MosesAlex:


See the identity of the brothers of Jesus so that so may you may understand that these are sons of Alpheus (Two of them are apostles).

Error 1: Fallacy of assumption that the Son of Alpheus called James had no namesake called James in all of Israel during Jesus time.
Which is most likely impossible.

MosesAlex:

The brothers of Jesus listed in Matthew 13: 55 are James and Joseph and Simon and Jude.

Yes. And they even introduced his mother and sisters as well.
Which means he also had sisters.
And they even implied that these people grew in their front.
Read below.

Mat 13:55 - Is not this the carpenter's son? is not his mother called Mary? and his brethren, James, and Joses, and Simon, and Judas?

13:56 - And his sisters, are they not all with us? Whence then hath this man all these things?

MosesAlex:

Gal 1.19 Identifies one of the apostles James as the brother of Jesus. (Note two of the twelve apostles bear James. One the son of Zebedee and the other son of Alpheus)

This is where your assumption comes to Light
James the Son of Alpheus is a disciple of Jesus
Matthew was also the Son of Alpheus
So, James was most likely a brother of Matthew

Sorry, this James Alpheus is not the same James the brother of Jesus
Why? Because James the brother of Jesus didnt believe Jesus when Jesus was alive, so he couldnt have been a disciple.

Read:

John 7:5 says, "Even his own brothers did not believe in him."

MosesAlex:

Luke 6:15: Says James father is Alpheus (not Joseph, ).

Righly so.
because Alpheus was also the father of Matthew.
So it couldn't have been Joseph.

Which further means James Alpheus (disciple) is different from James brother of Jesus (who was an unbeliever during this period)

MosesAlex:

Luke 6:16: identifies the apostle Jude as the brother of James the less.

Another mixup
You replace Judas with Jude. Wrong
Matthew 10:3
List of disciples refers to this Judas as Lebbaeus the Son of Thaddeus.

So this Judas is obviously not a brother of Jesus
He was the son of Thaddeus
His other name was Lebbaeus

MosesAlex:

Mark 15: 40 Acknowledges that the mother of James the less is also the mother of Joseph. Hence James and Joseph are brothers. So with this we can see that James the less, Jude and Joseph listed as brothers of Jesus in

Another assumption you made here
Read the next verse. The Mary mentioned here is described further

Mark 15:41 (Who also, when he was in Galilee, followed him, and ministered unto him and many other women which came up with him unto Jerusalem.

So that Mary you just read, was Mary the mother of James and she came from Galilee, not nazareth.

And Galilee was the area Jesus recruited disciples from.

MosesAlex:

Matthew 13:55 have been identified .
John 19:25 Identifies Mary of Cleopas(Alpheus) as the sister of Mary the mother of Jesus.( Note Cleopas is the Greek version of the Aramaic name Alpheus).

I quote

John 19:25 Now there stood by the cross of Jesus his mother, and his mother's sister, Mary the wife of Cleophas , and Mary Magdalene .

Its very clear.
3 people are mentioned all seperated by commas;
1. His mother,
2. Mary wife of cleophas (Alpheus)
Who is also mother of James the son of Alpheus,
3. Mary Magdalene

So there are a total of three Marys.

MosesAlex:

Hence the brothers are simply his relatives. Since their Mother is a sister to Mary the Mother of Jesus

No sir.
Reasons as shown above.

cyrilamx:
Plz take ur liberalism away frm here. Most of u are so rational minded that you devoid of anything spiritual. What can't be reasoned out is termed a lie. Even one of the greatest pioneer of free thinking who wrote so much against faith, Immanuel Kant; recanted his error on his death bed. The world has seen many of ur type...and you know what: they ended up embracing the truth they once fought against. The virgin birth and perpetual virginity are some of these revealed truth ur rational mind can't comprehend.

WHERE IN THE BIBLE OR APOSTLES CREED OR CHURCH TRADITION IS RERPETUAL VIRGINITY AN ARTICLE OF FAITH

Belief in Perpetual virginity of Mary predates the canonicity of the new testament. It might not be fully deliberated in the Nicea Creed because there was little or no opposition to the dogma. And besides there are allusions to Mary's ever virginity in the New testament. The problem with u pentecostals is that cos you people can't trace your churches beyond the 20/21 century, you criticise what you don't know. The Church truth is derived from two pillars: sacred Tradition (words of mouth) and sacred Scripture(letters) please Google the Perpetual virginity of Mary and you will be shocked at much evidence posted in its favours by the Church fathers and even the Protestant reformers like Luther, Calvin etc.
Mary: Ever Virgin | Catholic Answers
https://www​.catholic.com/.../mary-ever- ...
An important historical document which supports the teaching of Mary's perpetual virginity is the Protoevangelium of James, which was written probably less than sixty ...


Biblical Evidence for the Perpetual Virginity of Mary - Crisis Magazine
www​.crisismagazine.com/.../biblical- ...
8 Feb 2011 ... For most of Christian history, Mary's perpetual virginity was a commonplace belief, even well into the Protestant Reformation. But in our hyper- sexualized ...

Emyogalanya:
WHERE IN THE BIBLE OR APOSTLES CREED OR CHURCH TRADITION IS RERPETUAL VIRGINITY AN ARTICLE OF FAITH

Investnow2017:


You never cease to amaze me and all honest-hearted readers here. How can you make such assumptions and claim they are revelations.
If your arguements do not hold water why not be humble enough to accept the truth. Must you go against every rationality? How can you flush a clear statement of a Bible writer that James was the Lord's brother with a harmless statement of Luke where he simply referred to believers as brethren or brothers. I know you know that the word brethren can refer to brothers and sisters. How can you compare that with where the Bible clearly refers to James as the BROTHER of Jesus? Is that how to compare Scriptures with Scriptures? Matthew 1:25 is too clear to be interpreted unless you want English people to change their own language to push up your argument.

I have one recommendation though. Pick up a version of the Bible in your own language, perhaps you will find it easier than the English language. You may be surprised it will help you to unlearn the false teaching which you have held so dear.

