The Biblical Case Against Mary’s Perpetual Virginity.
A main argument against Mary’s perpetual virginity is found in Matthew 1:24-25, where the word “until” is used. This argument suggests that Mary was a virgin “until” she gave birth to Jesus, implying that her virginity was not a permanent state.
Advocates of this view argue that the term “until” indicates a transition in her status, which aligns with the idea that she could have had children after the birth of Christ.
Here is the passage:
“When Joseph woke from sleep, he did as the angel of the Lord commanded him; he took his wife, 25 but knew her not until she had borne a son; and he called his name Jesus.”
We can see the passage uses the term “until,” which some would argue, implies a change in Mary’s status after the birth of Jesus, suggesting she was a virgin only up to that point. This indicates that her virginity was not a lifelong condition. Additionally, the verse does not mention her remaining a virgin after giving birth, leaving open the possibility that she had other children.
After All doesn’t Scripture teach Jesus had Brothers? (Keep an eye out for an upcoming post on that topic.)
In the following sections, we’ll delve deeper into the nuances of this argument, examining why it’s weak and easy to debunk. From a simplistic perspective, this seems worth exploring why the interpretation of “until” deserves a closer look.
Selective Interpretations for “Until
Proponents of the argument that Mary was not a perpetual virgin or no longer remained a virgin until after Jesus’ birth have every right to stand by that position, however, allow me to demonstrate the absurdity of the argument.
- 1 Corinthians 15:25 says “For he must reign UNTIL he has put all his enemies under his feet.”
Does this mean Christ will cease to reign when his enemies are under his feet? Surely not.
-
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? Surely not.
- Acts 25:21: “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.”
Does this text mean that Paul would not be held in custody after he was “sent” to Caesar? Surely not.
It doesn’t take much to look at this argument in context, to see its weakness, but let’s consider an alternative position to the subject.
Tim Staples and The Greek
Tim Staples, a Catholic Answers apologist wrote the following in his article: The Case for Mary’s Perpetual Virginity
“In recent years, some have argued that because Matthew 1:25 uses the Greek words heos hou for “until” whereas … heos alone, there is a difference in meaning. The argument goes that Heos hou indicates the action of the first clause does not continue. Thus, Mary and Joseph “not having come together” would have ended after Jesus was born. The problems with this theory begin with the fact that no available scholarship concurs with it. In fact, the evidence proves the contrary. Heos hou and heos are used interchangeably and have the same meaning.” In his article, Tim Staples demonstrates further verses to prove how absurd this argument is.
Purgatory or Perpetual Virginity. You can’t have both.
One final reason this argument is so bad is that the man himself, Martin Luther, the esteemed reformer and prophetic figure of the Reformation says otherwise.
In 1519 Martin Luther debated at the University of Leipzig with Johan Eck, a leading Catholic theologian.
The discussion centered on key issues such as the authority of Scripture, the nature of faith, and the doctrine of justification.
Eck challenged Luther on his views, particularly regarding the papacy and the Council of Trent however, one thing that stands out in this debate is Martin Luther’s position on purgatory. Luther is famous for rejecting the idea of purgatory and leading the way for the protestant reformation. Martin Luther challenged the concept of purgatory using Matthew 1:25 and the implications of the word “until.”
In the debate, Eck had argued for the existence of purgatory by citing church fathers and several Scripture passages, one of which was Matthew 5, to support his claims. Luther countered by asserting that sins cannot be removed without an increase of grace, which contradicts the idea of purgatory as a place for punishment. He argued that just as “until” in Matthew 1:25 does not imply the end of Mary’s virginity, it also suggests that the grace necessary for salvation cannot be confined to a transitional state like purgatory.
In the book, “The Leipzig Debate in 1519: leaves from the story of Luther’s life by Dau, W. H. T. (William Herman Theodore), b. 1864
We can see Martin Luther say the following:
“The term “till,” he said, does not signify a terminus in Matt. 5:26, just as little as the same term in Matt. 1, 25 signifies the termination of the virginity of Mary.”
He is arguing people will be suffering forever and not UNTIL they go through a change … the same way Mary didn’t stop being a virgin “UNTIL” she was married to Joseph.
