When did Mary's hymen break?

Eloy Craft

Myth only points, Truth happened!
Supporter
Jan 9, 2018
3,132
871
Chandler
✟386,808.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
The Bible names her children (plural). But if you want to believe the RCC or Orthodox on that, it is not a big deal. I choose scripture over any falsely based traditions.

This is a written by someone I'm acquainted with. It's scriptural.


Well let’s do the math. Listed is 4 brothers plus Jesus makes 5 and it says all sisters not both so that is at least 3, which brings us to 8.

Since it is known that back then 25% of all babies died within the first year of life and 50% died by age 10, we can estimate Mary had 12 to 16 pregnancies. That's a lot of fruit making.


Now we also know from Luke 2:41-42 that only Jesus, Mary and Joseph went to the temple. So we can determine that up until the time Jesus was 12 no other brothers and sisters were born.

We also know that Jesus was around 30 in the verses in question.

So that means the other siblings must have been born in the 18 years between Luke 2 and Matthew 13.

Only Jesus and Mary were present at the wedding at Cana, so it is safe to assume that all of the other Children must have been at least 12 for Mary to leave them Home Alone

I think you see where I’m going with this…

Which seems more plausible, these brothers and sisters were cousins or Mary had 7 other children in 6 years?

Hope this helps some.

Your friend is grasping at straws.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

1stcenturylady

Spirit-filled follower of Christ
Supporter
Feb 13, 2017
11,189
4,193
76
Tennessee
✟431,122.00
Country
United States
Faith
Charismatic
Marital Status
Celibate
Politics
US-Republican
Your friend is grasping at straws.

My friend, the Bible, is grasping at straws? I think not.

If Mary and Joseph only had one child, Jesus, when He was 12, don't you think they could have kept track of Him. By 12, Mary, around 28 would have had younger children to keep track of. When they discovered Jesus missing, the younger children could have gone home with relatives, leaving His parents to search for Him. And between 12 and the time Jesus was 30, she could have had more. I don't see any problem.
 
Upvote 0

RDKirk

Alien, Pilgrim, and Sojourner
Supporter
Mar 3, 2013
39,140
20,187
US
✟1,441,679.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
My friend, the Bible, is grasping at straws? I think not.

If Mary and Joseph only had one child, Jesus, when He was 12, don't you think they could have kept track of Him. By 12, Mary, around 28 would have had younger children to keep track of. When they discovered Jesus missing, the younger children could have gone home with relatives, leaving His parents to search for Him. And between 12 and the time Jesus was 30, she could have had more. I don't see any problem.

It answers both questions if Mary were a second wife and Joseph had had older children by an earlier, now deceased, wife.

At age 12, Jesus would no longer have been kept under Mary's hem. He would have been in the company of older male siblings and male cousins. Luke 2:41,42 does not preclude that other siblings went to the temple with them, but it would also be logical that they would have taken Jesus in particular, or even alone because He was the child at the age to "put away childish things" and be presented before the elders as the new "man" in the family.

After that, He'd have gone back into the company of the crowd of male relatives--where, indeed, scripture says Mary and Joseph thought He was--until they realized they hadn't seen Him at all three days later.
 
Upvote 0

1stcenturylady

Spirit-filled follower of Christ
Supporter
Feb 13, 2017
11,189
4,193
76
Tennessee
✟431,122.00
Country
United States
Faith
Charismatic
Marital Status
Celibate
Politics
US-Republican
It answers both questions if Mary were a second wife and Joseph had had older children by an earlier, now deceased, wife.

At age 12, Jesus would no longer have been kept under Mary's hem. He would have been in the company of older male siblings and male cousins. Luke 2:41,42 does not preclude that other siblings went to the temple with them, but it would also be logical that they would have taken Jesus in particular, or even alone because He was the child at the age to "put away childish things" and be presented before the elders as the new "man" in the family.

After that, He'd have gone back into the company of the crowd of male relatives--where, indeed, scripture says Mary and Joseph thought He was--until they realized they hadn't seen Him at all three days later.

Where does it say that Joseph was a widower and had previous children?
 
