The not so virgin Mary

[Canto]

You may interpret that the one or the other way, but Scripture verses talking about His borthers are clearly indicating that she did not stay untouched after giving birth to Jesus.

Here is the Catholic translation by the way…
24 When Joseph awoke, he did as the angel of the Lord had commanded him and took his wife into his home.
25 He had no relations with her until she bore a son, and he named him Jesus.

Catholics don’t deny the above transaltion as you know we just argue that the Greek doesn’t deal with the time after the birth of Christ.

The word brothers could mean they were kids of Jospeh from a prior marriage so it does not definitvley prove Mary had sex.

The ark of the covenant carried the word of God
Mary carried the Word of God
This is not normal for a person thus we should not place conceptions of our opinions of normalacy on Mary

Catholics, Orthodox even the reformers hold to Mary’s perpetual virginity - have they all been miss reading the Bible for 2 milleniums?

There may not be a Bilble verse that explicitly says “thus say the Lord: Mary is a pereptual virgin”

But there is no verse saying: “compile 27 books into a New Testament.”

Christ said to preach and baptise.

 

[Insight]

I’m sorry, but…though for Mary’s sake I would hope that this was true (what woman would NOT love to have a birth that easy???) the gospels are rather clear that she was in some difficulty that night…hence the frantic search for a place to stay.

The 4 cited Gospel visionaries explain that Mary experienced no pain in childbearing because she was without the stain of original sin. But as you observed, She did suffer in comfort and lodging.

God Bless

 

[Good_Fella]

ya ok but what about 1 Corinthians 7:3-8 never answered that.

"Behold, you will conceive in your womb, and bear a son, and you shall call his name Jesus. The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and* the power of the Most High** will overshadow you."*
Luke 1, 31,35

The angel Gabriel appears to be telling Mary that, by conceiving and bearing God’s divine Son, she will enter into a form of marital relationship with him as spouse of the Holy Spirit. To “lay one’s power (reshuth) over a woman” was a Hebraic euphemism for “having a marital relationship with her.” To “overshadow” by spreading a wing (kanaph) or cloak (tallith) over a woman was another euphemism for marital relations. The latter term is derived from tellal, meaning “shadow”. Thus to “spread one’s cloak” over a woman, to overshadow her, means to cohabit with her (kiddushin).

Referring to Israel as his bride, God said:

“You grew up and became tall and arrived at full womanhood; your breasts were formed, and your hair had grown; yet you were naked and bare. I passed by you again and looked on you; you were at the age for love. I spread the edge of my cloak over you, and covered your nakedness: I pledged myself to you and entered into a covenant with you, says the Lord God, and you became mine.”
Ezekiel 16, 7-8

Joseph was a righteous man and a law-abiding Jew. He knew that he was forbidden to have conjugal relations with his wife now that she had conceived and borne God’s Only-begotten Son by the power of the Holy Spirit. By his understanding of the Torah, he was aware that Mary was God’s possession.

A garden enclosed is my sister, my spouse; a spring shut up, a fountain sealed.
Songs 4, 12

Pax Christu :harp:

 

[rev_kevin]

True.

Sorry, rev kev, but this just does not flush. You can’t project the modern concepts of words into Scripture. In those days, relations between Jews were all tribal and clan based. Any relative that was too close for marriage was considered a brother or sister. There were no Hebrew words for cousin.
never said anything about cousins cant you read

Do you disagree? Can you think of any reason that Jesus would give the care of His Mother to a non-relative? This would be considered an extreme insult to any surviving kin.
never said anything about that eather cant you read

Wow. I guess we are al in a fix!

so far you have answered nothing I said never said anything about cousins and never said anything about the cross I dont know were you see that I did I guess you never learned how to read did you now leave me alone no more discussion about this you have twisted my words and said things that i never said.

 

[rev_kevin]

"Behold, you will conceive in your womb, and bear a son, and you shall call his name Jesus. The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and* the power of the Most High*** will overshadow you."
Luke 1, 31,35

The angel Gabriel appears to be telling Mary that, by conceiving and bearing God’s divine Son, she will enter into a form of marital relationship with him as spouse of the Holy Spirit. To “lay one’s power (reshuth) over a woman” was a Hebraic euphemism for “having a marital relationship with her.” To “overshadow” by spreading a wing (kanaph) or cloak (tallith) over a woman was another euphemism for marital relations. The latter term is derived from tellal, meaning “shadow”. Thus to “spread one’s cloak” over a woman, to overshadow her, means to cohabit with her (kiddushin).

