Mary – La Vista Church of Christ

Very Costly Perfume

Jeffrey Hamilton — Tue, 20 Jan 2026 17:46:15 +0000

by Hugh DeLong

In chapter 14 of Mark, we are introduced to two different worldviews: what is the most important goal of one’s life, and the resulting use of one’s monetary resources.

First, the ‘woman’, identified for us in Matthew 26:6-13 and John 12:1-8, is Mary, the sister of Martha and Lazarus. She takes an alabaster jar of pure nard and uses the whole thing to anoint Jesus. Such anointing, Jesus said, was in preparation for his coming sacrificial death. Trying to understand the actual monetary value in today’s money system is always problematic (i.e., the value of a dollar in 1950 compared to such value today). So, the closest we can come is to note that a denarius was used for a day’s wage for the common laborer (Matthew 10:1-16 ). Doing so has yielded a value of nearly a year’s wages for such laborers. Depending on what you consider such a wage to be, it is in the many thousands of dollars!

She, possibly without a clear understanding of its meaning, was willing to use the whole thing to show her devotion to Jesus. He meant more than all of the worldly value of material things.

Then, contrast that with the reaction of Judas in John 12:4-6: "But Judas Iscariot, one of His disciples, who was intending to betray Him, said, 'Why was this perfume not sold for three hundred denarii and given to poor people?' Now he said this, not because he was concerned about the poor, but because he was a thief, and as he had the money box, he used to pilfer what was put into it" (John 12:4-6).

The challenge for us is which of those two people expresses our view of Jesus and our ‘things’? If you had been in the room with Jesus, would you have agreed with Judas? Or Mary? The answer can only come from an inspection of how you are using your worldly possessions now. Be careful: this is not about how we are supposed to view them, but about how we are actually using and valuing them. Examine yourself.

Mary No Longer Called Co-Redemptrix

Jeffrey Hamilton — Sat, 08 Nov 2025 03:45:18 +0000

Source: Talia Wise, "Pope Leo Declares Jesus Alone Saved the World, Rejects Title of Mary as 'Co-Redeemer'," CBN, 7 November 2025.

"A decree from Pope Leo's office firmly rejects the claim that Mary, Jesus' mother, helped save the world from damnation, settling a debate that has baffled the Catholic community by stating that Jesus alone redeemed humanity by his crucifixion and death."

"In a lengthy note titled 'Mater Populi Fidelis' or 'Mother of the Faithful People of God,' the Vatican's doctrinal office instructed Catholics to no longer give her the title of "co-redemptrix" or "co-redeemer" as it "carries the risk of eclipsing the exclusive role of Jesus Christ" as the Savior."

"The late Pope Francis also strongly opposed granting Mary the title of "co-redeemer," and according to Reuters, he suggested the idea was "foolishness." "She never wanted to take anything for herself from her son," Francis said in 2019. Additionally, Benedict XVI, Francis' predecessor, also opposed the title. However, his predecessor, John Paul II, supported the title until the mid-90s when the doctrinal office began to voice skepticism."

Source: Cindy Wooden, "Mary, mother of Jesus and all believers, is not co-redeemer, Vatican says," United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, 4 November 2025.

"In a lengthy doctrinal note titled 'Mater Populi Fidelis' ('Mother of the Faithful People of God'), the dicastery said the title co-redemptrix or co-redeemer 'carries the risk of eclipsing the exclusive role of Jesus Christ" in salvation. And, regarding the title co-mediatrix or co-mediator, it said that Mary, 'the first redeemed, could not have been the mediatrix of the grace that she herself received.' However, it said, the title may be used when it does not cast doubt on 'the unique mediation of Jesus Christ, true God and true man.'"

"The church believes that those in heaven can pray and intercede for people still on earth, and, among those chosen and glorified with Christ, first and foremost is his Mother,' the note said. 'Therefore, we can affirm that Mary has a unique collaboration in the saving work that Christ carries out in his Church. With this intercession, Mary can become for us a motherly sign of the Lord's mercy.'"

This becomes another example of the Roman Catholic Church changing its teachings while leaving itself enough wiggle room to claim that it hasn't really changed; it only clarified. This should be sufficient evidence that its teachings are not from God. God doesn't need to clarify Himself or rewrite the past to fit current teachings.

