Then I would say we should consider that the vast majority of Jewish families did NOT practice chastity. If we are to refer to cultural norms in evaluating language, then we should also refer to cultural norms regarding behavior.
Since there isn’t a statement of fact that Mary was an eternal virgin (rather, she and Joseph were quite devout Jews), wouldn’t the default assumption would be towards multiple children and not eternal chastity?
At best I would think the claim could be made that “we don’t know”, because the Bible is either ambiguous or contrary to the eternal virginity of Mary. Thus it would be a position based on faith and faith alone, correct?
Of course, ALL of Christianity - and really, all religions - ultimately are on faith and faith alone, so this isn’t a big issue for me. Other than the “single interpretation allowed only” position of the Catholic Church.
The Church believed it based on a culturally influenced view that anything else would have desecrated her body after Jesus. Her body became a temple that was to remain God's and God's only.
No one ever challenged this belief for 1500 years. Even those Churches that broke off early on (Coptic and Oriental) retained their Marian belief because it was cultural and devotional.
In that mindset, they cannot imagine Mary wanting to start "normal" relations. Nothing can top God and nothing can change her state of being "full of grace."
Of course, ALL of Christianity - and really, all religions - ultimately are on faith and faith alone, so this isn’t a big issue for me. Other than the “single interpretation allowed only” position of the Catholic Church.
Of course it is a belief. The single interpretation is an unbroken tradition from the start based on the reasons outlined above. It's a dispistion of honor.