Oh But They Do…

Abandon doctrine in favor of tradition.  Or if you prefer, set aside Scripture in favor of tradition.  Here’s just one example of many-

Scripture clearly teaches that Jesus had brothers and sisters.  The Greek words can be fudged any way you wish, but their meaning cannot be changed.

Yet in spite of this scriptural truth Catholic dogma insists, based on its tradition of the perpetual virginity of Mary, that Jesus was an only child.

That is, they reject Scripture’s plain meaning in favor of their traditional/dogmatic ideology.  So, yes, Catholics do – when they wish – abandon Scripture.

6 thoughts on “Oh But They Do…

  1. David Withun 3 May 2011 at 1:06 pm

    While I agree that Roman Catholics often do favor their “traditions” over Scripture, which is a serious problem, your example is a deeply flawed one as you ignore the fact that all of the earliest interpreters of that verse deny that these brothers and sisters of Christ were children of Mary; the nearly universal opinion of the ancient Church (until St. Jerome, who introduced the current Roman Catholic belief that these brothers and sisters were actually cousins) was that the brothers and sisters of Christ were the children of Joseph from a previous marriage. This has nothing to do with placing tradition over Scripture; rather, it’s just good historical work. Just as Roman Catholics too often place their “traditions” over Scripture, so do Protestants too often place their new “traditions” over old traditions and Scripture.


    • Jim 3 May 2011 at 1:13 pm

      that’s pure eisegetical speculation. how do you know that joseph had other children? no, that’s just a guess and unsubstantiated at that. what we have in the text is the clear statement that while jesus was teaching someone said to him- your mother and your brothers are outside seeking you. unless you’re ready to argue that mother means half mother then you can’t argue that brothers means half brothers.

      previous marriage children indeed. the simple reading isnt a protestant putting a new tradition over an old one. it’s just plain reading of a simple straightforward text. it’s the gymnastics of those defending aberrant and unnatural readings that need real help.


  2. David Withun 3 May 2011 at 1:17 pm

    I’m glad you came along to correct those who sat at the feet of the authors of the New Testament books. What would we ever have done without you?


    • Jim 3 May 2011 at 1:23 pm

      ah well no correction necessary. anyone with even the most basic reading skills can read what they themselves wrote. im not the one trying to change what they say so as to make it fit with my own ideology- that i leave to others with less interest in reading and more interest in eisegesis. (that means ‘reading into’ as opposed to ‘reading out of’ – exegesis).


  3. Gerard 3 May 2011 at 4:42 pm

    According to the Bible they were Jesus’ half brothers, as Joseph was not the biological father of Jesus.


    • Jim 3 May 2011 at 4:44 pm

      they were jesus’ brothers and sister by mary his mom and joseph is (so far as his contemporaries were concerned) dad.


Comments are closed.