The claim that the dead can interceed for the living contradicts the Scriptures. The dead are unaware of events on the earth (Ecclesiastes 9:5-6).

See "The Deification of Mary" for citations showing the extent the Catholic Church developed their ideas about Mary before rejecting them. At least in this change, the Roman Catholic Church moves a shade closer to the truth that pre-existed it.

Life’s Necessary Thing

Jeffrey Hamilton — Thu, 14 Mar 2024 13:45:50 +0000

by Jon W. Quinn

Jesus had three friends who lived in Bethany. He would occasionally stay in their home when He was in Judea. Lazarus, Mary, and Martha were brothers and sisters. They lived together in the same house. Bethany was located on the eastern slope of the Mount of Olives on the road linking Jerusalem to Jericho. It was just over a mile and a half from Jerusalem. It would have been a very convenient place for Jesus and His fellow Galileans to stay when visiting Jerusalem for a feast day or on some other occasion. Also, its proximity to the garden of Gethsemane should be noted. Though we only have the record of the Lord's final visit to Gethsemane for prayer and His subsequent arrest there, we know that it was a favorite place of His while in the Jerusalem area.

Martha serves while Mary listens to Jesus' teachings - Luke 10:38-40

On one occasion, Martha was busy in the kitchen preparing a meal for her guests while Jesus was teaching those who had gathered in her home. The Scripture says, "And she had a sister called Mary, who moreover was listening to the Lord's word, seated at His feet. But Martha was distracted by all her preparations; and she came up to Him and said, 'Lord, do You not care that my sister has left me to do all the serving alone? Then tell her to help me" (Luke 10:39,40).

Both Mary and Martha were disciples of Jesus. These two women deal with Jesus' visit in two different ways. It is certainly important to observe something just now: it was not an either/or proposition for them or us. We do not have to choose between worshiping the Lord like Mary or serving the Lord like Martha. Neither does there need to be such a conflict between our physical or secular needs and our spiritual growth. Sadly, that is exactly what many believers end up with.
A careful reading of the context shows that Mary had been in the kitchen with Martha until Jesus started teaching. Note Martha said that her sister had left her alone to do all the serving.

But Jesus knew that neither Mary nor Martha could live by bread alone (Matthew 4:4). It was now time to digest some spiritual bread and feed the soul. Martha was being distracted from her soul's needs by other things. The other things, in this case, are not bad. Sometimes, even good things can fill up our lives to the point where we neglect our souls. God has not blessed us with our families, friends, jobs, abilities, and other gifts to give us an excuse to abandon a close walk with Him.

"But the Lord answered and said to her, 'Martha, Martha, you are worried and bothered about so many things" (Luke 10:41). Anxiety is a killer. Many of the physical and mental ills of our present day are stress-related. I can well imagine Martha "stewing" for a time in the kitchen (where else would you stew?) before being emboldened to charge into the room in such a way. And certainly, the Lord does care, but not nearly as much about the problem as Martha sees it as He does about the real problem of which Martha is unaware. The Lord is more concerned about Martha's state of mind and priorities than He is about being served a feast later. Where faith grows, anxiety lessens.

"...but only a few things are necessary, really only one, for Mary has chosen the good part, which shall not be taken from her" (Luke 10:42). The good part that Mary had chosen was to listen to the Lord's teaching. In the final scheme of things, the things Jesus said that day were of much more importance than what He ate. If we are so hassled by the routines of daily existence that we find ourselves lashing out at those we love as Martha did on that occasion, then is not that a good indication that something needs to be fixed?

To the Glory of God

Jeffrey Hamilton — Sun, 20 Sep 2020 23:47:09 +0000

https://www.lavistachurchofchrist.org/cms/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/To-the-Glory-of-God.mp3

Dealing with John 11

by Alan Feaster

Was Mary’s mother a Levite?

Jeffrey Hamilton — Wed, 20 May 2020 19:17:13 +0000

Question:

Regarding necessary inferences in the New Testament:

Fact: Mary and Elisabeth are cousins.
Fact: Elisabeth had to be a full-blooded Levite in order to marry a priest. (Zacharias)
Fact: Mary's father was of the tribe of Judah.

