Why Believe in Perpetual Virginity?

brightlights

A sinner
Jul 31, 2004
4,164
298
USA
✟28,862.00
Country
United States
Faith
Presbyterian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Roman Christians believe in the perpetual virginity of Mary. This is the doctrine that not only was Mary a virgin at the time she conceived Jesus, but that she remained a virgin throughout her life.

Why believe this?

I understand that the Roman Church teaches this doctrine, and that this reason alone is enough for assenting Catholics to accept it. But there doesn't seem to be any basis for this belief in Scripture and I don't understand what is gained by believing it.

To me it seems rooted in a medieval error that virginity or even celibacy is somehow holier than sex and marriage.
 

LivingWordUnity

Unchanging Deposit of Faith, Traditional Catholic
May 10, 2007
24,496
11,193
✟213,086.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
It's suggested in Old Testament typology that the Virgin Mary was to remain perpetually a virgin.

"Then he brought me back to the outer gate of the sanctuary, which faces east; and it was shut. And he said to me, 'This gate shall remain shut; it shall not be opened, and no one shall enter by it; for the Lord, the God of Israel, has entered by it; therefore it shall remain shut.'" - Ezekiel 44:1-2

Also, see the following:
IV. Mary is Ever Virgin

Exodus 13:2,12 - Jesus is sometimes referred to as the "first-born" son of Mary. But "first-born" is a common Jewish expression meaning the first child to open the womb. It has nothing to do the mother having future children.

Exodus 34:20 - under the Mosaic law, the "first-born" son had to be sanctified. "First-born" status does not require a "second" born.

Ezek. 44:2 - Ezekiel prophesies that no man shall pass through the gate by which the Lord entered the world. This is a prophecy of Mary's perpetual virginity. Mary remained a virgin before, during and after the birth of Jesus.


Mark 6:3 - Jesus was always referred to as "the" son of Mary, not "a" son of Mary. Also "brothers" could have theoretically been Joseph's children from a former marriage that was dissolved by death. However, it is most likely, perhaps most certainly, that Joseph was a virgin, just as were Jesus and Mary. As such, they embodied the true Holy Family, fully consecrated to God.


Luke 1:31,34 - the angel tells Mary that you "will" conceive (using the future tense). Mary responds by saying, "How shall this be?" Mary's response demonstrates that she had taken a vow of lifelong virginity by having no intention to have relations with a man. If Mary did not take such a vow of lifelong virginity, her question would make no sense at all (for we can assume she knew how a child is conceived). She was a consecrated Temple virgin as was an acceptable custom of the times.


Luke 2:41-51 - in searching for Jesus and finding Him in the temple, there is never any mention of other siblings.


John 7:3-4; Mark 3:21 - we see that younger "brothers" were advising Jesus. But this would have been extremely disrespectful for devout Jews if these were Jesus' biological brothers.

John 19:26-27 - it would have been unthinkable for Jesus to commit the care of his mother to a friend if he had brothers.

John 19:25 - the following verses prove that James and Joseph are Jesus' cousins and not his brothers: Mary the wife of Clopas is the sister of the Virgin Mary.

Matt. 27:61, 28:1 - Matthew even refers to Mary the wife of Clopas as "the other Mary."

Matt. 27:56; Mark 15:47 - Mary the wife of Clopas is the mother of James and Joseph.

Mark 6:3 - James and Joseph are called the "brothers" of Jesus. So James and Joseph are Jesus' cousins.

Matt. 10:3 - James is also called the son of "Alpheus." This does not disprove that James is the son of Clopas. The name Alpheus may be Aramaic for Clopas, or James took a Greek name like Saul (Paul), or Mary remarried a man named Alpheus.

V. Jesus' "Brothers" (adelphoi) = Cousins or Kinsmen

Luke 1:36 - Elizabeth is Mary's kinswoman. Some Bibles translate kinswoman as "cousin," but this is an improper translation because in Hebrew and Aramaic, there is no word for "cousin."

