Why Believe in Perpetual Virginity?

[Saucy]

Roman Christians believe in the perpetual virginity of Mary. This is the doctrine that not only was Mary a virgin at the time she conceived Jesus, but that she remained a virgin throughout her life.

Why believe this?

I understand that the Roman Church teaches this doctrine, and that this reason alone is enough for assenting Catholics to accept it. But there doesn't seem to be any basis for this belief in Scripture and I don't understand what is gained by believing it.

To me it seems rooted in a medieval error that virginity or even celibacy is somehow holier than sex and marriage.

It's really all about typology. They try so hard to make her into this Heavenly queen, so they look for bible verses in the Old Testament that sort of reveal this type of 'prophecy' almost. But the bible very CLEARLY talks about Mary having other kids. Even James says he's Jesus' brother. Talks about how Jesus' own siblings at one time wanted nothing to do with him. He even differentiated between his mom and brothers and sisters with followers. It's all right there.

I've debated with many other Catholics about this and they say, "well, there is no word for cousins in the Hebrew, so James and company were probably Jesus' cousins." But the New Testament was written in Greek, not Hebrew, and they DO have a word for cousin.

There's only one prophecy about the mother of Jesus, and that's a virgin shall conceive. That's it. She was a married woman (to Joseph!) and was able to have sexual intercourse and other kids, which the bible records happening.

 

[Hank77]

Elizabeth honours Mary as " mother of lord" , notice it is Mary she honours, not just the child in her womb,

Of coarse she is the mother of our Lord. Who has said anything different?
For Mary to be the most blessed among all women does that require that she remain a virgin?

Do you not understand that the sin nature came from Adam, not Eve? And that the sin nature is passed from the father to all of his children, not from the mother.

 

[Mountainmike]

Now read the rest of my post.


Why do you disagree with those who compiled your New Testament?

Of coarse she is the mother of our Lord. Who has said anything different?
For Mary to be the most blessed among all women does that require that she remain a virgin?

Do you not understand that the sin nature came from Adam, not Eve? And that the sin nature is passed from the father to all of his children, not from the mother.

 

[hooverbranch]

Now read the rest of my post.


Why do you disagree with those who compiled your New Testament?

The councils that put together the Canon of Scripture were not infallible. Most people do not realize that by the time the first Canon came along in Northern Africa in 397 a.d. (where the first major Canon of Scripture was affirmed) the only 3 books that were even in question by that time were James, Hebrews, and Jude. They also made a decision that added books to the Bible by using the geographical decision over the traditional one. Being in Northern Africa they used the Northern African septuagint to Canonize for the Old Testement. Adding books that Jerome would not even add in the same century while compiling the original Latin Vulgate because those books were not in the traditional septuagint or the Masereric Texts. So I dont look back at the Councils for my Cannon. I look at Church History and realize that the churches of that time recognized these books as inspired works of God before it was formally Canon.

 

[Hank77]

Why do you disagree with those who compiled your New Testament?

Because the RCC is not God? Because their words don't have the same authority as God's does?

Now maybe you can answer my question.

 

[Sammy-San]

Not between married couples as God intended.

so that's another example of truth mixed up with lies?

 

[com7fy8]

Our Lady's womb was the dwelling place of Our Lord. Cyril of Alexandria described her as a temple of God.

And a child of God is the dwelling place of the Holy Spirit . . . even though we are not perfectly without sin. So, if God's own Holy Spirit of His own love (Romans 5:5) lives "in our hearts" without being contaminated by us, surely Jesus could have been in the body of a woman who is not perfectly without sin.

Jesus could be born without sin and yet be born from an imperfect woman.

Possibly, a number of people feel that Jesus could be contaminated if He was born from the body of a woman not perfect. But Jesus came and had contact physical even with women who had been sinful, including the woman who washed His feet with her tears and kissed His feet! So, Jesus is not afraid of contact with females. But there are men who can fear women and fear being defiled by women, and they might accept religious ideas witch fit with their own problems.

But Jesus in us makes us men able to tenderly share with wives. The Holy Spirit so pure fills us with His love, so we can perfectly and intimately share with our wives. And physical intimacy does not defile the Holy Spirit who is in our bodies and having us sharing tenderly and intimately. If people fear this, also they might still be unregenerate so lusts can get the better of them. Developing religious ideas to fit with their problem does not solve their problems.

She was as mother of a davidic king ,that gives her title " queen", a throne, and powers of intercession visible in the Old Testament

Our Apostle Paul is clear that Jesus Himself "makes intercession for us," in Romans 8:34. But I notice how certain people make a point only of talking about Mary and saints making intercession . . . not a word about Jesus making intercession for us according to His own faith and all His faith can get for us.