Now he has nothing else to say. It is now clear to you that brethren don't mean siblings of same womb always. Isn't it wonderful how people claim to know it all and dish out advise in an anonymous forum? How you know I haven't read the scriptures in more languages than you can imagine baffles me.

Now you've heard the truth, harden not your heart.

Syncan:



Now he has nothing else to say. It is now clear to you that brethren don't mean siblings of same womb always. Isn't it wonderful how people claim to know it all and dish out advise in an anonymous forum? How you know I haven't read the scriptures in more languages than you can imagine baffles me.

Now you've heard the truth, harden not your heart.

You would have made the exchanges more interesting if you are not intentionally picky about salient points I have raised again and again.

What became of Mary and Joseph after the birth of Jesus? Did Mary divorce Joseph? Remember that 12 years after the birth of Jesus, the Bible still reports Joseph and Mary being together as husband and wife. So she continued to be a virgin 12 years after giving birth to Jesus Christ. These are questions you have not dared, and you say I have nothing more to say?

Or may be that too is open to interpretation?

linearity:


What you are trying to do, is to prove a negative; which is impossible.

Facts:
1. There is no reference in the Bible stating that Jesus did not have brothers or sisters.
2. There is no reference stating that Mary did not have other children.
3. There are many references stating that Jesus have at least a brother and at least a sister.
4. There are many references stating that Mary have other children apart from Jesus.

The greek word used in the new testament to description Jesus' brothers and sisters is 'adelphoi', it means 'from the womb'; which means Jesus and those referenced as his brothers and sisters are from the same womb.

But, the Catholics confuses this with the Hebrew word "ben-dod", which means 'son of a paternal uncle. It is the Hebrew that do not have a word that differentiates between brother, cousin, etc..they all use the word "ben-dod"....but Greek with which the new testament was written have definite words for brothers/sisters, which is 'adelphoi'. If the reference to 'brothers & Sisters" were in the Old testament, then your argument might have some validity, since some portion of the old testament were written in Hebrew, but the new testament was written in greek.

The Catholics believed otherwise and they have references that are not in the Bible and in their reference they believe that Joseph and not Mary had other children and these were actually Jesus' step brothers and sisters. This position is not supported by the scriptures and trying to use the facts in the scriptures to prove these, is like proving a negative, which is impossible.

Truth:

1. There is no reference in scriptures stating that Jesus has brothers and sisters from same womb.
2. There is no reference in scripture stating that Mary, mother of Jesus, has other children
3. There are references in the bible showing that brethren does not mean from same womb.
4. There Is absolutely NO REFERENCE stating that Mary has any other child.

[quote author]The first thing to understand is that the term brother (Gk. adelphos) has a broader meaning than uterine brothers. It can mean a biological brother, but it can also mean an extended relative, or even a spiritual brother.

Take Genesis 13:8 for example. Here the word brother is being used to describe the relationship between Abraham and Lot, who were not biological brothers but uncle and nephew:

“So Abram said to Lot, “Let’s not have any quarreling between you and me, or between your herdsmen and mine, for we are brothers" (Gen 13:8, NIV; see also 14:12).

Because of the Bible’s broad semantic range of “brother," we can rest assured that although St. Paul writes, “[Jesus] appeared to more than five hundred…brothers at the same time" (1 Cor. 15:6), we need not infer from this verse that Mary gave birth to more than 500 children![/quote]

I laugh at the ignorance of the person you copied in those assumptions you stated about Catholics.

cyrilamx:
Plz take ur liberalism away frm here. Most of u are so rational minded that you devoid of anything spiritual. What can't be reasoned out is termed a lie. Even one of the greatest pioneer of free thinking who wrote so much against faith, Immanuel Kant; recanted his error on his death bed. The world has seen many of ur type...and you know what: they ended up embracing the truth they once fought against. The virgin birth and perpetual virginity are some of these revealed truth ur rational mind can't comprehend.

FROM MY QUOTE DO I SOUND LIKE A PROTESTANT TO YOU ? PENTECOST STARTED IN CATHOLIC I'M A PROVEN PENTECOSTAL CATHOLIC MAN A FANATICAL ONE IF YOU LIKE. YOU THINK YOU KNOW CHURCH DOGMA AND TRADITIONS THAN I? VIRGIN BIRTH IS NOT SUBJECT FOR DEBATE BUT ETERNAL VIRGINITY IS. PLS FIND A WAY TO PROVE THAT A MAN MARRIED HIS WIFE AND WONT MEET HER FOR 12 YEARS WERE THEY UNDER VOW OF CELIBACY WAS JOSEPH A EUNUCH. DID MARY VOW TO REMAIN VIRGIN FOR EVER AFTER MARRIAGE.

Investnow2017:


You would have made the exchanges more interesting if you are not intentionally picky about salient points I have raised again and again.

What became of Mary and Joseph after the birth of Jesus? Did Mary divorce Joseph? Remember that 12 years after the birth of Jesus, the Bible still reports Joseph and Mary being together as husband and wife. So she continued to be a virgin 12 years after giving birth to Jesus Christ. These are questions you have not dared, and you say I have nothing more to say?

Or may be that too is open to interpretation?

Truth remains that there is no where recorded in scripture that Joseph knew Mary after the birth of Jesus. Was it Possible that Joseph stayed with Mary in a celibate relationship? the answer is Yes, nothing is Impossible to God.

Now to your questions. Having agreed that Scripture never gave us specific insight into their sexual lives after the birth of Jesus, nor did it in any where suggest they have other Children together (at twelve years, it was still Jesus, Mary and Joseph), I make bold to present to you this line of thought from a renowned theologian called Thomas Aquinas.

"Without any hesitation we must abhor the error of Helvidius, who dared to assert that Christ's Mother, after His Birth, was carnally known by Joseph, and bore other children.

For, in the first place, this is derogatory to Christ's perfection: for as He is in His Godhead the Only-Begotten of the Father, being thus His Son in every respect perfect, so it was becoming that He should be the Only-begotten son of His Mother, as being her perfect offspring.

