Why the Church Teaches That Mary is a Virgin w/ Tim Staples
Vložit
- čas přidán 30. 07. 2024
- This video is taken from Pints with Aquinas episode #213: • 4 Things Catholics Bel...
Why is it so important that Mary be a virgin? Is it not enough that she's the mother of God? Find out why Mary's virginity matters in this short clip with Tim Staples.
----------------------------------------- SPONSORS -----------------------------------------
Hallow: hallow.onelink.me/Q25Y/80833e8
Covenant Eyes: www.covenanteyes.com/ (use promo code: mattfradd)
----------------------------------------- GIVING -----------------------------------------
Patreon: / mattfradd
This show (and all the plans we have in store) wouldn't be possible without you. I can't thank those of you who support me enough. Seriously! Thanks for essentially being a co-producer coproducer of the show.
------------------------------------------- LINKS -------------------------------------------
Website: pintswithaquinas.com/
Merch: teespring.com/stores/matt-fradd
FREE 21 Day Detox From Porn Course: www.strive21.com/
------------------------------------------- SOCIAL -------------------------------------------
Facebook: / mattfradd
Twitter: / mattfradd
Instagram: / mattfradd
------------------------------------------ MY BOOKS ----------------------------------------
Does God Exist: www.amazon.com/Does-God-Exist...
Marian Consecration With Aquinas: www.amazon.com/Marian-Consecr...
The Porn Myth: www.ignatius.com/The-Porn-Myt...
------------------------------------------ CONTACT ------------------------------------------
Book me to speak: www.mattfradd.com/speakerrequ...
--
Website - mattfradd.com
Facebook - mattfradd/
Twitter - mattfradd - Zábava
Definitely Mother Mary was virgin. But whether or not she remained forever a virgin, im not bothered to know the answer, doesnt affect my faith in Jesus.
David Young the word for brother in hebrew means cousin or family member. If james was the son of Blessed Mary as well, and we know him to be alive after Jesus’s crucifixion, why did he Jesus give Mary to John to stay with her?
David Young Also it never said that Joseph did not know her until after she had Jesus, but that She didn’t know Joseph before the time she had Jesus. All it says is they didn’t have sex before Jesus, never says that after that they had sex
Michael C excellent!
@@michaelc1732 The new testament text was written in Greek, not Hebrew. And in Greek there was a DIFFERENT word that was used for "cousin or family member", it is used in describing Elizabeth in Luke 1.
As Mary's "firstborn" (see Matthew 1:25), Jesus had the right to pass the responsibility of caring for His mother over to whomever He saw fit, and for whatever reason He saw the apostle John the beloved more fit.
@@michaelc1732 Yes it does say that in Matthew 1:25 "but he kept her a virgin until she had given birth to a Son [her firstborn child]; and he named Him Jesus (The Lord is salvation)." AMP
Love it. Beautiful.
Friends, if the early church believed that she was a perpetual virgin, that has to be the standard, and dissidents have the burden of proof.
Such a clear explanation! Really helped answer my question. Thank you
Thanks a lot for this. I’ve never heard the virginity of Mary explained so well with biblical references before.
Wow! What a great explanation. There should be no doubt after that unpacking. Great job guys.
Very very interesting my brain exploded😂
I was about to make the exact same comment!
About my brain exploding is what I mean :D
Mine also lol
I’m sorry but this argument relies on so many premises, all of which have very questionable plausibility. I find it so implausible, just for one example, that countless Protestant Greek scholars just happen to miss that the Greek actually tells us that Jospeh merely “walked beside her” and that’s supposed to mean they didn’t have marital relations. The argument is just so disjointed and can only persuade the one who already believes in perpetual virginity. So much reading into the text here. “She’s married to the Holy Spirit.” Says who?! He’s just asserting this.
Copy, still trying to address His half brothers and sisters, according to these guys.
That doesn't sound like a fault of the arguement. That sounds like scholars failing to learn their etymology. That kind of error manifests in many Christians today given translation after translation. We always need to go back and learn what the original writing in the original language says. It's VERY important to understand what the heck its even talking about. We lose SO MUCH context when we fail to translate the Scriptures as accurately as possible.
Also, it only makes sense that Mary is "married" to the Holy Spirit as it is what concieved Jesus in her womb, not Joseph. It's simply metaphorical. It makes me think of the language nuns use about taking their vows; they are "married" to Jesus, fully devoted to him and to no man on earth. This is also just like how Jesus is devoted to us as "our bridegroom," and we, the church, are his "bride." We must wait patiently for him and be devoted only to him until the times comes that we can finally (metaphorically) consummate our salvation on the final day.
@@sandstorm7768 I think the issue is how far one takes the analogy. If Mary is only metaphorically married to the Holy Spirit, then her having relations with Joseph wouldn’t be immoral or unholy in any way. The only way I could understand it as being unholy is if Mary was really married to the Spirit.
Ya ah ...." PROTESTANT Greek scholars " says it all ...bias comes into play ....those protestants that found out became catholic ....I know a few .....so my friend look deeper ....don't just see the surface ....do your own research ....I did and I learnt the Jewish history of marriage first ....and their customs ....because Afterall Jesus was a JEW ....MARY was a JEW and they followed Jewish customs ....you see now ....protestants don't do that because they believe in Sola Scriptura....not everything is in the bible ....you have to read everything in context ...not just surface reading ....which most people do .
@@ericworiax1277 There was no brothers and sisters ....you people don't know history ....in those days a close community of people referred to everybody as either brother or sister much like what the Muslims do today .....and some churches still do today ....that my friend doesn't mean biological brothers and sisters ....c'mon guys do your homework.....study history not sola scriptura......big mistake
Jesus said in Matt 5:17
“Think not that I have come to abolish the law and the prophets; I have come not to abolish them but to fulfil them.” Jesus is the Word and we must abide by every Word of God even though our human minds can’t understand that Mary is a perpetual virgin. It’s not about us. God bless you Tim Staples, what a beautiful explanation of the Holy Spirit leading Christs Church to all truth even about the ever Virgin Mary. Amen. I believe!
Wait, for this argument to follow, we have to look at Jesus' conception in some sense as a sexual act with the Holy Spirit do we not? Is that not the implication of the idea that Joseph saw Mary as being married to the Holy Spirit? Needless to say, I take great issue with that line of reasoning. If I'm misunderstanding, please correct me. Also, is the catholic position that Joseph had another wife by whom he had Jesus' brothers who are mentioned in the Gospels? And, why did James refer to himself as Jesus' half brother if he was not Mary's son? He would have been Joseph's son, but he would have no real relation to Jesus. I'm legitimately asking here, not just trying to poke holes.
@ ZachDavenport I think you are misunderstanding in that we are talking about a spiritual being in the Holy Spirit. A spirit does not have sex! But the Spirit can place what is needed into her womb to bring about the pregnancy without sacrificing her virginity. And here is how Mary gave birth without giving up her virginity. In the words of Bishop Sheen: “Christ was born as the light of the Sun ☀️ comes through a window.”
@@lauriemcbroom I understand and believe that, but the fact that it is not a sexual union leads me to believe that it shouldn't be seen as a marital one either. Which is why I don't think we should see Mary as being married to the Holy Spirit as this argument says.
Agreed.
Zack : silly man ....you must be Muslim to think that way .
James was the son of Mary of Clopas (scripture). He referred to himself as a brother because many languages including scripture didnt have another word for cousin/nephew/uncle/half brother or adopted brother / or someone from the same tribe. Its all "brother"... which is why they said who their parents were.
My childhood language also calls my cousins "brothers and sisters" since we dont have a word for cousin.
This vídeo was so helpful. May God bless you 🙏🕊️💕
So instead of verse 25 saying, “he knew her not until she brought forth her firstborn” or should read, “and Joseph never knew her because she was married to God.”
I don’t think it should be read that way, I think St Luke or St Matthew was focused on fulfilling the prophecy, so he was just focused on the period until Jesus was born since it says a Virgin shall conceive AND bear a son. So the virgin has to give birth and still be a virgin. But as Tim Staples was saying, there are a couple of places that point to Mary’s perpetual virginity.
This is the most bizzar Catholic argument - Marry was a virgin , and had children after that. What Catholics are doing is wrapping themselves in lies to cover up their idolatry of Marry.
Interesting, makes sense, never heard before 👍
Good stuff! In Christ, Andrew
PRICELESS !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
There is a big problem with saying the king David did not take his wives back because they belong to another. Absalon was dead. Plus, they belong to David in the first place.
It was because a son defiled as fathers wives. Not at all a parallel with Mary and Joseph God’s best on our quest for absolute truth.
St. Paul warned the Corinthians... "Do not go beyond what is WRITTEN (in the Scripture/Bible)." ...(ref. 1 Corin. 4:6)...
St. Paul also warned the Galatians... "If we (Apostles) or an Angel from Heaven teaches/preaches (Gospel/Prophesies) DIFFERENTLY, other than what we have Preached, Taught, and Received from us (Apostles), let the CURSE of God be upon them." (be ANATHEMA, be doomed to destruction, be condemned eternally in Hell. etc.)... (ref. Galatians 1:8)...
Facts and Truth, Biblically and logically speaking... Praise be to God in Christ... Amen.
Brothers, Where in the Old or New Testament does it say Mary was uniquely married to the Holy Spirit?
Matthew 1:24 When Joseph awoke from sleep, he did as the angel of the Lord commanded him; he took (Mary) as his wife, 25 but had no marital relations with her UNTIL she had borne a son; and he named him Jesus. (I love my Catholic brothers and sisters, but nothing you can say changes this. Sexual relations within the bonds of marriage is expected, holy and completely sanctified.)
Your understanding is in error because the Greek word that is translated as "until" in English does not imply that marital relations happened afterwards. You have to understand that nuances in language are lost in translation.
