7 REASONS ROMAN CATHOLICISM IS DEADLY FALSE DOCTRINE - 10-26-24

[Bill]

Ancient Babylonian religion - Semiramis is called the "Queen of Heaven". -Semiramis designed the confessional. -They had priests. -Semiramis claims she was still a virgin, after giving birth to Tammuz. -They had statues of Semiramis holding the little sun God, appearing all over.

Roman Catholic church - Mary is called the "Queen of Heaven". -It has a confessional. -They have priests. -Mary is a virgin, even after giving birth to Christ, and throughout her whole life. -They have statues of Mary holding what they say is Jesus, in her arms.

Very similar isn't it, and even the Popish office, is not a godly office, and not in the bible, it is an over exalted office.

Mat 23:8-9
(8) But be not ye called Rabbi: for one is your Master, even Christ; and all ye are brethren.
(9) And call no man your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in heaven.

This is speaking of using the word father as a spiritual title, such as they do towards the pope, and even priests.

God says no to that, and also it says be not called rabbi, which is not just a teacher but rather a master, expert teacher.

It is men who want highly exalted titles.

In truth, there was only one master teacher that came as a man on earth, and that is Jesus, and of course the one who truly reveals the word to us, is the Holy Spirit, which is our master teacher.

The glory belongs to God, not to men.

You really forget some little simple facts that have to do with the Jewish teachings. That Mary still had to follow the laws of Moses.

Basically she could not Unite with anyone else, because she had been United with God. And the result of the Union is Jesus.

For her to have a union with another person outside of the relationship she had with God. She would be considered an adulterer. It was for the same reason that Joseph after realizing that she was pregnant wanted to separate from her quietly without embarrassing her. But the angel interested and told Joseph to remain with married. The only way that Joseph could remain unsoiled and still be true as her husband would be never to have any intercourse with her at all. It would be the only way in the laws of Moses that he and her would not become adulterers in the eyes of God and his laws/ the laws of Moses.

 

[Gerbolski]

First of all Mary did not have a sexual union with God, but rather it was a miracle.

Mary was espoused to Joseph to become her husband, so you could see the concern in Joseph about her being pregnant.

But the angel said fear not take her as your wife, and sexual union is part of marriage.

Here is what the bible says:


Mat 1:18-19
(18) Now the birth of Jesus Christ was on this wise: When as his mother Mary was espoused to Joseph, before they came together, she was found with child of the Holy Ghost.
(19) Then Joseph her husband, being a just man, and not willing to make her a publick example, was minded to put her away privily.

Mat 1:20-25
(20) But while he thought on these things, behold, the angel of the Lord appeared unto him in a dream, saying, Joseph, thou son of David, fear not to take unto thee Mary thy wife: for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Ghost.
(21) And she shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call his name JESUS: for he shall save his people from their sins.
(22) Now all this was done, that it might be fulfilled which was spoken of the Lord by the prophet, saying,
(23) Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God with us.
(24) Then Joseph being raised from sleep did as the angel of the Lord had bidden him, and took unto him his wife:
(25) And knew her not till she had brought forth her firstborn son: and he called his name JESUS.

The part of Joseph knowing her not until she brought forth her firstborn son, speaks of sexual union, that is they did not have sexual union until she brought forth her firstborn.

And proof that Jesus had a mother, followed by brothers and sisters, for family is the context of this, is found in these verses:

Mat 13:55-56
(55) Is not this the carpenter's son? is not his mother called Mary? and his brethren, James, and Joses, and Simon, and Judas?
(56) And his sisters, are they not all with us? Whence then hath this man all these things?

 

[Bill]

First of all Mary did not have a sexual union with God, but rather it was a miracle.

Mary was espoused to Joseph to become her husband, so you could see the concern in Joseph about her being pregnant.

But the angel said fear not take her as your wife, and sexual union is part of marriage.

Here is what the bible says:


Mat 1:18-19
(18) Now the birth of Jesus Christ was on this wise: When as his mother Mary was espoused to Joseph, before they came together, she was found with child of the Holy Ghost.
(19) Then Joseph her husband, being a just man, and not willing to make her a publick example, was minded to put her away privily.

