Salvation requires belief in Mary's Perpetual VIRGINITY?

[Goth_Catholic]

in judaism, having an heir is extremely & religiously important to jews.

Joseph already had heirs.

 

[BrewMax]

You mean “And he knew her not till she had brought forth her firstborn son.” Matthew 1:25 ? Well first of all, it doesn’t say he did not have relatiosn with her, just that he knew her not.

Plus, I don’t know about you, but my KJV misspells public and privately just in that first chapter. Not to mection the insensative badly translated english. 100:1 the original scripture says something entirely different.

So Joseph didn’t know who he was married to until Jesus was born? That is totally nonsensical. The correct translation of this by many Biblical scholars is that he didn’t have sex with her until Jesus was born. Catholics have this notion that sex even in marriage is dirty and sinful.

 

[wanner47]

So Joseph didn’t know who he was married to until Jesus was born? That is totally nonsensical. The correct translation of this by many Biblical scholars is that he didn’t have sex with her until Jesus was born.

And other respected Biblical scholars have a different translation for the word translated as “until” in that passage.

Catholics have this notion that sex even in marriage is dirty and sinful.

Uh… no. They don’t. Actually, such an attitude is very contrary to Catholic teaching.

 

[Mannyfit75]

So Joseph didn’t know who he was married to until Jesus was born? That is totally nonsensical. The correct translation of this by many Biblical scholars is that he didn’t have sex with her until Jesus was born. Catholics have this notion that sex even in marriage is dirty and sinful.

ANS:

A: Mk 6:3 says, “Is not this the carpenter, the son of Mary and brother of James and Joses, and Judas and Simon, and are not His sisters here with us?” We need to realize a few things here about these “brothers and sisters”: #1, there was no word for cousin, or for nephew or niece, or for aunt or uncle in ancient Hebrew or Aramaic - the words that the Jews used in all those instances were “brother” or “sister”. An example of this can be seen in Gen 14:14, where Lot, who was Abraham’s nephew, is called his brother.

Another point to consider. If Jesus had had any brothers, if Mary had had any other sons, would the last thing that Jesus did on earth be to grievously offend his surviving brothers? In Jn 19:26-27, right before Jesus dies, it says that Jesus entrusted the care of His mother to the beloved disciple, John. If Mary had had any other sons, it would have been an incredible slap in the face to them that the Apostle John was entrusted with the care of their mother!

Also, we see from Mt. 27:55-56, that the James and Joses mentioned in Mark 6 as the “brothers” of Jesus, are actually the sons of another Mary. And, one other passage to consider is Acts 1:14-15, “[The Apostles] with one accord devoted themselves to prayer, together with the women and Mary the mother of Jesus and with His brothers…the company of persons was in all about a hundred and twenty.” A company of 120 persons composed of the Apostles, Mary, the women, and the “brothers” of Jesus. Let’s see there were 11 Apostles at the time. Jesus’ mother makes 12. The women, probably the same three women mentioned in Matthew 27, but let’s say it was maybe a dozen or two, just for argument’s sake. So that puts us up to 30 or 40 or so. So that leaves the number of Jesus’ brothers at about 80 or 90! Do you think Mary had 80 or 90 children? She would have been in perpetual labor! No, Scripture does not contradict the teaching of the Catholic Church about the “brothers” of Jesus, when Scripture is properly interpreted in context.

 

[Goth_Catholic]

Manny…can I nominate you for sainthood?

 

[swariffin]

Of course. What I meant was: in addition to following Christ, must one also believe that Mary never had sex in order to be saved?

So is it a yes?

To be a true christian one must believe what the Catholic church is teaching about Mary, else the person is rejecting Jesus?

