My eBay Method: 13 Steps to Profitable Auctions

My eBay Method: 13 Steps to Profitable Auctions

Monday, 15th May 2006 (by J.D.) This article is about Hints and Tips, Odds and Ends


A few weeks ago I linked to Stephen Smith’s guide to selling stuff on eBay. Today I’ll share some tips of my own.
In February I sold $1500 of geek goods to raise money so that I could make accelerated debt payments. My auctions consistently fetched more money than concurrent auctions for similar items. Something about my method works. I recommend the following steps:
Research the hell out of each item you post. Dig through eBay to find what similar items fetch (and how often they sell). Check other places (Amazon, abebooks.com, other forums) to see what they charge for the item.
Use low starting bids. Low starting bids cost less to list, and they encourage participation. The more popular you expect an item to be, the lower you should set the starting bid. If you expect only a few bids, start bidding closer to your minimum desired sale point. For example, I sold some Tolkien videos on VHS that I thought would receive few bids, so I set my minimum bid at about $10. Do not use a reserve.
Start your listings on Thursday afternoons and evenings. Run ten-day listings. Time your auctions to end on Sunday evening between seven and ten Eastern (four and seven Pacific). This gives two weekends to attract bids.
If needed, pay the extra ten cents to prepare listings in advance and schedule them to start on Thursday evenings. Prepare a group of listings in advance, then schedule them to start within a couple of hours of each other. (Don’t have your listings end closer than within two minutes of each other.)
Offer free shipping and delivery confirmation. You could charge for these, but free shipping builds goodwill. Delivery confirmation gives you peace of mind. Free insurance is of dubious value; I sometimes offer it, but generally only on expensive items. You might offer it as a customer-paid option.
Offer a money-back guarantee, but only for when the item is not as described. (Not for when a person changes his mind or makes a mistake.)
Craft your auction title with care. For example, I recently sold a book entitled The Hidden Game of Baseball by John Thorn and Pete Palmer. I could have put all that into my auction title, but it would have been a waste. My title was geared toward keywords that I believed interested buyers would use: HIDDEN GAME OF BASEBALL Thorn Palmer SABR Bill James. Bill James had nothing to do with the book, but fans of Bill James would be likely to purchase it. You want many people to see your items in their search results.
Write a good description listing the strengths and flaws of your item. Write things like “I think this book is in great shape, but be aware that the cover has a small tear and the previous owner’s name is on the flyleaf”, etc. Try to place additional keywords in the description, but sprinkled into conversational sentences. For example, in my auction for the Tolkien animated films on VHS, I used the names of Peter Jackson, Liv Tyler, etc.
Be thorough. Many people advocate short descriptions. I disagree. I think that long descriptions are best, especially if they use bold text and highlighting to emphasize the important aspects of your auction.
Refuse to accept bids from headaches: people with negative feedback, people who haven’t been paying, foreign bidders. (Note: foreign bidders aren’t a headache for everyone; if you love ‘em, let ‘em bid!)
Take photos and post them in the description. Use the 35-cent gallery feature so that your photo appears when people browse listings. If condition is a concern, use many photos to convey the state of the item.
Answer questions. You will receive many questions about your items. Some of the questions will be stupid. Answer them anyhow. If it’s a question that many people are likely to have, post the your response publicly.
Be amiable! A friendly, easy-going persona is going to receive better response than a brusque, business-like persona. Make jokes. Show enthusiasm.
These techniques have worked well for me, even though I do two things that defy conventional eBay wisdom: I use ten-day listings and I provide free shipping. I feel that both helped me get better prices. For more information about online auctions, check out A Beginner’s Guide to eBay: Confessions from an eBay Store Worker.
Like garage sales, eBay is a great way to simultaneously purge your life of stuff and make money while doing so. A little extra time and care in creating your listings can yield a huge increase in profits.

-->

You may also be interested to read:
How to Sell on eBay
Spare Change #3
An Introduction to Get Rich Slowly
How to Find Great Deals on eBay
More Money: 5 Ways to Earn Extra Cash in Your Spare Time

The Holy Bible

The Holy Bible - Part 1 The Old Testament – Overview
4/6/2008 3:29:24 PM
Born in the East and clothed in Oriental form and imagery, the Bible walks the ways of all the world with familiar feet and enters land after land to find its own everywhere. It has learned to speak in hundreds of languages to the heart of man. Children listen to its stories with wonder and delight, and wise men ponder them as parables of life. The wicked and the proud tremble at its warnings, but to the wounded and penitent it has a mother’s voice. It has woven itself into our dearest dreams; so that Love, Friendship, Sympathy, Devotion, Memory, Hope, put on the beautiful garments of its treasured speech. No man is poor or desolate who has this treasure for his own. When the landscape darkens, and the trembling pilgrim comes to the Valley of the Shadow, he is not afraid to enter; he takes the rod and staff of Scripture in his hand; he says to friend and comrade, 'Goodbye; We Shall Meet Again;' and, comforted by that support, he goes toward the lonely pass as one who walks through darkness into light. – Henry Van Dyke

Before we begin today’s study, please bow your hearts before the Lord…

“Father, we come before you with Thanksgiving in our hearts for all your many blessings. We ask that you would give us understanding of your Word and help us to hide your Word within our hearts. We ask this in Jesus’ mighty name, Amen.”

Introduction

The Bible has been the best selling book by far since the invention of the printing press. In the past 200 years it has been estimated that between 3.5-4 billion copies have been printed. The most popular in the English speaking countries have been the King James Version, the New International Version, The Living Bible and The New King James. Millions of Bibles are sold every year as well as portions of the Bible, such as the New Testament and the Psalms, are given away free by various ministries.

It has been said that the New Testament is in the Old Testament concealed and that the Old Testament is in the New Testament revealed. This is a good analogy as we can see many prophesies found in the Old Testament are fulfilled within the record of the New Testament.

These 66 Books written by some 40 authors are all One Book. Or as Chuck Missler likes to say, “An integrated message system designed outside of our time domain.”

Holy Bible: A General Overview

The word Bible is derived from the Greek word, biblia, meaning "books," and refers to the sacred writings of Judaism and Christianity.

The Holy Bible is an account of history, prophecy, and words of wisdom comprised of 66 books, written over a period of some 1500 years, by 40 different authors. The Old Testament (Old Covenant) is comprised of 39 books written from approximately 1400 to 400 BC. The New Testament (New Covenant) contains 27 books written from approximately 50 to 95 AD.

The Jewish Bible (Tenach) is the same as the Christian Old Testament, other then its book arrangement and numbering. The original language of the Old Testament was Hebrew as well as some Aramaic. The original language of the New Testament was Koine (common) Greek.

The Name of God - YHWH

The Name of God, YHWH (“I AM” or “I AM WHO I AM”), is from the Hebrew text appearing in Exodus 3:14. YHWH, known as the Tetragrammaton, from the Greek, tetra meaning four and gramma-letter, also known as the “Four-Letters.”

The Tetragrammaton is considered so sacred that it was never pronounced in Hebrew (except once a year in the Temple while in the Holy of Holies by the high priest) and traditionally is read in the text as HaShem (The NAME) or in prayer as Adonai (My Lord) or El Shaddai (The Almighty). In most English Bibles it is traditionally translated as “THE LORD,” using small capital letters. Some scholars believe that the Name is pronounced YAH-WEH.

The Tetragrammation is found eight times in Genesis in different forms. 15:1 “I am your shield,” Gen 15:7 “I am the LORD,” 17:1 & 35:11 “I am the Almighty God,” 26:24 “I am the God of Abraham,” 28:13 “I am the God of Bethel,” 31:13 "I am the LORD God of Abraham thy father,” and 46:3 “I am God, the God of your father.” Exodus continues with 21 places God uses the term “I am” to describe Himself and is an interesting study in itself.

The First and the Last

The term Nomina Sacra is Latin and means “Sacred names.” It was common practice when copping ancient manuscripts to abbreviate certain words or phrases, a type of shorthand if you will. These abbreviations are evident in ancient manuscripts and help researchers to differentiate between Christian and Jewish codexes of the Old Testament.

The use of Nomina Sacra is apparent in the first verse of the Bible with the Aleph and the Tau, or the first and last letters of the Hebrew alphabet.

Hebrew text: http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/tools/printer-friendly.pl?translation=heb&book=Gen&chapter=1#top

Hebrew is read from right to left and if you notice the forth ‘word’ or set of letters, they are not translated. These letters are the Aleph and the Tau, or the First and the Last.

If we were to translate these ‘letters’ into English we would read: “In the Beginning God (Aleph Tau or the First and the Last) created the heaven and the earth.”

We also find these letters in Zechariah in the Hebrew text, again not translated, when the Prophet speaks of the Messiah ...and they shall look upon me (Aleph Tau) whom they have pierced... Zechariah 12:10.

What is extremely interesting is that in the New Testament we see the use of the words Alpha and Omega (the first and last letters of the Greek alphabet ), explained within the text as the First and the Last - the Beginning and the End, to refer to Jesus Christ, or God in human form.

Jehovah

The name Jehovah is derived from the combination of the consonants YHWH and the vowels of Adonai. The name Jehovah was never part of the Hebrew Scriptures but entered the common English language through its use in the King James Bible.

The Old Testament

The name “Old Testament” comes from the Latin term vetus testamentum used by Tetullian in the second century AD.
The Old Testament begins with the Book of Genesis. The Hebrew word for Genesis (Bereshith) means “birth,” “origin,” or “beginnings,” and is defined as “the way in which something comes to be.” In Genesis we find the origin of the Universe and all life. We also learn of the beginning of sin and death and the birth of a nation, Israel.

God called Abram (whose name was later changed by God to Abraham-Gen17:5) to, “Leave your country, your people and your father's household and go to the land I will show you. I will make you into a great nation and I will bless you; I will make your name great, and you will be a blessing.” Gen12:1-2.

Isaac, the son of Abraham, also receives the calling of God and the promises of becoming a Great Nation - Gen 26:2-5

Jacob, Isaac’s son, whose name means “supplanter” or more literally, “grabber,” which is a fitting metaphor for his life, also receives the call of God. While in the womb he struggled with his twin brother, Esau and at birth he was clutching the elder’s heel. Later he supplants his older brother’s birthright which Esau sold him for a bowl of stew – Gen 25:31. Later in life God also changes his name, “…Your name will no longer be Jacob, but Israel, because you have struggled with God and with men and have overcome." Gen 32:28. Israel means struggling or striving with God. It was the twelve sons on Jacob (Israel) that are the 12 patriarchs of the nation of Israel.

The Old Testament records the history of this nation, both the good and the bad. This record was written by kings, shepherds, prophets and scribes on leather scrolls and stone tablets over hundreds of years as inspired by God.

Moses is the author of the first five books of the Old Testament, or Torah, Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers and Deuteronomy (other then the last few verses of Deuteronomy, which records his death and was penned by Joshua).

The Torah, which is translated as “doctrine” or “teaching,” and known in English as the Pentateuch, from the Greek Pentateukhos, which refers to scroll cases, is also commonly called the Law as the Laws of God, most notably the 10 Commandments, are revealed within its pages. The Torah is the first part of the Tenakh, the Hebrew Bible and the Christian Old Testament.

The word Tenakh originated from the initials T.N.K., the first letters of the three parts of the Old Testament. In Hebrew; these parts are the TORAH – the Law, NEVI’IM – the Prophets, and K’TUVIM – the writings (Psalms, history, poetry, etc.)

