Source of Non-Ever Virgin POV

[Kristos]

Historically, what is the source of the teaching that Mary did not remain a Virgin?

I'm not looking for right or wrong here, but a historical trace of this teaching. Was it a product of the Reformation? Or perhaps a by-product? Are there any ancient teachings along these lines, and what happened to them?

Please cite your references, Name, date, title, etc. If you don't wish to cite your reference, please don't post because I'm not interested in your opinion. Thanks!

 

[Kristos]

I will start:

Atheist Richard Dawkins, in his 1976 book "The Selfish Gene" claims that Mary was not a Virgin based on mistranslations. One being of the prophecy in Isaiah - young woman versus virgin.

 

[PaladinValer]

I wouldn't say it is a mistranslation but simply using a difference source.

The Hebrew clearly says "young woman" whereas the inspired Greek Septuagint clearly says "virgin."

While I sympathize with those who are angry with the RSV and NRSV who "changed the words" in Isaiah 7:14, I remind them and the opposing party both that "young woman" doesn't mean that the young woman couldn't also be a virgin. They are not opposite terms.

The fact that the Septuagint (originally written by Jews, mind you!) has it "virgin" and the fact that the Septuagint was the official version of the Bible for the Early Church should make it quite clear that the young woman was also a virgin. That means that it is a clearly Marian/Messianic verse that probably had a more immediate meaning (another young woman with child around that time) as well as the more miraculous meaning (birth of Jesus and Virginity of St. Mary the Theotokos).

I therefore don't object to it being translated as "young woman," though I do wish that was the footnote and not "Gk virgin". A simple swaping solves a lot of problems and makes everyone happy.

 

[repentant]

Kristos, you know this thread will die, because there are absolutly none older than a few hundred years...even the first reformer's believed in the PV of Mary..

People just like to claim this and that, with absolutly nothing to back it up..except false interpretations of Scripture..

 

[PaladinValer]

I agree. Both Luther and Calvin adhered to that noble and true doctrine promulgated and canonized by the Ecumenical Councils.

 

[Epiphanygirl]

I wouldn't say it is a mistranslation but simply using a difference source.

The Hebrew clearly says "young woman" whereas the inspired Greek Septuagint clearly says "virgin."

While I sympathize with those who are angry with the RSV and NRSV who "changed the words" in Isaiah 7:14, I remind them and the opposing party both that "young woman" doesn't mean that the young woman couldn't also be a virgin. They are not opposite terms.

The fact that the Septuagint (originally written by Jews, mind you!) has it "virgin" and the fact that the Septuagint was the official version of the Bible for the Early Church should make it quite clear that the young woman was also a virgin. That means that it is a clearly Marian/Messianic verse that probably had a more immediate meaning (another young woman with child around that time) as well as the more miraculous meaning (birth of Jesus and Virginity of St. Mary the Theotokos).

I therefore don't object to it being translated as "young woman," though I do wish that was the footnote and not "Gk virgin". A simple swaping solves a lot of problems and makes everyone happy.

It's nice to see you posting again!!!! Welcome back, I was wondering what happened to you.

 

[Epiphanygirl]

Historically, what is the source of the teaching that Mary did not remain a Virgin?

I'm not looking for right or wrong here, but a historical trace of this teaching. Was it a product of the Reformation? Or perhaps a by-product? Are there any ancient teachings along these lines, and what happened to them?

Please cite your references, Name, date, title, etc. If you don't wish to cite your reference, please don't post because I'm not interested in your opinion. Thanks!

This has popped into my head from time to time, I never got around to starting a post about it, glad you did!
Much like the "Rapture" teaching that so many have been led astray with, this particular one I haven't found much written about....I would love to pinpoint what protestant denomination took this idea and ran with it.


**As for the ancient teachings.....well we all know that the Vatican has them all locked up in the secret library

 

[E.C.]

**As for the ancient teachings.....well we all know that the Vatican has them all locked up in the secret library

I've heard some are in Constantinople.

 

[Epiphanygirl]

I've heard some are in Constantinople.

**Sssshhhh.....that's the extra super secret vault....now the cats outta the bag

 

[repentant]

Some of the oldest writings are also at St. Katherine's Monastery at Mt. Sinai.

 

[Kristos]

Kristos, you know this thread will die, because there are absolutly none older than a few hundred years...even the first reformer's believed in the PV of Mary..

People just like to claim this and that, with absolutly nothing to back it up..except false interpretations of Scripture..

It looks that way doesn't it.

I am actually curious about the source.

It seems like it's coming from Atheists and has somehow infiltrated christian thought.

This wouldn't be the first time Atheistic thought has made it's way into protestantism - just look at cremation!

 

[PaladinValer]

Cremation isn't Atheistic but Gnostic/Manichean

 

[Rhamiel]

lets not get into gnostic infiltration into modern christianity, that could fill up three whole threads by itself.

 

[PaladinValer]

Using my Q powers, I could shrink those three threads into one short one...but I digress.

It seems as if the opposing side cannot find any Early Church evidence that suggests there was a doctrine that the BVM was non-celibate.

 

[Kristos]

Cremation isn't Atheistic but Gnostic/Manichean

I'm not talking about the origin, rather the source of the modern practice. There have been several noted Atheists in the past 100 years who championed the idea of cremation and for some reason people followed.

Origin seems to be more pagan than gnostic.

 

[Kristos]

Using my Q powers, I could shrink those three threads into one short one...but I digress.

It seems as if the opposing side cannot find any Early Church evidence that suggests there was a doctrine that the BVM was non-celibate.

I didn't even specify early church. Anyone - anytime - what is the source? Reformers - Luther? Calvin? Wesley? Anyone?

I can find more atheist source, but that seems trite.

 

[simonthezealot]

I agree. Both Luther and Calvin adhered to that noble and true doctrine promulgated and canonized by the Ecumenical Councils.

You are wrong about Luther...
Show me why you would state this, and I'll show you your statement is out of context.

EDITED:oops was thinking of IC doctrine.

 

[simonthezealot]

Historically, what is the source of the teaching that Mary did not remain a Virgin?

!

The bible.

 

[PaladinValer]

You are wrong about Luther...
Show me why you would state this, and I'll show you your statement is out of context.

http://socrates58.blogspot.com/2004/02/luther-calvin-and-other-early.html

The bible.

In reality, they were either cousins or his brothers and sisters through St. Joseph the Betrothed. You forget that in Jewish Law, if a widower remarries and has new children, all children he has under his previous marriage are Lawfully the siblings of his new children, being considered full brothers and sisters.

 

[Epiphanygirl]

http://socrates58.blogspot.com/2004/02/luther-calvin-and-other-early.html



In reality, they were either cousins or his brothers and sisters through St. Joseph the Betrothed. You forget that in Jewish Law, if a widower remarries and has new children, all children he has under his previous marriage are Lawfully the siblings of his new children, being considered full brothers and sisters.

I'm still searching for source info.....all I'm finding is debunking of the belief that Mary didn't remain a Virgin.