How can I prove that the Virgin Mary has always been a virgin?

[chairman]

The fact that Joseph and Mary were married makes sexual intercourse between them acceptable in the site of God. It will only be fair on the part of Joseph that he had children, since he never took vow of continency, having a wife. And the fact that Mary had other children doesn’t deprive her of her heavenly tir=es and position as the mother of God.

She stands to intercede for us always cos we are her children and the brothers of Christ.

 

[choy]

How do you know what you read actually took place; that it’s not gleanings from the O.T. brought forward to prove a point? Scripture narratives were not written with the same style we use today.
Why do you imply sex is something sinful, to be avoided? That sex between 2 married people is failure in relationship? That it does not give glory to God?
Even if Mary was physically a virgin before the birth of Jesus, and I find no evidence outside of wishful thinking, what evidence is there to prove physical virginity post-birth? Again, wishful thinking?
And does it matter? Spiritual reality is not dependant upon physical condition.
In interpretation of Doctrine the Church Fathers were infallible, in understanding limited.

Marian theology is very much effected by the cult of the Goddess:
2 sects fighting for the right of supremacy and Christianity is an inclusive religion.

why do people keep saying i’m implying sex as sinful when i never said that?

Mary bore the Son of God, therefore she is holy. anyone with this knowledge will respect her above normal respect. if you get to talk to the pope, would you just talk to him like your next door neighbor? of course not. being the Vicar of Christ you’ll show him more respect. not that talking to him normally is sin. but because of what he is and that you give him more respect. same with Mary. being the mother of God, Joseph would respect her more. him avoiding intimate relations is not about a question if the sex is a sin or not, but because of her bearing the Messiah.

 

[KEVIN_WILCOX]

Sex between 2 consenting people in a marriage is not a violation.
The possibility of Mary having sex with her husband does not violate her spiritual virginity.

Speculative theology is based on metaphysical philosophy.
Pope John Paul 2 was a philosopher - he was inclined toward speculative theology.
Much of the dogmatic theology in his encyclicals was reliant upon Cardinal Ratzinger.

Speculative theology is not dogmatic theology.

I have never negated Mary’s spiritual virginity. I have refused to accept speculation as dogma.

 

[choy]

Sex between 2 consenting people in a marriage is not a violation.
The possibility of Mary having sex with her husband does not violate her spiritual virginity.

Speculative theology is based on metaphysical philosophy.
Pope John Paul 2 was a philosopher - he was inclined toward speculative theology.
Much of the dogmatic theology in his encyclicals was reliant upon Cardinal Ratzinger.

Speculative theology is not dogmatic theology.

I have never negated Mary’s spiritual virginity. I have refused to accept speculation as dogma.

look at it this way, Mary is Blessed among women

are lay people allowed to just touch anything in the church? in and around the altar? if Joseph doesn’t feel he’s in an elevated state of holiness like Mary, then he can assume by himself that he is not worthy of her. as lay people are not allowed to just touch other holy things. its not about sex being evil, but something that is above and beyond of being normal and another being merely normal.

the contention was never about sex being evil or not.

 

[panevino]

Sex between 2 consenting people in a marriage is not a violation.
The possibility of Mary having sex with her husband does not violate her spiritual virginity.

Speculative theology is based on metaphysical philosophy.
Pope John Paul 2 was a philosopher - he was inclined toward speculative theology.
Much of the dogmatic theology in his encyclicals was reliant upon Cardinal Ratzinger.

Speculative theology is not dogmatic theology.

I have never negated Mary’s spiritual virginity. I have refused to accept speculation as dogma.

hi Kevin, so you really dont believe she was a virgin before the birth (apologies if I have this wrong)
but, i think that would mean that jesus is not the messiah as prophecised in the OT.
as he was supposed to of been born to a virgin.
isaiah 7:14 KJV Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel.

so if you dont believe mary was a virgin b4 birth (at the least) then aren’t you disquallifying jesus as mesiah?

 

[choy]

i think Kevin is saying that sex between married couples is not a sin, which is correct. so if Mary and Joseph were to have intimate relations after the birth of Jesus, then it is not a sin. that Joseph also only needed to withhold himself until after the birth of Jesus

my contention here is, knowing that Mary bore the Messiah, wouldn’t Joseph treat her with higher respect and refrain from intimacy for the rest of their days? and its not a question of about whether its a sin or not. someone mentioned defilement and i think Kevin got it wrong to link defilement with sin. yes, sin defiles. but something holy can be defiled by something not holy and not because of sin. just by the fact that the other one is not holy or not as holy as the other object. in this case of course its two people.

