Did the Virgin Mary remain a virgin?

[bbbbbbb]

No, I was talking about Matthew 12:46-50 because you brought it up in post #2130. You seem to be talking about Matthew 13:55 and/or Mark 6:3, which have nothing to do with my replies.

Interestingly, I was responding to a post from Pan, not yourself. When I choose to respond to one of your posts I will do so. As a result, of course, my post did not address your posts.

 

[kepha31]

This discussion is about May remaining a virgin or not.

Clearly the bible teaches she had other children.

19 Then His mother and brothers came to Him, and could not approach Him because of the crowd. 20 And it was told Him by some, who said, “Your mother and Your brothers are standing outside, desiring to see You.”21 But He answered and said to them, “My mother and My brothers are these who hear the word of God and do it.” Luke 8:19-21

• His mother and brothers came to Him
• “Your mother and Your brothers are standing outside
  
• “My mother and My brothers are these who hear the word of God and do it.”

Unless you can provide some scriptures that teach us Mary continued to have children as a virgin, then it is clear that Mary had other children with Joseph.

JLB

First, we must understand that the term brother has a wide semantic range in Scripture. It can mean a uterine brother, an extended relative, or even a spiritual brother. In Genesis 13:8 and 14:12, we read of one example of brother being used to describe an extended relationship: Abraham and Lot. Though they were actually uncle and nephew, they called one another "brother." Moreover, in the New Testament, Jesus told us to call one another "brothers" in Matthew 23:8. The passage obviously does not mean to suggest that all Christians have the same physical mother.
You use the term "brother" in Luke 8 to have only one meaning, the one that best suits your preconceptions.

To illustrate the absurdity of your single meaning for "brothers", consider Acts 1:15, the gathering of 120 "brothers". Following your logic, with a gestation period of 9 months per person, Mary would have to be pregnant for 90 years to produce that many "brothers". What I am showing with scripture is your single use of the term "brothers" does violence to Scripture.

The terms "brothers," "brother," and "sister" did not refer only to close relatives. Sometimes they meant kinsmen (Deut. 23:7; Neh. 5:7; Jer. 34:9), as in the reference to the forty-two "brethren" of King Azariah (2 Kgs. 10:13–14).

Because neither Hebrew nor Aramaic (the language spoken by Christ and his disciples) had a special word meaning "cousin," speakers of those languages could use either the word for "brother" or a circumlocution, such as "the son of my uncle." But circumlocutions are clumsy, so the Jews often used "brother."

The writers of the New Testament were brought up using the Aramaic equivalent of "brothers" to mean both cousins and sons of the same father—plus other relatives and even non-relatives. When they wrote in Greek, they did the same thing the translators of the Septuagint did. (The Septuagint was the Greek version of the Hebrew Bible; it was translated by Hellenistic Jews a century or two before Christ’s birth and was the version of the Bible from which most of the Old Testament quotations found in the New Testament are taken.)

But all this biblical evidence is meaningless to you. You would rather stick to man made traditions about Mary that was invented by Protestant modernist liberals in the 19th century. Before that, I have yet to find any Protestant church that opposed Mary's perpetual virginity.

Mary having other children diminishes the uniqueness of the Incarnation and for that reason, IMO, is a doctrine of demons.

 

[SteveCaruso]

Because neither Hebrew nor Aramaic (the language spoken by Christ and his disciples) had a special word meaning "cousin," speakers of those languages could use either the word for "brother" or a circumlocution, such as "the son of my uncle." But circumlocutions are clumsy, so the Jews often used "brother."

The circumlocution בר–דוד /bar-dud/ was used as easily as you use the word "email" (itself a circumlocution with the same number of syllables) so calling them "clumsy" is dishonest at best. In the context that "brothers" and "sisters" are used in relation to Mary as "mother" the meaning of actual "sibling" would have been plain to an Aramaic speaker.

Most Aramaicists would really love to see these myths and poor arguments stop spreading – but like the claim that "abba" really means "daddy" – they make good pulpit fiction and continue to circulate regardless of how many times they've been addressed.

 

[kepha31]

The circumlocution בר–דוד /bar-dud/ was used as easily as you use the word "email" (itself a circumlocution with the same number of syllables) so calling them "clumsy" is dishonest at best. In the context that "brothers" and "sisters" are used in relation to Mary as "mother" the meaning of actual "sibling" would have been plain to an Aramaic speaker.

Most Aramaicists would really love to see these myths and poor arguments stop spreading – but like the claim that "abba" really means "daddy" – they make good pulpit fiction and continue to circulate regardless of how many times they've been addressed.

adelphos can only mean sibling in the New Testament? That's been refuted 20 times. Where is the Aramaic "sibling" used to describe Jesus' so called brothers and sisters? Please provide a lexicon.

 

[SteveCaruso]

adelphos can only mean sibling in the New Testament?

I was responding to the Aramaic argument specifically.

 

[MarkRohfrietsch]

This discussion is about May remaining a virgin or not.

Clearly the bible teaches she had other children.

19 Then His mother and brothers came to Him, and could not approach Him because of the crowd. 20 And it was told Him by some, who said, “Your mother and Your brothers are standing outside, desiring to see You.”21 But He answered and said to them, “My mother and My brothers are these who hear the word of God and do it.” Luke 8:19-21

• His mother and brothers came to Him
• “Your mother and Your brothers are standing outside
  
• “My mother and My brothers are these who hear the word of God and do it.”

Unless you can provide some scriptures that teach us Mary continued to have children as a virgin, then it is clear that Mary had other children with Joseph.


JLB

No, it is anything but clear. Great protestant men (Luther, Zwingli, and Calvin to name three) of reason retained the belief in Semper Virago because of Sola Scriptura.