What would be wrong with making a "necessary inference" and infer that Elisabeth's mother and Mary's mother were sisters? (making Mary and Elisabeth cousins).

This would make Mary's mother a full-blooded Levite also. This would make Mary from both of the tribe Levi (her mother) and of the tribe of Judah (her father).

Thank you.

Answer:

Mary and Elizabeth were cousins, though not necessarily first-cousins (Luke 1:36). The Greek word sungenis refers to someone related by blood who is a female. Recall that there is also a significant age difference between Mary and Elizabeth.

Priests were not restricted to only marrying Levite women. The restrictions on who a priest could marry were: "They shall not take a wife who is a harlot or a defiled woman, nor shall they take a woman divorced from her husband; for the priest is holy to his God" (Leviticus 21:7).

Mary was descended from the tribe of Judah (Luke 3:23-38, especially verse 33).

Typically "full-blooded" means both parents are of the same tribe.

We cannot draw a conclusion as to which tribe the common ancestor of Mary and Elizabeth was from. However, it needs to be noted that a wife becomes a part of her husband's tribe. This is why there was a law that when a man had only daughters, they were restricted to marry within their own tribe. "This is what the LORD has commanded concerning the daughters of Zelophehad, saying, 'Let them marry whom they wish; only they must marry within the family of the tribe of their father.' Thus no inheritance of the sons of Israel shall be transferred from tribe to tribe, for the sons of Israel shall each hold to the inheritance of the tribe of his fathers. Every daughter who comes into possession of an inheritance of any tribe of the sons of Israel shall be wife to one of the family of the tribe of her father, so that the sons of Israel each may possess the inheritance of his fathers. Thus no inheritance shall be transferred from one tribe to another tribe, for the tribes of the sons of Israel shall each hold to his own inheritance" (Numbers 36:6-9).

Question:

God separated the tribe of Levi from the rest of Israel and claimed them to Himself. God is speaking to the priests in Leviticus 21:1 and that thought carries on through Leviticus 21:14 where He says they shall take a wife of his own people.

Seeing that the tribe of Levi is separate from Israel then "his own people" can only mean from the tribe of Levi.

Is this not correct?

Thank you.

Answer:

A "people" refers to a nationality and not a tribe within the nation.

"There is no straw given to your servants, and they say to us, 'Make brick!' And indeed your servants are beaten, but the fault is in your own people" (Exodus 5:16). "Your own people" refers to the Israelites as oppose to the Egyptians.
"As for their children, half spoke in the language of Ashdod, and none of them was able to speak the language of Judah, but the language of his own people" (Nehemiah 13:24). Speaking about the intermarriage with other nationalities.
"It shall be as the hunted gazelle, And as a sheep that no man takes up; Every man will turn to his own people, And everyone will flee to his own land" (Isaiah 13:14). Referring to the nations captured by Babylon returning to their original countries when Babylon falls.

Priests were limited to marrying Israelites. There was no restriction to only marry other Levites. This can be seen in the repeat of this same law: "And they shall not marry a widow or a divorced woman but shall take virgins from the offspring of the house of Israel, or a widow who is the widow of a priest" Ezekiel 44:22).

Was Mary the mother of God?

Jeffrey Hamilton — Mon, 07 Oct 2019 21:51:56 +0000

Question:

I do not recite Hail Mary nor do I agree with it. But I talked to a person and we came to the topic of Hail Mary.

I pointed out that "Mother of God" is never seen in the Bible and expressed an inappropriate meaning. He stated that Elizabeth called Mary "mother of my Lord" and since "my Lord" refers to God, Mary can be called "Mother of God".

What do you have to say about this?

Answer:

Mary is never called the Mother of God in the Scriptures. She is the mother of Jesus (John 2:1) and she is called the mother of my Lord by Elizabeth (Luke 1:43), but both of these phrases refer to Jesus while he was here on earth.

Jesus is God (John 1:1) and as God, he pre-existed the world (John 8:58). For Mary to be the Mother of God she would have to pre-exist her son, which cannot be true. She existed on earth before Jesus came to earth to take on human flesh, but she did not pre-exist Jesus. Therefore, the title “Mother of God” is not proper to apply to a human woman.