“Secondly, this error is an insult to the Holy Ghost, whose "shrine" was the virginal womb, wherein He had formed the flesh of Christ: wherefore it was unbecoming that it should be desecrated by intercourse with man.

“Thirdly, this is derogatory to the dignity and holiness of God's Mother: for thus she would seem to be most ungrateful, were she not content with such a Son; and were she, of her own accord, by carnal intercourse to forfeit that virginity which had been miraculously preserved in her.

“Fourthly, it would be tantamount to an imputation of extreme presumption in Joseph, to assume that he attempted to violate her whom by the angel's revelation he knew to have conceived by the Holy Ghost.

“We must therefore simply assert that the Mother of God, as she was a virgin in conceiving Him and a virgin in giving Him birth, did she remain a virgin ever afterwards."

Emyogalanya:
FROM MY QUOTE DO I SOUND LIKE A PROTESTANT TO YOU ? PENTECOST STARTED IN CATHOLIC I'M A PROVEN PENTECOSTAL CATHOLIC MAN A FANATICAL ONE IF YOU LIKE. YOU THINK YOU KNOW CHURCH DOGMA AND TRADITIONS THAN I? VIRGIN BIRTH IS NOT SUBJECT FOR DEBATE BUT ETERNAL VIRGINITY IS. PLS FIND A WAY TO PROVE THAT A MAN MARRIED HIS WIFE AND WONT MEET HER FOR 12 YEARS WERE THEY UNDER VOW OF CELIBACY WAS JOSEPH A EUNUCH. DID MARY VOW TO REMAIN VIRGIN FOR EVER AFTER MARRIAGE.

Just find a way to prove to me that a woman gave birth without the aid of a man, and that a man will keep a woman in his house for more than Nine months without touching her and I will prove the rest to you.

Syncan:


Just find a way to prove to me that a woman gave birth without the aid of a man, and that a man will keep a woman in his house for more than Nine months without touching her and I will prove the rest to you.

PROVE WHAT ? I WANT YOU GUYS TO PROVE TO ME HOW SHE WILL BE IN JOSEPH HOUSE FOR OVER 12 YEARS AND STILL REMAIN A VIRGIN. I'V NO PROBLEM IF SHE HAD OTHER CHILDREN OR NOT BUT THE ETERNAL VIRGINITY IS THE PROBLEM

Guy you re using ur 21st century mentality cos ur mind is so imbued with idea of sex. You find it impossible to believe that so holy Christians in throughout the centuries in order to live radically the gospel were continent in marriage. Sound stupid to the modern man? If Mary, already betrothed to a man in person of Joseph and with the knowledge of how biological reproduction works will ask such question how she can conceive (Lk. 1:34), goes to tell you that she already planned a life of virginity which wasn't lacking among some holy Jews of her time. Read about the Essene Jews which according to extra- biblical writings, John the Baptist affiliated with. My brother the perpetual virginity of Mary was long settled in the early Church, it only rear it's ugly head during the Protestant revolts of the 16th centuries. Even Martin Luther, the man who spearheaded the reformation as well as John Calvin did believe in the ever virginity of Mary to the end. You ain't not knowledgeable than the Church fathers who were closer to the apostles and who bore the onerous task of setting the canons of the new testament that you now accept. If you can hold as inspired the Bible which was put together by the Catholic Church under Pope Damasus, why do u find it difficult to accept revealed truth as defined by the Church which is the pillar and ground of the truth ( 1Tim. 3:15) difficult to accept? Plz read about scriptural bases of the ever virginity of Mary Biblical Evidence for the Perpetual Virginity of Mary - Crisis Magazine
www​.crisismagazine.com/.../biblical- ...
8 Feb 2011 ... For most of Christian history, Mary's perpetual virginity was a commonplace belief, even well into the Protestant Reformation. But in our hyper- sexualized ...

Mary: Ever Virgin | Catholic Answers
https://www​.catholic.com/.../mary-ever- ...
An important historical document which supports the teaching of Mary's perpetual virginity is the Protoevangelium of James, which was written probably less than sixty ...

Emyogalanya:
FROM MY QUOTE DO I SOUND LIKE A PROTESTANT TO YOU ? PENTECOST STARTED IN CATHOLIC I'M A PROVEN PENTECOSTAL CATHOLIC MAN A FANATICAL ONE IF YOU LIKE. YOU THINK YOU KNOW CHURCH DOGMA AND TRADITIONS THAN I? VIRGIN BIRTH IS NOT SUBJECT FOR DEBATE BUT ETERNAL VIRGINITY IS. PLS FIND A WAY TO PROVE THAT A MAN MARRIED HIS WIFE AND WONT MEET HER FOR 12 YEARS WERE THEY UNDER VOW OF CELIBACY WAS JOSEPH A EUNUCH. DID MARY VOW TO REMAIN VIRGIN FOR EVER AFTER MARRIAGE.

The view/teachings of the early Church Fathers on Mary's ever-virginity.

As with many doctrines in the first few hundred years of the church, they tended not to be explicitly defined until heretics arose forcing the church to define doctrine.

This is why history is scarce on people speaking of this doctrine until the Antidicomarites show up in the mid to late 300s.