 

[kepha31]

I was responding to the Aramaic argument specifically.

It's your argument. Where is the Aramaic "sibling" used to describe Jesus' so called brothers and sisters? You are the translator, you shouldn't have any trouble finding a lexicon.

 

[SteveCaruso]

It's your argument. Where is the Aramaic "sibling" used to describe Jesus' so called brothers and sisters? You are the translator, you shouldn't have any trouble finding a lexicon.

This response, too, is a non-sequitur to what I posted.

I do not care if someone believes in the Perpetual Virginity of Mary or not. Any appeals to Aramaic that claim there is no word for "cousin" and therefore examples where Jesus is said to have brothers or sisters must therefore be cousins cannot be used as evidence because they are false. It is a spurious argument. There were phrases for "cousin" specifically that were not "clumsy" as your argument claimed, and were attested in Jesus' own dialect.

My own opinion on the matter is that where the word does have semantic range (like "brother" does in English), its use is defined by context. In Luke 8:19-21 (and its parallel in Matthew) the context is very clear. His genuine mother and brothers were being used in direct juxtaposition to that expanded semantic range. If this wasn't the case, the pericope has no meaning (real, close, direct family members vs figurative or greater family).

If you want a more concrete example, we can look at Matthew 13:55-56/Mark 6:3:

'"Isn't this the carpenter's son? Isn't his mother's name Mary, and aren't his brothers James, Joseph, Simon and Judas? Aren't all his sisters with us? Where then did this man get all these things?"'

Mary is his mother. James, Joseph, Simon and Judas are his brothers. He also had sisters. In this context, if it were in Aramaic using אחין "brothers" and אחוון "sisters" as one would expect behind the Greek, the context to an Aramaic speaker would be clear. We're not talking about his more distant relations – i.e. "all his house" (as it is used to describe Cornelius' family in Acts 10) – they are talking about his closest relatives. His mother and his siblings who lived there. People they thought ordinary whom they were contrasting him to.

But this is immaterial, and I genuinely do not care one way or another. All I do care in this "fight" is that junk arguments to Aramaic cease. That's it.

 

[bbbbbbb]

This response, too, is a non-sequitur to what I posted.

I do not care if someone believes in the Perpetual Virginity of Mary or not. Any appeals to Aramaic that claim there is no word for "cousin" and therefore examples where Jesus is said to have brothers or sisters must therefore be cousins cannot be used as evidence because they are false. It is a spurious argument. There were phrases for "cousin" specifically that were not "clumsy" as your argument claimed, and were attested in Jesus' own dialect.

My own opinion on the matter is that where the word does have semantic range (like "brother" does in English), its use is defined by context. In Luke 8:19-21 (and its parallel in Matthew) the context is very clear. His genuine mother and brothers were being used in direct juxtaposition to that expanded semantic range. If this wasn't the case, the pericope has no meaning (real, close, direct family members vs figurative or greater family).

If you want a more concrete example, we can look at Matthew 13:55-56/Mark 6:3:

'"Isn't this the carpenter's son? Isn't his mother's name Mary, and aren't his brothers James, Joseph, Simon and Judas? Aren't all his sisters with us? Where then did this man get all these things?"'

Mary is his mother. James, Joseph, Simon and Judas are his brothers. He also had sisters. In this context, if it were in Aramaic using אחין "brothers" and אחוון "sisters" as one would expect behind the Greek, the context to an Aramaic speaker would be clear. We're not talking about his more distant relations – i.e. "all his house" (as it is used to describe Cornelius' family in Acts 10) – they are talking about his closest relatives. His mother and his siblings who lived there. People they thought ordinary whom they were contrasting him to.

But this is immaterial, and I genuinely do not care one way or another. All I do care in this "fight" is that junk arguments to Aramaic cease. That's it.

I rather think that his mind is made up and you are wasting your time attempting to confuse him with the facts.

 

[kepha31]

19 Then His mother and brothers came to Him, and could not approach Him because of the crowd. 20 And it was told Him by some, who said, “Your mother and Your brothers are standing outside, desiring to see You.”21 But He answered and said to them, “My mother and My brothers are these who hear the word of God and do it.” Luke 8:19-21

• His mother and brothers came to Him
• “Your mother and Your brothers are standing outside
  
• “My mother and My brothers are these who hear the word of God and do it.”

Jesus said your tradition has made the word of God, of no effect.

• making the word of God of no effect through your tradition which you have handed down. And many such things you do.” Mark 7:13

Next, I guess you are going to tell us that you pray to Mary, and other dead people?

So you are trying to teach us that Mary was a relative and not a His mother.

If mother mean maternal mother, in the context, why try and change the meaning of brothers, to mean something else.

Please show us a scripture where the word brothers, when linked with mother, means "cousins".

The doctrine of demons is to say remained a virgin, and encourage people to pray to her.

Let's look at the context of that scripture that speaks of doctrines of demons, and see which group is being referred to here.

Now the Spirit expressly says that in latter times some will depart from the faith, giving heed to deceiving spirits and doctrines of demons, 2 speaking lies in hypocrisy, having their own conscience seared with a hot iron, 3 forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from foods which God created to be received with thanksgiving by those who believe and know the truth.
1 Timothy 4:1-3

The group promoting the doctrine of demons, is also the group that forbids to marry, which is the Catholic Church, who forbids priests and nuns to marry.

Also, no meat on certain days.

JLB

6 lies is a rant. I'll take one anti-Catholic falsehood at a time, that is, if you are capable of a civilized discussion.

 

[kepha31]

This response, too, is a non-sequitur to what I posted.

