Mary?

[James the Persian]

One, she wasn't married when she gave birth to Jesus.

True and there's no evidence that she ever was.

Two, who said she stayed a virgin her whole life?

Holy Tradition as accepted by all the pre-Reformation churches, so that means the overwhelming majority of Christians who have ever lived (and the vast majority of Christians alive today), though you are right that it does not follow from the mere fact of the virgin birth that she would remain virgin. You need other sources to come to that belief.

James

 

[lombas]

Yes, this is true (don't know about the Dutch but I'll take your word for it). Parthenos can mean virgin, maiden or (very rarely) girl. The normal reading of the word, though, is virgin and the alternative readings all also contain the notion that the female is marriageable which implies virginity (in the culture in which the NT was written). Maiden in English also implies virginity, though modern people rarely seem aware of the fact, which means that parthenos can accurately be translated as maiden. The normal, most natural and, in the context of the NT only valid translation of parthenos into modern English is virgin. In older English maiden would work as in those days the implication of virginity would not have been lost on the reader. Incidentally, I might not know Dutch but I do know German, which seems to have the opposite etymology - Jungfrau literally would translate as young woman but means virgin. Madchen, clearly a cognate with maiden, means girl. In any case, unless the Dutch version omits verse 34 of that chapter (which I very much doubt), it is completely clear from the context that, even without taking into account the subtler implications of the word vis a vis cultural norms, whatever the ambiguity of the translation used, the word parthenos is intended as virgin.

James

You're completely right again. Verse 34 reads: "Maria vroeg aan de engel: ‘Hoe zal dat gebeuren? Ik heb immers nog nooit gemeenschap met een man gehad."

Which translates as: "Mary asked the angel: "How will that happen, for I have never had "sex" ("gemeenschap" is a very broad term, meaning "society" and "intercourse", funny enough) with a man?

 

[gnostic]

I can understand the Christian belief that Mary was a virgin when she had Jesus. However, I don't understand some Christian persistence that she remained a virgin, afterward.

There are considerable evidences Jesus wasn't Mary's only child. I recalled 2 names, James and Judas (or Jude), but don't expect me to quote where their names are found.

Draka had already quoted Matthew 1:25.

Here is the KJV of this same quote.

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

"...her firstborn son" indicates that he indeed had siblings.

This is confirmed in the gospel of Luke:

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.

She gave birth to her first son, wrapped him in strip of cloth and laid him in the manger - there was no room for them to stay in the inn.

This also indicates that she had other sons.

Others (in another topic, like Was Mary Forever Virgin?) here have indicated that James and others were only Jesus' cousins, even when it is written that they were his brothers, but that doesn't satisfactorily explain these 2 verses, which confirmed that Mary had other sons. I also recalls that someone had also said that the brothers were Joseph's sons not Mary from his first wife, but I found no evidence for that; and the passages indicate "her son" clearly refute those arguments that she had remain a virgin and that Jesus was her only child.

 

[James the Persian]

I can understand the Christian belief that Mary was a virgin when she had Jesus. However, I don't understand some Christian persistence that she remained a virgin, afterward.

It's called Holy Tradition and it's the overwhelming majority of Christians that agree on this.

There are considerable evidences Jesus wasn't Mary's only child. I recalled 2 names, James and Judas (or Jude), but don't expect me to quote where their names are found.

Then provide it. Most of what is usually trotted out is an artifact of the English translation. There is no evidence that stands up to scrutiny in the original Greek.

Draka had already quoted Matthew 1:25.

Here is the KJV of this same quote.



"...her firstborn son" indicates that he indeed had siblings.

No, it doesn't. People with only one child can legitimately call that child their firstborn even before they have any more children. There is no implication here of later children even in English, and in Greek it certainly only means that there were none before.

Others (in another topic, like Was Mary Forever Virgin?) here have indicated that James and others were only Jesus' cousins, even when it is written that they were his brothers, but that doesn't satisfactorily explain these 2 verses, which confirmed that Mary had other sons.

Actually, the word rendered brothers in English is about as specific as saying male relative of the same generation, and some of us have clearly stated that Holy Tradition is that they were the legal but not biological brothers of Christ, being Joseph's children from a prior marriage.

I also recalls that someone had also said that the brothers were Joseph's sons not Mary from his first wife, but I found no evidence for that;

You will find no evidence for it in the Bible,but nor do you find anything to contradict it and this has always been, along with the perpetual virginity of the Theotokos, part of Holy Tradition

and the passages indicate "her son" clearly refute those arguments that she had remain a virgin and that Jesus was her only child.