Luke 22:32 - Jesus tells Peter to strengthen his "brethren." In this case, we clearly see Jesus using "brethren" to refer to the other apostles, not his biological brothers.

Acts 1:12-15 - the gathering of Jesus' "brothers" amounts to about 120. That is a lot of "brothers." Brother means kinsmen in Hebrew.

Acts 7:26; 11:1; 13:15,38; 15:3,23,32; 28:17,21 - these are some of many other examples where "brethren" does not mean blood relations.

Rom. 9:3 - Paul uses "brethren" and "kinsmen" interchangeably. "Brothers" of Jesus does not prove Mary had other children.

Gen. 11:26-28 - Lot is Abraham's nephew ("anepsios") / Gen. 13:8; 14:14,16 - Lot is still called Abraham's brother (adelphos") . This proves that, although a Greek word for cousin is "anepsios," Scripture also uses "adelphos" to describe a cousin.

Gen. 29:15 - Laban calls Jacob is "brother" even though Jacob is his nephew. Again, this proves that brother means kinsmen or cousin.

Deut. 23:7; 1 Chron. 15:5-18; Jer. 34:9; Neh. 5:7 -"brethren" means kinsmen. Hebrew and Aramaic have no word for "cousin."

2 Sam. 1:26; 1 Kings 9:13, 20:32 - here we see that "brethren" can even be one who is unrelated (no bloodline), such as a friend.

2 Kings 10:13-14 - King Ahaziah's 42 "brethren" were really his kinsmen.

1 Chron. 23:21-22 - Eleazar's daughters married their "brethren" who were really their cousins.

Neh. 4:14; 5:1,5,8,10,14 - these are more examples of "brothers" meaning "cousins" or "kinsmen."

Tobit 5:11 - Tobit asks Azarias to identify himself and his people, but still calls him "brother."

Amos 1:9 - brotherhood can also mean an ally (where there is no bloodline).
VIII. Misunderstanding about Matthew 1:25 (Joseph knew her "not until")

Matt. 1:25 - this verse says Joseph knew her "not until ("heos", in Greek)" she bore a son. Some Protestants argue that this proves Joseph had relations with Mary after she bore a son. This is an erroneous reading of the text because "not until" does not mean "did not...until after." "Heos" references the past, never the future. Instead, "not until" she bore a son means "not up to the point that" she bore a son. This confirms that Mary was a virgin when she bore Jesus. Here are other texts that prove "not until" means "not up to the point that":

Matt. 28:29 - I am with you "until the end of the world." This does not mean Jesus is not with us after the end of the world.

Luke 1:80 - John was in the desert "up to the point of his manifestation to Israel." Not John "was in the desert until after" his manifestation.

Luke 2:37 - Anna was a widow "up to the point that" she was eighty-four years old. She was not a widow after eighty-four years old.

Luke 20:43 - Jesus says, "take your seat at my hand until I have made your enemies your footstool." Jesus is not going to require the apostles to sit at His left hand after their enemies are their footstool.

1 Tim. 4:13 - "up to the point that I come," attend to teaching and preaching. It does not mean do nothing "until after" I come.

Gen. 8:7 - the raven flew back and forth "up to the point that" [until] the waters dried from the earth. The raven did not start flying after the waters dried.

Gen. 28:15 - the Lord won't leave Jacob "up to the point that" he does His promise. This does not mean the Lord will leave Jacob afterward.

Deut. 34:6 - but "up to the point of today" no one knows Moses' burial place. This does not mean that "they did not know place until today."

2 Sam. 6:23 - Saul's daughter Micah was childless "up to the point" [until] her death. She was not with child after her death.

