How do non-Catholics explain Eucharistic miracles, such as bleeding, and Marian...

[Root of Jesse]

i didn't eat my dessert until after my baby was born.
I didn't have sex until after my baby was born
I didn't go to the store until after my baby was born.

Gee, why did I even MENTION the store or dessert.
You can't prove that I WENT or ATE.
I just wanted to add extra goofy words in there.
I don't go to the store or eat dessert OR have sex..

the difference is you're speaking of an event that's past. I'm speaking of events coming up, whether they exist or not.

I might not see you until tomorrow. Doesn't mean I will, doesn't mean I won't.

 

[sunlover1]

the difference is you're speaking of an event that's past. I'm speaking of events coming up, whether they exist or not.

I might not see you until tomorrow. Doesn't mean I will, doesn't mean I won't.

The Bible was speaking the same tense as I was.
So I was just using your post to share my findings.
To show that it's illogical to presume that God put
that there for no reason ...

And I didn't "eat my dessert" until after I had brought forth my firstborn.

and I didn't "use my fishing boat", until after I had brought forth my "first" born.

and didn't know her sexually until she had brought forth her firstborn son.


Not sure why I'd mention desserts and boats since they never happen even
in the future.
God musta goofed up this one time?

 

[Epiphoskei]

Except the verse wherein this construction is contained is also in the past.

"Until" circumscribes the duration of an action, and while it technically leaves the state of the action after the "until" undefined, outside of very technical logical writing the choice to say that I didn't do something until a point implies that I didn't do something only until that point. For instance, I think we would all recognize "I didn't kill him until noon" as an admission of guilt, even though on a technicality it isn't.

 

[sunlover1]

Except the verse wherein this construction is contained is also in the past.

"Until" circumscribes the duration of an action, and while it technically leaves the state of the action after the "until" undefined, outside of very technical logical writing the choice to say that I didn't do something until a point implies that I didn't do something only until that point. For instance, I think we would all recognize "I didn't kill him until noon" as an admission of guilt, even though on a technicality it isn't.

My second set were constructed in the same exact way as the passage.

 

[Epiphoskei]

Yes, I wasn't responding to you, I was agreeing; we posted at the same time.

 

[sunlover1]

Yes, I wasn't responding to you, I was agreeing; we posted at the same time.

OH, I'm sorry. I was confused. (nothing new there lol)

 

[prodromos]

The Bible was speaking the same tense as I was.
So I was just using your post to share my findings.
To show that it's illogical to presume that God put
that there for no reason ...

And I didn't "eat my dessert" until after I had brought forth my firstborn.

and I didn't "use my fishing boat", until after I had brought forth my "first" born.

and didn't know her sexually until she had brought forth her firstborn son.


Not sure why I'd mention desserts and boats since they never happen even
in the future.
God musta goofed up this one time?

It is probably the most economic way that anyone could state in Greek, that Jesus birth was not the result of sexual intercourse. That is what the Gospel writer is telling us. He is not delving into the intimacies of Joseph and Mary's relationship which have absolutely nothing to do with the Gospel. Can you think of anything written in the Gospels which is unnecessary or redundant for knowledge leading to salvation?
You're right, God musta goofed up!

 

[Rick Otto]

The Bible was speaking the same tense as I was.
So I was just using your post to share my findings.
To show that it's illogical to presume that God put
that there for no reason ...

And I didn't "eat my dessert" until after I had brought forth my firstborn.

and I didn't "use my fishing boat", until after I had brought forth my "first" born.

and didn't know her sexually until she had brought forth her firstborn son.


Not sure why I'd mention desserts and boats since they never happen even
in the future.
God musta goofed up this one time?

More likely, you've been having desserts on your fishing boat.

 

[Epiphoskei]

It is probably the most economic way that anyone could state in Greek, that Jesus birth was not the result of sexual intercourse. That is what the Gospel writer is telling us. He is not delving into the intimacies of Joseph and Mary's relationship which have absolutely nothing to do with the Gospel. Can you think of anything written in the Gospels which is unnecessary or redundant for knowledge leading to salvation?
You're right, God musta goofed up!

I would assume the most economic way would have been "did not know her sexually, full stop."

 

[MoreCoffee]

Agreed, there is nothing inherent in the word that says "And after this, Joseph and Mary had sex". But there doesn't need to be. Because "until", or εως specifies that something did or, in this case, did not happen before a certain event took place.

