IF...
...this had happened I'm sure that JOSEPH would have noticed it!
Luke 2:23
...as it is written in the Law of the Lord, “Every male who first opens the womb shall be called holy to the Lord”
Posted on 03/12/2016 9:36:07 AM PST by 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.
Nor, far more important to the conjecturist
You wisely use the word conjecturist, because that is the most anyone can be regarding the brother and sister passages. There just is not sufficient information from Scripture to strongly support whether Mary did have other children or whether Mary did not have other children.
In contrast to your argument, here is an argument from Ellicott. Neither argument proves the point.
It is a slight argument in their favour, (1) that it would have been natural had there been other children borne by the mother of the Lord, that the fact should have been recorded by the Evangelists, as in the family narratives of the Old Testament (e.g., Genesis 5, 11; 1 Chronicles 1, 2), and that there is no record of any such birth in either of the two Gospels that give “the book of the generations” of Jesus; (2) that the tone of the brethren, their unbelief, their attempts to restrain Him, suggest the thought of their being elder brothers in some sense, rather than such as had been trained in reverential love for the first-born of the house; (3) that it is scarcely probable that our Lord should have committed His mother to the care of the disciple whom He loved (John 19:26) had she had children of her own, whose duty it was to protect and cherish her; (4) the absence of any later mention of the sisters at or after the time of the Crucifixion suggests the same conclusion, as falling in with the idea of the sisters and brethren being in some sense a distinct family, with divided interests; (5) lastly, though we enter here on the uncertain region of feeling, if we accept the narratives of the birth and infancy given by St. Matthew and St. Luke, it is at least conceivable that the mysterious awfulness of the work so committed to him may have led Joseph to rest in the task of loving guardianship which thus became at once the duty and the blessedness of the remainder of his life. On the whole, then, I incline to rest in the belief that the so-called “brethren” were cousins who, through some unrecorded circumstances, had been so far adopted into the household at Nazareth as to be known by the term of nearer relationship.
https://www.studylight.org/commentary/matthew/28-20.html
Wisely put
Truth
In His 13th year; Jesus was taken to Mars; to learn of Astrology.
Scripture alone can neither prove nor disprove this teaching of ELSIE.
ACTS 15 is NOT the final SAY so!!!
The above found in Rome's book it assembled long ago.
Jesus said, "I am the Way, the Truth and the Life. No one comes to the Father but through Me and Mom.
The actual TEACHING of Rome.
The Catholic book that a 12 year old can pickup and read SHOWS that Catholic teaching was faulty from the get go in the Revelation to John: chapters 1, 2 and 3.
Why answer something that was faulty at the start?
Why do you persist in beating your wife?
Has Common Core infiltrated your methods?
Doesn't I-step point out your problems?
Yeah, Bob.
This might play in Baghdad Rome; but the audience on FR are just a bit more knowledgeable.
17. God the Father imparted to Mary his fruitfulness as far as a mere creature was capable of receiving it, to enable her to bring forth his Son and all the members of his mystical body.
18. God the Son came into her virginal womb as a new Adam into his earthly paradise, to take his delight there and produce hidden wonders of grace.
God-made-man found freedom in imprisoning himself in her womb. He displayed power in allowing himself to be borne by this young maiden. He found his glory and that of his Father in hiding his splendours from all creatures here below and revealing them only to Mary. He glorified his independence and his majesty in depending upon this lovable virgin in his conception, his birth, his presentation in the temple, and in the thirty years of his hidden life. Even at his death she had to be present so that he might be united with her in one sacrifice and be immolated with her consent to the eternal Father, just as formerly Isaac was offered in sacrifice by Abraham when he accepted the will of God. It was Mary who nursed him, fed him, cared for him, reared him, and sacrificed him for us.
Since it's NOT found in Scripture; I'm just SURE that Rome has some kind of answer.
Being a PROT; I might ASSUME; since the book Rome assembled notes how INSANELY mad Herod was; that it could have been COMMON KNOWLEDGE (sense) that the UNKNOWN number of MAGI had left 'by a different route'.
And there folks; you have it.
PURE Catholic teaching on the subject.
Your 'Therefore' is a bit misplaced.
Your original sentence -- Jesus left the tomb without rolli8ng away the stone, He could leave Mary's womb without passing along the birth canal. -- implies that HE rolled away the stone.
An excellent summation of what catholiciism, as ‘another religion’ has sought to do with Nimrod and Semiramis, er, I mean the catholic Jesus and his mother. Catholiciism has incorporated so many pagan holidays, dates, and myths into its version of Christianity, why not go all the way and make Jesus a latter day Nimrod with a goddess mother? So they have!
Forgibe the poster, Elsie, he is not familiar with the scriptures so he had to change the focus slightly to give humself a pride=out. Someday, perhaps he will get around to reading the Gospel of Matthew all the way through. BUT, sadly, with catholic eyes, he will see what the magicsteeringthem has told him, not what is written.
...this had happened I'm sure that JOSEPH would have noticed it!
Luke 2:23
...as it is written in the Law of the Lord, “Every male who first opens the womb shall be called holy to the Lord”
I'm afraid I don't know much about Nimrod and Semiramis. I'm going to have to go to wiki. Thanks.
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.