Perpetual virginity

OSV.com ^ | 03-09-16 | Msgr. Charles Pope

[Salvation]

Perpetual virginity

3/9/2016

Question: I am a lifelong and devout Catholic and have always considered Mary to be ever virgin. But recently, I read in my Bible that Joseph had no relations with Mary “before” she bore a son (Mt 1:25). Now, I wonder if our belief does not contradict the Bible.— Eugene DeClue, Festus, Missouri

Answer: The Greek word “heos,” which your citation renders “before,” is more accurately translated “until,” which can be ambiguous without a wider context of time. It is true, in English, the usual sense of “until” is that I am doing or not doing something now “until” something changes, and then I start doing or not doing it. However, this is not always the case, even in Scripture.

If I say to you, “God bless you until we meet again.” I do not mean that after we meet again God’s blessing will cease or turn to curses. In this case, “until” is merely being used to refer to an indefinite period of time which may or may not ever occur. Surely, I hope we meet again, but it is possible we will not, so go with God’s blessings, whatever the case.

In Scripture, too, we encounter “until” being used merely to indicate an indefinite period whose conditions may or may not be met. Thus, we read, “And Michal the daughter of Saul had no child until the day of her death” (2 Sam 6:23). Of course, this should not be taken to mean that she started having children after she died. If I say to you in English that Christ “must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet” (1 Cor 15:25), I do not mean his everlasting kingdom will actually end thereafter.

While “until” often suggests a future change of state, it does not necessarily mean that the change happens — or even can happen. Context is important. It is the same in Greek, where heos, or heos hou, require context to more fully understand what is being affirmed.

The teaching of the perpetual virginity of Mary does not rise or fall on one word, rather, a body of evidence from other sources such as: Mary’s question to the angel as to how a betrothed virgin would conceive; Jesus entrusting Mary to the care of a non-blood relative at this death; and also the long witness of ancient Tradition.

[daniel1212]

This Kingdom is not of this visible world. Its locus is in Heaven. It is entered now only by rebirth in The Faith by faith alone, apart from any achievements of the individual of any kind. It only involves a decision based on understanding of the transaction offered by The God: the entirety of one human's sins and sinfulness in exchange for accreditation of all the righteousness of His son, of trading one's soul for everlasting life and the friendship of the Father.

Eloquent ethos, with the faith that baptism both properly requires and expresses being that which appropriates justification, on Christ's account, "To declare, I say, at this time his righteousness: that he might be just, and the justifier of him which believeth in Jesus," (Romans 3:26) God purifying the heart by faith even before baptism, (Acts 10:43; 15:7-9) although that can be the occasion when one comes to faith, and a catalyst for it. Since the only kind of faith that is salvific is the kind which effects obedience (all that we do is a result of what we really believe, at least at the moment), confessing Christ, then therefore salvation is promised to those who confess the Lord Jesus, (Mt. 10:32) to those who repent/believe and are baptized, (Mk. 16:16; Acts 2:38) since the former results in the latter, and ideally testifies to true faith, but with belief being the actual salvific means, thus the lack thereof meaning damnation. (Mk. 16:16b)

[MHGinTN]

Meant to ping you ...

[daniel1212]

Of course they believe it, and will rationalize that God agreed to bow his head in humble obedience to the priest’s command. Of course, nowhere is seen in Scripture, for nowhere in the life of the church is any NT pastor,

1. distinctively titled "priest;"

2. said/shown to distinctively engage in any sacerdotal function;

3. said/shown to offer the Lord's supper as a sacrifice for sin, or teach that it is;

4. charged with offering the Lord's supper as a sacrifice for sin

5. instructed in offering the Lord's supper as a sacrifice for sin as a unique pastoral function

6. said/shown to officiate at the Lord's supper as essential;

7. said/shown to even distribute food as part of his ordained function;

8. shown to even manifestly describe the Lord's supper more than 2 or 3 times;

9. shown to teach that the Lord's supper is "the source and summit of the Christian life" "in which our redemption is accomplished," as really being the Lord's body and blood, the "bread of angels," etc.;

10. shown to teach that eating the Lord's supper coveys spiritual life

[Mark17]

The blood was ALWAYS for the atonement, never for consumption.

I agree MM. I believe it was symbolic. Jesus NEVER meant we are to drink real blood or eat real flesh. If one takes it literally, then one must take everything literally. Jesus said he was the door. He was called the lily of the valley. He was called the bright and morning star. He was called the Alpha and Omega. He was called the Lamb of God. You can see where this can cause problems. Take it literally, where context indicates it and figuratively where context indcates it.
On the other hand, I don't care a lot about these issues. I have said it about 50,000 times. I only care about how people expect to make it to Heaven. It doesn't matter what they might have right or wrong, if they don't go to Heaven. Nothing else matters.
I feel these other issues will take care of themselves, but I want to see them get saved first. Then we can worry about other issues.

