September 5, 2016
August 2, 2016
“Is not this the carpenter, the son of Mary, the brother of James, and Joses, and of Juda, and Simon? and are not his sisters here with us? And they were offended at him.” Mark 6:3 (KJV)
One reason why the King James Bible is hated by the Catholic Church and Laodicean “christian” scholarship is because of the treasure trove of information it contains that no other version of the Bible does to disprove so many false doctrines taught in our day. For example, only in the KJV can you run the references to discover that the identity of the coming Antichrist is none other than Judas Iscariot, the ‘son of perdition’ revealed by a sop. It also shows you what the word Selah really means, and it has nothing to do with meditating on peaceful thoughts of sweet baby Jesus. It reveals a global war.
TODAY WE ARE GOING TO SEE WHERE THE KING JAMES BIBLE, IN BOTH OLD AND NEW TESTAMENTS, REVEALS THAT MARY THE MOTHER OF JESUS ABSOLUTELY HAD OTHER CHILDREN.
The Bible verse at the top of this article clearly shows that Jesus, the carpenter son of Mary, had four brothers named James, Joses, Juda and Simon. Not only that, He had an unnamed number of sisters, but two at the very least. The Catholic Church lamely attempts to dispute this by saying that the word “brother” doesn’t always mean brother, and that they could have been cousins. Then they run to the “teachings of the early church fathers” to try and show Mary’s “perpetual virginity”:
“THE ORIGIN IS DIFFERENT BUT THE NATURE ALIKE: NOT BY INTERCOURSE WITH MAN BUT BY THE POWER OF GOD WAS IT BROUGHT ABOUT: FOR A VIRGIN CONCEIVED, A VIRGIN BORE, AND A VIRGIN SHE REMAINED [SERMONS 22:2 (A.D. 450)]. – POPE ST. LEO I
BUT IN ALL THEIR BLATHER ABOUT ATTEMPTING TO CAST DOUBT ON THE CLEAR TEACHING OF JESUS’ SIBLINGS IN MARK 6, THEY FORGOT ALL ABOUT PSALM 69.
Psalm 69 is one of those great psalms of David where he starts out talking about himself, but winds up prophesying about the crucifixion of the Messiah Jesus on the cross. Let’s start with the very well-known passage talking about events leading to His death:
“For the zeal of thine house hath eaten me up; and the reproaches of them that reproached thee are fallen upon me.” Psalm 69:9 (KJV)
We know that this is talking about Jesus driving out the moneychangers in the Temple because John 2:17 says it is. This is what John recorded:
“And when he had made a scourge of small cords, he drove them all out of the temple, and the sheep, and the oxen; and poured out the changers’ money, and overthrew the tables; And said unto them that sold doves, Take these things hence; make not my Father’s house an house of merchandise. And his disciples remembered that it was written, The zeal of thine house hath eaten me up.” John 2:15-17 (KJV)
When the disciples watched the action in the Temple, they remembered that David had prophesied this about the Messiah, and they rightly connected it with Jesus. But have you ever stopped to see the verse that immediately precedes it in the context? It’s a verse that talks about the rejection of Jesus by both His people the Jews in general, and his brothers and sisters in particular:
“I am become a stranger unto my brethren, and an alien unto my mother’s children.” Psalm 69:8 (KJV)
Well, will you look at that? David records Jesus talking about the two-fold rejection of Jesus by brethren and brothers. One of the arguments presented by the Catholic Church is that if Jesus really did have other brothers and sisters, then why did He have to tell His disciple John to care for Mary? The answer is quite obvious – the all deserted Him in accordance with Old Testament prophecy. Only John, the “disciple that Jesus loved” remained till the bitter and glorious end.
“But all this was done, that the scriptures of the prophets might be fulfilled. Then all the disciples forsook him, and fled.”Matthew 26:56 (KJV)
Now you can go on believing that Mary remained a “perpetual virgin” if you want to, but you have to do it in spite of clear Bible teaching from both Testaments that Mary had other biological children with Joseph after the birth of Jesus.
Source. Click here to find out more