• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

Lets talk about the supposed vow of chastity of Mary

Status
Not open for further replies.

cobweb

Cranky octogenarian at heart
Jan 12, 2006
3,964
413
Georgia, USA
✟28,438.00
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married

I meant that it related the story of her being raised in the temple. You don't have to be nasty.
 
Upvote 0

washedagain

Resting in the Palm of His Hand
Jul 11, 2011
880
23
Austin Tx
✟23,654.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican


Incorrect. I was taught that this was truth.


Incorrect. I am simply asking for evidence. I have not said that my "stance" is "Mary had sex". I am asking for PROOF that Mary remained a perpetual virgin her entire life. I am looking for proof that Mary took a vow of celibacy, I am looking for something more than, "My church says so, so it must be true."

However, what evidence do you have that Mary had sex?

Start a new thread if you want to discuss the evidence that Mary may have had sex. This thread is about her SUPPOSED vow of perpetual chastity and the DOGMA of PV.


I mean, you clearly believe that she didn't remain a virgin. What evidence leads you to make that conclusion?

Clearly? that is not of particular importance to me.I don't know if she remained a virgin or not.(Athough there are scriptures that could be gleened from that suggest otherwise) Truth is, If it is true, that she is a perpetual virgin and is made a DOGMA that one must adhere to with threat of damnation, I would certainly have every reason to enquirer to its validity!
I'm not sure if believing in Mary's virginity is a salvific issue. And I don't know if those who teach Mary's virginity (like the Catholics and Orthodox) view it as a salvific issue, either.

If it is Dogma and you are Catholic, it is a salvific issue.

But here is the thing: when you say "Mary did not remain a virgin",

I have yet to say that in this thread

then you're disagreeing with hundreds of years of early church history.

Is Buddhism wrong? It has been around and has much, much, much more history than the Catholic Church.

You're not simply saying "Mary did not remain a virgin".

You're right... I have not simply said that.


You're also saying "...and my fellow brothers and sisters in Christ, who were filled with the same Holy Spirit I am, who I am going to see in Heaven for hundreds of years were believing the wrong thing."

Or they may be beleiving a false teaching... or not... I am asking for proof.

You are holding up your own opinion against hundreds of years of Christianity.

My opinion is that I have not recieved PROOF as of yet that it is true that she is a PV and it must, must, must be believed or fear damnation.
Now, I'm not saying "majority rules", but I think if you are going to make such a bold claim that flies in the face of hundreds of years of Christian history, you might want to quantify your position.

What bold claim??????????????????????????????????????? That I want PROOF that she took a vow of chastity and remained a virgin????? That is a bold claim? Seems more like a question, an inquiry to me.


The burden of proof rests on you and anyone else who says "Mary did not remain a virgin".

I suppose so if that is what I have said in this thread. Good thing I haven't.

... a DOGMA has been declared that Mary was purpetual virgin and a belief by many, that she took a vow of chastity. The burden of proof rests in someone, anyone PROVING that this dogma and this teaching is true.

Your turn.

Thanks!
 
Upvote 0

washedagain

Resting in the Palm of His Hand
Jul 11, 2011
880
23
Austin Tx
✟23,654.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Again, did you read Mary's life and Anna's before the "pledge"? Did you think why she and Joseph (who was nearly twice her age) were betrothed? Think backt to the "stoning" part of the Jewish tradition at that time. That'll help you out.

LOL.... this cracks me up... where do I read any of this?????? In Scripture? WHERE? How do you know that Joseph was twice her age????? WHO told you this and what was their evidence?

What about the stoning part????????? Scripture flat out says that that they were betrothed prior to the visitation of the angel. It is right there in black and white!

26 In the sixth month of Elizabeth’s pregnancy, God sent the angel Gabriel to Nazareth, a town in Galilee, 27 to a virgin pledged to be married to a man named Joseph, a descendant of David.
 
Upvote 0
T

Thekla

Guest
Thank you (FINALLY) for the honesty.


1. There is NO substantiation for the point here that Mary made a vow and the exact content of said vow. Nothing.

I have stated the same on several occasions.

And there is no indication that her clearly stated intention to not ever know a man was not the result of a vow.


2. There is NO substantiation for it being a dogmatic fact of highest importance to all and greatest certainty of Truth that Mary Had No Sex EVER. Nothing.
There is - the passages in Luke, if we trust that what Luke wrote was accurate, and we take Mary at her word (ie if we agree that Mary was not lying).





