[Mike Graham]

Originally Posted by goldenchild

And I'm assuming that you can explain to me how the usage of the greek word for "until" connotates a switch in what happened.

Originally Posted by goldenchild

Of course, that is the way it should be understood, but some people like to place a double standard on the Mary verse, by playing with the greek.

I saw no one in this thread argue from the Greek.

[KFBobInsanesMom]

Originally Posted by Katholish

The Catholic Church holds (though it has not made a formal declaration and thus does not so hold as a matter of Doctrine) that Joseph was not previously married. That James, The Brother of the Lord was James the Less, son of Alpheus.

The term brother also read in the plural as brethern not necessarily pointing to a member of the immediate family but also being used for the extended family.

In Luke 2:7 , Luke uses " firstborn ( Prototokos) son", yet in several other places when there was only one child he uses the word "only (Monogenes)" : Luke 7:12, 8:41-42, 9:38. Why wouldn't Luke have used the term Monogenes if Jesus was an only son, not the fristborn child. Luke was an educated man , I would trust he would use the term for ONLY when speaking of Jesus if that was what Jesus was and not use the term to show His birth order.

Does the Catholic church consider Psalm 69 to be a Messianic Psalm ???

[BurntHombre]

Originally Posted by goldenchild

Of course, that is the way it should be understood, but some people like to place a double standard on the Mary verse, by playing with the greek.

How do you know how it "should" be understood? I'm asking honestly -- I agree that until doesn't necessarily indicate a switch in behavior, but it also doesn't necessarily indicate a continuance beyond the specified point. I don't know Greek, so I can only comment on the English usage of until -- sometimes until is a synonym for "to," as in "I'll love you until the day I die." Other times (and, I would argue, the most common usage today) it refers to a specific point of time in a continuum, after which it's implied that the speaker will take action. "I won't go to Disney World until they lower the price." "I won't start the movie until you get here."

Does the original Greek indicate one of these two meanings? I'll admit that when I read the english version, the plain meaning I come away with is that Mary and Joseph did have sexual relations after Jesus was born. However, I'm ready to be persuaded otherwise.

[Fides_et_Ratio]

There are about ten instances in the New Testament where "brothers" and "sisters" of the Lord are mentioned (Matt. 12:46; Matt. 13:55; Mark 3:31–34; Mark 6:3; Luke 8:19–20; John 2:12, 7:3, 5, 10; Acts 1:14; 1 Cor. 9:5).

When trying to understand these verses, note that the term "brother" (Greek: adelphos) has a wide meaning in the Bible. It is not restricted to the literal meaning of a full brother or half-brother. The same goes for "sister" (adelphe) and the plural form "brothers" (adelphoi). The Old Testament shows that "brother" had a wide semantic range of meaning and could refer to any male relative from whom you are not descended (male relatives from whom you are descended are known as "fathers") and who are not descended from you (your male descendants, regardless of the number of generations removed, are your "sons"), as well as kinsmen such as cousins, those who are members of the family by marriage or by law rather than by blood, and even friends or mere political allies (2 Sam. 1:26; Amos 1:9).

Lot, for example, is called Abraham’s "brother" (Gen. 14:14), even though, being the son of Haran, Abraham’s brother (Gen. 11:26–28), he was actually Abraham’s nephew. Similarly, Jacob is called the "brother" of his uncle Laban (Gen. 29:15). Kish and Eleazar were the sons of Mahli. Kish had sons of his own, but Eleazar had no sons, only daughters, who married their "brethren," the sons of Kish. These "brethren" were really their cousins (1 Chr. 23:21–22).

The terms "brothers," "brother," and "sister" did not refer only to close relatives. Sometimes they meant kinsmen (Deut. 23:7; Neh. 5:7; Jer. 34:9), as in the reference to the forty-two "brethren" of King Azariah (2 Kgs. 10:13–14).


(I won't pretend I didn't have to look this one up... http://www.catholic.com/library/Bret...f_the_Lord.asp)

[goldenchild]

Originally Posted by KFBobInsanesMom

No I do not believe Joseph was celibate, nor do I believe Mary was, after Jesus birth. I believe they were married in every sense ( including having sexual relations) and that they had other children as scripture tells us.