And how much attention are certain people calling to how the Holy Spirit "makes intercession for us, with groanings which cannot be uttered"? (in Romans 8:26)

 

[Hank77]

so that's another example of truth mixed up with lies?

Not sure what you are calling truth and calling lies?

 

[KWCrazy]

Being a wife and mother in no way diminishes Mary as a person. On the contrary, that is the greatest role that God intends for women. However, Mary was not herself a deity or a prophet. As her firstborn, it was Jesus' responsibility to see to her care which He fulfilled by giving that honor to John.

 

[Saucy]

Now read the rest of my post.


Why do you disagree with those who compiled your New Testament?

1) those who complied the New Testament wrote that Jesus had brothers and sisters.

2) There is no mention in the New Testament of Mary as a queen, Mary as a perpetual virgin, Mary is to be prayed to, that Mary can answer prayers, that Mary hears your prayers, that Mary can work miracles, that Mary was perfect, that Mary had no other children. None of that. You'd think if any of it was true or necessary for our faith, that it would've been written about! Jesus would've said something. There'd be stories of people bowing to Mary, praying to Mary, Mary healing or getting involved in Christ's ministry. NONE OF IT HAPPENED. It's not there.

3) Show me a verse that says any of the above and I'll become a Catholic today.

 

[FireDragon76]

I just accept Mary's perpetual virginity as what best fits the scriptural evidence (esp. John 19:16) . I don't necessarily see it as a denigration of sexuality or marriage.

As for the idea there is no sin in married sex, go read Augustine. He saw everything as tainted by sin, including sex. That doesn't mean he found marriage unlawful. In fact, compared to some other church fathers, his views on sexuality were much more compassionate, since he forbade vows of celibacy within marriage. I think the issue is, some people want to put a certain kind of family type or sexuality on a pedestal (1950's nuclear family, informed by Victorian values of companionate love and domesticity), and denigrate all others.

Being a wife and mother in no way diminishes Mary as a person. On the contrary, that is the greatest role that God intends for women.

This is just sexist nonsense. God intends for a lot of women to be unmarried... because it happens. That doesn't make them less womanly. Women do not need to be the chattel property of a man to be fulfilled.

 

[com7fy8]

As her firstborn, it was Jesus' responsibility to see to her care which He did by giving that honor to John.

Ones could argue that if Jesus had a brother He would have trusted the care of Mary to one who was His brother. Except > Jesus knew He could trust John. His own brothers had not believed in Him.

There is no mention in the New Testament of Mary as a queen

When John was on the prison island of Patmos, he had the vision of Revelation, and he does not say he sees Mary on the throne with Jesus. Now, yes, ones can argue that Mary had not died, yet, when John had his vision of revelation.

But our Apostle Paul emphasizes how we can pray for one another > Ephesians 6:18 > "for all the saints", he says. So, do people give their attention mainly or only to getting intercession of Mary, or do they make sure they themselves make the intercession which Paul means we all can do?

"And who are these 'saints' who we are to pray for?"

"It does not say to seek saints for intercession, but to pray 'for all the saints'."

We in Jesus can do this > Galatians 2:20 < does Jesus in us need to ask Mary for intercession? If Mary is obedient, isn't she already obeying how our Apostle Paul says to pray "for all the saints"? So, why would one without sin need to be constantly asked for prayer? We are the ones who need to be encouraged to pray the way God desires.

If Mary is so like Jesus, why would she need to be asked for prayer, so much more often than Jesus needs to be asked for intercession??

 

[Mountainmike]

Which is not what the language means - it means kinsmen. Sooner or later one of you will study it and stop repeating the usual myths,

Or perhaps you will read the early fathers confirming what I said... take anasthasius who was one of the key voices behind the creed echoing what I just said... and Mary's perpetual virginity


Anasthasius is worth reading because you see just how silly the myth of apostasy during the reign of Constantine is


The pillar of truth is the church not scripture. Sola scriptura is provably false in several different ways..

.

1) those who complied the New Testament wrote that Jesus had brothers and sisters.

2) There is no mention in the New Testament of Mary as a queen, Mary as a perpetual virgin, Mary is to be prayed to, that Mary can answer prayers, that Mary hears your prayers, that Mary can work miracles, that Mary was perfect, that Mary had no other children. None of that. You'd think if any of it was true or necessary for our faith, that it would've been written about! Jesus would've said something. There'd be stories of people bowing to Mary, praying to Mary, Mary healing or getting involved in Christ's ministry. NONE OF IT HAPPENED. It's not there.

