Mary’s Perpetual Virginity

[Josiah]

Isa 7:14 matt 1:23 Rev 12:1

We know!

Your claim is that Scripture clearly states that Mary remained a virgin for the rest of her life. And you have gone to great lengths to undeniably prove it does not, you are wrong, your claim is false.

You have proved this over and over and over and over and over.... WE GET IT! No one is disagreeing with you on that. You are correct, Scripture does NOT state that Mary remained a virgin.




.

 

[Faithhopeandcharity]

We know!

Your claim is that Scripture clearly states that Mary remained a virgin for the rest of her life. And you have gone to great lengths to undeniably prove it does not, you are wrong, your claim is false.

You have proved this over and over and over and over and over.... WE GET IT! No one is disagreeing with you on that. You are correct, Scripture does NOT state that Mary remained a virgin.




.

Irritating ain’t it!

no offense

we’re not called to be successful only faithful!

jude 1:3

 

[Faithhopeandcharity]

Mary would not consent to God’s will and to receive the exalted dignity of the mother of God if it means violating her vow of perpetual virginity then why simply consent relations with Joseph!

That’s impossible!

Lk 1:34 Then said Mary unto the angel, How shall this be, seeing I know not a man?

(This verse imply’s that Mary is consecrated to God alone! and has taken a vow of perpetual virginity! She was s willing to refuse even the exalted dignity of mother of God, the mother of our savior, and mother of all Christians if it means violating Her vow of perpetual virginity)

Lk 1:35 And the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God.

36 And, behold, thy cousin Elisabeth, she hath also conceived a son in her old age: and this is the sixth month with her, who was called barren.

37 For with God nothing shall be impossible.

38 And Mary said, Behold the handmaid of the Lord; be it unto me according to thy word. And the angel departed from her.

She consented to our salvation when she realized it would not violate her vow of perpetual virginity!

 

[Josiah]

her vow of perpetual virginity

Quote the Scripture that states, "Mary made a vow of PERPETUAL virginity."

Do you know what "circular reasoning" is?





.

 

[Faithhopeandcharity]

Quote the Scripture that states, "Mary made a vow of PERPETUAL virginity."

Do you know what "circular reasoning" is?





.

Lk 1:34

 

[Faithhopeandcharity]

Lk 1;34 Then said Mary unto the angel, How shall this be, seeing I know not a man?

Why would she make this statement?

she is betrothed to Joseph

 

[Castle Church]

Lk 1;34 Then said Mary unto the angel, How shall this be, seeing I know not a man?

Why would she make this statement?

she is betrothed to Joseph

Just because she was a virgin does not mean she remained so perpetually. My wife was a virgin, but she is not now. That verse is not relevant to the conversation

 

[Faithhopeandcharity]

Just because she was a virgin does not mean she remained so perpetually. My wife was a virgin, but she is not now. That verse is not relevant to the conversation

We are not speaking of a virgin as a sexless woman but a vessel consecrated to God to bring the salvation of mankind!

 

[Faithhopeandcharity]

Why would she refuse to consent?

refuse the exalted dignity of the Mother of God and mother of our salvation?

 

[Josiah]

Lk 1:34

Thanks for again proving that Scripture does not say what you do.


.There's nothing in this verse about perpetual anything or about a vow to or for or about anything. You know that. We all know that. I find it... puzzling that you would give a biblical reference to prove the Bible does not say what you do, but that does seem to be your approach.



.

 

[Josiah]

a vessel consecrated to God to bring the salvation of mankind!

Mark,


1. Where does Scripture state that Mary was "consecrated to God?"


2. You must be forgetting that ALL baptized persons are "consecrated to God." It's a fundamental Catholic teaching, at least (and you claim to be Catholic). CCC 1272 is often quoted in this regard. Here is a sermon on the topic since it seems you missed this Catholic teaching: The Consecration that Flows from our Baptism, Baptism of the Lord (B), January 11, 2015 - Catholic Preaching Since you are baptized, you are consecrated to God. So, according to you, thus you are a PERPETUAL virgin. Indeed, all Catholics (if not all baptized Christians) are PERPETUAL virgins.




A blessed Advent season to you and yours...


- Josiah



.

 

[Faithhopeandcharity]

Mark,


1. Where does Scripture state that Mary was "consecrated to God?"


2. You must be forgetting that ALL baptized persons are "consecrated to God." It's a fundamental Catholic teaching, at least (and you claim to be Catholic). CCC 1272 is often quoted in this regard. Here is a sermon on the topic since it seems you missed this Catholic teaching: The Consecration that Flows from our Baptism, Baptism of the Lord (B), January 11, 2015 - Catholic Preaching Since you are baptized, you are consecrated to God. So, according to you, thus you are a PERPETUAL virgin. Indeed, all Catholics (if not all baptized Christians) are PERPETUAL virgins.




