What does until mean

[unitive_mystic]

Does anyone know what the word “until” means in scripture?

St. Matthew’s gospel says that Joseph “had no relations with her UNTIL she bore a son.”

 

[Maximilian75]

I am by no means a scripture scholar, but In that case, from what I have heard, the Greek word there would be better phrased as ‘never’ rather than until.

Just the opinion of a lay person with no in-depth scripture knowledge

 

[Augustinian]

you really have to be familiar with the original language of the scripture to know.

All the term “until” means is that the translator thought it was the most accurate English word.

 

[thistle]

Does anyone know what the word “until” means in scripture?

St. Matthew’s gospel says that Joseph “had no relations with her UNTIL she bore a son.”

It doesn’t mean she has relations after Jesus was born. As others have said that is the nearest translation from the original language.

If I say I won’t smoke until the day I die it does not mean I will smoke after I die. It means I will never smoke.

 

[jcrichton]

Hi!

“Until” is a grammatical accident (part of the construct of a sentence).

It is form of communication.

The same term when found in other places in Scriptures would make one think that something did not take place but after the death of someone. Let’s look at a sample or two:

8 And being found in appearance as a man,
he humbled himself
by becoming obedient to death—
even death on a cross! (Philippians 2)

Does this means that there was a type of death that Jesus would not have humbled Himself? ‘Even death on a cross’ does not take away Jesus’ Willingness to Obey the Father (He is in the form of man, the Son, of God–with His example He Teaches us to Obey God).

39 For I tell you, you will not see me again until you say, ‘Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord.’”

Here’s another example where we must understand the text by the content and not just by what the individual term/word may mean. Is Jesus somehow creating a folklore-based narrative where He would appear when people chant “Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord” or is His Resurrection dependent upon such calling or is His Parousia hinged upon all of the Believers chanting it?

Clearly Jesus is telling us that people will be in awe of His Divinity and will put together what their hearts and minds are soaking in: Jesus is Lord!

There are many other examples where a term/word may be taken out of context only to make the Word of God devoid of sense–usually, it is done by those who seek to bend Scriptures to their own understanding, even and in spite of it being wrong or ill-conceived.

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[KATRINA_68]

Yes, that is the explanation I heard Fr Pakwa give on EWTN.

 

[Hereiam]

Strictly means “up to” a point in time, OR “never again”.

In this case, “never again”.

Think of this hypothetical quote:

“Uncle Fred smoked 3 packs of cigarettes at day, but quit cold turkey on his 50th birthday, and never smoked again until the day he died.”

That doesn’t mean that he lit up after taking his dying breath!

Pax et bonum!

 

[Joe_5859]

2 Samuel 6:23 — So for Michal the daughter of Saul, she had no child UNTIL the day of her death.

Does this mean she had children after she died? No.

Even in English, the word “until” tells you what happened before but not necessarily after.

 

[spiderweb]

“Until I come, devote yourself to the public reading of Scripture, to preaching and to teaching”
(1 Timothy 4:13).

Another example that doesn’t stop just because St. Paul arrives. It definitely says what to do before he arrives, but not necessarily after he arrives. However, the obvious implication is that Timothy will continue doing this.

 

[porthos11]

“Until” (heos) simply means, up to a certain point. It carries no implication as to what happened after.

 

[steve-b]

Does anyone know what the word “until” means in scripture?

St. Matthew’s gospel says that Joseph “had no relations with her UNTIL she bore a son.”

the same word “until” is used in 1 Corinthians 15:25. Speaking of Jesus it says: “For he must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet.” Does that mean that once Jesus has defeated all of His enemies he will NO longer be king?

Reference:
Revelation 11:15: says "Then the seventh angel blew his trumpet, and there were loud voices in heaven, saying, ‘The kingdom of the world has become the kingdom of our Lord and of his Christ, and he shall reign for ever and ever.’"

Does that then contradict 1 Cor 15:25?

What about “brothers” and other “children” of Mary ?

“And she gave birth to her first-born son.” And so the argument goes, if Mary had a first-born, she must have had a second-born. But that is not necessarily so. In the Hebrew culture the term first-born is simply a title for a woman’s first child. If she only had one child he would still be her first-born.

What about the brothers and sisters of Jesus? Matthew 13:55-56: “Is He not the carpenter’s son? Is not His mother named Mary, and His brothers James, Joseph, Simon and Judas? Are not His sisters all with us?”

Although both Greek and English have a word for cousin, Aramaic, the language spoken by Jesus, does not. The word “brother” can mean relatives as in cousins or even friends.

Consider the word “offspring” of “the woman” as in Mary’s offspring from Rev 12
"Then the dragon was angry with the woman, and went off to make war on the rest of her offspring, on those who keep the commandments of God and bear testimony to Jesus"
THAT’S more kids than one can count. Except, no one thinks they are from her womb.