@@_MysticKnightCorrect. The verse only addresses what occured up until the time Jesus was born-it says nothing about what happened afterward. Some Protestants impose an implication on the verse that isn’t there. The Catholic Answers tract “Brethren of the Lord” points out:
In the Bible, it [until] means only that some action did not happen up to a certain point; it does not imply that the action did happen later, which is the modern sense of the term. In fact, if the modern sense is forced on the Bible, some ridiculous meanings result such as the examples below.
Consider this line: “Michal the daughter of Saul had no children till the day of her death” (2 Sam. 6:23). Are we to assume she had children after her death?
There is also the burial of Moses. The book of Deuteronomy says that no one knew the location of his grave “until this present day” (Deut. 34:6, Knox). But we know that no one has known since that day either.
The examples could be multiplied, but you get the idea-nothing can be proved from the use of the word “till” in Matthew 1:25. Recent translations give a better sense of the verse: “He had no relations with her at any time before she bore a son” (New American Bible); “He had not known her when she bore a son” (Knox).
@@_MysticKnight I studied koine Greek in a seminary and a university, and there are no nuances that are lost in the translation of Matthew 1:25. You need to site credible scholarly sources, if you have any.
Please read all.
www.catholic.com/tract/brethren-of-the-lord
@Arm
www.catholic.com/tract/brethren-of-the-lord
This is so important! Everyone needs to watch this
Isn't James the brother of Jesus? And other brothers were mentioned (in Greek). Why would Mary and Joseph not have kids naturally afterward? I really don't understand where this argument comes from. If the church is married to Christ then no Christian would have sex. I really think this is reading far too much into the language but happy to be educated.
Hi, thank you very much. You're completely right. As you can see, I made this comment 3 years ago and you'll be pleased to know that not long after it I did find the answer.
I found the following blog entitled "who were the brethren of the Lord from the website Obitel Minsk a great help when I grappled with this question because it was the most convincing Bible-based argument. I may as well post it here to expand on your comment for anyone else who happens by.
Who Were the “Brethren of the Lord”?
Posted on November 6, 2017 | by Editor | SourceReading time: 4 minutes
Q: Who were the “brethren of the Lord” (Matthew 12:46-47), and if He had brothers, why do we call the Theotokos “Ever-Virgin”?
A: The “brethren” of Jesus are mentioned several times in the New Testament. Four are mentioned by name. To explain who they were is not difficult, because the Scripture itself names four of them and identifies their parentage. Matthew (13:55) and Mark (6:3) list, as brethren of Jesus, James, Joses, Simon and Jude.
We know for certain that James and Joses were not sons of Mary or Joseph, for the Scripture identifies them, as children of a different Mary, who was the wife of Alphaeus-Cleopas (Matthew 27:56; Mark 15:40). James is also referred to as the “son of Alphaeus”, in the listing of the Apostles (Matthew 10:3 ; Mark 3:18 ; Luke 6:15 ; Acts 1:13). The relationship between these “brethren” (including “sisters”) must be seen in the context of Hebrew-Aramaic tradition, according to which even cousins were called brothers and sisters. This is the case also in Greek and Slavic languages and cultures to this day, so we do not have to speculate about it. This is a fact we know very well from our own families and lives. We have a perfect example of this in the Old Testament Scripture. The word used to describe the relationship between Lot and Abraham at Genesis 14:16 is “adelphi” in the original Greek, which can only be translated as “brother” in English. Nevertheless, we know that Lot was Abraham’s nephew. The Greek word “adelphos” and “adelphi” are only attempts to translate an unknown Aramaic word - and no one has any idea what the actual word was which is rendered in Greek and English as “brothers” or “brethren”.
There could have been no “first blood” brothers of Christ, otherwise He would not have given the care of His mother to St. John the Theologian (John 19:26) at the foot of the Cross. Indeed, Christ would have done His ‘brothers’ great disrespect and harm if He had done this ! The Old Testament prophecies explain the virginal marriage and ever-virginity of Christ’s mother, and we also have the testimony of the Holy Spirit speaking through the Church that Mary is “Ever-Virgin”.
Further evidence from the Holy Scriptures that in the Hebrew tradition “brothers” and “sisters” are not necessarily siblings. Our Orthodox Tradition teaches us that the Holy Virgin Mary was the only child of Saints Joakhim and Anna, but at John 19:25 we read, “Standing near the Cross of Jesus was His mother, and His mother’s sister, Mary of Klopas, and Mary magdala.” If our Church history is correct, how could Mary have had a sister? The first clue to our answer is that both women are named Mary. ! No family has two daughters and gives them both the same name! Therefore it is evident that the relationship between the two women has to be something different than our modern English concept of “sister”. The second clue to our answer is that the Bible clearly identifies this Mary of Klopas (Cleopas in KJV), as the mother of Jesus’ “brothers”. The name Klopas or Cleopas is the same as Alphaeus in the Aramaic language which Jesus spoke. Therefore the so-called brothers of Jesus mentioned at Mark 6:3 are elsewhere clearly identified as the sons of Alphaeus and his wife Mary of Klopas - the “sister” of the Virgin Mary.
Thus the Scriptures show that the “brothers” of Christ are not His brothers, but some relation. There is no scriptural evidence to support the notion that the Virgin Mary bore any other children apart from Jesus Christ our God.
Seeing Him born as an infant in Bethlehem. Let all creation glorify Him!
The Holy spirit is the father of Jesus?? What is going on here?
The Holy spirit is the spirit of the father and the son. We do not understand how jesus was placed in the womb of the virgin Mary..that is a mystery beyond our human ability to understand. It was a miraculous act unexplainable in human form.
"The bible puts it as overshadowing of the holyspirit".
What is said aboutthe Holy Spirit we need to be extremely careful becausesin againstthe Holyspiritis the only unforgivable sin. As described by Jesus christin the bible. Lets not assign human meanings to the works and power of the Holyspirit. @@miracles_metanoia
I agreed this time with James White on this matter of Blessed Mary's R.C.C. Dogmas that ANATHEMATIZE (Curse/Condemn) those who do not believe in it (reject it)... I concur with that...
The "Perpetual Virginity" Dogma of Blessed Mary by the R.C.C. was a total denial of the ACTUAL NORMAL BIRTH of the Infant Christ Jesus in Bethlehem...
"Blessed is the WOMB that bore THEE (Savior/Messiah)."... (ref. Luke 11:27-28)... The Bible never said, "Blessed is the WOMB that MIRACULOUSLY bore THEE (Savior)."
Praise be to God in Christ Jesus...Amen.
Prophet Isaiah 7, 14 // Gospels: Mathew 1, 18, //Matthew 1, 23, //Matthew 1, 25// Luke 1, 27,//Luke 1, 34
Understanding the Jewish law behind why Joseph and Mary could do the marital act blew my mind. So therefore, Mary completely belonged to God in a bigger way than just her vow stated. And she needed the protection therefore Jose needed to take her in. Mind blown
This sounds like hoccus poccus honestly
@@ORaddlyispissedoff What part? The Jewish law?
@@ORaddlyispissedoff Please avoid blasphemous parodies of the Mass.
Protection from what? Joseph was a carpenter.
@@SeekTheCross I really don’t remember. It’s been two years since I watched this video
(5:43) I see a problem here with this interpretation of Deut. 24:1-4 and that the law does not say that a betrothed person needs to divorce his wife. Deut. 24:1 is not speaking to a couple who is betrothed but a couple who has married and consummated the relationship. Joseph and Mary had not yet gotten to that point in their relationship. The law in Deut. refers to a legal dissolution of the marriage with a certificate of divorce. Which is why I believe that Matthew writes that Joseph put her away secretly. No written certificate of divorce required. This just does not apply in regard to Mary.
I invite our Catholic friends to read the Holy Bible - Matthew 1:24-25
The gymnastics they have to perform to get past that verse, will mirror the gymnastics this man performed here. Honestly, sickens me.
The Bible also says only a few should teach, and these two men should not teach, clearly.
I am not Catholic, but a Christian currently studying Catholicism and other denominations. When looking at the verse, I paid close mind to the word until. Matthew 1:25 - "but [St. Joseph] knew her not until she had borne a son." The Greek for "until" is έως. έως means "up to a point", not "beyond a point". From what I can gather, there is no specifics set if Joseph actually consummated the marriage with Mary or not. Thus, with the other supporting evidence they gave, it makes more sense on their stances. I'm not a scholar of theology by any means, but looking at the origins of wording does help explain better of what they are saying. And please, I have many loved ones and acquantices who are Catholic. The masses they go to and all they speak are from the Holy Bible, for the Bible was put together by God's own creations and arguably the Catholic church's entities as well. Don't "invite" Catholic friends to read the Bible, discuss the Bible together instead.
@@thecontagiouscajun4795 I invite our anti-catholic friends to actually hear us out and be charitable & patient with us. It might be the first time for some, but you only slander us if you don't listen.
@@rouxmain934Hear out is what some of us do and we are disappointed, because when we to are disagree, we are not allowed to disagree since that has to mean we are anti Catholic! See how that operates?
@@usamiichika1548 2 Peter 1:20, “First of all you must understand this, that no prophecy of scripture is a matter of one’s own interpretation.” Then try listening to the video instead of bringing your own errors into the discussion. Next in context study how Jesus organized the church in the Bible. Mat16:18-19, Mat18:18. Don’t add or subtract words or interpret scripture yourself and in particular the way protestants do because Jesus never gave them the authority to interpret it. Jesus gave the authority to the Church of the living God the pillar and bull work of truth 1Tim3:15.
Would be nice to hear more about data/sources/logic that support: 1. An elderly Joseph betrothed to a teenage Mary 2. A tradition that holds that Mary took a vow of virginity
A good point would be Jesus’s sister Mary. Naming a child after a living relative was taboo at the time, so if the sister meaning is correct (the word could apply to a number of things) she would have been Joseph’s daughter from a prior marriage. So if not elderly, at least quite a bit older
You'd understand if you'd listen : Tim Staples said that Mary was already "betrothed" to Joseph when she said she doesn't know man.
