This question is so old..lol. She was pure when she was carrying Jesus. The bible doesn't hide the fact that after she gave birth she had sex. Joseph was told not to lie with her until after she gave birth.
2007-08-16 02:58:06
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
5⤊
1⤋
Mary is Ever Virgin
Exodus 13:2,12 - Jesus is sometimes referred to as the "first-born" son of Mary. But "first-born" is a common Jewish expression meaning the first child to open the womb. It has nothing to do the mother having future children.
Exodus 34:20 - under the Mosaic law, the "first-born" son had to be sanctified. "First-born" status does not require a "second" born.
Ezek. 44:2 - Ezekiel prophesies that no man shall pass through the gate by which the Lord entered the world. This is a prophecy of Mary's perpetual virginity. Mary remained a virgin before, during and after the birth of Jesus.
Mark 6:3 - Jesus was always referred to as "the" son of Mary, not "a" son of Mary. Also "brothers" could have theoretically been Joseph's children from a former marriage that was dissolved by death. However, it is most likely, perhaps most certainly, that Joseph was a virgin, just as were Jesus and Mary. As such, they embodied the true Holy Family, fully consecrated to God.
Luke 1:31,34 - the angel tells Mary that you "will" conceive (using the future tense). Mary responds by saying, "How shall this be?" Mary's response demonstrates that she had taken a vow of lifelong virginity by having no intention to have relations with a man. If Mary did not take such a vow of lifelong virginity, her question would make no sense at all (for we can assume she knew how a child is conceived). She was a consecrated Temple virgin as was an acceptable custom of the times.
Luke 2:41-51 - in searching for Jesus and finding Him in the temple, there is never any mention of other siblings.
John 7:3-4; Mark 3:21 - we see that younger "brothers" were advising Jesus. But this would have been extremely disrespectful for devout Jews if these were Jesus' biological brothers.
John 19:26-27 - it would have been unthinkable for Jesus to commit the care of his mother to a friend if he had brothers.
John 19:25 - the following verses prove that James and Joseph are Jesus' cousins and not his brothers: Mary the wife of Clopas is the sister of the Virgin Mary.
Matt. 27:61, 28:1 - Matthew even refers to Mary the wife of Clopas as "the other Mary."
Matt. 27:56; Mark 15:47 - Mary the wife of Clopas is the mother of James and Joseph.
Mark 6:3 - James and Joseph are called the "brothers" of Jesus. So James and Joseph are Jesus' cousins.
Matt. 10:3 - James is also called the son of "Alpheus." This does not disprove that James is the son of Clopas. The name Alpheus may be Aramaic for Clopas, or James took a Greek name like Saul (Paul), or Mary remarried a man named Alpheus.
Jesus' "Brothers" (adelphoi)) = Cousins or Kinsmen
Luke 1:36 - Elizabeth is Mary's kinswoman. Some Bibles translate kinswoman as "cousin," but this is an improper translation because in Hebrew and Aramaic, there is no word for "cousin."
Luke 22:32 - Jesus tells Peter to strengthen his "brethren." In this case, we clearly see Jesus using "brethren" to refer to the other apostles, not his biological brothers.
Acts 1:12-15 - the gathering of Jesus' "brothers" amounts to about 120. That is a lot of "brothers." Brother means kinsmen in Hebrew.
Acts 7:26; 11:1; 13:15,38; 15:3,23,32; 28:17,21 - these are some of many other examples where "brethren" does not mean blood relations.
Rom. 9:3 - Paul uses "brethren" and "kinsmen" interchangeably. "Brothers" of Jesus does not prove Mary had other children.
Gen. 11:26-28 - Lot is Abraham's nephew ("anepsios") / Gen. 13:8; 14:14,16 - Lot is still called Abraham's brother (adelphos") . This proves that, although a Greek word for cousin is "anepsios," Scripture also uses "adelphos" to describe a cousin.
Gen. 29:15 - Laban calls Jacob is "brother" even though Jacob is his nephew. Again, this proves that brother means kinsmen or cousin.
Deut. 23:7; 1 Chron. 15:5-18; Jer. 34:9; Neh. 5:7 -"brethren" means kinsmen. Hebrew and Aramaic have no word for "cousin."
2 Sam. 1:26; 1 Kings 9:13, 20:32 - here we see that "brethren" can even be one who is unrelated (no bloodline), such as a friend.
2007-08-16 10:05:40
·
answer #2
·
answered by Gods child 6
·
2⤊
1⤋
You are confusing Christians with Catholics. They are the group that puts saints and other such labels on people. This Christian does not call her "Eternal Virgin Mary, Queen of Heaven"!She is just a good woman who got chosen to do a wonderful thing and I believe she is honored but hardly a saint or whatever! She is labeled the Virgin Mary because she had never slept with a man when she became pregnant with Jesus! Simple as that!