Provide the passages that 'clearly refute' Holy Tradition. I certainly know of none and nothing you've provided above comes remotely close.

James

 

[gnostic]

Then what do the Greek original (for Matthew 1:25 and Luke 2:7) translated to English say?

So far I don't have Greek original of the gospels. So it would be more helpful if you provided some sources.

Is there a good site with English translation of the original Greek, James?

And where can I find the Holy Tradition?

 

[James the Persian]

Then what do the Greek original (for Matthew 1:25 and Luke 2:7) translated to English say?

The translations aren't wrong as such, it's just the the implications that sometimes appear in English aren't necessarily in the original. Until is a very good example, because in English if you say I won't do X until, there is a clear implication that you will do it afterwards. In Greek, and many other languages - including Romanian, there simply is no such implication at all. As to your argument from firstborn, I don't believe that even survives scrutiny in English. My son is my firstborn because I have no older children and he always was even before I had any younger ones.

So far I don't have Greek original of the gospels. So it would be more helpful if you provided some sources.

My main source is a Greek priest who uses (slightly later Byzantine) Koine week in and week out in his worship, but I don't think he'd agree to me providing him to you. There's bound to be plenty of sites and books that address such aspects of the language, though. Such translational artifacts are common, no matter what the source and target languages.

Is there a good site with English translation of the original Greek, James?

Not that I'm aware of, and even if there was it wouldn't really help as you can't learn the implications of word or phrase simply by scrutinising a bare translation. I mean, a literal translation of a common Romanian saying which I usedf recently (it's a wedding blessing) is 'House of stone', but its use in the community dictates that you understand it as 'May you have a strong and prosperous marriage'. That's an extreme example, but hopefully it will help you understand what I mean.

And where can I find the Holy Tradition?

All over the place. The writings of the Fathers, the Bible (that's the most important part), the Liturgies of the Church, some of the extra-canonical texts (one important one in this instance being the Protoevanghelion of James), and even hymnography and iconography. It's not something that can easily be codified and learnt, you just sort of absorb it through worship in the Church.

James

 

[Truth_Faith13]

I believe it. I know it is difficult to comprehend in a society that is so obsessed with sex as ours is but there where times in the past when people had what one might call restraint over their sexual impulses as opposed to today when we just give into them whenever we can or want to.

I agree that our society is more obsessed with sex outside of marriage today. HOWEVER back then, it would have been very rare if not extinct for a man and his wife (when womean were considered mens property) not to have engaged in sexual intercourse once they were married! It was the expected thing - I mean c'mon, when royality got married, the parents used to watch! to make sure they did!

I personally cant see Mary being a virgin all her life. And to be honest, I dont see what it has anything to do with. You would still worship her as the mother of Jesus - Son of God. So it doesnt really change anything.

It is difficult to determine whether the bible refers to Jesus having brothers/sisters as it calls them bethren - which doesnt necessarily means blood brother/sister. It could mean a close friend who he considered a brother. Like priests calling themselves brothers etc.

 

[Truth_Faith13]

Mary would have had to be married to joseph before the birth of Jesus. You dont need proof of the marriage for that - only the logical historical understanding of those times. Any women found pregnant when not married was stoned to death! If mary had not been married to Joseph she would have been stoned to death! Joseph married her in order to save her (and her child) from death! I know films arent the most reliable of things (I dont know the bible very well) but all religious films which are quite accurate from my understanding portray Joseph saving mary from being stoned to death and then marrying her so she was pregnant in wedlock!

 

[Truth_Faith13]

Can I just say - many people are saying ALL christians believe Mary was a virgin all her life - I thought that that was a belief only helod by the catholic church - obviously other christians could believe she was, but I am yet to meet any who are not catholic!

 

[SoyLeche]

One, she wasn't married when she gave birth to Jesus.

I think you've most likely got this wrong. She wasn't married when Jesus was CONCEIVED. She most likely was married when Jesus was BORN.

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

The Bible and tradition certainly indicate clearly that she was a virgin.
And I believe that to be true.

We are taught that she remained one.
However my faith does not depend on either being fact.

Virgin birth is not as unusual as people think, but it always results in a female offspring, as there are only female chromosomes involved.

