Mary having the nature of the New Eve wouldn’t change after the birth of Christ. Either she is of this species or not. If not, then we don’t have Theandros and we don’t have a Trinity. The identity of Christ is tied to the identity of Mary like any man’s identity is tied to his mothers.
Yes, I thought your examples were lacking. We use the same construction in english " He smoked until the day he died." He didn’t smoke after death. Death was a finality. Just like in your example:
Death was a finality. A poetic way of saying “her whole life”. “Until” denotes time, in any construction.
If Jesus was true man and true God, and all men have original sin wouldn’t original sin be a prerequisite to a “true man”?
No. Adam had no original sin, and neither did Eve before the fall.
Yes, and much the same, I can say of a non-smoker:
Yes. It denotes time, but doesn’t give any definite information about the action afterwards. Unless you think Mikal gave birth after her death.
Jesus Christ was prefigured by Adam’s nature prior to the fall. This was the prophecy. To have a New Adam after the fall requires the ‘remaking’ of man and annihilation of the old man. Or to be born of a New Eve. This allows those of the clan of Adam to receive redemption and makes Mary our spiritual mother. Doesn’t the Church teach these things?
As you know, the original Gospel texts weren’t in English, they were in Greek. You may find it problematic that in English it is often rendered that the Mother of God was a virgin “until” Jesus’ birth does not indicate that she ceased to be a virgin afterwards; but the English is in this case irrelevant. In the original Greek, this ambiguity doesn’t exist.
It isn’t necessary to remove the word, but to define the word. The definition is what is inconvenient since by definition (Merriam-Webster) it means : up to (a particular time)
You kind of lost me.
It does seem to indicate that, why mention it at all. He knew her not until… Why not just say it. He knew her not. Never, ever. But we are given that qualifier, until she brought forth her first born son.
The Evangelist didn’t use the word “until”, because that is an English word and his Gospel was written in Koine Greek. The word “until” was chosen by the translator, who perhaps wished to emphasize that the text’s focus is on the fact that Blessed Mary was a virgin when Jesus was born. Nevertheless, as said above, the word “until” is not technically incorrect, though it can be easily misunderstood as such.
It isn’t a qualifier at all. If you ask the question why it was phrase the way it was, than it follows you must question the use of it elsewhere. Why didn’t they just say that Michal never had children?
This is a gospel, the good news of Jesus Christ, not of Mary, or John the Baptist.
It does indicate that the situation changed or why mention it. The raven might have returned after the flood waters disappeared.
Why did the writer of 2Samuel say “Michal the daughter of Saul had no child unto the day of her death”? Why not just say it: Michal had no children?
And Michl might have had children posthumously or why mention it?
It does no such thing. The definition of the word does not state that there is a change. It is referring only to the time UP to a point not beyond that point. That is why it is mentioned to say up to that point. The raven might have returned but the scripture does not say. It only mentions up to that point. But you asked why Matthew wrote the way he did. I answered it. The question is meaningless as it proves nothing about the intent or the meaning of the word. Words have definitions and you can’t just make up your own definition. As someone has pointed out this was a translation of a Greek word. The translator chose the word until because it was closest to meaning of the Greek. Which is only referring to a period of time before Jesus was born without reference to what happened after Jesus was born.
Exactly:thumbsup:
We are in agreement so far. He didn’t smoke after death and thus, “until” did not imply a cessation of the avoidance of smoking.
Great. Thus, Matthew 1:25 is not conclusive about Mary’s virginity.