With that said, here's the records we have:

~100 AD: Ignatius of Antioch
~150 AD: Polycarp (disciple of John the Apostle)
~160 AD: Justin Martyr
~200 AD: Irenaeus

In the year AD 383, Jerome writes that Ignatius, Polycarp, Justin Martyr, and Irenaeus all “held these same views” of Mary’s perpetual virginity and “wrote volumes replete with wisdom” (in his The Perpetual Virginity of Blessed Mary: Against Helvidius, section 19). No writings from these 4 men survived that unambiguously identifies their belief in this doctrine, but we assume Jerome had access to some of their many works that did not survive until the modern day.
248 AD: Origen

"Mary, as those declare who with sound mind extol her, had no other son but Jesus" [Origen's Commentary on the Gospel of John (Book I), Section 6]
Then as the Antidicomarites show up, we see an explosion in references to the doctrine (after the council of Nicea in 325 AD, as your source noted):

354 AD: Hilary of Poitiers

"If they [the brethren of the Lord] had been Mary's sons and not those taken from Joseph's former marriage, she would never have been given over in the moment of the passion [crucifixion] to the apostle John as his mother, the Lord saying to each, 'Woman, behold your son,' and to John, 'Behold your mother' [John 19:26-27], as he bequeathed filial love to a disciple as a consolation to the one desolate" [Hilary's Commentary on Matthew 1:4]
360 AD: Athanasius

Identifies Mary as "Mary Ever-Virgin" in his Discourse 2 Against the Arians, Section 70
373 AD: Ephrem

"Because there are those who dare to say that Mary cohabited with Joseph after she bore the Redeemer, we reply, 'How would it have been possible for her who was the home of the indwelling of the Spirit, whom the divine power overshadowed, that she be joined by a mortal being, and gave birth filled with birthpangs, in the image of the primeval curse?'" [Ephrem's Commentary on Tatian's Diatessaron]
~375 AD: Basil of Caesarea

"...the lovers of Christ do not allow themselves to hear that the Mother of God ceased at a given moment to be a virgin..." [Basil’s Homily: On the holy generation of Christ 5; PG 31, 1468 B]
375 AD: Epiphanius

"For I have heard from someone that certain persons are venturing to say that [Mary] had marital relations after the Savior’s birth. And I am not surprised. The ignorance of persons who do not know the sacred scriptures well and have not consulted histories, always turn them to one thing after another, and distracts anyone who wants to track down something about the truth out of his own head.” [The Panarion of Epiphanius of Salamis: De fide. Books II and III, page 620, 7.1]
383 AD: Jerome

In his The Perpetual Virginity of Blessed Mary: Against Helvidius he gives a long, full biblical defense of Mary's perpetual virginity, noted in earlier sections in this answer.
386 AD: Didymus the Blind

"Mary... remained always and forever an immaculate virgin" [Didymus's The Trinity 3:4]
388 AD: Ambrose of Milan

Identified prophecy of Ezekiel 44:2 as proof of Mary's perpetual virginity in his De Institutione Virginum 8.52
401 AD: Augustine

"A Virgin conceiving, a Virgin bearing, a Virgin pregnant, a Virgin bringing forth, a Virgin perpetual. Why do you wonder at this, O man?" [Augustine, Sermons 186:1]

Even the 16th century extreme anti-catholic reformer -Ulrich Zwingly affirmed thus:

I firmly believe that Mary, according to the words of the Gospel as a pure Virgin, brought forth for us the Son of God, and in childbirth and after childbirth forever remained a pure, intact Virgin.

Bishop Hugh Latimer – a staunch Protestant burned at the stake by Queen Mary – goes to great lengths in his St Stephen’s Day Sermon of 1552 to rebut the arguments of those who reject Mary’s perpetual virginity, blasting them as “heretics” who “violate, toss, and turmoil the Scriptures of God, according to their own fantasies and foolish minds.” In a letter to a Catholic in 1749, Methodist founder John Wesley – himself an Anglican priest – professed his belief that Mary “as well after as before she brought [Christ] forth, continued a pure and unspotted virgin.”

With this in mind, it is intriguing to see how universally – and often how vociferously – ancient Christian teaching on Mary is rejected by most evangelical Protestants today.

Syncan:


Truth remains that there is no where recorded in scripture that Joseph knew Mary after the birth of Jesus. Was it Possible that Joseph stayed with Mary in a celibate relationship? the answer is Yes, nothing is Impossible to God.

Now to your questions. Having agreed that Scripture never gave us specific insight into their sexual lives after the birth of Jesus, nor did it in any where suggest they have other Children together (at twelve years, it was still Jesus, Mary and Joseph), I make bold to present to you this line of thought from a renowned theologian called Thomas Aquinas.

YOU HAVE CLEARLY RUN OUT OF IDEAS!

At least you agreed that the marriage of Mary and Joseph continued after the birth of Jesus. MOST UNFORTUNATELY, you could not establish that there are marriages in which couples, I mean healthy couples, live together and not have conjugal affair! And you also want a sane person to believe this? So when Mary and Joseph were betrothed to marry before even the conception of Jesus Christ, they were just going to live together without relating as husband and wife in a carnal sense? You could not establish that the birth of Jesus Christ changed whatever marital equation in their lives. Did you?

Are you proud to propagate what you cannot prove to a sane mind? I can't tell my pet this and feel proud that I have said anything reasonable.

You mentioned that it was only Joseph, Mary and Jesus that were mentioned 12 years later, accepting that they continued to relate as husband and wife, but though Mary was still a virgin?? If you read the context of that incident mentioned at the 12th year of Jesus, you would easily notice that the focus was on JESUS. Mary the mother and Joseph the adopted father were only mentioned by the writers to accentuate the efforts and anxiety of loving parents when a child gets missing. So you were expecting the Bible writers to go on to mention Jesus' biological brothers and sisters!

All I can find in your anxious effort to defend the indefendable are mere assumptions and unwarranted presumptions. That was the same pitiable mistake made by the so-called church fathers who side-lined God's inspired word and went about propagating their own warped ideas, telling the world that Jesus was born on 25th December. As the enlightenment over this matter grew, they quickly said that they only assumed, thus mixing up the truth with outright falsehood.

And if I ask you now, why do you worship Mary? You will also have an explanation! Even the devil has explanation for his rebellion. Jesus or the apostles too were also wearing long cap and long garb as we see in the original church today. Right?

Sad, too sad indeed.

he gave birth to only Jesus others are Joseph children

cyrilamx:
The view/teachings of the early Church Fathers on Mary's ever-virginity.

As with many doctrines in the first few hundred years of the church, they tended not to be explicitly defined until heretics arose forcing the church to define doctrine.