Mat 1:20-25
(20) But while he thought on these things, behold, the angel of the Lord appeared unto him in a dream, saying, Joseph, thou son of David, fear not to take unto thee Mary thy wife: for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Ghost.
(21) And she shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call his name JESUS: for he shall save his people from their sins.
(22) Now all this was done, that it might be fulfilled which was spoken of the Lord by the prophet, saying,
(23) Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God with us.
(24) Then Joseph being raised from sleep did as the angel of the Lord had bidden him, and took unto him his wife:
(25) And knew her not till she had brought forth her firstborn son: and he called his name JESUS.

The part of Joseph knowing her not until she brought forth her firstborn son, speaks of sexual union, that is they did not have sexual union until she brought forth her firstborn.

And proof that Jesus had a mother, followed by brothers and sisters, for family is the context of this, is found in these verses:

Mat 13:55-56
(55) Is not this the carpenter's son? is not his mother called Mary? and his brethren, James, and Joses, and Simon, and Judas?
(56) And his sisters, are they not all with us? Whence then hath this man all these things?

Yes the thing with the brothers does pose a slight dilemma but you have to understand the language that was used. Latin and Greek. Just to let you know first cousins and brothers and sisters all use the same terminology. There's no differentiation between them. So it's plainly a matter of opinion.

For myself though I have to say that in the laws of Moses, the proof of the Union is Jesus. Because if you pay attention to the laws of Moses for a man and a woman come together the proof of that Union with God is the children. In the case of Mary she had the union with God only.

Still you have to understand that the laws of Moses because Mary was United with God to have the Child Jesus. Means that she could not have any copulation with another human unless she wanted to violate the laws of Moses. And this is where the problem is in my opinion. That people don't take into consideration the laws of Moses and the fact that Mary was a devout Jew

 

[Gerbolski]

Yes the thing with the brothers does pose a slight dilemma but you have to understand the language that was used. Latin and Greek. Just to let you know first cousins and brothers and sisters all use the same terminology. There's no differentiation between them. So it's plainly a matter of opinion.

For myself though I have to say that in the laws of Moses, the proof of the Union is Jesus. Because if you pay attention to the laws of Moses for a man and a woman come together the proof of that Union with God is the children. In the case of Mary she had the union with God only.

Still you have to understand that the laws of Moses because Mary was United with God to have the Child Jesus. Means that she could not have any copulation with another human unless she wanted to violate the laws of Moses. And this is where the problem is in my opinion. That people don't take into consideration the laws of Moses and the fact that Mary was a devout Jew

I understand what you are saying, but it does not match up the context of how it is saying things via, saying that his mother was Mary, and that he was the carpenter's son, followed by sisters and brothers, the context and the flow clearly shows family.

And Joseph did know Mary after the birth of Jesus, in a sexual manner, you know how the bible uses that type of wording, in such cases, which is all over the bible.

Jesus being conceived in her was not due to God's union with her, but rather it was a miracle, she was just the chosen vessel to bear the child, that is it.

There was no mystical union, nor sexual union.

 

[Gerbolski]

Knowing a woman Gen 4:1 (1) And Adam knew Eve his wife; and she conceived, and bare Cain, and said, I have gotten a man from the LORD. Gen 4:17 (17) And Cain knew his wife; and she conceived, and bare Enoch: and he builded a city, and called the name of the city, after the name of his son, Enoch. Gen 4:25 (25) And Adam knew his wife again; and she bare a son, and called his name Seth: For God, said she, hath appointed me another seed instead of Abel, whom Cain slew. Mat 1:24-25 (24) Then Joseph being raised from sleep did as the angel of the Lord had bidden him, and took unto him his wife: (25) And knew her not till she had brought forth her firstborn son: and he called his name JESUS.

Brothers mentioned with a family context Gen 42:1-3 (1) Now when Jacob saw that there was corn in Egypt, Jacob said unto his sons, Why do ye look one upon another? (2) And he said, Behold, I have heard that there is corn in Egypt: get you down thither, and buy for us from thence; that we may live, and not die. (3) And Joseph's ten brethren went down to buy corn in Egypt. Gen 27:22-23 (22) And Jacob went near unto Isaac his father; and he felt him, and said, The voice is Jacob's voice, but the hands are the hands of Esau. (23) And he discerned him not, because his hands were hairy, as his brother Esau's hands: so he blessed him. Mat 13:55-56 (55) Is not this the carpenter's son? is not his mother called Mary? and his brethren, James, and Joses, and Simon, and Judas? (56) And his sisters, are they not all with us? Whence then hath this man all these things?