1 Macc. 5:54 - not one was slain "up to the point that" they returned in peace. They were not slain after they returned in peace.
III. Mary is Ever-virgin (the Early Church fathers)

“And indeed it was a virgin, about to marry once for all after her delivery, who gave birth to Christ, in order that each title of sanctity might be fulfilled in Christ's parentage, by means of a mother who was both virgin, and wife of one husband. Again, when He is presented as an infant in the temple, who is it who receives Him into his hands? Who is the first to recognize Him in spirit? A man just and circumspect,' and of course no digamist, (which is plain) even (from this consideration), lest (otherwise) Christ should presently be more worthily preached by a woman, an aged widow, and the wife of one man;' who, living devoted to the temple, was (already) giving in her own person a sufficient token what sort of persons ought to be the adherents to the spiritual temple,--that is, the Church. Such eye-witnesses the Lord in infancy found; no different ones had He in adult age." Tertullian, On Monogamy, 8 (A.D. 213).

"For if Mary, as those declare who with sound mind extol her, had no other son but Jesus, and yet Jesus says to His mother, Woman, behold thy son,' and not Behold you have this son also,' then He virtually said to her, Lo, this is Jesus, whom thou didst bear.' Is it not the case that every one who is perfect lives himself no longer, but Christ lives in him; and if Christ lives in him, then it is said of him to Mary, Behold thy son Christ.' What a mind, then, must we have to enable us to interpret in a worthy manner this work, though it be committed to the earthly treasure-house of common speech, of writing which any passer-by can read, and which can be heard when read aloud by any one who lends to it his bodily ears?" Origen, Commentary on John, I:6 (A.D. 232).

"Therefore let those who deny that the Son is from the Father by nature and proper to His Essence, deny also that He took true human flesh of Mary Ever-Virgin; for in neither case had it been of profit to us men, whether the Word were not true and naturally Son of God, or the flesh not true which He assumed." Athanasius, Orations against the Arians, II:70 (A.D. 362).

"And when he had taken her, he knew her not, till she had brought forth her first-born Son.' He hath here used the word till,' not that thou shouldest suspect that afterwards he did know her, but to inform thee that before the birth the Virgin was wholly untouched by man. But why then, it may be said, hath he used the word, till'? Because it is usual in Scripture often to do this, and to use this expression without reference to limited times. For so with respect to the ark likewise, it is said, The raven returned not till the earth was dried up.' And yet it did not return even after that time. And when discoursing also of God, the Scripture saith, From age until age Thou art,' not as fixing limits in this case. And again when it is preaching the Gospel beforehand, and saying, In his days shall righteousness flourish, and abundance of peace, till the moon be taken away,' it doth not set a limit to this fair part of creation. So then here likewise, it uses the word "till," to make certain what was before the birth, but as to what follows, it leaves thee to make the inference.” John Chrysostom, Gospel of Matthew, V:5 (A.D. 370).

“Thus, what it was necessary for thee to learn of Him, this He Himself hath said; that the Virgin was untouched by man until the birth; but that which both was seen to be a consequence of the former statement, and was acknowledged, this in its turn he leaves for thee to perceive; namely, that not even after this, she having so become a mother, and having been counted worthy of a new sort of travail, and a child-bearing so strange, could that righteous man ever have endured to know her. For if he had known her, and had kept her in the place of a wife, how is it that our Lord commits her, as unprotected, and having no one, to His disciple, and commands him to take her to his own home? How then, one may say, are James and the others called His brethren? In the same kind of way as Joseph himself was supposed to be husband of Mary. For many were the veils provided, that the birth, being such as it was, might be for a time screened. Wherefore even John so called them, saying, For neither did His brethren believe in Him.' John Chrysostom, Gospel of Matthew, V:5 (A.D. 370).

