Mary always a virgin?

[Terri]

Hi there!



It isn't about "reputations" or "blessings", but just simply "truth" that is not influenced by ratings.

I don't want the blessings or the reputations. Thanks you, though, for your kind remarks. ... and back to the posting...


~serapha~

Well, I hope you don't mind an extra hug! I sure love the truth!!

 

[Serapha]

Hello All,




I want to add another point. According to all the available references in the Bible, it would be evident that Mary and Joseph were living a strict, Jewish life under Hasidic teachings which was the teaching in the synagogue in Nazareth.

The Hasidics were VERY strict to Torah teachings, which would have included the interpretation of Genesis to "be fruitful and multiply" even more so than the Sadducess, Pharasees, or the Essenes.

~serapha~

 

[Cary.Melvin]

Hi there!



I am jumping in on this question after about 140 responses. I read about half of the responses and never saw the original question answered.


"Did the Jews have no rule like this? Would it really have been considered acceptable for Mary and Joseph to never have sex? Wouldn't that have a serious negative impact on their marriage?"


In first-century Judaism, there were two parts to the marriage ceremony. The first part was the religious ceremony. The second part was the consumation of the marriage. If the marriage was not consumated, it would not be a valid marriage in Jewish tradition. Mary and Joseph were certainly aware of the fact that consumation of the marriage was a necessity for the marriage to be recognized by God.

Either they were married by the law and living as husband and wife before God, or they were living a lie before man.


~serapha~

Well, I think that Joseph and Mary's marraige can hardly be called normal.

I believe that God allowed Joseph to be the husband of Mary to fill the roll of protector of Mary and father figure to Jesus. But I think that was the extent of their marraige. By Mary being the Mother of Jesus, this would make her the spouse of God which was consumated by the Holy Sprit. For Joseph to have relations with Mary would be adutry in the eyes of God and I think Mary and Josheph were smart enough to realise this.

 

[tigersnare]

Well your thread turned into a bit of a fight pretty quickly, you poor old thing

I think it looks like the answer is " the jury is still out on this one"

Anyway whatever the case, it has little bearing on the fact that Jesus is the Way the Truth and the Life

John 14:6
Jesus answered, "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me

Bless Ya
Col <><

Sorry I'm alittle late here. Personally I don't care if she remained a virgin or not. It would have no bearing on my life. Mary was a great,strong,and faithful women. How much further should I honor her than that? I dont know, I dont' think I need to build a temple to her, or thank her for my salvation in my prayers.

Why? Basically Mary isn't the heart of the Gospel, I'd rather walk around wondering about the mysteries of Jesus, the words of Jesus, the actions of Jesus, the teachings of Jesus. Personally I see Jesus as my savior, my intercessor, my mediator....why? Becuase scripture says he is all the above, I don't tell unsaved brothers and sisters about Mary, why? Becuase there is power in the name of the Lord, every knee shall bow to Jesus.

 

[BBAS 64]

Hello All,




I want to add another point. According to all the available references in the Bible, it would be evident that Mary and Joseph were living a strict, Jewish life under Hasidic teachings which was the teaching in the synagogue in Nazareth.

The Hasidics were VERY strict to Torah teachings, which would have included the interpretation of Genesis to "be fruitful and multiply" even more so than the Sadducess, Pharasees, or the Essenes.

~serapha~

Good day , Serapha

I would have to agree with you here as to your assement of the Jewish Traditions of the time of Christ. May be If you asked this question of a Jewish historian you may get more info that is steeped in the historical reality of the time.

We must never forget IMHO that these were ALL Jewish peolple who took their history and Traditions seriously. All be it like most Traditions they had their faults. I think that does not negate the people's devotions to them for they are still God's only chosen people.

Maybe if you asked you question on the MJ fourm they may have some insight in this matter?

Peace to u,

BBAS

 

[tigersnare]

You know what....nevermind...unfruitful post on my behalf.

 

[Miss Shelby]

Problem #1 Protestants dont' see a "St. Joseph", they see Joseph, Mary's Husband, the Carpenter. Therefore they are not going to "honor" him as you do the Catholic "Saints". Don't expect that and perhaps you won't be disappointed.

Is that so? So what do you call it when Protestant Churches have names such as St. Matthew's Lutheran Church and things of that nature? Is that not honoring them?

Michelle

 

[thereselittleflower]

It is not that verse alone that proves it.

I am not sure if you are saying it does not prove it alone . . but I will take your response to mean that this verse, by itself, does not prove that Joseph and Mary had normal marital relations after Jesus was born . .

The question I asked was very specific . . if this verse alone proved that they had normal marital relations after Jesus was born in light of scripture passages in which the word "until" (the same Greek word used as in Matt 1:25) is used when the previous condition or state continued after the point in time the word "until" designated. . . ?

