Posted on 01/01/2006 4:48:03 PM PST by HarleyD
That does not say anything about Joseph having sex with Mary. You are confusing the English word "until" with the Aramaic and Greek definition of the transliteral. To them, it doesn't say anything about future, only about what it describes up to the present. You are presuming that the Bible says that Joseph had sex with Mary AFTER Jesus was born, but it DOES NOT SAY THAT. That is YOUR presumption.
Regards
Every time the phrase is used in the Bible it is talking about intercourse.
Genesis 38:26 And Judah acknowledged them, and said, She hath been more righteous than I; because that I gave her not to Shelah my son. And he knew her again no more.
Judges 19:25 But the men would not hearken to him: so the man took his concubine, and brought her forth unto them; and they knew her, and abused her all the night until the morning: and when the day began to spring, they let her go.
1 Kings 1:4 And the damsel was very fair, and cherished the king, and ministered to him: but the king knew her not.
Matthew 1:25 And knew her not till she had brought forth her firstborn son: and he called his name JESUS.
It appears that the popular thing is to prefer personal human opinions rather than the sure milk of the oracles of God. Nothing much new there, after all, Satan fooled Eve into thinking she would be like God, so why wouldn't the popular thing of the blind to prefer their own opinions equal to or better than God's Word?
Luke 1:28, "kecharitomene", properly translated "full of grace", suggests sinlessness, although you are correct that it is a matter of interpretation rather than direct scripture.
Let me ask you this: Why is it so important to you to insist on Mary being a sinner and also having marital relations with Joseph? Is it because the Catholic Church teaches otherwise, or is there something in your personal understanding to Christianity that does not square with the notion of sinless and ever virgin Mary?
That simply means, in the past tense, that she was a virgin -- that up to that time there was no conjugal relationship between +Joseph and Mary.
The verse does not say "he knew her after she had brought forth her firstborn..." so, ad minimum, the Protestants should remain neutral, because the Bible is silent on what transpired afterwords.
I am not talking about "knowing". I am talking about "till"...
"Matthew 1:25 And knew her not till she had brought forth her firstborn son: and he called his name JESUS
The Greek Septaugint uses the exact same word in Matthew 1:25 as in 2 Samuel 6:23
"Therefore Michal the daughter of Saul had no child till (unto) the day of her death."
Are you going to propose to me that Michal had a child AFTER her death? As Kosta says, the Scripture does not necessarily discuss the FUTURE when using "til" or "unto". It is YOUR presumption that Mary had sex with Joseph. The Bible is silent on that. Thus, we rely on Apostolic Tradition to tell us that Mary remained a virgin. The Bible alone does not tell us either way.
Regards
Matthew 1:25
And knew her not till
she had brought forth her firstborn son: and he called his name JESUS.
The Bible speaks very loudly to the fact that Mary and Joseph had sex.
"Matthew 1:25 And knew her not till she had brought forth her firstborn son: and he called his name JESUS
Chirst is the only intercessor to God the Father. But the scripture makes many references to various righteous people make intercession to Christ on behalf of others. Mary did so on behalf of the head waiter at Cana, and Jairus interceded for his sick daughter. We Catholics believe that these are examples given us in the scrupture so that we follow them. We also know that the saints, and certainly Mary have everlasting life, so that fact that they experienced death and went to heaven is no barrier for intercession. This is the Catholic, and the Orthodox belief. You don't have it and that is your prerogative. Again, I am curious about the intensity with which you attack our beliefs while no one has attacked yours.
No it doesn't but I will not do your homework HD.
Attack?
For believing that the Bible is true and stating what it says I am accused of attacking?
That's odd.
I knew Christianity was becoming unpopular, but I didn't realize that being a born again Bible believer and speaking of what the Word of God says could be construed as attacking.........
Wow. Perilous times indeed.
According to your logic, Michal delivered a child AFTER she died... Are you going to continue using "til" in refering to the future, you better be consistent.
Please. Let's not push this ridiculous assertion that Mary had sex with Joseph any longer. The Bible doesn't make that claim, you do.
And here I thought you were an advocate of Sola Scriptura... Why are you going on about something NOT in the Scriptura?
Regards
Matthew 28:20 - "I will be with you always, even until the end of the world."
So, according to your reasoning, Jesus won't be with us (or with the apostles) after the end of the world.
Or maybe, is it possible that your understanding could be wrong and that Jesus will be with us even after the end of the world? And that maybe your interpretation is wrong about Matthew 1:25 as well?
For believing that the Bible is true and stating what it says I am accused of attacking?
Sorry, brother, YOUR interpretations are NOT the Word of God. Let's make that perfectly clear.
This is the reason why the Church is such a great thing. When people disagree, we can "take it to the Church", which is what Christ commands us to do in Matt 18. All Protestants can do is try to guess what the Bible says by using their human knowledge.
Regards
It's basic English comprehension, FC. There is nothing in Mat 1:25 that even suggests anything after Jesus was born.
For what it's worth, I read in Bishop's history of the Middle Ages that the medieval view placed the chances of salvation at about 30%. This is among the church-going, pray, pay, and obey medieval culture.
I wish someone made a similar poll among Catholic Christians today. I wouldn't be surprised to see an expectation of near-universal salvation.
What does it tell us? Nothing about the Chrisitsn theology, of course, but a whole lot about the decadent contemporary culture.
The canon of scripture was thouroughly debated among the fathers of the Church, and it was established by ecumenical councils. Much was rejected. The role of apostolic succession was in that it determined who the bishops of the Church were that established the canon.
It means exactly what it says: Jesus Christ will be with us until the end of the world. He will guide us and intercede on our behalf until the Dread Judgment.
God loves everyone and wants all men to be saved, so He will continue to pour out His blesssngs on the "pious and impious." He will continue to be with us even when we can't see Him walking among us.
After the end of the world, He will not be with some, possibly many. But until that time, He will give everyone, even to the last breath, a chance to repent and, like the thief on the cross, enter His Kingdom.
Does it? Does the Bible tell us it has this sufficiency to the exclusion of any other source of authority? What does this Scripture tell us about the Church?
If the other sources were "GOD breathed" they would be in SCRIPTURE.
Again, you are presuming that everything "God breathed" is encapsulated within Scriptures. Sure, Scripture is God-breathed, but so are sacramental actions. So is the Liturgy. So is prayer. So are oral Apostolic Teachings. All are works begun and nutured by the Spirit, God's "Breath".
If GOD intended for pastors to have supernatural powers in every generation GOD would have made it very clear in SCRIPTURE.
He did.
Neglect not the gift that is in thee, which was given thee by prophecy, with the laying on of the hands of the presbytery. 1 Tim 4:14
Of course, Christ gave powers of forgiving sins and binding/loosening to the Apostles directly. If Christ expects His Church to exist for all time, can you give me a logical reason why He would not continue to provide this ministry to the Church for all time?
Regards
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.