 

[KEVIN_WILCOX]

hi Kevin, so you really dont believe she was a virgin before the birth (apologies if I have this wrong)
but, i think that would mean that jesus is not the messiah as prophecised in the OT.
as he was supposed to of been born to a virgin.
isaiah 7:14 KJV Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel.

so if you dont believe mary was a virgin b4 birth (at the least) then aren’t you disquallifying jesus as mesiah?

Wrong Scripture, the word here has been mistranslated - it should read ‘young maiden’. Honest, look it up. There are other Scriptures far more supportive.
Yes I do believe she was a virgin before giving birth to Jesus, before, during and after. But what we are to mean by this is what is in question.

 

[Vico]

Kevin Wilcox, you wrote: “Speculative theology is based on metaphysical philosophy. … Speculative theology is not dogmatic theology. … I have refused to accept speculation as dogma.”

The Magisterium has stated that the ever-virgin dogma it is a matter of faith, including the physical integrity that was preserved.

Are you saying that the ever-virgin dogma is speculation, in your opinion?

Besides the clear statement of the Second Latern council, and Blessed Pope John II in Capua 1992, we also have tradition in the liturgy:

Feast of the Synaxis of the Holy Theotokos, Byzantine Liturgy: “As thou hast found my womb, so thou hast left it.”

Byzantine Feast of the Nativity prayer includes: “According to His good pleasure, by a strange self-emptying, He passed through thy womb, yet kept it sealed.”

Tridentine Rite Responsorium, fifth Lesson of the Feast of Christmas: “Blessed Mary, Mother of God, whose womb abideth intact, has today given birth to the Savior of the world.”

 

[Vico]

It’s the Latern Council of 649 I should have referenced in the previous post:

You can read about the topic here: ewtn.com/library/SCRIPTUR/virbir.htm

 

[KEVIN_WILCOX]

Kevin Wilcox, you wrote: “Speculative theology is based on metaphysical philosophy. … Speculative theology is not dogmatic theology. … I have refused to accept speculation as dogma.”

The Magisterium has stated that the ever-virgin dogma it is a matter of faith, including the physical integrity that was preserved.

Are you saying that the ever-virgin dogma is speculation, in your opinion?

Besides the clear statement of the Second Latern council, and Blessed Pope John II in Capua 1992, we also have tradition in the liturgy:

Feast of the Synaxis of the Holy Theotokos, Byzantine Liturgy: “As thou hast found my womb, so thou hast left it.”

Byzantine Feast of the Nativity prayer includes: “According to His good pleasure, by a strange self-emptying, He passed through thy womb, yet kept it sealed.”

Tridentine Rite Responsorium, fifth Lesson of the Feast of Christmas: “Blessed Mary, Mother of God, whose womb abideth intact, has today given birth to the Savior of the world.”

The question of the physical integrity of Mary in giving birth is problematical. Scientific journals have given cases of women who have been able to have sexual intercourse without breaking their hymen.
The problem of accepting physical integrity was acceptable to the Fathers of the Church, it would be dubious today. The apocryphal gospels invented the most fantastic stories.
The signs of physical integrity can no longer be a necessary element in the definition of virginity.
*‘Every male that opens the womb shall be called holy to the Lord’ *
Vatican 2 did not enter into gynaecological debate.

There are women who have lost this physical integrity without ever having had sex.

Is Mary expressing her will to remain a virgin?
‘How can this be since I do not know a man?’
The present tense of the verb indicates a state and not an intention.

 

[Vico]

Kevin Wilcox, you wrote: “Vatican 2 did not enter into gynaecological debate.”

Correct, it is clear, from the statement of Blessed Pope John Paul II, and the other Church documents cited, that physical integrity is included in the ever-virgin dogma, and no further clarification is to be given.

 

[John7]

Kevin Wilcox, you wrote: “Vatican 2 did not enter into gynaecological debate.”

Correct, it is clear, from the statement of Blessed Pope John Paul II, and the other Church documents cited, that physical integrity is included in the ever-virgin dogma, and no further clarification is to be given.

