I was reading the bible and came across this passage in the new international version Matthew 1:25 New International Version But he did not consummate their marriage until she gave birth to a son. And he gave him the name Jesus. so I looked up the word consummate in the context in marriage and came across this Consummation or consummation of amarriage, in many traditions and statutes of civil or religious law, is the first (or first officially credited) act of sexual intercourse between two people, either following their marriageto each other or after a prolonged sexual attraction So i looked at other versions of the bible and came across this. now I am devoted to our lady I'm just back from fatima but I can see how some people can get mixed up for me the bible is for one thing and that is so I can feel close to god while reading it which I do . It also goes back to faith I have faith that out lady was and always was a virgin faith is based on not knowing all the truth the main thing is finding and placing Jesus Christ in your life through love and action
That seems like a protestant translation. I would be interested in the Greek word they have translated to "consummate". The word until is in Catholic translations too, but it is interpreted to mean only that there were no relations that resulted in Jesus's birth, not implying that after there were relations.
Douay-Rheims Bible + Challoner Notes [21] And she shall bring forth a son: and thou shalt call his name JESUS. For he shall save his people from their sins. [22] Now all this was done that it might be fulfilled which the Lord spoke by the prophet, saying: [23] Behold a virgin shall be with child, and bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God with us. [24] And Joseph rising up from sleep, did as the angel of the Lord had commanded him, and took unto him his wife. [25] And he knew her not till she brought forth her firstborn son: and he called his name JESUS. [25] Till she brought forth her firstborn son: From these words Helvidius and other heretics most impiously inferred that the blessed Virgin Mary had other children besides Christ; but St. Jerome shews, by divers examples, that this expression of the Evangelist was a manner of speaking usual among the Hebrews, to denote by the word until, only what is done, without any regard to the future. Thus it is said, Genesis 8. 6 and 7, that Noe sent forth a raven, which went forth, and did not return till the waters were dried up on the earth. That is, did not return any more. Also Isaias 46. 4, God says: I am till you grow old. Who dare infer that God should then cease to be: Also in the first book of Machabees 5. 54, And they went up to mount Sion with joy and gladness, and offered holocausts, because not one of them was slain till they had returned in peace. That is, not one was slain before or after they had returned. God saith to his divine Son: Sit on my right hand till I make thy enemies thy footstool. Shall he sit no longer after his enemies are subdued? Yea and for all eternity. St. Jerome also proves by Scripture examples, that an only begotten son, was also called firstborn, or first begotten: because according to the law, the firstborn males were to be consecrated to God; Sanctify unto me, saith the Lord, every firstborn that openeth the womb among the children of Israel, etc. Ex. 13. 2.
If you are implying based on the translation that Mary wasn't perpetual virgin and that she had other children then what Jesus said on the cross would make no sense and would be a violation of Jewish law and tradition. John 19: [26] When Jesus therefore had seen his mother and the disciple standing whom he loved, he saith to his mother: Woman, behold thy son. [27] After that, he saith to the disciple: Behold thy mother. And from that hour, the disciple took her to his own. Jesus would not have broken Jewish law by giving His Mother to John if he had younger brothers. This could only have been the case if all of Jesus's "brothers" in this case would have died. The Protestants argue that James the lesser was one of His brothers but this can't be the case then because we know James the lesser was still alive at the time of the crucifixion.