"But those who by virginity have desisted from this process have drawn within themselves the boundary line of death, and by their own deed have checked his advance; they have made themselves, in fact, a frontier between life and death, and a barrier too, which thwarts him. If, then, death cannot pass beyond virginity, but finds his power checked and shattered there, it is demonstrated that virginity is a stronger thing than death; and that body is rightly named undying which does not lend its service to a dying world, nor brook to become the instrument of a succession of dying creatures. In such a body the long unbroken career of decay and death, which has intervened between the first man and the lives of virginity which have been led, is interrupted. It could not be indeed that death should cease working as long as the human race by marriage was working too; he walked the path of life with all preceding generations; he started with every new-born child and accompanied it to the end: but he found in virginity a barrier, to pass which was an impossible feat." Gregory of Nyssa, On Virginity, 13 (A.D. 371).

"[T]he Son of God...was born perfectly of the holy ever-virgin Mary by the Holy Spirit..." Epiphanius, Well Anchored Man, 120 (A.D. 374).

"The friends of Christ do not tolerate hearing that the Mother of God ever ceased to be a virgin" Basil, Homily In Sanctum Christi generationem, 5 (ante A.D. 379).

"But as we do not deny what is written, so we do reject what is not written. We believe that God was born of the Virgin, because we read it. That Mary was married after she brought forth, we do not believe, because we do not read it. Nor do we say this to condemn marriage, for virginity itself is the fruit of marriage; but because when we are dealing with saints we must not judge rashly. If we adopt possibility as the standard of judgment, we might maintain that Joseph had several wives because Abraham had, and so had Jacob, and that the Lord's brethren were the issue of those wives, an invention which some hold with a rashness which springs from audacity not from piety. You say that Mary did not continue a virgin: I claim still more, that Joseph himself on account of Mary was a virgin, so that from a virgin wedlock a virgin son was born. For if as a holy man he does not come under the imputation of fornication, and it is nowhere written that he had another wife, but was the guardian of Mary whom he was supposed to have to wife rather than her husband, the conclusion is that he who was thought worthy to be called father of the Lord, remained a virgin." Jerome, The Perpetual Virginity of Mary Against Helvedius, 21 (A.D. 383).

"Imitate her, holy mothers, who in her only dearly beloved Son set forth so great an example of maternal virtue; for neither have you sweeter children, nor did the Virgin seek the consolation of being able to bear another son." Ambrose, To the Christian at Vercellae, Letter 63:111 (A.D. 396).

"Her virginity also itself was on this account more pleasing and accepted, in that it was not that Christ being conceived in her, rescued it beforehand from a husband who would violate it, Himself to preserve it; but, before He was conceived, chose it, already dedicated to God, as that from which to be born. This is shown by the words which Mary spake in answer to the Angel announcing to her conception; How,' saith she, shall this be, seeing I know not a man?' Which assuredly she would not say, unless she had before vowed herself unto God as a virgin. But, because the habits of the Israelites as yet refused this, she was espoused to a just man, who would not take from her by violence, but rather guard against violent persons, what she had already vowed. Although, even if she had said this only, How shall this take place ?' and had not added, seeing I know not a man,' certainly she would not have asked, how, being a female, she should give birth to her promised Son, if she had married with purpose of sexual intercourse. She might have been bidden also to continue a virgin, that in her by fitting miracle the Son of God should receive the form of a servant, but, being to be a pattern to holy virgins, lest it should be thought that she alone needed to be a virgin, who had obtained to conceive a child even without sexual intercourse, she dedicated her virginity to God, when as yet she knew not what she should conceive, in order that the imitation of a heavenly life in an earthly and mortal body should take place of vow, not of command; through love of choosing, not through necessity of doing service. Thus Christ by being born of a virgin, who, before she knew Who was to be born of her, had determined to continue a virgin, chose rather to approve, than to command, holy virginity. And thus, even in the female herself, in whom He took the form of a servant, He willed that virginity should be free." Augustine, Of Holy Virginity, 4 (A.D. 401).