When God is involved in the process no such laws apply... It is as easy for him to induce a male as it would be to induce a female.

When it comes down to it all we have to go on is faith.

Jesus is his own Testament.

 

[SoyLeche]

If it was done before, then Joseph was one heck of a man to buy that she was pregnant by a supernatural being and not another man...that or he was just plain gullible.

I think Gabriel helped out on that one.

 

[Truth_Faith13]

Virgin birth is not as unusual as people think, but it always results in a female offspring, as there are only female chromosomes involved.

Jesus is his own Testament.

Ok you have got me on that one. I know certain species are both sexes therefore can procreate by themselvles but as far as I was aware when it comes to humans you generally need a male and a female!

I know the body works in strange ways - people giving birth to twins conceieved by two different fathers. The mother getting pregnant twice and having babies being born just months apart - but I have never heard of a virgin birth other than mary!

 

[James the Persian]

Mary would have had to be married to joseph before the birth of Jesus. You dont need proof of the marriage for that - only the logical historical understanding of those times. Any women found pregnant when not married was stoned to death! If mary had not been married to Joseph she would have been stoned to death! Joseph married her in order to save her (and her child) from death! I know films arent the most reliable of things (I dont know the bible very well) but all religious films which are quite accurate from my understanding portray Joseph saving mary from being stoned to death and then marrying her so she was pregnant in wedlock!

Betrothal is much closer to a full marriage than it is to an engagement in the western sense, so the objection does not really apply in this case. The betrothed were, and still are in Orthodox belief, considered married in every respect but that they shouldn't sleep together (which is why most Orthodox get betrothed moments before marriage nowadays - it's a very hard tradition to keep) but to break the prohibition on sleeping together wouldn't have been adultery, however frowned upon, and so getting betrothed but never quite going the one step further to a complete marriage would still have had the same effect, of preventing accusations of adultery.

Can I just say - many people are saying ALL christians believe Mary was a virgin all her life - I thought that that was a belief only helod by the catholic church - obviously other christians could believe she was, but I am yet to meet any who are not catholic!

All the pre-Reformation churches agree with the idea that the Theotokos (Mary) remained virgin forever. That is, in addition to the Roman Catholics, the (Eastern as we are known in the west) Orthodox Church, the Oriental Orthodox Church and the Assyrian Church. These together make up the vast majority of Christians now living and all Christians (bar a few heretical groups) prior to the reformation. Perpetual virginity, then, is clearly the majority Christian view.

James

 

[Truth_Faith13]

Betrothal is much closer to a full marriage than it is to an engagement in the western sense, so the objection does not really apply in this case. The betrothed were, and still are in Orthodox belief, considered married in every respect but that they shouldn't sleep together (which is why most Orthodox get betrothed moments before marriage nowadays - it's a very hard tradition to keep) but to break the prohibition on sleeping together wouldn't have been adultery, however frowned upon, and so getting betrothed but never quite going the one step further to a complete marriage would still have had the same effect, of preventing accusations of adultery.


All the pre-Reformation churches agree with the idea that the Theotokos (Mary) remained virgin forever. That is, in addition to the Roman Catholics, the (Eastern as we are known in the west) Orthodox Church, the Oriental Orthodox Church and the Assyrian Church. These together make up the vast majority of Christians now living and all Christians (bar a few heretical groups) prior to the reformation. Perpetual virginity, then, is clearly the majority Christian view.

James

Ok that part of betrothal makes sense now! But I am still yet to meet a christian (who is not catholic) who believes that Mary was a virgin!

 

[James the Persian]

Ok that part of betrothal makes sense now! But I am still yet to meet a christian (who is not catholic) who believes that Mary was a virgin!

What do you mean by Catholic? Do you mean what I would refer to as a Roman Catholic, a member of that church with the Pope of Rome as its earthly head? If, as I expect, that is what you mean by Catholic (I would use that word rather differently), then you have, indeed, met at least one Christian who believes this and who is not, in your terms, catholic, at least online. I am Orthodox. We have no communion with Rome whatsoever and have not done so for almost a millennium.

James

 

[Peace]

Who actually believes that a married woman was a virgin? Does someone want to explain that to me?