till in this case refers to up to the time of His birth and has nothing to do with the time after. The argument made by St. Jerome is clear on this. Mary's perpetual virginity was never even an issue with the original Protestants ie: Martin Luther and John Calvin and others to come: "Certainly, no man will ever raise a question on this subject, except from curiosity; and no man will obstinately keep up the argument, except from an extreme fondness for disputation." - John Calvin on the Helvidous argument against perpetual virginity. Martin Luther wrote on Mathew 1:25: "When Matthew says that Joseph did not know Mary carnally until she had brought forth her son, it does not follow that he knew her subsequently; on the contrary, it means that he never did know her . . . This babble . . . is without justification . . . he has neither noticed nor paid any attention to either Scripture or the common idiom." and: "Christ, our Savior, was the real and natural fruit of Mary's virginal womb . . . This was without the cooperation of a man, and she remained a virgin after that. [...] Christ . . . was the only Son of Mary, and the Virgin Mary bore no children besides Him . . . I am inclined to agree with those who declare that 'brothers' really mean 'cousins' here, for Holy Writ and the Jews always call cousins brothers." John Wesley, in 1749, wrote: "I believe that He [Jesus] was made man, joining the human nature with the divine in one person; being conceived by the singular operation of the Holy Ghost, and born of the blessed Virgin Mary, who, as well after as before she brought Him forth, continued a pure and unspotted virgin." Huldrych Zwingli wrote: "I firmly believe that Mary, according to the words of the gospel as a pure Virgin brought forth for us the Son of God and in childbirth and after childbirth forever remained a pure, intact Virgin." (Zwingli Opera, Corpus Reformatorum, Berlin, 1905, v. 1, p. 424)
just doing a 2 second search on the new international translation, according to wikipedia, even protestants have critiqued it for trying to force certain points of view out through iffy translation (this is just cut and pasted from wikipedia on the niv): "In 2009 N. T. Wright wrote that the 1980 NIV obscured what Paul was saying, making sure that he [Paul] conformed to Protestant and Evangelical tradition. Wright believes that due to paraphrasing and interpretation, Protestants and Evangelicals will never understand what Paul was talking about if they rely on the NIV. According to Wright, this happens in several of Paul's letters, Galatians and Romans.[21] 2011 Revision[edit] Professor of New Testament Studies Daniel B. Wallace[22] has praised the 2011 update, "it is a well-thought out translation, with checks and balances through rigorous testing, overlapping committees to ensure consistency and accuracy".[23] However, the Southern Baptist Conventionrejected the 2011 update because of gender-related issues. Southern Baptist publisher LifeWay declined the SBC's censor request to remove the NIV from their stores.[24][25] While the Lutheran Church–Missouri Synod cautioned against its use,[26][27] the Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod stated many decisions are right and defensible,[28] and will use it in their new hymnal.[29]"
A priest told me once when reading the bible do not be afraid to ask questions I think his 100 percent right if you don't understand something then ask!
Andy I'm not implying nothing I have no issue with our lady's virginity if we are to have a unity in the Christian faith I can see how some Christian believe by reading miss interpretation in the bible
You are right! We should be able to defend our beliefs to non-catholics. 1 Peter, chapter 3-15 Always be ready to give an explanation to anyone who asks you for a reason for your hope. In further searching, I found more http://www.catholic.com/magazine/articles/the-case-for-mary’s-perpetual-virginity http://www.catholic-legate.com/articles/heoshou.html
Hope, This is from the first article you referenced and helps us not jump to false conclusions: Until Then Scripture’s statement that Joseph "knew [Mary] not until she brought forth her firstborn" would not necessarily mean they did "know" each other after she brought forth Jesus. Until is often used in Scripture as part of an idiomatic expression similar to our own usage in English. I may say to you, "Until we meet again, God bless you." Does that necessarily mean after we meet again, God curse you? By no means. A phrase like this is used to emphasize what is being described before the until is fulfilled. It is not intended to say anything about the future beyond that point. Here are some biblical examples: 2 Samuel 6:23: And Michal the daughter of Saul had no child to (until) the day of her death. (Does this mean she had children after she died?) 1 Timothy 4:13: Until I come, attend to the public reading of scripture, to preaching, to teaching. (Does this mean Timothy should stop teaching after Paul comes?) 1 Corinthians 15:25: For he (Christ) must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet. (Does this mean Christ’s reign will end? By no means! Luke 1:33 says, "he will reign over the house of Jacob forever and of his kingdom there shall be no end.") Safe in the Refuge of the Immaculate Heart!
Oakline, you are right about asking questions and being able to defend the faith. If you are Catholic, though, I would also have a Catholic translation of the bible to read regularly. You would be missing books, in addition to subjecting yourself to questionable translations, by using only a protestant translation.
Fr. Rich (Rick?) Simon, "Rev. Know-It-All", on Relevant Radio fielded a question about this exact verse on his show last week. I won't be able to repeat his answer because I won't do it justice, but he said that Mary and Joseph definitely did not have relations. If you feel like it, you may be able to listen to the audio archives from the show. I think it was last Tuesday--maybe Wednesday.