"Where are they who think that the Virgin's conception and giving birth to her child are to be likened to those of other woman? For, this latter case is one of the earth, and the Virgin's is one from heaven. The one case is a case of divine power; the other of human weakness. The one case occurs in a body subject to passion; the other in the tranquility of the divine Spirit and peace of the human body. The blood was still, and the flesh astonished; her members were put at rest, and her entire womb was quiescent during the visit of the Holy One, until the Author of flesh could take on His garment of flesh, and until He, who was not merely to restore the earth to man but also to give him heaven, could become a heavenly Man. The virgin conceives, the Virgin brings forth her child, and she remains a virgin." Peter Chrysoslogus, Sermon 117, (A.D. 432).

"And by a new nativity He was begotten, conceived by a Virgin, born of a Virgin, without paternal desire, without injury to the mother's chastity: because such a birth as knew no taint of human flesh, became One who was to be the Saviour of men, while it possessed in itself the nature of human substance. For when God was born in the flesh, God Himself was the Father, as the archangel witnessed to the Blessed Virgin Mary: because the Holy Spirit shall come upon thee, and the power of the most High shall overshadow thee: and therefore, that which shall be born of thee shall be called holy, the Son of God.' The origin is different but the nature like: not by intercourse with man but by the power of God was it brought about: for a Virgin conceived, a Virgin bare, and a Virgin she remained." Pope Leo the Great (regn. A.D. 440-461), On the Feast of the Nativity, Sermon 22:2 (ante A.D. 461).

"The ever-virgin One thus remains even after the birth still virgin, having never at any time up till death consorted with a man. For although it is written, And knew her not till she had brought forth her first-born Son, yet note that he who is first-begotten is first-born even if he is only-begotten. For the word first-born' means that he was born first but does not at all suggest the birth of others. And the word till' signifies the limit of the appointed time but does not exclude the time thereafter. For the Lord says, And lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world, not meaning thereby that He will be separated from us after the completion of the age. The divine apostle, indeed, says, And so shall we ever be with the Lord, meaning after the general resurrection." John of Damascus, Orthodox Faith, 4:14 (A.D. 743).

Source:
Scripture Catholic - THE BLESSED VIRGIN MARY
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

brightlights

A sinner
Jul 31, 2004
4,164
298
USA
✟28,862.00
Country
United States
Faith
Presbyterian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
It's suggested in Old Testament typology that the Virgin Mary was to remain perpetually a virgin.

"Then he brought me back to the outer gate of the sanctuary, which faces east; and it was shut. And he said to me, 'This gate shall remain shut; it shall not be opened, and no one shall enter by it; for the Lord, the God of Israel, has entered by it; therefore it shall remain shut.'" - Ezekiel 44:1-2

What justifies connecting this to Mary? Seems a very tenuous connection.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: lben
Upvote 0

thecolorsblend

If God is your Father, who is your Mother?
Supporter
Jul 1, 2013
9,199
8,425
Gotham City, New Jersey
✟308,231.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Oddly enough, Sacred Scripture gives no direct indication that she ever lost her virginity.

Separately, Our Lady's womb was the dwelling place of Our Lord. Cyril of Alexandria described her as a temple of God.

I should also say that Origen, Hilary of Poitiers and St. Athanasius all thought Our Lady was ever-virgin. Where did they get that idea?

1 Cor. 7 points to celibacy as the ideal so it's not like the Catholic Church is inventing something out of whole cloth. There's nothing "medieval" about that.

The reality is that God clearly took the Incarnation very seriously. One quibble I have with Protestantism is that many of them don't have a complete appreciation for how miraculous the Incarnation really is. The steps required to effectuate Our Lord's birth free of the stain of sin are rather extensive and I think Protestants deny (perhaps unwittingly) the beauty, scope and grandeur of God's plan in allowing Our Lord to be born without a sin nature. These required special circumstances for Our Lady and thus the Catholic Church recognizes and celebrates her and the special circumstances which allowed her to give birth to Our Lord.
 