If you feel that you can make a claim like this, you need to back it up by showing where it says this. Where does it say that Joseph and Mary had other children?

Originally Posted by KFBobInsanesMom

What I am wondering about is which view is actually held by the Catholic church.... that the brothers are really cousins or some other relative and that Joseph was not married before and was not an old man.... or is it believed that Joseph was married before and had children. I found quite a bit of discrepency over the years as to which view is held as truth by the Catholic church.... or is it possible that there is a third view that I have not come across???

The only view that Catholics are required to hold is that Mary was a virgin her entire life. It doesn't really matter(if I am wrong someone correct me) how we come to this conclusion as long as this is the result of our reasoning. I believe the most likely scenario is that these "brothers and sisters" were close relatives of Jesus, probably cousins, as can be defended with Scripture and the fact that Jesus came from such small communities that it is possible that much of the population was made up of extended families.

[goldenchild]

Originally Posted by KFBobInsanesMom

I think the obvious response to this is the frequent mention in scripture of Jesus brothers and sisters...this gives good reason to believe that the " until" means that they had no intercourse until after she gave birth to Jesus, and then they had a marriage in every sense of the word.

Alright, then I suppose we should get to discussing these verses you say show that Mary had other children. Please give some examples that say such things and we can continue. And also give an example that shows that Mary and Joseph were fully married in every sense of the meaning of marriage.

[goldenchild]

Originally Posted by Mike Graham

I saw no one in this thread argue from the Greek.

I know, my comments were a bit preliminary. But I believe we'll get to that eventually.

[KFBobInsanesMom]

OK, lets look at a few verses starting in John 15

1 "I am the true vine, and My Father is the vinedresser. ( obviously this is Jesus speaking)..........20 Remember the word that I said to you, 'A servant is not greater than his master.' If they persecuted Me, they will also persecute you. If they kept My word, they will keep yours also. 21 But all these things they will do to you for My name's sake, because they do not know Him who sent Me. 22 If I had not come and spoken to them, they would have no sin, but now they have no excuse for their sin. 23 He who hates Me hates My Father also. 24 If I had not done among them the works which no one else did, they would have no sin; but now they have seen and also hated both Me and My Father. 25 But this happened that the word might be fulfilled which is written in their law, 'They hated Me without a cause.'

Then in John 2 12 After this He went down to Capernaum, He, His mother, His brothers, and His disciples; and they did not stay there many days. 13 Now the Passover of the Jews was at hand, and Jesus went up to Jerusalem. 14 And He found in the temple those who sold oxen and sheep and doves, and the moneychangers doing business. 15 When He had made a whip of cords, He drove them all out of the temple, with the sheep and the oxen, and poured out the changers' money and overturned the tables. 16 And He said to those who sold doves, "Take these things away! Do not make My Father's house a house of merchandise!" 17 Then His disciples remembered that it was written, "Zeal for Your house has eaten Me up."

Now lets look in Psalm 69 4. They that hate me without a cause are more than the hairs of mine head: they that would destroy me, being mine enemies wrongfully, are mighty: then I restored that which I took not away.

9 For the zeal of thine house hath eaten me up; and the reproaches of them that reproached thee are fallen upon me.

Both the passages in John are clearly talking about Jesus and both are found in Psalm 69, so it appears that Psalm 69 is a Messianic Psalm. So why is this important.... well, lets look at a few more verses in Psalm 69 6 Let not them that wait on thee, O Lord GOD of hosts, be ashamed for my sake: let not those that seek thee be confounded for my sake, O God of Israel. 7 Because for thy sake I have borne reproach; shame hath covered my face. 8 I am become a stranger unto my brethren, and an alien unto my mother's children...... Now you can argue that brethren are not brothers or sisters, but some other relation, however you cannot do the same with " my mother's children"....... It would make no sense at all to say " I am a stranger to my 'cousins/relations', and an alien unto my mother's 'cousins/relations', clearly " my mother's children" are just that, Jesus' mothers ( Marys ) children.

To show that He was indeed a " an alien unto His mother's children".....John 7:5 For neither did his brethren believe in him.