Referring to Israel as his bride, God said:

"You grew up and became tall and arrived at full womanhood; your breasts were formed, and your hair had grown; yet you were naked and bare. I passed by you again and looked on you; you were at the age for love. I spread the edge of my cloak over you, and covered your nakedness: I pledged myself to you and entered into a covenant with you, says the Lord God, and you became mine."
Ezekiel 16, 7-8

Joseph was a righteous man and a law-abiding Jew. He knew that he was forbidden to have conjugal relations with his wife now that she had conceived and borne God’s Only-begotten Son by the power of the Holy Spirit. By his understanding of the Torah, he was aware that Mary was God’s possession.

A garden enclosed is my sister, my spouse; a spring shut up, a fountain sealed.
Songs 4, 12

Pax Christu :harp:

still never answered it why. if you cant answer the question dont give me a bunch or mumbo jumbo that has nothing to do with the question my god cant you people read or understand a question

 

[Mickey]

I guess you never learned how to read
you have twisted my words and said things that i never said.

This is rev kev’s typical response after he has lost a debating point.

 

[Janet1983]

It is not necessary, but it would behoove you to know that the word “until” does not necessarily imply any actions afterward. Scripture has several examples of this word being used in a way different than you are interpreting it.

The word “until” is a preposition and means, “up to that time, before a specified time, to the extent that.”

1. *]Up to the time of: “I ate until I was stuffed.” This means that I ate and stopped when I was full and designates a change of action. “I ate up to the time that I was stuffed.”
   *]Before a specified time: “You can’t go until you’ve paid the fine.” This designates a condition required before a change can occur. “You can’t go before you’ve paid the fine.”
   *]To the extent that: I worked until I was exhausted. Signifying an effect or condition as a result. “I worked to the point that I was exhausted.”
   
   In each verse, the word “until” does not designate cessation of the condition mentioned. In 1 Cor. 15:25 Jesus still reigns after he puts all enemies under his feet. In Phil. 1:10 we will still be blameless after the day of Christ. In 1 Tim. 6:14, we are to still keep the commandments of God after Jesus returns. Therefore, the Roman Catholics say that Mary retained her virginity because the word “until” does not necessitate that she stopped being a virgin.
   
   Of course, is just as easy to find verses that show a change in condition.
   
   Acts 20:11, “And when he had gone back up, and had broken the bread and eaten, he talked with them a long while, until daybreak, and so departed.”
   Acts 23:12, “And when it was day, the Jews formed a conspiracy and bound themselves under an oath, saying that they would neither eat nor drink until they had killed Paul.”
   Rev. 7:3, “Do not harm the earth or the sea or the trees, until we have sealed the bond-servants of our God on their foreheads.”
   In each verse above, the word “until” designates a change in condition/action. In Acts 20:11, Paul talked with them until daybreak and then left. In Acts 23:12, evil men would not eat or drink until after Paul had been killed. Rev. 7:3 prohibits harm to the earth, see, and trees, until the bond servants were sealed.
   
   Therefore, we can see that the word “until” is used in different contexts and it is not appropriate to look to other persons to see how the word is used and transfer the meaning of that word to Matt. 1:25. What are we to do?
   
   Context is the most significant thing we must look at when determining the meetings of words. The context of Matt. 1:25 is,
   
   “Now all this took place that what was spoken by the Lord through the prophet might be fulfilled, saying, 23 “Behold, the virgin shall be with child, and shall bear a Son, and they shall call His name Immanuel,” which translated means, “God with us.” 24 And Joseph arose from his sleep, and did as the angel of the Lord commanded him, and took her as his wife, 25 and kept her a virgin until she gave birth to a Son; and he called His name Jesus,” (Matt. 1:22-25).
   
   The context deals with a virgin bearing a child. Virginity is here the important topic and Matthew clearly wants us to understand that Jesus was not the result of normal sexual relations between a husband and wife. This is why Mary’s virginity is cited in prophecy in the Old Testament and its fulfillment in the New. The issue of her virginity is primary since Jesus is the son of God, the divine Messiah. Matthew then tells us that Joseph kept her a virgin until she gave birth to a son. The most natural reading is to conclude that he kept her a virgin until Jesus was born; that is, she wasn’t a virgin after Jesus was born because Joseph and she had sexual relations.
   In addition to this we see in other verses that Jesus indeed did have brothers.

 

[Mickey]

The most natural reading is to conclude that he kept her a virgin until Jesus was born; that is, she wasn’t a virgin after Jesus was born because Joseph and she had sexual relations.

Wrong. Sacred Tradition tells us otherwise. In fact, even the early reformers believed in the perpetual virginity of St Mary. Your innovative interpretation is a recent twist.