I do not care if someone believes in the Perpetual Virginity of Mary or not. Any appeals to Aramaic that claim there is no word for "cousin" and therefore examples where Jesus is said to have brothers or sisters must therefore be cousins cannot be used as evidence because they are false. It is a spurious argument. There were phrases for "cousin" specifically that were not "clumsy" as your argument claimed, and were attested in Jesus' own dialect.

My own opinion on the matter is that where the word does have semantic range (like "brother" does in English), its use is defined by context. In Luke 8:19-21 (and its parallel in Matthew) the context is very clear. His genuine mother and brothers were being used in direct juxtaposition to that expanded semantic range. If this wasn't the case, the pericope has no meaning (real, close, direct family members vs figurative or greater family).

If you want a more concrete example, we can look at Matthew 13:55-56/Mark 6:3:

'"Isn't this the carpenter's son? Isn't his mother's name Mary, and aren't his brothers James, Joseph, Simon and Judas? Aren't all his sisters with us? Where then did this man get all these things?"'

Mary is his mother. James, Joseph, Simon and Judas are his brothers. He also had sisters. In this context, if it were in Aramaic using אחין "brothers" and אחוון "sisters" as one would expect behind the Greek, the context to an Aramaic speaker would be clear. We're not talking about his more distant relations – i.e. "all his house" (as it is used to describe Cornelius' family in Acts 10) – they are talking about his closest relatives. His mother and his siblings who lived there. People they thought ordinary whom they were contrasting him to.

But this is immaterial, and I genuinely do not care one way or another. All I do care in this "fight" is that junk arguments to Aramaic cease. That's it.

Do your Aramaic rules apply to Matthew 16:18 or is that too a junk argument?
Why are you--and others--so desperately eager to prove that Jesus had blood brothers? Is it for any reason other than to make the Church look bad, or foolish?

Aramaic has no word for "cousin." If one wanted to refer to the cousin relationship, one has to use a circumlocution such as “the son of his uncle” (brona d-`ammeh). This often is too much trouble, so broader kinship terms are used that don’t mean “cousin” in particular; e.g., ahyana ("kinsman"), qariwa ("close relation"), or nasha ("relative"). One such term is aha, which literally means “brother” but is also frequently used in the sense of “relative, kinsman.”
Cousin, Kinswoman . . . Aargh!​

It's Hebraic both/and thinking that Jesus often used, not dichotomous either/or thinking that Calvin was notorious for.

 

[justinangel]

Never ask others for prayer, Jesus said we could ask the Father direct in his name.

Jesus is addressing the Jews and revealing to them how God is their heavenly Father. Until his coming to them and since their exodus from Egypt, the Jews considered God only by His actions, not in who He was. Jesus is there to correct and alter their perception of God. If how you interpret the Scriptures is true, then why did Paul ask his fellow brethren to pray for him so that he'd receive the actual graces he needed to complete his apostolate? Why didn't he pray directly to the Father in Jesus' name? And why does Paul ask Timothy to make petitions and intercessions for others so that everyone might be saved, as God desires?

Like many things about religion praying to mary, saints, the neighbors dead dog to beg them to pray on your behalf is a slap in the face to Jesus.

We read in Scripture that God has made us "a kingdom and priests" to serve Him. The function of a priest is to make intercession for others. As members of Christ's Mystical Body, the faithful do have a share in his principal mediation by being members of his body, of which he is the Head. The body is one and organic. So, by refusing to pray to the Blessed Virgin Mary and the saints, one slaps Jesus in the face. And by dishonouring Christ's Mystical Body, likening it to a "dead dog", you dishonour the Head to which the body is joined. Christ's Mystical Body is the heavenly Church and the pilgrim Church on earth which death cannot divide.

J.A.

 

[justinangel]

19 Then His mother and brothers came to Him, and could not approach Him because of the crowd. 20 And it was told Him by some, who said, “Your mother and Your brothers are standing outside, desiring to see You.”21 But He answered and said to them, “My mother and My brothers are these who hear the word of God and do it.” Luke 8:19-21

• His mother and brothers came to Him
• “Your mother and Your brothers are standing outside
  
• “My mother and My brothers are these who hear the word of God and do it.

JLB

We also have the statement “Behold your mother” (as in John 19) occurring in Matthew 12:47 and Mark 3:32. The theological theme in these two verses resembles that which we have in John 19:25-27. Both deal with what it means to be a “brethren of Jesus”. The crux of these passages is that the ties of obedience to the will of God take precedence over those of blood kinship. Although Jesus does not deny or intend to belittle his kinship with his mother, he nonetheless subordinates it to a higher bond of kinship that transcends all biological ties. Jesus regarded Mary as his genuine mother more for her faith in God than for their physiological ties, since it was a greater blessing to her (Lk.11:27-28). The Kingdom of Heaven imposes demands on the personal commitment of the disciple, which must often supersede natural family ties and even ethnic bonds.

These two verses introduce the image of a new family which takes on an eschatological aspect and rises above the national bond that connects the group of listeners surrounding Jesus. These passages are a prelude to our Lord’s intentions when he addresses his mother and the disciple from the Cross. It is not that she shall be like a mother to the Disciple, but rather she will be his mother from then on in the Kingdom of Heaven, as he shall be her son as much as Jesus is physically, though in a spiritual way.

In establishing this family of faith during his active ministry, Jesus begins to redefine Israel in the figure of Mother Zion. The nation shall no longer be defined by national boundaries or birth right, but by faith, as the New Zion shall extend beyond its borders and receive the Gentiles into God’s family kingdom. This vision of Zion goes beyond the metaphorical and reaches its personal secondary fulfillment in the Blessed Virgin Mary, Mother of the Church.

You're kindly invited to visit my website.
Behold Thy Mother

J.A.