Not Kevin but…,

Question I posed on another thread a while back was that if Mary’s physical integrity was maintained during birth then she couldn’t have had an umbilical cord connection with Jesus. If that was so then Jesus didn’t grow from embryo via umbilicus…but that’s impossible isn’t it?

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?p=5398764#post5398764

 

[Vico]

John7, you asked: “… if Mary’s physical integrity was maintained during birth then she couldn’t have had an umbilical cord connection with Jesus. If that was so then Jesus didn’t grow from embryo via umbilicus…but that’s impossible isn’t it?”

We are given that 1) Our Lord has both human and divine natures and wills, in one Person, and 2) physical integrity and the purity of sinlessness are both maintained by the Blessed Virgin Mary, since her conception by St. Anne, including, as the Magisterium has declared, before, during, and after the birth of Our Lord.

We can derive a theory to rationalize the incarnation in terms of the current level of our understanding of the laws of nature, however as Angel Gabriel said (Luke 1:37 NAB): “…nothing will be impossible for God.”

The ever-virginity is miraculous as are the Immaculate Conception, the Visitation, the Epiphany, the healings by Jesus, walking on water, catching the enormous number of fish, multiplication of fish and loves, producing wine at Cana, raising of the dead Lazarus, Transubstantiation, the Resurrection, the Ascension of the Lord, the Pentacost, the Assumption (dormition), and Transfigurations of Jesus, Enoch, and Elijah.

 

[tqualey]

Hi, Kevin,

Actually, Panevino has it correct, and it is you who are dodging this issue

Wrong Scripture, the word here has been mistranslated - it should read ‘young maiden’. Honest, look it up. There are other Scriptures far more supportive.
Yes I do believe she was a virgin before giving birth to Jesus, before, during and after. But what we are to mean by this is what is in question.

If you like ‘young maiden’ better, then fine - young maiden is a female who has not had sexual relations… in other words - a virgin.

The common and generally understood meaning of the word VIRGIN is someone who has not had sexual relations, be they male or female. The word can then be taken and modified in a completely different way when talking about olive oil! Here you not only have virgin - but, EXTRA virgin. Since no one is having sex with olives, it must mean something other then the usually accepted meaning when applied to humans. And we are only talking about the Blessed Virgin Mary.

You have yet to produce any reference on this ‘spiritual virgin’ idea of yours. To the best of my knowledge, there have only been two people who would qualify as having never sinned: Mary and Jesus. St. Joseph lead a model life - but, he was born with original sin. St. John the Baptist was cleansed from original sin while still in St. Elizabeth’s womb - but, he still had sin. There is no record of the lives of these two men to indicate that they never sinned and I am not aware of any Catholic Church dogma on the matter. So, we are free to believe what we wish in this area.

It is amazing to me that you refuse to address the issues presented to you. (1) There are CC dogmatic teaching on Mary being ever virgin - this is not some whimsical speculation - it IS a matter of Catholic Faith and (2) the God who made the entire universe and keeps it in existance is, according to you, incapable of maintaining Mary’s virginity during the birth of Christ. No one KNOWS how Christ was born - but, this issue of Mary never having had sex during her entire life-time is a matter of Faith. You either believe so you can understand (as St. Augustine said) or you will neither believe or understand.

Ever virgin means just that - Mary never had sex and remained a virgin throughout her life. Your position is that this is not the case.

So, you really do need to look at two challenges to your idea: (1) produce a viable reference for ‘spritiaul virginity’ that will allow you ‘prove’ Mary never sinned but did have sex, and (2) produce an example where our Omnipotent God can not have allowed Christ to be born and still maintained Mary’s virginity.

It is past time for you to actually produce evidence. So, far we have only been treated to your speculations.

God bless

 

[Luke65]

Wrong Scripture, the word here has been mistranslated - it should read ‘young maiden’. Honest, look it up.

Wrong. The Hebrew word almah always refers to a virgin - the word bethulah does not. And in this context, the only acceptable translation is “virgin”, since only a virgin giving birth would be a “sign”. And that is the reason why the Jews themselves translated it as “virgin” in the Greek Septuagint - before Christ was born. It was only after Jesus Christ fulfilled this Messianic prophecy that the Jews denied that Isaiah prophesied a virgin birth. Don’t be deceived.

The question of the physical integrity of Mary in giving birth is problematical. Scientific journals have given cases of women who have been able to have sexual intercourse without breaking their hymen.
The problem of accepting physical integrity was acceptable to the Fathers of the Church, it would be dubious today.