[Mark17]

I'm with you: I'd be interested to know if Roman Catholics believe this heretical crap.

I used to believe it, but now, I am an ex Catholic, so I don't accept it anymore. Some people think we can't be ex Catholics. I have news for them. We most assuredly can.

[knarf]

I followed this back about 6 or 8 replies and ...

You do indeed get tangled in some conversations

I'll say this for Catholics ...

The apologists have four encyclopedias worth of words to use to try to explain the unexplainable

I'm an ex Catholic, a former Catholic, a ust'a be Catholic and any OTHER adjective verb I can come up with ... I ain't no mo

I be washed in the blood, born again ..... CHRISTIAN ! !

[Mark17]

I'm an ex Catholic, a former Catholic, a ust'a be Catholic and any OTHER adjective verb I can come up with ... I ain't no mo

I be washed in the blood, born again ..... CHRISTIAN ! !

You are correct sir. Ex, former, ust'a be, however you want to put it. We are no mo.
Being washed in the blood, being born again, with complete confidence in having assurance of salvation, is far more wonderful, than just going through the empty, worn out rites and rituals of a false religion. Would you agree?

[boatbums]

If you truly prefer to “take Jesus at his word”, then you will also take him at his word when he tells you that by believing in him you have eternal life. Do you believe you have eternal life and are saved by your faith in him?

[knarf]

absotively .... posolutely ! !

[Mark17]

Catholics respond during a mass like islamists do when they speak of the prophet (spittle be upon him) and the prophet's holy book

I have to admit, this is new, even to me. Give me some more info in freep mail.

[knarf]

Here's the thread

Kyrie Eleison

http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-religion/3413004/posts

[Mark17]

absotively .... posolutely ! !

😆😀😃😂😄😎

[metmom]

Mary didn’t have sex with God.

The angel told Joseph to not be afraid to take her as his WIFE.

Scripture tells us that he did not know her until AFTER Jesus was born.

Mary was not committing adultery with Joseph. She was already legally married to him when the angel appeared with his announcement to her that she would bear God’s son. So it wasn’t like Mary would be committing adultery with Joseph. On the contrary, if anyone would be in the position of being able to be accused of being the adulterer, it would be both God and Mary as she was already legally Joseph’s wife.

And is anyone willing to go there? I don’t think so. So that argument fails.

And again, why is it so important that Mary and by default, Joseph, be perpetually virgin? Why is it considered such a virtue to remain abstinent in a marriage relationship?

[metmom]

Whom the Son sets free is free indeed.

[xzins]

You understand what people were probably saying.

[maryz]

These threads always remind me of C.S. Lewis's comment in an essay I believe written in the 40's that the modern age seems given to "a serious worship of sex quite unlike the cheery lechery endemic to our species." Compare and contrast with Chesterton's (late 19th, early 20th C) that everyone knows about sex, so nobody talks about it.

BTW, an old Jewish guy once hissed in my ear that "Christians believe in a God who committed adultery with the wife of a Jewish carpenter!" I've no idea how widespread that attitude is. . .

[metmom]

Not denigrating sex and those who have it as married couples is not *worshiping* sex.

I wouldn’t be surprised that some people think that way about Mary although I’ve never heard it. Not in the circles I run in anyway.

[xzins]

That, or various comments like it, were common in the early centuries of the church. They also didn’t have copies of the bible in every household to assist in explaining the actual facts. So, some explanations that grew up were defensive more than strictly scriptural. That’s my opinion and it explains for me the source of the perpetual virginity argument.

[Elsie]

Mary didn’t have sex with God.

NOW you've offended our MORMON FReepers!

---

. Mormons deny the virgin birth of Mary:

The Mormon Church Teaches That:	Our God is an exalted man of flesh and bone He physically lives with His many wives near the star Kolob Worthy Mormon men can also become Gods, like Him Our God is one of many Gods and serves a God of His own! God came down to earth in the flesh and was the physical father of Jesus You should not trust the Bible in this matter. It is wrong. Trust their prophets. Read what the Mormon leaders say about our Savior and the Virgin Mary.
How can Mormons claim they believe in the virgin birth if God had sex with Mary?	They change the definition of the word virgin. Mormons feel that they can still use the phrase "virgin birth" because God was an IMMORTAL being who had sex with Mary, not a mere mortal man. And this is exactly what Bruce McConkie, (top LSD theologian, and one of the Mormon 12 Apostles, died in 1985) said: "For our present purposes, suffice it to say that our Lord was born of a virgin, which is fitting and proper, and also natural, since the Father of the Child was an immortal Being" (The Promised Messiah, pg. 466). In other words, if Joseph had sex with Mary she would not have been a virgin, but since God had sex with Mary, she remains a virgin. By "Virgin birth", Mormons mean that no mortal human had sex with Mary, but since God had sex with Mary, and He is immortal, she remains a virgin!