Matthew 13:55 - "Is not this the carpenter’s son? Is not His mother called Mary, and His brothers, James and Joseph and Simon and Judas?" To argue here that "His brothers" are some male relation doesn't fit in the context of this passage. It is quite specific, carpenters son (Joseph), His mother ( Mary ) and his brothers (James, Joseph, Simon, and Judas).... if you wish to very clearly identify a person, you give precise details that will point to only the person you are speaking of ( details that are well known about them, like who their brothers are). I can imagine that there were many in the crowd who had cousins/ male relations named James, and Joseph, and Simon, and Judas... but I doubt there were any others who had 4 brothers with those 4 names.

Mark 6 1 Jesus left that part of the country and returned with his disciples to Nazareth, his hometown. 2 The next Sabbath he began teaching in the synagogue, and many who heard him were astonished. They asked, "Where did he get all his wisdom and the power to perform such miracles? 3 He's just the carpenter, the son of Mary and brother of James, Joseph, Judas, and Simon. And his sisters live right here among us." They were deeply offended and refused to believe in him. 4 Then Jesus told them, "A prophet is honored everywhere except in his own hometown and among his relatives and his own family. Jesus Himself is saying that HIS RELATIVES AND HIS OWN FAMILY ( his brothers) did not believe in Him. Why if " his brothers James, Joseph, Judas, and Simon" were relations, did Jesus give 2 classes of people here: RELATIVES AND OWN FAMILY"?????

I suppose one could claim that " HIS OWN FAMILY" just meant Mary and Joseph, because obviously if Jesus had no brothers or sisters then His "family" only included His mother and father. However, I doubt the Catholic church would make a claim that Mary and Joseph did not " honor" Jesus, or that Jesus was wrong in his claim that " His own family" did not honor HIm.

[KFBobInsanesMom]

Originally Posted by Fides_et_Ratio

There are about ten instances in the New Testament where "brothers" and "sisters" of the Lord are mentioned (Matt. 12:46; Matt. 13:55; Mark 3:31–34; Mark 6:3; Luke 8:19–20; John 2:12, 7:3, 5, 10; Acts 1:14; 1 Cor. 9:5).

When trying to understand these verses, note that the term "brother" (Greek: adelphos) has a wide meaning in the Bible. It is not restricted to the literal meaning of a full brother or half-brother. The same goes for "sister" (adelphe) and the plural form "brothers" (adelphoi). The Old Testament shows that "brother" had a wide semantic range of meaning and could refer to any male relative from whom you are not descended (male relatives from whom you are descended are known as "fathers") and who are not descended from you (your male descendants, regardless of the number of generations removed, are your "sons"), as well as kinsmen such as cousins, those who are members of the family by marriage or by law rather than by blood, and even friends or mere political allies (2 Sam. 1:26; Amos 1:9).

Lot, for example, is called Abraham’s "brother" (Gen. 14:14), even though, being the son of Haran, Abraham’s brother (Gen. 11:26–28), he was actually Abraham’s nephew. Similarly, Jacob is called the "brother" of his uncle Laban (Gen. 29:15). Kish and Eleazar were the sons of Mahli. Kish had sons of his own, but Eleazar had no sons, only daughters, who married their "brethren," the sons of Kish. These "brethren" were really their cousins (1 Chr. 23:21–22).

The terms "brothers," "brother," and "sister" did not refer only to close relatives. Sometimes they meant kinsmen (Deut. 23:7; Neh. 5:7; Jer. 34:9), as in the reference to the forty-two "brethren" of King Azariah (2 Kgs. 10:13–14).


(I won't pretend I didn't have to look this one up... http://www.catholic.com/library/Bret...f_the_Lord.asp)

Are you making the claim that brother and sister never mean just that.. brother and sister????

[SilverNitrate]

I never understood the thinking behind the whole "Mary remained a virgin 'till death" thing. I mean... as a guy... if I was married (therefore allowed to have sex) and my wife would not have sex with me... then I would be out like the fat kid in a dodgeball game.

[BurntHombre]

Are any verses beside Matthew 1:25 used to support the perpetual virginity of Mary?

[Epaphras]

Originally Posted by SilverNitrate

I never understood the thinking behind the whole "Mary remained a virgin 'till death" thing. I mean... as a guy... if I was married (therefore allowed to have sex) and my wife would not have sex with me... then I would be out like the fat kid in a dodgeball game.