No, the problem is not the times, the problem is a matter of faith - the Fathers had it, modernist Christians don’t.

The apocryphal gospels invented the most fantastic stories.

The Church’s doctrines are not based on apocryphal texts, they’re based on Sacred Scripture and Sacred Tradition. The apocryphal texts are based on tradition, but are not protected from error. And in fact, some of the Fathers, like St. Jerome, condemned the Protoevangelium of James.

The signs of physical integrity can no longer be a necessary element in the definition of virginity.

On the contrary, it is now an article of faith. But you’re hilarious thinking that the Fathers didn’t understand how natural childbirth worked! And by the way, the supernatural birth of Christ was foreshadowed here:

"Then the man brought me back to the outer gate of the sanctuary, the one facing east, and it was shut. The LORD said to me, “This gate is to remain shut. It must not be opened; no one may enter through it. It is to remain shut because the LORD, the God of Israel, has entered through it. The prince himself is the only one who may sit inside the gateway to eat in the presence of the LORD. He is to enter by way of the portico of the gateway and go out the same way.”

Our Lord Jesus entered the sanctuary of His mother’s womb supernaturally; and He left the sanctuary “the same way” - supernaturally.

Is Mary expressing her will to remain a virgin?
‘How can this be since I do not know a man?’
The present tense of the verb indicates a state and not an intention.

Wrong again. If Mary was merely describing her state, then she wouldn’t have bothered asking the question, since her state was about to change in marriage. And even if she was wondering because they hadn’t consummated their marriage yet, she would have asked how since she had “a husband I haven’t known yet.” But that is not what she said. She made a flat statement that she has “a husband I do not know.”

The Church’s dogmas are perfectly consistent with Scripture - and they are not negotiable.

 

[tqualey]

Hi, Luke65

Wrong. The Hebrew word almah always refers to a virgin - the word bethulah does not. And in this context, the only acceptable translation is “virgin”, since only a virgin giving birth would be a “sign”. And that is the reason why the Jews themselves translated it as “virgin” in the Greek Septuagint - before Christ was born. It was only after Jesus Christ fulfilled this Messianic prophecy that the Jews denied that Isaiah prophesied a virgin birth. Don’t be deceived.

No, the problem is not the times, the problem is a matter of faith - the Fathers had it, modernist Christians don’t.

The Church’s doctrines are not based on apocryphal texts, they’re based on Sacred Scripture and Sacred Tradition. The apocryphal texts are based on tradition, but are not protected from error. And in fact, some of the Fathers, like St. Jerome, condemned the Protoevangelium of James.

On the contrary, it is now an article of faith. But you’re hilarious thinking that the Fathers didn’t understand how natural childbirth worked! And by the way, the supernatural birth of Christ was foreshadowed here:

"Then the man brought me back to the outer gate of the sanctuary, the one facing east, and it was shut. The LORD said to me, “This gate is to remain shut. It must not be opened; no one may enter through it. It is to remain shut because the LORD, the God of Israel, has entered through it. The prince himself is the only one who may sit inside the gateway to eat in the presence of the LORD. He is to enter by way of the portico of the gateway and go out the same way.”

Our Lord Jesus entered the sanctuary of His mother’s womb supernaturally; and He left the sanctuary “the same way” - supernaturally.

Wrong again. If Mary was merely describing her state, then she wouldn’t have bothered asking the question, since her state was about to change in marriage. And even if she was wondering because they hadn’t consummated their marriage yet, she would have asked how since she had “a husband I haven’t known yet.” But that is not what she said. She made a flat statement that she has “a husband I do not know.”

The Church’s dogmas are perfectly consistent with Scripture - and they are not negotiable.

God bless

 

[KEVIN_WILCOX]

Is 7: 14

almah-

“virgin” NIV

“young woman” RSV

**The Message **translates it ‘Watch for this: A girl who is presently a virgin will get pregnant. She’ll bear a son and name him Immanuel (God-Is-With-Us)’

**The Septuagint **translators used the unambiguous word parthenos (‘virgin’) to translate almah.

In the O.T. the word almah is used to consistently designate a sexually mature but unmarried woman.

Matthew applies the prophecy to Christ.