Upvote 0

hooverbranch

My Avatar is so a picture from 2005
Feb 10, 2005
239
45
36
Port Huron, MI
✟9,532.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Libertarian
One quibble I have with Protestantism is that many of them don't have a complete appreciation for how miraculous the Incarnation really is. The steps required to effectuate Our Lord's birth free of the stain of sin are rather extensive and I think Protestants deny (perhaps unwittingly) the beauty, scope and grandeur of God's plan in allowing Our Lord to be born without a sin nature. These required special circumstances for Our Lady and thus the Catholic Church recognizes and celebrates her and the special circumstances which allowed her to give birth to Our Lord.

I dont believe by not Celebrating Mary we (Protestants) do not appreciate the amazing circumstances in how God the Father brought about Jesus. We fully realize the implications of Mary being a Virgin for Jesus. We fully realize hiw important it was for Jesus to be unblemished and without Sin. What we can not recognize is that anyone other than God can be perfect. Mary was not God in Flesh. Mary was a faithful servant who was chosen as the vessel to bring forth the Savior.

We know through scripture and Church history that Jesus had brothers. James the brother of Jesus is widely recognized as writing the book of James. This clearly implies that Mary had children after Jesus. And going back to 1st Corinthians 7 there is nothing wrong with that because Mary and Joseph were married and if Mary were to with hold herself from Joseph (her husband) that would be a sin according to Paul.

Now I have reread this before I posted and want to apologize if this comes off as an attack on the Catholic church. That is not my intention. I am just stating why Protestants do not see eye to eye on the doctrine of celebrating Mary. Because since reformers like Luther, Calvin and Zwingley we want to make sure we are putting the focus on God, because All Glory Belongs to Him!

1 Corinthians 10:31

So, whether you eat or drink, or whatever you do, do all to the glory of God.
 
Upvote 0

KWCrazy

Newbie
Apr 13, 2009
7,229
1,993
Bowling Green, KY
✟82,877.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Mary and Joseph were married after the birth of Christ.
Mark records the names of Jesus brothers and indicates more than one sister. Mark 6:3 Is not this the carpenter, the son of Mary, the brother of James, and Joses, and of Juda, and Simon? and are not his sisters here with us? And they were offended at him.
Mark and Matthew both record His mother and brothers wanting to meet with Him.
Mark 3: 31-35
Matthew 12: 26-50

The same church which insists Mary remained a virgin doesn't sanction a marriage in name only where there is no intention of ever having children. Many see this as the word of God having been added to by the teaching of man. For example, purgatory is never mentioned, though Hell is mentioned many times, and Christ taught us to pray to God rather than praying to intercessors. Still, Catholicism is a Christian religion and they are saved by the blood of Christ just as we are. So if they are wrong or we are wrong we can find out together in Heaven.
 
Upvote 0

LivingWordUnity

Unchanging Deposit of Faith, Traditional Catholic
May 10, 2007
24,496
11,193
✟213,086.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Doesn't it say that Jesus had several brothers and sisters (and I mean that in the biological sense)?
Cousins and other close relatives were called brothers back then. It's also used in a spiritual sense as in Christians are the brothers and sisters of our Lord Jesus Christ.
 
Upvote 0

Sammy-San

Newbie
May 23, 2013
9,020
848
✟104,569.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Single
Roman Christians believe in the perpetual virginity of Mary. This is the doctrine that not only was Mary a virgin at the time she conceived Jesus, but that she remained a virgin throughout her life.

Why believe this?

I understand that the Roman Church teaches this doctrine, and that this reason alone is enough for assenting Catholics to accept it. But there doesn't seem to be any basis for this belief in Scripture and I don't understand what is gained by believing it.

To me it seems rooted in a medieval error that virginity or even celibacy is somehow holier than sex and marriage.

What is your view on what these theologians said? Heretical?

Church Fathers & Doctors

St Augustine said that sexual intercourse was fundamentally disgusting, St Ambrose that it was a defilement, Tertullian that it was shameful, and St Jerome that it was unclean; in the views of other leading figures it was unseemly (Methodius) and filthy and degrading (Arnobius).
 
