| This thread has been locked, it will not receive new replies. |
|
Locked on 05/22/2017 3:39:19 PM PDT by Jim Robinson, reason:
childishness |
Posted on 05/13/2017 6:28:38 AM PDT by Salvation
St. Teresa of Avila
As I always tell my RCIA students, Scripture doesn’t say, “For God so loved the world, He sent a book.”
“Truth suffers, but never dies.”
So true.
Neither does paganism, nor legalism, nor the toxic brew of both.
I don’t understand. What does that mean?
Never mind. I figured it out. (I’m a little slow this morning ) You’re saying that it’s not in the Bible.
That being the case, then it’s obviously not important one way or the other.
Christians are be free to believe that Joseph and Mary never had marital relations, though it’s kinda goofy to suppose they didn’t.
There are a lot of Biblical links and directives to Mary. I recommend Edward Sri - both his Mary, a Biblical Walk with Mary and Walking with Mary.
I’m not on my computer and the iPad is more difficult to type on. I’ll try to share more this evening.
I do not believe it is a matter of perpetual virginity and it is really none of our business, i believe it would be like speaking of your own mothers virginity which any man with any gumption at all would not do.
However, the scriptures are silent about Mary having any other Children and the idea that Jesus only had step brothers or cousins have been explained so many times it has become to sound like a broken record even though it is the only thing which makes sense.
The meaning of the verb is properly, to know, especially through personal experience (first-hand acquaintance).
When read in context the meaning is clear.
Mary's question to Gabriel is how is she going to have the baby when she knows she and Joseph haven't engaged in sexual intimacy.
That can be the only meaning of her question.
Does she know Joseph? Yes. Have they met before? Yes. So it isn't referring to an acquaintance meaning. This leaves only the sexual meaning of the term.
Gabriel explains to her how this will happen in 1:35.
Likewise Joseph, did not "know" Mary until after Jesus was born.
Same questions about Joseph. He knew Mary, they had met, talked, etc. So this only leaves the sexual meaning of the term.
In modern day English we use similar terms for sex. Have you intimate knowledge of him/her?
Again, understanding the Greek and the context of the passages and subsequent ones where Jesus' family is noted can only lead to one understanding.
Joseph and Mary, after Jesus was born, consummated their marriage as any normal married couple would. There is no contradiction of the requirement Jesus be born of a virgin. There was no requirement of Mary remaining a virgin.
Please cite the scripture that states that Mary and Joseph consummated their marriage, I can’t seem to find it.
Thanks,
Love,
O2
The term “brother” could also refer widely to friends or mere political allies (see 2 Sm 1:26; Am 1:9). Thus, in family relationships, “brother” could refer to any male relative from whom you are not descended. We use words like kinsmen and cousins today, but the ancient Jews did not.
In fact, neither Hebrew nor Aramaic had a word meaning “cousin.” They used terms such as “brother,” “sister” or, more rarely, “kin” or “kinsfolk” (syngenis) — sometimes translated as “relative” in English.
However we are in the NT and the NT is written in Greek.
Context in this discussion is your friend. While the Msgr is correct that adelphos can convey a range of meaning the use of the term in the passage will clarify the meaning.
There is a Greek word for cousin which is used only once so we can dismiss the Msgr's position on brother could mean cousin in the passages in question.
The Greek for cousin is ἀνεψιός used only in Colossians 4:10.
συγγενής conveys the meaning of a relative, fellow countryman, kinsman. It is used 16x in the NT.
James, for example, whom St. Paul called the “brother of the Lord” (Gal 1:19), is identified by Paul as an apostle and is usually understood to be James the Younger.
Again, the Greek is against the Msgr in this example.
εἰ μὴ Ἰάκωβον τὸν ἀδελφὸν τοῦ κυρίου
The literal translation is "...if not James the brother of the Lord."
τοῦ κυρίου is in the genitive. This is generally used to indicate possession in NT Greek.
Paul has identified James as being the brother of the Lord. The relationship is clear.
In Mark 3:31 the Jews clearly identified Mary and His brothers as belonging to Him.
Then His mother and His brothers arrived, and standing outside they sent word to Him and called Him. 32A crowd was sitting around Him, and they said to Him, “Behold, Your mother and Your brothers are outside looking for You. Mark 3:31 NASB
The section in question:
...ἡ μήτηρ αὐτοῦ καὶ οἱ ἀδελφοὶ αὐτοῦ...
...the mother of Him and the brothers of Him...
αὐτοῦ is again in the genitive indicating possession.
The context of this passage, and the others involving His family are clear. Joseph and Mary had other children after Jesus was born.
Matthew 1:25
καὶ οὐκ ἐγίνωσκεν αὐτὴν ἕως οὗ ἔτεκεν υἱόν· καὶ ἐκάλεσεν τὸ ὄνομα αὐτοῦ Ἰησοῦν.
And not knew her until which gave birth to son, and he called the name his Jesus.
Again, context is your friend.
Again, context is your friend.
‘Until’ in the bible does not always mean the activity before stops afterward.
1 Cor 15
[25] For he must reign, until he hath put all his enemies under his feet.
Context is indeed my friend, unless you believe that Jesus stops reigning after His enemies are under His feet.
See also:
“As it is written: God hath given them the spirit of insensibility; eyes that they should not see; and ears that they should not hear, until this present day.” (the not hearing and not seeing does not stop that present day)
[Romans 11:8]
and:
“We are blasphemed, and we entreat; we are made as the refuse of this world, the offscouring of all even until now.” (again not stopping now)
[1 Corinthians 4:13]
and:
Acts 2
[34] For David ascended not into heaven; but he himself said: The Lord said to my Lord, sit thou on my right hand, [35] Until I make thy enemies thy footstool. (Still sitting at the right hand afterwards)
and:
“And Paul looking upon the council, said: Men, brethren, I have conversed with all good conscience before God until this present day.” (Did Paul never again converse with good conscience?)
[Acts Of Apostles 23:1]
My friend context shows me that it is perfectly biblical to believe that Joseph’s behavior (not knowing Mary) continued after the birth of Jesus.
Love,
O2
Except in the passage in question in does.
You're ignoring the context of the passages in question and relying upon your Catholic viewpoint.
I've given you the Greek behind the texts, the meaning of the verbs and the meaning of the genitive. These do not support the Catholic position.
I'm not going to slice all 146 passages where ἕως is used.
You are ignoring context and relying on your anti-Catholic viewpoint. You wish to disagree with the Catholic view that Mary did not remain a virgin, so you dismiss a justifiable interpretation that disagrees with yours.
You are ignoring the fact that the word ‘until’ does not always mean the behavior stops afterward. If you slice all of the 146 passages, you will find many more where the use supports my interpretation.
In fact, unless it is used in its most simple form in context of time(until morning, until sunset, etc), the word ‘until’ usually implies that the conditional behavior does indeed continue afterwards, as in the examples I provided.
In the Bible, the word until can be interpreted in more than one way. My interpretation of the meaning of the word ‘until’ is reasonable and biblical given the examples I have given. You may disagree with my interpretation, but it is Bible-based, and I am not in any way obligated to accept your interpretation as better than mine.
The truth is that Mary’s continued virginity, or lack thereof is not addressed in scripture. Any belief that you hold about that subject is therefore extra-biblical.
An honest sola-scriptura answer to that question would be ‘we don’t know’, not ‘you are wrong’.
Love,
O2
The passages noting his brothers and sisters disagree with your position.
Love,
O2
You do know the meaning of sola-scriptura...right?
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.