Dear AgnosTheist,

Believe in Jesus in term of salvation and Mary in term of perpetual virginity are different issues. The RCC position of salvation in Jesus is fixed, and nothing to do with Mary. Believe in Mary as a perpetual virginity is only in the realm of Theology. It is faith that saves people, not Theology nor Mariology nor Christology. Theology may leads to belief, but it has nothing to do with faith.Theology may make faith becomes stronger, but it is not theology which saves. That is why we both believe in Salvation through Jesus, AND perpetual virginity of Mary. But, the later is not a requisite nor prerequisite of the first. In short, Jesus will not judge you based on whether you believe in Mary’s perpetual virginity or not.

 

[Singinbeauty]

Didn’t I already answer this for you? They are just not “complete”. Tell me you are not just fishing for someone who doesn’t understand Catholicism to reinforce your innacurate understanding of Church teaching.

I haven’t read the whole thread just yet… but I had to address this. You either are or you aren’t a christian. There is no in between. Those that are ‘luke warm’ are spat from His mouth meaning that they are not a part of His Kingdom.

It’s all or nothing. No riding the fence on this one.

As for my response to this thread, I don’t believe that it matters one way or another that Mary was a perpetual virgin. To focus on this would take my focus off Jesus and I really don’t wanna do this. But I will say that in reference to Mary and Joseph’s marriage, back then you weren’t married until it was consumated… So were Mary and Joseph not really married?

 

[Prayer_Warrior]

what obsession?? The Scriptures tell the truthful story don’t they?? Joseph did not have physical relation wth Mary until Jesus was born.

So, if I show you from scripture that the Greek (heos hou) that translates to “until” does not always imply a change of condition, will you reconsider your interpretation of this scripture? We could start with 2 Sam 6:23. Saul’s daughter has no children until the day of her death…does that mean she had children after she died? Or ps 94:13 "That You may grant him relief from the days of adversity, UNTIL [heos hou] a pit is dug for the wicked. " Does that mean that after the pit is dug the relief from adversity is not granted? You are simply interpreting the modern day usage of “until” into the passage. Here is more about heos hou

Catholics have this notion that sex even in marriage is dirty and sinful.

You’ve fallen for some real rhetoric. This is patently absurd considering that in marriage is the ONE place that Catholics feel sex is not dirty or sinful. If you want to be taken seriously in these forums, you should cut these types of remarks.

 

[look3467]

What happened to Jesus?
Got lost in the discussion about the lusts of the flesh, sex…and marriage…



Peace>>>AJ

 

[st_lucy]

Not every woman, just your wife. how is that sad?
Has it ever occurred to that I just might be a women. You know what its people like you who like to think that they have so much knowledge but show their true colors of stupidity all while trying to tear someone else apart.

Yeah but marriage does. Especially if Joseph & Mary fell in-love with one another. Its a go go for sex!

I will continue to pray for you and all like you. But I will not be having any more contact with you again.

 

[RWMorris]

So Joseph didn’t know who he was married to until Jesus was born? That is totally nonsensical. The correct translation of this by many Biblical scholars is that he didn’t have sex with her until Jesus was born. Catholics have this notion that sex even in marriage is dirty and sinful.

We do not have the idea that sex is dirty! Catholics are taught that sex in marriage is a beautiful and sacred thing. Where did you get that idea??!! Why do you think we have so many children?

 

[BrianH]

So, if I show you from scripture that the Greek (heos hou) that translates to “until” does not

always imply a change of condition, will you reconsider your interpretation of this scripture? We could start with 2 Sam 6:23. Saul’s daughter has no children until the day of her death…does that mean she had children after she died? Or ps 94:13 "That You may grant him relief from the days of adversity, UNTIL [heos hou] a pit is dug for the wicked. " Does that mean that after the pit is dug the relief from adversity is not granted? You are simply interpreting the modern day usage of “until” into the passage. Here is more about heos hou
I have addressed the heos hou arguement in detail on another thread and clearly shown all examples in the NT indicate a change of status.
As far as the Greek translation of the Hebrew original, are you contending that the translation is inspired? A Catholic version of Peter Ruckman?

:

 

[AgnosTheist]

Ahh, now you show the extent of your intelligence.

