Question for Catholics about Mary?

Question

Catholics only please:

Where in the Bible (not the Catechism - see below) does it say that Mary died a virgin? I can't seem to find it anywhere, and if the Bible doesn't say it, how do Catholics infer this belief?

I believe she was highly favored by God (Luke 1:28-30).
I believe she was a virgin when she was pregnant with Jesus (Luke 1:34).

But that's all I could find. The argument goes something like this: There's a light switch in a hotel room in Chicago at this very moment (This is true). The light switch is either turned on or off. (This is also true) If God said in the Bible that the light switch was turned on, then I believe it's on, but the Bible doesn't say anything about this light switch, so how can we argue about whether it's on or off?

** Not allowed to beg the question with The Catechism - Part One, Section Two, Chapter Two, Article 3, Paragraph 2 which only quotes earlier versions of the same document or the Counsel of Trent, but has no specific Biblical reference

Wow, you can really get bogged down with a lot of detail that has very little to do with the question. The best explanation I've heard so far is that Jesus asked John to take his mother into his care which would have been done by his siblings if he had any, but it doesn't spell it out. Taking the Bible at face value and not "reading anything into it", I still cannot find a specific verse that says that she died a virgin.

Answer 1

She is called "virgin" in the Bible 5 times: 3 times in Lk.1, in Mt.1:23, and in Is.7:14.

Answer 2

You have to first understand Jewish tradition, laws and lifestyle.

Let's start with 'brothers' and 'sisters' in the Bible. It's a well known fact that family members were called brothers and sisters even if they weren't. If they were cousins, they were brothers and sisters, if they were who you were raised with, they were brothers and sisters. The Bible stating 'Jesus' brothers and sisters' does not count towards Mary having other children. Actually, one of the writers of the Bible says "I am a brother of Christ Jesus." and we know for a fact he was a distant cousin of sorts.

Now, if it were true that Mary was having relations, you would expect her to get pregnant again. If she had, then when Jesus was on the crucifix he wouldn't have given her away to James. By Jewish lifestyle, if a woman has no family to take her in then someone else must. Jesus shows he has no siblings by saying "26 Seeing his mother and the disciple whom he loved standing near her, Jesus said to his mother, 'Woman, this is your son.' 27 Then to the disciple he said, 'This is your mother.' And from that hour the disciple took her into his home."

If he had other siblings, this never would've happened as there would've been no need to. The same goes for if Joseph was still alive, which shows us he is not.

Also, for those who say it's a sin against God to not reproduce within marriage, Jesus actually talks about that though most people ignore that verse. Matthew 19:12 "For example, some men are celibate because they were born that way. Others are celibate because they were castrated. Still others have decided to be celibate because of the kingdom of heaven. If anyone can do what you've suggested, then he should do it."

He is saying there are some who do not marry or at least have a sexual life, some who give up marriage for God and some who are born to be celibate at birth. Would a marriage be unlawful if the woman or man were sterile? Also, during the time Mary and Joseph were alive, there was a sect of Judaism that remained celibate their entire lives though married. They believed in sacrificing this for God and giving their entire lives to God, including their sexuality.

So it isn't unBiblical to remain celibate.

Also, think about this: If you were Joseph and your wife was chosen to be the new Covenant of the Lord and bear His son, would you even dream of touching her afterwards? She was marked by God to become the Mother of God, I would be in such awe that a sexual life would be non-exsistant. And Joseph being a devout Jew would most likely be the same. Here's a woman who was kept from sin (that's biblical too) just to become the handmaid of the Lord and bear the savior of the world.

What devout God-fearing man would come between that? Joseph's place was to protect Jesus and Mary from condemnation, but I doubt he would've ever sexually touched Mary after such a wonderous miracle.

We use both Sacred Tradition along with Sacred Scripture. And Mary's virginity has been believed from the very beginning of Christianity, though it wasn't until centuries later it became dogma. If you think about it rationally, you will see how we Catholics believe this.

Answer 3

Does the New Testament say Mary had other children? Read carefully now. St. Matthew (13: 55) and St. Mark (6:3) do give the names of those it calls Jesus' "brothers," namely, James, Joses, Simon, and Jude. However, if you look at Matthew 27: 56 and Mark 15: 40 you will see both Evangelists tell us quite clearly that James and Joses were NOT sons of Mary or Joseph but children of a different "Mary" who is called both the Wife of Alphaeus/Cleopas AND the Virgin Mary's "sister." Now, it would have been highly unlikely in those days for two Jewish sisters to have the same first name, but obviously some close relationship is implied among all these people. It's really fairly easily solved: Alphaeus/Cleopas was the brother of St. Joseph, hence Alphaeus' wife, Mary, was the sister-in-law of the Virgin, making James, Joses, Simon, Jude, and the "sisters" to be Jesus' cousins. That the Evangelists call such cousins "brothers and sisters" isn't surprising but quite in line with Semitic thought where close kin were often called brothers/sisters.