The word interprets the word, not us.

And yes the word brethren is used in many ways, such as spiritual brothers in Christ, and it is also used in many other ways, but context always reveals what it is saying, and it is obvious that the scriptures up above refers the context of family, and God is not the author of confusion.

And the truth is, the word cousin does actually appear in the bible:

Luk 1:36
(36) And, behold, thy cousin Elisabeth, she hath also conceived a son in her old age: and this is the sixth month with her, who was called barren.

And concerning God having a sexual or even mystical union with Mary, were does it say that ?

Now there was evil spirits of the past that had sexual union with woman, which here is the verse:

Gen 6:4
(4) There were giants in the earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare children to them, the same became mighty men which were of old, men of renown.

And it is clear about them, but it does not say that about God and Mary, but rather the bible says this:

Mat 1:20
(20) But while he thought on these things, behold, the angel of the Lord appeared unto him in a dream, saying, Joseph, thou son of David, fear not to take unto thee Mary thy wife: for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Ghost.

No union, but rather just the Holy Ghost all by himself, causing a conception to happen in Mary, it had to be all God, and none of man, otherwise, Jesus would have been born as a sinful man.

 

[Gerbolski]

Mary needed a savior

Luk 1:46-47
(46) And Mary said, My soul doth magnify the Lord,
(47) And my spirit hath rejoiced in God my Saviour.

Jesus never mentioned his need for a savior, for he was the perfect savior, but Mary here acknowledged that God was her savior, which shows she knew her need for a savior.

 

[B-A-C]

1. Is the Pope the head of the Roman Catholic Church?
Yes. The Pope is officially recognized as the Vicar of Christ and the visible head of the Church on Earth.

• Catechism of the Catholic Church #882:
  “The Pope, Bishop of Rome and Peter’s successor, is the perpetual and visible source and foundation of the unity both of the bishops and of the whole company of the faithful.”
  Catechism of the Catholic Church - IntraText

---

2. Is Mary officially called a Mediatrix?
Yes, but not in a way that replaces Christ’s unique role.

• Lumen Gentium #62 (Vatican II):
  “The Blessed Virgin is invoked in the Church under the titles of Advocate, Helper, Benefactress, and Mediatrix.”
  1 October 1997
• Catechism #969:
  “By her manifold intercession she continues to bring us the gifts of eternal salvation.”
  Catechism of the Catholic Church - IntraText

"She continues to bring us the gifts of eternal salvation". Salvation can come from Mary?

---

3. Must you be a member of the Catholic Church to be saved?
Yes, but with important qualifications.

• Catechism #846–848:
  Salvation comes through Christ and His Church, but those who are invincibly ignorant and sincerely seek God may be saved.
  https://www.vatican.va/content/cate...of-faith/chapter-three/articles-9-10.html#846
• Lumen Gentium #16:
  “Those who, through no fault of their own, do not know the Gospel of Christ or His Church… may achieve eternal salvation.”
  What Did Vatican II Say About Salvation Outside the Church?

---

4. Is confession to a priest required for forgiveness?
Yes, for mortal sins, confession to a priest is required.

• Catechism #1456:
  “Confession to a priest is an essential part of the sacrament of Penance.”
  Part Two Section Two The Seven Sacrements Of The Church Chapter Two The Sacraments Of Healing Article 4 The Sacrament Of Penance And Reconciliation VII. The Acts Of The Penitent
• Canon Law – Can. 960:
  “Individual and integral confession and absolution constitute the only ordinary means…”
  Code of Canon Law - Book IV - Function of the Church Liber (Cann. 959-997)

---

5. What does “Vicar” mean in Catholic context?
A vicar is a representative or deputy acting on behalf of a superior.

• The Pope is the Vicar of Christ, meaning he acts as Christ’s representative on Earth.
• Other types include Vicar General, Parochial Vicar, and Apostolic Vicar.

Vicar

 

[Bill]

Knowing a woman Gen 4:1 (1) And Adam knew Eve his wife; and she conceived, and bare Cain, and said, I have gotten a man from the LORD. Gen 4:17 (17) And Cain knew his wife; and she conceived, and bare Enoch: and he builded a city, and called the name of the city, after the name of his son, Enoch. Gen 4:25 (25) And Adam knew his wife again; and she bare a son, and called his name Seth: For God, said she, hath appointed me another seed instead of Abel, whom Cain slew. Mat 1:24-25 (24) Then Joseph being raised from sleep did as the angel of the Lord had bidden him, and took unto him his wife: (25) And knew her not till she had brought forth her firstborn son: and he called his name JESUS.