Following the Torah we begin with the “First Prophets,” Joshua, Judges, Samuel and Kings, which include the history of the nation Israel. Interspersed throughout this history of Israel we find stories of conquest and defeat, love and hate, betrayal, deceit, murder, and of course prophecy (prophecy is found dispersed throughout the Scriptures). The stories found within these books have stirred the hearts of men and women for centuries and are beloved by both Jews and Christians. (The books of I & II Samuel and I & II Kings in the Tenakh are counted as one book each respectively).

Within the books of the First Prophets we find the book of Ruth - a very prophetic book of the goel, or Kinsman-Redeemer; I & II Chronicles – written for the exiles who had returned to Israel following the Babylonian captivity; Ezra and Nehemiah - the story of the return from exile to rebuild the city of Jerusalem and the Temple; Esther – the story of Purim and God’s care of his chosen people while in exile; and Job - a book of several sermons in itself. From the sovereignty of God, suffering, obedience, blessings, and even the workings of Satan, the book of Job has long been a favorite and comfort to millions through the centuries.

Considered the ‘writings’ are the book of Pslams - songs of praise to God; Proverbs and Ecclesiastes - books of knowledge and wisdom; and the Song of Solomon - a beautiful human love story.

The last section of the Old Testament is the Prophets. Isaiah – from God’s judgment, His salvation, and a prophetic vision of the suffering Christ, Isaiah is one of the most startling and majestic of the prophetic books; Jeremiah – God’s Omnipresence, His judgment, and individual accountability permeate the writings of this Prophet in the setting before Judah’s eventual capture and captivity to Babylon; Lamentations– written by Jeremiah tells the story of the fall of Judah and the destruction of the Temple and true repentance; Ezekiel – More judgment of Judah as well as the surrounding nations, God’s total sovereignty over all creation; Daniel – a look at Israel’s captivity, the sovereignty of God, and prophecies of the coming world rulers. The ’70 weeks of Daniel’ is a prerequisite to understanding the book Revelation.

The final twelve prophetic books are known as the Minor Prophets which include Hosea, Joel, Amos, Obadiah, Jonah, Micah, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, Haggai, Zechariah and Malachi. There is nothing ‘minor’ about them as their prophecies are of major importance. The term minor only refers to the length of the books, not their importance. We’ll cover these books of the Prophets in depth in later studies, Lord willing.

For those who have been fascinated with Eschatology, a branch of theology concerned with the “end-times,” these books of prophecy have become some of the most thoroughly studied in the past 60 years, since the re-birth of the nation Israel.

We’ll continue our study at a later time with an overview of the New Testament, history of Biblical translations, archaeology, the canon, the Apocrypha and how to study the Bible.

Common sayings from the Bible

Here’s a quick study for you of sayings from the Old Testament that have become part of the English lexicon. This is a fun, quick and educational study. Grab your Bible (or you can use the Blue Letter Bible link listed under "favorite links" at upper left of this page – use the KJV or NKJV listing on BLB) to look up these references and see how they were used in God’s Word.

Brother’s keeper – Gen 4:9

Fire and brimstone – Gen 19:24

Scapegoat – Lev 16:8

Eye for an eye – Lev 24:19-20

Sabbatical – Lev 25

Apple of the eye – Deu 32:10

Skin of my teeth – Job 19:20

Spare the rod spoil the child –Pro 13:24

Fly in the ointment – Ecc 10:1

Drop in the bucket – Isa 40:15

Leopard change his spots – Jer13:23

The writing on the wall – Dan 5

Until next week be like the Bereans and study the Scriptures daily (Acts 17:11).

Glory to our Lord Yeshua ha Mashiach (Jesus the Messiah)!

References
The Holy Bible
Halley’s BibleHandbook, Henry H. Halley
Archaeology of the Land of the Bible, Ephraim Stern
Old Testament Survey, W.S. Lasor, David Hubbard & Frederic Bush
Cosmic Codes – Hidden Messages from the Edge of Eternity, Chuck Missler
Archaeology and the Old Testament World, John Gray
The Bible as History, Werner Keller
The Bible, Max Anders
Every Prophecy of the Bible, John F. Walvoord
Strong's Concordance, Dr. James Strong
Vine’s Complete Expository Dictionary of the Old and New Testament Words, W.E. Vine, Merrill F. Unger & William White, Jr.
Fascinating Bible Facts, David M. Howard, Jr., Ph.D.
Bible Almanac, Anna Trimiew
www.blueletterbible.org
www.allaboutgod.com
www.allabouttruth.org
www.williamtyndale.com
www.conservapedia.com
www.khouse.org
BELIEVE Religious Information Source: http://mb-soft.com/believe/index.html
The Unbound Bible: http://unbound.biola.edu/index.cfm?method=multilex.showSearchForm

The Holy Bible - Part 2 The New Testament – Overview
4/13/2008 2:51:47 PM
The New Testament is the very best book that ever was or ever will be known to the world. – Charles Dickens

Before we begin today’s study, please bow your heart before the Lord…

Father, your love and care continues to amaze us. We are so blessed and ask that you would give us understanding of your Word and help us to hide your Word within our hearts. We ask this in Jesus’ mighty name, Amen.

Introduction

The New Testament is about a Man, and God’s plan of salvation for all of mankind.

In 4 BC, some 400 years after the book of Malachi had been written, a child was born of a virgin. Some 30 years later this Man began to perform miraculous miracles in the site of all those around Him. Obviously this was no ordinary Man. This Man is known to the English speaking peoples of the world as Jesus Christ.

Jesus Christ

The name Jesus is the Latin form of the Greek Iesous, which is in turn a transliteration of His Hebrew Name Yeshua, Yahshuah or YAHU'SHUAH, and means YHWH (God) is Salvation.

The term Christ, or Christos, is the Greek equivalent of the Hebrew term Messiah or transliterated Hebrew, Meshiach, and means “Anointed.” Or in Hebrew: Yeshua ha Mashiach – God Saves the Anointed!

Who are the Anointed?

Before we continue with our current study the above statement begs the question, “Just who is the Anointed that will be saved by God?” If you have put your faith and trust in Jesus, believe He has paid the price for your sins and have a personal relationship with Him, YOU are that Anointed. Salvation is a free gift. It cannot be earned no matter how good you think you are or how many works of good you have done. This is the Gospel Message, the Good News!

If you would like this free gift God is waiting to hear from you. Tell Him right now that you need Him and the salvation that Jesus provided for you on the Cross. It’s really that simple. Continue to speak with Him throughout each and every day and read His word, even the difficult parts. Get connected with a Bible believing and teaching church. As time goes on you will grow in your faith as well as God’s plan for your life and you will experience true joy in no matter what situation you might find yourself. Don’t wait until you think you are good enough to approach Him as that day will never come – COME JUST AS YOU ARE! His grace will change everything.

The Gospels

Just as the Old Testament has three sections, The NewTestament also has three distinct parts; The Gospels, the Epistles, and Prophecy (Revelation).

The New Testament begins with the four Gospels, Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, which provide us with the history of Jesus’ birth, ministry, Deity, and His death.

The term Gospel comes from the Greek word “euangelion,” which means Good News. It must be noted that the information within the Gospels was taught and spread by the Apostles, as well as many of the eye witnesses of the events of Pentecost, for some 20 years by oral tradition before they were written down for all of posterity.

The first three Gospels are known as the Synoptic Gospels (from the Greek syn-together, and opsis-seeing or “seeing together” or “seeing with the same eyes”). These three Gospels share many of the same events of the life of Jesus as seen from different perspectives. There are many similarities of these three records and yet also differences. This is exactly what one would expect of three different witnesses of an event who are asked to relate what they saw and heard.

Matthew, one of the two Apostle writers of the Gospels, and as a Jew was writing mainly to other Jews. From the words and terms he uses it is quite obvious who he believed was his main audience. Matthew attempts to show his fellow Jews how Jesus fulfilled the Old Testament prophecies of the promised Messiah as well His human lineage connecting Him to David.

John Mark, a young man during Jesus’ ministry, is believed to be the first of the Gospel writers to put down his recollections of the events of Jesus’ life and death in written form. No doubt that Mark was an eye witness to many of the public events of Jesus’ life but it would seem much of his written account came from the oral teachings of the Apostles in Jerusalem.

Luke, the only gentile to have written any of the books of the Bible, (he also penned the book Acts or Acts of the Apostles), was a doctor and also a friend of Paul’s and accompanied him on several of his ministry journeys.

John, the “Apostle that Jesus loved,” wrote not only of the historical events surrounding the life and ministry of Jesus, but also of His Divinity and ties the Old and New Testaments together. This Gospel has become a favorite of many Christians today. As the Apostle John tells us, “Jesus did many other things as well. If every one of them were written down, I suppose that even the whole world would not have room for the books that would be written.” Jhn 21:25

Following the Gospels we come to the book of Acts. Acts is an historical record of the workings of the early Church, Saul of Tarsus’ (Paul’s) conversion and journeys, the Holy Spirit being poured out upon the Apostles at Pentecost, and the spread of the Gospel message throughout much of the Roman Empire.

Epistles

The word Epistle comes from the Greek word, epistole and means “letter.”

The Epistles are comprised of 21 letters. These letters are addressed to churches and individuals, and in reality, to all of us. 14 of the 21 books were written by Paul with the remaining attributed to James, Peter, John and Jude. James and Jude were Jesus’ younger brothers (half-brothers) by birth.

These Epistles arose to address special situations within the early Churches of the first century. These letters address behavior, misunderstandings, or doctrinal error that needed correcting and expound upon in the way a Christian should live.

The Epistles are: Romans, 1 Corinthians, 2 Corinthians, Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, 1 Thessalonians, 2 Thessalonians, 1 Timothy, 2 Timothy, Titus, Philemon, Hebrews (written by Paul), James, 1 Peter, 2 Peter, 1 John, 2 John, 3 John and Jude.

Revelation

Many writers and producers of Bibles have named this book incorrectly such as the “Revelation of St. John” or “The Apocalypse.” This book is, as stated in its first words, “The Revelation of Jesus Christ,” as it reveals to us the very nature of our Risen Lord. The Apostle John, while imprisoned on the island of Patmos, was visited by the Lord Himself in Power and in Glory, and was instructed by an angel, or heavenly messenger, to write down what was about to be revealed.

Revelation is the only book of the Bible that offers a special blessing to everyone that reads and heeds the things that are written within yet many Christians have yet read through the book. We believe this is due to the symbolism used by John who was shown events that would take place in the distant future that he would have no knowledge or reference. Much of the symbolism used in Revelation is explained within the text itself or can be found throughout the Old Testament. A good concordance should be utilized when studying this book.

Revelation begins with seven letters to seven early Churches in Asia Minor, tells of the rise of the Anti-Christ, a world wide government, the return of Jesus, the end of Satan and the end of the world as well as a New Heaven, New Earth and a New Jerusalem. The descriptions of this New World defy imagination.

This has only been a general over-view of the Holy Bible and we plan on going much more in depth on each book as we proceed with our future studies, Lord willing.

We’ll continue our study at a later time with the history of Biblical translations, archaeology, the canon, the Apocrypha and how to study the Bible.

Common sayings from the Bible

Here’s a quick study for you of sayings from the New Testament that have become part of the English lexicon. This is a fun, quick and educational study. Grab your Bible (or you can use the Blue Letter Bible link to your upper left) to look up these references and see where they are found in God’s Word.

