- Nice set up with typical and atypical. Why should it allow my mind to entertain this dogmatic construction? It appears from Matthew’s account that he “knew her not until she had given birth to a son”. Does it not seem reasonable to conclude that after the conception of the child that he “knew” her in the typical sense?
There are many examples in Scripture in which this is the case (OT references are from the Septuagint):
Gen 8:7 and sent forth a raven; and it went to and fro until the waters were dried up from the earth.
Did the raven cease to fly once the waters dried up?
Deut 34:6 and he buried him in the valley in the land of Moab opposite Beth-pe'or; but no man knows the place of his burial to [or "until"] this day.
No one knows it after that day either!
2 Sam 6:23 And Michal the daughter of Saul had no child to the day of her death.
She had no child after her death either.
2 Chron 26:15 In Jerusalem he made engines, invented by skilful men, to be on the towers and the corners, to shoot arrows and great stones. And his fame spread far, for he was marvelously helped, till he was strong.
Was he no longer helped once he became strong?
Psa 57:1 Be merdiful to me, O God, be merciful to me, for in thee my soul takes refuge; in the shadow of thy wings I will take refuge, till the storms of destruction pass by.
Will David cease to take refute in the Lord once the storms pass by?
Mt 28:20 teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, to [or "until"] the close of the age.
Jesus will always be with us, not just up to when the age closes.
Jn 9:18 The Jews did not believe that he had been blind and had received his sight, until they called the parents of the man who had received his sight
They didn't believe him after they called his parents either.
Rom 11:8 as it is written, "God gave them a spirit of stupor, eyes that should not see and ears that should not hear, down to this very day."
Paul is quoting Moses in Deut 29:4 and applying it to his own generation. That means Israel was stubborn both in Moses' day and in Paul's day.
2 Cor 3:15 Yes, to this day whenever Moses is read a veil lies over their minds;
Yet even now the veil remains over the eyes of the Jewish people. So, yea, you get the idea. You're making way too much out of the word "until" in Mt 1:25. If you look at the context of the passage, you'll see that Matthew is simply affirming that Mary remained a virgin during this time before the birth of Christ so that she can be seen to truly be the fulfillment of Isaiah's prophecy: "A virgin shall conceive and bear a son" (7:14). He's not attempting to make any type of statement about what happened afterward.
- Also…can you prove that because this was not the “typical” family that they would not have the “typical” sex? What is in the word “typical” that disqualifies it’s subjects from having sex?
- What indication is there in scripture that the betrothed woman lives with her soon to be husband? You say that he’s already taken her into his home…but where is this found? All the scripture says is that she is found to be with child before they came together.
- And you are mixing being betrothed with being married in your conclusion, “Typically, once this happens, the couple begins marital relations with each other”. But they were not married yet. The reason she asks this question is simply because they had not come together yet.
- How do you go from…I do not know man to I do not ever intend to know man.
- What were Joseph’s intensions? You mean to tell me that she wasn’t going to sleep with him even though he wanted it before the angel appeared to them? If you believe that then I’m the sole heir to the throne of Zumunda and I will sell you my property for only $10,000 and you can have it all!
- I do not swim and I do not eat meat does not mean that I’ve never swam, never ate meat or never will do them. That is the problem with you disdain for logic. I do not deep sea dive…but that doesn’t mean that I won’t in the future.
- It can become anything you want it to become…but it doesn’t mean that that’s what the intent of Scripture is.
- Is she also the Garden? That was where Elohim first tabernacled. You’re arguing that she is likened to the temple made with hands that our Lord destroyed in 70AD? You’re arguing that the Son destroyed His mother?
- What about the temple that is made without hands that is said to come down from Heaven? That’s the only temple that the former shadowy temples pointed to…not to Mary.
- That’s eisegesis to say that Ezek 44:1-2 has anything to do with Mary. It’s a joke…not even worth a rebuttal.
- How does any of the rest of this language therefore mean that she remains a virgin?
- All this is foretold by moses and the prophets that His dwelling would be with man (and woman) in the New Heavens and Earth and we would have what were to have with Adam. Paradise Restored. What was lost in the garden is now fulfilled in Christ…the relationship has been restored with Saviour…and Mary just like you and I need that salvation.
- All your doing is based on church dogma reading something back into the text that wasn’t there or wasn’t even hinted at.
The leaping doesn’t make anything here certain. Doesn’t make her the ark any more than it makes John David. This is all eisgesis.
- Her womb was set apart for Holy “PURPOSES” but it does not make her womb holy in the sense that no other child could dwell there. Only if Joseph thought like you (irrationally) might he come to that conclusion. A first century Jew? What would they be thinking? I’m curious. A first century Jew would reason from the scriptures. And there is nothing in scripture that would suggest to this Jew that he not know his wife. So now you know how Joseph feels about what he would do with his wife? There’s no way huh? She was consecrated for a higher purpose and she served that purpose.
- Matthew 12:47-50
While he was still speaking to the people, behold,(BR) his mother and his(BS) brothers stood outside, asking to speak to him.[a] 48But he replied to the man who told him, "Who is my mother, and who are my brothers?" 49And stretching out his hand toward his disciples, he said, "Here are my mother and my brothers! 50For(BT) whoever(BU)does the will of my Father in heaven is my brother and sister and mother."
It can be reasonably inferred from the text that Yeshua had brother and sisters. That his mother and his brothers were waiting to speak with him. Were they her children…the text does not say that they were…but there is no reason also to assume that they weren’t. Atleast not enough to build the fanciful dogma of her perpetual virginity!