Brothers mentioned with a family context Gen 42:1-3 (1) Now when Jacob saw that there was corn in Egypt, Jacob said unto his sons, Why do ye look one upon another? (2) And he said, Behold, I have heard that there is corn in Egypt: get you down thither, and buy for us from thence; that we may live, and not die. (3) And Joseph's ten brethren went down to buy corn in Egypt. Gen 27:22-23 (22) And Jacob went near unto Isaac his father; and he felt him, and said, The voice is Jacob's voice, but the hands are the hands of Esau. (23) And he discerned him not, because his hands were hairy, as his brother Esau's hands: so he blessed him. Mat 13:55-56 (55) Is not this the carpenter's son? is not his mother called Mary? and his brethren, James, and Joses, and Simon, and Judas? (56) And his sisters, are they not all with us? Whence then hath this man all these things?

The word interprets the word, not us.

And yes the word brethren is used in many ways, such as spiritual brothers in Christ, and it is also used in many other ways, but context always reveals what it is saying, and it is obvious that the scriptures up above refers the context of family, and God is not the author of confusion.

And the truth is, the word cousin does actually appear in the bible:

Luk 1:36
(36) And, behold, thy cousin Elisabeth, she hath also conceived a son in her old age: and this is the sixth month with her, who was called barren.

And concerning God having a sexual or even mystical union with Mary, were does it say that ?

Now there was evil spirits of the past that had sexual union with woman, which here is the verse:

Gen 6:4
(4) There were giants in the earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare children to them, the same became mighty men which were of old, men of renown.

And it is clear about them, but it does not say that about God and Mary, but rather the bible says this:

Mat 1:20
(20) But while he thought on these things, behold, the angel of the Lord appeared unto him in a dream, saying, Joseph, thou son of David, fear not to take unto thee Mary thy wife: for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Ghost.

No union, but rather just the Holy Ghost all by himself, causing a conception to happen in Mary, it had to be all God, and none of man, otherwise, Jesus would have been born as a sinful man.

You read it in English now. The Hebrew from the Old Testament is translated from Hebrew but the New Testament is translated from Latin and Greek. There's a big difference as at least in the Hebrew there was a difference in the way words were made to represent first cousins second cousin and so on however in the Latin and the Greek you don't have those distinctions. It's basically up to the Theologian that interprets that particular scripture. If the Theologian is leaning to Jesus having Brothers then he's going to treat the scripture in that fashion and if the Theologian is leaning that the Jesus doesn't have any brothers then he's going to treat that scripture in that fashion. There is no distinction between the one or the other

 

[Gerbolski]

You read it in English now. The Hebrew from the Old Testament is translated from Hebrew but the New Testament is translated from Latin and Greek. There's a big difference as at least in the Hebrew there was a difference in the way words were made to represent first cousins second cousin and so on however in the Latin and the Greek you don't have those distinctions. It's basically up to the Theologian that interprets that particular scripture. If the Theologian is leaning to Jesus having Brothers then he's going to treat the scripture in that fashion and if the Theologian is leaning that the Jesus doesn't have any brothers then he's going to treat that scripture in that fashion. There is no distinction between the one or the other

Context is key, many people give the Hebrew and Greek excuses when it does not fit with what they say or context, we are able to check these things out, and the Holy Spirit reveals thing to us, God is not the author of confusion.

Here is the Greek word for brethren in our Mark verses:

(Strong's concordance)

(G80
ἀδελφός
adelphos
ad-el-fos'
From G1 (as a connective particle) and δελφύς delphus (the womb); a brother (literally or figuratively) near or remote (much like [H1]): - brother.
Total KJV occurrences: 346)

The context in Mark obviously shows family, such as Jesus' mother Mary, being of the carpenter's son, (Joseph being step dad), followed by brothers and sisters, there is no trickery in these verses, and neither should we use trickery so to confuse people.

And also there is the Septuagint and Vaticanus, and things that concern Alexandria Egypt, and then there is the Textus Receptus, and Masoretic text, and things that concern Antioch.