2007-08-24 09:44:18
·
answer #3
·
answered by knight_janette 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
When the virgin Mary became pregnant with Jesus she was a virgin and that is why she was labeled that way, because it was a miracle birth.
But worshiping her is wrong as it states in the 10 comandments
read
exodus 20 ; 1-17
2007-08-22 18:15:04
·
answer #4
·
answered by debra g 2
·
1⤊
0⤋
Excuse me, Roman Catholicism is centered only in the Lord Jesus Christ and eventually in the Lord God and Holy Spirit. But it does not teach its followers to worship Virgin Mary. And Mary is called Virgin Mary because even after giving birth to the Lord Jesus Christ, she is still a virgin. Got it right now?
2007-08-24 04:56:31
·
answer #5
·
answered by Jet 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Catholics traditionally portray that Mary remained a virgin her entire life, and that Jesus's brothers were "brothers in the Lord.". Ptotestants usually take a more literal meaning and take that they are his brothers born of Mary and Joseph.
Either way, so what? Mary was a virgin when Christ was born, so that's the importance of the term "virgin Mary." Whether or not she "got some action" with her husband aftyer they were married in no way makes her less pure.
2007-08-16 10:01:41
·
answer #6
·
answered by Some dude 4
·
2⤊
0⤋
The only birth that matters in this story is Jesus who was conceived of a Virgin. Joseph was told to leave alone until after the birth.
After that the restriction was lifted and as most married couples do, They started having mutually agreed sex. big time. Look how long Joe waited. Don't you imagine they were both ready for it.
She was pure and still is. Their sex was in the marriage bed where all things are legal.
Mary was a Saint and your feeble accusations of impurity and your attitude about sex leaves me thinking you sure aren't.
2007-08-24 00:22:55
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Yes, the scriptures plainly show that Jesus had fleshly brothers and sisters:
"His mother and brothers now arrived and, standing outside, sent in a message asking for him. A crowd was sitting round him at the time the message was passed to him, ‘Your mother and brothers and sisters are outside asking for you’. He replied, ‘Who are my mother and my brothers?’ And looking round at those sitting in a circle about him, he said, ‘Here are my mother and my brothers. Anyone who does the will of God, that person is my brother and sister and mother.’” -Mark 3:31-35, see also Matthew 13:53-56
Here a clear distinction is drawn between Jesus’ natural brothers and his spiritual brothers, his disciples.
Also, Mary, like all humans, was a sinner. The Bible reports that in accord with the requirement of the Mosaic Law, 40 days after Jesus’ birth Mary offered at the temple in Jerusalem a sin offering for purification from uncleanness. She, too, had inherited sin and imperfection from Adam. If Mary was perfect, she would not have to sacrifice for the forgiveness of her sins. -Luke 2:22-24; Leviticus 12:8; Romanms 5:12
*Edit*
And as far as being "well off" financially, I suppose that Anda has never read Leviticus 12: 8 and compared it to what Mary did in Luke 2:22-24. Only persons who could not afford a sheep were allowed to offer pigeons or turtledoves. Obviously, Mary wasn't "well off". Rather, she was a poor and humble servant of God. Why else would she say "my spirit cannot keep from being overjoyed at God my Savior; because he has looked upon the low position of his slave girl." -Luke 1:46, 47
2007-08-16 10:18:52
·
answer #8
·
answered by johnusmaximus1 6
·
0⤊
1⤋
As a Christian I don't label her 'Eternal Virgin Mary etc. that sounds like the Roman Church. She was a sinner just like you and me. She was a virgin when she conceived but not by any human action - and that's what gave rise to a sinless offspring - Jesus.
What's this business of being naughty at night - is that how you see marital sex - something wrong with you somewhere.
2007-08-22 17:00:41
·
answer #9
·
answered by cheir 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
That's a real nice and interesting question. Yes, why when in fact she has borne other children aside from Jesus. She was married and had a husband. That certainly is a wrong notion that the Catholic Church failed to correct. Why continue calling a woman a virgin when she isn't one anymore?
2007-08-24 07:30:46
·
answer #10
·
answered by annabelle p 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
In the Dark Ages, Christendom became globally appalled by the concept of human sexuality. The Church came to believe sexuality was only evil, began to forbid its priests to marry, and developed the ideology of Mary's perpetual virginity. They also encouraged public self-flagellation, and exhumed bodies of various saints and sent pieces of them (like fingers, radii, femurs, hair, teeth, etc) they called "relics" around the known world to become focal points for worship, and increased income from the faithful into the church coffers. It was a pretty sick time in Church history. There is absolutely nothing impure about sexual relationships within the context of marriage. Mary and Joseph were Gallilean Jews, and Judaism prescribed sex within marriage as an integral duty between partners. So she was as pure as any married Jewish woman ever.
2007-08-24 01:19:42
·
answer #11
·
answered by javadic 5
·
0⤊
0⤋