Need help with perpetual Virgin?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Jim_Baur
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Cachonga said:
Look here and note item C
Click to expand...
I have NO IDEA who or what this mysterious site is. It could be your own. :confused:
Does that include the anathema found in 1 Cor 16:22? Just something to think about - if the Church puts an anathema on a dogma, then later removes the anathema, what does that say about the alleged infallibility of the Church? On a more serious note, I would join po18guy in asking “Who removed it?”, and would also ask, “When was it removed?”
Click to expand...
First, I DID NOT ask “who removed it?”. I asked you to provide a documented source for your claim. Still waiting. Also, you condemn the Church’s use of the dreaded “anathema”, then you point to that exact item in scripture. Which side are you on?

And, how can the Church condemn you for disbelief, when you have condemned yourself by said disbelief of God’s revealed truth? UNLESS, tthe Church really does have the power to bind and loose… :hmmm:
 
40.png
CWBetts:
1983 Code of Canon Law catholic.com/library/sr_chick_tracts_p5.asp
Click to expand...
So I don’t get the excommunication ceremony? Bummer! I remember when they televised a portion of Jackie Kennedy’s excommunication ceremony (yes, I’m that old). The point still holds - because I do not believe in Mary’s perpetual virginity (among other things), I am excommunicated from Catholic fellowship, and cannot partake of communion, etc… Somehow, I don’t think Paul meant the anathema in the same way you describe (and is that anathema still in force, or did the Code of Canon Law change that, too?).
40.png
Lampo:
Matt. 1:25 - this verse says Joseph knew her “not until (“heos”, in Greek)” she bore a son. Some Protestants argue that this proves Joseph had relations with Mary after she bore a son. This is an erroneous reading of the text because “not until” does not mean “did not…until after.” “Heos” references the past, never the future. Instead, “not until” she bore a son means “not up to the point that” she bore a son. This confirms that Mary was a virgin when she bore Jesus. Here are other texts that prove “not until” means “not up to the point that”:
Click to expand...
Works great if you don’t bother with context. Did the angel tell Joseph to keep her a virgin? Was Joseph instructed not to engage in normal, marital relations for as long as she lived? No! However, once Joseph woke up, he took Mary as his wife, and Luke let’s us know that Joseph kept her a virgin until the birth of Jesus. There is nothing in Scripture to indicate that Joseph and Mary did not engage in normal marital relations after the birth of Jesus.
40.png
po18guy:
I have NO IDEA who or what this mysterious site is. It could be your own.
Click to expand...
This is not my site. You asked for a reference, this is what you get.
40.png
po18guy:
First, I DID NOT ask “who removed it?”. I asked you to provide a documented source for your claim. Still waiting. Also, you condemn the Church’s use of the dreaded “anathema”, then you point to that exact item in scripture. Which side are you on?

And, how can the Church condemn you for disbelief, when you have condemned yourself by said disbelief of God’s revealed truth? UNLESS, tthe Church really does have the power to bind and loose…
Click to expand...
First, I would refer you to post #13 (your post where you asked “Who removed it?”).

Second, I have given a documented source (or don’t you consider web sites as “documentable sources”? What would garysibio, Lampo or CWBetts say about that?) Do you have a specific question about the source, or are you just afraid it might be an “anti-Catholic” site, and you’ll catch some kind of disease from reading it?

Third, I apologize for the misunderstanding. I was not condemning the Church’s anathema. I was simply pointing out that the Church had used the anathema here (and other places). Paul used the anathema once (1 Cor 16:22), and that was to condemn anyone who did not love the Lord. Not exactly the same thing as the way the Church used it with the Marian dogmas.

Fourth, the “Church” condemns every Catholic who denies the dogmas they teach as truth (at one time, they condemned everyone who wasn’t a Catholic to hell, but that isn’t “ecumenical” anymore). I readily admit that I do not believe the Marian Dogmas (among other things), and have removed myself from the Catholic Church (would have been nice to have an excommunuication ceremony, but I’ll get over it).
 