 

[stpurl]

I had heard, regarding that passage, that the reason it was phrased as it was, was to point to the divinity of Jesus. Remember that since Mary was Joseph’s legal wife, it would have been assumed by the Jewish people that Joseph could have been the ‘actual’ father of Jesus, since by law they were married (and the betrothed status would not have taken away from that). The phrasing, that Joseph ‘had no relations (until) the birth was done to make it crystal clear that Joseph was not the actual father of Jesus; God was. That was the focus, on Jesus’ being the Son of God. To the audience the gospel was intended for, not only would most of them have knowledge of Jesus as "the son of the carpenter’ (and thus, need to have this misconception addressed), they would also already be aware that Mary had no other children; thus, they would not ‘need to know’ about putative relations AFTER the birth of Jesus. This group would have already known (if not by their personal knowledge, by the knowledge of parents and grandparents who had known the Holy Family, that there had been no other child, therefore their only need for reassurance would have been the testimony of Matthew that Joseph could not POSSIBLY have fathered Jesus since he had had no relations with Mary at all before Jesus was born.

 

[MonteRCMS]

Was not written in English.

Go find the original text.

[Greek??]

 

[JanetF]

I am by no means a scripture scholar, but In that case, from what I have heard, the Greek word there would be better phrased as ‘never’ rather than until.

Just the opinion of a lay person with no in-depth scripture knowledge

That’s the way I have always had it explained to me. Research into Josephite marriages might give some insight.

 

[Gorgias]

Does anyone know what the word “until” means in scripture?

St. Matthew’s gospel says that Joseph “had no relations with her UNTIL she bore a son.”

Up at the top right of the forum screen, you’ll see a little magnifying glass icon. Click it (it’s the ‘search’ feature for the forums). Type in the search term heos and take a look at the threads that come up. You’ll find many threads that discuss the meaning of the Greek word ‘heos’ (and how it – and other prepositions – have shades of meaning that differ between languages in translation).

 

[pablope]

Does anyone know what the word “until” means in scripture?

St. Matthew’s gospel says that Joseph “had no relations with her UNTIL she bore a son.”

How about St. Jerome’s explanation: http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/3007.htm

1. His first statement was: Matthew says, aration of Scripture: Matthew 1:24-25 And Joseph arose from his sleep, and did as the angel of the Lord commanded him, and took unto him his wife; and knew her not till she had brought forth her son.
2. Our reply is briefly this — the words knew and till in the language of Holy Scripture are capable of a double meaning. As to the former, he himself gave us a dissertation to show that it must be referred to sexual intercourse, and no one doubts that it is often used of the knowledge of the understanding, as, for instance, the boy Jesus tarried behind in Jerusalem, and his parents knew it not. Now we have to prove that just as in the one case he has followed the usage of Scripture, so with regard to the word till he is utterly refuted by the authority of the same Scripture, which often denotes by its use a fixed time (he himself told us so), frequently time without limitation, as when God by the mouth of the prophet says to certain persons, Isaiah 46:4 Even to old age I am he. Will He cease to be God when they have grown old? And the Saviour in the Gospel tells the Apostles, Matthew 28:20 Lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world. Will the Lord then after the end of the world has come forsake His disciples, and at the very time when seated on twelve thrones they are to judge the twelve tribes of Israel will they be bereft of the company of their Lord? Again Paul the Apostle writing to the Corinthians says, Christ the first-fruits, afterward they that are Christ’s, at his coming. Then comes the end, when he shall have delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father, when he shall have put down all rule, and all authority and power.

 

[joeybaggz]

Matthew’s gospel was directed to the Jewish people. My guess was it was originally written in Hebrew, but a Scripture scholar might have a different take.

 

[unitive_mystic]

Protestant scholars and catholic scholars both study Greek and Latin and they still cant agree on the context of scripture. How do we know which one in right?

 

[Gorgias]

Matthew’s gospel was directed to the Jewish people. My guess was it was originally written in Hebrew, but a Scripture scholar might have a different take.

There are historical references to a “Gospel of Matthew” that was written in Hebrew and appears to pre-date the canonical Gospel of Matthew (which comes to us as a Greek manuscript).

However, we don’t have access to this Hebrew text, and do not know whether the Greek was a translation of the Hebrew document that was attested to by early Church Fathers.

Protestant scholars and catholic scholars both study Greek and Latin and they still cant agree on the context of scripture.

It’s called “eisegesis” – that is, attempting to make the Bible say what you want it to say. We each might claim that our own interpretation is the accurate one, and the other’s is eisegesis.

How do we know which one in right?

For me? I know because I trust the Church that was founded by Jesus, and given authority by Jesus, and has been around for 2000 years.

 

[joeybaggz]

There are historical references to a “Gospel of Matthew” that was written in Hebrew and appears to pre-date the canonical Gospel of Matthew (which comes to us as a Greek manuscript).

However, we don’t have access to this Hebrew text, and do not know whether the Greek was a translation of the Hebrew document that was attested to by early Church Fathers.

Appreciate the insight. It kind of made sense to me that a Jewish man (Matthew) writing to a Jewish audience, might write in Hebrew. I believe bible scholarship is of the opinion that it was followers/scribes faithful to or influenced by Matthew did the actual writing, and I would imagine learned people of that period understood Greek as it was the more popular language of much of the citizenry.