Now you can easily search how Jewish customs were at that time thanks to Google.
As for the second point, all ancient churches hold that belief (you know, the ones that aren't built upon Luther's apostasy).
I love the way that Tim Staples explains everything. I have been a fan of his since he visited the my church 25 years ago and gifted me with a personalized message and autographed copy of his book Nuts and Bolts...
Come from a Protestant background. I have never come across a Protestant who took issue with Jesus being conceived by a virgin birth. It’s the belief she remained a perpetual virgin that is debated.
The moment he (Mr. Staples) said these words I was greatly disturbed and like the men of old, I felt like tearing my clothes apart and falling facedown: “…the fact that Mary is consecrated to the Holy Spirit she becomes what of course the franciscans championed greatly after saint francis of Assisi the SPOUSE OF THE HOLY SPIRIT…”
Now, he is saying that Mary is not only the mother of GOD but also the SPOUSE of GOD! WHAT????!!!
I ask you now brothers and sisters, is this to you a sound doctrine? Did the Apostles believed and held the same view as Mr Staples’? Does this kind of thinking and reasoning still from GOD? In contrast, Jesus in His parables taught His disciples & apostles that He is the GROOM and the CHURCH is the bride - THIS is the real story, THIS is what we the bride of Jesus should believe in! Promoting this unbiblical doctrine desecrates the very essence of GOD - the Holiness of GOD.
Let us all be like the Bereans. Meditate and examine HIS words - the scriptures, to see if what men are teaching, preaching, or promoting is true. To GOD alone be the highest glory, honor, and praise! 🙏
Please let me understand
If bethrothal means technically married, then Blessed Mary is the Spouse of the Holy Spirit, how does that work?
Does that mean Mary is Spouse to two? Or by the virtue of consummation of marriage through the bearing of child, the Holy Ghost is now the legitimate Spouse of Mary?
I know its semantics but man I need answers
You have to understand that to Jews then and even somewhat to Catholics now, that marriage is a two step process. For first century Jews, the first step is betrothal and the second is consummation. For Catholics, the first step is the Sacrament of marriage while the second is consummation. In both cases the marriage is only binding after consummation. This is why you can annul a Catholic marriage without question if it has not been consummated.
@@_MysticKnight Is it right if I say that the Blessed Mary is the wife of the Holy Spirit?
@@m.e4752 Yeah he didn't answer the question because there is no answer
The claim is biblically unfounded
Bro perpetual virginity is unbiblical you can't arrive at it by merely reading the text.
It's heresy attempted to exalt the place of Mary in doctrine as well as the prayer to saints
I am the lmmaculate Conception. These are the words of Mary to Bernadette at Lourdes. Many astounding miracles are worked at Lourdes.
In the dialect of the Pyreenes it has past continuing sense, so peculiar to the syntax that Bernadette found the phrase itself 'unusual'. Anyway, although it affirmed the proclaimed dogma, the apparition was 'private revelation'.
Matthew 1:25
If Mary is the spouse of the Holy Spirit, that means that the Holy Spirit committed adultery, since Mary was already married to Joseph, correct? Your argument seems to be getting worse rather than better. Plus I know it’s an old video, but do you have links to where you answer the question about sex being evil in catholic theology in marriage? God’s best on request for absolute truth.
This was very good. This video finally answered the MAJOR question surrounding Mary and Joseph that I hear from all shades of Christianity. Now we just got to figure out what happened to Joseph in the later years.
If you guys ask me, as a former RC, I think Mary had to be a virgin just for God to show that Jesus is special unless if I am wrong.
But what about the verse that says joseph didnt know her until after?
This is a good question
There does appear to me to be a disconnect between the idea that Mary was both a perpetual virgin and without sin. The Jews at the time of Christ believed that the first and greatest commandment was the first commandment that God gave humanity given in Genesis 1 when God commanded Adam and Eve to be “fruitful and multiply”. Obviously Mary “multiplied” but with a single “child” she would have been seen as a sinner. I do not say this because I believe that what the people believed about Mary was of any consequence but that Mary would have lived in obedience to God in every way. In regard to Joseph having children from a previous marriage, why is there no mention of these children when he took his family to Bethlehem for the census?
Always good to hear something wonderful about Mamma Mary. 🥰
@Dr. Alan Hales I do not care for your opinion.
@Dr. Alan Hales I know the Bible. Preach to someone else.
@Dr. Alan Hales go away
Amazing! Really, really well explained! Thank you so much🙌
Ugh, his argument just went nowhere. He basically argues that Mary has to be a perpetual virgin because she is "married" to the Holy Spirit and Joseph is simply there for appearances sake, that he had no right to a husband's privilege of having sexual relations with his own wife. The protestant view is much more logical. It affirms the immaculate conception but then acknowledges that Mary and Joseph became a normal married couple after Jesus' birth. This thing about elevating Mary to such absurd heights makes me scratch my head every time
Protestants affirm the immaculate conception?
Some maybe which ones.
Calvin and Wesley and Luther disagree with you they affirm her perpetual virginity.
@@iggyantioch Still not an argument. The gospels indicate that Jesus had siblings. It is absurd and unnecessary to argue that Mary was a perpetual virgin. I am starting to think that Mary was elevated by the early church to appeal to converted Pagans. It creates a sort of continuity with goddess worship. Honor Mary YES, but remember who the hero of the story is......
Why not an argument?
Do the Reformers have no merit?
The argument that scripture says she had other children,why don't the Reformers agree? Seeing as they were Sola Scriptura believers and very anti Catholic.
I would direct you to this by John Calvin
He agreed with St. Jerome vs Helvidius on this. He appeals to Ezekiel 44. She's the East Gate.
Remember She's the Mother of God.
This arguing style of many that disagree harms The hypostatic union. This is why the Marian Dogmas were ascribed in many instances.
It wasn't pagan reasons that the Dogmas were made it was due to heresy.
Arianism, Nestorianism gnostics and all sorts of people degrading The Saviors person.
Thanks for the response
Peace.
You can read the response to the charge of Helvidius that she wasn't a perpetual virgin. At New advent Catholic Encyclopedia
It's not too long.
Do we really understand the biological details of Mary's pregnancy? Was it Mary's ovum or did the Spirit miraculously deposit a viable zygote into Marys' womb? Can Jesus be considered the son of Mary through gestation and delivery as he is considered the son of Joseph through adoption? The perpetual virginity of Mary still seems an answer to a question no one is asking. I'll read and pray more concerning this. Thanks Matt for the video.
Not a zygote, but a sperm!
Most probably an ovum of Mary was fertilized, for otherwise Jesus wouldn't have been biologically a descendant of David as promised
My understanding is that it had to be using Mary's ovum as Jesus was a decendent of David. Mary is a decendent of King David.
@@spedchica05 where does it say that ? It does say that Joseph is from the line of David !
@@andrejones2147How do you think Jesus is the son of David? It’s from Joseph. Hence, through her marriage with Joseph she enters his family and legally becomes, she and her son Jesus, a part of the House of David.
AND, in Hebrew tradition, the mother is the queen, not the wife. That’s why Mary is called queen of heaven.
Bit confused then, what about Jesus’ siblings? Surely they weren’t also conceived of the spirit
Jesus was an only Child!!
I think you can find you answer here: www.catholic.com/magazine/online-edition/jesus-had-brothers
@@hezzerk73 Except for His brothers James, Jude, Simon and Joseph (Matt 13:55) and His sisters.
@@thomasfryxelius5526 not Mary's children though.
Joseph was much older than Mary and already had children.
Why would Jesus say behold your mother. Of Mary already had children to take care of her?
And Jesus's "brothers" were at the place of the skull.
Surely Jesus didn't need to tell John behold your mother and mother behold your son.
Jesus was firstly telling us that we must all behold our mother but also Mary had nobody to take care of her and therefore John took care of her.
Jesus wouldn't say this if he had brothers and his mother had sons
@RetroMan okay prove to me why you say that.
I can show you a number of 4th century Christians that believed that?
What about Matt. 1:25
It says knew her not till shad had delivered Jesus? Why the word till?
They say "until" does not mean what we think it means.
So those parts where it mentions his brothers and sisters-
y’know like Mark 6, Luke 8-
you’re just going to ignore those parts…
Not that it has any bearing on anything anyway though!
The absolute mental and biblical gymnastics required to believe in the perpetual virginity of Mary astonishes me. Why would anyone accept such a radical doctrine with no scriptural support?
Edit: Forgot to mention, the Holy Spirit is not the spouse of Mary. Joseph was. Were they a throuple? You can’t just make stuff up to justify insane theology.
The holy spirit espoused / overshadowed Mary, and the Word was made flesh
@@miracles_metanoia How does that relate to the perpetual virginity of Mary?
The part about Matt 1:20 “take” (paralambano) seems half thought out. Looking all all the references of that word online doesn’t suggest anything but that it means to take or grasp. And then he rewrites the text by ignoring the phrase “as” your wife. I mean grasping g at straws here.
How can somebody think that was a good explanation, then if she belong to the Holy Spirit ( which it cant be because they didn’t have sexual relationships or were married) why would the Angel tell Joseph that he can take his wife if Mary “belongs@ to the Holy Spirit, Matthew 1:24-25 speaks that Joseph didn’t consumare their marriage UNTIL she gave birth to Jesus, or why would the Bible refer to the brothers and sisters of Jesus if they were children of Joseph when He wasn’t his father ( that will be like calling the children of your Moms partner your siblings, you are literally unrelated)
Does this also mean that St. Joseph was a perpetual virgin?
hahaha
There is a thought 💭 toward the strength of 'tradition' that also makes sense: if Joseph was a 'observant Jew', and he knew Mary's pregnancy and birth of Jesus was a miracle, would he have been so bold then to have had conjugal relations with Mary and 'spoilt' the evidence of the miracle. Also, in Numbers 30:3-4 there is the Mosaic basis for the Protoevangelium claiming Mary was a consecrated virgin prior to her betrothal to Joseph.