This is why history is scarce on people speaking of this doctrine until the Antidicomarites show up in the mid to late 300s.

With that said, here's the records we have:

~100 AD: Ignatius of Antioch
~150 AD: Polycarp (disciple of John the Apostle)
~160 AD: Justin Martyr
~200 AD: Irenaeus

In the year AD 383, Jerome writes that Ignatius, Polycarp, Justin Martyr, and Irenaeus all “held these same views” of Mary’s perpetual virginity and “wrote volumes replete with wisdom” (in his The Perpetual Virginity of Blessed Mary: Against Helvidius, section 19). No writings from these 4 men survived that unambiguously identifies their belief in this doctrine, but we assume Jerome had access to some of their many works that did not survive until the modern day.
248 AD: Origen

"Mary, as those declare who with sound mind extol her, had no other son but Jesus" [Origen's Commentary on the Gospel of John (Book I), Section 6]
Then as the Antidicomarites show up, we see an explosion in references to the doctrine (after the council of Nicea in 325 AD, as your source noted):

354 AD: Hilary of Poitiers

"If they [the brethren of the Lord] had been Mary's sons and not those taken from Joseph's former marriage, she would never have been given over in the moment of the passion [crucifixion] to the apostle John as his mother, the Lord saying to each, 'Woman, behold your son,' and to John, 'Behold your mother' [John 19:26-27], as he bequeathed filial love to a disciple as a consolation to the one desolate" [Hilary's Commentary on Matthew 1:4]
360 AD: Athanasius

Identifies Mary as "Mary Ever-Virgin" in his Discourse 2 Against the Arians, Section 70
373 AD: Ephrem

"Because there are those who dare to say that Mary cohabited with Joseph after she bore the Redeemer, we reply, 'How would it have been possible for her who was the home of the indwelling of the Spirit, whom the divine power overshadowed, that she be joined by a mortal being, and gave birth filled with birthpangs, in the image of the primeval curse?'" [Ephrem's Commentary on Tatian's Diatessaron]
~375 AD: Basil of Caesarea

"...the lovers of Christ do not allow themselves to hear that the Mother of God ceased at a given moment to be a virgin..." [Basil’s Homily: On the holy generation of Christ 5; PG 31, 1468 B]
375 AD: Epiphanius

"For I have heard from someone that certain persons are venturing to say that [Mary] had marital relations after the Savior’s birth. And I am not surprised. The ignorance of persons who do not know the sacred scriptures well and have not consulted histories, always turn them to one thing after another, and distracts anyone who wants to track down something about the truth out of his own head.” [The Panarion of Epiphanius of Salamis: De fide. Books II and III, page 620, 7.1]
383 AD: Jerome

In his The Perpetual Virginity of Blessed Mary: Against Helvidius he gives a long, full biblical defense of Mary's perpetual virginity, noted in earlier sections in this answer.
386 AD: Didymus the Blind

"Mary... remained always and forever an immaculate virgin" [Didymus's The Trinity 3:4]
388 AD: Ambrose of Milan

Identified prophecy of Ezekiel 44:2 as proof of Mary's perpetual virginity in his De Institutione Virginum 8.52
401 AD: Augustine

"A Virgin conceiving, a Virgin bearing, a Virgin pregnant, a Virgin bringing forth, a Virgin perpetual. Why do you wonder at this, O man?" [Augustine, Sermons 186:1]

Even the 16th century extreme anti-catholic reformer -Ulrich Zwingly affirmed thus:

I firmly believe that Mary, according to the words of the Gospel as a pure Virgin, brought forth for us the Son of God, and in childbirth and after childbirth forever remained a pure, intact Virgin.

Bishop Hugh Latimer – a staunch Protestant burned at the stake by Queen Mary – goes to great lengths in his St Stephen’s Day Sermon of 1552 to rebut the arguments of those who reject Mary’s perpetual virginity, blasting them as “heretics” who “violate, toss, and turmoil the Scriptures of God, according to their own fantasies and foolish minds.” In a letter to a Catholic in 1749, Methodist founder John Wesley – himself an Anglican priest – professed his belief that Mary “as well after as before she brought [Christ] forth, continued a pure and unspotted virgin.”

With this in mind, it is intriguing to see how universally – and often how vociferously – ancient Christian teaching on Mary is rejected by most evangelical Protestants today.

Sorry, the so-called early fathers had clearly deviated from the way of truth as expounded by Jesus Christ and his apostles before the unfortunate introduction of dogmas and falsehood. Why Bible students are not surprised is because Jesus and the early faithful apostles prophesied concerning this upcoming heresy. Read Matthew chapter 24:11, 24-25; Acts 20:29-30.

lovetruth:
he gave birth to only Jesus others are Joseph children

What is your authority?

Investnow2017:


YOU HAVE CLEARLY RUN OUT OF IDEAS!

At least you agreed that the marriage of Mary and Joseph continued after the birth of Jesus. MOST UNFORTUNATELY, you could not establish that there are marriages in which couples, I mean healthy couples, live together and not have conjugal affair! And you also want a sane person to believe this? So when Mary and Joseph were betrothed to marry before even the conception of Jesus Christ, they were just going to live together without relating as husband and wife in a carnal sense? You could not establish that the birth of Jesus Christ changed whatever marital equation in their lives. Did you?

Are you proud to propagate what you cannot prove to a sane mind? I can't tell my pet this and feel proud that I have said anything reasonable.

You mentioned that it was only Joseph, Mary and Jesus that were mentioned 12 years later, accepting that they continued to relate as husband and wife, but though Mary was still a virgin?? If you read the context of that incident mentioned at the 12th year of Jesus, you would easily notice that the focus was on JESUS. Mary the mother and Joseph the adopted father were only mentioned by the writers to accentuate the efforts and anxiety of loving parents when a child gets missing. So you were expecting the Bible writers to go on to mention Jesus' biological brothers and sisters!

All I can find in your anxious effort to defend the indefendable are mere assumptions and unwarranted presumptions. That was the same pitiable mistake made by the so-called church fathers who side-lined God's inspired word and went about propagating their own warped ideas, telling the world that Jesus was born on 25th December. As the enlightenment over this matter grew, they quickly said that they only assumed, thus mixing up the truth with outright falsehood.

And if I ask you now, why do you worship Mary? You will also have an explanation! Even the devil has explanation for his rebellion. Jesus or the apostles too were also wearing long cap and long garb as we see in the original church today. Right?

Sad, too sad indeed.

It's a pity when people just become dramatic rather than face truth. You started with scripture, I followed you up with scripture, now you're dancing around absurdity. One who believes a woman gave birth to a child without the aid of a man doubts the possibility of married Celibacy. You believe a man that intends to marry a virgin(having left her untouched while living with him) could agree to still go ahead and marry her pregnant , yet you doubt the possibility of that man not touching her afterwards. You agree that the man lived with her for nine months without touching her, yet you doubt the possibility of same man continuing to leave her untouched. So how long is the limit according to you?

As per the later paragraphs, Imagine the trivialities you now concern yourself, baseless accusations instead of thinking deep and accepting truth staring in your face. Am not even going to oblige you of such discuss.

cyrilamx:
The view/teachings of the early Church Fathers on Mary's ever-virginity.

As with many doctrines in the first few hundred years of the church, they tended not to be explicitly defined until heretics arose forcing the church to define doctrine.

This is why history is scarce on people speaking of this doctrine until the Antidicomarites show up in the mid to late 300s.

With that said, here's the records we have:

~100 AD: Ignatius of Antioch
~150 AD: Polycarp (disciple of John the Apostle)
~160 AD: Justin Martyr
~200 AD: Irenaeus

In the year AD 383, Jerome writes that Ignatius, Polycarp, Justin Martyr, and Irenaeus all “held these same views” of Mary’s perpetual virginity and “wrote volumes replete with wisdom” (in his The Perpetual Virginity of Blessed Mary: Against Helvidius, section 19). No writings from these 4 men survived that unambiguously identifies their belief in this doctrine, but we assume Jerome had access to some of their many works that did not survive until the modern day.
248 AD: Origen

"Mary, as those declare who with sound mind extol her, had no other son but Jesus" [Origen's Commentary on the Gospel of John (Book I), Section 6]
Then as the Antidicomarites show up, we see an explosion in references to the doctrine (after the council of Nicea in 325 AD, as your source noted):

354 AD: Hilary of Poitiers

"If they [the brethren of the Lord] had been Mary's sons and not those taken from Joseph's former marriage, she would never have been given over in the moment of the passion [crucifixion] to the apostle John as his mother, the Lord saying to each, 'Woman, behold your son,' and to John, 'Behold your mother' [John 19:26-27], as he bequeathed filial love to a disciple as a consolation to the one desolate" [Hilary's Commentary on Matthew 1:4]
360 AD: Athanasius

Identifies Mary as "Mary Ever-Virgin" in his Discourse 2 Against the Arians, Section 70
373 AD: Ephrem

"Because there are those who dare to say that Mary cohabited with Joseph after she bore the Redeemer, we reply, 'How would it have been possible for her who was the home of the indwelling of the Spirit, whom the divine power overshadowed, that she be joined by a mortal being, and gave birth filled with birthpangs, in the image of the primeval curse?'" [Ephrem's Commentary on Tatian's Diatessaron]
~375 AD: Basil of Caesarea

"...the lovers of Christ do not allow themselves to hear that the [b]Mother of God [/b]ceased at a given moment to be a virgin..." [Basil’s Homily: On the holy generation of Christ 5; PG 31, 1468 B]
375 AD: Epiphanius

"For I have heard from someone that certain persons are venturing to say that [Mary] had marital relations after the Savior’s birth. And I am not surprised. The ignorance of persons who do not know the sacred scriptures well and have not consulted histories, always turn them to one thing after another, and distracts anyone who wants to track down something about the truth out of his own head.” [The Panarion of Epiphanius of Salamis: De fide. Books II and III, page 620, 7.1]
383 AD: Jerome

In his The Perpetual Virginity of Blessed Mary: Against Helvidius he gives a long, full biblical defense of Mary's perpetual virginity, noted in earlier sections in this answer.
386 AD: Didymus the Blind

"Mary... remained always and forever an immaculate virgin" [Didymus's The Trinity 3:4]
388 AD: Ambrose of Milan

Identified prophecy of Ezekiel 44:2 as proof of Mary's perpetual virginity in his De Institutione Virginum 8.52
401 AD: Augustine

"A Virgin conceiving, a Virgin bearing, a Virgin pregnant, a Virgin bringing forth, a Virgin perpetual. Why do you wonder at this, O man?" [Augustine, Sermons 186:1]

Even the 16th century extreme anti-catholic reformer -Ulrich Zwingly affirmed thus:

I firmly believe that Mary, according to the words of the Gospel as a pure Virgin, brought forth for us the Son of God, and in childbirth and after childbirth forever remained a pure, intact Virgin.

Bishop Hugh Latimer – a staunch Protestant burned at the stake by Queen Mary – goes to great lengths in his St Stephen’s Day Sermon of 1552 to rebut the arguments of those who reject Mary’s perpetual virginity, blasting them as “heretics” who “violate, toss, and turmoil the Scriptures of God, according to their own fantasies and foolish minds.” In a letter to a Catholic in 1749, Methodist founder John Wesley – himself an Anglican priest – professed his belief that Mary “as well after as before she brought [Christ] forth, continued a pure and unspotted virgin.”

With this in mind, it is intriguing to see how universally – and often how vociferously – ancient Christian teaching on Mary is rejected by most evangelical Protestants today.