Last edited:
  • Agree
Reactions: lben
Upvote 0

Tallguy88

We shall see the King when he comes!
Supporter
Jan 13, 2009
32,459
7,737
Parts Unknown
✟240,396.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Single
Another tradition, popular in Eastern Orthodoxy and stated at least as early as the Protoevangelium of James, written in the 100s most likely, is that the siblings of Jesus are Joseph's children from a previous marriage, him being a widower when he betrothed Mary. Since ordinary folks believed Jesus was Joseph's biological son, they would have assumed they were his siblings. Even though Joseph is not Jesus' biological father, he was his legal father and so his children would have been Jesus' legal siblings.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Hank77

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Jun 26, 2015
26,368
15,457
✟1,099,338.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
From the already present notion that there was a Queen of Heaven, which they mistakenly gave that place to Mary?
One quibble I have with Protestantism is that many of them don't have a complete appreciation for how miraculous the Incarnation really is. The steps required to effectuate Our Lord's birth free of the stain of sin are rather extensive and I think Protestants deny (perhaps unwittingly) the beauty, scope and grandeur of God's plan in allowing Our Lord to be born without a sin nature
I think you fail to realize how Jesus could be born without sin and yet be born from an imperfect woman.
Mary knew she was imperfect and needed a Savior.

Luk 1:46 And Mary said, `My soul doth magnify the Lord,
Luk 1:47 And my spirit was glad on God my Saviour,
Luk 1:48 Because He looked on the lowliness of His maid-servant, For, lo, henceforth call me happy shall all the generations,
Luk 1:49 For He who is mighty did to me great things, And holy is His name,
 
Upvote 0

LivingWordUnity

Unchanging Deposit of Faith, Traditional Catholic
May 10, 2007
24,496
11,193
✟213,086.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
What justifies connecting this to Mary? Seems a very tenuous connection.
Jesus isn't named directly in the Old Testament. But he is mentioned a lot of times in it indirectly through prototypes and other subtle references. The same is true for the Virgin Mary.
 
Upvote 0

Hank77

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Jun 26, 2015
26,368
15,457
✟1,099,338.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Last edited:
  • Agree
Reactions: lben
Upvote 0

Sammy-San

Newbie
May 23, 2013
9,020
848
✟104,569.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Single
Wow, I knew some of the them degraded the very act that God created to accomplish the amazing creation of new life, but I didn't realize there were so many.

Wasn't there some truth to what they said? In the improper context their comments would be truthful.
 
Upvote 0

FireDragon76

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Apr 30, 2013
30,475
18,455
Orlando, Florida
✟1,249,423.00
Country
United States
Faith
United Ch. of Christ
Marital Status
Legal Union (Other)
Politics
US-Democrat
It's not just Roman Catholics, but most Christians historically. Eastern Orthodox, Oriental Orthodox, and a great many Anglicans and Lutherans. Calvin himself argued in favor of Mary's perpetual virginity, as well, in his Institutes.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Hank77

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Jun 26, 2015
26,368
15,457
✟1,099,338.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Cousins and other close relatives were called brothers back then.
This is still true in the East today. My half Asian grandchildren call their cousins gege and mei mei, meaning brother and sister.
 
Upvote 0

KWCrazy

Newbie
Apr 13, 2009
7,229
1,993
Bowling Green, KY
✟82,877.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
What is your view on what these theologians said? Heretical?

Church Fathers & Doctors
What does God say?
Ephesians 5:
Wives, be subject to your own husbands, as to the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife, as Christ also is the head of the church, He Himself being the Savior of the body. But as the church is subject to Christ, so also the wives ought to be to their husbands in everything.

Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ also loved the church and gave Himself up for her, so that He might sanctify her, having cleansed her by the washing of water with the word, that He might present to Himself the church in all her glory, having no spot or wrinkle or any such thing; but that she would be holy and blameless. So husbands ought also to love their own wives as their own bodies. He who loves his own wife loves himself; for no one ever hated his own flesh, but nourishes and cherishes it, just as Christ also does the church, because we are members of His body. FOR THIS REASON A MAN SHALL LEAVE HIS FATHER AND MOTHER AND SHALL BE JOINED TO HIS WIFE, AND THE TWO SHALL BECOME ONE FLESH.

There is no sin in a husband and wife loving each other and engaging in acts of love which were given to man and woman from the beginning. I disagree with the condemnation of marital sex as something dirty or sinful. The Bible makes no such claim.
 
Upvote 0

Mountainmike

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Nov 2, 2016
4,614
1,591
66
Northern uk
✟561,129.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Sounds like you don't understand the word translated as brother, it actually means kinsman, related.

You are certainly demeaning Mary!

She was Kaire kecharetomene, often but undertranslated as " full of grace" where it means more like " perfected in grace" . And as a part of speech it is not an adjective, but a title akin to " grace personified" " God was with her"
Elizabeth honours Mary as " mother of lord" , notice it is Mary she honours, not just the child in her womb,

Clearly the highest of saints.

She was as mother of a davidic king ,that gives her title " queen", a throne, and powers of intercession visible in the Old Testament, and used at Cana , where Jesus says in effect " not yet, wait till my time has come..."

We see from the word used infrequently for " woman" that she is the new eve, a model of obedience, not disobedience, and she is there in various prophecies, she is also there at Cana, also at the cross " behold your mother" but also as the " woman" of revelations whose ( spiritual) offspring are those who obey the commandments of God. Giving her a role ongoing in salvation history


She is a great deal more than the " used wineskin" many Protestants treat her as! She was god's most perfect creation amongst mankind and lauded by the angel as such.

As for reformers - Even Luther revered her!

And perhaps it is worth reading what those at the councils that wrote the creed and compiled the New Testament Canon ( so clearly inspired) said of her!.. they were gushing! And such as Ephraim urged to ask her for her intercession! Some of them spoke of her perpetual virginity!

I dont believe by not Celebrating Mary we (Protestants) do not appreciate the amazing circumstances in how God the Father brought about Jesus. We fully realize the implications of Mary being a Virgin for Jesus. We fully realize hiw important it was for Jesus to be unblemished and without Sin. What we can not recognize is that anyone other than God can be perfect. Mary was not God in Flesh. Mary was a faithful servant who was chosen as the vessel to bring forth the Savior.

We know through scripture and Church history that Jesus had brothers. James the brother of Jesus is widely recognized as writing the book of James. This clearly implies that Mary had children after Jesus. And going back to 1st Corinthians 7 there is nothing wrong with that because Mary and Joseph were married and if Mary were to with hold herself from Joseph (her husband) that would be a sin according to Paul.

Now I have reread this before I posted and want to apologize if this comes off as an attack on the Catholic church. That is not my intention. I am just stating why Protestants do not see eye to eye on the doctrine of celebrating Mary. Because since reformers like Luther, Calvin and Zwingley we want to make sure we are putting the focus on God, because All Glory Belongs to Him!

1 Corinthians 10:31

So, whether you eat or drink, or whatever you do, do all to the glory of God.
 
Last edited:
  • Haha
Reactions: lben
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Hank77

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Jun 26, 2015
26,368
15,457
✟1,099,338.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
What is your view on what these theologians said? Heretical?

Church Fathers & Doctors
And what did Paul say?

1Co 7:4 the wife over her own body hath not authority, but the husband; and, in like manner also, the husband over his own body hath not authority, but the wife.
1Co 7:5 Defraud not one another, except by consent for a time, that ye may be free for fasting and prayer, and again may come together, that the Adversary may not tempt you because of your incontinence;
 
Upvote 0