A blessed Advent season to you and yours...


- Josiah



.

Lk 1: 48 For he hath regarded the low estate of his handmaiden: for, behold, from henceforth all generations shall call me blessed.

 

[Faithhopeandcharity]

Lk 1:38 And Mary said, Behold the handmaid of the Lord;

but you did not answer

 

[Josiah]

Lk 1: 48 For he hath regarded the low estate of his handmaiden: for, behold, from henceforth all generations shall call me blessed.

Correct.

NOTHING about "consecrated"...
NOTHING about "perpetual"
NOTHING about any vow to anyone about anything.




.

 

[Faithhopeandcharity]

Correct.

NOTHING about "consecrated"...
NOTHING about "perpetual"
NOTHING about any vow to anyone about anything.




.

She “is” the handmaiden of the Lord and that has implications of consecration

again why would Mary say I know no man?

 

[Josiah]

She “is” the handmaiden of the Lord and that has implications of consecration

... anything can have "implications" if you choose to put it in, but by definition, an "implication" is something NOT stated.

According to Catholicism, EVERY baptized person is consecrated. Does that mean that ergo every Catholic is a perpetual virgin?

gain why would Mary say I know no man?

Because she was at that moment a virgin, that's what the expression meant. But you choose to entirely, wholly, completely IGNORE what the verse says. It says "I KNOW" (present tense). At that moment, she is a virgin. You need to just delete that word (because you think the Holy Spirit goofed there) and instead, in lieu of that, in place of the word actually there, put in a word that is NOT there in order to support your opinion which is also NOT there. She does not say, "I will be a virgin forever" or "I am perpetually a virgin." Those would require a DIFFERENT word, a DIFFERENT verb. You know that. We all do. Let's stop playing games.... and try to respect Scripture and what the Holy Spirit choose to inspire. Deleting words (God goofed there) and replacing them is not only dishonest and really bad apologetics, but disrespectful to God and Scripture (and Mary).




.

 

[Faithhopeandcharity]

Fortunately truth is revealed by God and proposed by holy church for our belief

and holy mother church has always taught with the fathers, doctors and saints that Mary is a perpetual virgin

 

[Josiah]

Fortunately truth is revealed by God and proposed by holy church for our belief

and holy mother church has always taught with the fathers, doctors and saints that Mary is a perpetual virgin

MARK -


Consider the following...



1. Your claim has been that Scripture clearly states that Mary was a PERPETUAL virgin. But you have taken it upon yourself to PROVE that's false, your claim is wrong, Scripture states no such thing. Shooting yourself in the foot, proving yourself wrong, undermining your own credibility (and perhaps honesty). The TRUTH is (as you've proven), Scripture is silent on this issue; it's clear that She was a virgin at the birth of Jesus but says NOTHING about after that. Sorry, it's just the truth - as you yourself have proven. Mark, you do this not only with the Marian teachings of your church but all of its teachings and claims.


2. What everyone here already knew (long before you came into our community) is that your church, The Catholic Church, teaches this. The FEW times you stated this obvious fact (Duh), no one disputed it. You are being honest. And truthful. Of course, as I'm sure you agree, just because a church teaches something doesn't make it true, so that's not a defense, it's not apologetics, it has nothing whatever to do with showing it to be true - just something now taught by The Catholic Church.


3 Many of us here are former Catholics (including me), others have Catholic spouses. We get it. Honestly, we do. We know all about CCC 85 and 87, etc., etc,, etc. Catholics are told by The Catholic Church to swallow whatever it itself now teaches "with docility" - because it itself is teaching it. This is an epistemology MANY reject (as I'm sure you do, too - you just make a single but radical exception for The Catholic Church). Okay. You believe it BECAUSE your church teaches it and tells you to accept whatever it does teach. WE GET IT. Lots of us have "been there, done that." And IF you stated that.... "I believe Mary was a perpetual virgin because my church says so and it says I am to docilicly accept what it teaches" we'll all say "okay - understood." But it would get you no further than a Mormon doing the exact, identical, same thing. AND (more importantly) it has nothing to do with showing something to be TRUE. For that, we'd need some COMMON norm (such as the words of Scripture) and we don't: your norm is whatever The Catholic Church says (obviously, you don't care much what Scripture says - only what The Catholic Church tells you it MEANS, how it itself spins it). And we don't think The Catholic Church is the inerrant, authoritative Voice of God.