In answer to the original poster:

Protestant objection : "There are scriptural sources that strongly imply Mary had sexual relations with Joseph after the birth of Christ. Examples: Matthew 1:18: “Now the birth of Jesus Christ took place in this way. When his mother Mary had been betrothed to Joseph, before they came together, she was found to be with child of the Holy Spirit.” (italics added) Or Matthew 1:25, where it states that Joseph “knew her not until she had borne a son.”

RESPONSE:In the above verses, the word “before” and the word “until” supposedly imply that Mary had relations after the birth of Christ. This charge was also leveled by an ancient commentator named Helvidius, and was thoroughly leveled by Saint Jerome using many of the arguments I will now present.
Let’s look at the first verse, Matthew 1:18 again, with my own emphasis: “Now the birth of Jesus Christ took place in this way. When his mother Mary had been betrothed to Joseph, before they came together, she was found to be with child of the Holy Spirit.”
Notice that I put emphasis not on the “before” but on the “came together.” The Greek word for “come together” is “sunerchomai.” It is appears 30 times in the New Testament, and it never refers to sexual relations. This obviously supports the Catholic belief that they maintained celibacy afterwards.
Also, as Saint Jerome pointed out, scripture often uses a fixed time to denote time of infinite duration. For example in Isaiah when God says “even unto old age I am He.” Does that mean that he will cease to Be God when He is old? Of course not. The use of the word “until” in the Greek language simply does not require the protestant understanding of it. In some cases, “until” terminates the action of the main verb, in other cases it continues the action. For instance, the Catholic interpretation based on the traditions of the earliest Christians is that in this case, “until” continues the action of the phrase “knew her not.” If “knew her not” is accepted as referring to sexual relations, then a continuing of the verb’s application would mean that Joseph and Mary refrained from sexual relations indefinitely. Supporting the above “continuing” interpretation of the Greek is the fact that Matthew’s gospel contains several instances where “until” continues the action of the verb, as well as in the Greek Septaguint in the Old Testament (including the verse above used by Saint Jerome).

There is a very early tradition coming from a non-canonical work that Mary had taken a vow of celibacy and Joseph respected this. I am merely pointing this out to demonstrate that the belief was there.

The Essene sect practiced vows of celibacy, and were highly regarded for it by their fellow Jews, so the concept is most definitely not foreign to Jewish culture at the time.

Given all the very strong parallels between Mary and the ark of the Old Covenant, it would not make sense for Mary to have another child. Once something is consecrated to God, it is absolutely Holy. She was consecrated by the presence of God incarnate as an utterly holy vessel. Are we to believe that she could then give birth and have child bearing the stain of original sin in a womb that had already been consecrated to God? Or that a man bearing the stain of original sin would enter her with his seed? That just doesn’t make theological sense. Sin can’t touch Mary’s womb. Even if you don’t believe she was immaculately conceived, you have to believe she was purified at least after having conceived her son. From this point she is consecrated. Once you are God’s, you are God’s. Is it really so hard to believe that Joseph wouldn’t want to touch the woman out of whom came his saviour? I sure wouldn’t.
 
Jim_Baur said:
How do we explain Matt. 1: 25?
Click to expand...
Matt 1:25 (KJV) And knew her not till she had brought forth her firstborn son: and he called his name JESUS.

You are going beyond what is written! That verse only says what happened up till Jesus was born.
Let’s take a look at another example: Whenever I travel, when I am away I pray for God to keep my wife and children save till I get home. Do you imagine that I mean to have Him stop keeping them safe then? The use of till indicates what happened up until a certain time and doesn’t indicate anything about after unless what happened after is stated explicitly.
 
Cachonga said:
So I don’t get the excommunication ceremony? Bummer! I remember when they televised a portion of Jackie Kennedy’s excommunication ceremony (yes, I’m that old). …
Click to expand...
I do not think so, wouldn’t there have had to been such a thing for you to have seen it?
 
