Posted on 05/31/2011 11:34:50 AM PDT by sigzero
Mary was a virgin who was to conceive by being overshadowed by the Holy Spirit and give birth to the Son of God. Few in Christian realms would deny Mary was a virgin and remained a virgin through pregnancy and the birth of Christ. This was the ultimate fulfillment of a prophecy from Isaiah:
Therefore the Lord Himself will give you a sign: Behold, the virgin shall conceive and bear a Son, and shall call His name Immanuel. (Isaiah 7:14, emphasis added)
However, Mary’s virginity after the birth of Christ can become a heated debate in some circles. Though some may think this is a Roman Catholic versus Protestant view, it is not. Many Protestants, including people like Martin Luther and John Calvin, have held to Mary remaining a virgin for the duration of her life. Let’s look at the issues in a little more detail.
(Excerpt) Read more at answersingenesis.org ...
Your post attempts to make your point by twisting the way people actually use language. Again, what sacred cow are you trying to protect with such intellectual gymnastics?
The only reason someone would use the “till” as you use it would be to trick the listener into assuming what, in fact, a reasonable person would assume.
What would your response be to a 30 year old person who says “I didn’t rape women until I was 20?” What would be the reason for wording it that way?
Or “did you stop beating your wife?” Lol!
Better not respond to that with a yes or no answer.
Odd of him to use the future tense, then, rather than the present.
>>I guarantee you, if I was St. Joesph, I would also have refrained from relations with the Mother of My Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.
Anyone who argues otherwise cannot comprehend the immensity of the Incarnation and all it entails, or is simply being disingenuous.<<
You may want to read about the lives of the prophets. You’d be surprised how fast day to day life sets in after witnessing a miracle, even when you, yourself, are a part of it. IOW, I don’t give your guarantee value unless you yourself are speaking from experience. I will say this: From a “lower level” perspective, I am speaking from personal experience.
You realize that Greek and English are different languages, yes?
Excuse me. The angel was giving the news for what was to happen shortly not in the distant future of her marriage. I think you knew what I meant. She wasn’t currently pregnant but the angel was telling her the Holy Spirit was on the way.
Luke 1:30And the angel said unto her, Fear not, Mary: for thou hast found favour with God.
31And, behold, thou shalt conceive in thy womb, and bring forth a son, and shalt call his name JESUS.
You are sure about that? It seems to me that if you read the Scripture, it clearly says "shalt." This is translated as "will" in modern versions. That indicates the future.
>>A very excellent article. But don’t expect it to change any minds.<<
I think it will, actually. I just don’t think it will change a lot of minds. My mind has been changed by several articles like this. Of course, part of the process is re-evaluating my beliefs within the scope of the article and from what information sources I formed my original opinion.
There are sincere Catholics (and protestants) that will do the same here. At the very least, they will begin asking their spiritual leaders about this. Of course, this sort of questioning, and the lack of satisfactory answers, is exactly what caused my wife to leave the Catholic church to begin with.
The bible was not written in English, despite the idea on this thread that "If the KJV was good enough for Peter and Paul, then its good enough for me!"
Its pointless to rehash old arguments, so I'll just cut and paste
The problem with this understanding is that it forces a modern English use of until on the Bible. In the Bible the Greek and Hebrew words for until means only that some action did not happen to a certain point. Scholars are in agreement on this point. For example, Dr. William Hendriksen, the former Professor of New Testament Literature at Calvin Seminary in Grand Rapids, Michigan writes: "This conclusion cannot be based merely upon the negative plus "until." That wording does not always introduce an event (in this case: she gave birth to a son) whereby the earlier situation (the couple had no sexual relations) is reversed (they now begin to have sexual relations)." From The Gospel of Matthew, p. 144.And of course, for those so ignorant of scripture as to have forgotten the bolded excerpt from Samuel above, I'll repost that old truism I posted above yet once more:Consider this quotation from Samuel: "And so Saul's daughter Michal was childless until the day of her death (2 Sam 6:23)." Are we to conclude that she bore children after her death? How about the raven released from the ark? We read that the raven "flew back and forth until the waters dried off from the earth (Gn 8:7)." Does that mean the raven returned? Other examples can be seen in Dt 34:6; 1 Macc 5:54 and Ps 109:1 [RSV 110:1].
My aunt in Chicago voted Republican TILL the day she died. She has voted Democrat ever since.
Scripture itself proves "TILL" means nothing in regard to Mary's Perpetual Virginity, unless you want to argue that Saul's daughter Michal, who was childless until the day of her death, had children after her death.
Nothing in the grammatical construction of the verse indicates "near future" rather than "distant future."
This is a distinction you have introduced into the passage without any textual support.
>>In short, if you can’t rely on the infallibility of the Catholic Magisterium, then you can’t rely on the Bible either.<<
Yikes! That is a really dangerous position. History demonstrates there were a LOT of corrupt leaders in the Church. You need to compare their teachings with the word, just as early hearers of the gospel compared it with their “word” at the time (OT).
Yes I realize what the scripture says. I clarified with the previous poster. The angel wasn’t telling her of her distant married future. He was speaking to her about what was going to happen shortly. She realized that this prophecy wasn’t about her future marriage or she wouldn’t have been suprised that she would conceive. The prophecy was going to happen before she was married and still a virgin.
Again I suspect you knew what I meant as well.
Thanks for reminding us of our true focus. I appreciate it.
However, in defense of this thread, I believe we are participating in a discussion spiritually similar to when Paul took up the subject of circumcision.
So now you are claiming Mary had foreknowledge of the angel’s announcement about the Holy Ghost “coming over her”?
Read the Scripture. Her “how shall this be?” comes before.
Are you sure you are just reading Scripture for its plain meaning and aren’t injecting your preconceived (no pun intended) notions?
“I AM till you grow old” (Isaias 46:4).
“Sit Thou on My right hand until I make Thy enemies Thy foot-stool” (Psalm 109:1).
I didn’t need to introduce it into the passage. After the angel came to her, the Holy Spirit overshadowed her PROVING that it was to happen before she married. I think you just want an argument. This is getting ridiculous. You don’t need to divine the grammatical construction of the scripture to see that the angel gave her the news and it happened before she got married. I don’t care if the angel gave her the news and it was 40 years before she got pregnant. She got pregnant in her CURRENT state as a virgin and not her MARRIED state proving that Mary KNEW the prophesy was to happen before her marriage which was the entire point. She knew it was to happen while she was a virgin and that is why she asked how it could happen. Good grief!
St. Joseph's miracle never got old. Every morning, he walked down the stairs and sat down to breakfast with the Incarnation and the Immaculate Conception.
Even the most sleepy eyed OT prophet would have a hard time forgetting he was living with the Son of God, and that Mary was His mother.
Of course, our age is so obsessed with sex, modern Christians cannot for a moment fathom giving up marital relations for any reason, even the most important reason of all history for which St. Joseph did so.
If you really believe that, then try calling you local DEA office and saying something like "Hi this is Dr. _____. I just wanted you to know that I never abused my prescription pad until last month.", and hanging up. How long do you think it would be until you got a visit?
Until is not a meaningless, irrelevant word.
Good grief no. Someone upthread said something about Mary shouldn’t have been suprised about the announcement of having a baby because wouldn’t a soon to be married woman be expecting to have children.
What I should have said in response was that she was suprised because the angel told her what was ABOUT to happen to her (she would conceive) in her current state (virgin). She was suprised because she knew as a virgin she couldn’t possibly conceive naturally.
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.