The Virgin Mary - or was she? (Jesus Christ, reject, Earth)

[kadzbiz]

Originally Posted by Ratiocinative

Sorry if I'm confused, but isn't the Biblical Debates section? I would think that implies that you should reference some scripture(s) to support your opinion. I'm looking for some kinda of scriptural reason as to why it is important for Mary to have remained a virgin all her life, otherwise why bother "debating" over it?

The OP was asking whether Mary was a virgin when she had Jesus, not that she remained one afterward, but that's okay, it makes the thread longer.

I'm no expert, but I believe the Church is the one that claims Mary's virginous state. The Church also claimed that Mary Magdalene was a prostitute, but they had to retract that teaching didn't they.

[MidnightBlue]

Originally Posted by kadzbiz

I believe that it was practice at the time not to name your child after a living relative, so Salome would not have been mother and child.

It's the Ashkenazi custom now. I don't think it was the Jewish custom then, and if it was, the Christians weren't aware of it. See Luke 1.59-61:

And it came to pass, that on the eighth day they came to circumcise the child; and they called him Zacharias, after the name of his father.

And his mother answered and said, Not so; but he shall be called John.

And they said unto her, There is none of thy kindred that is called by this name.

[gnostic]

Originally Posted by francine

If Jesus had little brothers, then he would have arranged for them to take care of his mother. Instead, Jesus charged St. John with her care.

The only reference to this is in John (19:26-27); the other gospels don't mention John whatsoever at the crucifixion caring for Mary. Did the author embellish his part?
In Luke 23:39-43, one criminal insulted him, the other ask a question, and Jesus answer the 2nd man that he would join him in Paradise. However, you look at Mark (15:32) and Matthew (27:44), both criminals clearly insulted and mocked Jesus. And if you look at two men crucified with Jesus, John say nothing more than that (19:18). Did Luke embellish his version of the event?
My point is that I don't think the gospels are trustworthy in telling the truth. Clearly some of these events are embellished, even in the gospels.

[Francine]

Originally Posted by gnostic

The only reference to this is in John (19:26-27); the other gospels don't mention John whatsoever at the crucifixion caring for Mary. Did the author embellish his part?

Tradition also has our Blessed Mother living under the care of St. John in Ephesus, Asia Minor, until her death.

[gnostic]

You are mistaken. This tradition was actually said to be that of Mary Magdalene.
It was never certain that it was Jesus' mother where she died, or even when. The only connection between Mary (mother) and Ephesus were paintings, not from tradition, and these paintings were a lot later, and not supported by of the churches' traditions (Eastern or Western).

[Francine]

Originally Posted by gnostic

You are mistaken. This tradition was actually said to be that of Mary Magdalene.

House of the Virgin Mary - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[MidnightBlue]

Originally Posted by Francine

House of the Virgin Mary - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I don't know how I missed hearing about that one all these years.

My grandfather's sister was named for the Holy House of Loreto, and that was the only house of the virgin I had ever heard of.

[logician]

Originally Posted by Ratiocinative

Exactly why does it matter if Mary was a virgin after Jesus's birth? The virgin birth has an obvious importance, since it proves that there was divine intervention in Jesus's birth, but why does it matter afterwards?

The better question is, why does it matter whether she was before.

[Francine]

Originally Posted by logician

The better question is, why does it matter whether she was before.

It proves that there was divine intervention in Jesus' birth.

[kadzbiz]

Originally Posted by MidnightBlue

...... and they called him Zacharias, after the name of his father. And his mother answered and said, Not so; but he shall be called John.
....

Doesn't that prove my point?