Upvote 0

ViaCrucis

Confessional Lutheran
Oct 2, 2011
37,342
26,787
Pacific Northwest
✟728,236.00
Country
United States
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
In Relationship
Politics
US-Others
Where does it say that Joseph was a widower and had previous children?

The same place it says that Mary gave birth to other children beside Jesus.

-CryptoLutheran
 
Upvote 0

1stcenturylady

Spirit-filled follower of Christ
Supporter
Feb 13, 2017
11,189
4,193
76
Tennessee
✟431,122.00
Country
United States
Faith
Charismatic
Marital Status
Celibate
Politics
US-Republican
The same place it says that Mary gave birth to other children beside Jesus.

-CryptoLutheran

Where are the older children?

4 Joseph also went up from Galilee, out of the city of Nazareth, into Judea, to the city of David, which is called Bethlehem, because he was of the house and lineage of David, 5 to be registered with Mary, his betrothed wife, who was with child.
 
Upvote 0

Circumcised_Heart

Well-Known Member
Sep 24, 2017
408
501
LA
✟26,482.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Constitution
Lol. What a strange question. Isn't this like arguing about how many angels can dance on the head of a pin?

To me, it seems obvious that the hymen would have broken during birth, given that Mary had no intercourse prior to Jesus' birth. How does it matter theologically when her hymen broke?
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Eloy Craft

Myth only points, Truth happened!
Supporter
Jan 9, 2018
3,132
871
Chandler
✟386,808.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
To me, it seems obvious that the hymen would have broken during birth, given that Mary had no intercourse prior to Jesus' birth. How does it matter theologically when her hymen broke?
It doesn't matter to modern theologians. It did to ancient theologians who believed only a miraculous birth could preserve Mary's perpetual virginity.
 
Upvote 0

Eloy Craft

Myth only points, Truth happened!
Supporter
Jan 9, 2018
3,132
871
Chandler
✟386,808.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
My friend, the Bible, is grasping at straws? I think not.
Dear 1stcenturylady, it's certain that the bible is not doing any grasping.

If Mary and Joseph only had one child, Jesus, when He was 12, don't you think they could have kept track of Him. By 12, Mary, around 28 would have had younger children to keep track of. When they discovered Jesus missing, the younger children could have gone home with relatives, leaving His parents to search for Him. And between 12 and the time Jesus was 30, she could have had more. I don't see any problem.
They went every year and according to the Bible they thought they were keeping track of Him. He was entrusted to relatives. Also, Joseph and Mary would have never thought that Jesus would decide for Himself to stay behind. To them Jesus was doing wrong(committing a sin) for the first time. It's a sin to disobey authority that comes from above. From the account we see that Jesus knew the Law better than they did. He astonished the scribes and Pharisees with His knowledge of the Law. Twelve is the age when children become adults according to the Law. Jesus was acting accordingly. Jesus submitted Himself to their authority nevertheless.

Luke 2-43
“Child, why have you treated us like this? Look, your father and I have been searching for you in great anxiety.” 49 He said to them, “Why were you searching for me? Did you not know that I must be in my Father’s house?

50 But they did not understand what he said to them.

51- Then he went down with them and came to Nazareth, and was obedient to them. His mother treasured all these things in her heart.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

1stcenturylady

Spirit-filled follower of Christ
Supporter
Feb 13, 2017
11,189
4,193
76
Tennessee
✟431,122.00
Country
United States
Faith
Charismatic
Marital Status
Celibate
Politics
US-Republican
Dear 1stcenturylady, it's certain that the bible is not doing any grasping.

They went every year and according to the Bible they thought they were keeping track of Him. He was entrusted to relatives. Also, Joseph and Mary would have never thought that Jesus would decide for Himself to stay behind. To them Jesus was doing wrong(committing a sin) for the first time. It's a sin to disobey authority that comes from above. From the account we see that Jesus knew the Law better than they did. He astonished the scribes and Pharisees with His knowledge of the Law. Twelve is the age when children become adults according to the Law. Jesus was acting accordingly. Jesus submitted Himself to their authority nevertheless.

