[Wondergirl]

There was no New Testament for the first 300 years of Christianity. What did the early Christians rely on?

The early church used the Old Testament books plus the apostolic oral tradition (apostles' accounts of spending time with Jesus and what he said and did). Of course, the churches that received epistles (letters) from the various apostles used those in the teaching of and preaching to their members.

[Galveston1]

Matt 1:24-25
24 Then Joseph being raised from sleep did as the angel of the Lord had bidden him, and took unto him his wife:
25 And knew her not till she had brought forth her firstborn son: and he called his name JESUS.
(KJV)

Note the word "till" clearly implying that he did "know" her AFTER Jesus was born.

[JoeT777]

Matt 1:24-25
24 Then Joseph being raised from sleep did as the angel of the Lord had bidden him, and took unto him his wife:
25 And knew her not till she had brought forth her firstborn son: and he called his name JESUS.
(KJV)

Note the word "till" clearly implying that he did "know" her AFTER Jesus was born.

“Tilll” is a Scriptural figure of speech. This has been taught from the beginning by the Magisterium of the Church. The following is a theological tact. Halvidius made the same argument that sisters and brethren were “proof” that the Virgin Mary had children. The argument surrounding the “till” was settled by St. Jerome.

St. Jerome, Against Helvidius (circa) 383 A.D.

…so with regard to the word till he is utterly refuted by the authority of the same Scripture, which often denotes by its use a fixed time (he himself told us so), frequently time without limitation, as when God by the mouth of the prophet says to certain persons, Isaiah 46:4 Even to old age I am he. Will He cease to be God when they have grown old? And the Saviour in the Gospel tells the Apostles, Matthew 28:20 Lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world. Will the Lord then after the end of the world has come forsake His disciples, and at the very time when seated on twelve thrones they are to judge the twelve tribes of Israel will they be bereft of the company of their Lord? Again Paul the Apostle writing to the Corinthians says, Christ the first-fruits, afterward they that are Christ's, at his coming. Then comes the end, when he shall have delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father, when he shall have put down all rule, and all authority and power. For he must reign, till he has put all enemies under his feet. Granted that the passage relates to our Lord's human nature, we do not deny that the words are spoken of Him who endured the cross and is commanded to sit afterwards on the right hand. What does he mean then by saying, for he must reign, till he has put all enemies under his feet? Is the Lord to reign only until His enemies begin to be under His feet, and once they are under His feet will He cease to reign? Of course His reign will then commence in its fulness when His enemies begin to be under His feet. David also in the fourth Song of Ascents speaks thus, Behold, as the eyes of servants look unto the hand of their master, as the eyes of a maiden unto the hand of her mistress, so our eyes look unto the Lord our God, until he have mercy upon us. Will the prophet, then, look unto the Lord until he obtain mercy, and when mercy is obtained will he turn his eyes down to the ground?

Why is the Ever Virgin Mary a threat to Protestantism?

JoeT

[Tj3]

“Tilll” is a Scriptural figure of speech.

You might have a weak argument if it was not for the fact that scripture tells us specifically that Mary had additional children. We cannot ignore the context of the whole of scripture.

This has been taught from the beginning by the Magisterium of the Church. The following is a theological tact.

I do not care what the private interpretation of your denomination is. I prefer to go by what the word of God says rather than the private interpretation of men.

[Criado]

Originally Posted by JoeT777
which often denotes by its use a fixed time (he himself told us so), frequently time without limitation

How can you be sure that Matt 1:24-25 denotes no limitation? And not what till means in Matt 2:9; Matt 10:23; Matt 13:33; Mark 9:9

Jerome's argument is not flawless after all.

==================

Originally Posted by Peter Wilson
55"Isn't this the carpenter's son? Isn't his mother's name Mary, and aren't his brothers James, Joseph, Simon and Judas?
56Aren't all his sisters with us? Where then did this man get all these things?"

I think Mark 6:3 holds a stronger support that Mary have children--Jesus had sisters in flesh (who were unbelievers).

[Tj3]

The early church used the Old Testament books plus the apostolic oral tradition (apostles' accounts of spending time with Jesus and what he said and did). Of course, the churches that received epistles (letters) from the various apostles used those in the teaching of and preaching to their members.

Just to add what to what you have said, the Apostles subsequently wrote their teachings down and we have them today in the New Testament, not as a separate additional teaching, and their teachings are in complete harmony with the Old Testament.

[N0help4u]

Matt 1:24-25
24 Then Joseph being raised from sleep did as the angel of the Lord had bidden him, and took unto him his wife:
25 And knew her not till she had brought forth her firstborn son: and he called his name JESUS.
(KJV)

Note the word "till" clearly implying that he did "know" her AFTER Jesus was born.

It puzzles me to no end how somebody can say this is figurative.

In the O.T. knowing your wife means sexual relationship and the fact that he knew marry BEFORE Jesus' birth WHAT was there not to know about her in any other way?
So if it is figuratively WHAT then did he KNOW about her after Jesus was born that he didn't know before he was born?