[goldenchild]

Originally Posted by BurntHombre

How do you know how it "should" be understood? I'm asking honestly -- I agree that until doesn't necessarily indicate a switch in behavior, but it also doesn't necessarily indicate a continuance beyond the specified point. I don't know Greek, so I can only comment on the English usage of until -- sometimes until is a synonym for "to," as in "I'll love you until the day I die." Other times (and, I would argue, the most common usage today) it refers to a specific point of time in a continuum, after which it's implied that the speaker will take action. "I won't go to Disney World until they lower the price." "I won't start the movie until you get here."

Does the original Greek indicate one of these two meanings? I'll admit that when I read the english version, the plain meaning I come away with is that Mary and Joseph did have sexual relations after Jesus was born. However, I'm ready to be persuaded otherwise.

I'm getting on to something with this. I've been finding out some things that I like and will get back with you on this soon. If it gets too long, remind me.

[KFBobInsanesMom]

Originally Posted by BurntHombre

Are any verses beside Matthew 1:25 used to support the perpetual virginity of Mary?

A question to ask about this verse , is why was the word " firstborn" used, and not a word meaning " only" if indeed Jesus was Mary's only child???

The Greek "monogenes"
( Strongs : 1. single of its kind, only
1. used of only sons or daughters (viewed in relation to their parents)
2. used of Christ, denotes the only begotten son of God )

is used in the following verses:

Luke 7:12 Now when he came nigh to the gate of the city, behold, there was a dead man carried out, the only son of his mother, and she was a widow: and much people of the city was with her.
Lu 8:42 For he had one only daughter, about twelve years of age, and she lay a dying. But as he went the people thronged him.
Lu 9:38 And, behold, a man of the company cried out, saying, Master, I beseech thee, look upon my son: for he is mine only child

John 1:14 And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.
Joh 1:18 No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him.
Joh 3:16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
Joh 3:18 He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.

Hebrews 11:12 By faith Abraham, when he was tried, offered up Isaac: and he that had received the promises offered up his only begotten son,

1 John 4:9 In this was manifested the love of God toward us, because that God sent his only begotten Son into the world, that we might live through him.

The Greek word used for " firstborn" is Prototokos
( Strongs : 1. the firstborn
1. of man or beast
2. of Christ, the first born of all creation)

and is used in the following verses:

Matthew 1:25 And knew her not till she had brought forth her firstborn son: and he called his name JESUS.

Luke 2:7 And she brought forth her firstborn son, and wrapped him in swaddling clothes, and laid him in a manger; because there was no room for them in the inn.

Romans 8:29 For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren.

Col 1:15 Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature:
Col 1:18 And he is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all things he might have the preeminence.

Hebrews 1:6 And again, when he bringeth in the firstbegotten into the world, he saith, And let all the angels of God worship him.
Heb 11:28 Through faith he kept the passover, and the sprinkling of blood, lest he that destroyed the firstborn should touch them.
Heb 12:23 To the general assembly and church of the firstborn, which are written in heaven, and to God the Judge of all, and to the spirits of just men made perfect,

Revelation 1:5 And from Jesus Christ, who is the faithful witness, and the first begotten of the dead, and the prince of the kings of the earth. Unto him that loved us, and washed us from our sins in his own blood,

Here we have first born among many brethren, of every creature, from the dead.... which shows there were those who followed after this " first born". Why should we believe that the usage of this word in Matthew ( and in Luke) means something different???

When saying that Jesus was God's only son , the word used is monogenes, when saying that Jesus was Mary's first born son , the word used is prototokos

[KFBobInsanesMom]

Originally Posted by goldenchild

The only view that Catholics are required to hold is that Mary was a virgin her entire life. It doesn't really matter(if I am wrong someone correct me) how we come to this conclusion as long as this is the result of our reasoning. I believe the most likely scenario is that these "brothers and sisters" were close relatives of Jesus, probably cousins, as can be defended with Scripture and the fact that Jesus came from such small communities that it is possible that much of the population was made up of extended families.

It certainly does matter how you come to the conclusion that Mary was a virgin her entire life. If you get this because someone tells you its true, and you then have to explain away every time Jesus's brothers and sisters are mentioned, instead of taking the Bible as the authority, then you are following false teaching. Try reading those passages without first setting your mind on believing they are speaking of some other relations, and come to your own conclusion from the Word of God.