 

[Janet1983]

Insulting her by characterizing the revelations of God to her as “silly” or “made up” seems to me to be extremely risky behavior. Not only have you insulted His mother, but also His Bride!

What? I can have my opinions and I think that doctrines that are contradictory to biblical teaching are the work of beings with good imaginations and plans. The Council of Nicea did already lose the focal point when they lifted the Emperor into the position of power… Pope Gregory did however produce a landslide…
Extremely risky? Are planning on coming over to my house to burn me on the stake or are you just trying to get the next church official involved to excommunicate me? Bring it on…

(I really can’t believe this…)

 

[Mannyfit75]

What? I can have my opinions and I think that doctrines that are contradictory to biblical teaching are the work of beings with good imaginations and plans. The Council of Nicea did already lose the focal point when they lifted the Emperor into the position of power… Pope Gregory did however produce a landslide…

A little history concerning Emperor Constantine. When he became Emperor of the Roman Empire, he did not want division in the Christian Church. So when the issue of Arianism arises, he called all the Christian bishops to Nicea in 325 AD to settle the issue. Arianism was condemned as heresy, and Christianity became more orthodox in its belief. It defined the nature of God, and that God is a Triune God. Constantine was not well catechized in the orthodox belief of God, so he let the bishop discuss it amongst themselves.

The Council of Nicea in 325 AD is modeled after the Council of Jerusalem recorded in the Book of Acts.

Second, who the people you claimed that lifted the Emperor into a higher position? The Emperor is a politician. Throughout Roman history, Roman Emperors always have a position that is high. It was not given to them by the Church. It this same Empire that have persecuted Christianity for 300 years. until Constantine issued the Edict of Milan.

Constantine gain much of his power through military victories against his enemies. So if any claimed that the Church put Constantine in a high position is HISTORICALLY INACCURATE.

There is also some confusion by some Non-Catholic Christians who think Constantine made Christianity the official religion of the Empire. He didn’t. It was in 381 AD that Emperor Theodosius I who officially made Christianity as the official religion of the Roman Empire and banned pagan worship.

 

[Mannyfit75]

Extremely risky? Are planning on coming over to my house to burn me on the stake or are you just trying to get the next church official involved to excommunicate me? Bring it on…

(I really can’t believe this…)

I do not think she meant to do that. It is pathetic that you assumed that guanophore might come over to your house and burn you at the stake and get you to excommunicate.

Believe it or not, when a Catholic leaves the Church he or she is not excommunicated. She is still in fact a member of the Catholic Church because of her baptism. Excommunication deals with Catholics who have completely go against the teaching of the faith and professing beliefs contrary to the teachings of the Church.

The results of Excommunication involves mainly with penalty that the Catholic can no longer part take in the Sacraments.

 

[Janet1983]

I do not think she meant to do that. It is pathetic that you assumed that guanophore might come over to your house and burn you at the stake and get you to excommunicate.

Believe it or not, when a Catholic leaves the Church he or she is not excommunicated. She is still in fact a member of the Catholic Church because of her baptism. Excommunication deals with Catholics who have completely go against the teaching of the faith and professing beliefs contrary to the teachings of the Church.

The results of Excommunication involves mainly with penalty that the Catholic can no longer part take in the Sacraments.

Sure… pathetic.
No comment.

 

[Mannyfit75]

Sure… pathetic.
No comment.

I wonder why you just attack guanophore by assuming such ridiculous assertions?

 

[guanophore]

still never answered it why. if you cant answer the question dont give me a bunch or mumbo jumbo that has nothing to do with the question my god cant you people read or understand a question

rev kev, it is inappropriate to read modern day interpretations of words (language) and culture back into scripture. This is called eisogesis. In order to understand the scriptures, we need to know what the writers meant by those words. Hebrews at the time of Jesus referred to all the kin that were too closely related for marriage as brothers and sisters. All tribal societies are like this.

 

[guanophore]

The word “until” is a preposition and means, “up to that time, before a specified time, to the extent that.”

It means that to us. Please see the previous post in eisogesis. It does mean that, and sometimes, it has no implications for what occurred after that time, for example, Michal did not have any children after she died, just because she did not have them “until” the day she died.

In each verse, the word “until” does not designate cessation of the condition mentioned. In 1 Cor. 15:25 Jesus still reigns after he puts all enemies under his feet. In Phil. 1:10 we will still be blameless after the day of Christ. In 1 Tim. 6:14, we are to still keep the commandments of God after Jesus returns. Therefore, the Roman Catholics say that Mary retained her virginity because the word “until” does not necessitate that she stopped being a virgin.