It does indeed say nothing about what happened afterwards, which leaves everyone who isn't painted into a corner thinking "Well, what happened afterwards? Since nothing else is specified, it makes sense to assume that it was "business as usual" in a marriage".
<...The rest of the post was addressed to others...>

There's the rub; "what happened after" is a matter of conjecture and as valuable as a pound of presumptions may be to some it is still worth less that an ounce of evidence. Brother Stryder06 offered the presumption as fact saying "Joseph knew Mary" (in a sexual way) because he presumed that Matthew 1:25 said so; I objected and asked him to produce a verse from the bible that actually said that "Joseph knew Mary". He failed. It is no wonder that he did fail because no such verse exists.

If folk want to believe that Mary and Joseph enjoyed sexual relations throughout their married years they will do so but they will be doing so on the basis of a guess, a conjecture, a presumption and not because any passage of scripture ever actually says that they did.

 

[MrLuther]

If folk want to believe that Mary and Joseph enjoyed sexual relations throughout their married years they will do so but they will be doing so on the basis of a guess, a conjecture, a presumption and not because any passage of scripture ever actually says that they did.

Just the same as those who believe they didn't. And those who believe they did have more to base their guesses on than those who believe they didn't, ergo the probability that THEY are correct and the "ever virgin"-crowd is wrong, is greater.

 

[prodromos]

I would assume the most economic way would have been "did not know her sexually, full stop."

Without the reference to Jesus' birth, what you have suggested would be revealing intimacy details completely irrelevant to the Gospel.

 

[MoreCoffee]

Just the same as those who believe they didn't. And those who believe they did have more to base their guesses on than those who believe they didn't.

I do not think your statement is correct; those who believe that Mary is ever virgin do so on the basis of Apostolic Tradition and no matter what you may make of the meaning of the phrase "Apostolic Tradition" the truth is that in the Church during the centuries when she was persecuted we have testimony from church fathers that Mary was indeed ever virgin.

For example, Protoevangelium of James tells is that saint Anne (Mary's mother) vowed that she would devote the child to the service of the Lord. The same source tells us that saint Joseph (Mary's husband) was elderly when they married.

4. And, behold, an angel of the Lord stood by, saying: Anna, Anna, the Lord hath heard thy prayer, and thou shalt conceive, and shall bring forth; and thy seed shall be spoken of in all the world. And Anna said: As the Lord my God liveth, if I beget either male or female, I will bring it as a gift to the Lord my God; and it shall minister to Him in holy things all the days of its life. And, behold, two angels came, saying to her: Behold, Joachim thy husband is coming with his flocks. For an angel of the Lord went down to him, saying: Joachim, Joachim, the Lord God hath heard thy prayer Go down hence; for, behold, thy wife Anna shall conceive. And Joachim went down and called his shepherds, saying: Bring me hither ten she-lambs without spot or blemish, and they shall be for the Lord my God; and bring me twelve tender calves, and they shall be for the priests and the elders; and a hundred goats for all the people. And, behold, Joachim came with his flocks; and Anna stood by the gate, and saw Joachim coming, and she ran anti hung upon his neck, saying: Now I know that the Lord God hath blessed me exceedingly; for, behold the widow no longer a widow, and I the childless shall conceive. And Joachim rested the first day in his house.

...

8. And her parents went down marvelling, and praising the Lord God, because the child had not turned back. And Mary was in the temple of the Lord as if she were a dove that dwelt there, and she received food from the hand of an angel. And when she was twelve years old there was held a council of the priests, saying: Behold, Mary has reached the age of twelve years in the temple of the Lord. What then shall we do with her, test perchance she defile the sanctuary of the Lord? And they said to the high priest: Thou standest by the altar of the Lord; go in, and pray concerning her; and whatever the Lord shall manifest unto thee, that also will we do. And the high priest went in, taking the robe with the twelve bells into the holy of holies; and he prayed concerning her. And behold an angel of the Lord stood by him, saying unto him: Zacharias, Zacharias, go out and assemble the widowers of the people, and let them bring each his rod; and to whomsoever the Lord shall show a sign, his wife shall she be. And the heralds went out through all the circuit of Judaea, and the trumpet of the Lord sounded, and all ran.