Mr. Man, how do you feel when you write Mother of God? Do you know what you are talking about? Mother of God! So your god has a mother. So who is the father? I can see why the Bible says Babylon the Great has fallen, and she has become a dwelling place of demons and a place where every unclean spirit and every unclean and hated bird lurks! Rev 18:2 But honest-hearted students of the Bible are given a heart-warming order to "get out of her....if you do not want to share with her in her sins......" Revelation 18:4

You have exalted Mary even above Jesus and claim that Jesus' father even has a mother! Spurious

Emyogalanya:
PROVE WHAT ? I WANT YOU GUYS TO PROVE TO ME HOW SHE WILL BE IN JOSEPH HOUSE FOR OVER 12 YEARS AND STILL REMAIN A VIRGIN. I'V NO PROBLEM IF SHE HAD OTHER CHILDREN OR NOT BUT THE ETERNAL VIRGINITY IS THE PROBLEM

What you have problem with or not does not matter. Just find a way to prove to me that a woman gave birth without the aid of a man(or don't you believe it?), and that a man will keep a woman in his house for more than Nine months without touching her(which you believe Joseph did)and I will prove the rest to you.

So the problem these catholic people have is what?

That if Mary had sex with Joseph AFTER the Birth of Jesus Christ It reduces the Lordship of our Lord Jesus Christ?

If Mary remained a perpetual Virgin according to their warped explanation; Why then was there even a Joseph in the story?
God could as well just chosen a virgin, who was not bethroted to any man. Infact, God would have kicked Joseph out of the equation.

If I may ask; if we are to agree with this perpetual virginity theory what the heck then was Joseph doing in that equation?

Emyogalanya:
FROM MY QUOTE DO I SOUND LIKE A PROTESTANT TO YOU ? PENTECOST STARTED IN CATHOLIC I'M A PROVEN PENTECOSTAL CATHOLIC MAN A FANATICAL ONE IF YOU LIKE. YOU THINK YOU KNOW CHURCH DOGMA AND TRADITIONS THAN I? VIRGIN BIRTH IS NOT SUBJECT FOR DEBATE BUT ETERNAL VIRGINITY IS. PLS FIND A WAY TO PROVE THAT A MAN MARRIED HIS WIFE AND WONT MEET HER FOR 12 YEARS WERE THEY UNDER VOW OF CELIBACY WAS JOSEPH A EUNUCH. DID MARY VOW TO REMAIN VIRGIN FOR EVER AFTER MARRIAGE.

Virgin birth is not subject to debate but perpetual Virginity is? LOL. With due respect, brother, that sounded ridiculous.
I mean, how come you very easily believe that the blessed virgin Mary conceived our Lord without a man's help but doubt her perpetual virginity?

You want proof that a man (Joseph) never knew his wife? OK. But kindly prove how reproduction takes place without human effort.
Let's begin with these my dear PENTECOSTAL CATHOLIC.

Emyogalanya:
PROVE WHAT ? I WANT YOU GUYS TO PROVE TO ME HOW SHE WILL BE IN JOSEPH HOUSE FOR OVER 12 YEARS AND STILL REMAIN A VIRGIN. I'V NO PROBLEM IF SHE HAD OTHER CHILDREN OR NOT BUT THE ETERNAL VIRGINITY IS THE PROBLEM

Prove how a man would keep a woman in his house for over nine months without touching her and how a woman is able to conceive without a man's help and you'll have your answers. It's quite simple, bro.

“After the festival was over, while his parents were returning home, the boy Jesus stayed behind in Jerusalem, but they were unaware of it. Thinking he was in their company, they traveled on for a day. Then they began looking for him among their relatives and friends.”
‭‭Luke‬ ‭2:43-44‬ ‭NIV‬‬


So according to that guy above me, it was only Mary, Joseph and Boy Jesus (3 of them) that went to Jerusalem.

How can 1 person get missing in a company of 3 and it takes 24 hours for them to realise?


Again I ask;
If Mary had sex, and had other Children. Does it reduce the Lordship and Power if Jesus Christ as the Messiah?

AkunnaTochi:

Virgin birth is not subject to debate but perpetual Virginity is? LOL. With due respect, brother, that sounded ridiculous.
I mean, how come you very easily believe that the blessed virgin Mary conceived our Lord without a man's help but doubt her perpetual virginity?

You want proof that a man (Joseph) never knew his wife? OK. But kindly prove how reproduction takes place without human effort.
Let's begin with these my dear PENTECOSTAL CATHOLIC.

God is the Source of Life, according to Psalm 36:9. He miraculously transferred the life of Jesus in heaven into the womb of Mary who was then a virgin betrothed to Joseph. That was undoubtedly a miracle. How do you compare that miracle with an issue not warranting same? Are you saying God made a miracle to make Joseph a celibate or Mary to remain a virgin continuously? If to make Joseph a celibate, was Joseph even needed in the whole equation? Why Joseph, if he would not play the husband to Mary?

The CONFUSION in this your dogma is hopelessly as complex as the concept of trinity where you have 3 gods in one god. How humans begin to believe these kind of irrationalities baffles every sane person.

Investnow2017:


God is the Source of Life, according to Psalm 36:9. He miraculously transferred the life of Jesus in heaven into the womb of Mary who was then a virgin betrothed to Joseph. That was undoubtedly a miracle. How do you compare that miracle with an issue not warranting same? Are you saying God made a miracle to make Joseph a celibate or Mary to remain a virgin continuously? If to make Joseph a celibate, was Joseph even needed in the whole equation? Why Joseph, if he would not play the husband to Mary?

The CONFUSION in this your dogma is hopelessly as complex as the concept of trinity where you have 3 gods in one god. How humans begin to believe these kind of irrationalities baffles every sane person.

What is baffling rather is that you believe God chose to bypass the natural means of procreation to give the world his son, but you do not believe something as simple as celibacy. Something is obviously wrong with your upbringing.

O yes, Joseph was needed in the equation because a bastard son is what the Jews wouldn't have in their midst.
And hey, playing the husband role doesn't amount to just sexual relations just as being a wife isn't just about being a baby making machine.