I really like the typology of Mary and the Ark

Here is an article from CA *This Rock *that does a great job explaining some of it.

Mary, the Ark of the New Covenant by Steve Ray

Among other things it is significant to note that when a man accidently fell against the Ark of the Covenant, God struck him dead.

The Ark carried the 10 commandments, the word of God
Mary carried the Word of God

Great article. Take the time to look up scripture references in your bible. It really is worth it!

God Bless,
Maria
 
consider Psalm 69, A Messianic Psalm
Jesus quotes Psalm 69:4 in John 15:25, “But they have done this in order that the word may be fulfilled that is written in their Law, they hated Me without a cause.”

He also quotes Psalm 69:9 in John 2:16-17, "and to those who were selling the doves He said, “Take these things away; stop making My Fathers house a house of merchandise.” His disciples remembered that it was written, “Zeal for Thy house will consume me.”

Clearly, Psalm 69 is a Messianic Psalm since Jesus quoted it in reference to Himself two times. The reason this is important is because of what is written between the verses that Jesus quoted.

To get the whole context, here is Psalm 69:4-9,
“Those who hate me without a cause are more than the hairs of my head; Those who would destroy me are powerful, being wrongfully my enemies, What I did not steal, I then have to restore. 5O God, it is Thou who dost know my folly, And my wrongs are not hidden from Thee. 6May those who wait for Thee not be ashamed through me, O Lord God of hosts; May those who seek Thee not be dishonored through me, O God of Israel, 7Because for Thy sake I have borne reproach; Dishonor has covered my face. 8I **have become estranged from my brothers, and an alien to my mothers sons. **9For zeal for Thy house has consumed me, And the reproaches of those who reproach Thee have fallen on me.”

Who are my mother’s sons?

consider
Acts 1:14 - “These all with one mind were continually devoting themselves to prayer, along with the women, and Mary the mother of Jesus, and with His brothers.”

1 Cor. 9:4-5 - “Do we not have a right to eat and drink? Do we not have a right to take along a believing wife, even as the rest of the apostles, and the brothers of the Lord, and Cephas?”

Gal. 1:19 - But I did not see any other of the apostles except James, the Lords brother."

Are all of these verses to be interpreted as cousin?

consider Jude 1:1 ALONG with Mark 2:3

Jude, a servant of Jesus Christ and a brother of James,
and
Is not this the carpenter, the son of Mary, and** brother of James, and Joses, and Judas**, and Simon?

We see Jude and James are in the “brother” list: and also Jude call James his brother …so are they really just cousins of cousins or is the actual context that the are siblings?

There are other verses also such as
John 2:12 - “After this He went down to Capernaum, He and His mother, and His brothers, and His disciples; and there they stayed a few days.”

Context is the most significant thing we must look at when determining the meanings of words *just because the word brother means fellow Jews or cousin in one place, does not mean it has the same meaning in another. Therefore, each verse should be looked at in **context *to see what it means.

you may argue with a point or two , but the number of brother references in mother/brother context builds a strong Biblical case that Mary did have other children after the Virgin Birth of Jesus
 
RedBert said:
consider Psalm 69, A Messianic Psalm
Jesus quotes Psalm 69:4 in John 15:25, “But they have done this in order that the word may be fulfilled that is written in their Law, they hated Me without a cause.”

He also quotes Psalm 69:9 in John 2:16-17, "and to those who were selling the doves He said, “Take these things away; stop making My Fathers house a house of merchandise.” His disciples remembered that it was written, “Zeal for Thy house will consume me.”

Clearly, Psalm 69 is a Messianic Psalm since Jesus quoted it in reference to Himself two times. The reason this is important is because of what is written between the verses that Jesus quoted.

