(Edited)
(Edited)
Okay. We are given several names, here.
You have got to be kidding me. So the Bible plays word games with It’s readers then? The only thing playing the word games is the Catholic doctrine. The Catechism. The catechism gives this false explanation that James and Joseph are born of this “other” Mary, which is completely unfounded in God’s Word. Do any of you not find it shocking that the Catholic Mary so closely resembles a Pagan God in this perpetual virgin state, than she does the Biblical mother of Jesus? Someone please explain to me why. Is it to elevate her to a goddess-like status, so that she may be worshiped, bowed down to, prayed to, honored, or whatever terminology you would like to sugar coat it with?
Yep. And apparently you fell for it!
(Edited) As has already been shown to you, the words used in the original Greek text (heos hou) do not translate exactly by the English word ‘until’. The semantic field is different in the two languages. There is no implication of reversal of a situation in the Greek word. The TEV translation of the United Bible Society gives the translation of this verse as, “Joseph did not know Mary BEFORE she gave birth.” The Greek usage gives no implication about what happens afterward. This article addresses the use of “until” at length using examples from within Scripture itself that make the Catholic and Orthodox point:
So did Mary die when Jesus was born?
No. She began raising God as her son.
You are partially, right, it does show what “some” early Christians believe. But I think I will take the Word of God over what any man or woman on Earth has to say. Regardless, this is an everlasting debate, and my intent is not to cause outrage in anyone, but to provoke sensible argument and debate. I’ts obvious that we aren’t going to convince eachother, because we believe in different sources for our faith, but I thank all of you who participated in thread and I look forward to further debates. Good day.
Why do you assume that your interpretation of scripture is the correct one and St. Jerrome’s interpretation in incorrect?
“And Jesus answering said unto them, Do ye not therefore err, because ye know not the scriptures, neither the power of God?” **Mark 12:24 **
We can, but we have to read the whole thing; you can’t just cherry pick a verse or two and assume you know what it means. The “brothers” of Jesus have different parents than Jesus did - you see that when you search their names in a search engine.
Are you trying to infer that St. Jerome never studied the Bible? He studied it in the original languages, and his translation is still considered to be the most authentic translation in the whole world - it is the basis for every other translation ever made, since, including every English translation.
I will ask you again, but in a different way.
The previous scriptures have already answered your question. Read them again. Ask the Holy Spirit to guide you in your own interpretation of the scriptures I have provided you.
Excellent post!:clapping:(Edited) As has already been shown to you, the words used in the original Greek text (heos hou) do not translate exactly by the English word ‘until’. The semantic field is different in the two languages. There is no implication of reversal of a situation in the Greek word. The TEV translation of the United Bible Society gives the translation of this verse as, “Joseph did not know Mary BEFORE she gave birth.” The Greek usage gives no implication about what happens afterward. This article addresses the use of “until” at length using examples from within Scripture itself that make the Catholic and Orthodox point:
bringyou.to/apologetics/num27.htm
Regarding “firstborn”, this is a technical Jewish term of the child (also applies to the husbandry animals) that opens the womb - for which there were certain ceremonial functions to be carried out in dedicating and “buying back” the child (or the animal). Exodus 22:28ff and Deut. 15:19 address this. Being the child that opens the womb doesn’t mean absolutely that others were born to the mother.
Further, Matthew 1:25 tells us that Joseph did not have relations with Mary before the birth of her Son. Why not? There was no ban on intercourse during pregnancy under the Jewish Law under normal circumstances, and if he was going to have intercourse with her after the pregnancy why not before?
It was because in Jewish culture this would have meant that Joseph acknowledged biological fatherhood over Jesus. Because he refused to do this he was saying in essence that he did not accept Jesus as his biological son though he would accept him as his legal son. By refusing to consummate his marriage with Mary he was in conformity with the Jewish Law. By not having intercourse with Mary before the birth of Jesus he is acknowledging in principle that he was also forbidden to have intercourse with her thereafter. A woman found to be with child that is not her husband’s is forbidden forever more to him and to the man who impregnated her. (In fact, a woman caught in adultery is likewise penalized.)
Under Jewish, because Mary was found to be with child before she had consummated her marriage to Joseph she was forever forbidden to him. He could keep her as his wife but he was not allowed intimate relations with her. Had Mary born any children after Jesus she would have been stoned to death under the Law. Had Joseph claimed those children to be biologically his, he would have been stoned to death also. And Joseph, (if for no other reason, but we know there was one) being a “righteous man” would have been obedient to Jewish law whether or not anyone else knew about the origins of the Child.
Welcome to CAF.