God said this:

Psa 12:6-7
(6) The words of the LORD are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times.
(7) Thou shalt keep them, O LORD, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever.

 

[Gerbolski]

All these Catholic doctrines that we are covering, cannot be genuinely defended by the word, which shows there is some trickery in it, and deception.

And it is hard to admit this, especially if you are so devoted to it.

It does not matter what you bring to hard core devotees of these persuasions, tradition triumphs over truth in them.

But maybe one day, some of them can be honest, just like one day I had to be honest, when I finally forsook Catholicism, and eventually became born again.

 

[Bill]

Context is key, many people give the Hebrew and Greek excuses when it does not fit with what they say or context, we are able to check these things out, and the Holy Spirit reveals thing to us, God is not the author of confusion.

Here is the Greek word for brethren in our Mark verses:

(Strong's concordance)

(G80
ἀδελφός
adelphos
ad-el-fos'
From G1 (as a connective particle) and δελφύς delphus (the womb); a brother (literally or figuratively) near or remote (much like [H1]): - brother.
Total KJV occurrences: 346)

The context in Mark obviously shows family, such as Jesus' mother Mary, being of the carpenter's son, (Joseph being step dad), followed by brothers and sisters, there is no trickery in these verses, and neither should we use trickery so to confuse people.

And also there is the Septuagint and Vaticanus, and things that concern Alexandria Egypt, and then there is the Textus Receptus, and Masoretic text, and things that concern Antioch.

God said this:

Psa 12:6-7
(6) The words of the LORD are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times.
(7) Thou shalt keep them, O LORD, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever.

There is a thought that someone brought up here to talk Jesus that I never considered and I almost forgot about it. We do not know if Joseph had children with another person before Mary. So there is a good possibility that Joseph had other children prior to being married to Mary

 

[Gerbolski]

There is a thought that someone brought up here to talk Jesus that I never considered and I almost forgot about it. We do not know if Joseph had children with another person before Mary. So there is a good possibility that Joseph had other children prior to being married to Mary

I would not hold too strongly to that view, and personally believe that he did have children with Mary, and there is no proof that Joseph had another wife or was with another woman, but nevertheless, he sure did have sexual relations with Mary, which we have shown in another scripture that he knew his wife after Jesus was born.

 

[Gerbolski]

I know people use these arguments, of Mary having no other children, and having no sexual relation with her husband Joseph, so to add validity to their doctrine of Mary remaining a virgin, and it goes along with their doctrine of Mary's immaculate conception, and that she was without sin, although there was nothing sinful in Mary having sex with her husband Joseph, and Mary herself declared she needed a savior, which shows she was not perfect..

And with this doctrine of immaculate conception and a sinless Mary, they make her the queen of heaven, as the pagans did to some of their goddesses.

God was angry when Israel/Judah did so:

Jer 44:25-27
(25) Thus saith the LORD of hosts, the God of Israel, saying; Ye and your wives have both spoken with your mouths, and fulfilled with your hand, saying, We will surely perform our vows that we have vowed, to burn incense to the queen of heaven, and to pour out drink offerings unto her: ye will surely accomplish your vows, and surely perform your vows.
(26) Therefore hear ye the word of the LORD, all Judah that dwell in the land of Egypt; Behold, I have sworn by my great name, saith the LORD, that my name shall no more be named in the mouth of any man of Judah in all the land of Egypt, saying, The Lord GOD liveth.
(27) Behold, I will watch over them for evil, and not for good: and all the men of Judah that are in the land of Egypt shall be consumed by the sword and by the famine, until there be an end of them.

 

[Bill]

I would not hold too strongly to that view, and personally believe that he did have children with Mary, and there is no proof that Joseph had another wife or was with another woman, but nevertheless, he sure did have sexual relations with Mary, which we have shown in another scripture that he knew his wife after Jesus was born.

And I don't hold strongly to your view either because the law of Moses prohibits that, and Mary and Joseph are not adulterers

 

[Gerbolski]

And I don't hold strongly to your view either because the law of Moses prohibits that, and Mary and Joseph are not adulterers

Well you are assuming that God had either a sexual relation with Mary, or mystical, and the bible said that Joseph knew Mary, so was Joseph in sin ?

And were is this sexual union, or mystical union verse about God and Mary ?