 

[SteveCaruso]

Do your Aramaic rules apply to Matthew 16:18 or is that too a junk argument?

The normal claim that 'there is only one word for "rock"' in Aramaic is false. In Jesus' dialect there were two, כיפה /kefa/ and אבנה /evna/. They were synonyms, like "stone" and "rock" in English. The latter one, אבנה /evna/ Jesus used as a pun (he was fond of wordplays) against the word אבנה /evne/ which means "I will build." So it is a pun with two layers; two "hops" if you will:

"You are Kefa (rock) and upon this evna (rock) evne (I will build) my church."

Any argument about the primacy of Peter or that some shade of difference between Petros and petra matters is therefore irrelevant. This passage cannot be used for or against Papal authority.

Why are you--and others--so desperately eager to prove that Jesus had blood brothers?

Re-read above. I am not. I don't care if you believe Mary wore a party hat all the days of her life. It's not a Creedal matter.

Aramaic has no word for "cousin." If one wanted to refer to the cousin relationship, one has to use a circumlocution such as “the son of his uncle” (brona d-`ammeh). This often is too much trouble, so broader kinship terms are used that don’t mean “cousin” in particular; e.g., ahyana ("kinsman"), qariwa ("close relation"), or nasha ("relative"). One such term is aha, which literally means “brother” but is also frequently used in the sense of “relative, kinsman.”
Cousin, Kinswoman . . . Aargh!

Jimmy there is simply wrong.

First, he's pulling from Classical Syriac – an Aramaic language that is 500 years and hundreds of miles removed from Jesus' day and place. Remember that Aramaic is not a single monolithic language, it's an entire family of them. As a result, the phrases "brona d-`ammeh" "ahyana" "qariwa" and "nasha" (in that sense) do not exist in Galilean Aramaic/JPA. It's like claiming that Spanish words exist in French.

Second, in Jesus' own dialect, the circumlocution בר–דוד /bar-dud/ is readily attested in Bereshit Rabba (בני דודיכון אנן = /bənai duḏeḵon ənan/ = "We are your cousins." 344:4) and Talmud Yerushalmi (כן אורחהון דבני דודייא עבדין = /kən 'orḥhon da-vənai dudekon 'avdin/ = "Is this how cousins act?"), and בר–אח דאב /bar-aḥ d'av/ is attested in Targum Neofiti.

It's Hebraic both/and thinking that Jesus often used

"Hebraic both/and thinking"? What malarkey is this?

 

[kepha31]

The normal claim that 'there is only one word for "rock"' in Aramaic is false. In Jesus' dialect there were two, כיפה /kefa/ and אבנה /evna/. They were synonyms, like "stone" and "rock" in English. The latter one, אבנה /evna/ Jesus used as a pun (he was fond of wordplays) against the word אבנה /evne/ which means "I will build." So it is a pun with two layers; two "hops" if you will:

"You are Kefa (rock) and upon this evna (rock) evne (I will build) my church."

That is not how the Aramaic reads. Kepha is the same word as Kepha, and it is found twice in the same verse. I keep asking for lexicons but you don't deliver.

Any argument about the primacy of Peter or that some shade of difference between Petros and petra matters is therefore irrelevant. This passage cannot be used for or against Papal authority.

I don't care. Peter's papal authority does not rest on one verse, it's all over the NT.

Re-read above. I am not. I don't care if you believe Mary wore a party hat all the days of her life. It's not a Creedal matter.

Not for you.

Jimmy there is simply wrong.

First, he's pulling from Classical Syriac – an Aramaic language that is 500 years and hundreds of miles removed from Jesus' day and place. Remember that Aramaic is not a single monolithic language, it's an entire family of them. As a result, the phrases "brona d-`ammeh" "ahyana" "qariwa" and "nasha" (in that sense) do not exist in Galilean Aramaic/JPA. It's like claiming that Spanish words exist in French.

So all the resources available to average dummies like me, and all the scholars who write the text books, are wrong except you.

Second,

in Jesus' own dialect, the circumlocution בר–דוד /bar-dud/ is readily attested in Bereshit Rabba (בני דודיכון אנן = /bənai duḏeḵon ənan/ = "We are your cousins." 344:4) and Talmud Yerushalmi (כן אורחהון דבני דודייא עבדין = /kən 'orḥhon da-vənai dudekon 'avdin/ = "Is this how cousins act?"), and בר–אח דאב /bar-aḥ d'av/ is attested in Targum Neofiti.

You seem sure "bənai duḏeḵon ənan" and "kən 'orḥhon da-vənai dudekon 'avdin" doesn't translate as siblings. Which is it? Cousins or siblings?

R.T. France (Anglican)
“Jesus now sums up Peter's significance in a name, Peter . . . It describes not so much Peter's character (he did not prove to be 'rock-like' in terms of stability or reliability), but his function, as the foundation-stone of Jesus' church. The feminine word for 'rock', 'petra', is necessarily changed to the masculine 'petros' (stone) to give a man's name, but the word-play is unmistakable (and in Aramaic would be even more so, as the same form 'kepha' would occur in both places). It is only Protestant overreaction to the Catholic claim . . . that what is here said of Peter applies also to the later bishops of Rome, that has led some to claim that the 'rock' here is not Peter at all but the faith which he has just confessed. "The word-play, and the whole structure of the passage, demands that this verse is every bit as much Jesus’ declaration about Peter as verse 16 was Peter’s declaration about Jesus. Of course it is on the basis of Peter’s confession that Jesus declares his role as the Church’s foundation, but it is to Peter, not his confession, that the rock metaphor is applied. . . Peter is to be the foundation-stone of Jesus' new community . . . which will last forever.”
(Tyndale New Testament Commentaries, [Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1985], vol. 1: Matthew, 254, 256)