To get the whole context, here is Psalm 69:4-9,
“Those who hate me without a cause are more than the hairs of my head; Those who would destroy me are powerful, being wrongfully my enemies, What I did not steal, I then have to restore. 5O God, it is Thou who dost know my folly, And my wrongs are not hidden from Thee. 6May those who wait for Thee not be ashamed through me, O Lord God of hosts; May those who seek Thee not be dishonored through me, O God of Israel, 7Because for Thy sake I have borne reproach; Dishonor has covered my face. 8I **have become estranged from my brothers, and an alien to my mothers sons. **9For zeal for Thy house has consumed me, And the reproaches of those who reproach Thee have fallen on me.”

Who are my mother’s sons?

consider
Acts 1:14 - “These all with one mind were continually devoting themselves to prayer, along with the women, and Mary the mother of Jesus, and with His brothers.”

1 Cor. 9:4-5 - “Do we not have a right to eat and drink? Do we not have a right to take along a believing wife, even as the rest of the apostles, and the brothers of the Lord, and Cephas?”

Gal. 1:19 - But I did not see any other of the apostles except James, the Lords brother."

Are all of these verses to be interpreted as cousin?

consider Jude 1:1 ALONG with Mark 2:3

Jude, a servant of Jesus Christ and a brother of James,
and
Is not this the carpenter, the son of Mary, and** brother of James, and Joses, and Judas**, and Simon?

We see Jude and James are in the “brother” list: and also Jude call James his brother …so are they really just cousins of cousins or is the actual context that the are siblings?

There are other verses also such as
John 2:12 - “After this He went down to Capernaum, He and His mother, and His brothers, and His disciples; and there they stayed a few days.”

Context is the most significant thing we must look at when determining the meanings of words *just because the word brother means fellow Jews or cousin in one place, does not mean it has the same meaning in another. Therefore, each verse should be looked at in **context ***to see what it means.
Click to expand...
And taken in context, there are ZERO references to brothers that indicate blood brothers. In fact reread the passion in John, then come back, and I will explain to you why Mary could not have had any sons other than Jesus.
 
Both Martin Luther and John Calvin affirmed the perpetual virginity of Mary. Whether or not they, and the Roman Catholic Church, are correct will ultimately be decided when we encounter the Lord and he reveals to us in heaven

You see my friend it is like this, it really doesn’t matter to me.
And that is one of the strengths of Protestantism is that we do have some freedom in the non-essentials of the Faith (See Romans 14)

However, because of the RCC doctrine of Papal or Church infallibility, you have to defend EVERY doctrine like your Church depends on it. Because it does.

If I’m wrong on this , no big thing; if the RCC is wrong on this……………

Romans 14
5One man considers one day more sacred than another; another man considers every day alike. Each one should be fully convinced in his own mind. 6He who regards one day as special, does so to the Lord. He who eats meat, eats to the Lord, for he gives thanks to God; and he who abstains, does so to the Lord and gives thanks to God…
22So whatever you believe about these things keep between yourself and God. Blessed is the man who does not condemn himself by what he approves

On the essentials , unity,
On the non-esstialials, liberty,
And in all things, charity.
St. Augustine
 
Psalm 69 is a Todah Psalm, and probabli is Messianic in nature, but being a Psalm, and therefore poetry, the “Mother’s sons” reference need not be taken as literal sons of Mary, and instead speaks of Israel at large.
 
anf if they figre out the perpetual virgin problem how many more people would be brought to the church
 
RedBert said:
consider Psalm 69, A Messianic Psalm
Jesus quotes Psalm 69:4 in John 15:25, “But they have done this in order that the word may be fulfilled that is written in their Law, they hated Me without a cause.”

He also quotes Psalm 69:9 in John 2:16-17, "and to those who were selling the doves He said, “Take these things away; stop making My Fathers house a house of merchandise.” His disciples remembered that it was written, “Zeal for Thy house will consume me.”

Clearly, Psalm 69 is a Messianic Psalm since Jesus quoted it in reference to Himself two times. The reason this is important is because of what is written between the verses that Jesus quoted.