“Tilll” is a Scriptural figure of speech. This has been taught from the beginning by the Magisterium of the Church. The following is a theological tact. Halvidius made the same argument that sisters and brethren were “proof” that the Virgin Mary had children. The argument surrounding the “till” was settled by St. Jerome.

JoeT

Joseph having more kids seems more a threat to Catholic's than Mary being a virgin is to Protestants because it is not a threat either way... at least to us... why is that?

[JoeT777]

It puzzles me to no end how somebody can say this is figurative.

In the O.T. knowing your wife means sexual relationship and the fact that he knew marry BEFORE Jesus' birth WHAT was there not to know about her in any other way?
So if it is figuratively WHAT then did he KNOW about her after Jesus was born that he didn't know before he was born?



Joseph having more kids seems more a threat to Catholic's than Mary being a virgin is to Protestants because it is not a threat either way...at least to us....why is that?

The objection was in the word "till." St. Jerome shows that the objection is spurious.

If its not a threat then why the anxiety in proving it to be false?

Why is the Ever Virgin Mary a threat to Protestantism?

JoeT

[N0help4u]

Some people just like to wonder about things that doesn't make it a threat.

I wonder about how many stars, galaxies, planets are actually out in space and how vast the universe is does that make it a threat?

Usually people who want to project something onto somebody it is often the way they themselves actually see it... would it be a threat to your religion if she actually did give birth to other children? Would it make her a sinner in your eyes or what? Why is it so important to you that she be denied or deny Joseph a relationship AFTER Jesus was born?

[Tj3]

The objection was in the word "till." St. Jerome shows that the objection is spurious.

Private interpretation, and this does not take into account the fact that scripture is quite specific in the fact that Mary had other children.

If its not a threat then why the anxiety in proving it to be false?

Love of the truth and integrity found in God's word would be my interest. Once you start tearing apart the truth found in God's word to support your denominations variant doctrinal teachings, then it is the start of a slippery slope which opens the way to altering other parts of God's word.

[JoeT777]

How can you be sure that Matt 1:24-25 denotes no limitation? And not what till means in Matt 2:9; Matt 10:23; Matt 13:33; Mark 9:9

Jerome's argument is not flawless after all.

==================

I think Mark 6:3 holds a stronger support that Mary have children--Jesus had sisters in flesh (who were unbelievers).

Well, no I couldn't agree to a statement like that. I only pasted a small part of St. Jerome's tract, maybe it would be wise to read the remainder. Brother refers to clansman -link.

Mark 6: 3 Is not this the carpenter, the son of Mary, the brother of James, and Joseph, and Jude, and Simon? are not also his sisters here with us? And they were scandalized in regard of him.

JoeT

[Tj3]

Well, no I couldn't agree to a statement like that. I only pasted a small part of St. Jerome’s tract, maybe it would be wise to read the remainder. Brother refers to clansman -link.

Mark 6: 3 Is not this the carpenter, the son of Mary, the brother of James, and Joseph, and Jude, and Simon? are not also his sisters here with us? And they were scandalized in regard of him.

JoeT

Why do you make one man's opinion the authority over doctrine?

[N0help4u]

So if it is figuratively WHAT then did he {Joseph} KNOW about her {Mary} after Jesus was born that he didn't know before he was born?

So any Catholics can you answer me?

[Wondergirl]

Why is the Ever Virgin Mary a threat to Protestantism?

If the Catholic Church has lied about (misrepresented?) that, what else has been misrepresented?

[JoeT777]

So any Catholics can you answer me?

Think about, relationships such as marriage don't rely on physical contact. Rather, such relationships rely on love. Ask yourself why must there have been a physical relationship between Mary and Joseph for your faith to work?

Why is the Ever Virgin Mary a threat to Protestantism?

JoeT

[JoeT777]

If the Catholic Church has lied about (misrepresented?) that, what else has been misrepresented?

That's a big claim Wondergirl. Do you wish to show us how this could be?

JoeT

[N0help4u]

That's a big claim Wondergirl. Do you wish to show us how this could be?

JoeT

I am sure she could but I am even more sure Catholics would still not see it.

[N0help4u]

Think about, relationships such as marriage don't rely on physical contact. Rather, such relationships rely on love. Ask yourself why must there have been a physical relationship between Mary and Joseph for your faith to work?

Why is the Ever Virgin Mary a threat to Protestantism?

JoeT

Open your eyes the Bible says NOTHING about sex between a husband and a wife being wrong so WHY IS IT such a threat to you that she may have actually been ONE with HER husband as God honors Biblically?

In fact the Bible says do not listen to *religions* that forbid and preach abstinance

[JoeT777]

I am sure she could but I am even more sure Catholics would still not see it.

Not only would I not believe it; I'd suggest that it wouldn't be true either.

JoeT

[N0help4u]

Just proves Catholics will only believe what they are taught no matter what proof is given otherwise.