To: Forest Keeper; jo kus; annalex; Agrarian
Does that mean that the Orthodox do not believe in Mary's perpetual virginity? The Catholic and Orthodox Churches believe in absolute, inviolate, and perptual virginity of Theotokos, the Birthgiver of God, Mary His Mother. It is inconceivable that Mary would have carnal relations, or desires after having carried the precious and sacred Child. She loved God with all her heart and mind and soul. Nor would Blessed Jospeh have been the man he was if he defiled "Sacred Ground" as Agrarian states.
This passage is a difficult one (so much for five year-old children understanding Scripture!), especially in view of the word ewV which means till or until, but is also translated as unto. The word eginwosken, which comes from "to know" (ginwsko) which was a Jewish idiom for sexcual intercourse, and does not support what the Church came to believe.
Personally, I can't imagine that someone as blessed as she was would even entartain the thought, and +Josph would tremble at the thought; yet +Matthew seems to make a strong case that this was not so, and is troubling.
5,505 posted on
05/03/2006 4:08:19 PM PDT by
kosta50
(Eastern Orthodoxy is pure Christianity)
To: kosta50
But the miracle was Jesus, not Mary.
5,511 posted on
05/03/2006 4:20:07 PM PDT by
Dr. Eckleburg
("I don't think they want my respect; I think they want my submission." - Flemming Rose)
To: kosta50; Forest Keeper; jo kus; Agrarian
+Matthew seems to make a strong case that this was not so, and is troubling Matthew does not speak to what happened after the Nativity at all. "Eos" is a very common word that is used several times with the clear meaning "even unto, but possibly also after" by Matthew himself. In 1:25 his focus is on the miraculous birth, so he speaks on what happened before the birth. I don't see what is so troubling to you, other that late-Protestant machinations.
To: kosta50; Forest Keeper; jo kus; annalex; Agrarian
With all due respects to the blessed Mary, she was in need of a Savior just as we all are:
Luk 1:47 And my spirit has rejoiced in God my Savior.
She wasn't perfect contrary to popular myth. The only reason you think Matt 1:25 is hard is simply because you have flawed concept. There is nothing evil or wrong about Joseph having sexual relationship with Mary. It states in several places about our Lord Jesus' "brothers"
1Co 9:5 Do we not have a right to take along a believing wife, even as the rest of the apostles and the brothers of the Lord and Cephas?
Joh 7:2-3 Now the feast of the Jews, the Feast of Booths, was near. Therefore His brothers said to Him, "Leave here and go into Judea, so that Your disciples also may see Your works which You are doing.
There are a few others. The scripture also has our Lord Jesus minimizing Mary,
Mat 12:48-50 But Jesus answered the one who was telling and said, "Who is My mother and who are My brothers?" And stretching out His hand toward His disciples, He said, "Behold My mother and My brothers! For whoever does the will of My Father who is in heaven, he is My brother and sister and mother."
I will add that John Calvin thought Mary was a perpetual virgin which only goes to show you can't be right about everything.
5,523 posted on
05/03/2006 4:47:55 PM PDT by
HarleyD
("Then He opened their minds to understand the Scriptures" Luk 24:45)
To: kosta50; Forest Keeper; jo kus; annalex; Agrarian; Dr. Eckleburg; 1000 silverlings; HarleyD; qua
"It is inconceivable that Mary would have carnal relations, or desires after having carried the precious and sacred Child."
Why is that so inconceivable when Paul tells us in 1 Cor. 3:16 that we are the temple of God and that the Spirit of God dwells in us and we still sin? Aren't they co-equal in the Godhead? Does one deserve more veneration than the other?
To: kosta50
The Catholic and Orthodox Churches believe in absolute, inviolate, and perpetual virginity of Theotokos, the Birthgiver of God, Mary His Mother. Yes, I should have known that. When I thought about it some more, I remembered that I think it was you who told me what "BEV" means. I think that would pretty much sum up your view on the subject. :)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson