Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
There's also the fact that Matthew says, "Joseph knew her not until she had given birth to a son." He doesn't say "Joseph knew her not, ever."
"I didn't do it until this time" implies that I did it do after that time, doesn't it?
in Matthew 28:19-20 Jesus says "And behold, I am with you always, until the end of the age.”"
-does that also imply that after the end of the age, he will no longer be with us?? If so, then he wouldn't be 'with you always', now would he?
in 2 Sam 6:23 we're told "Therefore Michal the daughter of Saul had no children until the day of her death."
-does that also imply that Michal did have children AFTER she died?? that would be quite a teaching - does your denomination teach that also?
in (Mark 12:36) we're told "The Lord said to my Lord, “Sit at My right hand, [un]Till I make Your enemies Your footstool.”
-does that also imply the Jesus will no longer sit at God's right hand after his enemies are footstools??
It seems you are relying on the 20th century English meaning of the use of the word 'until' backwards onto scripture that was written in Hebrew/Greek completely incorrectly, as scripture itself demonstrates above!
in Matthew 28:19-20 Jesus says "And behold, I am with you always, until the end of the age.”"
-does that also imply that after the end of the age, he will no longer be with us?? If so, then he wouldn't be 'with you always', now would he?
in 2 Sam 6:23 we're told "Therefore Michal the daughter of Saul had no children until the day of her death."
-does that also imply that Michal did have children AFTER she died?? that would be quite a teaching - does your denomination teach that also?
in (Mark 12:36) we're told "The Lord said to my Lord, “Sit at My right hand, [un]Till I make Your enemies Your footstool.”
-does that also imply the Jesus will no longer sit at God's right hand after his enemies are footstools??
It seems you are relying on the 20th century English meaning of the use of the word 'until' backwards onto scripture that was written in Hebrew/Greek completely incorrectly, as scripture itself demonstrates above!
Big difference in saying a couple abstained during a pregnancy and a woman had no children till she died. Just kind of a silly argument
She was already betrothed to Joseph. If she had expected to have sexual relations with him, she would not have been surprised at all to find out that she was going to have a child. Yet alas, she was surprised...
Except that she hadn't actually had relations with him at that point. That's why she objected saying she was a virgin. If she expected it to be that she'd been pledged to remain a virgin for life, she'd have said that. You're reading into it what isn't there.
Except that she hadn't actually had relations with him at that point. That's why she objected saying she was a virgin. If she expected it to be that she'd been pledged to remain a virgin for life, she'd have said that. You're reading into it what isn't there.
The angel said "you will conceive", future tense. The angel did not tell her that she was pregnant at that moment.
If she had expected to soon have sexual relations, she would not have wondered "how this could be", as we assume she understood the birds and the bees and knew exactly how it "could be".
It is your interpretation that reads into it and tries to explain what needs no explanation.
Except that she hadn't actually had relations with him at that point. That's why she objected saying she was a virgin. If she expected it to be that she'd been pledged to remain a virgin for life, she'd have said that. You're reading into it what isn't there.
Quote:
Originally Posted by EscAlaMike
The angel said "you will conceive", future tense. The angel did not tell her that she was pregnant at that moment.
If she had expected to soon have sexual relations, she would not have wondered "how this could be", as we assume she understood the birds and the bees and knew exactly how it "could be".
It is your interpretation that reads into it and tries to explain what needs no explanation.
Matthew and Luke have totally different perspectives
Luke has Mary being told in advance by the angel she will conceive
And Matthew has the conception already in the past and the angel telling Joseph about it
Luk 1:31**And, behold, thou shalt conceive in thy womb, and bring forth a son, and shalt call his name JESUS.
Luk 1:32**He shall be great, and shall be called the Son of the Highest: and the Lord God shall give unto him the throne of his father David:
Luk 1:33**And he shall reign over the house of Jacob for ever; and of his kingdom there shall be no end.
Luk 1:34**Then said Mary unto the angel, How shall this be, seeing I know not a man?
Luk 1:35**And the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God.
Mat 1:18**Now the birth of Jesus Christ was on this wise: When as his mother Mary was espoused to Joseph, before they came together, she was found with child of the Holy Ghost.
Mat 1:19**Then Joseph her husband, being a just man, and not willing to make her a publick example, was minded to put her away privily.
Mat 1:20**But while he thought on these things, behold, the angel of the Lord appeared unto him in a dream, saying, Joseph, thou son of David, fear not to take unto thee Mary thy wife: for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Ghost.
Mat 1:21**And she shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call his name JESUS: for he shall save his people from their sins.
Mat 1:22**Now all this was done, that it might be fulfilled which was spoken of the Lord by the prophet, saying,
Mat 1:23**Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God with us.
in Matthew 28:19-20 Jesus says "And behold, I am with you always, until the end of the age.”"
-does that also imply that after the end of the age, he will no longer be with us?? If so, then he wouldn't be 'with you always', now would he?
in 2 Sam 6:23 we're told "Therefore Michal the daughter of Saul had no children until the day of her death."
-does that also imply that Michal did have children AFTER she died?? that would be quite a teaching - does your denomination teach that also?
in (Mark 12:36) we're told "The Lord said to my Lord, “Sit at My right hand, [un]Till I make Your enemies Your footstool.”
-does that also imply the Jesus will no longer sit at God's right hand after his enemies are footstools??
It seems you are relying on the 20th century English meaning of the use of the word 'until' backwards onto scripture that was written in Hebrew/Greek completely incorrectly, as scripture itself demonstrates above!
But let's look at the big picture:
"until the end of the age"
"until the day of her death"
"until I make your enemies your footstool"
...all of these are metaphors for events that close an era or are in the distant future.
If the Bible said "Joseph had no relations with her until the day of her death," then sure. That is just an emphatic way of saying "He never did." It wouldn't mean he had relations with her after she had died.
But "until she had given birth to a son"? That event was only a few months away! It is a real stretch to make that mean Mary's entire life. This definitely implies that they had relations some time after Jesus was born.
The angel said "you will conceive", future tense. The angel did not tell her that she was pregnant at that moment.
If she had expected to soon have sexual relations, she would not have wondered "how this could be", as we assume she understood the birds and the bees and knew exactly how it "could be".
It is your interpretation that reads into it and tries to explain what needs no explanation.
You're eisegeting, Mike. That's not good exegesis. You're reading into it what isn't there.
"until the end of the age"
"until the day of her death"
"until I make your enemies your footstool"
...all of these are metaphors for events that close an era or are in the distant future.
If the Bible said "Joseph had no relations with her until the day of her death," then sure. That is just an emphatic way of saying "He never did."
But "until she had given birth to a son"? That event was only a few months away! It is a real stretch to make that mean Mary's entire life.
In light of the language demonstrated in scripture, what is a real stretch is using/interpreting that single verse (Matthew 1:25) to posit that Mary DID have relations with Joseph 'AFTER' she gave birth to a son, since the word 'after' is not used.
Notice that the author could easily have used the Greek word μετὰ (meta) {after} if he had intended to convey that they did after Jesus birth, but he didn't; the passage is simply stating that Joseph was not Jesus's father!
Is is non-Catholics that try to use that verse (Mat 1:25) as a 'proof' text doctrine that Mary had relations with Joseph, and it simply doesn't hold up to scrutiny.
The angel said "you will conceive", future tense. The angel did not tell her that she was pregnant at that moment.
If she had expected to soon have sexual relations, she would not have wondered "how this could be", as we assume she understood the birds and the bees and knew exactly how it "could be".
It is your interpretation that reads into it and tries to explain what needs no explanation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BaptistFundie
You're eisegeting, Mike. That's not good exegesis. You're reading into it what isn't there.
Actually, Mike is not 'eisegeting'.
When one fully considers the first part of Luke chapter 1, notice that Zachariah was struck mute (for a period) for seemingly questioning the angel same as Mary, but of course Mary wasn't - so why wasn't she?
Therein lies your answer.
In light of the language demonstrated in scripture, what is a real stretch is using/interpreting that single verse (Matthew 1:25) to posit that Mary DID have relations with Joseph 'AFTER' she gave birth to a son, since the word 'after' is not used.
Notice that the author could easily have used the Greek word μετὰ (meta) {after} if he had intended to convey that they did after Jesus birth, but he didn't; the passage is simply stating that Joseph was not Jesus's father!
Is is non-Catholics that try to use that verse (Mat 1:25) as a 'proof' text doctrine that Mary had relations with Joseph, and it simply doesn't hold up to scrutiny.
I can't read Greek, or Hebrew either, for that matter. But I'm familiar with translations in general, and all translations of the Bible are full of uses of words translated "until." And those have to be read, like everything else, in context.
Context is key. If the context indicates that "until" means "up to the point that it is no longer possible," then we conclude that it did not happen. E.g. "Michal had no children until the day of her death." This is an exceptional, emphatic usage. We do not conclude that she had children after that, because it's impossible.
But if the context is the ordinary one of "up to the point that something else happens, but no longer," then we give "until" its ordinary meaning:
"Then Jacob was left alone, and a man wrestled with him until daybreak." This means that after daybreak, they stopped wrestling.
"But Hannah did not go up, for she said to her husband, "I will not go up until the child is weaned." We conclude that after the child was weaned, she went up.
The very straightforward statement that Joseph had no relations with Mary until she gave birth to a son seems clearly to be a usage of the word's ordinary meaning, not the exceptional one. After the baby was born, they had relations.
I know we're not going to agree, or I would be a Catholic (or you would be a Protestant!) I am simply explaining why interpreting "until" to mean the basic meaning of "until" in the passage about Mary is the way any unprejudiced person--I mean someone coming to the Scripture for the first time--would read it.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
