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.
Sounds like an uttering from a prostitute's lisping, petulant child; demanding to be told a tale before going to sleep!
(I had to look it up!)
hor·ta·to·ry. [ˈhôrdəˌtôrē] ADJECTIVE 1.tending or aiming to exhort:
==============================================
se·ques·tra·tion.
[ˌsikwəˈstrāSH(ə)n, ˌsekwəˈstrāSH(ə)n]
NOUN
1.the action of taking legal possession of assets until a debt has been paid or other claims have been met:
Try...
...you are Catholic indoctrinated and are trying your very best to justify your clinging stubbornly to 'doctrines' that have no value Scripturally.
Does Hail vs Holy REALLY mean that much difference to a phrase?
It makes a difference in answering your question: “How many times will the phrase, Hail Mary, Mother of GOD be uttered in all of these celebrations”?
The phrase “Hail Mary, Mother of GOD” is not uttered. There is at least one occasion where the phrase “Holy Mary, Mother of God” is uttered. There may be others. There may also be hymns sung that include the phrase.
True, Mother of God is not found in the Bible. But you weren’t asking about the Bible.
Regarding your question about the Church doing it intentionally, it’s more reflexive than intentional. As natural as Jesus is God. But I have come to understand the sensitivities of those who are uncomfortable calling Mary the mother of God.
I believe we agree that these two statements are true. Mary is the mother of Jesus. Jesus is truly God.
Amen?
placemarker
and these two; as well...
"All have sinned and come short of the glory of GOD."
Mary was fully human.
Don’t forget “Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned:”
God bless you for your witness.
I just re=read your excellent post. It still regales my soul as one of the finest and most succinct explanations I’ve seen.
God bless you. Thank you for the encouragements.
So, then, for the next 1,600 years they misinterpreted what He said until the revolution set them straight??????????please.
really???
Good grief....
Don't be ridiculous. Do you actually know when the doctrine of transubstantiation even was dogmatically defined by your church? Try the Council of Trent in reaction to the Reformation which tried to set straight a lot of things munged up over the centuries. A think maybe in the early years your church got it right about justification by faith but in didn't take long before they changed and started teaching an accursed gospel that made salvation dependent upon works more than on faith. So, no, you don't have 1600 years to boast about.
But you go ahead and believe you get your weekly portion of Jesus grace doled out in a wafer which is only good until you sin and then you go through confession, penance and communion all over again to keep that ticket to purgatory/hopefully heaven punched. You mock Christians who know they are saved because they believe what Jesus says and then turn around and claim only Catholics REALLY believe Jesus' words. If that were true, then you would also have the assurance of your salvation and rejoice that his once for all sacrifice for sin was finished. He who the Son sets free is free indeed! I pray that your eyes may be opened to this exceedingly precious promise.
When do you think Christians first believed that they were actually consuming the body and blood of Jesus Christ?
Measure yourselves, Catholics. Read what boatbums wrote explaining the establishing of the Communion of saints (the living Body of Christ here active on Earth).
That you refuse to comprehend what she so clearly explained is symptomatic of what spirit is in you if you believe you eat the body, blood, SOUL and DIVINITY of The Christ. The central tenant of the Catholic Mass is a demonic lie you've been fed.
IF one is a Christian, then that one is alive in their human spirit by the Real Presence of God's Holy Spirit Spark in their human spirit.
When you have God's Spirit in the human spirit, you are, during the Church Age, a part of The Mystical Body of Christ. You do not eat a portion of the body to which you belong as a Christian.
The father of lies, a murderer from the start is the only one who profits from a Catholic believing they can eat the real body and blood AND SOUL AND DIVINITY of GOD. Such blasphemy slides by Catholic radar, showing what Spirit is NoT in catholiciism.
I’ve seen your image, riding/standing in a boat, crossing to Hell atop the River of Stix. The painter’s name escapes me presently, but there you are, captured in all the horror the painter could muster.
Ignore the question if you wish, but the extant historical records clearly demonstrate that from the early days, the followers of Jesus Christ truly believed that they were consuming His body and blood.
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.