David Hill (Presbyterian)
“It is on Peter himself, the confessor of his Messiahship, that Jesus will build the Church…Attempts to interpret the ‘rock’ as something other than Peter in person (e.g., his faith, the truth revealed to him) are due to Protestant bias, and introduce to the statement a degree of subtlety which is highly unlikely.”
(The Gospel of Matthew, New Century Bible Commentary [Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1972], 261)

One of the most respected and referenced Greek dictionaries among Evangelicals is Gerhard Kittel’s Theological Dictionary of the New Testament. In a most candid statement about Matthew 16:18, Dr. Oscar Cullman, a contributing editor to this work, writes:

The obvious pun which has made its way into the Greek text . . . suggests a material identity between petra and Petros . . . as it is impossible to differentiate strictly between the two words. . . . Petros himself is this petra, not just his faith or his confession. . . . The idea of the Reformers that he is referring to the faith of Peter is quite inconceivable. . . . For there is no reference here to the faith of Peter. Rather, the parallelism of “thou art Rock” and “on this rock I will build” shows that the second rock can only be the same as the first. It is thus evident that Jesus is referring to Peter, to whom he has given the name Rock. . . . To this extent Roman Catholic exegesis is right and all Protestant attempts to evade this interpretation are to be rejected.

"Hebraic both/and thinking"? What malarkey is this?

Catholics think in terms of "both/and" rather than making false and unnecessary dichotomies ("either/or").
either/or allows no equivocation; being limited in choice to two options.

Still waiting for some kind of Aramaic resource that shows "Kepha" only appearing once in Matthew 16:18. (that you didn't write yourself)

 

[MarkRohfrietsch]

Please use scripture to validate your belief.

We have too many promoting false doctrine based on their tradition, rather than the word of God.


19 Then His mother and brothers came to Him, and could not approach Him because of the crowd. 20 And it was told Him by some, who said, “Your mother and Your brothers are standing outside, desiring to see You.”21 But He answered and said to them, “My mother and My brothers are these who hear the word of God and do it.” Luke 8:19-21

• His mother and brothers came to Him
• “Your mother and Your brothers are standing outside
  
• “My mother and My brothers are these who hear the word of God and do it.”

Jesus said your tradition has made the word of God, of no effect.

• making the word of God of no effect through your tradition which you have handed down. And many such things you do.” Mark 7:13

Next, I guess you are going to tell us that you pray to Mary, and other dead people?


JLB

Before you start spouting a bunch of off topic stuff; this thread is about the perpetual virginity, and that is it. Another member said to deal with on thing at a time. If you are in-doubt, read post one of the thread, it defines the topic and the scope of the thread.

Stay on topic! Start a new thread if you want to discuss something else.

On the cross our Lord Jesus Christ commended his single mother to the care of St. John. Why? Because there was no other male siblings to take care of her; not female siblings to take her into their spouses homes either. Without a male guardian, the Blessed Virgin would have been destitute.

Regarding that bit about the Saints; no we don't pray to them, but we accept that the Bible tells us that they do intercede on our behalf (prayers/incense in the Revelation of St. John).

They are praying for you too; not just us "traditional Christians".

 

[SteveCaruso]

That is not how the Aramaic reads. Kepha is the same word as Kepha, and it is found twice in the same verse. I keep asking for lexicons but you don't deliver.

Ok, then, show me the Aramaic.

You keep asking for lexicons, but there are no Strongs Numbers for Galilean Aramaic. You'll have to directly rely upon the work of Aramaic linguists like Sokoloff, Fassberg, Casey, Vermes, etc. – and that's probably for the better.

Not for you.

I'd be glad for you to show me where the Perpetual Virginity is mentioned in the Apostle's or Nicene Creed.

So all the resources available to average dummies like me, and all the scholars who write the text books, are wrong except you.

The scholars who write the text books who have any modicum of training in Aramaic languages will agree with me.

There simply aren't resources available to laymen without training in Galilean Aramaic. Sokoloff's grammar is in Hebrew, and Fassberg's grammar is written specifically for linguists with strong knowledge of Aramaic, Hebrew, and general Semitic linguistics and is otherwise quite opaque.

You seem sure "bənai duḏeḵon ənan" and "kən 'orḥhon da-vənai dudekon 'avdin" doesn't translate as siblings. Which is it? Cousins or siblings?

Another non-sequitur. These are examples of בר–דוד /bar-dud/ which means "cousin" explicitly, never "sibling."

בני דודיכון אנן = /bənai duḏeḵon ənan/ = "We are your cousins." (Bereshit Rabba 344:4)

כן אורחהון דבני דודייא עבדין = /kən 'orḥhon da-vənai dudaya 'avdin/ = "Is this how cousins act?" (Yerushalmi Tan 69b(16))

The differences in aspiration and endings have to do with natural language inflection. Ex:

bar-dud = "cousin"; bənai-dudaya = "the cousins"; bənai-duḏeḵon = "your cousins"; etc.

These examples are cited in Michael Sokoloff's seminal dictionary on Galilean/Jewish Palestinian Aramaic ("A Dictionary of Jewish Palestinian Aramaic" Ramat-Gan, Israel, Bar Ilan University Press. 1990.) – which is the current authority on the dialect.

Sokoloff also attests to both words for "rock/stone" in Jesus' dialect as well (/kefa/ on page 256, and /evna/ on page 33). In other Aramaic dialects, such as Syriac (a much more well-known Aramaic language) or Biblical Aramaic (the Imperial Aramaic forms of Daniel and Ezra) /kefa/ is by far the most common.

So the assertion that "kefa would have been in both places" is shortsighted, especially where the Greek uses two separate words – which would work nicely, given the pun.

