[@Ttcopp12rt]

Jesus said many will be decieved...A prime example of this is these people in the comments and Catholics...Whats the difference between Catholics and Muslims? Nothing. They both love to read things INTO that are simply not there.

[@duckymomo7935]

Yes, Jesus had several siblings as Mary give birth to other childten after Jesus was born. Psalms 69:8 "I am become a stranger unto my brethren, and an alien unto my mother's children." This prophecy in Psalms 69:8-9 was fulfilled in Christ. Quoted in Jn 2:17 Rom 15:3. "...my brethren, and an alien unto MY MOTHER's children*". This prophecy proves that Christ had half- brothers and Mary had other children after Christ was born. See Lk 8:19 Evidences that Mary had other children‼ 1. It is plainly stated that Jesus had four brothers (i. e., half brothers), James, Joses, Simon, and Judas. He had at least three half sisters also:"are not his sisters here with us?" These are referred to as "HIS OWN KIN." His mother, brethren, and sisters are used literally (Mt 13:55-56 Mk 6:3). 2. The Lord is called Mary's "firstborn" (Mt 1:25; Lk 2:7), and the natural inference is that she had other children. The Greek:prototokos (G4416) is used only in Rom 8:29; Col 1:15-18 Heb 1:6; 11:28; 12:23; Rev 1:5 of the first of many others. Had He been her only son, the word would have been monogenes (G3439), which occurs in Lk 7:12; 8:42; 9:38; of human parentage of the "only son," "only daughter" and "only child"; and of the Lord Jesus as "the only begotten of the Father" (Jn 1:14, 18; 3:16, 18 1 Jn 4:9. 3. It was predicted by God that Mary would have other children and the Messiah would have brothers:"I am become a stranger unto my brethren, and an alien unto my mother's children" (Ps 69:8-9). 4. "His mother, and His brethren" are mentioned as following Him to Capernaum and seeking to hinder His work (Mt 12:46-50 Mk 3:31-35 Lk 8:19-21 Jn 2:12). The children of some other woman would not be following Mary as "His brethren." 5. "His brethren" are mentioned as not believing on Him until after the resurrection (Jn 7:3-10 Acts 1:14). 6. James is called "the Lord's brother" (Gal 1:19). See Mk 6:3. 7. The natural meaning of "His brethren" would never have been questioned but for the fact of pagan corruption in the church-- in seeking to raise Mary from a mere "handmaid of the Lord" (Lk 1:38) to that of mother of God and to invest her with divine powers as a goddess. Thus the way was prepared for identifying her with the goddess of paganism, who is thought to be the mother of a divine son, and who is yet a virgin-- a deity known in Egypt as Isis, the mother of Horus; in India, Isi; in Asia, Cybele; in Rome, Fortuna; in Greece, Ceres; in China, Shing Moo; and in other lands by different names, but always with a son in arms. So it is said that Mary had no other children and that His brethren were cousins by another Mary and Cleophas, that Joseph was too old to have children by Mary, or that he had children by a former marriage. All this is false, as nothing is mentioned in Scripture or history about these claims. If Joseph did have children before Jesus was born, then Jesus could not be the legal heir to David's throne, which by law went to the firstborn.

[@jefflinahan5853]

How do we know that Pslams 69:8 is about Jesus when verse 5 is talking about sins (so it can't be about Jesus)

[@duckymomo7935]

@@jefflinahan5853 Jn 2:17 and Rm 5:3 tells us this 69:5 is not part of 69:6-12

[@Gnmercjr76]

That is how the roman catholic does it they try to find in the scripture and say "you see its there" they even say that the rosary is in the bible

[@user-vj9qz3br6l]

Well the Our Father, Hail Mary, and most of the meditations which make up most of the rosary are straight from the Bible

[@alishavogel7926]

​@user-vj9qz3br6l when the devil tempted Jesus, he also used Scripture. His folly was he used it out of context and to further an improper and evil goal. Just because you take from Scripture, doesn't mean it's in context or proper.

[@vaughncj]

Athanasius of Alexandria, Jerome, Augustine of Hippo, and Origen all defended the dogma of the perpetual virginity.

[@arminius504]

So?

[@billyr9162]

People in galacia were preaching you had to be circumcised too. So what? False doctrine has been there from the beginning.

[@ma61king]

Augustine also believed that in Heaven there would be musical farts, do you believe that too?

