The Opposition
There are two (or maybe three) major parts of scripture which protestants always use against the idea of the perpetual virgintiy. The first is Mark 6:3 where mention is made of Jesus' brothers and sisters. The second is Mathew 13:55 which says basically the same thing. The third, and probably the most solid, is Mathew 1:25 which seems to state clearly that Joseph and Mary had intercourse sometime after the birth of Jesus.

The Defense
I will try to refute the above arguments by using other parts of scripture. It should be clearly stated however, that it is not normal Catholic practice to base the foundation of all our beliefs on scripture alone. In fact the idea of "scripture alone" did not surface until the 1500 years after Jesus' death, when the likes of Martin Luther and John Calvin kick-started the Protestant Reformation. Nevertheless, observe the following counterpoints:

Mathew 1:25 seems to state clearly, or insinuate the possibility, that Joseph did have sexual relations with Mary after the birth of Jesus. This deduction is erroneous. One must remember first that the New Testament of the Bible was written originally in Greek, not English. English is not one of the most expressive languages in the world. It is not uncommon to hear, or read, of people pointing out that the original meanings of some words or phrases in their native language are lost in translation into English. I am no Bible Scholar and I have no knowledge of Greek beyond Alpha, Omega, Delta and some other weird mathematical constants . So rather than get into the whole semantics argument, I will use other parts of scripture to help us arrive at a logical deduction.

Psalm 110:1 employs a very interesting use of the word 'till'. Here God the Father is addressing God the son, Jesus. He asks that He (Jesus) sit at His right hand until he makes his enemies his footstool. Going by the earlier discussed interpretation of Mathew 1:25, could the Psalmist be implying that after God has made His enemies His footstool, Jesus will relinquish his position at God's right hand?
Also, consider 2 Sam 6:23. Note here that 'unto' is an old English variation of 'until' and 'til'. Does it mean here that Michal had a child after she died?

As for Mark 6:3 and Mathew 13:55 there are two counter-arguments. First is the one we probably hear of all the time - the use of "brothers" in reference to Jesus' relatives does not necessarily connote brotherhood of the same mother. As an African from the Yoruba tribe of Nigeria, I know that in my culture, there are only two words for addressing relatives who are neither my mother nor father; Egbon (which means 'elder one') and Aburo ('younger one'). It doesn't matter who that person is; brother, sister, cousin, nephew, uncle, second cousin, he/she is either my Ebgon or my Aburo. We have no need for extra vocabulary to express these relationships and the reason is evident in how the average Yoruba man holds communal life in high esteem. This is similar across other cultures in Africa and Asia. So it is not unlikely, in the time of Jesus, and even in modern-day Israel, that this "brothers" were possibly Jesus' cousins, uncles or nephews. In fact, the closest possible relation that Jesus could have with any of these men is that of half-brotherhood. All Christians agree on the fact that Jesus was not conceived of a human, but rather by the overshadowing of the Holy Spirit. So even if Mary went on to have other children, there is no way they could have been Jesus' full brothers because Jesus was not born of the same father. At best, they were his half-brothers (and sisters).

Perhaps the most revealing part of scripture on this matter is John 19:25. This verse clearly differentiates between 3 Marys; Mary the mother of Jesus, Mary the wife of Cleopas and Mary of Magdalene The second Mary was either a cousin or sister-in-law to Mary herself. And it is very likely that she lived with them (not uncommon in Bible times and even now). She is the one who was the mother of James. How come this verse never gets quoted? Reading this verse helps you to see other verses, like Mark 15:40, 16:1, Mathew 27:56 and Luke 24:10, in better light. Clearly, the Mary being referred to in these verses was not Mary the mother of Jesus.

Going by these deductions from scripture above, can one authoritatively say that Mary had no other children but Jesus and hence remained a virgin all her life? Maybe not. In truth, the bible does not clearly state that she remained a virgin. However, it also does not state that she had sexual relations with Joseph (we have already debunked the erroneous interpretation of Mathew 1:25).

But come to think of it, does it make sense that the body of the woman who gave birth to the son of God, would be defiled by such a carnal act as sex? You decide to believe what you want, but Catholics hold firm to their belief. Like I stated earlier, we Catholics do not look only to scripture as basis for our beliefs; we also look to tradition that has been passed down from the earlier times. This idea of "not scripture alone" may seem strange to a typical protestant and it is quite understandable. It will be a topic for discussion some other day.

even if nothing works for me the fact that it does not make sense that the body of the woman who gave birth to the son of God, would be defiled by such a carnal act as sex is even proof that she remained a virgin, lets pray that all people come to this understanding, well done muyiGL. God bless you pls keep it coming.

nice pics

didoburns: even if nothing works for me the fact that it does not make sense that the body of the woman who gave birth to the son of God, would be defiled by such a carnal act as sex is even proof that she remained a virgin, lets pray that all people come to this understanding, well done muyiGL. God bless you pls keep it coming.

Thank you didoburns. Please spread the message

Mary had children, it's in the bible, but then again do the catholics read the bible ?

Matthew 13:55-56 "Is not this the carpenter's son? Is not His mother called Mary, and His brothers, James and Joseph and Simon and Judas? 56 "And His sisters, are they not all with us? Where then did this man get all these things?" 57 And they took offense at Him. But Jesus said to them, "A prophet is not without honor except in his home town, and in his own household."

Mark 6:3 "Is not this the carpenter, the son of Mary, and brother of James, and Joses, and Judas, and Simon? Are not His sisters here with us?" And they took offense at Him. 4 And Jesus said to them, "A prophet is not without honor except in his home town and among his own relatives and in his own household."

frosbel: Mary had children, it's in the bible, but then again do the catholics read the bible ?

Matthew 13:55-56 "Is not this the carpenter's son? Is not His mother called Mary, and His brothers, James and Joseph and Simon and Judas? 56 "And His sisters, are they not all with us? Where then did this man get all these things?" 57 And they took offense at Him. But Jesus said to them, "A prophet is not without honor except in his home town, and in his own household."

Mark 6:3 "Is not this the carpenter, the son of Mary, and brother of James, and Joses, and Judas, and Simon? Are not His sisters here with us?" And they took offense at Him. 4 And Jesus said to them, "A prophet is not without honor except in his home town and among his own relatives and in his own household."

Hi frosbel. I'm not sure you read through this article before posting your comment. Kindly do so and then review your comments