Luke 2:7

[Sum_Fidelis]

This is a question I think we never get a real answer to,and it will remain as a debate that never really ends.
“Was Virgin Maria really a virgin Her whole life?” I have been thinking about this following text in the Gospel according to Luke,2:7:"…and She gave birth to her firstborn son…". (The Latin version is the same,*…et peperit filium suum primogentum),*thinking as a lawyer this is kind of evidence that she later on did have other children. Can someone shed some light on this?

 

[FCEGM]

This is a question I think we never get a real answer to,and it will remain as a debate that never really ends.
“Was Virgin Maria really a virgin Her whole life?” I have been thinking about this following text in the Gospel according to Luke,2:7:"…and She gave birth to her firstborn son…". (The Latin version is the same,*…et peperit filium suum primogentum),*thinking as a lawyer this is kind of evidence that she later on did have other children. Can someone shed some light on this?

Firstborn is used precisely because there were certain ritual obligations within Judaism for the first child, if it is a boy, born to a woman. It doesn’t imply further children.

 

[FCEGM]

P.S. We do very much get a real answer to the question - the answer is no. Unless, of course, one doesn’t trust Christ to teach truthfully through His Church.

 

[Corki]

First is still first even if there isn’t a second. For example, when I was pregnant, my medical chart read “prima gravida” indicating it was my first pregnancy. Unless the doctors were also fortune tellers, they had no idea if that would be the first of many or the only one.

And as a lawyer, would some one arguing in court that “this is the first time my client has ever been accused of a crime” mean that the client is bound to be arrested again?

 

[HisLamb]

We must read the scriptures according to the time in which they were written, who they were addressing, etc. In other words, context is essential to understanding the scriptures. While “firstborn” in modern times would often imply that there was a “second born”, we must not assume that in ancient times there was the same implication.

The first response to this thread is correct: there was a particular responsibility for the first born child in Judaism. The firstborn was considered holy and belonging solely to God as it was written in the scriptures, “The first son that opens the womb shall be holy to the Lord.” To be “firstborn” simply means that a child first and gives them a particular status. They received this status immediately, — no one waited around to see if there was going to be a second born, before they called the first child “firstborn”.

 

[SonCatcher]

This is a question I think we never get a real answer to,and it will remain as a debate that never really ends.
“Was Virgin Maria really a virgin Her whole life?” I have been thinking about this following text in the Gospel according to Luke,2:7:"…and She gave birth to her firstborn son…". (The Latin version is the same,*…et peperit filium suum primogentum),*thinking as a lawyer this is kind of evidence that she later on did have other children. Can someone shed some light on this?

I’m not a lawyer but hope you can appreciate this answer:

The obligations FCEGM mentioned are not merely ritual obligations. They are legal obligations, as well.

[BIBLEDRB]Luke 2:22-24[/BIBLEDRB]
the law referenced:
[BIBLEDRB]Exodus 13:2[/BIBLEDRB][BIBLEDRB]Exodus 13:12-16[/BIBLEDRB]

By way of analogy: there are many professions in which the practitioner must pass certain exams, pay certain fees, etc., before acting in a professional capacity for the first time. There is no requirement to repeat all of this process for the second job. Indeed, often the practitioner may continue in this capacity for the rest of his career with no additional legal challenges.

 

[DianaCC]

Arguing like a lawyer:

• If we grant for the sake of argument that firstborn implies a secondborn, then Mary could not have known Jesus was a firstborn until the arrival of his next sibling. But the rituals prescribed for firstborns were carried out while Jesus was very young. Therefore they probably did not wait until the secondborn came along.
• Furthermore, if Mary had no subsequent children, the rituals for the firstborn would have been put off indefinitely. But they were carried out.
• Therefore, whether Mary had any more children after Jesus or not, the idea that firstborn implies a secondborn leads to absurdities.

 

[thistle]

This is a question I think we never get a real answer to,and it will remain as a debate that never really ends.
“Was Virgin Maria really a virgin Her whole life?” I have been thinking about this following text in the Gospel according to Luke,2:7:"…and She gave birth to her firstborn son…". (The Latin version is the same,*…et peperit filium suum primogentum),*thinking as a lawyer this is kind of evidence that she later on did have other children. Can someone shed some light on this?

The question has been answered. The Church (under authority from God) teaches Mary was a perpetual virgin. End of story. The Church cannot be in error in matters of faith and morals unless you think the Catholic Church is not the Church established by Christ.

 

[Sum_Fidelis]

First is still first even if there isn’t a second. For example, when I was pregnant, my medical chart read “prima gravida” indicating it was my first pregnancy. Unless the doctors were also fortune tellers, they had no idea if that would be the first of many or the only one.

And as a lawyer, would some one arguing in court that “this is the first time my client has ever been accused of a crime” mean that the client is bound to be arrested again?

Thank you for the good answers,I guess you are a lawyer,so,my learned friend,that was a good one. For all that I know there is always the element of possibility that he/she will be arrested again. However,I would not advice anyone to use it. God bless.