[@mjramirez6008]

not only them but Martin Luther, John Calvin, Ulrich Zwingli, John Knox and other protestants, pretty much the whole posse...

[@mjramirez6008]

@@ma61king maybe after the musical fart comes a brown emperor splashing down in the head...

[@usurumarthi]

I've a question I'm unable to comprehend. Will there be atleast few people in Roman Catholic Church(Or some false denomination) who will be in heaven ( I mean they continue there and die as is). Because there are people in there who follow the new testament standard, even better than some of us. I firmly believe that there's no way other than Jesus, but surely there will be some who might have been deceived ? I just can't strike out a balance between Jesus's love and his wrath.

[@oracleoftroy]

Yes. The Reformed draw a distinction between the Romanist denomination, which is regarded as somewhere from serious error to apostate, and an individual who may attend a Romanist church but just puts their faith in what the Bible teaches. God is mighty to save.

[@alishavogel7926]

I think there will be many Catholics in heaven. Not because catholicism is correct, but because many Catholics are ignorant of Roman Catholicism and don't hold to apostate positions.

[@timharris2291]

Why is it important? Just let this one go.

[@annodomini7250]

That is fine if you are saying truth does not matter.

[@timharris2291]

@@annodomini7250 It's also fine if not every truth is knowable. It's also fine if not every question, even if knowable, is worth doing a "deep dive" on, to the exclusion of many other topics -- since our time is finite.

[@annodomini7250]

@@timharris2291 What exclusion, if you know Dr.White's work he covers vast amounts of subjects.

[@frankperrella1202]

In my humble opinion The Catholic & Eastern Orthodox beat Prostestants in Debates, 🛐🙏🗝️🗝️

[@KevinSmile]

Yet you are hesitant to say anything about what he argued in this video.

[@frankperrella1202]

@@KevinSmile He was Doing his nonsense he always does, Mary Was a Virgin, I love how he Doesn't debate Eastern Orthodox is it too hard to understand for him he will debate Catholics because Eastern Orthodox is not as big. They're both Catholic Rome & Eastern Orthodox. The Church Father's Council's white only knows a little I seen Dr Robert Sungenis take him apart! 🙏🗝️🗝️ I meant he tried to say Mary wasn't a Virgin. #2 The First Christians they're not Prostestant they're Catholic.

[@kreg3283]

0:24 is White just forgetting about Athanasius in "Four Discourses Against the Arians", Origen in "Commentary on Matthew", Epiphanius in "The Man Well -Anchored" , and Augustine in many of his writings? Don't be misled blindly by White's blanket statements about the church fathers!!

[@myles7446]

Not a Roman Catholic but affirm the perpetual virginity. I almost stopped listening when he emphatically emphasized the only mention of her perpetual virginity is in a gnostic source.

[@iteadthomam]

James White thinks a 17th century heretic who's burning in hell and suffering for his blasphemies is more authoritative than holy orthodox councils and fathers. St. Athanasius the Great: “Let those, therefore, who deny that the Son is by nature from the Father and proper to his essence deny also that he took true human flesh from the ever-virgin Mary” (Discourses Against the Arians 2:70 [A.D. 360]). we follow Bible, Councils and holy orthodox fathers, not 17th century heretics.

[@isaacleillhikar4566]

It sounds like he's saying Mary was ever Virgin in the past when conceiving, to me. Same as when he's saying it in "in the incarnation" its talking about her not having been "soiled" you are not soiled by your husbands marital congress.

[@iteadthomam]

@@isaacleillhikar4566 when Fathers and councils say EVER-virgin, they mean what the literal words mean.

[@isaacleillhikar4566]

@@iteadthomam Maybe its ever meaning in the past.

[@iteadthomam]

​@@isaacleillhikar4566 maybe, sure! but that's not what they meant. you can't read your own interpretation into the fathers and councils when they themselves viewed it as "PERPETUAL" virginity of holy mother of God. i.e. she never lost her virginity, before, during the birth and after it. even reformers affirmed it. IDK why protestants like dishonoring and blaspheming our holy mother.

[@isaacleillhikar4566]

@@iteadthomam Do you think its blasphemy or insulting to say Joseph had intercourse with Mary ?