Are you sure about Numbers 31:33. It doesn't seem like a relevant passage. “And threescore and twelve thousand beeves,” (Num 31:33, KJVA)
@@StanleyPinchak It's a mistake. It should be Numbers 30:3-4 - thank you for pointing it out! 👍🏼
My problem with this is that he is making it sound as if the Holy Spirit had sex with Mary, which He certainly did not! She was a virgin. I always thought of it more like a spiritual insemination. Not sex. So nothing that would prevent Joseph from having normal marriage relations with her afterward.
Exactly, especially using the example of David, his concubines and Absolom. One could argue Mary was a 'spiritual virgin, perpetually', meaning she didn't serve other gods or fall into spiritual adultry/Idolatry. Mary remaining a physical virgin or not really has no effect on the work of Jesus on the cross - who cares? Matthew 1:25 and later passages about the siblings of Jesus seem to disprove the perpetual virgin ideology 🤔
Ave mary
First off, I grew up as an evangelical, so this is the first time hearing about this doctrine. The obvious rebuttal is what about her other children? But at a deeper level this sounds like an equivocation fallacy. How can God, who can commit no sin or tempt man to sin, do something to break his own law? Basically in order to get perpetual virginity, you are making the incarnation akin to the consumption of marriage, an act which for humans involves sex, but for God involved the agency of the Holy Spirit. But this would make God an adulterer because Mary was already betrothed to Joseph. Or are you saying that Mary was always bethrothed to God, in which case Joseph would be the adulterer if he slept with her? Sorry, this sounds like one of those doctrines thought up first, with scripture shoehorned on afterwards to make it fit.
I fully agree with you, that's exactly what I was thinking when I was watching this. They do their best to sidestep the "brothers of Jesus" issue saying that they were either cousins or step-brothers. The latter is done by declaring that Joseph was much older than Mary, a widower, and had children from a previous marriage. However, in ALL of these defenses of the perpetual virginity of Mary, the question still remains that if it was an indispensable doctrine of christianity, then why on earth did God place evidence in the Bible to the contrary? Why in Matthew 1:25 does it say that Joseph did not consumate his marriage union with Mary "UNTIL the birth of her FIRSTBORN"? It does not use the Greek word which is used in John 3:16 which translates as "one and only-born", it uses a different word which implies that Jesus was the first of multiple. You cannot make "brothers" into "cousins" because there was a separate word for that used in describing Elizabeth, Mary's cousin. If one tries to go the step-brother route, and the issue is as critical as they claim it to be, then why on God's green earth would God omit a simple sentence explaining that Joseph was a widower with children and he had made a vow with Mary to have an asexual marriage (which is not even a marriage according to the new testament)? If it was such a critical issue, why would God be careless in laying it out? God would have known if people needed one more simple sentence to make this critical issue rock solid and clear.
Then they want to argue that Mary was betrothed to the Holy Spirit, while at thesame time being betrothed to Joseph, oh, and it was to protect Mary from society. Does that mean when it's convenient for you, you can lie? "Mary, people won't understand you being married to the Holy Spirit, so just tell them that you're married to Joseph, it doesn't really matter." That would be a God ordained lie, which is a contradiction because "God is not a man that He should lie..."
Seriously, catholics?
Jesus never had other brothers, you need to read the whole Bible.
www.catholic.com/magazine/online-edition/jesus-had-brothers
Here a more deeper explanation of the brothers of the Lord.
www.catholic.com/tract/brethren-of-the-lord
@@PhilipDNorris You want my advice Norris. Read Numbers 30 about married women concerning vows. An Israelite woman can be married and still have her vows before God provided the husband agrees.
Next, you said marriage must be consummated in the new testament, but wasn't Mary under the law of Moses as a Jew?
Though I have to admit, there isn't explicit evidence from scripture that supports Mary's virginity but there also isn't explicit evidence from scripture that denies the doctrine as well..... Those against the doctrine try to use from scripture:
A. The until argument: but the preposition doesn't infallably describe what happens after. You need more information.
B. The brothers/sisters of the Lord: Brothers/sisters have a wide range of meaning apart from being biological.
C. The Firstborn argument: doesn't strictly imply other children. An only born is a firstborn as well.
D. The sex must happen in Marriage: If the woman vows to be celibate and the man agrees, then this argument ain't convincing according to the law of Moses.
@@isaacosahon4352 An argument from silence isn't convincing either.
Who's mother was Jesus brothers? And if Mark was Jesus' cousin why he wasn't called Jesus brother?Joseph and Mary live together until Jesus got older. Did they live together and both are celebate? The virgin is literally meant for maiden.Joseph and Mary were engaged and surely be married later on.
I am a Catholic and I believe that Mother Mary is ever virgin and holy, not only because she has the status as the Mother of God, but also because of her many apparitions under powerful graces of God, and I believe in her apparitions she usually testified as the virgin anyway.
John 7 : 1-16, Mark 6 : 2-4, Matthew 13 : 54-57
The Gospel quotes above from Mark and Matthew are the ones depicting the 'brothers' of Jesus and His 'sisters', Jesus' neighbors underestimate Him and look down upon Him. If you only read the passages plainly you might be mistaken, just like the neighbors or townsfolk in the Synagogue, to think that Jesus is nothing special, like how can He have such authority and power? since we know He is only 'a son' of a carpenter and a simple mother, and we know His 'brothers' and 'sisters' as working class people around. How can Jesus be the Son of God if He has mortal parents and siblings? as it seems.
Well, if Mary had other children beside Jesus, it will be a sin in Luke 1 : 43 where Elizabeth calls Mary 'mother of my Lord' and then Mary would become a mother of some other mortals, in which we would call Mary as Mother of God, Mother of James, Mother of Joseph, Mother of Simon, Mother of Judas, etc. Can we put God, although appeared as a man, as just one among other humans? Mary and Joseph would have dishonored, and hence sinned against, God by engaging in sexual relations when they knew the miraculous conception of Jesus and His divine nature by the will of God and yet they insisted in their own earthly desires and commitments. If Mary and Joseph are not holy, Mary would be a sinner and this would also be unfitting to the incarnation of God.
So who are these 'brothers' and 'sisters' of Jesus? I think it is written as such to show extended families from either or both Mary and Joseph and hence they seemed to outsiders as 'brothers' and 'sisters' of Jesus as they focused on Jesus. And in John 7, Jesus' brothers in Galilee might as well be his friends He knew since childhood or fellow religious friends. The other thing about Joseph in Matthew 1 : 25, the Greek word is ἐγίνωσκεν (knew) regarding how Joseph did not commit to his (holy) family life with Mary after Jesus was born, which I take it as simply Joseph started calling Mary his wife and living a family life in chastity, because as explained how they must honor God from the graces and responsibilities they received. Without doubt, God's power and graces worked greatly in the holy family, for Christ.
I am an inquirer and have a legit question.
What he is saying makes sense, yet what do you do with Jesus’ brothers?
Were they then born of the Spirit too? And if they were, then wouldn’t that elevate them to the same existence as Christ our Lord?
I get what the speaker here is saying as far as Joseph walking along side her, but what about after Christ is born? Would her taking relations with Joseph then make the relationship between Mary and the Holy Spirit more like David with the concubines? God is bound to take care of her but can no longer bring her into the marriage bed?
Also, where can I find quotes from the Fathers and early saints who believed in the perpetual virginity of Mary?
Mary had no other children after Jesus.
συνελθειν was the word used to show Joseph did not have sex till after the birth of Jesus . But the text is clear in verse 25 that once Jesus was born a normal marriage relationship was started
I guess you believe that once the presence of God left the Temple the jews used the Holy of Holies room for regular storage or sleeping, just like everybody would do with any other room. And because of that, at the time of Jesus, anyone, or at least any of the priests, would come and go in that room because it was their right. Am I right? And if Jews would able to find the Ark of the Covenant, they would use it to store stuff in it because after all it is just a fancy wooden gold lined box...but just a box after all and that is what anybody does with the boxes they own. Put stuff in them. And I wonder if after talking to God in the bush, Moses later on came back and cut the bush and used it for cooking and heating...because that is what people do with bushes after all. I wonder how normal the marriage relationship could be when angels tell to each one of the couple that the first born child is actually from God.
@@jayschwartz6131 still waiting for the protestants to show where in scripture it says that Joseph was the high priest. Oh wait, he isn't even from the line of Aaron.
Read Richard Bennett’s book ‘Catholosism, East of Eden’. It gives all the answers perfectly.
Matthew 1:25 TPT
[25] but they refrained from having sex until she gave birth to her son, whom they named "Jesus."
The "until" doesn't mean that they necessarily had sex after the birth of Chirst.
"My grandfather didn't touch a drop of alcohol until the day he died."
That doesn't mean that after He died, he drank.
Jesus promised us He will be with us until the end of the age. That doesn't mean after the end of the age, He's going to leave us.
@@jeffscully1347 Yes it does that is the only logical conclusion . The until is clearly given a time limit “until she gave birth to her son”
Matthew 12:46-50 NASBS
[46] While He was still speaking to the crowds, behold, His mother and brothers were standing outside, seeking to speak to Him. [47] Someone said to Him, "Behold, Your mother and Your brothers are standing outside seeking to speak to You." [48] But Jesus answered the one who was telling Him and said, "Who is My mother and who are My brothers?" [49] And stretching out His hand toward His disciples, He said, "Behold My mother and My brothers! [50] For whoever does the will of My Father who is in heaven, he is My brother and sister and mother."