3) Show me a verse that says any of the above and I'll become a Catholic today.

 

[Hank77]

This is just sexist nonsense. God intends for a lot of women to be unmarried... because it happens. That doesn't make them less womanly. Women do not need to be the chattel property of a man to be fulfilled.

I agree but that doesn't change the fact that being a wife and mother, or indeed a husband and father isn't a blessing from God that God Himself prominently expresses in His word. For example Abraham and Sarah, Jacob and Rachel.

 

[KWCrazy]

Ones could argue that if Jesus had a brother He would have trusted the care of Mary to one who was His brother. Except > Jesus knew He could trust John. His own brothers had not believed in Him.

And still did not until well after the resurrection.

When John was on the prison island of Patmos, he had the vision of Revelation, and he does not say he sees Mary on the throne with Jesus. Now, yes, ones can argue that Mary had not died, yet, when John had his vision of revelation.

Revelation is thought to have been written 80-91 AD. Mary was young when she had Jesus and Jesus was 33 when He did. So if Mary was 15 when Christ was born she would be around 128 years old at the earliest. It is very likely that she had already died. However, her mention in the Bible is not very prominent, so she would be expected to be seated with Jesus.

But our Apostle Paul emphasizes how we can pray for one another > Ephesians 6:18 > "for all the saints", he says. So, do people give their attention mainly or only to getting intercession of Mary, or do they make sure they themselves make the intercession which Paul means we all can do?

We are the intercessors, praying FOR the saints not TO the saints. That includes those who, like Paul, are preaching the message of Christ's redemption.

Jesus said to pray in this manner: "Our father who art in Heaven...."
We pray directly to God.

 

[Sammy-San]

I just accept Mary's perpetual virginity as what best fits the scriptural evidence (esp. John 19:16) . I don't necessarily see it as a denigration of sexuality or marriage.

As for the idea there is no sin in married sex, go read Augustine. He saw everything as tainted by sin, including sex. That doesn't mean he found marriage unlawful. In fact, compared to some other church fathers, his views on sexuality were much more compassionate, since he forbade vows of celibacy within marriage. I think the issue is, some people want to put a certain kind of family type or sexuality on a pedestal (1950's nuclear family, informed by Victorian values of companionate love and domesticity), and denigrate all others.



This is just sexist nonsense. God intends for a lot of women to be unmarried... because it happens. That doesn't make them less womanly. Women do not need to be the chattel property of a man to be fulfilled.

What do you mean by Victorian values?

 

[Tigger45]

Proper scripture interpretation requires historical knowledge within the culture at the time it was written. Many modern day evangelicals interpret scripture through the lens
of their own time and culture.

 

[hooverbranch]

The pillar of truth is the church not scripture. Sola scriptura is provably false in several different ways..

.

And that is the statement where you will not have Protestant Christians ever agree on. The Church by design is from God and is perfect. The Church in practice is ran by men who are all sinners (Rom 3:23) Imperfect men can not make perfect anything. Scripture however in inspired by God or God Breathed (2 Tim 3:16) Before the formation of the organized Church the individual Churches got their teaching directly fromthe Apostles. And then they passed around the letters from the men that formed the Church with Apostolic Authority (not all of them actually being themselves apostles but at the very least approved by them.) In fact by the time John wrote all of his books in the late 80 early 90s a.d. all the other letters were being circulated through asia minor. And you do not see John refute them, in fact his entire message against the Gnostics in 1st John was to hold firm to the original message brought by the apostles. So I will hold firm to my Sola Scriptura because I believe that The Bible along with the Holy Spirit is Gods direct manifestation for this age. (Just as I would argue The Angel of The Lord was before Christ, and Christ was before this age)

 

[Hank77]

Proper scripture interpretation requires historical knowledge within the culture at the time it was written. Many modern day evangelicals interpret scripture throught the lens
Of their own time and culture.

Well many people go back and look at the scriptures through the eyes of what the culture was in the earliest times of the church and that was a Jewish culture, not Roman gentiles.
Once I started doing that many scriptures became much more clear.
In my view the worst thing that happened in the church was the exclusion of the Jewish brothers and sisters in the Christ.
I have been very fortunate in that I have learned a lot from others who are natural Jews, who believe in the Messiah Yeshua, and the writings of those who studied the Jewish culture and writings such as the Talmud, and could read the scriptures in their original languages.
I've learned many things about the OT from Jews who are not believers as well.

 

[S.O.J.I.A.]

I suppose God's holy nature is trumped by man's sinful nature.