LaaJiblik:
“After the festival was over, while his parents were returning home, the boy Jesus stayed behind in Jerusalem, but they were unaware of it. Thinking he was in their company, they traveled on for a day. Then they began looking for him among their relatives and friends.”
‭‭Luke‬ ‭2:43-44‬ ‭NIV‬‬


So according to that guy above me, it was only Mary, Joseph and Boy Jesus (3 of them) that went to Jerusalem.

How can 1 person get missing in a company of 3 and it takes 24 hours for them to realise?


Again I ask;
If Mary had sex, and had other Children. Does it reduce the Lordship and Power if Jesus Christ as the Messiah?

.

Jesus didn't get missing in a company of three. Mary and Joseph traveled in the company of their friends and relatives and so, it was natural for them to assume he was in their company. Company here isn't just Mary and Joseph.

Whether it reduces or adds to the power and lordship of Jesus or not, Mary's a perpetual virgin and had no biological children aside Jesus.

AkunnaTochi:


What is baffling rather is that you believe God chose to bypass the natural means of procreation to give the world his son, but you do not believe something as simple as celibacy. Something is obviously wrong with your upbringing.

No amount of insult would push through an irrational belief! Its not in my upbringing to talk back with insult. I am only helping you to listen to yourself.

I dated my wife-to-be for some time before getting married finally. And all through that time we endeavoured not to know ourselves carnally. But we were not to tell ourselves that after the wedding ceremony was over. So it is possible for faithful, God-fearing young ones to date with the hope of getting married without having sex before marriage. The opposite may be commonplace these days but I can tell you that there are still persons who, out of regard for God's law, keep themselves chaste and pure before marriage. That is very, very possible despite the debase moral environment that persist now in the world.

Joseph, a God-fearing man having been given a divine answer to his concerns can respectfully obey God not to have any carnal knowledge of Mary throughout her pregnancy with Jesus. And interestingly this was also reported by Matthew and also in line with the prophesy of Isaiah concerning the Messiah. But since their marriage was never broken and there is no record that they ever made vows to remain celibate, it would be wrong to assume that they never slept in the manner of husband and wife after the birth of Jesus.

Remember that as soon as Mary became pregnant of her Firstborn Son, Jesus, she left Joseph to visit her cousin Elizabeth and stayed for three months, and that is some 90 days. So Joseph and Mary lived apart for three months during Jesus' pregnancy. Read Luke 1:56. Then according to Luke chapter 2:5, the Bible says Mary had already been given to Joseph as a wife.

When Mary was betrothed to Joseph were they having the intention not to raise children? Well, you may say yes. And I will agree with you that there can be marriage where both mates agree not to have children. But to have a marriage where both couple would agree not to have sex is irrational to contemplate.

You can see that this issue is beyond one that can be wished away with lazy insults. Read God's inspired word DAILY and meditate. It is not about that was my parents' religion and then you swallow everything hook, line and sinker. Your life is involved.

Investnow2017:



No amount of insult would push through an irrational belief! Its not in my upbringing to talk back with insult. I am only helping you to listen to yourself.

I dated my wife-to-be for some time before getting married finally. And all through that time we endeavoured not to know ourselves carnally. But we were not to tell ourselves that after the wedding ceremony was over. So it is possible for faithful, God-fearing young ones to date with the hope of getting married without having sex before marriage. The opposite may be commonplace these days but I can tell you that there are still persons who, out of regard for God's law, keep themselves chaste and pure before marriage. That is very, very possible despite the debase moral environment that persist now in the world.

Joseph, a God-fearing man having been given a divine answer to his concerns can respectfully obey God not to have any carnal knowledge of Mary throughout her pregnancy with Jesus. And interestingly this was also reported by Matthew and also in line with the prophesy of Isaiah concerning the Messiah. But since their marriage was never broken and there is no record that they ever made vows to remain celibate, it would be wrong to assume that they never slept in the manner of husband and wife after the birth of Jesus.

Remember that as soon as Mary became pregnant of her Firstborn Son, Jesus, she left Joseph to visit her cousin Elizabeth and stayed for three months, and that is some 90 days. So Joseph and Mary lived apart for three months during Jesus' pregnancy. Read Luke 1:56. Then according to Luke chapter 2:5, the Bible says Mary had already been given to Joseph as a wife.

When Mary was betrothed to Joseph were they having the intention not to raise children? Well, you may say yes. And I will agree with you that there can be marriage where both mates agree not to have children. But to have a marriage where both couple would agree not to have sex is irrational to contemplate.

You can see that this issue is beyond one that can be wished away with lazy insults. Read God's inspired word DAILY and meditate. It is not about that was my parents' religion and then you swallow everything hook, line and sinker. Your life is involved.

You don't necessarily have to play the helpless victim to push your thoughts through. I repeat, if you believe God can choose to bypass the natural mode of procreation to give the world his son but believe celibacy is impossible in marriage, something is wrong with your upbringing and it is absolutely not your fault.

Speaking of insults,

"The CONFUSION in this your dogma is hopelessly
as complex as the concept of trinity where you
have 3 gods in one god."

You think the above comment credited to you isn't a LAZY INSULT coming from your ignorant self?

AkunnaTochi:


You don't necessarily have to play the helpless victim to push your thoughts through. I repeat, if you believe God can choose to bypass the natural mode of procreation to give the world his son but believe celibacy is impossible in marriage, something is wrong with your upbringing and it is absolutely not your fault.

Speaking of insults,

"The CONFUSION in this your dogma is hopelessly
as complex as the concept of trinity where you
have 3 gods in one god."

You think the above comment credited to you isn't a LAZY INSULT coming from your ignorant self?

Was that an insult? Really? Tell me more.

Investnow2017:

Was that an insult? Really? Tell me more.

No. It wasn't. It's praise and worship.

AkunnaTochi:
O yes, Joseph was needed in the equation because a bastard son is what the Jews wouldn't have in their midst.
And hey, playing the husband role doesn't amount to just sexual relations just as being a wife isn't just about being a baby making machine.

Again I ask;
If Mary had sex, and had other Children. Does it reduce the Lordship and Power if Jesus Christ as the Messiah?