@followingjesus1333 no. It doesn't. The Apostles, their students, the Early Church Fathers, everyone associated with Jesus Church agreed that Mary, the Mother of God, remained a virgin her entire Earthly life.
It wasn't until AFTER Martin Luther's great heresy that anyone even questioned it. Even Luther and John Calvin and Ulrich Zwingli believed it.
The Protestant reformer John Calvin: “Helvidius has shown himself too ignorant, in saying that Mary had several sons, because mention is made in some passages to the brothers of Christ” [quoted by Bernard Leeming, Protestants and Our Lady, 9].
Martin Luther agreed with Calvin that Mary was always a virgin, as did Ulrich Zwingli: “I esteem immensely the Mother of God, the ever chaste, immaculate Virgin Mary” [E. Stakemeier, De Mariologia et Oecumenismo, K. Balic, ed., 456].
"For the Lord has done great things for me." What are those great things? Daughter of the Father. Mother of the Son. Spouse of the Holy Spirit. "The Spirit will overshadow you." In modern parlance, the Spirit will marry you. (See the conversation between Ruth and Boaz. "Place the wings of your cloak over me.")
Mathew 12:47, Why is this so hard to believe? John 7:3. It's like you guys are blind. The Gospel of Mark (6:3) and the Gospel of Matthew (13:55-56) mention James, Joseph/Joses, Judas/Jude and Simon as brothers of Jesus, the son of Mary. The same verses also mention unnamed sisters of Jesus. So please find me another wife of Joseph I guess that will help
Read the verses you posted. Yes they point Jesus as the son of Mary. And Yes they point out James, Joses, Jude and Simon as Jesus brothers. And yes they point out the sisters of Jesus. But it is a very big leap to assume that brothers and sisters imply biological brothers and sisters. I know this because brothers and sisters have a wide meaning in the bible. I would agree with you if the bible gave the information that Mary gave birth to the Lord's siblings. But that's not in the bible, hence we disagree.
@Adrian Pritchard Now you are just taking another big leap with your interpretation.
but knew her not until she had borne a son; and he called his name Jesus.
Matthew 1:25 RSV-CI. By your interpretation Joseph knew Mary after Jesus was born.
Till I come, attend to the public reading of scripture, to preaching, to teaching.
1 Timothy 4:13 RSV-CI. By your interpretation, Paul is advising Timothy to stop preaching, teaching...... when he comes.
For he must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet. 1 Corinthians 15:25 RSV-CI. By your interpretation, Christ must stop reigning after all His enemies are under his feet.
If your friend greets you with this, "God be with you till (until) we meet again". Does he/she means that God won't be with you when you all meet again?
Now can you see the problem with the "until/till" argument. The word 'until' does not infallably define what happens after. You need more context for that....
@Adrian Pritchard Now you hold on a minute and answer my question concerning the verse:
And the angel said to her, “Do not be afraid, Mary, for you have found favor with God. And behold, you will conceive in your womb and bear a son, and you shall call his name Jesus. And Mary said to the angel, “How shall this be, since I have no husband?”
Luke 1:30-31, 34 RSV-CI
The question is this: Mary got the news that she will bear a son, but she was betrothed to Joseph. If she actually planned on having kids with him, why would she ask, "How shall this be, since I have no husband?" Is it that she didn't acknowledge Joseph as her husband (unfortunately some Christians accept this)? Or is it that she has already vowed to be a virgin despite being married to Joseph? After all she was a woman under the law of Moses, who was free to obey the law in Numbers 30 concerning vows.
Love to hear your answer.
@@isaacosahon4352 Indeed. Her question makes no sense if she was expecting to have children with Joseph in the first place.
@Adrian Pritchard A phrase like this is used to emphasise what is being described before the until is fulfilled. It is not intended to say anything about the future beyond that point. Here are some biblical examples:
2 Samuel 6:23: And Michal the daughter of Saul had no child until the day of her death. (Does this mean she had children after she died?)
1 Timothy 4:13: Until I come, attend to the public reading of scripture, to preaching, to teaching. (Does this mean Timothy should stop teaching after Paul comes?)
1 Corinthians 15:25: For he (Christ) must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet. (Does this mean Christ’s reign will end? By no means! Luke 1:33 says, “he will reign over the house of Jacob forever and of his kingdom there shall be no end.”)
Y’all lost me with this argument. Why would God have Joseph go through with his marriage to Mary if He didn’t intend for Joseph to consummate the marriage? Nowhere did God tell Joseph he was not to consummate his marriage with Mary after Jesus was born. Wedlock is between 2 HUMANS, and the reason Mary was a virgin is because no MAN had been with her through Jesus’ conception
Why would God? How about 1) To guarantee His Son an earthly father. 2) To prevent the stoning of Virgin Mary (due to getting pregnant out of wedlock). 3) Due to the law of levirate (even if Mary hadn't been stoned, she would have been completely dispossessed for not being able to inherit anything). 4) So that it was more evident to the people that Jesus was descent from David. 5) Because it would have been unjust and unfair to Mary to leave her pregnant with a Child that He put her in charge of.
@@JatnaRD
1. Why would Jesus need an earthly father? He is already morally pure, and God could provide for any needs (as he did for Israel in the wilderness).
2. God protected Jesus. Why couldn't he have protected Mary?
3. Refer to 1
4. Fair
5. He did leave Mary pregnant with a child that she was in charge of.
@@atear2616 1) Because Jesus became man, and it is important for human boys to have fathers. Moreover, it protected Mary's reputation. 2) He could have protected Mary. And actually He did. He didn't do it the exact same way that He did Jesus. He did it the way that He saw fit. Mary needed far more support as a pregnant woman and then as a mother that adult Jesus. It is also good. It is also a way of allowing everyone to more easily know that Jesus was descendant of the tribe of David.
@@atear2616 by law Mary had to marry Joseph.
But, If Joseph could not engane in sexual relationship with her because of her vow to the sacred marriage with the Holy Spirit, why is it allowed for her to continue her marriage with Joseph aswell in the first place? I mean, some parts of the laws of marriage apply and some don't? (I just want to understand this whole thing better)
You do understand we marry Jesus when we fo to Heaven, but we don’t have sex with Jesus.
This didn't convince me. I wish the Jewish law, historical context, and translations of the Bible texts had been even more flushed out in this discussion. What was said here was too surface level, felt like it was missing a ton of context, and didn't address enough of both sides of the argument. Im not convinced either way about Mary's perpetual virginity btw.
Let me add some. It is cleared described in Ezekiel 44, 1-2:
_1 Then the man brought me back to the outer gate of the sanctuary, the one facing east, and it was shut. 2 _*_The Lord said to me, “This gate is to remain shut. It must not be opened; no one may enter through it. It is to remain shut because the Lord, the God of Israel, has entered through it_* .
Let’s check the Fathers of The Church:
_”Some quite emphatically understand this closed gate through which only the Lord God of Israel passes … as the Virgin Mary, who remains a Virgin before and after childbirth. In fact, she remains always a Virgin, in the moment in which the Angel speaks with her and when the Son of God is born”_ .
St. Jerome (Commentarium in Evangelium Lucae, PL 25, 430.)
_”Only Christ opened the closed doors of the virginal womb, which continued to remain closed, however. This is the closed eastern gate, through which only the high priest may enter and exit and which nevertheless is always closed”_ .
St. Jerome (Dialogus contra Pelagianos 2, 4)
_”Who is this gate (Ezekiel 44:1-4), if not Mary? Is it not closed because she is a virgin? Mary is the gate through which Christ entered this world, when He was brought forth in the virginal birth and the manner of His birth did not break the seals of virginity”_ .
St. Ambrose (The Consecration of a Virgin and the Perpetual Virginity of Mary , 8:52)
_”She is closed because she is a virgin; she is a gate, because Christ has entered through her......This gate faces east, because she has given birth to him who rises, the sun of justice.....Mary is the good gate that was closed and was not opened. Christ passed through it, but did not open it”_ .
St. Ambrose (De Institutione Virginis, 8, 57. PL 16, 334)
Read Dr Brant Pitre's book "Jesus and the Jewish roots of Mary." Excellent explanation. Also below is a talk 👇🏾he gave on Mary's role as the Ark of the New Covenant.
czcams.com/video/jmNWqLSJcJI/video.html
@@Serquss He is so easy to understand. IMHO the best teacher of the Jewish roots of the Catholic faith which is no surprise as he is a Professor of Ancient Judaism and the NT.
Him and Brother Bob Fishman are great to watch. Now I understand a lot more about the Jewish roots of the Catholic faith. There are a lot of practices and traditions we have which are over 2000years old that I didn't know where they came from. People look at Catholic practices and traditions and have no idea what or why we Catholics believe/practice what we do.
My protestant friends would ask me "why do Catholics do.this or believe that?" and I would give out inadequate answers. Now I understand why we believe and do those things, the Jewish roots of the Eucharist, Our Lady's role etc
Laura McDonald Me either. He added a lot of anecdotal information that does not actually confirm his position.
@@austindearmond2162
czcams.com/users/results?search_query=mary+ark+of+the+new+covenant+pitre
A lot of assumptions here. Primarily, he assumes that God miraculously impregnating Mary is treated the same way as intimacy, in that it must happen in marriage. That causes a lot of problems. Since Mary was already exclusively claimed by Joseph, that means that the Holy Spirit committed adultery with a "legally married, betrothed" woman. And then Joseph formally married someone else's wife.
Also, Matthew 1:20-25 is worded really weird if they were never "together". Why point out that "he 'knew' her not till she brought forth their firstborn son" if he "knew her not" afterword as well?
Also, Matthew 13:55-56, Mark 3:32, Luke 8:20, and John 2:12 reference his siblings. All four gospels.