Actually, Josiah, you have never describes what is needed for something to be "proved to the highest level possible".

Please do so; otherwise there can be no response as it cannot be know what you mean by this.




But you are very wrong on one point:

Luke does NOT state that Mary had no INTENTION to EVER have sex. Not that intention = dogmatic evidence, but Luke says NOTHING about Her intention (and I think you know that).

I fully and adamantly disagree with you.
I have given the evidence; you are a Physics major, I was a Literature major. The scan of the text on its own clearly supports that Mary did not ever intend to engage in sexual relations. The greater context of the Holy Scriptures as well as the subtext (here cultural - Midrash, Old Testament, etc.) support what the Lukan passages demonstrate; no intention on Mary's part to ever have marital relations.




I think it is you who have remained at your default position -" we" are not in agreement on your position.










.[/quote]
 
Upvote 0

CaliforniaJosiah

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Aug 6, 2005
17,496
1,568
✟229,195.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Republican
And there is no indication that her clearly stated intention to not ever know a man was not the result of a vow.


1. Let's say there is no indication that you can prove that Columbus ever ate fish during his historic journey westward, does that prove that it is a dogmatic fact of highest importance to all and greatest certainty of Truth that he ate exactly 14.5 ounces of fish per day during that journey? Do you see the "problem" of your apologetic? What "indications" do you have that Joseph Smith didn't find those plates? If you have nothing of consequence (even to the degree that you have for Mary had no sex ever), is that confirmation to the highest level possible that it is a matter of highest importance to all and greatest certainty of Truth that he did?


2. What "clearly stated intention?" How is her intention confirmation of it's fulfullment (even if you have ANYTHING to indicate such a vow, which has not yet been provided)?





There is - the passages in Luke, if we trust that what Luke wrote was accurate, and we take Mary at her word (ie if we agree that Mary was not lying).

Luke says NOTHING of Her status in this regard at the moment of Her death ( or was it undeath - what is the EO teaching there?). It may well be that Luke was written before Her death. Luke says NOTHING about Her sex life after Jesus was born.






The scan of the text on its own clearly supports that Mary did not ever intend to engage in sexual relations.

I completely disagree. There is NOTHING in Luke - in this text or any other, that says Mary had no sex ever - or even that it was her INTENT to have no sex ever. There's NOTHING about Her at the moment of Her death (or was it undeath)?

Yes, AT THE ANNUNCIATION, Mary states that She IS (Present tense) a virgin. I'll state here and now, "I AM a virgin." A true statement. How does that confirm that it is a dogmatic fact of highest importance to all and greatest certainty of Truth that I will remain such throughout and up to the second of my death (or undeath)? It doesn't.


.
 
Upvote 0

Dorothea

One of God's handmaidens
Jul 10, 2007
21,649
3,635
Colorado Springs, Colorado
✟273,491.00
Country
United States
Gender
Female
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
You have given opinion... not PROOF.
I see, so you buy hook, line, and sinker all stuff that is documented in US history, but you don't bother to believe the Church's history.

I don't even know how you read the Bible without proper historical background and understanding the traditions of the time. It seems it would be awfully difficult and incomplete.

Scriptural proof was given by Thekla on countless occasions through Luke and the OT she talked about. Apparently that isn't good enough.

So, anyhow, you don't believe history when it comes to Church, but I'm betting you believe other history without any problem. Again, I think it's your being brought up to be anti-Catholic because you seem to have brought that out to mr in your response to him, and bunch us Orthodox up with the Catholics, as if we're the same. Again, some research on our beliefs and our whole holistic, ascetic, and spiritual mindset and doctrines/dogmas would see that we are different, but we do share the belief in Mary because both Churches actually preserve and value the history of the Church.

Again, it's not good enough because you'd have to agree with a Catholic on something. Heaven forbid!
 
Reactions: Tzaousios
Upvote 0
T

Thekla

Guest

Do you have dogmatic beliefs ?

What is your standard for dogma ?

We have provided linguistic, Biblical (including the use of "types"), cultural and historical support for our belief on this matter.

The result of the textual analysis of the Lukan passages is clear.
 
Reactions: Dorothea
Upvote 0
T

Thekla

Guest

Her stated intention may or may not have been a vow.

Can you prove that Mary never made a vow ?

2. What "clearly stated intention?" How is her intention confirmation of it's fulfullment (even if you have ANYTHING to indicate such a vow, which has not yet been provided)?

The analysis has been given repeatedly.





