|
Did Mary Remain a Virgin?
 Today’s Question:
Tom, Tom, Tom...I
can't believe that you, a supposedly learned man are teaching
things of which you know not. You recite a ridiculous Protestant
doctrine that says that Mary didn't remain a virgin and that
Jesus actually had brothers & sisters!
In the New American Bible’s English translation of the
Gospel of St. Mark we do indeed read about the crowd asking,
"Isn’t this the carpenter, the son of Mary, a brother
of James and Joses and Judas and Simon? Aren’t His sisters
our neighbors here?" (Mk 6:3) A similar reference occurs
earlier in Mk 3:31: "His mother and brothers
arrived...."
The problem emerges in understanding the meaning of the word
brother. In the original text of the Gospel, we find the Greek
word adelphos, meaning brother, used. However, adelphos
does not just mean blood brothers born of the same parents.
Rather, adelphos was used to describe brothers not born
of the same parents, like a half-brother or stepbrother. The word
also described other relationships, like cousins, nephews, etc.
For example, in Genesis 13:8 and 14:16, the word adelphos
was used to describe the relationship between Abraham and Lot;
however, these two men did not share a brother relationship, but
one of uncle and nephew.
Actually, the confusion originates in Hebrew and Aramaic, the
languages of most of the original Old Testament texts and of
Christ. In these languages, no special word existed for cousin,
nephew, half-brother, or step-brother; so they used the word
brother or a circumlocution, such as in the case of a cousin,
"the son of the brother of my father." When the Old
Testament was translated into Greek and the New Testament written
in Greek, the word adelphos was used to capture all of
these meanings. So in each instance, we must examine the context
in which the title is used. In all, the confusion arises in
English because of the lack of distinct terms for relatives in
the Hebrew and Aramaic, and the usage of the Greek adelphos
to signify all of these relations.
Therefore, as Catholics, based on Sacred Scripture and
Tradition, we do not believe that Mary and Joseph had other
children and consequently that Jesus had any blood brothers or
sisters.
Yours in Christ
L.M.
Bible Answer: Hi Laurance. Your argument
about the brothers and sisters of Jesus are very lame. You
mentioned that the Greek word, adelphos, means both relatives
and brothers. Then you quoted the Hebrew in Genesis 13:8. How can
you quote from the Greek in Mark and the quote the Hebrew in
Genesis 13:8 and say those are the same words. I give you the
benefit of the doubt that you meant the Greek Septuagint.
The word adelphos literally means, "the sharing of the
womb". I quote to you Strongs:
adephos (ad-el-fos'); from 1 (as a connective
particle) and delphus (the womb); a brother (literally or
figuratively) near or remote [much like 1]: KJV-- brother.
So the word adelphos comes from the word "womb".
This clearly places his brothers and sisters as coming from the
same womb that Jesus came from.
You made an argument that there were no other Greek words that could have
been used to speak of relatives; however that is not true. Consider Luke 1:36:
"Even Elizabeth your relative is going to have a child
in her old age, and she who was said to be barren is in her
sixth month."
The Greek word "relative" sometimes translated
cousin is the word suggenes. Strongs defines it as the
following: "suggenes (soong-ghen-ace'); a relative (by blood); by
extension, a fellow countryman: KJV-- cousin, kin (-sfolk,
-sman)."
You notice the word sugGENES has the word
"genes" which can mean brother and sister, but can also
mean any relative that shares genes with you. Cousin’s have
similar genes, that's why we often look like our cousins.
You see, your Roman Church, tells you that there are not
any Greek words for cousin or relative. You said, "No
special word existed for cousin, nephew, half-brother, or
step-brother; so they used the word brother or a circumlocution,
such as in the case of a cousin, 'the son of the brother of my
father.'" However I've just shown you the Greek word suggenes.
So your argument does not stand since there was a another Greek word for
relative.
The Bible is very clear: Mary
had more children after Christ was born. "When Joseph woke up, he did what
the angel of the Lord had commanded him and took Mary home as his wife. But he
had no union with her until she gave birth to a son. And he gave him the name
Jesus" (Matt 1:24-25). Notice that Joseph did not have "union with her
until she gave birth." It did not say "no union for life" but "until".
It is clear he waited until the birth before he began to fulfill his conjugal
vows to Mary. This passage is quite clear.
Matthew 13:55-56 also confirms Jesus had brothers and sister: "'Isn't this
the carpenter's son? Isn't his mother's name Mary, and aren't his brothers
James, Joseph, Simon and Judas? Aren't all his sisters with us?'" Notice
both Mary and Joseph are mentioned along with Jesus brothers and sisters. There
is no way to read anything except that they were Jesus' brothers and sisters
through the same parents. The language of the passage would not make sense if
they were referring only to Jesus relatives since they link them with the same
parents.
She was a virgin at the
time of Jesus conception and birth. That's what matters. But Roman Catholics want to make Mary as Co-Redeemer, Mediator of all
Graces and Advocate for the people of God. I guess you think
keeping her a Virgin will make people venerate her. Mary has
become a goddess in the Roman Catholic church, and that is
idolatry--anyway you look at it.
One final note: I have a deep respect and honor for Mary, the mother of our
Lord. Do not misread my statements as being disrespectful of Mary, because I
believe she is the most important woman ever born, and she has the eternal
distinction of bearing the Son of God in her womb. The concept of the "ever
Virgin" Mary appeals to some because of their Victorian approach to sex. Some
still find sex, even with the spouse, as somehow beneath saintliness. And of
course the Roman Catholic Church is the only church requiring celibacy, and so
it is no coincidence that some Catholics view sex as sinful. But it is not if it
occurs between a husband and the wife. In fact, sex is a command of God given in
Genesis 1:28, "Be fruitful and increase in number." So there is
nothing wrong with Mary having children after giving birth to Jesus. It is not a
sin--rather it is a woman's glory--for wives to bear children. It can even be
consider obedience to God to have children. God showed Mary honor and favor by
enabling her to bear more children. God gave Mary more children as gifts for her
sacrifice in bearing the Son of God.
 Send
your comments
Read more Bible Answers to Today's
Questions
Click
here if you're interested in having Tom
Brown come to your area
Back to the Main Page
|