So, if I misunderstood your answer (I am not arguing the rightness or wrongness of it) please feel free to clarify . .

God bless you in love and peace!


Peace in Him!

 

[BBAS 64]

Well, I think that Joseph and Mary's marraige can hardly be called normal.

I believe that God allowed Joseph to be the husband of Mary to fill the roll of protector of Mary and father figure to Jesus. But I think that was the extent of their marraige. By Mary being the Mother of Jesus, this would make her the spouse of God which was consumated by the Holy Sprit. For Joseph to have relations with Mary would be adutry in the eyes of God and I think Mary and Josheph were smart enough to realise this.

Good Day, Cary

A question if I may let us just say for the sake of this issue we assume that what you think to be the case as wrong. Also your presumptions of how God relates to a commandment given to man for man.

Explain what is the effect on the life and finished work of Jesus if all your thinking was wrong. Futher more how are we effected today in the 21 st century?

Peace to u,

BBAS

 

[Ryder]

I think Joseph and Mary had a normal marriage after Jesus was born. I think they had other kids too. I take certain references to Jesus' brothers to be references to literal/physical/bodily brothers (or half brothers more accurately) and not just 'spiritual' brothers, in specific cases. I don't see how this dishonors God or anything, in my humble opinion.

 

[FreeinChrist]

The question I asked was very specific . . if this verse alone proved that they had normal marital relations after Jesus was born in light of scripture passages in which the word "until" (the same Greek word used as in Matt 1:25) is used when the previous condition or state continued after the point in time the word "until" designated. . . ?

So, if I misunderstood your answer (I am not arguing the rightness or wrongness of it) please feel free to clarify . .

Therese, I believe I made myself clear. You claim that the Protestant view is that this one verse is proof that Mary and Joseph had marital relations. I am familiar with many Protestant views, and have found that they use this as one of the verses that shows they had marital relations after the birth of Christ, like an obedient Jewish couple would. I don't doubt that some may make the claim that it is the only proof needed, but seems that most feel it is one of several verses that back it up.

I believe 'until' means 'until'. I have already explained the verses you have picked to try and show that 'until' does not mean 'until', and showed that yes, there was a time element in them. For instance, when Paul writes to Timothy and and instructs him to study and heed doctrine until he comes. So that is what Timothy was to do. Then when Paul came, they could discuss. It doesn't preclude Timothy later picking up scripture to study, but 'until' DOES mean until in that verse.

One needs to study scripture in light of the context it is written. This is in regards to the whole passage, and who is saying what to whom and why, cnd can include why the letter or book is written in the first place, and must be understood in light of the overall message of God found in scripture.

Mary gave birth to Christ - she was no longer the "vessel" as Catholics put it (which I find a disrespectful term, but that's MHO). There is NO indication in scripture that Joseph and Mary were less than a proper Jewish couple, who followed Jewish Law. NOR is there any reason why God would consider matrimony, which is God-ordained, to be unholy. I don't know about others, but when I got married in a church with the blessings of God, I entered holy matrimony . It is not shameful, or sinful, and is blessed by God.

 

[thereselittleflower]

Hi there!



I am jumping in on this question after about 140 responses. I read about half of the responses and never saw the original question answered.


"Did the Jews have no rule like this? Would it really have been considered acceptable for Mary and Joseph to never have sex? Wouldn't that have a serious negative impact on their marriage?"


In first-century Judaism, there were two parts to the marriage ceremony. The first part was the religious ceremony. The second part was the consumation of the marriage. If the marriage was not consumated, it would not be a valid marriage in Jewish tradition. Mary and Joseph were certainly aware of the fact that consumation of the marriage was a necessity for the marriage to be recognized by God.

Either they were married by the law and living as husband and wife before God, or they were living a lie before man.


~serapha~

Hi serapha

If I can ask a question about this . . when the Jewish wedding ceremony takes place, when does the second part of the marraige ceremony take place as you mentioned above? Are you speaking of the yihud?

Peace in Him!

 

[Cary.Melvin]

A question if I may let us just say for the sake of this issue we assume that what you think to be the case as wrong.

The reason I think this way is because it is based on the apostolic teachings of Catholic Church (which I believe is infalible on such matters).

Also your presumptions of how God relates to a commandment given to man for man.

Joseph was a man. I think that the law against adultry would apply to him.

Explain what is the effect on the life and finished work of Jesus if all your thinking was wrong. Futher more how are we effected today in the 21 st century?

I believe that the effect that Mary's Ever-virginity has is that it further attests to the divinity of Jesus. It would be expected that the holy vessle that carried the Son of God, would not be defiled in such a manner.

I am effected today by knowing that not only do I have a father and brother in God, but also a mother in the faith. A most rightious mother to all christians who we can ask for intersecion. Also as an example to all christians a goal to shoot for in her lessons of rightiousness and obeidiance.