[@jvlp2046]

The Bible did not support the PERPETUAL VIRGINITY of Blessed Mary (Virgin before and after giving birth)... No Biblical support we can find... However, since there is no impossible with God, I firmly believe in the RESTORATION of the VIRGINITY of Blessed Mary as part of the Miracle of God... The Bible clearly narrates that God is the "GIVER and TAKER."... God took Mary's virginity by conceiving the PREPARED BODY of God's Son (Christ Jesus) through the Holy Spirit with her permission... therefore, I believe that since God is a Righteous God, gave it back and restored it to be FAIR with St. Joseph as her Faithful Spouse who was a FAIR/JUST man to bear their own biological children, then when St. Joseph died, I believe God RESTORED her virginity once again before she died...

[@tomidomusic]

Same rules apply to the dogma of the trinity though.

[@mjramirez6008]

smoothly said.

[@KristiLEvans1]

@@mjramirez6008 lol

[@swissapologetics]

The concept of the Trinity is biblical

[@skippy8696]

Eh, no...not even close. The deity of Christ and the doctrine of the Trinity can be easily proven from scripture and the writings of the direct disciples of the apostles (such as Ignatius) and their subsequent disciples over time. The Nicene Creed actually predates the New Testament canon, meaning the people who compiled and preserved the book you claim to believe in were all Trinitarians.

[@vaughncj]

Luther accepted the idea of the perpetual virginity of Mary. Jaroslav Pelikan noted that the perpetual virginity of Mary was Luther's lifelong belief, and Hartmann Grisar, a Roman Catholic biographer of Luther, concurs that "Luther always believed in the virginity of Mary - Wikipedia

[@arminius504]

So? That is not an argument nor does it help to defend your position. I’m not even a big White fan since I’m not a Calvinist but he even addressed the “but Luther and Calvin believed it” nonsense that is brought up over and over again in regards to this issue. They weren’t infallible men just like Jerome or Athanasius weren’t infallible. Scripture is the highest authority and the case for Mary’s perpetual virginity is abysmal based on scripture and grammar and requires mental gymnastics to make it work. Does that mean we throw out all of Athanasius, Luther and Calvins views and teachings? Of course not.

[@bman5257]

@@arminius504 Catholics don’t believe that Sts. Jerome and Athanasius are infallible. Although, their views or writings might be ratified infallibly by the magisterium through the pope or the pope affirming ecumenical councils.

[@mjramirez6008]

@@arminius504 then Luther was wrong, he did a famous translation of the Bible but oh you know Scripture better , John Calvin was also wrong, he didn't know his Bible, same for Huldreich Zwingli, John Knox , Jan Hus all those reformed theologians were Bible illiterates regarding the perpetual virginity of Blessed Mary... Hippolytus of Rome (AD 210!), Origen, Athanasius, Epiphanius of Salamis, Jerome, Ambrose, Augustine... etc. etc. they didn't know, you do 🤣

[@DavidFleury-ot3dt]

Same old Protestant arguments from a 21st OPINION by reading into scripture. I have heard these arguments destroyed under only slight scrutiny. I love how a guy who is coming at this with goal of arguing against the Catholic faith 2,000 years later is more knowledgeable than church fathers so much closer to the actual events. Watch Shameless Popery for a great presentation from scripture on this topic.

[@CRoadwarrior]

@DavidFleury-ot3dt. Watching "Shameless Popery" is indeed shameless, since bad hermeneutics and logical fallacies magnify there. If you want to talk about "same old" arguments, you need to look at the claims made by Catholic sources who still think that 2 Samuel 6:23 is grammatically equal to Matthew 1:25.

[@byronscherer5098]

So are you calling the writing by Paul to the church of Galatia a lie? How does Paul address James as the brother of our Lord Jesus Christ? Don't tell me about church history and Jerome unless you openly defy the warning of Jesus Christ in Rev 22 : 18 thru 20. Waiting for your reply as to whether Paul lied and is Jesus mistaken to what he warns in Rev 22: 18-20

[@darrenjonprior9504]

People still watching his videos? 😒

[@johnmanual7595]

The word brother-sister in the Bible can also mean stepbrother or even cousin… It’s a blasphemy to say that the Theotokos wasn’t a perpetual virgin…

[@bastionofthefaith92]

This is the least of the blasphemies uttered by Calvinists

[@Nick-wn1xw]

I’m sorry but only God can be blasphemed. Mary was a woman. Plainly had a family after Jesus.