Mary was blessed to have been chosen to bear the Son of God (Luke 1:43). It was a special honor, but it doesn’t afford her any special status (Luke 11:27-28).

Can you give me more insight into Mary’s sister?

Jeffrey Hamilton — Mon, 31 Dec 2018 02:19:00 +0000

Question:

The Bible talks about Mary having a sister who is the wife of Clopas whose name is also Mary. The Bible states that this Mary had kids and in an article that you wrote you stated her kids were James and Joses. But when we look at Matthew 13:55, it says that James and Joses (some versions say Joseph) are the children of Mary, Jesus' mother.

Is this a situation where there is an over usage of common names and both Marys had two sons by the same name? The Catholics don't believe that this Mary is Mary's, Mother of Jesus, sister because they don't understand why the parents would name their daughters the same name, so they say this is her cousin. Could you give me clarification on this?

Answer:

It was an expectation in the Jewish culture to name children after a relative, "And it happened that on the eighth day they came to circumcise the child, and they were going to call him Zacharias, after his father. But his mother answered and said, "No indeed; but he shall be called John." And they said to her, "There is no one among your relatives who is called by that name." And they made signs to his father, as to what he wanted him called. And he asked for a tablet and wrote as follows, "His name is John." And they were all astonished" (Luke 1:59-63). Now imagine generations of children being named after relatives. You would have a ton of similar names, which doesn't make keeping various people in the Bible distinct easy.

This is why you find qualifiers on names. A qualifier might be a father's name, where a person originated from, a person's occupation, or even a major event in a person's life. Take a look at three accounts regarding the women who were at the cross when Jesus died:

"And many women who followed Jesus from Galilee, ministering to Him, were there looking on from afar, among whom were Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James and Joses, and the mother of Zebedee's sons" (Matthew 27:55-56).

"There were also women looking on from afar, among whom were Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James the Less and of Joses, and Salome, who also followed Him and ministered to Him when He was in Galilee, and many other women who came up with Him to Jerusalem" (Mark 15:40-41).

"Now there stood by the cross of Jesus His mother, and His mother's sister, Mary the wife of Clopas, and Mary Magdalene" (John 19:25).

	Mary, the mother of Jesus	Mary, the mother of James and Joses	Mary Magdalene	Salome
Matthew 27:55-56		"Mary the mother of James and Joses"	"Mary Magdalene"	"the mother of Zebedee's sons"
Mark 15:40		"Mary, the mother of James the Less and of Joses	"Mary Magdalene"	"Salome"
John 19:25	"His mother"	"Mary the wife of Clopas"	"Mary Magdalene"	"His mother's sister"

None of the accounts say there were just four women. All three accounts list Mary Magdalene (a qualified name based on where this Mary came from). Only John mentions that Jesus' mother was at the cross, but there is a third Mary who is distinguished by the names of her children in Matthew and Mark's accounts. It is likely that Mary, the wife of Clopas, is the same woman.

It is possible that "the mother of Zebedee's sons," "Salome," and "his mother's sister" are three different women or they could be different qualifiers for the same woman. If it is the same woman, then James and John, the sons of Zebedee, would be Jesus' cousins and Mary, the mother of Jesus, would have a sister named Salome.

Some assume that John lists out four Marys at the cross. Here they assume that Mary's sister is the mother of James and Joses and that Mary the wife of Clopas is the fifth person to be mentioned. Since this makes both Mary and her sister have the same name, it might be possible, but it would be an unnecessary conclusion.

A common mistake is to read John 19:25 as a list of three women instead of four, with "his mother's sister" and "Mary the wife of Clopas" as being the same person. Again, it causes the conclusion that Mary had a sister named Mary. While remotely possible, it is not the most natural way to read this verse.

Jeff Hamilton and Alan Feaster

Did Mary lead prayers? Did people receive all the gifts of the Spirit?

Jeffrey Hamilton — Sat, 17 Mar 2018 02:44:00 +0000

Question:

Thank you for taking my questions.

We were discussing the upper room Wednesday night. Acts 1:13-17 mentions that Mary, Jesus' mother, and other women were present. We were trying to determine if Mary herself was praying while all the people were there. I know some women prophesied back then. My option is she was there supporting and taking care of all there.