The "he knew her not" can be seen as a simple affirmation of the fact that Mary was a virgin (as prophesied) when she gave birth. If you take the text of the whole narration you see that the points that are being said are to explain and certify that the prophesied miracle of a virgin conceiving and giving birth was taking place. Therefore it is not odd that it says that he didn't have relations until she gave birth. For instance, Jesus says that He is with us every day until the end of the world, which isn't to mean that He will NOT be with us after: the emphasis and point and information given is about what happens before, not about what happens after.
About the siblings, if you see Acts you see hundreds of brothers together, and in the Old Testament you find people with 600 brethren. Homes back then often contained more than one family, and so uncles, aunt's and cousins often lived together. The cousins that lived in the same home were called "brethren". In Spanish to this day the cousins that are children of the siblings of your parents are called "brother-cousins" or "sister-cousins".
St. Joseph was the Redemptoris Custos -- The Guardian of our Redeemer.
Thank God for you ministry, Matt.
Sia lodato Gesu Cristo!
Matthew 1:25 And knew her not till she had brought forth her firstborn son: and he called his name JESUS.
The word 'until' doesn't mean what we think it means in English. It comes from the Greek word that is used as an infinite amount of time
@@CPATuttle it does not change anything. Till remains till. Look how it is used "And knew her not till she had brought forth her firstborn Son"
Look how "knowing" someone is used in Genesis:
Genesis 24:15-17
New King James Version
15 And it happened, before he had finished speaking, that behold, Rebekah, who was born to Bethuel, son of Milcah, the wife of Nahor, Abraham’s brother, came out with her pitcher on her shoulder. 16 Now the young woman was very beautiful to behold, a virgin; no man had known her. And she went down to the well, filled her pitcher, and came up. 17 And the servant ran to meet her and said, “Please let me drink a little water from your pitcher.”
No man had known her, meaning no man had laid with her; she was a virgin.
Now when it says Joseph did not know Mary until after Jesus was born, what do you think it suggests if Joseph married Mary? If Mary would remain virgin forever why would she marry a man knowing the marriage will not be fullfilled like having a fake marriage? In the right context Jospeh discovered his would be wife Mary was pregnant, and because he did not want to shame her he want to privately dismiss her, but the Angel told him to not do that that she was not pregnant because of premarital sex but because this was by the will of God through The Holy Spirit, that she was still virgin and never laid with a man. The Angel then instructs him to still marry her because the birth of Christ is of God, that way Joseph would still marry Mary, imagine in those days according to Jewish customs, a woman being pregmant before getting married, it is a great dishonor, not something that would get a woman killed but she would be put to shame as it is written that Jospeh did not want to shame her, it did not say protect her from being killed. I think people believe in The Gospel of James a book that is not in the Bible and follow the teachings of Tatian who taught sex and marriage are a byproduct of original sin, rather than the original sin being that Adam and Eve disobeying God and listening to the serpent and eating from the tree that God forbid them to eat from, thinking they would become Gods too like God which is the serpents desire (that will never come to pass). It was God who created Eve for Adam, before the original sin. God saw Adam needed a companion, this was after Adam named all the animals when Adam was asleep, and God took one of his ribs and made Eve. How can Tatian hold this belief when God said be fruitful and multiply? We see it in animals in nature and with human beings its reproduction by the blessing of God; trees and plants fruits etc grow seeds, animals get puppies cubs etc and mankind have babies.
And seeing how birth works, how can one remain virgin after giving birth to a child? Some woman die when a child is born for example, some need a c section, but either way a child came out of the lady part down there and it takes away the hymen etc. And a married couple can consumate their marriage, that is not sin but lawful. Marriage is considered holy, if you get married in a Church; does it not include a ritual that you take eachother as husband and wife before God? And that you are expected to hold the marital duties? And that when the marriage is fruitful you have many children which is a blessing rather than something to look down upon? If Mary remained virgin forever or not, she is the blessed among women, she was chosen by God to bear His Son. What a great honor.
@@CPATuttle This is not true. ἕως • (héōs) means "for a time". Not "for all time"
@@ninjason57 yes it is. Matthew 28:20 uses “heos” translated “until” to mean continuous as God will continue to be with us after the end of time
Same book of Matthew 28:20 uses “heos” translated “until” to mean continuous as God will continue to be with us after the end of time
Didn’t really follow the reasoning here with David’s concubines. Saying that Joseph having sexual relations with Mary violates OT consecration of marriage doesn’t make sense if you’re using multiple wives and concubines as a proof. Maybe that still shows some of the understanding of taking a woman after she has lain with another man but that still isn’t a true example of marriage to begin with. Seems more cultural than theological reasoning on that front
The more important question is why would Mary's perpetual virginity be necessary?
“Mt 1:25 Knew her not. A Hebrew form for conjugal intercourse. The language of the verse does not imply the perpetual virginity of Mary.” ??
David's wives weren't taken. His concubines were. You should know this.
So all those arguments sound fine but I am really perplexed at the framing "Mary is married to the Holy Spirit." Is this language even licit and cohere with how the Church Fathers and Saints would frame it and The Church? I am having trouble with this framing. I think there needs to be more nuance unpacked in how marriage is conceived in ancient Israel and how The Catholic Church conceives it in light if Mary's Virginal Perpetuity.
St. Joseph was the husband of Mary in the common usage of the idea of marriage.
The pious custom of referring to the Holy Spirit as the spouse of Mary is a symbolic expression of Mary’s perpetual virginity and the virgin birth of Jesus. It is not meant in a literal manner but rather in terms of Mary’s singular devotion to God and unique relationship to the Trinity.
For me it's simple. If Mary had other children, her attention would be diverted from serving Jesus. As perfect model of the Church, it is fitting that she would be wholly focused on Christ.
Most people don't have a clue what this particular word used for Mary which in Hebrew is alma, it's only used three times in the old testament referring to a young woman, however this word goes beyond the meaning of just a young woman but actually indicates her age, just as the word betulah in Hebrew is also referring to a virgin but also indicates age, both of these words are argued among scholars and can only come up with a young woman in their translation, a never ending argument that carries no proof, they could prove in their time if a young woman was a virgin or not, we can also do that in our time but no one wants to accept the truth, the two words that has everyone confused because they think they mean the same thing is the main problem with translating them, one is virgin and the other is virginity, I see no need to go into great detail trying to explain the difference but I can assure you this, one can be proven and the other can only be believed, a woman of any age can have virginity however a TRUE virgin which Mary was would have been impossible for her to get pregnant, I am saying this because of what I know a miracle to be and what many think is a miracle which is not, the true virgin (alma) which Mary was, would have been impossible to conceive a child and it wouldn't have mattered if she slept with a man or not, not having a understanding of the customs in ancient times, specifically the Jewish customs, is why all the arguing exist among gentiles and among the Jews as to what these two words mean, not willing to admit it because of the shame it brings to them, also people not having a understanding of WHY Jesus had to be born from a virgin and not just a young woman having virginity just don't understand the significance of His BLOOD, in this the whole world has been deceived, among other issues but this being a very important one, I know how old Mary was at the time God and the Holy Spirit came upon her but you will never figure it out from their scriptures by the way it was translated
The guy is speaking human philosophy and reasoning by assumptions,
@mattfradd here is part of the problem..... Saint JPII's Catechism of the Catholic Church teaches heresy saying in CCC 497 that St Joseph is Mary's fiancee.
Not a heresy, possibly a misinterpretation
@@humphreyobanor866 More like mistranslation.
Although neither Hebrew nor Aramaic had a word for "cousin", both customarily spoke of a cousin as a "son of an uncle" (Heb. ben dod; Aram. bar dad) and the Septuagint, the Greek translation of the Old Testament, never translates either expression as "brother" or "sister". Brothers’ (adelphoi) never means ‘cousins’ in New Testament Greek” (1976, 1:181, emp. added). Indeed, the Greek language had a separate and distinct word for “cousins”-anepsioi (e.g., Colossians 4:10). When a nephew was meant, the relationship was clearly specified (e.g., Acts 23:16).
Matthew 1:25?... narrates that "he (Joseph - husband of Blessed Mary) KNEW (had marital sex) her not until she brought forth a SON and he (Joseph) called/named Him Jesus."
The English word "KNEW or KNOWN" in the context of the Holy Scripture (Word of God) is a modest way to say "had Marital Sex."... nothing is CLEARER than this Biblical passage...
However, since God took her VIRGINITY with her consent at a younger age (perhaps not even of legal age of 18 years old in our time), I firmly believe that God Almighty had RESTORED (gave back) Blessed Mary's Virginity before she died even after having other Biological Children from her husband Joseph...
Nothing is Impossible with God if God wills it... When God takes something, God also gives it back... When God closed the Door, God also opened another Door... When God allowed the 1st Temple to be destroyed, God also allowed the 2nd Temple to be restored...
This "VIRGINITY RESTORATION" of Blessed Mary falls under the SPOKEN/ORAL TRADITION of the early CHURCHES in Asia Minor of the 1st Century A.D. and not under the written/epistle Tradition taught by the Apostles of Christ...
This became the Roman Catholic Doctrine of "Perpetual Virginity of Blessed Mary," which I firmly believe is God's sole doing and not Blessed Mary's self-doing alone...
Glory, Praise, and Thanks be to God in Christ Jesus... Amen and Amen...
I'm saying that nowhere in the bible does it state that Mary was a perpetual virgin. Prove your point by pointing out the scripture that confirms this.
Tell me if I’m crazy, But I learned that both Joseph and Mary had taken an oath to lifelong celibacy even in their marriage. So they had never planned to have sex. Right/wrong??? There are even people in these modern times who take this oath.
Laurie McBroom correct. And is in the Bible too Numbers 30
Read Brant Pitre’s book Jesus and the Jewish roots of Mary. You will love it, I did it in audible
i knew them personally, and they went at it like rabbits
@@bjraleigh1439 fr
This is such a terribly weak argument… It’s no wonder that I have never heard it before. Mary was betrothed to Joseph. You’re suggesting that she was consecrated to God, and therefore could not be with her husband? It’s so absurd.