To get the whole context, here is Psalm 69:4-9,
“Those who hate me without a cause are more than the hairs of my head; Those who would destroy me are powerful, being wrongfully my enemies, What I did not steal, I then have to restore. 5O God, it is Thou who dost know my folly, And my wrongs are not hidden from Thee. 6May those who wait for Thee not be ashamed through me, O Lord God of hosts; May those who seek Thee not be dishonored through me, O God of Israel, 7Because for Thy sake I have borne reproach; Dishonor has covered my face. 8I **have become estranged from my brothers, and an alien to my mothers sons. **9For zeal for Thy house has consumed me, And the reproaches of those who reproach Thee have fallen on me.”

Who are my mother’s sons?

consider
Acts 1:14 - “These all with one mind were continually devoting themselves to prayer, along with the women, and Mary the mother of Jesus, and with His brothers.”

1 Cor. 9:4-5 - “Do we not have a right to eat and drink? Do we not have a right to take along a believing wife, even as the rest of the apostles, and the brothers of the Lord, and Cephas?”

Gal. 1:19 - But I did not see any other of the apostles except James, the Lords brother."

Are all of these verses to be interpreted as cousin?

consider Jude 1:1 ALONG with Mark 2:3

Jude, a servant of Jesus Christ and a brother of James,
and
Is not this the carpenter, the son of Mary, and** brother of James, and Joses, and Judas**, and Simon?

We see Jude and James are in the “brother” list: and also Jude call James his brother …so are they really just cousins of cousins or is the actual context that the are siblings?

There are other verses also such as
John 2:12 - “After this He went down to Capernaum, He and His mother, and His brothers, and His disciples; and there they stayed a few days.”

Context is the most significant thing we must look at when determining the meanings of words *just because the word brother means fellow Jews or cousin in one place, does not mean it has the same meaning in another. Therefore, each verse should be looked at in **context ***to see what it means.

you may argue with a point or two , but the number of brother references in mother/brother context builds a strong Biblical case that Mary did have other children after the Virgin Birth of Jesus
Click to expand...
2 Peter 1:20 (King James Version)

“Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation.”

Next argument, please.
 
RedBert said:
consider Psalm 69, A Messianic Psalm
Jesus quotes Psalm 69:4 in John 15:25, “But they have done this in order that the word may be fulfilled that is written in their Law, they hated Me without a cause.”

He also quotes Psalm 69:9 in John 2:16-17, "and to those who were selling the doves He said, “Take these things away; stop making My Fathers house a house of merchandise.” His disciples remembered that it was written, “Zeal for Thy house will consume me.”

Clearly, Psalm 69 is a Messianic Psalm since Jesus quoted it in reference to Himself two times. The reason this is important is because of what is written between the verses that Jesus quoted.

To get the whole context, here is Psalm 69:4-9,
“Those who hate me without a cause are more than the hairs of my head; Those who would destroy me are powerful, being wrongfully my enemies, What I did not steal, I then have to restore. 5O God, it is Thou who dost know my folly, And my wrongs are not hidden from Thee. 6May those who wait for Thee not be ashamed through me, O Lord God of hosts; May those who seek Thee not be dishonored through me, O God of Israel, 7Because for Thy sake I have borne reproach; Dishonor has covered my face. 8I **have become estranged from my brothers, and an alien to my mothers sons. **9For zeal for Thy house has consumed me, And the reproaches of those who reproach Thee have fallen on me.”

Who are my mother’s sons?
Click to expand...
I bolded something in red. If you believe that this proves Mary had children, what wrongs did Jesus have? Or is it possible that it is not quite what you interpreted it to be since I do not believe you think Jesus had any folly or wrongs.

continued…
 
originally posted by RedBert
consider
Acts 1:14 - “These all with one mind were continually devoting themselves to prayer, along with the women, and Mary the mother of Jesus, and with His brothers.”

1 Cor. 9:4-5 - “Do we not have a right to eat and drink? Do we not have a right to take along a believing wife, even as the rest of the apostles, and the brothers of the Lord, and Cephas?”

Gal. 1:19 - But I did not see any other of the apostles except James, the Lords brother."