9. And Joseph, throwing away his axe, went out to meet them; and when they had assembled, they went away to the high priest, taking with them their rods. And he, taking the rods of all of them, entered into the temple, and prayed; and having ended his prayer, he took the rods and came out, and gave them to them: but there was no sign in them, and Joseph took his rod last; and, behold, a dove came out of the rod, and flew upon Joseph's head. And the priest said to Joseph, Thou hast been chosen by lot to take into thy keeping the virgin of the Lord. But Joseph refused, saying: I have children, and I am an old man, and she is a young girl. I am afraid lest I become a laughing-stock to the sons of Israel. And the priest said to Joseph: Fear the Lord thy God, and remember what the Lord did to Dathan, and Abiram, and Korah; how the earth opened, and they were swallowed up on account of their contradiction. And now fear, O Joseph, lest the same things happen in thy house. And Joseph was afraid, and took her into his keeping. And Joseph said to Mary: Behold, I have received thee from the temple of the Lord; and now I leave thee in my house, and go away to build my buildings, and I shall come to thee. The Lord will protect thee.

Such stories do not come out of nowhere; there were, I conjecture, stories of a similar kind in circulation among Christians, and possibly among heretics too, at that time (the early second century AD).

Thus the evidence upon which the Church relies for the doctrine of the perpetual virginity of Mary is found both in scripture and in the early church.

 

[sunlover1]

Originally Posted by sunlover1
And I didn't "eat my dessert" until after I had brought forth my firstborn.

and I didn't "use my fishing boat", until after I had brought forth my "first" born.

and didn't know her sexually until she had brought forth her firstborn son.


Not sure why I'd mention desserts and boats since they never happen even
in the future.
God musta goofed up this one time?
​

It is probably the most economic way that anyone could state in Greek, that Jesus birth was not the result of sexual intercourse.

Or maybe the most economical way to say he didn't know her WHILE
she was pregnant....just like it says..?

That is what the Gospel writer is telling us. He is not delving into the intimacies of Joseph and Mary's relationship which have absolutely nothing to do with the Gospel. Can you think of anything written in the Gospels which is unnecessary or redundant for knowledge leading to salvation?
You're right, God musta goofed up!

I think men goofed up and are too proud to change it.
Some groups "can't be wrong" even go so far as to
Kinda stupid and causes a lot of confusion, imo.

Brother means cousin, "until" means "never",
blessed means without sin, "no one" means
"no one except Mary", and so forth

More likely, you've been having desserts on your fishing boat.

You are brilliant !

 

[prodromos]

Or maybe the most economical way to say he didn't know her WHILE
she was pregnant....just like it says..?

I guess you believe the Gospels give us unnecessary intimate details of peoples' personal lives which do not pertain to salvation? Can you perhaps provide some other examples where the Gospel writers do this?

 

[Epiphoskei]

Without the reference to Jesus' birth, what you have suggested would be revealing intimacy details completely irrelevant to the Gospel.

There are arguably hundreds of facts with roughly equal Gospel irrelevancy throughout the gospels. And since Mary and Joseph's sex or lack of it was allegedly important enough that a valid tradition concerning it was preserved throughout early church history, it's fairly problematic to suggest the church of the first century was respecting the privacy of intimacy details while simultaneously passing these details down in tradition.

 

[prodromos]

There are arguably hundreds of facts with roughly equal Gospel irrelevancy throughout the gospels.

Examples?

And since Mary and Joseph's sex or lack of it was allegedly important enough that a valid tradition concerning it was preserved throughout early church history, it's fairly problematic to suggest the church of the first century was respecting the privacy of intimacy details while simultaneously passing these details down in tradition.

Preserving the knowledge that Mary remained a virgin doesn't even bring sex into the picture. There is no intimacy to be exposed.

 

[Epiphoskei]

Examples?

From the same chapter, all of verse 19 explaining Joseph's intention to divorce Mary. It makes the story flow and helps the narrative, but it's strictly not any more of a core gospel truth than, say, the duration of the virginity of Mary.

Preserving the knowledge that Mary remained a virgin doesn't even bring sex into the picture. There is no intimacy to be exposed.

Which means the Bible wouldn't be exposing anything by omitting "until she gave birth to a son."

 

[GratiaCorpusChristi]

I feel like Protestants wouldn't care about Mary's perpetual virginity if it wasn't such good ammunition in the fight to assert that Catholics don't really care about the Bible, since the Bible so strongly suggests Mary had other children.

So whether or not she was a perpetual virgin, I think it's really just about bashing Catholicism.

 

[GratiaCorpusChristi]

Which means the Bible wouldn't be exposing anything by omitting "until she gave birth to a son."

The Greek "until" doesn't imply what the English word does. The Septuagint uses the word to refer to actions that aren't performed until death. Are we to assume people performed those actions after death?