 

[Gerbolski]

And I don't hold strongly to your view either because the law of Moses prohibits that, and Mary and Joseph are not adulterers

So you do not believe what this verse says, which is this:

Mat 1:24-25
(24) Then Joseph being raised from sleep did as the angel of the Lord had bidden him, and took unto him his wife:
(25) And knew her not till she had brought forth her firstborn son: and he called his name JESUS.

And you should mention the verse you are talking about in the old testament, so we can look at it, because I do not want to assume which verses you are talking about.

And there is no proof of a sexual union between God and Mary at all.

It had to be all of God, and none of man.

It is what you call, a miracle, not a sexual union, but just simply a miracle.

So would it be sinful for Joseph to sleep with his wife, when she had never married to some other and had no sexual union whatsoever, for she was called a virgin, Jesus was born of a virgin, virgin, virgin, which shows no sexual union.

 

[Gerbolski]

Isa 7:14
(14) Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel.

If she had a sexual union with God, then in conception and birth, she should not be called a virgin, which shows that, that contradicts what the bible says.

There was no mystical union between God and Mary, nor was there a sexual union with God and the one who was a virgin while giving birth.

It was what you call just simply a miracle, that is it.

 

[Gerbolski]

Are the verses you are referring to, these verses:

Deu 22:22-26
(22) If a man be found lying with a woman married to an husband, then they shall both of them die, both the man that lay with the woman, and the woman: so shalt thou put away evil from Israel.
(23) If a damsel that is a virgin be betrothed unto an husband, and a man find her in the city, and lie with her;
(24) Then ye shall bring them both out unto the gate of that city, and ye shall stone them with stones that they die; the damsel, because she cried not, being in the city; and the man, because he hath humbled his neighbour's wife: so thou shalt put away evil from among you.
(25) But if a man find a betrothed damsel in the field, and the man force her, and lie with her: then the man only that lay with her shall die:
(26) But unto the damsel thou shalt do nothing; there is in the damsel no sin worthy of death: for as when a man riseth against his neighbour, and slayeth him, even so is this matter:

Or is it another ?

Anyhow, Mary was a virgin when she conceived and when she gave birth, so what you are saying does not apply, God never slept with her.

Someone who gets slept with, is not called a virgin.

 

[Gerbolski]

I surely do understand the predicament Joseph was in, but the angel said take her to wife, and it is possible they kept hush hush about it, because normally virgins do not give birth, but this was a miracle, that is the only thing that can explain things here.

No sin was committed here , not by God, nor by Joseph later knowing his wife.

 

[B-A-C]

Matt 10:3 Philip and Bartholomew; Thomas and Matthew the tax collector; James the son of Alphaeus, and Thaddaeus;

Mark 3:18 and Andrew, and Philip, and Bartholomew, and Matthew, and Thomas, and James the son of Alphaeus, and Thaddaeus, and Simon the Zealot;
Luke 6:15 and Matthew and Thomas; James the son of Alphaeus, and Simon who was called the Zealot;
Acts 1:13 When they had entered the city, they went up to the upper room where they were staying; that is, Peter and John and James and Andrew, Philip and Thomas, Bartholomew and Matthew, James the son of Alphaeus, and Simon the Zealot, and Judas the son of James.

Gal 1:19 But I did not see any other of the apostles except James, the Lord's brother.
Mark 6:3 "Is not this the carpenter, the son of Mary, and brother of James and Joses and Judas and Simon? Are not His sisters here with us?" And they took offense at Him.

It would seem that James was not the son of a previous wife (which would have made Joseph an adulturer).
But rather likely, Mary had relations with someone named Alphaeus, after Joseph might had died.

Rom 7:2 For the married woman is bound by law to her husband while he is living; but if her husband dies, she is released from the law concerning the husband.
Rom 7:3 So then, if while her husband is living she is joined to another man, she shall be called an adulteress; but if her husband dies, she is free from the law, so that she is not an adulteress though she is joined to another man.

1Cor 7:39 A wife is bound as long as her husband lives; but if her husband is dead, she is free to be married to whom she wishes, only in the Lord.

So then if mary did remarry, it wouldnt have been a sin. But to say mary would have been an adulteress if she married again makes no sense..

She has "relations" with the Holy Spirit.. and then she marries Joseph... (she would have already been an adultress at that point).