Salt of the earth – Matt 5:13

Seek and you will find – Matt 7:7

Wolf in sheep’s clothing – Matt 7:15

The blind leading the blind – Matt 15:14

With God all things are possible – Matt 19:25-26

What God has joined together – Mark 10:9

Eat, drink and be merry – Luke 12:13-21

Sweating blood – Luke 22:44

A thorn in one’s side – 2 Cor 12:7-9

You reap what you sow – Gal 6:7

The root of all evil (the LOVE of money) – 1 Timothy 6:10

Keep the faith – 2 Tim 4:7

Until next week be like the Bereans and study the Scriptures daily (Acts 17:11).

Glory to our Lord Yeshua ha Mashiach (Jesus the Messiah)!

References
The Holy Bible
Halley’s Bible Handbook, Henry H. Halley
Archaeology of the Land of the Bible, Ephraim Stern
Old Testament Survey, W.S. Lasor, David Hubbard & Frederic Bush
Cosmic Codes – Hidden Messages from the Edge of Eternity, Chuck Missler
Archaeology and the Old Testament World, John Gray
The Bible as History, Werner Keller
The Bible, Max Anders
Every Prophecy of the Bible, John F. Walvoord
Strong's Concordance, Dr. James Strong
Vine’s Complete Expository Dictionary of the Old and New Testament Words, W.E. Vine, Merrill F. Unger & William White, Jr.
Fascinating Bible Facts, David M. Howard, Jr., Ph.D.
Bible Almanac, Anna Trimiew
www.blueletterbible.org
www.allaboutgod.com
www.allabouttruth.org
www.williamtyndale.com
www.conservapedia.com
www.khouse.org
BELIEVE Religious Information Source: http://mb-soft.com/believe/index.html
The Unbound Bible: http://unbound.biola.edu/index.cfm?method=multilex.showSearchForm
www.skypoint.com/~waltzmn/NominaSacra.html

The translations of the Bible

The Holy Bible – Part 3 – Bible Translations
4/20/2008 4:47:59 PM
I am a spirit come from God, and returning to God. I want to know one thing: the way to heaven. God himself has condescended to teach me the way. He has written it down in a book. Oh, give me that book! At any price give me the book of God. Let me be a man of one book. – John Wesley

Before we begin today’s study, please bow your heart before the Lord…

Father, thank you for your loving grace which you so freely give to each of us. We ask that you would fill us with your Holy Spirit, give us understanding of your Word, and help us to hide your Word within our hearts. We ask this in Jesus’ mighty name, Amen.

Introduction

It is believed that following the return of the Israelites from their captivity in Babylon, Ezra, described as priest and scribe (Ne 8:9), compiled the scrolls of the Old Testament and continued the tradition of the Jews of keeping and copying their Holy writings for future generations. It is obvious that they had kept their Scriptures during the 70 years of exile from the fact that upon their return to Israel the reading of the Law, as well as their feasts, were reinstated nationally.

Between 285 – 250 BC the Hebrew Bible (Tenach) was translated into Greek by Jewish scholars in the cultural center of Alexandria, Egypt. The translation became known as the Septuagint, a fancy word for 70, which is a reference to the tradition that 70 or 72 men performed the translation.

The reason for this translation was that at this time in history Hebrew, as well as other native languages, were being replaced with Greek and the only ones who would have spoken, read and written Hebrew were the priests. Following Alexander's conquest of much of the ‘known world,’ Koine Greek quickly became the universal language.

This translation is one of the most important throughout history and documents the existence of the Bible and the prophecies that would be fulfilled. Some scholars have tried to late date much of the Hebrew Scriptures to exclude the power of fulfilled prophecy and regulate the Bible to nothing more then poetry and possibly some history. The importance of this translation can not be overstated as it is the one cited by the New Testament authors and by Jesus Christ Himself!

Once the New Testament was written the real work of translation began in earnest. Even though Greek had become the universal language the Roman Empire had conquered the areas formerly held by the Greeks and continued to expand. There were many areas that had retained their native tongue as well as newly conquered lands and they wanted to read God’s Word in their own languages.

Writing and Major Translations/Revisions of the Bible

1400 – 400 BC: All the original Hebrew and Aramaic manuscripts, which make Up the 39 Books of the Old Testament, are completed.

285 – 250 BC: The Greek Septuagint translation is accomplished in Alexandria, Egypt. The 39 books of the Tenach, as well as 14 Apocrypha books, are translated from the Hebrew into Koine Greek.

100 BC – 100 AD: The Old Testament is translated into Syriac, a dialect of Aramaic, directly from the Hebrew.

40-95 AD: All original Greek manuscripts, which make Up the 27 Books of the New Testament, were written.

90 AD: Jewish elders, during the Council of Yavne, also known as the Council of Jamnia, defined a final Hebrew Biblical canon.

100-300 AD: Syriac was one of the first translations of the New Testament.

200-300 AD: Coptic translations are produced. There is much debate and disagreement between scholars as to the date of these translations but most agree that they were in use by the fourth century.

350-380 AD: A Western Gothic bishop, Wulfila, translated the Greek Bible into Gothic.

382-405 AD: Commissioned by Pope Damasus I, Jorome produced a Latin translation of the Bible. Jorome relied mainly on the Hebrew Tanakh for the Old Testament and revised a current Latin New Testament version using the oldest Greek manuscripts known to him. This translation is called the Vulgate from the Latin versio vulgate, which means the published translation. The Vulgate contains 53 books of the Old Testament (39 plus 14 Apocrypha) and the 27 New Testament books. The Vulgate became the official Bible of the Roman Catholic Church.

411-434 AD: In 406 AD St. Mesrob invented a new alphabet, for the Armenians, which was suited for the complex sounds of these peoples native tongue. In 411 AD several of his students began the task of translating the Bible into Armenian.

500 AD: It is believed by this time in history the Scriptures had been translated into over 500 different languages!

600 AD: Scripture translations in the Western world, for the most part, are abruptly stopped by the power of the Roman Catholic Church and their instance that the Scriptures only be written and transmitted in Latin. All other translations were outlawed and destroyed and anyone who disobeyed was put to death. This, we believe, extended the “Dark Ages” for hundreds of years!

864 – 865 AD: St. Cyril and St. Mathodius, two missionary brothers to the Slavs, invented the Glagolitic alphabet to transcribe the Old Church Slavonic language. St. Cyril is credited with the invention of the Cyrillic alphabet, based on the Glagolitic, and the Scriptures were translated into this language.

1000 AD: Early Anglo-Saxon translations of the New Testament are produced.

1384 AD: Relying solely on Jerome’s Latin Vulgate, Wycliffe produces a hand-written English translation of the entire Bible (all 80 books of the Vulgate).

1455 AD: Gutenberg invents the printing press and books can now be mass-produced. The first book produced? The Bible (in Latin).

1516 AD: Erasmus produces a Greek/Latin parallel of the New Testament.

1522 AD: Martin Luther translates the New Testament into German.

1526 AD: William Tyndale translates the New Testament into English from the original Greek language.

1530 - 1534 AD: William Tyndale completes the translation of the Torah and his translations of Johah and the New Testament are printed. In 1535 William Tyndale was tried for heresy and treason, found guilty and in 1536 strangled and burnt at the stake all for printing the scriptures in English.

1535 AD: The first complete Bible in English, the Myles Coverdale’s Bible, is printed including the 14 books of the Apocrypha.

1537 AD: The second complete English Bible, “Matthews Bible” from John Thomas Matthew Rogers was printed and also included the Apocrypha.

1539 – 1540 AD: The “Great Bible” was the first authorized (not illegal) English Bible. Printed on cotton linen sheets, as opposed to wood-pulp paper, is still in excellent shape today. This Bible was authorized by King Henry VIII (founder of the Church of England or the Anglican Church) to usurp the Roman Catholic Church and the Pope’s power. It is also referred to as “Cranmer’s Bible” as the Archbishop of Canterbury, Thomas Cranmer wrote the preface. The term “Great Bible” comes from the books great size and also included the Apocrypha.

1560 AD: The Geneva Bible, which was the first English Bible to include numbered verses, also included the Apocrypha.

1568 AD: The “Bishops’ Bible” is a revision of the “Great Bible” by bishops of the Church of England under the direction of Bishop Mathew Parker, Queen Elizabeth’s Archbishop.

1582 AD: The Latin Vulgate New Testament is published in English for Catholics.

1609 AD: The complete Douay-Rheims Bible is translated from the Vulgate and is published making the first complete Catholic Bible (80 books including the Apocrypha).

1611 AD: The King James Bible is produced. Originally the King James Bible included the Apocrypha making it 80 books instead of the current 66 which was established in 1885. A brief history of the King James Bible can be found here.

1782 AD: The first English language Bible without the Apocrypha was the Aitken’s Bible. Based on the King James Bible, produced by Robert Aitken and printed in America. A smaller 6” x 4” version, known as “The Bible of the Revolution” was carried by many soldiers during the Revolutionary war.

1791 AD: The first “Family Bible” and first “Illustrated Bible” are printed in America. Both are King James versions by Isaac Collins and Isaiah Thomas, respectively.

1808 AD: Jane Aitken, daughter of Robert Aitken, is the first woman to print a Bible.

1831 – 1833 AD: Noah Webster, called "America's Schoolmaster" for his famous dictionary, revised the King James Bible. As the Bible was the Book used by educators in schools, Webster felt that an updated version was needed.

1841 AD: The first English Hexapla New Testament is printed. This Bible lists six of the most important English translations in parallel columns. The original Greek is at the top of the page and this Bible includes a preface detailing how each translation from 1380 to 1611 assisted in the following translations.

1846 AD: Another King James version was the Illuminated Bible enacted by Congress in 1843 and printed by Harper & Brothers of New York. It has been estimated that less then 100 of these Bibles are still in existence today. They were lavishly illustrated and a sample page can be seen here.

1870 – 1885 AD: The Church of England decided to make a revision of the King James Bible. Teams of scholars were appointed and the first major English revision of the King James Bible, the “Revised Version,” was produced.

1901 AD: Due to the revised King James Bible in England, which was oriented for the British using their spelling and figures of speech, the first major American revision of the King James Bible, the “American Standard Version,” is produced in America.

1929 – 1952 AD: In 1929 the World Council of Churches began work on a revision of the American Standard Version. Their work was based on the latest scholarly Greek texts and their New Testament was published in 1946 and the Old Testament in 1952. This text is known as the Revised Standard Version (RSV).

1946 – 1970 AD: The Church of Scotland, under the supervision of Dr. C. H. Dodd began work using the latest Biblical research, including the Dead Sea Scrolls. The New Testament was published in 1961 and the Old Testament in 1970.

1956 – 1971 AD: Kenneth Taylor produced the entire Bible in “everyday” language, or a paraphrase. The New Testament was published in 1956 and the Old Testament in 1971. While this Bible is a paraphrase and not as accurate as other translations it has opened up the Scriptures to an entire generation of Americans as well as English speaking peoples around the world.

1966 AD: The Roman Catholic Church published the Jerusalem Bible. This translation is based on the original languages and has become popular with both Catholics and Protestants. A revision, the “New Jerusalem Bible” was published in 1986.

1966 – 1976 AD: The American Bible Society produced the “Good News Bible.” This is a readable and accurate translation into everyday American speech and is based on a careful study of linguistics. This type of translation is used as a pattern for translations into many other languages.