[@bastionofthefaith92]

@@Nick-wn1xw protestants blaspheme God every moment of the day by denying his church and his infinite and unbounded power to appear fully in the Eucharist.

[@bastionofthefaith92]

@@Nick-wn1xw Protestantism regurgitates every ancient heresy condemned by the church universal throughout time. Protestantism has no place in Christianity, as it is neither Christian, Catholic, or orthodox. It is the definition of man made religion

[@isaacleillhikar4566]

No it isnt. Do you know what a blasphemy means ? Its a blaspemy to say she wasnt a virgin when she conceivced Jesus.

[@irsshill4502]

As a prostestant I believe we should respect Mary as the mother of God. So as lack of evidence for both sides, I choose the side that respects her the most. Which is the catholic side.

[@jarrydwyatt3454]

I think he presented a wide range of evidence. Furthermore, a postion of love wo truth can not be great. This quote helps to shed the light between love and truth as well: "Love without truth is sentimentality; it supports and affirms us but keeps us in denial about our flaws. Truth without love is harshness; it gives us information but in such a way that we cannot really hear it. God's saving love in Christ, however, is marked by both radical truthfulness about who we are and yet also radical, unconditional commitment to us. The merciful commitment strengthens us to see the truth about ourselves and repent. The conviction and repentance moves us to cling to and rest in God's mercy and grace." Tim Keller

[@chrisazure1624]

Doesn't Matthew 1:25 refute this myth?

[@user-vj9qz3br6l]

Even Martin Luther believed in the perpetual virginity of Mary

[@mjramirez6008]

and John calvin and Ulrich zwingli

[@alishavogel7926]

And? Luther also became a Jew hater that wished death on them. Luther isn't perfect nor infallible.

[@annodomini7250]

A Roman Catholic not that amazing.

[@tiptupjr.9073]

James White would be a brilliant man of God if he would abandon the Critical Text and learn to trust the Textus Receptus and KJV. Maybe someday.

[@lhinton281]

Look at Jesus' words in Mark 6:4 after the reference to brothers and sisters of Jesus. A prophet is without honor among his "kin" (ἐν τοῖς συγγενέσιν)could be translated "cousin" (cf Luke 1:34). Also, are they ever called the children of Mary or just the Lord's brothers? Do they interact with Mary in the Gospels? Where are these other alleged son of Mary at the cross when Jesus says to her, "Behold your son" (referring to John who takes her to his home)? See Kappes/Albrecht and Brant Pitre

[@allisvanity...9161]

Jesus' brothers did not believe him until after the Resurrection. Where were they? Keeping their heads down. Christ's point was that a Prophet is rejected by his nearest, and dearest. Remember semantic domain.

[@Justas399]

There are Greek words for cousin-anepsios as in Colossians 4:10 or kinsman = sungenis which is used in Luke 1:36. Never used for the brothers of Jesus.

[@allisvanity...9161]

@@Justas399 Pastor James White is fluent in Koine Greek, and he pointed out that Christ's brothers are referred to as adelphoi, brothers, I think in John's Gospel. Matthew 1:24-25 says that Joseph knew her not until after she gave birth to Christ.

[@lhinton281]

@@allisvanity...9161 My point is that after listing those people, Jesus speaks about being among his kin (συγγενέσιν). This same word is used as aunt (Lev 18:14, LXX) or cousin (Luke 1:36). The word “adelphos” can mean more than biological brother of the same mother. Dr White needs to deal with all of the other evidence in text that support the perpetual virginity of Mary (see Kappes/Albtecht/Pitre) and the universal teaching of this dogma in Jesus’ Church, the pillar and buttress of Truth.

[@allisvanity...9161]

@@lhinton281 kzbin.info/www/bejne/p2WUZmhng7mDeaM

[@peterhenryzepeda3484]

Luke’s annunciation narrative proves the Perpetual Virginity of Mary and that’s in the New Testament.

[@menderkoure6442]

Dear James White. My knowledge of the Bibles is many times smaller than yours. I love your videos. I have a feeling that you are applying the modern way of thinking in this subject. These brothers are the cousins ​​of Jesus because they are the children of the 'other' Mary. Wife of clopa. You find it in gospel of John. That is why Jesus also said to John... This is your mother. Take care of her. If she had other childerens, why should John take care of her.