4. Honesty matters. Frankly, even as a past Catholic, I've been surprised at how you often misrepresent Catholicism and the TERRIBLE apologetics you offer (where are you getting this stuff ???!!! A lot of "Evangelicals" repudiate Catholicism BECAUSE they hold that some of what it claims for itself and itself teaches is not found in Scripture - and you seem DETERMINED to prove they are right. Why in the world would you do that? You quote Mary but CHANGE her words - profoundly disrespecting her and showing "Evangelicals" how little Catholics respect her (they won't even respect her words!). You're not doing yourself good.... nor your church.


5. I suggest that you be honest.... tell the truth (rather than errors you yourself prove to be wrong)... be respectful to your fellow Christians (and they'll be far more likely to respect you back). Share your faith... explain with honesty and respect. You'll be appreciated. And you can teach our community more about your church. And that would be good. You MIGHT even begin to win back the members here who have put you on their ignore list. I'm now Lutheran. I post as such. I doubt I'm CONVERTING anyone, nor is that my intent. I'm sharing my perspective - honestly, truthfully - in hopes of advancing mutual understanding and in hopes that they'll do the same for me. Catholics have MUCH to share.... MUCH that is good.... MUCH that (IMO) Protestantism can learn from. And vise-versa.


Consider it. Perhaps.



A blessed Advent to you and yours...


- Josiah





.

 

[NathanH83]

I don’t see anything in the Bible that says, or even implies, that Mary remained a virgin the rest of her life.

It seems to suggest that Mary and Joseph slept together AFTER Jesus was born, as you would expect anyway in any normal marriage (after all, Gabriel DID tell Joseph to go ahead and marry her).

And then of course there’s the “brother and sisters” of Jesus. And someone could say that “brother” could mean a distant relative, or even a brother in the Lord. But the context seems to suggest that it means Jesus had actual brothers, meaning children of Mary.


Sooo….. Where did the idea that Mary was a perpetual virgin?

There are apostolic church fathers who knew the disciples personally, such as Clement, Polycarp, Ignatius, Barnabas, etc. And we can read their writings today.

Now, I don’t know any examples (please enlighten me) of any of these apostolic fathers saying that Mary was a perpetual virgin.

I DO know that church fathers who came later on, such as Augustine in the 4th century, believed that Mary was a perpetual virgin.

But if the 1st generation of Christians, and the 2nd generation who knew the disciples personally before they died….if THEY never said anything about Mary being a perpetual virgin, then where in the world did we even get this idea anyway???

And if they never even mentioned it, then why is it so important to believe? Certainly if this was a cornerstone belief to Christianity, you’d think the disciples would at least mention it. Wouldn’t they?

 

[Lanman87]

But if the 1st generation of Christians, and the 2nd generation who knew the disciples personally before they died….if THEY never said anything about Mary being a perpetual virgin, then where in the world did we even get this idea anyway???

Justin Martyr and Irenaeus used the analogy of Mary being the "Eve" figure in the redemption story. They were battling several different "traditions" that had sprouted up in the late 1st and 2nd Century. Gnosticism being the biggest error they were trying to correct. Mary being a virgin and Christ having been born of "the virgin" were key arguments that Christ was a human with flesh and bone and blood. That is pretty much the only thing the early fathers had to say about Mary.

In the late 2nd Century a writing was produced called the Protoevanglium of James(POJ), which is the source for most the "Tradition" about that is not found in the New Testament. The irony for Catholics is that this book was listed as a book to be avoided by Catholics in the Gelasian Decree in the 5th Century and much earlier Origen called it a "late heretical work".

If the 3rd and 4th Centuries asceticm became popular and many of the leading theologians were also monks. They had a very dim view of married sexuality and projected their beliefs onto Mary. Because they were the most influential people in the church the Marian Dogmas of ever virgin, and immaculate conception began to become the norm.

This put 6th Century Catholics in a bind because they believed in perpetual virginity and immaculate conception but couldn't use the POJ (due to the Gelasian decree). Today the Catholic church ignores the Gelasian decree. If you look at a Catholic apologetics site they are more than happen to reference the POJ as a reliable source for the Tradition of the Marian Dogmas.

I've read the POJ and think it is a work of 2nd century fan fiction where someone made up a backstory for Mary. Whether it was a work inspired by Satan to take the emphasis off Christ or just fluke of history I'll not speculate on.