1971 AD: A modern word for word English translation, the “New American Standard Bible,” (NASB) is produced.

1973 AD: In the past 35 years many Christians have become “NIV positive.” The New International Version (NIV) is published as a modern and accurate phrase for phrase English Translation.

1982 AD: The King James Bible is revised and published as a modern English version which maintains the original style. The NKJV becomes popular with many evangacal churches.

1989 AD: The New Revised Standard Version (NRSV) is produced responding to the need for a readable and accurate text with “gender-inclusive” language.

The breaking with the Roman Catholic Church by England’s Henry VIII and the Reformation gave rise to many Bible translations throughout Europe. Between 1500 and 1700 most countries of Western Europe received translations in their own languages.

A brief history of the Bible in English from William Tyndale Gallery can be found here.

The Best Translation

You must have known that we would have to add our two cents to the on going debate as to which translation is best. As far as we are concerned all translations have their pluses and minuses and ALL should be used in the study of the Word. One should familiarize themselves with the problems of each translation and there is a wealth of knowledge to be found on this subject.

I recall as a child opening that big Book my parents kept and trying to read and understand it. I could not get past a few verses before realizing this was not something I would be attempting to read in the future. As a young adult and new Christian the Living Bible was a true joy to read and I took a pocket New Testament to work with me and read it every chance I had.

It really doesn’t matter what translation, version or paraphrase you use. The Gospel message is what is truly important and they all present that message well.

We’ll continue our study at a later time with Biblical archaeology, the canon, the Apocrypha and how to study the Bible.

This week we’re including a short quiz on the Bible. The answers appear at the bottom of this post. Let’s see how well you know the Good Book.

What is the longest book in the Bible?
What is the longest chapter in the Bible?
What is the longest verse in the Bible?
What is the shortest book in the Bible?
What is the shortest chapter in the Bible?
What is the shortest verse in the Bible?
Who was the oldest man in the Bible?
What page in the Bible can be torn out and thrown away?

Until next week be like the Bereans and study the Scriptures daily (Acts 17:11).

Glory to our Lord Yeshua ha Mashiach (Jesus the Messiah)!

References
The Holy Bible
Halley’s Bible Handbook, Henry H. Halley
Archaeology of the Land of the Bible, Ephraim Stern
Old Testament Survey, W.S. Lasor, David Hubbard & Frederic Bush
Cosmic Codes – Hidden Messages from the Edge of Eternity, Chuck Missler
Archaeology and the Old Testament World, John Gray
The Bible as History, Werner Keller
The Bible, Max Anders
Every Prophecy of the Bible, John F. Walvoord
Strong's Concordance, Dr. James Strong
Vine’s Complete Expository Dictionary of the Old and New Testament Words, W.E. Vine, Merrill F. Unger & William White, Jr.
Fascinating Bible Facts, David M. Howard, Jr., Ph.D.
Bible Almanac, Anna Trimiew
www.blueletterbible.org
www.allaboutgod.com
www.allabouttruth.org
www.williamtyndale.com
www.conservapedia.com
www.khouse.org
BELIEVE Religious Information Source: http://mb-soft.com/believe/index.html
The Unbound Bible: http://unbound.biola.edu/index.cfm?method=multilex.showSearchForm
www.skypoint.com/~waltzmn/NominaSacra.html
www.greatsite.com
http://www.bible-researcher.com/index.html

Quiz Answers

Jeremiah is the longest book in the Bible. It may not have the most chapters but does contain the most words. The book with the most chapters is Psalms.
Psalm 119 is the longest chapter with 176 verses. It is an acrostic poem with each group of eight verses beginning with successive letters of the Hebrew alphabet. Psalm 119 is a praise of the Torah (the Law) and each verse refers to God’s Word in some way.
Esther 8:9 is the longest verse in the Bible containing 85 words in the NRSV and 43 words in the Hebrew. This verse tells of Mordechai, Esther’s adoptive father, issuing an edict. For a real challenge find the Name of God in the book of Esther.*
3 John is the shortest book in the Bible. 2 John is a close second with 19 more words. There are five books in the Bible that are only one chapter long, 3 John, 2 John, Philemon, Jude and Obadiah.
Psalm 117 contains the shortest chapter in the Bible. This wonderful Psalm exhorts us to praise God for his goodness and faithfulness.
John 11:35, “Jesus wept.” is the shortest verse in the Bible. Even though Jesus would shortly raise Lazarus from the dead He still wept over the grief those around Him were experiencing.
Methuselah at 969 years of age upon his death. Okay smarty pants, how is it that Methuselah died before his dad?**
Yes, there is a page in almost all Bibles produced today that can be discarded, the blank page between the Old and New Testaments as the Bible is ONE BOOK!

* The book of Esther does not contain the Name of God – except in an acrostic in the original Hebrew.

** Who was Methuselah’s dad? Enoch, who walked with God and was taken to heaven - Gen 5:24. Both Enoch and the prophet Elijah were both taken to heaven before death. Could these two be the two “witnesses” who are to come in the “latterdays” mentioned in Revelation 11:3-12?

Countering the Counterfeit: A Case for Traditional Marriage

Countering the Counterfeit: A Case for Traditional Marriage
By Penna Dexter
If we do not defend marriage now we will lose it. Too strong a statement? The truth is we are one court decision away from the beginning of the end of traditional marriage in this country. Homosexual activists across America are poised and ready for a court in Massachusetts, New Jersey, Indiana, Arizona, or another state to grant marriage to same sex couples. The first state to approve these "marriages" will become a vacation spot for gay couples who will travel there to get "married" and return to their home states asking for those marriages to be recognized. If you don't believe this will happen, consider the situation in Vermont, which began allowing civil unions three years ago. Eighty-five percent of the nearly 5700 civil unions registered in Vermont have been for out-of-state homosexual couples.

Once just one state legalizes gay marriage, the 37 states that have laws limiting marriage to one man and one woman will see those laws challenged; some will stand; some will be struck down. Unless a constitutional amendment is passed, defining marriage as between one man and one woman, gay marriage will be imposed incrementally on a nation that has taken the sexual revolution too far, but not far enough to applaud this. There is no state legislature that would approve same sex marriage unless forced to by the courts. No state referendum asking for legal gay marriage could pass. Several public opinion polls show that Americans are even less ready for same sex marriage than before the Supreme Court overturned the Texas sodomy law. Overcelebrating and overreaching on the part of the gay activist community has forced Americans, even those who really don't mind giving homosexuals just about any rights they want, to take a serious look at this idea of same sex marriage.

The Federal Marriage Amendment, already introduced in the House of Representatives is the only way to prevent the courts from imposing same sex marriage on America. But, a constitutional amendment is a tall order. It will require public opinion to hold firm against same sex marriage. When someone asks why allowing Harry and Sam to get "married" would demean your marriage, or mine, we'll need answers that take into consideration Americans' strong aversion to rhetoric that even approaches sounding intolerant toward homosexuals as persons. Homosexual activist groups and the mainstream media are expert in capitalizing on that sentiment. In workplace lunchrooms, over coffee at Starbucks, or on the sidelines at athletic practices we need to have a reasoned national conversation on why traditional marriage must be preserved and why that cannot happen if gay marriage is allowed.

Marriage: the foundation of all successful societies

Human societies have always restricted marriage to opposite sex unions. This has served to protect families against the negative consequences of unrestrained sexuality. Noted British anthropologist, J.D. Unwin, set out to show, by studying 86 cultures, that sex outside of marriage did not destroy cultures. He proved the opposite. Dr. Unwin's report, released in 1934, shows that the key to a society's success is the degree to which it confines sex to marriage. The energy displayed by monogamous societies is channeled into productive endeavors, promoting an expansive society, socially, economically and in many other ways. As a society becomes less monogamous, its productive energy diminishes. Dr. Unwin found that the impact lags two generations. Now, a generation away from the beginning of the sexual revolution, we're at a crossroads. We must encourage marriage to strengthen society.

But homosexual activists say, "That's just want we want. We want what heterosexuals have: marriage." Trouble is, expanding marriage to allow homosexual partners, would redefine the institution and ultimately destroy it. Our society will suffer the consequences. In a July 3 Boston Globe column, Jeff Jacoby describes how homosexual marriage would diminish traditional marriage:

"Together with the ancient taboos against adultery and incest and the western taboo against polygamy, the heterosexuality of marriage helps shield women and children from exploitation, cements the union between fathers and mothers, and bolsters the ethos of monogamy on which the dignity of marriage depends."

The price we p ay for increased sexual freedom is the erosion of these protections. Legalized same sex marriage will unravel the family stability so important to society.
There are several reasons:

1. Same sex marriage will not be monogamous. Jordan Lorence, Senior Staff Attorney for the Alliance Defense Fund warns against assuming that homosexuals think about marriage the same way heterosexuals do. Gays do not value chastity or "waiting until marriage". Prominent homosexuals admit this. Lesbian writer Camille Paglia calls gay marriage "monogamy without fidelity", describing a sort of emotional faithfulness that does not exclude physical unfaithfulness. And conservative homosexual columnist Andrew Sullivan writes of "a broader understanding of commitment". This understanding is born out by several studies, the most recent of which is based on the health records of young Dutch homosexual men. Dr. Maria Xiridou of the Amsterdam Municipal Health Service published her findings in the May issue of the journal, AIDS. She found that homosexual relationships last, on average, 1 1/2 years and that men in those relationships have an average of eight partners per year outside their main partnership. Your fellow soccer mom may argue that heterosexual marriages are wrecked by unfaithfulness too. But the vast majority of marriages last. Sixty-seven percent of first marriages in the United States last 10 years and 50% last 20 years. And several studies show more than 3/4 of married people say they have been faithful to their vows.

2. Men need the restraint of marriage. Jordan Lorence likens men's sex drives to "nuclear energy". Marriage provides a natural, healthy outlet for the sex drives of both men and women. Marriage helps men to focus on their wives and children. It restrains the self-centeredness and self-indulgence that are part of human nature. Women and children are the victims of the sexual revolution. To the extent that the society has retreated from marriage, there has been an expansion of government as the state attempts to fix the problems that result. Maggie Gallagher, editor of Marriagedebate.com and co-author of The Case for Marriage, describes marriage as

"...the fundamental, cross-cultural institution for bridging the male-female divide so that children have loving, committed mothers and fathers. Marriage is inherently normative: It is about holding out a certain kind of relationship as a social ideal, especially where there are children involved."

3 Every individual has limits on the list of who they can marry. An adult male cannot marry a six-year-old girl, his mother, or his dog. He cannot marry someone else's wife, or three women. Jordan Lorence points out that the emotional argument set forth by homosexuals who want to "come to the marriage party" is really a request to expand the list of who we can marry. How far will this go? Stanley Kurtz of the Hoover Institution wrote an extensive article for The Weekly Standard (8/4 &11, 2003) entitled "Beyond Gay Marriage". He makes a compelling case that legalizing homosexual marriage will usher in legalized polygamy and polymory (group marriage). He writes, "State-sanctioned polymory is now the cutting-edge issue among scholars of family law." He names and describes the work of several family law theorists at major universities many of whom are also advocates for lesbian and gay rights. Stanley Kurtz is disturbed by the influence of these scholars who seek "the eventual abolition of marriage as a legal category." One argument made for same sex marriage is that it will curb gay male promiscuity. Kurtz expects that, instead, sexually open couples will "help redefine marriage as a non-monogamous institution." We have eons of experience to prove that traditional marriage provides a stable environment for raising children. Place children smack in the middle of these open "marriages" and you have a recipe for emotional disaster, not to mention an exploding social welfare state as people moving in and out of these relationships try to figure out who will take care of the kids.

