Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Probably
Why did Jesus leave Mary in John’s care?
The reason that Jesus left his mother in the care of John and not in the care of one of his siblings, is probably because none of his brothers believed in Him at that point of time.www.biblword.net
Probably
Per Jewish law the obligation automatically transfers to the next oldest son. Per Jewish law, it's not optional.
No. I don't. Jewish law decrees what happens.Yep, but you'll have to argue what Jesus said.
John tookAre you seriously arguing against Jewish law? The key point here is that if James were the son of Mary as you claim - there would have been no need for Jesus to transfer his obligation to John as that obligation would have automatically transferred to the next oldest son but since there were no other sons, Jesus selected John - the disciple he loved the most - to care for his mother.
And from that hour the disciple took her into his home. John 19:27
Read this.Are you seriously arguing against Jewish law? The key point here is that if James were the son of Mary as you claim - there would have been no need for Jesus to transfer his obligation to John as that obligation would have automatically transferred to the next oldest son but since there were no other sons, Jesus selected John - the disciple he loved the most - to care for his mother.
And from that hour the disciple took her into his home. John 19:27
“Woman, behold, your son.” Then he said to the disciple, “Behold, your mother.” And from that hour the disciple took her into his home. John 19:26-27John took
Read this.
Why did Jesus entrust Mary to the apostle John instead of to His brothers? | GotQuestions.org
Why did Jesus entrust Mary to the apostle John instead of to His brothers? If Mary had other children, shouldn’t they have been the ones to take care of her instead of John?www.gotquestions.org
So why are you disagreeing with me? I can speak/witness/testify to people of all beliefs without insisting they give up their own faith.No, he was talking about WITNESSING to others. Whether I agree with HIS beliefs or not, Christ COMMANDS His followers to preach the gospel as they understand it. This is why we hay a responsibility to get it right.
Because you're looking to argueSo why are you disagreeing with me? I can speak/witness/testify to people of all beliefs without insisting they give up their own faith.
I don't believe she is trying to argue with you. The essence of the post you said you agreed with was that it's not ok to tolerate other religious beliefs. I believe she was genuinely surprised that you would agree with that. I know I was. God gave everyone free will. Who are we to try to take that away from them?Because you're looking to argue
THIS was Your accusatory response to me acknowledging COMMON GROUND with someone I disagree with concerning Catholic beliefs. Where did I ever say THIS:
You agree that people should be forced into changing their beliefs?
Like I said, you just want to argue for the sake of being disagreeable.
Ok. Care to comment on the rest of the information?“Woman, behold, your son.” Then he said to the disciple, “Behold, your mother.” And from that hour the disciple took her into his home. John 19:26-27
No. Because this says it all.Ok. Care to comment on the rest of the information?
What about his brothers being unbelievers? According to Jewish law, wouldn't the next oldest son take care of her?No. Because this says it all.
If James were the son of Mary - as you claim - there would have been no need for Jesus to transfer his obligation to John as that obligation would have automatically transferred to the next oldest son but since there were no other sons, Jesus selected John - the disciple he loved the most - to care for his mother.
“Woman, behold, your son.” Then he said to the disciple, “Behold, your mother.” And from that hour the disciple took her into his home. John 19:26-27
Why stop at 1863? Let's go back to Ritulae Romanum and Baptism.Pope Pius IX in his encyclical letter (1863) said that Well known is the Catholic teaching that no one can be saved outside the Catholic Church. This refers to the belief that only those who are in full communion with the Catholic Church and accept the teachings and magisterium of the Church can be saved.
Jewish law doesn't have that stipulation and you have zero scriptural basis for that belief.What about his brothers being unbelievers?
If I have faith in Jesus and his Word but I'm not a Catholic, am I saved?Why stop at 1863? Let's go back to Ritulae Romanum and Baptism.
Q: What do you ask of God's Church?
A: Faith.
Q: What does faith offer you?
A: Eternal life.
This is included in the Catechism of the Catholic Church, which in the next sentence says, "Salvation comes from God alone..."
Faith is apportioned to us by God, but it is the Church that teaches a life of faith.
The entire context of Catholic teaching must be known/presented. Finding something in 1863 does not encompass all of Catholic teaching.
Wrong. Jewish law says the oldest son is responsible for the mother. Jesus was the oldest and James was next, but he wasn't a believer at that time. John was.Jewish law doesn't have that stipulation and you have zero scriptural basis for that belief.
If you want to continue disparaging the mother of Christ be my guest but you are ignoring scripture in doing so.
Are you aware the Book of James was written in Greek style--excellent Greek style at that--and well after the Jerusalem James had died?The author of the Book of James was the brother of Jesus.
This is not an argument. It is a question asked to gain understanding into your perspective. And I am still confused. That may be because you are arguing over something about which I am seeking understanding.You agree that people should be forced into changing their beliefs?
What's your scriptural basis for believing that?Wrong. Jewish law says the oldest son is responsible for the mother. Jesus was the oldest and James was next, but he wasn't a believer at that time. John was.
"Saved" is a terminology used by non-Catholic Christians. Catholics tend to use the words, Reconciliation, Redemption, Salvation. "Saved" is not even listed in the index of the Catechism of the Catholic Church.If I have faith in Jesus and his Word but I'm not a Catholic, am I saved?
Read this opinion.Are you aware the Book of James was written in Greek style--excellent Greek style at that--and well after the Jerusalem James had died?
