Scripture that say Mary did not have more children

[cradlecathlic26]

I am having a debate with someone that thinks Mary was sinfull and had other children, are there any scriptures that say otherwise?

 

[FCEGM]

I am having a debate with someone that thinks Mary was sinfull and had other children, are there any scriptures that say otherwise?

You might ask the person to indicate where Scripture says that she was sinful and had other children.

These articles will be helpful:

catholic.com/library/Immaculate_Conception_and_Assum.asp

catholic.com/library/Mary_Ever_Virgin.asp

catholic.com/library/Brethren_of_the_Lord.asp

bringyou.to/apologetics/a82.htm

bringyou.to/apologetics/num27.htm

bringyou.to/apologetics/a27.htm

bringyou.to/apologetics/a115.htm

bringyou.to/apologetics/a116.htm

Also, do a search for the discussion threads (there are many) here on CAF on the Perpetual Virginity of Mary; you will find excellent material to help you.

 

[itsjustdave1988]

I am having a debate with someone that thinks Mary was sinfull and had other children, are there any scriptures that say otherwise?

See also

Doctrines about Mary are Biblical

 

[Tantum_ergo]

Ah, yes, the approximately 300 year old position (even Martin Luther and John Calvin believed in Mary’s perpetual virginity) that points to “UNTIL”, firstborn, and “Brethren” (gee, I WONDER how brilliant theologians MISSED those points from AD 33 until these ‘men’ picked up on it) yet somehow ignores other SCRIPTURAL usages of until which do NOT indicate ‘fulfilment’ after (cf. Michal the wife of David had no children by him until the day of her death. Does this mean Michal had children AFTER death? Well, golly gee why not? It says, UNTIL, doesn’t it? ), the SCRIPTURAL connotation of ‘firstborn’ as the MALE child who ‘opens’ the womb, REGARDLESS of whether there are ANY children born AFTER that child (IOW, a ‘firstborn’ son was often an ONLY CHILD) as well as the fact that every person mentioned as ‘brethren’ to the Lord can be traced back, in Scripture itself, to have a parent who is --surprise, surprise, surprise–NOT the Virgin Mary.

Furthermore in Luke 2 we see that when Jesus was 12, He and ‘His parents’ went up to Jerusalem with their relatives. No mention of “His brethren” here–and why not? They are ‘prominently’ mentioned in other parts of Scripture, so why not here? AND when Jesus is missing, His parents (NOT His ‘parents and sibs’) go looking for Him.

If Mary had more children, where are they? Where is the mention of ‘Mary’s’ OTHER sons (the only mention of her having ANY child at all is in naming Jesus as “the son of Mary”. Why is that?

Over 1600 years and all Christendom understood Scripture as portraying that Mary was ever Virgin and Jesus her only son. . .but some ‘man’ decides that HE can ‘interpret’ Scripture and that HIS understanding is that ‘until’ means that afterward marital relations DID happen (despite there being no Scriptural or oral teaching to support it), that ‘firstborn’ means there had to be ‘secondborn’ (despite there being no Scriptural or oral teaching to support it) and that ‘brethren’ means Jesus had sibs from Mary-and-Joseph, despite there being no Scriptural or oral teaching to support it).

So some people, as St. Paul (as we celebrate the feast of his Conversion today) warn us, have ‘itching ears’ and set themselves up (despite the warnings of St. Peter on private interpretation of Scripture) to claim that THEIR interpretation is true and 2000 years worth of teaching is ‘wrong’. . .because ‘they say so.’

Forgive me if my expression of belief ‘offends’ the ears of those who disagree, but I stand with St. Paul, and St. Peter, and the Church that Christ instituted, in submitting to that Church’s authority, God-given and Spirit led, regarding authentic Scriptural interpretation. . .

and by that interpretation. . .I stand with the perpetual Virginity of the Blessed Mother of Jesus Christ, to Him be all glory, honor, and praise, Amen. Alleluia.

 

[iamACE]

Here’s one. Just my understanding.

Mt 1: 18-19

18This is how the birth of Jesus Christ came about: His mother Mary was pledged to be married to Joseph, but before they came together, she was found to be with child through the Holy Spirit. 19Because Joseph her husband was a righteous man and did not want to expose her to public disgrace, he had in mind to divorce her quietly.

she was found to be with child through the Holy Spirit.

Thus, when Mary conceived Jesus she was a virgin.

Because Joseph her husband was a righteous man

A righteous man in those times and even now is defined as a man living in accordance with the laws & fear of God.
Now, will Joseph, a righteous man, take advantage of the Mother of God?
Remember, God talked to Joseph i think 8 times in Matthew about Mary and His Son.
**If **Joseph did take advantage of Mary after she gave birth to Jesus, then the Bible is wrong. Joseph never was a righteous man if that’s the case

 

[joseph_virgen]

near the cross of Jesus stood his mother, his mothers sister, mary, the wife of clopas, and mary magdalene. when Jesus saw his mother there, and the disciple whom he loved standing nearby, he said to his mother, “Dear woman, here is your son,” and to the disciple, " Here is your mother." from that time on, this disciple took her to his home.

had the Nazarene had other siblings, he would not have gone to the length of entrusting his beloved Mother to any one else.

we must remember that in those days old age was not very kind to widows who were without children.