Privatize marriage?
Why not just take the state out of the marriage equation and let the church have it? That's the compromise proposed by the leader of Canada's Conservative Party, Peter MacKay. The plan would be to scrap marriage from the lawbooks and replace it with registered domestic partnerships for both homosexual and heterosexual couples. Michael Kinsley proposed essentially the same thing in a Washington Post column entitled "Abolish Marriage", (7/3/03). Marriage would be left to the churches and other organizations that want it. They could define what kind of couples they want to offer marriage to. Is that what we want? We'd better start explaining why not.

http://sites.silaspartners.com/partner/Article_Display_Page/0,,PTID320166%7CCHID634376%7CCIID1718054,00.html

Will Homosexual Marriage Destroy Marriage?
By Penna Dexter
There's a huge question mark punctuating the future of marriage in America. Depending upon the outcome of the battles now taking place in Massachusetts, Oregon, San Francisco and so many other places, we can expect one of two very different societies: one with marriage and one virtually without it. Defenders of traditional marriage are often asked, "What will gay marriage do to your marriage." The answer is that gay marriage will do nothing to my marriage, but it will eventually marginalize the institution of marriage and destroy its positive impact on our culture.

Europe is ahead of the U.S. on the gay marriage curve. In the Netherlands and Belgium there is full, legal same sex marriage. Many other European countries and Canada have marriage lite, civil unions which confer on cohabiting couples most of the benefits of marriage. These unions are also legal for homosexuals in Vermont and California. Some people call these arrangements 'marriage without the name.' But they are far less permanent. Couples can enter them and take advantage of the benefits...insurance coverage, hospital visitation rights, tax advantages, etc... and then leave when they want to. They don't need a divorce. To some people, this sounds convenient. But it's not so convenient...or beneficial... for children. And the cost to society is staggering.

In some parts of Europe, a generation is growing up literally without the influence of the traditional family. Alan Sears writes in his book, The Homosexual Agenda, that more than half of the children in Europe are born to unwed mothers. In countries like Norway, Sweden, Iceland, Denmark, it's been decades since the traditional family has been the norm for large percentages of children. For instance, in Sweden, 54% of children are born out of wedlock. In Norway, it's 49%. Denmark, 46%. In Iceland, the number of children born to unwed mothers is over 65%. Admittedly, the numbers are not great here in America: 27% of children are born to white single mothers; 69% to black single mothers. When governments subsidize single motherhood, marriage is discouraged. In Scandinavia mothers are simply better off financially if they do not marry The U.S. has injected some sanity into the system with welfare reform, which curtailed the financial incentives for women to have children out of wedlock. But if we allow it... the homosexual, same sex marriage juggernaut will turn the bus around and send us barreling down the road of government subsidy of all kinds of variations of families and the cheapening of marriage. Right now our laws encourage marriage because it's healthy for the society. Open all the benefits of marriage, and marriage itself, up to people simply living together with a registered partnership or a "marriage" between two homosexuals, and what do you have? Well the "conservative" argument for gay marriage says you have more stability, that marriage, gay or straight is good for America. "At least they're getting married, or making some sort of commitment."

To show where this "conservative" argument for homosexual marriage breaks down, Anthropologist, Stanley Kurtz wrote a series of articles for the Weekly Standard. Dr. Kurtz says marriage is fast disappearing in those places that are most hospitable to homosexual marriage. He points to Nordland, a county in northern Norway, where, even in some powerful churches, there's a high degree of acceptance of gay marriage. In fact, two parishes in Nordland have voted to fly rainbow flags on their churches. The flags signify that no one in these churches, including priests, may speak or preach against homosexual behavior. This shouldn't surprise us. In countries that embrace homosexuality, all of a sudden it literally becomes a crime to speak against anything having to do with the lifestyle. (For instance, in Canada, Christians have been fined for publicly stating that homosexuality is a sin.) In these churches in Nordland, gay priests are welcome and freely live in "registered partnerships." In most of Norway the Lutheran church is an important positive influence for traditional marriage. But, in Nordland, the promotion of homosexuality has resulted in a near-purge of conservative clergy and therefore of the churches' moral disapproval of cohabitation. Sixty-seven percent of all children born in Nordland in 2002 were to unmarried mothers often in cohabiting relationships. For firstborn children, the figure is 87%. Some couples were getting married when the second baby arrived, but that's changing. Fewer and fewer Nordlanders are doing so. So the 67% figure is moving toward the 87% number. When it gets there, in that part of Norway, marriage will be effectively dead. And, since cohabiting couples in Norway are three times as likely to break up as married couples, where's the stability? There's no conservative argument for gay marriage in Nordland. Instead, gay marriage is destroying marriage. Marriage is nearly dead there. Where does that leave the children? Many of their needs must increasingly be met by government.

Another Norwegian district is Nord-Troendelag. It's like the Norwegian Massachusetts because it's highly influenced by a liberal-left leaning institution of higher learning. Nord-Troendelag is bordered by the Norwegian University of Science and Technology. Two radical, pro-gay marriage social scientists, Kari Moxnes and Kari Melby, teach at the University. Their philosophy is pervasive in Nord-Troendelag. Again, out-of-wedlock birthrates are much higher than in the country as a whole: 83% for first-time births and 67% for all children. In these districts…really the Vermont and Massachusetts of Norway…marriage has almost disappeared. But people are still having babies. The connection between marriage and parenthood is fast disappearing.

This is spreading. Stanley Kurtz writes that "Marriage in Scandinavia is in deep decline, with children shouldering the burden of family dissolution." He says the "mainspring" of this decline..."the separation between marriage and parenthood...can be linked to gay marriage." Certainly, to some degree, marriage is being separated from parenthood in the United States. Look at the divorce rate and the numbers of children being raised in single parent homes. But we have a long way to go before marriage is decoupled from parenthood to the degree it is in Nordland and Nord-Troendelag. Gay marriage unleashed across America will do it.

Homosexual activists' quest for gay marriage is about getting some kind of rights. But marriage is not about rights. It's about what's right for children, for the next generation. It's about offering our kids a stable society. Because of its intended permanence the marriage relationship between a man and a woman is the only one that has the biological potential to produce children and then provide the ideal environment for those children to grow up in. Successful societies have always understood this. That's why marriage provides a net benefit for the society. If we tamper with it, we'll find ourselves looking to government to care for the children.

This article first appeared in the May 2004 issue of the Freedom Club Report.
Copyright & Reproduction Limitations
This document is the sole property of National Center for Freedom & Renewal (NCFR), the parent organization of Point of View. It may not be altered or edited in any way. It may be circulated without charge if reproduced in its entirety. All reproductions of this document must contain the copyright notice (i.e., Copyright, [Date] National Center for Freedom & Renewal) and this Copyright/Limitations notice. This document may not be used for resale (or the enhancement of any product sold) without the written permission of National Center for Freedom & Renewal.
Point of View Radio Talk Show uses the powerful tool of live, daily, national talk radio to defend a Biblical Christian worldview and to proclaim Christian solutions for the problems of America. Point of View---and its parent ministry, NCFR---aims to restore the greatness of Christian thought and values to every area of American life. Point of View is a non-profit ministry which serves because of the gifts of like-minded Christians throughout the nation.

How to Defend Your Pro-Life Views in 5 Minutes or Less

How to Defend Your Pro-Life Views in 5 Minutes or Less
Written by Scott Klusendorf
Suppose that you have just five minutes to graciously defend your pro-life beliefs with friends or classmates. Can you do it with rational arguments? What should you say? And how can you simplify the abortion issue for those who think it's hopelessly complex?
Hard Questions, Real Answers
Here's how to succeed in three easy steps:
1) Clarify the issue. Pro-life advocates contend that elective abortion unjustly takes the life of a defenseless human being. This simplifies the abortion controversy by focusing public attention on just one question: Is the unborn a member of the human family? If so, killing him or her to benefit others is a serious moral wrong. It treats the distinct human being, with his or her own inherent moral worth, as nothing more than a disposable instrument. Conversely, if the unborn are not human, killing them for any reason requires no more justification than having a tooth pulled.
In other words, arguments based on "choice" or "privacy" miss the point entirely. Would anyone that you know support a mother killing her toddler in the name of "choice and who decides?" Clearly, if the unborn are human, like toddlers, we shouldn't kill them in the name of choice anymore than we would a toddler. Again, this debate is about just one question: What is the unborn?
At this point, some may object that your comparisons are not fair—that killing a fetus is morally different than killing a toddler. Ah, but that's the issue, isn't it? Are the unborn, like toddlers, members of the human family? That is the one issue that matters.
Remind your critics that you are vigorously "pro-choice" when it comes to women choosing a number of moral goods. You support a woman's right to choose her own doctor, to choose her own husband, to choose her own job, and to choose her own religion, to name a few. These are among the many choices that you fully support for women. But some choices are wrong, like killing innocent human beings simply because they are in the way and cannot defend themselves.{1} No, we shouldn't be allowed to choose that.
2) Defend your pro-life position with science and philosophy. Scientifically, we know that from the earliest stages of development, the unborn are distinct, living, and whole human beings. Leading embryology books confirm this.{2} Prior to his abortion advocacy, former Planned Parenthood President Dr. Alan Guttmacher was perplexed that anyone, much less a medical doctor, would question this. "This all seems so simple and evident that it is difficult to picture a time when it wasn't part of the common knowledge," he wrote in his book Life in the Making.{3}
Philosophically, we can say that embryos are less developed than newborns (or, for that matter, toddlers) but this difference is not morally significant in the way abortion advocates need it to be. Consider the claim that the immediate capacity for self-awareness bestows value on human beings. Notice that this is not an argument, but an arbitrary assertion. Why is some development needed? And why is this particular degree of development decisive rather than another? These are questions that abortion advocates do not adequately address. Put simply, there is no morally significant difference between the embryo you once were and the adult you are today. Differences of size, development, and location are not relevant. Think of the acronym SLED as a helpful reminder of these non-essential differences:{4}
Size: True, embryos are smaller than newborns and adults, but why is that relevant? Do we really want to say that large people are more valuable than small ones? Men are generally larger than women, but that doesn't mean that they deserve more rights. Size doesn't equal value.
Level of development: True, embryos and fetuses are less developed than you and I. But again, why is this relevant? Four year-old girls are less developed than 14 year-old ones. Should older children have more rights than their younger siblings? Some people say that self-awareness makes one valuable. But if that is true, newborns do not qualify as valuable human beings. Six-week old infants lack the immediate capacity for performing human mental functions, as do the reversibly comatose, the sleeping, and those with Alzheimer's Disease.
Environment: Where you are has no bearing on who you are. Does your value change when you cross the street or roll over in bed? If not, how can a journey of eight inches down the birth-canal suddenly change the essential nature of the unborn from non-valuable tissue mass to valuable human being? If the unborn are not already human and valuable, merely changing their location can't make them so.
Degree of Dependency: If viability bestows human value, then all those who depend on insulin or kidney medication are not valuable and we may kill them. Conjoined twins who share blood type and bodily systems also have no right to life.
In short, it's far more reasonable to argue that although humans differ immensely with respect to talents, accomplishments, and degrees of development, they are nonetheless equal (and valuable) because they share a common human nature. Humans have value simply because of the kind of thing they are, not because of some acquired property they may gain or lose during their lifetimes.
3) Challenge your listeners to be intellectually honest. Ask the tough questions. When critics say that birth makes the unborn human, ask, "How does a mere change of location from inside the womb to outside the womb change the essential nature of the unborn?" If they say that brain development or higher consciousness makes us valuable humans, ask if they would agree with Joseph Fletcher that those with an IQ below 20 or perhaps 40 should forfeit their right to life? If not, why not? True, some people will ignore the scientific and philosophic case you present for the pro-life view and argue for abortion based on self-interest. That is the lazy way out. Remind your critics that if we care about truth, we will courageously follow the facts wherever they lead, no matter what the cost to our own self-interests.
References
Gregory Koukl, Precious Unborn Human Persons (Lomita: STR Press, 1999) p. 11.
See T.W. Sadler, Langman's Embryology, 5th ed. (Philadelphia: W.B. Saunders, 1993) p. 3; Keith L. Moore, The Developing Human: Clinically Oriented Embryology (Toronto: B.C. Decker, 1988) p. 2; O'Rahilly, Ronand and Muller, Pabiola, Human Embryology and Teratology, 2nd ed. (New York: Wiley-Liss, 1996) pp. 8, 29.
A. Guttmacher, Life in the Making: The Story of Human Procreation (New York: Viking Press, 1933) p. 3.
Stephen Schwarz, The Moral Question of Abortion (Chicago: Loyola University Press, 1990) p. 18.
Scott Klusendorf is President of the Life Training Institute and a popular conference and banquet speaker. Get his free pro-life training articles at www.prolifetraining.com
Related Articles:
The Vanishing Pro-Life Apologist
Personhood: The Measure of Life
Arguments Against Abortion