I see the womb as too sacred to receive another man that would be stained with original sin.
The argument goes that Jesus had brothers. That word can be translated as cousins or very possibly and more probably Joseph had children from before. Mary was probably 13 or 14.
Wait. The best argument for the PERPETUAL virginity of Mary is that "Joseph would have known" she was "consecrated to the Holy Spirit????????" I came here with an open mind trying to learn more about the RC position, but - with all due respect - this actually a worse argument than I was expecting. Can anyone here point to a better resource? (And I really appreciate and enjoy PWA!)
The Catholic Church was commissioned by Christ to teach all nations and to teach them infallibly-guided, as he promised, by the Holy Spirit until the end of the world (see John 14:25, 16:13). The mere fact that the Church teaches that something definitely true is a guarantee that it is true (see Luke 10:16).
Not an issue for me, this one. Unlike the dogma of Mary's immaculate conception which I still don't get. Idea for a video?
Check out Brant Pitre on CZcams or his book Jesus and the Jewish Roots of Mary. The idea of her immaculate conception comes from typology. If Jesus is the new Adam, Mary is the new Eve. Adam and Eve were both created without sin. New Testament types are always greater than their Old Testament counterparts. This means that Mary would’ve been created without sin too and would’ve remained without sin, otherwise she’d be no different from Eve. You could also see that she is the new ark of the new covenant because within her womb was the Word made flesh, the great high priest, the fulfillment of the law and prophets. The three items in the old ark were the manna, the staff of Aaron, and the 10 commandments. The old ark was so holy that if you touched it you would die. The new ark not made by hands would be even holier. Still, none of this changes that Mary is a creature, not divine. It just shows how God chose her to bear His only begotten Son.
@@impasse0124 The argument only works if you think sex is inherently sinful and that original sin is some kind of sti passed on to children. Not Augustine's greatest moment, that.
thekikupiku At Lourdes Our Lady appeared to Bernadette and said I am the Immaculate Conception. God has worked many astounding miracles in Lourdes. Heaven has authenticated the title . CheCk out Lourdes to help with this.
@@impasse0124 Correct. Also scriptural support for the role of Our Lady.👇🏾czcams.com/video/kUdYeYy3NQA/video.html
I found this response unsatisfactory based on scriptural evidence. Moreover I found it inflammatory that it is being said that the holy spirit cannot do such and such a thing such as singing a census paper or defending her from a mob of mortal beings. That is utterly un-orthodox even for Catholic standards (classical catholic standards since pope Francis is not much of an orthodox himself). You are taking away attributes from the triune-God and giving sovereignty to a piece of paper.
Back in the 1500s the catholic church would have burn you to the stake for such wrong interpretation of the attributes of a sovereign and might God.
Let me add some. It is cleared described in Ezekiel 44, 1-2:
_1 Then the man brought me back to the outer gate of the sanctuary, the one facing east, and it was shut. 2 _*_The Lord said to me, “This gate is to remain shut. It must not be opened; no one may enter through it. It is to remain shut because the Lord, the God of Israel, has entered through it_* .
Let’s check the Fathers of The Church:
_”Some quite emphatically understand this closed gate through which only the Lord God of Israel passes … as the Virgin Mary, who remains a Virgin before and after childbirth. In fact, she remains always a Virgin, in the moment in which the Angel speaks with her and when the Son of God is born”_ .
St. Jerome (Commentarium in Evangelium Lucae, PL 25, 430.)
_”Only Christ opened the closed doors of the virginal womb, which continued to remain closed, however. This is the closed eastern gate, through which only the high priest may enter and exit and which nevertheless is always closed”_ .
St. Jerome (Dialogus contra Pelagianos 2, 4)
_”Who is this gate (Ezekiel 44:1-4), if not Mary? Is it not closed because she is a virgin? Mary is the gate through which Christ entered this world, when He was brought forth in the virginal birth and the manner of His birth did not break the seals of virginity”_ .
St. Ambrose (The Consecration of a Virgin and the Perpetual Virginity of Mary , 8:52)
_”She is closed because she is a virgin; she is a gate, because Christ has entered through her......This gate faces east, because she has given birth to him who rises, the sun of justice.....Mary is the good gate that was closed and was not opened. Christ passed through it, but did not open it”_ .
St. Ambrose (De Institutione Virginis, 8, 57. PL 16, 334)
@@masterchief8179 I agree to disagree, and it is unfruitful to debate the virginity of Mary or its holy ascention. Since I am a Reformed Baptist. But I will like to ask you how will you respond to: Mark 3:31-35, John 7:3-4, Mark 15:40, John 2:12, et cetera. Now my simple response to that is that it is giving old Testament attributes to a New Testament character by non-canonical authors.
@@Fiscacondaniel Scriptural support for the role of Mary.👇🏾czcams.com/video/kUdYeYy3NQA/video.html
How would anyone know if Mary and Joseph had sex?
how does a cartoon character talk?
Remember that Mary is the NEW ARK OF THE COVENANT as told to us in the Book of Revelation. What is true for the Ark in the Old Testament is true for the Ark in the New Testament--PURE.
Sex with one's husband does not make her "unpure"
God doesn't need ur help defending his word by saying Mary stayed a Virgin. God tells Joseph not to "know" Mary until she gives birth to Jesus. By what God tells Joseph it was okay to "know" her after Jesus was born. When he is in his home town the people state he has brothers and sisters? Or do you understand that as them talking about the disciples
Really not convincing to me in any way.
Mary having more children with Josepth (which follows another of the purposes of Marriage as stablished by God).. .is wrong for Catholics? weird
Yes, because it was not the case. She was consacrated to God.
Let me add some. It is cleared described in Ezekiel 44, 1-2:
_1 Then the man brought me back to the outer gate of the sanctuary, the one facing east, and it was shut. 2 _*_The Lord said to me, “This gate is to remain shut. It must not be opened; no one may enter through it. It is to remain shut because the Lord, the God of Israel, has entered through it_* .
Let’s check the Fathers of The Church:
_”Some quite emphatically understand this closed gate through which only the Lord God of Israel passes … as the Virgin Mary, who remains a Virgin before and after childbirth. In fact, she remains always a Virgin, in the moment in which the Angel speaks with her and when the Son of God is born”_ .
St. Jerome (Commentarium in Evangelium Lucae, PL 25, 430.)
_”Only Christ opened the closed doors of the virginal womb, which continued to remain closed, however. This is the closed eastern gate, through which only the high priest may enter and exit and which nevertheless is always closed”_ .
St. Jerome (Dialogus contra Pelagianos 2, 4)
_”Who is this gate (Ezekiel 44:1-4), if not Mary? Is it not closed because she is a virgin? Mary is the gate through which Christ entered this world, when He was brought forth in the virginal birth and the manner of His birth did not break the seals of virginity”_ .
St. Ambrose (The Consecration of a Virgin and the Perpetual Virginity of Mary , 8:52)
_”She is closed because she is a virgin; she is a gate, because Christ has entered through her......This gate faces east, because she has given birth to him who rises, the sun of justice.....Mary is the good gate that was closed and was not opened. Christ passed through it, but did not open it”_ .
St. Ambrose (De Institutione Virginis, 8, 57. PL 16, 334)
When you understand that she is the Ark of the New Covenant, you understand why Joseph who was a Jew and understood the holiness and power of the Ark of the Old Covenant and what that meant then you will understand. Dr Brant Pitre explains 👇🏾czcams.com/video/jmNWqLSJcJI/video.html
Any quotes from the Apostolic Fathers saying Mary was a perpetual Virgin? I would love to read.
So the Holy Spirit snatched Mary from Joseph?
There’s a book called Consecration to Jospeh that explains the relationship of Mary and Joseph. They were both consecrated to God as virgins, had an immense amount of chastity and were deeply in love with one another. The nature of their marriage was supernatural from the beginning.
@@priscillaferrara2844 The Bible says nothing remotely close to what you speak of. To infer this without strong biblical proof text would be to build an entire house on a faulty foundation.
Much like what Mormons or JW's teach which is problematic at best
David Adeniyi Well, lets not put the mormons and JWs on the same footing as the Catholic Church, who wrote and compiled the Bible. I don’t subscribe to sola scriptura. That may be the foundational difference between you and I. Peace brother ✌️
All About Mary! In our current sexually permissive age it is difficult to fully appreciate the scandal caused by the pregnancy of Mary when in the espousal stage of her marriage, with Joseph (Mt. 1:18; Lk. 1:27; 2:5). Mary explained how she came to be pregnant, but Joseph, like all the others, did not believe her. He could have had Mary stoned to death for adultery (Lev. 20:10; Dt. 22:22-24; Jn. 8:1-5), but, because of his love for her, Joseph decided to divorce Mary quietly to lessen her embarrassment and shame. It took an angel of God, by way of a dream to a sleeping Joseph, to convince him that Mary was not guilty of adultery (Mt. 1:18-25; Lk. 1:26-56). Therefore, Joseph did not have Mary stoned to death, or divorce her, or even observe the Jewish law of jealousies (Num. 5:11-31). However, Mary’s reputation would be tarnished for the rest of her life for being pregnant while in the espousal stage of her marriage to Joseph. The Pharisees saying they were not born of fornication is proof of this truth (Jn. 8:41).