But, I've only translated Aramaic professionally for 15 years and am currently working on a research grant for the Galilean dialect. What do I know?

 

[justinangel]

I'd be glad for you to show me where the Perpetual Virginity is mentioned in the Apostle's or Nicene Creed.

Why should the PVM be mentioned? The Nicene Creed is called Nicene because it was originally adopted in the city of Nicaea by the First Council of Nicaea in 325. The council's main purpose was to eradicate the Arian heresy and settle the doctrine of the Trinity – that God, Jesus and the Holy Spirit were three divine persons in complete union. Whether Mary remained a virgin after the birth of Jesus was irrelevant to this cardinal matter of faith. Arius and his followers proposed that Jesus was the son of Joseph and Mary, created "out of nothing" like every other human being. Mary's virginity before the birth of Jesus (virginitas ante partum) was what mattered. What did matter though was whether Mary was the mother of a divine Person in the flesh. But it was the Council of Ephesus that first dealt with this problem over a century later when Nestorius questioned the propriety of calling Mary the Theotokos (God bearer) or Mother of God.

With respect to Mary's virginity, this comes from the exposition of the 150 council fathers:

"for us humans and for our salvation he came down from the heavens and became incarnate from the holy Spirit and the virgin Mary."

The following is the Arian Catholic Creed which is professed today by Arian Catholics:

I BELIEVE IN ONE GOD,
Creator of Heaven and earth,
And of all things visible and invisible.
And in his Spiritual Son, Jesus Christ,
Whom was born of Mary and Joseph,
Was not consubstantial nor co-eternal with God the Father almighty,
Suffered under Pontius Pilate; was crucified, died, and was buried.
On the third day His Spirit was resurrected.
He ascended into Heaven,
And sitteth at the right hand of God, the Father almighty.
Whence he shall come again to judge the living and the dead,
Of whose Kingdom there shall be no end.

And I believe in the Holy Spirit,
The Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church,
The communion of saints,
The forgiveness of sins,
The resurrection of the Spirit,
And life everlasting.
Amen.

Below is the 6th Anathema against the "Three Chapters" from the Second Council of Constantinople in 553 A.D.

'If anyone declares that it can be only inexactly and not truly said that the holy and glorious ever-virgin Mary is the mother of God, or says that she is so only in some relative way, considering that she bore a mere man and that God the Word was not made into human flesh in her, holding rather that the nativity of a man from her was referred, as they say, to God the Word as he was with the man who came into being; if anyone misrepresents the holy synod of Chalcedon, alleging that it claimed that the virgin was the mother of God only according to that heretical understanding which the blasphemous Theodore put forward; or if anyone says that she is the mother of a man or the Christ-bearer, that is the mother of Christ, suggesting that Christ is not God; and does not formally confess that she is properly and truly the mother of God, because he who before all ages was born of the Father, God the Word, has been made into human flesh in these latter days and has been born to her, and it was in this religious understanding that the holy synod of Chalcedon formally stated its belief that she was the mother of God: let him be anathema.'

The Perpetual Virginity of Mary has always belonged to the sacred Tradition of the Catholic Church (East & West) and since apostolic time. Alexander, the Patriarch of Alexandria took the 25-30 year-old Athanasius, whom he was grooming to replace him, with him to the Council in Nicaea. In his fight against the Arians by about the age of 70, he wrote four discourses against them. This is what he writes in his Second Discourse against the Arians (2:70) dated A.D. 360: "Let those, therefore, who deny that the Son is by nature from the Father and proper to his essence deny also that He took true human flesh from the ever-virgin Mary."

Another non-sequitur. These are examples of בר–דוד /bar-dud/ which means "cousin" explicitly, never "sibling."

בני דודיכון אנן = /bənai duḏeḵon ənan/ = "We are your cousins." (Bereshit Rabba 344:4)

כן אורחהון דבני דודייא עבדין = /kən 'orḥhon da-vənai dudaya 'avdin/ = "Is this how cousins act?" (Yerushalmi Tan 69b(16))

bar-dud = "cousin"; bənai-dudaya = "the cousins"; bənai-duḏeḵon = "your cousins"; etc.

The Galilean Aramaic term for a male cousin is indeed בר דוד or bar duḏ, but literally stated is “uncle’s-son”. Jeremiah uses the term, ben dodo, “[son] of his [uncle]” (Jer. 32:8). Biblical Hebrew uses the term, bat dodo, “[daughter] of his [uncle]” to describe Esther, Mordechai’s cousin (Est 2:7). But in either case, there isn't an original single word for cousin, but a combination of two words.

These are circumlocutions: a number of words that are used where a fewer number or only one word should or could be used. Further, there are two circumlocutions used: one for male (ben dodo) and one for female (bat dodo), like ach (IA acha) for "brother" and achoth for "sister" in Hebrew. But ach and achoth are single words or words in their own right. A circumlocution is just that: a circumlocution. By definition, it certainly isn't a single word with one meaning, but an expression of speech which in this case is used for the sake of lexical expediency. The above terms consist of a combination of two key words. Finally, Aramaic (Syriac Aramaic) does have a related word achyana, but this is also used for kinsfolk in general, not just specifically for a cousin. The Jennings Lexicon of the Peshitta translates achyana as kinsman or cousin.

Now some Protestants contend that because Mark wrote his gospel in Koine Greek, he would have incorporated the Greek word for cousin if in fact James and his brothers Jude and Simon were cousins of Jesus, seeing that there is such a word in the Greek language (ἀνεψιός/anepsios). However, we should keep in mind that the characters in Mark's Gospel are themselves speaking in Aramaic, and thus as Jews would have used the idiom of their language that served as a substitute. The evangelist wrote a literary work, and diction is a literary device. Mark was addressing an audience which perhaps consisted largely of Jewish converts to the Christian faith who were familiar with the Semitic usage of the word brother. We know for a fact, moreover, that the Semitic usage is preserved in the Biblical Greek. Let's look at the Septuagint, the Greek translation of the Hebrew Old Testament for our evidence.