A virgindade de Maria e os irmãos de Jesus

A virgindade de Maria e os irmãos de Jesus
PERGUNTA
Nome:
Fábio
Enviada em:
29/07/2005
Local:
Bragança Paulista - SP,
Religião:
Protestante
Indubitavelmente, este é um assunto já resolvido no meio protestante tradicional devido à abundância de textos nas Escrituras neotestamentária que o elucidam. Poderíamos até considerá-lo obsoleto se não fosse pelo mariocentrismo, doutrina da Igreja Católica Romana que teima em admitir que Maria permaneceu virgem após o parto (virginitas post partum), o que torna parte dessa teologia um verdadeiro desvario e um grande óbice ao verdadeiro cristianismo ortodoxo. Durante séculos, a mariologia tem sofrido evoluções cada vez mais ousadas, e o tempo é testemunha disso:• Em 400 d.C, Maria foi proclamada “Mãe de Deus”; • Em 1854, a “Imaculada Conceição de Maria” torna-se dogma; • Em 1950, a “Assunção de Maria” vira artigo de fé.Hoje, cogita-se em colocar Maria junto à Trindade divina, formando assim uma quaternidade. O catolicismo está criando cada vez mais uma Maria totalmente diferente daquela apresentada pelos evangelhos. Ao inventarem supostos pais para Maria, Santa Ana e São Joaquim, baseados em livros apócrifos, os católicos ao mesmo tempo omitiram a verdadeira família de Maria e roubaram-lhe a nobre missão de mãe.A voz dos outros evangelistasOutro fator que corrobora com a interpretação acima é o fato de Lucas ter usado a expressão grega pro­totokos, que significa “Primogênito”, em relação ao nascimento de Cristo: “e teve a seu filho primo­gênito...” (Lc 2.7). Se Lucas quisesse dizer que Jesus foi o único filho de Maria, teria usado, de modo inequívoco, a expressão monogenes (unigênito, em português) que significa “[filho] único gerado”, como acontece em João 3.16. Mas não, ele usou, de modo consciente, o termo certo: “primogênito”, indicando que Jesus foi apenas o “primeiro” filho de Maria, e não o “único”. Se Jesus tivesse sido o único filho de Maria, os evangelistas mostrariam isso, de modo explícito, em seus escritos. Mas não é isso que constatamos no Novo Testamento.O que diz o Novo ­TestamentoUma leitura superficial do Novo Testamento, em especial dos evangelhos, mostrará, sem sombra de dúvida, que Jesus Cristo teve irmãos e irmãs (Mt 12.46,47, 13.55-56; Mc 6.3). E ainda nos dão os nomes dos irmãos: Tiago, José, Simão e Judas. E essas pessoas aparecem sempre relacionadas com Maria, mãe de Jesus, o que nos dá a impressão de que os escritores e os evangelistas quiseram nos transmitir o quadro de uma família composta por mãe e filhos. Vejamos: “Enquanto ele ainda falava às multidões, estavam do lado de fora sua mãe e seus irmãos, procurando falar-lhe. Disse-lhe alguém: Eis que estão ali fora tua mãe e teus irmãos, e procuram falar contigo” (Mt 12.46-47). Depois do milagre em Caná, Maria e os irmãos do Senhor aparecem juntos: “Depois disso desceu a Cafarnaum, ele, sua mãe, seus irmãos, e seus discípulos; e ficaram ali não muitos dias” (Jo 2.12). Em outra ocasião, Maria e seus irmãos mandam chamá-lo: “Chegaram então sua mãe e seus irmãos e, ficando da parte de fora, mandaram chamá-lo” (Mc 3.31). João acrescenta que nem os seus criam em Jesus: “Pois nem seus irmãos criam nele” (Jo 7.5). E, por último, os irmãos de Jesus aparecem no cenáculo orando com Maria: “Todos estes perseveravam unanimemente em oração, com as mulheres, e Maria, mãe de Jesus, e com os irmãos dele” (At 1.14). Resposta a um suposto argumentoNão conseguindo desmentir o consenso cristalino das Escrituras, os mestres romanistas acabam forjando sofismas cada vez mais mascarados de piedade que, aos poucos, vão alcançando a mente e o coração dos adeptos católicos. Todavia, quando confrontados com a Bíblia, tais disparates revelam ser apenas paliativos ardilosos que, por vezes, acabam sendo pulverizados diante dos fartos argumentos bíblicos. Na tentativa de esquivar-se dos argumentos protestantes, os líderes católicos desenterram, das ruínas medievais, teses falaciosas floreadas com terminologias teológicas modernas para causar impressão. Uma dessas teses tenta transferir os irmãos de Jesus para uma outra Maria e, para alcançar esse objetivo, faz verdadeiro malabarismo com os nomes bíblicos. Consegue fazer uma combinação engenhosa com os textos de Marcos 6.3, 3.18, 15.14, 16.1 e João 19.25. Diz que Maria, mãe de Tiago (o menor) e de José é irmã de Maria (a mãe de Jesus) e mulher de Cleofas, a quem confundem com Alfeu. Resumindo: esses “irmãos” (Tiago e José) de Marcos 6.3, segundo essa teoria, na verdade seriam primos de Jesus. Uma explicação plausível e uma suposta base “bíblica” para a questão. Ledo engano!Origens dessa doutrinaNão se sabe ao certo onde e como começou a acreditar-se que os irmãos de Jesus, de quem tanto a Bíblia fala e “de modo explícito”, eram apenas seus primos ou irmãos em sentido espiritual (versão Romana) ou meio-irmãos de um casamento anterior de José (versão Grega). Parece que isso surgiu com uma deturpação da resposta de um soldado romano chamado Pantera aos judeus que acusavam Maria de cometer adultério (Atos de Pilatos 11.3 e Talmud, séc. II). No ponto de vista judaico, Jesus seria um filho bastardo desse suposto soldado. O fato é que essa doutrina ganhou força somente após o século IV, com Jerônimo. Até então, era praticamente desconhecida pelos antigos escritores pré-niceno. Como de praxe, é mais uma das invencionices da Igreja Católica. Um dos pais primitivos que mais colaborou para que essa distorção criasse corpo foi Orígenes, que se baseou em duas obras apócrifas: o “Proto-Evangelho de Tiago” e o “Evangelho de Pedro”, de meados do século II. Não demorou muito, Epifânio seguiu os passos de Orígenes e acabou abraçando tal idéia. É interessante notar que Orígenes, Epifânio e Jerônimo eram adeptos do ascetismo e da vida monástica que incluía a castidade. Orígenes, segundo alguns historiadores, chegou a castrar-se! Mais tarde, porém, essa teoria sobre os irmãos de Jesus foi desenvolvida e aperfeiçoada. Empacotada de modo sofismável pelos teólogos católicos, é agora um dos dogmas do catolicismo romano. O que muitos protestantes talvez não saibam é que até mesmo os reformadores Lutero e Calvino criam na virgindade perpétua de Maria. Mas, por outro lado, é bom frisarmos que muitos pais primitivos como Hegesipo, Tertuliano, Irineu e, posteriormente, Eusébio e Helvídio defendiam a idéia de que os irmãos de Jesus eram de fato seus irmãos carnais. A mesma defesa é feita atualmente por uma maioria esmagadora de protestantes e também por alguns teólogos católicos. Analisando o evangelho de MateusO texto de Mateus 1.25 afirma o seguinte: “e não a conheceu enquanto (até que) ela não deu à luz um filho; e pôs-lhe o nome de Jesus”. Para os protestantes, a referência bíblica em apreço parece ser, a princípio, uma fortaleza inexpugnável, e não é para menos, pois diz categoricamente que José não a conheceu “até” ou “enquanto” (heos, hou) ela não deu à luz. Ora, o que depreende e subentende-se é que, após o parto, Maria teve relações sexuais com seu marido como qualquer casal judeu normal de seu tempo! Parece ser esta a preocupação principal do evangelista ao transmitir sua mensagem. Mas, por outro lado, devemos concordar com nossos antagonistas romanos em que há casos em que Mateus usa a preposição “até” para dizer que não houve mudança após a ocorrência de determinado evento. Por exemplo, “Não esmagará a cana quebrada, e não apagará o pavio que fumega, até que faça triunfar o juízo” (Mt 12.20). É claro que o texto não está dizendo que o manso Messias será um ditador cruel após o triunfo do juízo. Outros textos bíblicos, além de Mateus, podem ser usados como exemplo: Salmo 110.1 e 1 Timóteo 4.13. Mas podemos ver Mateus usando a preposição “até” (que indica um limite de tempo, nos espaços, ou nas ações) quando o contexto diz claramente que há mudança. Vejamos: “E, havendo eles se retirado, eis que um anjo do Senhor apareceu a José em sonho, dizendo: Levanta-te, toma o menino e sua mãe, foge para o Egito, e ali fica até que eu te fale; porque Herodes há de procurar o menino para o matar” (Mt 2.13). Assim, tomar este trecho de forma isolada não é de modo nenhum conclusivo para ambas as partes; não resolve o problema. Se quisermos obter uma idéia mais clara do assunto teremos de nos voltar para um contexto maior e achar algo fora desse trecho que complete esta lacuna e dirima a incógnita. Será que Mateus usou a preposição “até” para indicar mudança ou não? Resolveremos isso usando dois princípios de interpretação: o contexto imediato e o contexto mais lato. É notório que os casamentos orientais da época de Jesus eram, sem sombra de dúvida, bem diferentes dos do nosso tempo. Mateus declara que Maria estava desposada (entenda-se noiva) com José. Diz ainda que ele não a “conheceu até” (Mt 1.18). Algumas vezes a palavra “conhecer” é usada na Bíblia de modo figurado, significando relação sexual (Gn 4.25), e, neste caso, o contexto apóia este sentido.O significado de irmãos na BíbliaEm Mateus 12.47, na Bíblia católica, versão dos “Monges Maredsous”, o tradutor teceu o seguinte comentário sobre os “irmãos” de Jesus no rodapé da página: “Irmãos: na língua hebraica esta palavra pode significar também ‘parentes próximos’ ou ‘primos’, como neste caso. Exemplo: Abraão, tio de Lot, chama-o com a designação de irmão (Gn 11.27; 13.8)”. Outro estudioso católico afirma: “Assim sendo, é possível que por detrás dos ‘irmãos’ e ‘irmãs’ de Jesus estejam seus ‘primos’ ou ‘parentes’1. Refutação bíblica: Não existe um só caso na Bíblia, e principalmente no Novo Testamento, em que a palavra grega adelphós (irmão) é traduzida por primo ou parente. Das 343 vezes em que o N.T usa o termo adelphós, ele apresenta dois sentidos para a palavra “irmão”: a de irmão legítimo (carnal) e o metafórico. Sentido metafórico: Neste sentido, enquadram-se todos os textos sobre os seguidores de Jesus (Mc 3.35), os cristãos da igreja (1Co 1.1), os judeus (Rm 9.3) e os seres humanos em geral (Hb 2.11,17). É obvio que as referências nos evangelhos e nas epístolas aos “irmãos” (filhos de Maria) de Jesus não se enquadram nesta categoria. Sentido literal: É justamente neste sentido que a palavra irmãos (no plural) é usada, em sua grande maioria, na Bíblia. Nenhum estudioso católico jamais traduziu esta palavra como primos ou irmãos espirituais. As Escrituras não deixam nenhuma dúvida quanto a esse assunto. Duvido que alguém leia os textos que seguem e consiga empregar o sentido de primo ou irmão espiritual onde aparece a palavra irmãos. “E, passando mais adiante, viu outros dois (irmãos) Tiago, filho de Zebedeu, e seu irmão João, no barco com seu pai Zebedeu, consertando as redes; e os chamou” (Mt 4.21). “E todo o que tiver deixado casas, ou irmãos, ou irmãs, ou pai, ou mãe, ou filhos, ou terras, por amor do meu nome, receberá cem vezes tanto, e herdará a vida eterna” (Mt 19.29). A Bíblia deixa patente que quando a palavra “irmãos” aparece junto aos termos “pai” e “mãe” ela denota filiação legítima de sangue, e isto ninguém consegue eclipsar. Compare: “Não é este o filho do carpinteiro? E não se chama sua mãe Maria, e seus irmãos Tiago, José, Simão, e Judas?” (Mt 13.55). Nas quinze ocorrências em que é empregado o termo adelphós em relação a Jesus o sentido básico é de irmãos legítimos. Mas alguns podem objetar dizendo que a palavra hebraica ah (irmão) aparece várias vezes significando irmãos não de sangue, mas primos ou sobrinhos. É verdade que a língua hebraica tinha um vocabulário um pouco pobre e, por isso, não possuía uma palavra específica para primos ou parentes. Então utilizava a expressão “irmão” de modo lato (Gn 29.12, 24.48) Esse artifício, no entanto, não é suficiente para que os católicos se esquivem da derrocada teológica! A palavra “irmão”, no hebraico, pode significar primo, mas, mesmo neste caso, temos de tomar cuidado. Geralmente, quando a palavra “irmão” é empregada no sentido de parente próximo o contexto esclarece a questão (1Cr 23.21-22). Além disso, o Novo Testamento foi escrito em grego, e não em hebraico. Será que no grego Coiné, língua na qual foi escrito o Novo Testa­mento, existia esta distinção ­praticamente ausente no hebraico? Vejamos. Termos do Novo Testamento para irmãos e primosNão devemos nos esquecer de que quando o Novo Testamento faz referências aos irmãos de Jesus o contexto não traz nenhum tipo de esclarecimento adicional, como acontece no Antigo Testamento. Além disso, os escritores sabiam a diferença entre os termos irmão (adelphós), primo (anepsiós) e parentes (sungenes). Mesmo Paulo, que usava bastante metáfora, sabia usar com distinção essas palavras. Tanto é que escreveu sobre os “irmãos” de Jesus sem deixar nenhuma dúvida ao laço carnal entre o Senhor e seus irmãos. Vejamos: “Não temos nós direito de levar conosco esposa crente, como também os demais apóstolos, e os irmãos do Senhor, e Cefas?” (1Co 9.5). “Mas não vi a nenhum outro dos apóstolos, senão a Tiago, irmão do Senhor” (Gl 1.19). Como já falamos, e isso é interessante, o apóstolo Paulo sabia perfeitamente usar a palavra correta para primo (anepsiós) e parente (sungenes) em suas epístolas. Não havia motivo de confusão! “Saúda-vos Aristarco, meu companheiro de prisão, e Marcos, o primo de Barnabé...” (Cl 4.10). “Saudai a Herodião, meu parente” (Rm 16.11). Caso a tese católica estivesse correta, o apóstolo poderia muito bem ter usado a expressão hoi anepsiós Kyriou (primos do Senhor), e não adelphói tou Kyriou (irmãos do Senhor), até porque os irmãos de Jesus estavam vivos quando o apóstolo escreveu as duas epístolas.Argumentos contraproducentesDiante do exposto, a única consideração plausível a que podemos chegar é que os “irmãos” de Jesus eram realmente seus irmãos legítimos. É justamente esse o sentido do termo adelphós no Novo Testamento. Apesar de todo o esforço empregado pelos católicos para defender a virgindade perpétua de Maria, seus argumentos são totalmente contraproducentes.O Salmo 69 é um texto profético com força suficiente para desmantelar o arcabouço erigido pelas artimanhas teológicas católicas. Qualquer exegeta que ler esse salmo terá de admitir que se trata de um salmo messiânico, ou seja, um salmo que fala sobre o ministério e a vida de Jesus, o Messias. No verso 8, o autor descreve perfeitamente a família de Jesus sem deixar dúvidas quanto à legitimidade carnal de parentesco entre eles. Vejamos: “Tornei-me como um estranho para os meus irmãos, e um desconhecido para os filhos de minha mãe”. Quando, então, comparado com alguns textos do Novo Testamento, João 7.3-8 por exemplo, o Salmo 69 torna-se um argumento esmagador contra a teoria católica. “Disseram-lhe, então, seus irmãos: Retira-te daqui e vai para a Judéia, para que também os teus discípulos vejam as obras que fazes. Porque ninguém faz coisa alguma em oculto, quando procura ser conhecido. Já que fazes estas coisas, manifesta-te ao mundo. Pois nem seus irmãos criam nele. Disse-lhes, então, Jesus: Ainda não é chegado o meu tempo; mas o vosso tempo sempre está presente. O mundo não vos pode odiar; mas ele me odeia a mim, porquanto dele testifico que as suas obras são más. Subi vós à festa; eu não subo ainda a esta festa, porque ainda não é chegado o meu tempo”. Compreendemos agora, por meio desse texto, o porquê de Jesus ter deixado sua mãe aos cuidados de João, e não de seus irmãos!
RESPOSTA
Fábio,
Ave Maria puríssima!

