The Perpetual Virginity of Mary

[jeffrey]

Nuns and priests are married to a member of the opposite sex. Mary was.

To be pregnant and not married could have meant death to her, and if nothing else, 'shunned' I really don't think God would have put her through that.

 

[opensoul7]

Mark 3:31-35,Acts1:12-14 , the most direct verse is matthew 13:55-56 "Is this not the carpenters son? Is not his mother called mary? And are not his brothers James and Joseph and Simon and Judas? and are not all his sisters with us ? Where then did this man get all this ?" Aldephoi (brothers) and aldelphi (sisters) original Greek. The context strongly suggests children of the same mom.

 

[Quiddity]

open soul, how do you say "step-brother" in Greek? How do you say brother in Aramaic?

 

[ChrisBianchi]

I'm seeing a lot of responders mentioning Jesus' possible brothers and sisters - which may or may not have been blood relatives of the same maternal line - but I have yet to see someone show a verse that describes that Mary remained a virgin. Though traditional, it would appear that Mary's perpetual virginity is merely an assumed guess on behalf of the Catholic Church.

 

[Quiddity]

I'm seeing a lot of responders mentioning Jesus' possible brothers and sisters - which may or may not have been blood relatives of the same maternal line - but I have yet to see someone show a verse that describes that Mary remained a virgin. Though traditional, it would appear that Mary's perpetual virginity is merely an assumed guess on behalf of the Catholic Church.

I wonder if you even bothered to look at my links in my first post. I will assume you didn't see them. It's far from an assumption when you have most of Christendom in history agreeing with you. If anything, I think it's you making an unwarranted assumption.

~Victor

 

[Evenstar]

To be honest, none of us truely know.

So we are all assuming things, we dont have a clue about.​

Not one of us know her personally.... or maybe I have missed out on something lol.

 

[Katzpur]

There are nuns today that feel they are 'married to God' that go their entire life without sex. Their are Priests that go their entire life without sex.

There are lots of Mormons who go their entire lives without sex, too. But I think it's reasonable to assume that if a man and woman are married, they're going to have sex. Why would they not have sex is perhaps a better question.

 

[Quiddity]

There are lots of Mormons who go their entire lives without sex, too. But I think it's reasonable to assume that if a man and woman are married, they're going to have sex. Why would they not have sex is perhaps a better question.

There was nothing normal about the Holy Family Katzpur. Their situation was unique and special. I hope you can at least agree with this.

~Victor

 

[Katzpur]

There was nothing normal about the Holy Family Katzpur. Their situation was unique and special. I hope you can at least agree with this.

~Victor

Of course I can, Victor. I just think that there would be some Biblical evidence to support the notion of Mary's perpetual virginity if it were, in fact, true doctrine. My question is really nothing more than "What purpose would her perpetual virgininty have accomplished?'

 

[ChrisBianchi]

Aside from the mass amount of historical writings that records how most Christians understood Mary's perpetual virginity and the various verses we use it will not deviate others from holding to their interpretations. Since catholics are not bound to the Bible Alone, it does not matter if it's in the Bible or not to us. We believe things that are not in the Bible.

~Victor

I've gone back and re-read these, and there are no verses on the page that you offered that that specify Mary's perpetual virginity.

Due to lack of consistent translation, I'm forced to limit regard for the Old Testament documents and prophecies. However, I will mention this. With regards to Ezekiel's prophecy, this could simply indicate that Mary would be rendered sterile post Jesus' birth or may be a mistranslation or misunderstanding to modern language altogether.

Mark 6:3 has been over-specified to define siblings. In addition to the use of the word "brothers", a connotation between "a" and "the" can merely be a translational difference, so that cannot be considered evidence or proof.

You will be with child and give birth to a son, and you are to give him the name Jesus. He will be great and will be called the Son of the Most High. The Lord God will give him the throne of his father David, and he will reign over the house of Jacob forever; his kingdom will never end." "How will this be," Mary asked the angel, "since I am a virgin?"

Your source states that the angel's use of the word "will" somehow signifies Mary's intentions, yet it does not. The angel's use of words has no relevence to Mary's intentions. Note that Mary states that "I am a virgin" using "am" as present-tense. She doesn't say "I will be a virgin". Mary is simply asking the angel how she's to be pregnant since she 'has not to this point in time' been with a man. Therefore, this is not evidence of perpetual virginity.

in searching for Jesus and finding Him in the temple, there is never any mention of other siblings.

And? There is no relevance to the omission of other siblings from the text. The text was about Jesus, not others. Entire geaneologies throughout the bible neglected to name females. In addition, the lack of siblings does not indicate the lack of sexual relations.

The remainder of the verses also specify the lack of siblings as proof of lack of a sexual relationship. However, as many fertility doctors will agree, it is quite possible and even common to engage in sexual relations without bearing children. That said, there is always the possibility of Mary being rendered sterile.

This is why I didn't want this to become a discussion about Jesus' brothers and sisters. Again, the bible doesn't specify. People claiming that they absolutely know that the "brothers" mentioned in Matthew and Mark are "cousins" are making some very gross assumptions and claiming them as absolute fact. If they were, indeed, cousins, then why aren't their own parents mentioned? Again, an omission of mentioning does not constitute an absence in reality.

Find some real indication that Mary was ever-virgin -not- that she didn't have other children, and post that, please.

 

[Quiddity]

Of course I can, Victor. I just think that there would be some Biblical evidence to support the notion of Mary's perpetual virginity if it were, in fact, true doctrine. My question is really nothing more than "What purpose would her perpetual virgininty have accomplished?'