 

[tqualey]

Kevin,

Soon you will be discussing the meaning of meaning. What are you trying to prove: Mary was never a virgin, was a virgin before the angel came, was a virgin after conception, was a virgin after the birth of Christ, remained a virgin throughout her life?

Is 7: 14

almah-

“virgin” NIV

“young woman” RSV

**The Message **translates it ‘Watch for this: A girl who is presently a virgin will get pregnant. She’ll bear a son and name him Immanuel (God-Is-With-Us)’

**The Septuagint **translators used the unambiguous word parthenos (‘virgin’) to translate almah.

In the O.T. the word almah is used to consistently designate a sexually mature but unmarried woman.

Matthew applies the prophecy to Christ.

You have yet to acknowledge the references given that Mary’s virginity is a matter of faith. This is factual informaiton that directly contradicts what you have said. So, let’s start somewhere at baseline beliefs and then move on from there. Can you do that?

God bless

 

[KEVIN_WILCOX]

Kevin,

Soon you will be discussing the meaning of meaning. What are you trying to prove: Mary was never a virgin, was a virgin before the angel came, was a virgin after conception, was a virgin after the birth of Christ, remained a virgin throughout her life?

I think you have a typing error? Let’s hope so. Or we’ll be starting another discussion.

You have yet to acknowledge the references given that Mary’s virginity is a matter of faith. This is factual informaiton that directly contradicts what you have said. So, let’s start somewhere at baseline beliefs and then move on from there. Can you do that?

Clarification - define ‘virgin’
Physical / spiritual?
Physical virginity (biological) is questionable - Speculative theology, not an essential article of Faith

Spiritual virginity (without sin) is credible - Dogmatic theology, an essential article of Faith

It does not negate virginity, and clarifies meaning.

God bless

God bless

 

[Nathan_Wagar]

Nobody ever understood as “Almah” to refer to anything but “virgin” in reference to Mary for a long time. The word “virgin” in Matthew 1:32 is the Greek “parthenos.” It is used 14 times in the New Testament, and when it is explained in scripture, as it is in 1 Corinthians 7:28-37, it refers to an unmarried woman who has had no sexual relations with men.
Matthew uses this Greek word “parthenos” to interpret the Hebrew word “almah” appearing in the Immanuel prophecy in Isaiah 7:14 we discussed earlier. Some Jewish exegetes tried to say that “almah” refers only to a girl or young woman, therefore Jesus is neither born of a virgin nor is he the Messiah. Support for this conclusion is made by claiming that Isaiah would have used the term “bethulah,” a more specific Hebrew term for “virgin,” if he meant to say that the prophesied woman had not engaged in sexual relations.
However, the word “almah” occurs only seven times in the Hebrew Old Testament (Gen 24:43; Ex. 2:8; Ps 68:25; Pr 30:19; Sg 1:3; 6:8; Is) thus the evidence to base such conclusions on is very limited. None of the above passages suggest that “almah” refers to a woman who has married or had sexual relations. Conversely, there are explicit indications that “almah” refers to an unmarried woman who has had no sexual relations. In Genesis 24:43, for example, “almah” is used to refer to Rebecca before she is married to Isaac. Yet in the same context (Genesis 24:16) Rebecca is referred to using the word “bethulah.” This shows that almah and bethulah were considered interchangeable, and were understood to mean virigin. Another word, “naarah,” also designates a young woman that is an unmarried virgin, and is exchanged with “bethulah” multiple times in the Old Testament.
The usage of “almah” in Proverbs 30:19 also refers to a virgin. The way of a maiden in this passage is contrasted with the ways of a married woman that engages in adulterous sexual relations.
The use of “almah” in Sg. 1:3 leads to the same conclusion, since in the context the maidens are attracted to the loving man of Solomon’s Song, implying they are refraining from sexual relations with him so that the loving man can be intimate with his one and only lover.
What people fail to realize is that a young woman in Ancient Near Eastern cultures was automatically assumed to be a virgin. She was never left out of sight or unescorted. Not only that, but the above two passages also show that not only does the term “almah” refer to young women, but also specifically to young women that appear to be refraining from sexual relations for one reason or another.
Finally, the Greek Septaguint translated “almah” in Isaiah 7:14 with “parthenos,” the same Greek word Matthew chose to use which means “virgin.” So apparently, the alexandrian Jews understood this to refer to a virgin. Not only that, but they translated it as “ha-almah,” which doesn’t just mean “a virgin,” but “the virgin.”