Also, read John 19:25-27 (NJB): Seeing his mother and the disciple whom he loved standing near her, Jesus said to his mother, "woman this is your son." Then to the disciple he said, "This is your mother." Thus, Jesus gave away his mother to the care of St. John the apostle, which would be very strange and probably even illegal had Mary had children of her own who could have cared for her.

One must also take into account the almost universal belief of Christians throughout the ages that Mary, the Mother of Jesus, whom we call the God-bearer, was ever-virgin. The majority of the ancient Fathers of the Church believed Mary was ever-virgin, including Clement of Alexandria, Origen, and St. Jerome. Many Reformers did as well (surprisingly to most Protestants) including Luther, Calvin, Zwingli, and John Wesley.

In the Old Testament it is written that Michal had no child until the day of her death; does that mean she had one after she died? Of course not! The Evangelist, by stating that Joseph did not "know" Mary "until" she had given birth to Jesus, is simply re-emphasizing that this was a virgin birth, a birth caused by God and not man. St. Jerome, a language scholar, explained that the use of "until" is a Hebrew idiom which does not necessarily imply Mary had other children. Even John Calvin believed "firstborn" simply indicated that Mary was a virgin, and agreed with St. Jerome's assertions about the use of "until."

As for "first-born," Colossians 1: 15 calls Jesus the Firstborn of all creation in God's image. Does this mean that there is a second, third, fourth born? That would be heresy. A first-born can be the only born. The term "firstborn" also had an important meaning in Judaic religion: The firstborn was considered holy and belonging solely to God as it was written in the Torah, "The first son that opens the womb shall be holy to the Lord." The parents had to "redeem" the firstborn son with offerings and sacrifice. Firstborn also is a synonym for "preeminent" in this ancient usage.

Answer 4

I can see why they think Mary should be sinless. Although, it does contradict the bible and God could have preserved Jesus' sinless nature in the womb without making Mary sinless. But what I really don't get is; why do they believe Mary was sinless after the birth of Christ? And why she couldn't have lived a normal married life with her husband Joseph? Such as having children like the bible said: "I am become a stranger unto my brethren, and an alien unto my mother's children." (Psalm 69:8).  And I'm not trying to bash Catholics here. I truly want to know what they believe and why--while backing it up with the bible. I never got a sufficient answer from a Catholic.

Answer 5

But that's all I could find. The argument goes something like this: There's a light switch in a hotel room in Chicago at this very moment (This is true). The light switch is either turned on or off. (This is also true) If God said in the Bible that the light switch was turned on, then I believe it's on, but the Bible doesn't say anything about this light switch, so how can we argue about whether it's on or off?


that is not an argument which is convoluted enough, or indeed more specious, you will need to do better... wow... you DO get the prize...
the Bible does not say anything about Diesel engines either, do you believe they exist ?
EDIT: I see Pastor Fart is back, always a fetid presence...

Answer 6

pastor art did you study "koine" greek, which is the greek used in the new testament for the better part atleast.

many have already pointed out the different passages and reasoning. i just add that the bible was cnaonized by the roman catholic church under the guidance of the holy spirit. without the roman catholic church there would be no bible today, the church preserved and recorded the sacred scriptures under the roughest persecutions, many even died defending the bible and the church jesus christ established.

may i also point out that as early as 80a.d before the bible was even compiled and before all the books were finished we have written recoeds from the bishop in rome having authority, at this same time st john was a bishop in ephesus. if st john whom was with jesus in his ministry disagreed with any of the practiced of the catholic church or authority in rome why would he be a bishop of that church?

yuo can find these writings and others at
www.earlychristianwritings.com

god bless.

Answer 7

To believe that the Bible is our only source of Christian Truth is unbiblical and illogical.



Our Lord founded a Church (Matthew 16:18-19), not a book, which was to be the pillar and ground of Truth (1 Timothy 3:15).

this Church teaches by looking not only at Sacred Scripture, but into History and by reading what the earliest Christians have written, what those who've sat on the Chair of Peter have spoken consistently with Scripture and Tradition, and what they've solemnly defined.




Tradition: the teachings which the Church has preserved and passed down from Christ, His Apostles, and the unanimous teachings of the early Church Fathers (1 Corinthians 11:2, 2 Thessalonians 2:15, 2 Thessalonians 3:6)

Answer 8

Lk 1:24 how can this be, since I do not know man

Lk 2:41-51 age 12, Jesus evidently only son of Mary.

Mk 6:3 "the son of Mary" not "a son of Mary"

Mt 27:56 Mary the mother of James and Joseph is also Mary the wife of Clopas Mt 19:25.

Jn 19:26 entrusted Mary to John(non relative), and not a younger sibling

Ex 25:11-21 ark made of purest gold for God's Word

Lk 1:37 for with God nothing is impossible.