I did provide some verses Katzpur. But as you know that verses alone are hardly sufficient to prove a point nowadays. But you asked a very good question. One in which is long-winded to give it any adequate response in a couple paragraphs. But in short, God seems to have issues with impurities/sin (flaming bush, asks Moses to take off his sandles for he was stepping on holy land). There are tons of examples of this. A simple touch by Christ would heal people. Long story short, the nature of God is to be pure and holy in everyway. Having a clean and pure human being is but a gift from God and it goes right in line with his nature as a pure God. That's why to deny Mary's gifts is to deny the power/nature of Christ/God.

~Victor

 

[Quiddity]

Find some real indication that Mary was ever-virgin -not- that she didn't have other children, and post that, please.

If early Christian writings saying she remained a virgin aren't good enough for you then I don't I don't know what else to tell you. If you are a Sola Scripturist, I don't think we will get far until we get that out of the way.

Peace In Christ
~Victor

 

[Katzpur]

I did provide some verses Katzpur. But as you know that verses alone are hardly sufficient to prove a point nowadays. But you asked a very good question. One in which is long-winded to give it any adequate response in a couple paragraphs. But in short, God seems to have issues with impurities/sin (flaming bush, asks Moses to take off his sandles for he was stepping on holy land). There are tons of examples of this. A simple touch by Christ would heal people. Long story short, the nature of God is to be pure and holy in everyway. Having a clean and pure human being is but a gift from God and it goes right in line with his nature as a pure God. That's why to deny Mary's gifts is to deny the power/nature of Christ/God.

~Victor

Thanks, Victor. I can agree with your premise (God has issues with impurities), but not your conclusion (having sex with her husband would have compromised Mary's purity). Unfortunately, we're not going to be able to come to any agreement since, as you pointed out, a few scriptures alone are not enough to go on. (I guess there would be little point in arguing the validity of Sola Scriptura in our one-on-one debate. )

 

[jeffrey]

Makes a whole lot of sense, Victor. :clap

 

[Katzpur]

If early Christian writings saying she remained a virgin are good enough for you then I don't I don't know what else to tell you. If you are a Sola Scripturist, I don't think we will get far until we get that out of the way.

Peace In Christ
~Victor

How "early" are these writings and who was really in a position to know such a personal thing about her?

 

[ChrisBianchi]

I did provide some verses Katzpur. But as you know that verses alone are hardly sufficient to prove a point nowadays. But you asked a very good question. One in which is long-winded to give it any adequate response in a couple paragraphs. But in short, God seems to have issues with impurities/sin (flaming bush, asks Moses to take off his sandles for he was stepping on holy land). There are tons of examples of this. A simple touch by Christ would heal people. Long story short, the nature of God is to be pure and holy in everyway. Having a clean and pure human being is but a gift from God and it goes right in line with his nature as a pure God. That's why to deny Mary's gifts is to deny the power/nature of Christ/God.

~Victor

Actually, the provided verses do not really even provide evidence in one direction or another. However, God created humans the way that he did for the purpose of sexual relationships - specifically that as between a husband and wife. Paul later went on to describe sex for pleasure between a husband and wife. Therefore, for Mary to engage in a sexual relationship with her bonded husband would have in no way made her impure.

Mary was human and, though found favorite with God, was not exempt from sin. There are many cases in the the bible, both Old and New Testament, where God found favorites in human beings. Of course, this Protestand Christian idea violates the idea of Immaculate Conception (not to be confused with virgin-birth) idea of the Catholic Church and is a topic for other discussion. - Noah was accepted for saving simply because he was the "least bad". He was the "Diet Coke" of his day - not as bad as the other items on the market but still not truely good. Since Noah was the least bad, the rest of his family who was saved would have been a bit worse, even, than Noah. The truth is that "ALL have sinned and come short of the glory of God." No human being is exempt from sin - not the saints, not Mary, not the Pope, not your Priest or the Nuns, not me, not you, not my wife, not your boss, not your doctor, and not Gandi. Moses, who you mentioned, even killed a man.

The scriptures do not support or provide evidence of perpetual virginity - that conclusion can be reached quite easily as shot-in-the-dark inferences are made by "educated theologists" in favor of one direction or another. However, they do not truely provide evidence that she was not perpetually virgin.

 

[Green Gaia]

Did Mary remain a virgin after the birth of Jesus?

Don't know - don't care.

Does it really matter?

 

[Aqualung]

There are nuns today that feel they are 'married to God' that go their entire life without sex. Their are Priests that go their entire life without sex.

That's their problem. I don't see them as being any more "pure" than a person who does have sex.

 

[Aqualung]

To be pregnant and not married could have meant death to her, and if nothing else, 'shunned' I really don't think God would have put her through that.

\Why don't you think that? God has a reputation of putting his prophets, and even his son, through pretty harsh stuff.

 

[ChrisBianchi]

\Why don't you think that? God has a reputation of putting his prophets, and even his son, through pretty harsh stuff.

Agreed. Here are some examples:

- Destroying the entire earth with flood saving only a few.
- Allowing the Israelites to be enslaved by the Egyptians for generations.
- Isaac being told to sacrifice his son (a traumatic ordeal for both of them).
- The destruction of everything that Job had and loved.
- The beating and crucifixion of Jesus.
- The imprisonment and martyrdom of the disciples.
- Many more...

A "snubbing" would have been easy!