“In the beginning was the Word, and the word was with God, and the word was God.” John 1:1

“The word became flesh and dwelt among us.” John 1:14

no, this is the extent of my intelligence: the dude who said those words was John, not Joseph nor Mary.

 

[newbetx]

Now there was no indication that mary & joseph believed that the baby is god.

??? Aren’t you ignoring scripture, now?

OK, Joseph is Betrothed to Mary. Mary is to live with her parents for a year. She goes away to see Elizabeth. Comes back and is “with child”. Joseph is vistited by an angel. Joseph has to believe at this point that Mary’s story is true (otherwise, she would have been stoned.) He takes her lawfully as his wife but he knows that Mary truely belongs to God. At that point, he knows his role and it’s not going to be “normal”.

An furthermore, Mary knows this baby is special. Because she’s already betrothed. If someone said to a woman that has a husband that she’ll bear a child, well, DOH! Most likely. But she doesn’t say that. She asks how that can be “since she does not know man.” She knew this was a now thing. A special mission from God. If she didn’t know at that point, her cousin let her know.

Oh, and there are groups of people (then and now) that don’t have the same views about sex that we are taught today. Some do/did think it was bad and impure. And should only be used for procreation. I won’t claim to know if Mary and Joseph were part of a group like that but I have heard it could have been possible.

Well, this is how and why I believe. As for my salvation, it will always be up to God, not me. Anyone who “rejects” part of what the Church teaches and claims to be Catholic becomes what some refer to as Cafeteria Catholics. I must admit to being one, but I keep trying to learn more and so far, the Church’s arguments have won out everytime. If you think you can beat Her, swing away! (baseball analogy)

 

[AgnosTheist]

Not every woman, just your wife. how is that sad?

I was assuming that youre a female (since your handle says ‘lucy’), and i wasnt referring to you when i said ‘youre wife’.

stupidity? hey dont lose your charity, i forgive you.

I will continue to pray for you and all like you. But I will not be having any more contact with you again.

dont worry about me. save all your prayer energy for the planet earth. global warming.

 

[AgnosTheist]

??? Aren’t you ignoring scripture, now?

OK, Joseph is Betrothed to Mary.

how does any of that imply that the couple believed that mary has god in her tummy?

mind you, such notion is blasphemous for jews!

 

[TMC]

I am one of the Catholics that responded that belief in Perpetual Virginity is not required for salvation. You are right that over half of Catholics voted either “no” or “don’t no”.

For myself, I believe this doctrine, but I have trouble accepting that I would automatically be damned for eternity if I did not. In fact I have trouble believing that adherence to this belief has any effect on salvation at all.

 

[AgnosTheist]

I am one of the Catholics that responded that belief in Perpetual Virginity is not required for salvation. You are right that over half of Catholics voted either “no” or “don’t no”.

For myself, I believe this doctrine, but I have trouble accepting that I would automatically be damned for eternity if I did not. In fact I have trouble believing that adherence to this belief has any effect on salvation at all.

its disturbing that half of the catholics here believe that disbelief in any teaching of the Catholic church (like the idea of perpetual virginity) equates to full rejection of Jesus. It makes very little sense. For Catholic teachings added over time. Does that mean that Salvation is becoming increasingly difficult over time?

 

[jmcrae]

its disturbing that half of the catholics here believe that disbelief in any teaching of the Catholic church (like the idea of perpetual virginity) equates to full rejection of Jesus. It makes very little sense. For Catholic teachings added over time. Does that mean that Salvation is becoming increasingly difficult over time?

Not at all. Babies who die after being baptized still go directly to Heaven, before taking even one Catechism class or knowing anything at all - we are not Gnostics. But we are truth-tellers, and believers in truth.

Once the information becomes available, we are required to believe what we know to be true. We are not free to knowingly believe lies.

 

[Prayer_Warrior]

I have addressed the heos hou arguement in detail on another thread and clearly shown all examples in the NT indicate a change of status.
As far as the Greek translation of the Hebrew original, are you contending that the translation is inspired? A Catholic version of Peter Ruckman?