Also in Acts 8:17 when the apostles gave power to others, did the apostles give them all powers of healing too or gifts of the Word that they would know what to say when preaching, setting up churches, etc.?

Answer:

"And when they had entered, they went up into the upper room where they were staying: Peter, James, John, and Andrew; Philip and Thomas; Bartholomew and Matthew; James the son of Alphaeus and Simon the Zealot; and Judas the son of James. These all continued with one accord in prayer and supplication, with the women and Mary the mother of Jesus, and with His brothers" (Acts 1:13-14).

Just because someone is listed as being present by name, it does not imply that they took a leading role. Since such a role violates other teachings (I Timothy 2:12), we can safely assume that the women were there to learn and support the work.

"Now when the apostles in Jerusalem heard that Samaria had received the word of God, they sent them Peter and John, who came down and prayed for them that they might receive the Holy Spirit. For He had not yet fallen upon any of them; they had simply been baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus. Then they began laying their hands on them, and they were receiving the Holy Spirit" (Acts 8:14-17).

While the passage does not state what gifts were given, we are told after a list of various spiritual gifts, "But one and the same Spirit works all these things, distributing to each one individually as He wills" (I Corinthians 12:11). It wasn't the apostles who decided what gifts were given to individuals. They were only the medium through which the Spirit worked. It was the Holy Spirit who decided which gifts to give various individuals. We also know that individuals did not receive all the gifts. "And God has appointed these in the church: first apostles, second prophets, third teachers, after that miracles, then gifts of healings, helps, administrations, varieties of tongues. Are all apostles? Are all prophets? Are all teachers? Are all workers of miracles? Do all have gifts of healings? Do all speak with tongues? Do all interpret?" (I Corinthians 12:28-30). The answers to Paul's rhetorical questions are all "no." Such a distribution of different gifts was to encourage Christians to rely on each other. Some didn't even have any miraculous gifts; yet, every person was important to the functioning of the church.

Why is it so important to you that Mary had other children? What difference does it make?

Jeffrey Hamilton — Tue, 24 Sep 2013 01:54:00 +0000

Question:

I have always been puzzled why the members of the church of Christ are so adamant that Mary, the mother of Jesus, had additional children with her husband, Joseph. I know the Catholic teaching is that Mary was a perpetual virgin; why does it matter to the church of Christ if she had other children or not? Jesus is the only one who was significant.

Answer:

"All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work" (II Timothy 3:16-17).

"Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit who is from God, that we might know the things that have been freely given to us by God. These things we also speak, not in words which man's wisdom teaches but which the Holy Spirit teaches, comparing spiritual things with spiritual" (I Corinthians 2:12-13).

Since the Bible is from God and the very words it contains were selected by God, it follows that accurately presenting what God taught in the Bible is important. Paul showed that small, seemingly insignificant details can have important meanings. For example, the lack of a plural changes a promise from a nation being a blessing to the world to a person (Christ) being a blessing to the world. "Now to Abraham and his Seed were the promises made. He does not say, "And to seeds," as of many, but as of one, "And to your Seed," who is Christ" (Galatians 3:16). The Jews of Paul's day had missed that small, but important point. Jesus used a very odd verse to prove that there was life after death: "But concerning the resurrection of the dead, have you not read what was spoken to you by God, saying, 'I am the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob'? God is not the God of the dead, but of the living" (Matthew 22:32-33). It quickly is apparent that every word is important in the Bible, even when we might not fully appreciate what the significance is at the moment.

The Gospels are quite clear that Mary was not a virgin after she gave birth to Jesus. "Then Joseph, being aroused from sleep, did as the angel of the Lord commanded him and took to him his wife, and did not know her till she had brought forth her firstborn Son. And he called His name Jesus" (Matthew 1:24-25).

