Monday, August 15, 2011

In Defense of My Mother- Perpetual Virginity 2 of 4

Continuing on in this series 'In Defense of My Mother', we take a look at the Perpetual Virginity of Mary. As a recap, I found these attacks on a Fundamentalist's blog. I'm going to go through each of them answering the objections raised and defending against the attacks made. I'm not seeking to prove Mary's perpetual virginity (I've already done that here) . Instead, I just want to defend the doctrine against these attacks, and show why these attacks are false. Charges are in bold and orange, and my answer is in regular print.



— According to Catholic doctrine, Mary was a virgin before, during and after the birth of Christ.

I've got to give it to our Fundamentalist chum, s(he) sure knows what the Catholic Church believes (as far as this doctrine goes, at least).

_____Matthew 1:24-25 says, Then Joseph being raised from sleep did as the angel of the Lord had bidden him, and took unto him his wife: And knew her not till she had brought forth her firstborn son: and he called his name JESUS. Till (until) means that after that point, Joseph did know (have sexual relations with) Mary. (See Genesis 4:1 where Adam knew Eve and she conceived and had a son.)

Really? That's what till (until) means? With that understanding, maybe someone can explain to me what these verses mean:

"And Michal the daughter of Saul had no child until the day of her death." (2 Samuel 6:23) Does this mean she had children after her death?

"Until I come, attend to the public reading of scripture, to preaching, to teaching." (1 Timothy 4:13) Does this mean Timothy should stop reading, teaching, and preaching after Paul comes?

"For [Christ] must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet." (1 Corinthians 15:25) Does this mean that Christ will cease to reign after all His enemies are under His feat?

"But when Paul had appealed to be kept in custody for the decision of the emperor, I commanded him to be held until I could send him to Caesar." (Acts 25:21) Does this mean that Paul was released after he was sent to Caesar?

Obviously the answer to all of these is "NO!" The word till (until) does not mean that the opposite action occurs, or that an action ceases, at the moment that until refers to. Instead, until only deals with the time period leading up to the moment being referred to. It has nothing to do with what happens after the moment that until refers to.

_____Jesus had brothers and sisters. The Bible even tells us their names. Matthew 13:54-56 says, And when he was come into his own country, he taught them in their synagogue, insomuch that they were astonished, and said, Whence hath this man this wisdom, and these mighty works? Is not this the carpenters son? Is not his mother called Mary? And his brethren, James, and Joses, and Simon, and Judas? And his sisters, are they not all with us? Other Scripture verses which specifically refer to Jesus brothers are: Matthew 12:46; John 2:12; John 7:3; Acts 1:14; and Galatians 1:19.

Here's the problem with all of that: our Fundamentalist comrade fails to follow through on his/her accusation. S(he) fails to see if these guys are mentioned anywhere else. You could just take my word for it, but let's pass it over to Mr. Tim Staples of Catholic Answers (for the complete article):

"If we examine more closely the example of James... we discover him to be a cousin or some other relative of Jesus rather than a uterine brother. For example, Galatians 1:18-19 informs us: "Then after three years I [Paul] went up to Jerusalem to visit Cephas, and remained with him fifteen days. But I saw none of the other apostles except James the Lord’s brother."

Notice, the "James" of whom Paul was speaking was both a "brother of the Lord" and an "apostle." There are two apostles named James among the 12. The first James is revealed to be a "son of Zebedee." He most likely would not be the "James" referred to because according to Acts 12:1-2 he was martyred very early on. Even if it was him, his father was named Zebedee, not Joseph.

Paul more likely is referring to the second James who was an apostle, according to Luke 6:15-16. This James is revealed to have a father named Alphaeus, not Joseph. Thus, James the apostle and Jesus were not uterine brothers.... The Catechism here [CCC 500] refers to the fact that 14 chapters after we find the "brothers" of the Lord listed as "James, Joseph, Simon and Judas," we find "James and Joseph" mentioned again, but this time their mother is revealed as being named Mary, but not Mary, the Mother of Jesus. We can conclude that "James and Joseph" are "brothers" of Jesus, but they are not uterine brothers."

So, sorry, but they are not actually the uterine (biological through the mother) brothers of Christ.

_____I was always taught that brothers and sisters were general terms that really could refer to any kind of kinsman, including cousins. This is true in the Hebrew language. However, the New Testament is written in Greek, which is an extremely precise language. It makes a clear distinction between the words used to describe family relationships. There is a Greek word which refers to people who are relatives but not of the immediate family, such as aunts, uncles, nephews, nieces and cousins. There are other Greek words which refer specifically to a persons brother or sister within a family.

Two problems with that:

1. According to this website, adelphos does have a range in meaning.

2. If you scroll down a wee-bit, you'll see that there is a verse count, by book, of verses that use the word adelphos. Here's one example: "But do not be called Rabbi; for One is your Teacher, and you are all brothers." (Matthew 23:8). Adelphos is used for the word brother in this verse. Is Christ telling us that all Christians are biological brothers? Nope. He's talking about spiritual brotherhood here, but he uses the word adelphos, contrary to what our Fundamentalist amic(o/a) wants us to believe.

So as we see, these attacks on Mary's Perpetual Virginity fails. These aren't new attacks for the Fundamentalists. You would think that when they've seen their attacks fail time and time again, they would eventually either come up with new arguments or become Catholic (I bet the former would happen long before the latter).

Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, Part 4

No comments:

Post a Comment