It seems like you are making the arguement FOR us. Mary was a consecrated virgin. She never intended to have children. She certainly would not have relations with someone after she has been espoused to the HS.

Of course, is just as easy to find verses that show a change in condition. Therefore, we can see that the word “until” is used in different contexts and it is not appropriate to look to other persons to see how the word is used and transfer the meaning of that word to Matt. 1:25. What are we to do?

No doubt. this is why it is so important to understand the scriptures in the light of what the Apostles believed and taught.

Context is the most significant thing we must look at when determining the meetings of words.

While I agree that context is important, one must keep in mind that the context of the NT is the Catholic Church. That is why it cannot be properly understood without the Teaching that the Apostles committed to the Church.

The most natural reading is to conclude that he kept her a virgin until Jesus was born; that is, she wasn't a virgin after Jesus was born because Joseph and she had sexual relations.

In addition to this we see in other verses that Jesus indeed did have brothers.

This is a good example why the “natural”, human, carnal mind can be insufficient. Mary had no other children but Jesus, so assumming that she did on the basis of this ambiguous text is an error.

 

[guanophore]

What? I can have my opinions and I think that doctrines that are contradictory to biblical teaching are the work of beings with good imaginations and plans. The Council of Nicea did already lose the focal point when they lifted the Emperor into the position of power…

Indeed, you can have whatever opinions, thougths, imaginations and plans your heart desires. You can also insult the Holy Bride of Christ, by asserting that what has been revealed to her by God is silly and made up. All these are within the freedom God has created you to have.

The Council of Nicea did not have any authority to “lift the Emperor into the position of power”. On the contrary, had he not been in a postition of power, the council would never have taken place, or all the bishops assasinated at the time. The church had no authority over him, nor he over the church. Such a statement seems to indicate that you do not know the focal point of the council, which had nothing to do with secular matters, but matters of doctrine and faith practice.

Extremely risky? Are planning on coming over to my house to burn me on the stake or are you just trying to get the next church official involved to excommunicate me? Bring it on...

You will bring the consequences of your actions upon yourself. This happens to all who insult the Holy Bride of Christ. The problem you are having results from a deficient understanding of the nature of church.

(I really can’t believe this…)

I know. If you did, you would not post some of the calumny that you do.

 

[dianaiad]

The 4 cited Gospel visionaries explain that Mary experienced no pain in childbearing because she was without the stain of original sin. But as you observed, She did suffer in comfort and lodging.

God Bless

I am grateful for this topic. I have learned something I did not know before. I had NO idea that Catholics believed that Mary did not actually deliver Jesus vaginally, but rather had a sort of divine, miraculous and painless delivery that bypassed the hymen so that her virginity was not only spiritually, but physically preserved.

At least, that’s the impression I’m getting. Please correct me if I have that wrong!!!

Now, please realize that I do not accept the visionary’s idea of this, but I"m going to try very hard to be as respectful as possible of the idea, as very odd as it seems to me at the moment.

 

[dianaiad]

Sure… pathetic.
No comment.

Hey, Janet?

lighten up, sweetie. This sort of stuff you are doing is just…wrong. I’d like to refer you to the Forum Rules, Conduct rules, # 7. It’s their site.

You can be as nasty as you want on alt.religion.christian.roman.catholic. You’d have plenty of company, too.

Now me, I’m a curmudgeon. I’m cranky…and I have a temper, but hey, you seem to have more of a problem even than that.

Come yell at the Mormons, instead, OK?

 

[Louie1983]

I am grateful for this topic. I have learned something I did not know before. I had NO idea that Catholics believed that Mary did not actually deliver Jesus vaginally, but rather had a sort of divine, miraculous and painless delivery that bypassed the hymen so that her virginity was not only spiritually, but physically preserved.

At least, that’s the impression I’m getting. Please correct me if I have that wrong!!!

Now, please realize that I do not accept the visionary’s idea of this, but I"m going to try very hard to be as respectful as possible of the idea, as very odd as it seems to me at the moment.

That’s all catholics ask for diana! there’s no problem in sharing your beliefs and opinions with everyone just as long as it’s done in a respectfull way which you do anyway. Same goes both ways i might add.

 

[rev_kevin]

This is rev kev’s typical response after he has lost a debating point.

No listen I never said anything about cousins or the cross. How is that loosing a debate? We can’t debate something I never said. If you so smart then show me were I said it Micky. Prove yourself. Prove me wrong. You can’t because its not true. Give me a # were is said anything about cousins or the people at the cross.PROVE YOU SELF MICKY!!!