B. Gods Must Have Wives

• If none but gods will be permitted to multiply immortal children, it follows that each God must have one or more wives. God, the Father of our spirits, became the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ according to the flesh. (Orson Pratt, The Seer, page 158)

C. Mary And God Were Married

• The fleshly body of Jesus required a Mother as well as a Father. Therefore, the Father and Mother of Jesus, according to the flesh, must have been associated together in the capacity of Husband and Wife; hence the Virgin Mary must have been, for the time being, the lawful wife of God the Father: we use the term lawful Wife, because it would be blasphemous in the highest degree to say that He overshadowed her or begat the Savior unlawfully. (Orson Pratt, The Seer, page 158)

D. Joseph was Her Second Husband

• Inasmuch as God was the first husband to her, it may be that He only gave her to be the wife of Joseph while in the mortal state, and that He intended after the resurrection to again take her as one of his own wives to raise up immortal spirits in eternity. (Orson Pratt, The Seer, page 158)
• The man Joseph, the husband of Mary, did not, that we know of, have more than one wife, but Mary the wife of Joseph had another husband. (Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses, 11:268)

E. The Bible Is Wrong

• Joseph Fielding Smith, 10th Prophet of the Mormon Church: "They tell us the Book of Mormon states that Jesus was begotten of the Holy Ghost. I challenge that statement. The Book of Mormon teaches No Such Thing! Neither does the Bible!" (Doctrines of Salvation, Vol. 1:18)

F. God Is A Man

• "Christ was begotten of God. He was NOT born without the aid of man and that man was God!" (Doctrines of Salvation, Vol. 1:18)

G. An Act Of The Flesh

• The birth of the Savior was as natural as are the births of our children; it was the result of natural action. He partook of flesh and blood- was begotten of his Father, as we are of our fathers. (Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses, 8:115)
• In relation to the way in which I look upon the works of God and his creatures, I will say that I was naturally begotten; so was my father, and also my Savior Jesus Christ. According to the Scriptures, he is the first begotten of his father in the flesh, and there was nothing unnatural about it. (Heber C. Kimball, Journal of discourses, 8:211)

H. Not Of The Holy Ghost

• ''When the Virgin Mary conceived the Jesus, the Father had begotten him in his own likeness. He was not begotten by the Holy Ghost... (Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses, Vol. 1:50-51)
• 'What a learned idea' Jesus, our elder brother was begotten in the flesh by the same character that was in the garden of Eden, and who is our Father in heaven." (Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses, Vol. 1:50-51)
• 'Now Remember from this time forth, and forever, hat Jesus Christ was not begotten by the Holy Ghost. will repeat a little anecdote. I was in conversation with a certain learned professor upon this subject when I replied to this idea- "If the son was begotten y the Holy Ghost, it would be very dangerous to baptize and confirm females and give the Holy Ghost o them, lest he should beget children to be palmed off on the Elders by the people, bringing the Elders into great difficulties."...But what do the people in Christendom, with the Bible in their hands, know but this subject? Comparatively Nothing." (Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses, Vol. 1:50-51)

I. Bruce R. McConkie, deceased member of the 12 Apostles (d.1985) and leading LDS theologian, writes in Mormon Doctrine:

• SON OF GOD: God the Father is a perfected, glorified, holy Man, an immortal Personage. And Christ was born into the world as the literal Son of this Holy Being; he was born in the same personal, real, and literal sense that any mortal son is born to a mortal father. There is nothing figurative about his paternity; he was begotten, conceived and born in the normal and natural course of events, for he is the son of God, and that designation means what it says.—page 742
• SON OF MAN: Christ is the Son of Man, meaning that his Father (the eternal God!) is a Holy Man. "In the language of Adam, Man of Holiness" is the name of God. Page 742
• SON OF MARY: ...but the Holy ghost is not the Father of Christ and when the Child was born, he was "the Son of the eternal Father. —page 743
• ONLY BEGOTTEN SON: These name-titles all signify that our Lord is the only Son of the Father in the flesh. Each of the words is to be understood literally. Only means only, begotten means begotten, and Son means son. Christ was begotten by an Immortal Father in He same way that mortal men are begotten by mortal fathers. —page 546

 

From here --->  http://www.bible.ca/mor-god-had-sex-with-mary.htm

 

And more...      

https://www.bing.com/search?q=mormon+mary+sex&form=EDGEAR&qs=PF&cvid=2922a9e3c2444dd79993d5ed23558e75&pq=mormon%20mary%20sex