υἱοὶ Μεραρί· Μοολὶ καὶ Μουσί. υἱοὶ Μοολί· ᾿Ελεάζαρ καὶ Κίς. καὶ ἀπέθανεν ᾿Ελεάζαρ, καὶ οὐκ ἦσαν αὐτῷ υἱοί, ἀλλ᾿ ἢ θυγατέρες, καὶ ἔλαβον αὐτὰς υἱοὶ Κὶς ἀδελφοὶ αὐτῶν. υἱοὶ Μουσί· Μοολὶ καὶ ᾿Εδὲρ καὶ ᾿Ιαριμώθ, τρεῖς.

The sons of Merari; Mooli, and Musi: the sons of Mooli; Eleazar, and Kis. And Eleazar died, and he had no sons, but daughters: and the sons of Kis, their brethren , took them. The sons of Musi; Mooli, and Eder, and Jarimoth, three.
- 1 Chronicles 23, 21-23

Therefore, the Greek word for "brothers" (adelphoi/ἀδελφοὶ : of the same womb) is used in sacred Scripture in reference to cousins in keeping with ancient Hebrew parlance. The daughters of Eleazar married the sons of his brother Kish, "the sons of their uncle."

J.A.

 

[kepha31]

Ok, then, show me the Aramaic.

You keep asking for lexicons, but there are no Strongs Numbers for Galilean Aramaic. You'll have to directly rely upon the work of Aramaic linguists like Sokoloff, Fassberg, Casey, Vermes, etc. – and that's probably for the better.

These guys say "Kepha" appears only once in the Syrian Aramaic of Matt. 16:18?

I'd be glad for you to show me where the Perpetual Virginity is mentioned in the Apostle's or Nicene Creed.

Elaborating on Mariology is not the function of the Creeds. I'd be glad for you to show me where the Perpetual Virginity is denied or disputed before, during, or after the Creeds were drawn up. You have 4 centuries of early Church Fathers to choose from.
StayCatholic.com - ECF Mary Ever-Virgin

The scholars who write the text books who have any modicum of training in Aramaic languages will agree with me.

There simply aren't resources available to laymen without training in Galilean Aramaic. Sokoloff's grammar is in Hebrew, and Fassberg's grammar is written specifically for linguists with strong knowledge of Aramaic, Hebrew, and general Semitic linguistics and is otherwise quite opaque.

Another non-sequitur. These are examples of בר–דוד /bar-dud/ which means "cousin" explicitly, never "sibling."

בני דודיכון אנן = /bənai duḏeḵon ənan/ = "We are your cousins." (Bereshit Rabba 344:4)

כן אורחהון דבני דודייא עבדין = /kən 'orḥhon da-vənai dudaya 'avdin/ = "Is this how cousins act?" (Yerushalmi Tan 69b(16))

The differences in aspiration and endings have to do with natural language inflection. Ex:

bar-dud = "cousin"; bənai-dudaya = "the cousins"; bənai-duḏeḵon = "your cousins"; etc.
These examples are cited in Michael Sokoloff's seminal dictionary on Galilean/Jewish Palestinian Aramaic ("A Dictionary of Jewish Palestinian Aramaic" Ramat-Gan, Israel, Bar Ilan University Press. 1990.) – which is the current authority on the dialect.

I don't contest the use of the word "cousins" as you put it, but it doesn't prove Jesus had siblings, and the abuse of the word "brothers" isn't proof at all.

Sokoloff also attests to both words for "rock/stone" in Jesus' dialect as well (/kefa/ on page 256, and /evna/ on page 33). In other Aramaic dialects, such as Syriac (a much more well-known Aramaic language) or Biblical Aramaic (the Imperial Aramaic forms of Daniel and Ezra) /kefa/ is by far the most common.
So the assertion that "kefa would have been in both places" is shortsighted, especially where the Greek uses two separate words – which would work nicely, given the pun.

Shortsighted in the Aramaic?

But, I've only translated Aramaic professionally for 15 years and am currently working on a research grant for the Galilean dialect. What do I know?

Congratulations. I have an honest question. New written evidence shows the Syrian liturgy celebrating the Assumption going back to 300 AD, predating the Apostles Creed by about 100 years. Do you know where I could get more information?
The Assumption of Mary in History | Catholic Answers gives sketchy information and I can't find more on line.
My second question is what language was common in Syria in the 2-3rd century?

 

[MarkRohfrietsch]

Why should the PVM be mentioned? The Nicene Creed is called Nicene because it was originally adopted in the city of Nicaea by the First Council of Nicaea in 325. The council's main purpose was to eradicate the Arian heresy and settle the doctrine of the Trinity – that God, Jesus and the Holy Spirit were three divine persons in complete union. Whether Mary remained a virgin after the birth of Jesus was irrelevant to this cardinal matter of faith. Arius and his followers proposed that Jesus was the son of Joseph and Mary, created "out of nothing" like every other human being. Mary's virginity before the birth of Jesus (virginitas ante partum) was what mattered. What did matter though was whether Mary was the mother of a divine Person in the flesh. But it was the Council of Ephesus that first dealt with this problem over a century later when Nestorius questioned the propriety of calling Mary the Theotokos (God bearer) or Mother of God.

With respect to Mary's virginity, this comes from the exposition of the 150 council fathers:

"for us humans and for our salvation he came down from the heavens and became incarnate from the holy Spirit and the virgin Mary."