Você inicia sua carta escrevendo:

“Indubitavelmente, este é um assunto [virgindade perpétua] já resolvido no meio protestante tradicional”

Mas qual a importância do meio protestante tradicional em qualquer discussão teológica? Aliás, quando você fala em meio protestante tradicional, a qual você se refere, o batista, o luterano, o presbiteriano, o anglicano ou o metodista?

As decisões do protestantismo não têm a mínima importância, pois nunca Cristo prometeu qualquer garantia a herege algum, o fez entretanto à Sua Santa Igreja, que é a Igreja Una, Santa, Católica e Apostólica, governada pelo Sucessor de São Pedro, o bispo de Roma

E você prossegue:

“Poderíamos até considerá-lo obsoleto se não fosse pelo mariocentrismo, doutrina da Igreja Católica Romana que teima em admitir que Maria permaneceu virgem após o parto (virginitas post partum), o que torna parte dessa teologia um verdadeiro desvario e um grande óbice ao verdadeiro cristianismo ortodoxo”

A Igreja Católica, Fábio, não teima nada, ela define verdades e proclama dogmas com o poder dado pelo próprio Cristo, ou você nunca leu o Evangelho, no qual está dito:

“Tudo o que ligares na terra será ligado no Céu” (Mt XVI, 19)

A virgindade perpétua da Santíssima Virgem foi definida por Pio IX, sucessor de São Pedro e herdeiro da promessa de Cristo, transcrita acima. Que Nossa Senhora foi Virgem antes, durante e depois do parto, foi ligado no Céu pelo poder das chaves, ou por acaso você não aceita essa parte da escritura?

“Durante séculos, a mariologia tem sofrido evoluções cada vez mais ousadas, e o tempo é testemunha disso:

• Em 400 d.C, Maria foi proclamada “Mãe de Deus”;
• Em 1854, a “Imaculada Conceição de Maria” torna-se dogma;
• Em 1950, a “Assunção de Maria” vira artigo de fé.”

Não existiu evolução nenhuma. Desde os primeiros séculos Nossa Senhora tem um papel singular na vida da Igreja, o que ocorreu foi que, nos primeiros séculos do cristianismo, durante a conversão dos pagãos, era perigoso apresentar a devoção mariana da forma como a conhecemos hoje, visto que os pagãos, oriundos de uma religião idólatra, poderiam facilmente, perante a grandeza incomensurável de Maria Santíssima, considerá-la como uma deusa.

Passado esse perigo, a devoção a grandíssima Mãe de Deus floresceu de maneira admirável em toda a cristandade.

Portanto o que houve foi prudência, não evolução.

“Hoje, cogita-se em colocar Maria junto à Trindade divina, formando assim uma quaternidade. O catolicismo está criando cada vez mais uma Maria totalmente diferente daquela apresentada pelos evangelhos. Ao inventarem supostos pais para Maria, Santa Ana e São Joaquim, baseados em livros apócrifos, os católicos ao mesmo tempo omitiram a verdadeira família de Maria e roubaram-lhe a nobre missão de mãe.”

Aqui, Fábio, você parte para a acusação puramente gratuita, não sem usar de muita má fé. Mostre-me onde houve essa cogitação absurda, envie-me a encíclica, decreto ou instrução eclesiástica onde se disse tamanha tolice. A Igreja Católica nunca cogitou tal coisa.

Nossa Senhora não é, de forma alguma, maior do que Deus, antes é infinitamente inferior a Ele, todavia, entre as criaturas, Ela é a mais gloriosa.

Você também acusa, ridiculamente, a Igreja de ter inventado supostos pais para Nossa Senhora. Como inventado? Acaso você pensa que Nossa Senhora não teve pais? São Joaquim e a Sant’Ana foram os pais de Nossa Senhora, sendo esse fato confirmado pela autoridade da Tradição Eclesiástica, autoridade essa de instituição divina.

Passemos agora a responder suas longas e infundadas considerações sobre a virgindade perpétua da Mãe de Deus.