God says in the holy Quran:
And mention in the Book (the Qur’ân, O Muhammad the story of) Maryam (Mary), when she withdrew in seclusion from her family to a place facing east. She placed a screen (to screen herself) from them; then We sent to her Our Ruh [angel Jibrîl (Gabriel)], and he appeared before her in the form of a man in all respects. She said: "Verily! I seek refuge with the Most Gracious (Allâh) from you, if you do fear Allâh." (The angel) said: "I am only a messenger from your Lord, (to announce) to you the gift of a righteous son." She said: "How can I have a son, when no man has touched me, nor am I unchaste?". He said: "So (it will be), your Lord said: ‘That is easy for Me (Allâh): And (We wish) to appoint him as a sign to mankind and a mercy from Us (Allâh), and it is a matter (already) decreed, (by Allâh).’ " So she conceived him,[1] and she withdrew with him to a far place (i.e. Bethlehem valley about 4-6 miles from Jerusalem). And the pains of childbirth drove her to the trunk of a date-palm. She said: "Would that I had died before this, and had been forgotten and out of sight!" Then [the babe ‘Îsâ (Jesus) or Jibrîl (Gabriel)] cried unto her from below her, saying: "Grieve not: your Lord has provided a water stream under you. "And shake the trunk of date-palm towards you, it will let fall fresh ripe-dates upon you." "So eat and drink and be glad. And if you see any human being, say: ‘Verily! I have vowed a fast unto the Most Gracious (Allâh) so I shall not speak to any human being this day.’" Then she brought him (the baby) to her people, carrying him. They said: "O Mary! Indeed you have brought a thing Fariyy (a mighty thing). "O sister (i.e. the like) of Hârûn (Aaron)[1]! Your father was not a man who used to commit adultery, nor your mother was an unchaste woman." Then she pointed to him. They said: "How can we talk to one who is a child in the cradle?[2]" "He [‘Îsâ (Jesus)] said: "Verily I am a slave of Allâh, He has given me the Scripture and made me a Prophet;[3]" "And He has made me blessed wheresoever I be, and has enjoined on me Salât (prayer), and Zakât (charity), as long as I live." "And dutiful to my mother, and made me not arrogant, unblest. "And Salâm (peace) be upon me the day I was born, and the day I die, and the day I shall be raised alive!" Such is ‘Îsâ (Jesus), son of Maryam (Mary). (It is) a statement of truth, about which they doubt (or dispute).
(Maryam (Mary) 19: 16-34)

 

[Truth_Faith13]

What do you mean by Catholic? Do you mean what I would refer to as a Roman Catholic, a member of that church with the Pope of Rome as its earthly head? If, as I expect, that is what you mean by Catholic (I would use that word rather differently), then you have, indeed, met at least one Christian who believes this and who is not, in your terms, catholic, at least online. I am Orthodox. We have no communion with Rome whatsoever and have not done so for almost a millennium.

James

I dont know what I mean by catholics - Im not very good with demoninations!

All I know is that one of my christian friends who is not "catholic" orthodox or otherwise, said to me one day - "this is getting rediculous, the catholic church now believe that Mary was a virgin for her entire life". suggesting that it was "the catholic church" which started it!

I should say, no insult to your faith intended I am just quoting what she said! hence I say catholic!

 

[James the Persian]

I dont know what I mean by catholics - Im not very good with demoninations!

All I know is that one of my christian friends who is not "catholic" orthodox or otherwise, said to me one day - "this is getting rediculous, the catholic church now believe that Mary was a virgin for her entire life". suggesting that it was "the catholic church" which started it!

I should say, no insult to your faith intended I am just quoting what she said! hence I say catholic!

Fair enough. The belief that Mary remained virgin her entire life is very old and is not something that Rome has recently decided (which is impression I get about your friend's intended comment). It goes right back to before any of the Schisms that divided our four communions from one another - that makes it before the 4th century, I believe (I think that's when the Assyrians went) and certainly before the 5th.

James

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

Ok you have got me on that one. I know certain species are both sexes therefore can procreate by themselvles but as far as I was aware when it comes to humans you generally need a male and a female!

I know the body works in strange ways - people giving birth to twins conceieved by two different fathers. The mother getting pregnant twice and having babies being born just months apart - but I have never heard of a virgin birth other than mary!

It is indeed not unusual in the lower orders and they do not need to be hermaphrodites... It does however happen in larger species.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/6196225.stm


And in an unproven case to humans


http://www.theolarts.org/parthenogenesis.html



As people are never actually looking out for parthenogenesis it might simply be very rare, but clearly not impossible and is more likely to happen to sexually active people as there are more of them, so would be even less likely to be noticed.