Luke 2-43
“Child, why have you treated us like this? Look, your father and I have been searching for you in great anxiety.” 49 He said to them, “Why were you searching for me? Did you not know that I must be in my Father’s house?

50 But they did not understand what he said to them.

51- Then he went down with them and came to Nazareth, and was obedient to them. His mother treasured all these things in her heart.

We are discussing whether Mary bore other children.
 
Upvote 0

Eloy Craft

Myth only points, Truth happened!
Supporter
Jan 9, 2018
3,132
871
Chandler
✟386,808.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
If Mary and Joseph only had one child, Jesus, when He was 12, don't you think they could have kept track of Him.
Your point being, that they lost track of Jesus because Mary was distracted by her other children? My objection points out that Mary's attention wasn't necessary, so, didn't lapse and become an opportunity for Jesus to stay behind. That would make Jesus a child that sins. Just all the rest of them do.

Edited out the smiley. I would rather break a stained glass window than offend the good 1stcenturylady. Very sorry if it was offensive.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Circumcised_Heart

Well-Known Member
Sep 24, 2017
408
501
LA
✟26,482.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Constitution
It doesn't matter to modern theologians. It did to ancient theologians who believed only a miraculous birth could preserve Mary's perpetual virginity.
What was the reason they wanted to believe in perpetual virginity for Mary, given mention of Jesus' "mother and brothers" in the bible, and God allowing Joseph to marry her?
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Eloy Craft

Myth only points, Truth happened!
Supporter
Jan 9, 2018
3,132
871
Chandler
✟386,808.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
What was the reason they wanted to believe in perpetual virginity for Mary, given mention of Jesus' "mother and brothers" in the bible, and God allowing Joseph to marry her?
As for brothers and sisters, the common understanding was, and is still, that the words used for siblings also served for cousins in the time and place that Jesus lived.

The perpetual virginity of Mary came to be universally believed by all Christians from earliest times. The belief in the perpetual virginity of Mary is doctrine from Sensus Fidelium.
Sensus fidelium - Wikipedia
The understanding is, basically, that because the belief became universal and persistent among the faithful it is a work of the Holy Spirit. That the office of Priest King ,Prophet of the laity is exercised in the Sensus Fidelium. Sense of the faithfull. This is the world that theologians studying Christ were born into.

Joseph was understood as a defender of Mary's virginity. He had vows of celibacy as well. His vows made him among the men to choose from by the temple priests as protector of Mary's sacred vows. He would provide for her as a husband and father. Give her a life of safety, so she could live out her vows unmolested by the world.

It also has to be taken into account that Mary's perpetual virginity was not questioned until recently. Martin Luther believed it and was devoted to Mary as Virgin and Mother of God. I believe it because I see the types in the OT that point to the mother of the savior. To me, Mary's perpetual virginity is appropriate for an Incarnation of God.

I have problems with Joseph as a pious widower assigned to Mary as a protector of her vows of celibacy by the religious ministers of the Jewish Temple. It's too much of a stretch for me and the story is deadened by it. I don't buy it myself. I see it as a much richer story of grace and sacrificial love if Joseph is a younger man expecting the marital embrace.

My take on it is, his commitment to Mary and her purposes from heaven were tested in the trial presented to him by the Incarnation. He couldn't cast her and the child out to the margins of society. A life that forced women into adultery. The sentence, if she was found guilty by him was a life he couldn't bear to see her live. He was proven to be willing to live a celibate life rather than judge Mary as an adulteress. If the evidence to reach a decision is insufficient a just man doesn't make the judgement. Joseph didn't understand what happened. In his mind he knew Mary wouldn't commit adultery. Yet he didn't understand how she could be pregnant. He couldn't allow the seed of another man contaminate his bloodline. He couldn't judge Mary to be an adulteress. Joseph's solution was to divorce her privately. Which in this circumstance meant a divorce that looked like a normal marriage to the community. It was after that decision Heaven revealed the Incarnation to him.
 