 

[thereselittleflower]

Therese, I believe I made myself clear. You claim that the Protestant view is that this one verse is proof that Mary and Joseph had marital relations. I am familiar with many Protestant views, and have found that they use this as one of the verses that shows they had marital relations after the birth of Christ, like an obedient Jewish couple would. I don't doubt that some may make the claim that it is the only proof needed, but seems that most feel it is one of several verses that back it up.

I am looking for a simple answer . . . yes or no . . not "it is one of" . .

I would think that if the answer was "Yes" then you would not hesitate to say "yes' . .

That you do not give a clear "no, it does not prove it by itself" in the absence of a clear "yes, it does" speaks volumes and that silence is in itself an answer . .

Side stepping a request for a clear yes or no answer with one that is ambiguous does not clearly answer a question . .

I am only asking about that one verse, standing by itself, not any other proof you want to use with it . . just that verse . . . I am sad that you keep wanting to expand your answer to address things I am not asking about. . .


Trying to glean your position from your answers, I think you are saying this:

"No, by itself this verse does not prove that Mary and Joseph had normal marital relations after Jesus was born. But I believe that this verse, in conjuction with other proofs do prove it."

That would be a clear answer . . .

Is this what you are saying? A simple yes or no will suffice.

Otherwise, I see no further point in trying to understand your position further . .



Peace in Him!

 

[KennySe]

Mary gave birth to Christ - she was no longer the "vessel" as Catholics put it (which I find a disrespectful term, but that's MHO). There is NO indication in scripture that Joseph and Mary were less than a proper Jewish couple, who followed Jewish Law. NOR is there any reason why God would consider matrimony, which is God-ordained, to be unholy. I don't know about others, but when I got married in a church with the blessings of God, I entered holy matrimony . It is not shameful, or sinful, and is blessed by God.

Would you please consider asking Catholics their position on Holy Matrimony?
(I invite you to OBOB.)

 

[BBAS 64]

Thank you Cary

Peace to u,

BBAS

 

[tigersnare]

Is that so? So what do you call it when Protestant Churches have names such as St. Matthew's Lutheran Church and things of that nature? Is that not honoring them?

Michelle

I'd rather not debate or argue about this. It's totally pointless, I'll walk away feeling right, and so will you. Who won? The enemy.

 

[FreeinChrist]

[/color][/size]

I am looking for a simple answer . . . yes or no . . not "it is one of" . .

I would think that if the answer was "Yes" then you would not hesitate to say "yes' . .

That you do not give a clear "no, it does not prove it by itself" in the absence of a clear "yes, it does" speaks volumes and that silence is in itself an answer . .

Side stepping a request for a clear yes or no answer with one that is ambiguous does not clearly answer a question . .
I am only asking about that one verse, standing by itself, not any other proof you want to use with it . . just that verse . . . I am sad that you keep wanting to expand your answer to address things I am not asking about. . .

So now you change your original question furthur by stating you were asking for just a 'yes' or 'no', and now accuse me of sidestepping. Nor was my response to in the least ambiguous - you are just tossing out unsupported accusation here, Therese.

Therese, I gave you an honest answer to how I believe that verse should be interpreted and understood.

Did you not read what I wrote regarding interpreting scripture in light of the whole passage and of the the whole message of God?? Apparently not. It is POOR hermenuetics to take a verse and just derive dogma from it. I believe that is how the inquisitors found their justification to burn people at the stake.
In the case of Mathew 1:24 - 25, I strongly believe that the Biblical evidence supports the Protestant interpretation that Joseph refrained from maritial relations until the birth of Christ, and then they were fully man and wife. Other evidence has been given in this thread, but you apparently choose not to see it.

Otherwise, I see no further point in trying to understand your position further . .

 

[FreeinChrist]

Would you please consider asking Catholics their position on Holy Matrimony?
(I invite you to OBOB.)

I see no point in doing so. I am married to a Catholic man. When I was married, there was a Catholic priest and a Baptist minister officiating. I spent much time in discussion about marriage and doctrine, so I understand alot more than you probably think.

Besides, any discussion I would have in the OBOB forum will change my position on Mary in regards to her virginity. This is not the first year I have been discussing it. And I have been very solid in my position for the last 40 some years.

 

[Miss Shelby]

I'd rather not debate or argue about this. It's totally pointless, I'll walk away feeling right, and so will you. Who won? The enemy.

tigersnare,

Pardon me for asking. I realize it is off topic, but it was just something that occured to me while drivng down the road the other day and I passed a Lutheran Church that was named St. Matthews.

That is a form of honor or veneration to a Saint, isn't it? I am just pointing out that some Protestant denominations DO honor Saints. If I am wrong and am misrepresenting them, I'm sorry.

Michelle