The following is the Arian Catholic Creed which is professed today by Arian Catholics:

I BELIEVE IN ONE GOD,
Creator of Heaven and earth,
And of all things visible and invisible.
And in his Spiritual Son, Jesus Christ,
Whom was born of Mary and Joseph,
Was not consubstantial nor co-eternal with God the Father almighty,
Suffered under Pontius Pilate; was crucified, died, and was buried.
On the third day His Spirit was resurrected.
He ascended into Heaven,
And sitteth at the right hand of God, the Father almighty.
Whence he shall come again to judge the living and the dead,
Of whose Kingdom there shall be no end.

And I believe in the Holy Spirit,
The Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church,
The communion of saints,
The forgiveness of sins,
The resurrection of the Spirit,
And life everlasting.
Amen.

Below is the 6th Anathema against the "Three Chapters" from the Second Council of Constantinople in 553 A.D.

'If anyone declares that it can be only inexactly and not truly said that the holy and glorious ever-virgin Mary is the mother of God, or says that she is so only in some relative way, considering that she bore a mere man and that God the Word was not made into human flesh in her, holding rather that the nativity of a man from her was referred, as they say, to God the Word as he was with the man who came into being; if anyone misrepresents the holy synod of Chalcedon, alleging that it claimed that the virgin was the mother of God only according to that heretical understanding which the blasphemous Theodore put forward; or if anyone says that she is the mother of a man or the Christ-bearer, that is the mother of Christ, suggesting that Christ is not God; and does not formally confess that she is properly and truly the mother of God, because he who before all ages was born of the Father, God the Word, has been made into human flesh in these latter days and has been born to her, and it was in this religious understanding that the holy synod of Chalcedon formally stated its belief that she was the mother of God: let him be anathema.'

The Perpetual Virginity of Mary has always belonged to the sacred Tradition of the Catholic Church (East & West) and since apostolic time. Alexander, the Patriarch of Alexandria took the 25-30 year-old Athanasius, whom he was grooming to replace him, with him to the Council in Nicaea. In his fight against the Arians by about the age of 70, he wrote four discourses against them. This is what he writes in his Second Discourse against the Arians (2:70) dated A.D. 360: "Let those, therefore, who deny that the Son is by nature from the Father and proper to his essence deny also that He took true human flesh from the ever-virgin Mary."



The Galilean Aramaic term for a male cousin is indeed בר דוד or bar duḏ, but literally stated is “uncle’s-son”. Jeremiah uses the term, ben dodo, “[son] of his [uncle]” (Jer. 32:8). Biblical Hebrew uses the term, bat dodo, “[daughter] of his [uncle]” to describe Esther, Mordechai’s cousin (Est 2:7). But in either case, there isn't an original single word for cousin, but a combination of two words.

These are circumlocutions: a number of words that are used where a fewer number or only one word should or could be used. Further, there are two circumlocutions used: one for male (ben dodo) and one for female (bat dodo), like ach (IA acha) for "brother" and achoth for "sister" in Hebrew. But ach and achoth are single words or words in their own right. A circumlocution is just that: a circumlocution. By definition, it certainly isn't a single word with one meaning, but an expression of speech which in this case is used for the sake of lexical expediency. The above terms consist of a combination of two key words. Finally, Aramaic (Syriac Aramaic) does have a related word achyana, but this is also used for kinsfolk in general, not just specifically for a cousin. The Jennings Lexicon of the Peshitta translates achyana as kinsman or cousin.

Now some Protestants contend that because Mark wrote his gospel in Koine Greek, he would have incorporated the Greek word for cousin if in fact James and his brothers Jude and Simon were cousins of Jesus, seeing that there is such a word in the Greek language (ἀνεψιός/anepsios). However, we should keep in mind that the characters in Mark's Gospel are themselves speaking in Aramaic, and thus as Jews would have used the idiom of their language that served as a substitute. The evangelist wrote a literary work, and diction is a literary device. Mark was addressing an audience which perhaps consisted largely of Jewish converts to the Christian faith who were familiar with the Semitic usage of the word brother. We know for a fact, moreover, that the Semitic usage is preserved in the Biblical Greek. Let's look at the Septuagint, the Greek translation of the Hebrew Old Testament for our evidence.

υἱοὶ Μεραρί· Μοολὶ καὶ Μουσί. υἱοὶ Μοολί· ᾿Ελεάζαρ καὶ Κίς. καὶ ἀπέθανεν ᾿Ελεάζαρ, καὶ οὐκ ἦσαν αὐτῷ υἱοί, ἀλλ᾿ ἢ θυγατέρες, καὶ ἔλαβον αὐτὰς υἱοὶ Κὶς ἀδελφοὶ αὐτῶν. υἱοὶ Μουσί· Μοολὶ καὶ ᾿Εδὲρ καὶ ᾿Ιαριμώθ, τρεῖς.

The sons of Merari; Mooli, and Musi: the sons of Mooli; Eleazar, and Kis. And Eleazar died, and he had no sons, but daughters: and the sons of Kis, their brethren , took them. The sons of Musi; Mooli, and Eder, and Jarimoth, three.
- 1 Chronicles 23, 21-23

Therefore, the Greek word for "brothers" (adelphoi/ἀδελφοὶ : of the same womb) is used in sacred Scripture in reference to cousins in keeping with ancient Hebrew parlance. The daughters of Eleazar married the sons of his brother Kish, "the sons of their uncle."

J.A.

The Lutheran Confessions affirm this belief in the Smalcald Articles of 1537, and the Formula of Concord --"Solid Declaration". This is an ageless teaching of the Church catholic, still confessed by the majority of Christians world-wide.