[@JamesPeterCovers]

Dear Mender Koure. I can understand your reasoning as to why Jesus would entrust his birth mother to John, however you should also take something into account. Jesus' brothers were not present at the resurrection. They weren't believers yet and did not care much for what happened to Jesus, or else they would have been present at the cross. That is a compelling argument as to why Jesus would entrust Mary to John instead of his brothers who were nowhere to be seen. Also, as the eldest son, He had the cultural obligation to care for his mother, so He entrusted Mary to John to replace Him as the eldest son. Another important fact is that this scripture shows how loving and caring Jesus is. James, His half-brother wrote that the true and pure religion is to care for the widows and the orphans. Jesus, even in His last moments of ministry, showed this love and care, so that we can follow in His example.

[@menderkoure6442]

@@JamesPeterCovers As you know two of brothers of Jesus where deciples of Jesus. Only at the moment of crusifixion wherent there. But still they could take care of Mary. In that time it was there was a lot of people who lived 'virgin' for God. It was not some thing new devolped in the munnik times. The bible came thru the early church. And the early church had his tradition as story known next to the bible.

[@john318john]

Remember at the time of his crucifixions' his brothers did not believe in him. Please read the gospel john. (John is the disciple Jesus loves) John 2"So she ran and went to Simon Peter and the other disciple, the one whom Jesus loved, and said to them, “They have taken the Lord out of the tomb, and we do not know where they have laid him.”

[@mjramirez6008]

@@JamesPeterCovers even if the 'brothers' were ''not believers in Christ yet'' they *surely were Jews* and there was the Law to which they had to comply. It was compulsory for a son to take care of a widowed mother, *there's no escaping this* .

[@JamesPeterCovers]

@@mjramirez6008 I agree, and Jesus decided to give his position of eldest brother to John. It's not about receiving Mary as our mother, it's about Jesus entrusting his mother to his beloved disciple who was at the cross while the real brothers were nowhere to be seen.

[@forgivemylaughterihaveacon2556]

The holiest thing on earth was the ark of the covenant. It was the house of God on earth. It contained the word of God(commandments),the rod of Aron signifying the priesthood, and the manna from heaven. Mary is the ark of the new covenant. In her womb she carried the word become flesh,the true high priest, and the true manna from heaven.

[@dannymcmullan9375]

Not true. The ark of the covenant was where God dwelt. If there is a ark of the new covenant, it would be all believers who are indwelt by the Holy Spirit. We are the temple of the living God. We have the word of God, we are priests to God, (we can go directly to God), and we have the bread which came down from heaven (Christ)The scripture does not say that Mary is the ark of the new covenant.

[@KristiLEvans1]

Moreover, the spirit of the Lord was over the ark, not in it. The Mary parallel/type/shadow is read into Scripture by Roman Catholics who are told to see it there. That’s just a fact. No one drew these comparisons until Christian challenges forced them to find these ideas in Scripture. Scripture does not convey Gnostic (secret knowledge) doctrines. Scripture doesn’t communicate truths the same way Gnostic metaphysical texts try to communicate “truth”.

[@swissapologetics]

Well, lets see: The holy spirit came upon the prophets. They were still normal human beings, failable and sinful, but they wrote the perfect word of God. And the word of God had a double-nature. It was fully divine inspired and fully writen by men at the same time. The holy Spirit came upon Mary. She was still a normal human being, failable and sinful, but she gave birth to the perfect Word of God. And the word of God has a double-nature, He is fully man and fully God at the same time. Do you like this foreshsdowing? Its even clearer than the one with the ark. But of course you dont like it because it doesnt go in the direction you want it to go, right?

[@KristiLEvans1]

@@swissapologetics theotokos was about Christ. Now? Theotokos is considered to be a title for Mary. It’s the giving over of His titles to her. Thank God she doesn’t know what’s happening here.

[@swissapologetics]

@@KristiLEvans1 I didnt say anything about this "title"... so what are you even talking about?

[@danielvidal-garate3554]

pray to the mother of god ! :)

[@berglen100]

two adam's in man, the first is smart and stupid seen always looking and waiting or not believing, second Adam isn't seen or saved, waking you can't look outside or waiting for JESUS story you think was history event's. every story is what happens in man about those two adams. womb born the first male female the next birth which is waking by God in man.

[@AndrewofVirginia]

Wow, seems like James goes from bowing before an altar to "losing the gospel" pretty quick.

[@kurtwingston619]

Get off you tube 😂