Em seu texto você se limita a dizer que a comparação de textos bíblicos para provar que Tiago, José, Simão e Judas eram primos de Jesus é um “ledo engano.”

Nesse ponto você se limita a afirmar que esse argumento não é válido, esquece-se, entretanto, de dizer por que.

Para responder essa questão, transcrevo-lhe a brilhante resposta de Lúcio Navarro, em seu livro Legítima Interpretação da Bíblia, Campanha de Instrução religiosa, Brasil-Portugal, Recife, 1958 n º 400, pp.590 a 592 inclusive.


"400. Diante da frase de S. Mateus vista no número anterior, o leitor ainda poderá compreender como se tenham equivocado os protestantes, iludindo-se com as aparências.

Mas agora vai pasmar ao ver a malícia, a precipitação com que esses enfatuados intérpretes da Bíblia que a lêem continuamente e procuram aprendê-la de cor, ainda vão tirar da expressão irmãos de jesus uma conclusão. contra a virgindade perpétua do Maria Santíssima. Senão, vejamos.
Sabemos que a Escritura não somente designa com o nome de Irmãos aquêles que são filhos do mesmo pai ou da mesma mãe, como eram Caim .Abel, Esaú e Jacó, S. Tiago Maior e S. João Evangelista (que eram filhos de Zebedeu) etc.; mas também aqueles que são parentes próximos, como tios e primos. - A Escritura está cheia destes exemplos.

Abraão chama de Irmão a Lot: "Peço-te que não haja rinhas entre mim e ti, nem entre os meus pastores e os teus, porque somos irmÃos (Gênesis, XIII-8). Mais adiante a própria Bíblia o chama assim: "Abraão, tendo ouvido que Lot, seu irmão, ficara prisioneiro... (Gênesis XIV-14). Pois bem, "Lot era apenas sobrinho de Abraão, pois já antes disto se lê no Gênesis: "Tinha Abraão setenta e cinco anos, quando saiu de Harã. E ele levou consigo a Sarai, sua mulher, a Lot, filho de seu irmão, e todos os bens que possuíam (Gênesis XII-4 e 5).

Labão, diz a Jacó: "Acaso, porque tu és meu irmão, deves tu servir-me de graça ? (Gênesis XXIX-15). E no entanto Jacó era sobrinho de Labão:Isaac chamou a Jacó e o abençoou e lhe pôs pôr preceito dizendo: "Não tomes mulher da geração de Canaã; mas vai e parte para a Mesopotimia ... e desposa-te com uma das filhas de Labão, TEU TIO"" (Gênesis, XXVIII -l e 2). Realmente Jacó era filho de Isaac com Rebeca (Gênesis XXV, 21 a 25) e Rebeca era irmã de Labão: "Rebeca, porém, tinha um irmão chamado Labão (Gênesis, XXIV-29). E, no entanto, não só como vimos acima, seu tio o chama irmão, mas também quando Jacó se encontra com Raquel, que é filha de Labão (Gênesis XXIX-5 e 6), diz à moça que é irmão de Labão: "E lhe manifestou que era irmão de seu pai, filho de Rebeca (Gênesis XXIX-12).

Lê-se no Levítico que Nadab e Abiu, filhos de Arão (Levítico X-1) são mortos pôr castigo, pôr terem oferecido um fogo estranho nos seus turíbulos. Moisés chama os primos dos que faleceram: Misael e Elisafan, filhos de Oziel, tio de arão (Levítico X-4) e lhes diz: ide, tirai vossos irmãos de diante do santuário e levai-os para fora do campo (Levítico X-4).

Lê-se no livro de Paralipômenos que Eleazar e Cis são filhos de Moholi: "filhos de moholi: Eleasar e Cis"(I Paralipômenos XXIII-21), portanto Irmãos no verdadeiro sentido da palavra. Eleazar só teve filhas e não filhos; as filhas dele se casaram com os filhos de Cis. Espera-se que a Escritura diga: casaram-se com os filhos de Cis, que eram seus primos; mas ela diz: com os filhos de Cis, seus irmãos: "E Eleazar morreu e não teve filhos, senão filhas; e casaram com os filhos de Cis, seus irmãos (I Paralipômenos, XXIII-22).

É dentro deste costume hebreu de designar com o nome de irmãos, não só os que têm os mesmos pais, senão também os parentes próximos como tios, primos e sobrinhos, pois o hebraico não possuía palavras próprias para designar esses parentescos, que o Novo Testamento fala em irmãos de jesus e é o próprio Novo Testamento QUE SE ENCARREGA DE. DEMONSTRÄ-LO.
Querem ter a prova nossos amigos protestantes?

Dá alguma vez o Evangelho os nomes desses irmãos de Jesus, para que possamos identificá-los?

Sim, dá. Sabe-se dos nomes, pelo menos de 4: Tiago, José, Judas e Simão: "Não é este o oficial, filho de Maria, irmão de tiago, de José, de judas e de simao? Não vivem aqui entre nos também suas irmãs ? (Marcos, I-3). "Porventura não é este o filho do oficial ? Não se chama sua mãe Maria, e seus irmãos tiago, josé, simao e judas? E suas irmãs não vivem elas todas entre nós? (Mateus, XIII-55 e 56).
Pois bem, este tiago que encabeça a lista é um Apóstolo, pois diz S. Paulo na Epístola aos Gálatas: "E dos outros apóstolos não vi a nenhum, senão a tiago, irmão do SENHOR (Gálatas, 1-19).

Quer dizer então que, segundo a opinião desses protestantes, este Tiago Apóstolo era filho de Maria, mãe de Jesus; e de Maria e de José, porque, como os próprios protestantes reconhecem, Maria nunca teve filhos antes de seu casamento com José. E não se casou com outro depois da morte de José, pois na hora da morte de Cristo, ela está sozinha, sem marido e Cristo a entrega a S. João Evangelista; além disto se Maria tivesse casado outra vez, seus filhos estariam pequenos, não estariam em idade de ser Apóstolos.
"
Temos 2 Apóstolos com o nome de Tiago: Tiago Maior, e Tiago Menor. Vamos ver se algum deles era filho de José com Maria.
S. Tiago Maior era irmão de S. João Evangelista, e ambos FILHOS DE ZEBEDEU: "Da mesma sorte havia deixado atônitos a tiago e a. JOÃO, filhos db zebedeu (Lucas V-IO).

S. Tiago Menor, que era irmão de Judas, era filho de ALFEU. Entre os Apóstolos, que são enumerados pôr S. Mateus, estão: Tiago FILHO DE ZEBEDEU, e Tiago filho de ALFEU (Mateus X-3). Que tem a ver Maria Santíssima com este Alfeu ou com este Zebedeu? Logo, este Tiago, IRMÃO DO SENHOR, não é seu filho.

Além disto, comparando-se os Evangelhos, se vê claramente que este Tiago « este José que encabeçam a lista são PRIMOS de Jesus», e o Tiago é o Apóstolo Tiago Menor. Enumerando as mulheres que estavam juntamente com Maria ao pé da cruz, Mateus, Marcos e João as identificam da seguinte maneira:

Mateus XXVII- 56
Marcos XV - 40
João XIX - 25
Maria, mãe de Tiago e de José;
Maria, mãe de Tiago Menor e de José;
a irmã de sua mãe, Maria, mulher de Cleofas
Maria Madalena;
Maria Madalena
Maria Madalena
a mãe dos filhos de Zebedeu.
Salomé

Por aí se vê que a mesma Maria que é apresentada por São João como tia de Jesus (Irmã de sua mãe) é apresentada por São Mateus e S. Marcos como mãe de TIAGO MENOR E de José. E é claro que não se trata de Maria Salomé, que é a mãe dos filhos de Zebedeu e, portanto, é mãe de Tiago Maior.

Tiago Menor e José são, portanto, PRIMOS de Jesus e são os primeiros que. encabeçam aquela lista: TIAGO, JOSÉ, JUDAS E SIMÃO
E de fato o Apóstolo S. Judas Tadeu era irmão de S. Tiago Menor, pois ele diz no começo de sua Epístola: "Judas, servo de Jesus Cristo e IRMÃO de Tiago (vers. l.). Tanto o Evangelho de S. Lucas (VI-16) como os Atos dos Apóstolos (1-13) para diferenciarem Judas Tadeu de Judas Iscariotes, chamam a Judas Tadeu: Judas, irmão de Tiago.

E assim cai por terra fragorosamente a alegação dos protestantes de que Maria teve outros filhos além do Divino Salvador, alegação baseada em que o Evangelho fala em irmãos de jesus. Não só provamos que entre os hebreus se chamavam IRMÃOS os parentes próximos, mas também mostramos que a lista dos nomes apresentados como sendo destes IRMÃOS é logo encabeçada pôr dois PRIMOS, filhos da irmã da mãe de Jesus. Logo, não tem nenhum valor a alegação.

A única dificuldade, esta agora já sem importância, que pode fazer o protestante é que Tiago Menor é filho de ALFEU, e sua mãe é apresentada COMO MULHER DE CLEOFAS.

Sem precisar recorrer a nenhum argumento de tradição (porque talvez os protestantes não gostem disto) temos que observar o seguinte:

l.0 — o texto original não diz MULHER DE CLEOFAS, mas diz simplesmente: a irmã de sua mãe, Miaria, a do Cleofas (texto grego de João XIX-25); podia chamar-se Maria, a do Cleofas, pôr causa do pai ou pôr outro qualquer motivo;

20 — não repugna que a mesma Maria se tenha casado com Alfeu e dele tenha tido S. Tiago Menor, e depois se tenha casado com Cleofas e tido outros filhos ou mesmo deixado de ter. Tiago é o único que é apontado nos Evangelhos como filho deste Alfeu, pois o Alfeu, pai de S. Mateus (Marcos 11-14) já deve ser outro;

3.° — não repugna que o próprio Alfeu seja o mesmo Cleofas. É muito comum nas Escrituras uma pessoa ser conhecida pôr 2 nomes diversos: O sogro de Moisés é chamado Raguel (Êxodo 11-18 a 21) e logo depois é chamado Jetro (Êxodo, III - l). Gedeão, depois de ter derribado o altar de Baal é chamado também Jerobaal (Juizes, VI-32). Osias, rei de Judá, é chamado também Azarias (4 Reis, XV-32; I Paralipômenos, III-12). E no Novo Testamento o mesmo Mateus é chamado Levi: "Viu um homem, que estava assentado no telônio, chamado Mateus (Mateus, IX-9) . "Viu a Levi, filho de Alfeu, assentado no telônio (Marcos, 11-14). O mesmo que é chamado José é chamado Barsabas (Atos, I, 23).

Ainda hoje mesmo, entre nós, nas nossas localidades do interior principalmente, é multo comum esta duplicidade de nomes.

Seja Alfeu o mesmo Cleofas ou não seja. Isto pouco importa. 0 que é fato é que Maria de Cleofas é Irmã de Maria, mãe.de Jesus e é ao mesmo tempo mãe de Tiago e de José, que são chamados IRMÃOS do Senhor" (Lúcio Navarro, Legítima Interpretação da Bíblia, Campanha de Instrução religiosa, Brasil- Portugal, Recife, 1958 n0 400, pp.590 a 592 inclusive).


Fica, portanto, provado, que os irmãos de Jesus eram seus parentes, conforme a própria Sagrada Escritura.

Esperando sua refutação...

Ad Majorem Gloriam Dei,
Sérgio Meneses