Luke says NOTHING of Her status in this regard at the moment of Her death ( or was it undeath - what is the EO teaching there?). It may well be that Luke was written before Her death. Luke says NOTHING about Her sex life after Jesus was born.

Why do you doubt Mary's word ?





I completely disagree. There is NOTHING in Luke - in this text or any other, that says Mary had no sex ever - or even that it was her INTENT to have no sex ever. There's NOTHING about Her at the moment of Her death (or was it undeath)?

So you think she changed her mind ?

You are mistaking the English present tense for the Hellenistic Greek present tense.

You have also disregarded the actual order of the recorded exchange with Gabriel.

It seems you read the text from your opinion, instead of engaging in a close analysis.
 
Reactions: Dorothea
Upvote 0

CaliforniaJosiah

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Aug 6, 2005
17,496
1,568
✟229,195.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Republican
Can you prove that Mary never made a vow ?

Since I have no position (much less DOGMA), I don't need to.

Can you prove that there are not 6.1 billion cute furry brown critters living on the Moon of Endor? IF not, does that confirmed that it is a dogmatic fact of highest importance to all and greatest certainty of Truth that there is?





The analysis has been given repeatedly.


I know. However creative. But so far, nothing to indicate that She made a vow, what was the content of said vow, and that at the moment of Her death (or was it undeath, what is the EO view there?) She was a virgin; that it is a dogmatic fact of highest importance to all and greatest certainty of Truth that Mary Had No Sex EVER.




Why do you doubt Mary's word ?


I don't. Where did she say, "I had no sex ever?" Or even "It is my intention to have no sex ever?" We both know, She didn't.





You have also disregarded the actual order of the recorded exchange with Gabriel.


No.


I'm simply noting what was said and not said.

And, yes, I'm viewing it via the ancient Catholic (is it also EO?) Tradition that embraces that the Annunciation and the Incarnation happened ON THE SAME DAY. If this tradition is true, then Mary's reply in the present tense makes perfect sense. In any case, my saying "I am a virgin" is not confirmation that I'm a perpetual virgin - that at the moment of my death (or undeath), I WILL BE a virgin. I think you know that.







.
 
Upvote 0

washedagain

Resting in the Palm of His Hand
Jul 11, 2011
880
23
Austin Tx
✟23,654.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
=Dorothea;58272619]I see, so you buy hook, line, and sinker all stuff that is documented in US history, but you don't bother to believe the Church's history.


If someone in the year 2009 came out and said that George Washington liked to wear his wife's clothing, I would find that suspect as it is reported over 200 years later without evidence. Same with many of of the RCF's.

I don't even know how you read the Bible without proper historical background and understanding the traditions of the time. It seems it would be awfully difficult and incomplete.

And no one is asking you to.

Scriptural proof was given by Thekla on countless occasions through Luke and the OT she talked about. Apparently that isn't good enough.

Yes, that is correct as there in nothing in Luke that suggests that Mary took a vow of celibacy nor that she is exclaiming perpetual virginity.

So, anyhow, you don't believe history when it comes to Church, but I'm betting you believe other history without any problem.

History is one thing... someone proclaiming something centuries later without evidence is suspect.

Again, I think it's your being brought up to be anti-Catholic because you seem to have brought that out to mr in your response to him, and bunch us Orthodox up with the Catholics, as if we're the same.

I was brought up Catholic.


Again, some research on our beliefs and our whole holistic, ascetic, and spiritual mindset and doctrines/dogmas would see that we are different,

Yes, I know that you are.

but we do share the belief in Mary because both Churches actually preserve and value the history of the Church.

So?

Again, it's not good enough because you'd have to agree with a Catholic on something. Heaven forbid!

I have no problem agreeing with a Catholic if they can PROVE their case... in this case, you haven't.
 
Upvote 0

washedagain

Resting in the Palm of His Hand
Jul 11, 2011
880
23
Austin Tx
✟23,654.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
=Thekla;58272883]Do you have dogmatic beliefs ?


Of course... it is called the bible.

What is your standard for dogma ?

God's word.

We have provided linguistic, Biblical (including the use of "types"), cultural and historical support for our belief on this matter.


No you haven't... you have not proven that Mary ever made a vow of celebacy nor have you proven that she is ever virgin.

The result of the textual analysis of the Lukan passages is clear.

No it's not. There is nothing indicated in her response that she was planing to NEVER have sex.
 
Upvote 0

washedagain

Resting in the Palm of His Hand
Jul 11, 2011
880
23
Austin Tx
✟23,654.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican


Amen and amen.
 