Upvote 0

DamianWarS

Follower of Isa Al Masih
Supporter
May 15, 2008
9,486
3,322
✟858,457.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Jesus had to break it with his head at his birth
a woman's body goes through a lot of changes in preparation for birth and I would actually think the hymen would naturally stretch and tear during these changes. If not the 9 months before the labour then I would think the stress of the labour itself would stretch the hymen until it torn well before the baby was delivered. But of course if still not "broken" it would have to be torn by the baby but I just see that very unlikely however with that said a lot of other tearing can occur which could perhaps satisfy your blood covenant analogy.

I actually see a greater (or more mysterious) connection through the the process of growing a baby in your body. The placenta acts as a type of exchange system of blood between the mother and child with the fetal blood running through the placenta and passing off the waste and collecting the rich nutrients all without mixing the two together. But the blood itself is the key component to the exchange for both mother and child thus a type of covenant working together. There is a delivery of the placenta as well where blood is going to be present and is going to be spilled (births are messy things)

how do you see the hymen breaking at delivery important to a blood covenant? Yes, I understand there is spilled blood from the result of the baby and I understand where the roots are from but why do you think this act would echo this abrahamic blood covenant or perhaps usher in a new?
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

AlexDTX

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Jun 13, 2015
4,191
2,818
✟328,934.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
a woman's body goes through a lot of changes in preparation for birth and I would actually think the hymen would naturally stretch and tear during these changes. If not the 9 months before the labour then I would think the stress of the labour itself would stretch the hymen until it torn well before the baby was delivered. But of course if still not "broken" it would have to be torn by the baby but I just see that very unlikely however with that said a lot of other tearing can occur which could perhaps satisfy your blood covenant analogy.

I actually see a greater (or more mysterious) connection through the the process of growing a baby in your body. The placenta acts as a type of exchange system of blood between the mother and child with the fetal blood running through the placenta and passing off the waste and collecting the rich nutrients all without mixing the two together. But the blood itself is the key component to the exchange for both mother and child thus a type of covenant working together. There is a delivery of the placenta as well where blood is going to be present and is going to be spilled (births are messy things)

how do you see the hymen breaking at delivery important to a blood covenant? Yes, I understand there is spilled blood from the result of the baby and I understand where the roots are from but why do you think this act would echo this abrahamic blood covenant or perhaps usher in a new?
I don't believe it ushered in a new covenant. I was only thinking out loud. But your comment is very thought provoking. Thank you.
 
Upvote 0

DamianWarS

Follower of Isa Al Masih
Supporter
May 15, 2008
9,486
3,322
✟858,457.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
I don't believe it ushered in a new covenant. I was only thinking out loud. But your comment is very thought provoking. Thank you.

let me think out loud with you. If the unborn incarnate was responsible for either directly or indirectly the tearing of Mary's hymen what does this mean and how can it relate to a blood covenant?

Jesus is the bridegroom his church is the bride; "My beloved is mine, and I am his". If Mary is the flesh of Adam and Jesus the divine made flesh then Jesus perhaps enters into this marriage blood covenant as suggested by Sheila Cooley by an act that started as Mary's submission to the divine. The tearing of the hymen perhaps is one of these nested revelations that show Jesus as the bridegroom.

With many mythical accounts the divine comes down and essentially rapes or seduces women where the product is sort of demi-god. It is comforting to know that the incarnation is nothing like this. What I like is this perspective seems to show entering legitimately into this marriage covenant without the need of a sexual act which would compromise the whole thing.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

mmksparbud

Well-Known Member
Dec 3, 2011
17,312
6,821
73
Las Vegas
✟255,978.00
Country
United States
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Widowed
Politics
US-Others
It seems somewhat inconsistent that on one hand the Catholic church will grant a divorce, or annulment for non- consummation of the marriage, then insist that Mary and Joseph never did so. They also state that the reason for marriage is to have children and are against contraception, yet insist that Mary never had any other children. :scratch:

Heb 13:4 Marriage is honourable in all, and the bed undefiled: but whoremongers and adulterers God will judge.

No reason for Mary and Joseph to have been celibate. Was not a sin but a command. Be fruitful and multiply was the first command of God to Adam and Eve. And the church quotes it often--except for when it applies to Mary. Don't mean to be rude or obtuse but----why?
 
Upvote 0