Further evidence is found in the fact that Jesus was heir to the throne of David. This inheritance came through him through Joseph because Joseph married Mary prior to Jesus' birth. Jesus, being the firstborn received the blessing (Matthew 1). This becomes important because one way to explain away Jesus' siblings is to claim that they were Joseph's children by a previous wife. "Is this not the carpenter's son? Is not His mother called Mary? And His brothers James, Joses, Simon, and Judas? And His sisters, are they not all with us? Where then did this Man get all these things?" (Matthew 13:55-56). If Joseph had four sons older than Jesus, then Jesus would not be the heir to David's throne because the brothers outlived Jesus and would be in line to the throne prior to Jesus. Therefore the four sons had to have been born after Jesus.

Another tactic is to claim that "brother" in Greek can refer to a cousin, such is true. But what is ignored is that "sister" in Greek is not used to refer to a cousin. Jesus had both brothers and sisters.

Finally, Mary is never called a virgin after Jesus was born in the Bible.

Since the evidence in the Scriptures is solid, then the question of why Christians say that Mary did not remain a virgin after giving birth to Jesus is self-evident. We do so because it is the truth.

A better question, however, is to ask why the Roman Catholic Church established a tradition contrary to what is found in the Bible. What is it that they seek to gain?

Roman Catholicism sees the celibate life to be superior to sexual life. It is one of the reasons why they forbid their priests, monks, and nuns from marrying. They hold this position despite Paul's warning: "Now the Spirit expressly says that in latter times some will depart from the faith, giving heed to deceiving spirits and doctrines of demons, speaking lies in hypocrisy, having their own conscience seared with a hot iron, forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from foods which God created to be received with thanksgiving by those who believe and know the truth" (I Timothy 4:1-3). Roman Catholics wish to elevate Mary above other humans and, thus, the perpetual virginity of Mary is a part of their claim that Mary was superior to others. The thought that Mary would have sexual relations with a man after having conceived a child by the Holy Spirit is abhorrent to a culture that seeks to make Mary someone more than the Scriptures teach. See: The Glorification of Mary

Therein lies the chief problem. Mary never held a special position beyond the privilege of having been the one to bear the Son of God and raise him. There is one mention of Mary after Jesus' death (Acts 1:14) and no mention of her after the church began. She had no special position in the church. All that the Roman Catholics attribute to her is of their own imagination -- unsupported by God's Word.

So why is the knowledge that Mary had other children important? Simply because it is evidence that the Roman Catholic Church teaches falsehoods.

Why is it that there is no contribution of Mary’s in the books of the Bible?

Jeffrey Hamilton — Fri, 15 Apr 2011 00:30:00 +0000

Question:

What happened to Mary after the death of Jesus?
Why is it that there is no contribution of Mary's in the books of the Bible? She should be closer to God than all other disciples after the death of Jesus.
Why do we have many versions of the Bible? When God does not change, His word should not change.
Does Christianity believe in destiny?
What is the fate of those who lived and died before the birth of Jesus?

Please reply with evidence from the Bible.

Answer:

The Bible does not record what happened to Mary. The events in her life, beyond her interactions with Jesus, were not the basis of Christianity. All we know is that John took care of her (John 19:26-27). There is no mention that Mary was a prophetess. It was God who chose who would write His book and no woman was among the ones selected. We do have one of Mary's praise recorded in Luke 1:46-55, but that is basically it.

The assumption that Mary was closer to God than the other disciples is false. There is no biblical basis for such a statement. See The Glorification of Mary.

We have versions of the Bible to handle the many languages in the world. You make an assumption that the various versions of the Bible teach different doctrines. God's Word has not changed. "Beloved, while I was very diligent to write to you concerning our common salvation, I found it necessary to write to you exhorting you to contend earnestly for the faith which was once for all delivered to the saints" (Jude 3). I'll grant you that there are some bad versions, but we call them bad because they don't accurately render the teachings of the Bible. It is because the Bible is fixed that we can make judgments about the quality of various versions. See Which Translation Should I Use?

If by "destiny" you mean a predetermined destiny to be righteous or sinful, the Bible does not teach that. See Predetermined Destiny. If you mean that someone might be selected in advance to play certain roles in God's plans, that is true (Isaiah 44:26-28).

Jesus' death brought salvation to those who lived under the prior covenant and were judged righteous. "And for this reason He is the Mediator of the new covenant, by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions under the first covenant, that those who are called may receive the promise of the eternal inheritance" (Hebrews 9:15).