Answer 9

Fact: The Bible does indeed teach that Mary is ever-virgin.
Also Fact: You have not located this teaching in the Bible, but that fact does not constitute evidence that said teaching isn't in the Bible.

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.

2 Kings 10:13-14 - King Ahaziah's 42 "brethren" were really his kinsmen.

1 Chron. 23:21-22 - Eleazar's daughters married their "brethren" who were really their cousins.

Neh. 4:14; 5:1,5,8,10,14 - these are more examples of "brothers" meaning "cousins" or "kinsmen."

Tobit 5:11 - Tobit asks Azarias to identify himself and his people, but still calls him "brother."

Amos 1: 9 - brotherhood can also mean an ally (where there is no bloodline).

Misunderstanding about Matthew 1:25 (Joseph knew her "not until")
Matt. 1:25 - this verse says Joseph knew her "not until ("heos", in Greek)" she bore a son. Some Protestants argue that this proves Joseph had relations with Mary after she bore a son. This is an erroneous reading of the text because "not until" does not mean "did not...until after." "Heos" references the past, never the future. Instead, "not until" she bore a son means "not up to the point that" she bore a son. This confirms that Mary was a virgin when she bore Jesus. Here are other texts that prove "not until" means "not up to the point that":

Matt. 28:29 - I am with you "until the end of the world." This does not mean Jesus is not with us after the end of the world.

Luke 1:80 - John was in the desert "up to the point of his manifestation to Israel." Not John "was in the desert until after" his manifestation.

Luke 2:37 - Anna was a widow "up to the point that" she was eighty-four years old. She was not a widow after eighty-four years old.

Luke 20:43 - Jesus says, "take your seat at my hand until I have made your enemies your footstool." Jesus is not going to require the apostles to sit at His left hand after their enemies are their footstool.

1 Tim. 4:13 - "up to the point that I come," attend to teaching and preaching. It does not mean do nothing "until after" I come.

Gen. 8:7 - the raven flew back and forth "up to the point that" [until] the waters dried from the earth. The raven did not start flying after the waters dried.

Gen. 28:15 - the Lord won't leave Jacob "up to the point that" he does His promise. This does not mean the Lord will leave Jacob afterward.

Deut. 34:6 - but "up to the point of today" no one knows Moses' burial place. This does not mean that "they did not know place until today."

2 Sam. 6:23 - Saul's daughter Micah was childless "up to the point" [until] her death. She was not with child after her death.

1 Macc. 5:54 - not one was slain "up to the point that" they returned in peace. They were not slain after they returned in peace.

Answer 10

I'm Catholic.

Mary's death is not recorded anywhere in Scripture. Neither is a lot of people's. Your birth was not recorded in Scripture -- does that mean you were never born? Many, many things have happened that are true facts and they aren't in Scripture.

Catholics believe that Mary ended her life on earth as a virgin because of our understanding of the Scriptures that DO talk about Mary's life.

For example, your protestant Bible says "highly favored" in reference to Mary at Luke 1:28. However, that is a poor translation of the Greek. The Greek words indicate "Most Graced" or "the Fullness of Grace." Protestants who translate the Bible downplay this and use the loosest and broadest terms they can ('highly favored') on purpose because of their theology on Mary. They don't WANT Mary to be "the fullness of Grace" because what is the fullness of Grace? It means completely absolved from all sin, right? Catholics are cool with that, but Protestants have a lot of trouble with it. They think it's impossible or wrong to say that Mary had received the fullness of Grace -- total absolution -- because it would mean that Mary is special.

So, what I suggest you do is that you learn Greek. That's what I did. I took classes in Greek from a Jewish scholar. I learned as much as I could so that I could read the New Testament in the oldest form we have. Luke was written in Greek, but Matthew was probably written in Hebrew and Mark and John were probably written in Aramaic. So even the oldest versions we have of those are a translation. And once you learn Greek, you'll see that translation is really, really hard. It's not word-for-word across. You have to take into account different cultures and grammars, too.

Anyway, aside from that one particular phrase, we Catholics also rely on Sacred Tradition as well as the Bible, because the Bible says so (See 2 Thess. 2:15). At the time of Mary's departure from earth, there were witnesses attending her in her last hours. We consider their testimonies to be valuable and trustworthy, because these were the Apostles themselves! So what we know about Mary's final hours, we know from this tradition.

Furthermore, we also consider the Old Testament. As you know, Mary and Joseph were not 1st century Christians, they were 1st century Jews. They had only the OT for their Scriptures. Their understanding of the Holy Spirit coming upon Mary and her pregnancy with Jesus in the OT way -- she was the New Ark of the Covenant, the tabernacle where God met His people in a new way. If you go back and read all about the original ark of the covenant and how people treated that, you'll have a good understanding of how Joseph regarded Mary as any good and holy Jewish man would regard her. And you'll see how it would have been impossible for him to have done anything sexual with Mary, ever.