The prophecies of a son, born of a virgin (Isa. 7:14; 9:6; Mic. 5:2) had to be either ignored or discounted by the Jewish religious leaders and common citizens alike in regard to the pregnancy of Mary and the birth of the Lord Jesus, her first born son (Mt. 1:22-25). It should be noted that after the birth of the Lord Jesus, Mary made a sacrifice for her own sins, in the manner that all Jewish women were to do after they had a baby (Lk. 2:22-24, 39). The instructions of how Jewish women were to make an offering, for their own sins, after having a baby was given by God to Moses, who recorded them in Leviticus 12:1-8. The fact that this was to be an offering for sin or an atonement by the new mother is stated four different times in this passage. Thus, the belief and teaching that Mary was born sinless and never sinned throughout her life is biblically false! Another false belief and unbiblical teaching is that Mary remained a virgin throughout her lifetime. The biblical account reveals that Mary and Joseph sexually consummated their marital union after the birth of the Lord Jesus and together they had four additional sons with an unknown number of daughters (Mt. 12:46-47; 13:53-56; Mk. 3:31-32; 6:1-3; Lk. 8:19-20; Jn. 2:12; 7:5; Acts 1:14; 1 Cor. 9:4-5; Gal. 1:19). Nothing is recorded or is known about the sisters of the Lord Jesus Christ.
The doctrines of election and free will are clearly taught in the holy Scriptures! These doctrines appear to be incompatible but actually complement each other as is clearly illustrated in the three stages of a Jewish marriage, which are 1. Engagement, 2. Espousal (Song 3:11; Jer. 2:2; 2 Sam. 3:14; 2 Cor. 11:2; Mt. 1:18; Lk. 1:47; 2:5) 3. Marriage Supper. The names of all human beings are placed in the Lamb’s Book of Life upon conception in their mother’s womb (Dan. 12:1; Phil. 4:3; Rev. 3:5; 21:27). Thus, every human being has been elected by God to be saved in heaven throughout eternity. This confirms that God is not willing that any should perish (2 Pet. 3:9). However, in our current Age of Grace, every man and woman, upon reaching their age of accountability MUST trust solely, by faith alone, in the finished work of the Lord Jesus Christ for their personal salvation to keep their name in the Lamb’s Book of Life (Jn. 3:15-18; 14:6; 20:30-31). Therefore, the CAUSE of salvation, upon reaching the age of accountability, is simply believing and the EFFECT of believing is to have a change of mind and ways [repentance] and identifying [baptism] with the Lord Jesus. An explanation of all the previous statements and much more may be found, read, and confirmed in the treatise entitled, A Biblical View of the Past, Present, & Future that is posted on www.endtimewarnings.org. Maranatha!
Joe Heschmeyer adds the fact that there wasn't any law precisely preventing the couple from intercourse during bethrodal. It happened, sure, but wasn't forbidden. So another question is, why they did not do it before? Tradition states that Mary took an oath of purity/chastity. It' worth mentioning.
Do we really know for sure about such a law in the Jewish first century? If there was one, I think we can be confident that Mary and Joseph wouldn't have broken it.
Why was this never mentioned in the Gospels, Acts, or letters? This seems to be adding an interpretation into the text instead of letting it speak for itself (in the case of his brothers mentioned in the Gospels). I know LDS members that do the same thing, so how is that any different?
Not everything was written bro
@@humphreyobanor866 Seems like an awfully big thing to leave out in the earliest writings. I'm more than happy to convert if it's true.
If the early church all believed it to be true (which is very likely given the direct passing on of oral tradition from the disciples themselves) then why would they state the obvious? A bit like the Real Presence of Jesus in the Eucharist. No christian questioned it for 1500 years because it was a given not because it was invented 1500 years after. There is so much balanced and well researched evidence for this point of view (also explaining why the "brothers" of Jesus couldn't have been his brothers at all if you match up the names of the different Marys at the Crucifixion and their children) my advice is to look up and learn for yourself. It's something I from time to time struggle with too however there comes a point where your reason is convinced and then you must make the leap of Faith.
Let me add some. It is cleared described in Ezekiel 44, 1-2:
_1 Then the man brought me back to the outer gate of the sanctuary, the one facing east, and it was shut. 2 _*_The Lord said to me, “This gate is to remain shut. It must not be opened; no one may enter through it. It is to remain shut because the Lord, the God of Israel, has entered through it_* .
Let’s check the Fathers of The Church:
_”Some quite emphatically understand this closed gate through which only the Lord God of Israel passes … as the Virgin Mary, who remains a Virgin before and after childbirth. In fact, she remains always a Virgin, in the moment in which the Angel speaks with her and when the Son of God is born”_ .
St. Jerome (Commentarium in Evangelium Lucae, PL 25, 430.)
_”Only Christ opened the closed doors of the virginal womb, which continued to remain closed, however. This is the closed eastern gate, through which only the high priest may enter and exit and which nevertheless is always closed”_ .
St. Jerome (Dialogus contra Pelagianos 2, 4)
_”Who is this gate (Ezekiel 44:1-4), if not Mary? Is it not closed because she is a virgin? Mary is the gate through which Christ entered this world, when He was brought forth in the virginal birth and the manner of His birth did not break the seals of virginity”_ .
St. Ambrose (The Consecration of a Virgin and the Perpetual Virginity of Mary , 8:52)
_”She is closed because she is a virgin; she is a gate, because Christ has entered through her......This gate faces east, because she has given birth to him who rises, the sun of justice.....Mary is the good gate that was closed and was not opened. Christ passed through it, but did not open it”_ .
St. Ambrose (De Institutione Virginis, 8, 57. PL 16, 334)
Scripture is not to be interpreted in a vacuum or through a white western lens. Consider first century Jewish cultural traditions. Jesus was looking after his widowed mother, lived with her for 30 years. Upon His crucifixion, who looks after Mary? The Jewish cultural and social norms of the day dictated that the surviving children would take in and look after the mother.
Jesus looked down from the cross at his heartbroken mother who had nobody left to take care of her. We know she had no other children because Jesus requested that Holy Apostle Saint John take her into his home and care for her which he did until her Assumption.
Also "brothers" meant many different things as it does today. Best friends who hang out with each other refer to each other as "brothers", soldiers refer to each other as "brothers in arms". In my middle eastern culture for over a thousand years a person from the same tribe is referred to as my "brother/sister".
First off, MATTHEW 1:24-25 24 says, "Then Joseph, having been awoken from sleep, did as the angel of the Lord commanded him and took to himself his wife, 25 and did not know her UNTIL she had given birth to her firstborn Son." Then in Matthew 13:55 it says, " Is not this the carpenter's son? is not his mother called Mary? and his brethren, James, and Joses, and Simon, and Judas? 56 And his sisters, are they not all with us?" Please look up this verse in a Greek concordance. The words translated as brethren, and sisters mean just that, NOT cousins or any other relative. If you look at the plain reading of scripture it is pretty clear; Joseph did not have marital relations with Mary UNTIL Jesus was born and then they had four sons and at least two girls. OR are you trying to say that these six siblings of Jesus were also immaculately conceived? Be HONEST! If Mary was a virgin impregnated by the Holy Spirit to have Jesus, and then AFTER his birth, she assumed normal marital relations with her husband Joseph and over the course of time they had four boys and at least two girls, isn't the above verses be how that would be described? I see absolutely nothing about Mary being a perpetual virgin.
I love you guys.
Your talks are amazing 😍
I love to listen from you 😍
May my lady ❤️ bless both of you.
I'm what now because of our lady.
The mother of Jesus+God)
So first this is borrowed from the gnostic myth of sophia. She had a real virgin birth - no father involved at all. When you lower her to mortal status you put a kink in your mythology. But the problem is that Jesus is BOTH man and God, and since he is also wholly a human man he carried the sin of Adam as does anyone who passes through the birth canal of a human woman according to OT. Luke 2:22 says Mary needed to "purify" herself and the only way to counteract the implications of Luke 2:22 is to make Mary as sinless and Godlike as holy as possible. Otherwise you loose the sinlessness of Savior.
❤️❤️❤️
I'm Protestant so that's probably why I don't get it. Didn't Jesus have siblings?
I don't have a problem with the belief. You could even convince me of it. But infallible dogma? Give me a break. It's the quintessential pious opinion.
If it is true, then anything else would be a lie.
Let me add some. It is cleared described in Ezekiel 44, 1-2:
_1 Then the man brought me back to the outer gate of the sanctuary, the one facing east, and it was shut. 2 _*_The Lord said to me, “This gate is to remain shut. It must not be opened; no one may enter through it. It is to remain shut because the Lord, the God of Israel, has entered through it_* .
Let’s check the Fathers of The Church:
_”Some quite emphatically understand this closed gate through which only the Lord God of Israel passes … as the Virgin Mary, who remains a Virgin before and after childbirth. In fact, she remains always a Virgin, in the moment in which the Angel speaks with her and when the Son of God is born”_ .
St. Jerome (Commentarium in Evangelium Lucae, PL 25, 430.)
_”Only Christ opened the closed doors of the virginal womb, which continued to remain closed, however. This is the closed eastern gate, through which only the high priest may enter and exit and which nevertheless is always closed”_ .
St. Jerome (Dialogus contra Pelagianos 2, 4)
_”Who is this gate (Ezekiel 44:1-4), if not Mary? Is it not closed because she is a virgin? Mary is the gate through which Christ entered this world, when He was brought forth in the virginal birth and the manner of His birth did not break the seals of virginity”_ .
St. Ambrose (The Consecration of a Virgin and the Perpetual Virginity of Mary , 8:52)
_”She is closed because she is a virgin; she is a gate, because Christ has entered through her......This gate faces east, because she has given birth to him who rises, the sun of justice.....Mary is the good gate that was closed and was not opened. Christ passed through it, but did not open it”_ .
St. Ambrose (De Institutione Virginis, 8, 57. PL 16, 334)
Scriptural support for the role of Mary.👇🏾
czcams.com/video/kUdYeYy3NQA/video.html
@@masterchief8179 Will i go to hell if Mother of God, Mary remaining forever a virgin is not important to my devotion to God? I definitely believe Mary was a virgin, but whether she remained a virgin, it doesnt really matter to me. Will I go to hell?
@@m.e4752
www.catholic.com/tract/brethren-of-the-lord
Sounds like a stretch to me