Upvote 0
T

Thekla

Guest
Since I have no position (much less DOGMA), I don't need to.

This is what I actually posted:
Her stated intention may or may not have been a vow.

Can you prove that Mary never made a vow ?

Your personal opinion on the matter is not relevant; you claim the vow cannot be proven. I asked if you can prove the obverse; I did not ask for your opinion.
Can you prove that there are not 6.1 billion cute furry brown critters living on the Moon of Endor? IF not, does that confirmed that it is a dogmatic fact of highest importance to all and greatest certainty of Truth that there is?
You have never described your standard for confirming dogma.
How can the "required" evidence be given when what is "required" is unknown ? (Rather Kafka-esque ...)




Actually, text analysis is not a matter of creativity.
It requires a pointed investigation of all aspects of the language used by the writer.
It may require a certain degree of flexibility of thought, as one must consider several aspects singly and also in relation to the whole: linguistic ground, grammar, word choice (what is vs. what is not chosen by the author), context (immediate and broader), ordinal flow, intended audience, rhetorical device/s, style (author's voice), author's corpus, subtext, historical period, and logic - and this is a partial list.

Your opinion on the passages in question has missed several factors, thus falling short of analysis.




I don't. Where did she say, "I had no sex ever?" Or even "It is my intention to have no sex ever?" We both know, She didn't.
The present is not a tense of time, but state -- you have mistaken "present tense" for the English present tense. They are not the same. Her statement is further supported by the ordinal flow of the passages as concepts are revealed one at a time (as is typical in conversations where each speaker's statements are brief) and she responds to each.

No.
I'm simply noting what was said and not said.
Actually, perhaps you are not accustomed to really deeply reading and analyzing text, as your opinion does not demonstrate an understanding of the logical progression of the conversation.

Present tense is not a time, but a statement of what is ongoing.
Even in the English understanding of present tense, your opinion demonstrates a failure to read the conversation as a progressive, incremental revealing of information in "real time".

Here it is, in English, with the numbers corresponding to the order of information revealed in "real time" and the English tenses of the statements described in parenthesis:

1. Gabriel - " ...you will conceive ..." (future time)

2.Mary - "I do not know ..." (English present time, while betrothed to be married at a future time)

3.Gabriel - "... will conceive by the Holy Spirit ..." (future time)

You will note that in order for your opinion to be correct, Mary must know the information given in 3. at the time of 1.
IE, your opinion relies on Mary knowing what Gabriel says (3) before he says it (at 1) in order for her response (2) to make sense.

Your opinion is not supported by an analysis of the Greek text (understandable), but is also not supported by the English translation.
 
Reactions: Dorothea
Upvote 0
T

Thekla

Guest
LOL...... textual analysis doesn't say that she made a vow to be an ever virgin nor does it say that she never had sex.

You are correct; it does not demonstrate a vow.
One may see that a vow is implied, or not.

It does demonstrate that she did not intend to engage in sexual relations in marriage.

Here then, one must assume that Mary was or was not reliable in her statements. I think she was reliable in her statements. Firstly, I have no reason to doubt what she said of her own intention; secondly, she is known to have heard and kept the word of God, resulting in the birth of Jesus Christ.
 
Reactions: Dorothea
Upvote 0

Dorothea

One of God's handmaidens
Jul 10, 2007
21,649
3,635
Colorado Springs, Colorado
✟273,491.00
Country
United States
Gender
Female
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
Yep, but they keep saying the same thing over and over, ignoring the support we give them. Blinders on, I say.
 
Upvote 0

washedagain

Resting in the Palm of His Hand
Jul 11, 2011
880
23
Austin Tx
✟23,654.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
=Thekla;58274192]You are correct; it does not demonstrate a vow.
One may see that a vow is implied, or not.


Yes that is correct.
It does demonstrate that she did not intend to engage in sexual relations in marriage.

Where????????????????????????????? Simply because at that moment she had not been with a man?

Here then, one must assume that Mary was or was not reliable in her statements.

Assumptions are dangerous and you know what they say about them


I think she was reliable in her statements.

You think???????? Really??????

Firstly, I have no reason to doubt what she said of her own intention;

I don't doubt here either as she is good Jewish girl... God would not have chosen a hussy.


secondly, she is known to have heard and kept the word of God, resulting in the birth of Jesus Christ.

Of course we know that she kept herself because scripture tells us that Joseph knew her NOT till Jesus was born.... She was a virgin upon Jesus' birth.
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.