Are all of these verses to be interpreted as cousin?

consider Jude 1:1 ALONG with Mark 2:3

Jude, a servant of Jesus Christ and a brother of James,
and
Is not this the carpenter, the son of Mary, and** brother of James, and Joses, and Judas**, and Simon?

We see Jude and James are in the “brother” list: and also Jude call James his brother …so are they really just cousins of cousins or is the actual context that the are siblings?

There are other verses also such as
John 2:12 - “After this He went down to Capernaum, He and His mother, and His brothers, and His disciples; and there they stayed a few days.”

Context is the most significant thing we must look at when determining the meanings of words *just because the word brother means fellow Jews or cousin in one place, does not mean it has the same meaning in another. Therefore, each verse should be looked at in **context ***to see what it means.

you may argue with a point or two , but the number of brother references in mother/brother context builds a strong Biblical case that Mary did have other children after the Virgin Birth of Jesus
Click to expand...
I originally piece mealed this and it was way too confusing. In another thread Randy Carson dealt very nicely with this.
from the thread seeking the truth posted by Randy Carson #31
Brothers of Jesus, Not Sons of Mary

Many non-Catholics deny the Perpetual Virginity of Mary by referring to passages of scripture that mention the “brothers” of Jesus. A rigorous analysis of scripture, however, proves their position is false. Consider the following:

1. Jesus had a “brother” named James.

"Isn’t this the carpenter’s son? Isn’t his mother’s name Mary, and aren’t his brothers James, Joseph, Simon and Judas?”(Matthew 13:55)

2. James, the Lord’s “brother”, is an apostle.

“Then, after three years I went up to Jerusalem to visit Cephas, and remained with him fifteen days. But I saw none of the other apostles except James, the Lord’s brother. (Galatians 1:18-19)

3. There are two apostles named James.

“When morning came, he called his disciples to him and chose twelve of them, whom he also designated apostles: Simon (whom he named Peter), his brother Andrew, James, John, Philip, Bartholomew, Matthew, Thomas, James son of Alphaeus, Simon who was called the Zealot, Judas son of James, and Judas Iscariot, who became a traitor.”(Luke 6:13-16)

4. One James (the brother of John) is not the uterine brother of Jesus; his father is Zebedee.

“James son of Zebedee and his brother John (to them he gave the name Boanerges, which means Sons of Thunder)” (Mark 3:17)

5**. The other apostle named James is not the uterine brother of Jesus; his father is Alpheus.**

“And when it was day, he called his disciples, and chose from them twelve, whom he called apostles: Simon, whom he named Peter and Andrew his brother, and James and John and Philip and Bartholomew, and Matthew and James the son of Alpheus, and Simon who was called the Zealot, and Judas the son of James and Judas Iscariot, who became a traitor.” (Luke 6:13-16)

6. Therefore, neither apostle named James was a uterine brother of Jesus.

7. The man named Joseph (or Joses) is not the uterine brother of Jesus; his mother is Mary and his brother is James. Therefore, this Mary is the wife of Alphaeus.

“Many women were there, watching from a distance. They had followed Jesus from Galilee to care for his needs. Among them were Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James and Joses, and the mother of Zebedee’s sons.” (Matthew 27:55-56)

8. Judas is not a uterine brother of Jesus because he is the son of James.

“When they arrived, they went upstairs to the room where they were staying. Those present were Peter, John, James and Andrew; Philip and Thomas, Bartholomew and Matthew; James son of Alphaeus and Simon the Zealot, and Judas son of James.” (Acts 1:13)

**9. While Matthew 15:35 declares James, Joseph and Judas to be the “brothers” of Jesus, it has been demonstrated from scripture that they are NOT uterine brothers of the Lord. From this, it is apparent that scripture must be using the term “brothers” to mean relatives other than sons of Mary. **
Click to expand...
There is a strong biblical case but it suggests not that Mary had other children but that Jesus had many male relatives who were not the sons of Mary but called brothers of Jesus.

Respectfully,
Maria
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top