Was Mary a Perpetual Virgin?

Most Protestants believe that Mary wasn't a perpetual virgin. After all, doesn't the Bible say that Joseph and Mary remained celibate only "until" the birth of Jesus? And doesn't the New Testament describe the "brothers" of Jesus? So what are the biblical reasons Catholics and Orthodox are convinced that Mary WAS a perpetual virgin?

[@angelanelson2369]

Love these podcasts. I’m a cradle Catholic who went from Catholic Kindergarten through College. I’ve tried to explain the faith to non-Catholics using biblical references, but was never quite able to explain it as well as in these podcasts. I’m learning greater depth of understanding for my own sake, but now am finding greater tools at my fingertips in explaining Catholic teaching. So excited. So grateful. Thank you. Thank God!

[@RJLupin-xl6yf]

I left Oneness Pentecostal two years ago and have been digging into the history of Christianity for the church straight from the apostles. Having been taught from a young age that not only Catholics, but also the trinity, was nothing more than pagan worship, I had a lot to relearn and “de-cult-anize” from. The continual virginity of Mary was one of the hardest things to understand but how you were able to argue (and convince) to it, not only Spiritually but logically, is just one of the many reasons I’m converting to Catholicism.

[@ingoditrust7784]

It's not difficult to understand at all. Have you never encountered a pure girl whom you didn't want to have sex with? I know I have. It's the normal response of a gentleman's heart to feminine beauty in purity of soul. Mary is millions of times more beautiful and pure than the purest woman you and I will ever encounter in this life.

[@zunir0a]

I was raised Oneness too, UPCI specifically. Oddly enough, one of the reasons I converted to Catholicism is because I already held Mary in a higher view from the beginning, and other UPCI folk were very degrading to her. I proclaimed Semper Virgo long before I considered conversion. Glad to see another breaking from that cult; Dr. Bernard is a know-nothing.

[@RJLupin-xl6yf]

@@zunir0a My church was UPCI too. It’s funny cuz now looking at all of Dr. Bernard’s videos, there’s this “group mentality” kinda going on, and I’m not trying to tear Dr. Bernard down or anything, but the way even on screen he makes leaps in not only theological thinking but also history shows how self righteous the UPCI really is. Also I don’t know about the other UPCI churches but mine was very much into the end of the world. We were told nearly every service that an asteroid was coming or someone was going to drop a nuke anytime now. It was worse during the Obama presidency.

[@zunir0a]

@@RJLupin-xl6yf “Ah yes, the Word was just an idea in God’s mind for man’s salvation. The world was created just so God could use this plan of salvation that was the Word.” It’s utter nonsense, and at times outright blasphemes Christ. Bernard tries to claim every Christian was modalist up until Tertullian, but St. Ignatius of Antioch (my beloved) wrote in his letter to the Trallians in the year 107 that modalism was akin to “mixing aconite into sweet wine so that the drought of death would be masked with sweetness.” He’s stretching and outright lying regarding most of his history and theology, and I genuinely have no idea how he graduated with a doctorate in Theology, because the man is NOT studying God or His people. I have zero respect for that man and I will gladly call him anathema for what he and his movement has done in tearing salvation from my family.

[@RJLupin-xl6yf]

@@zunir0a Amen! A bunch of denominations have their own Bible colleges and they tend to teach in their own theology. Also, don’t need any kind of qualifications to start a Bible college. Look at the founder of the Pentecostal movement, Charles Parham, and even he didn’t start the Jesus only movement. That was 40 years later by a guy who didn’t even have a proper education but was just convicted by the book of acts and then started preaching Jesus baptism only. Don’t even get me started on sola scriptura. How on earth are we to take most of the Bible at plain text but some need to be interpreted? In fact, the main thing that really sent me off at the end was the yearly communion. I’ve actually had it only twice my whole time growing up. One when I was 3 and then about a month before I left. They’re always preaching against the Catholics so my parents never took us to them but that one time, but the last communion was ‘different’. In the same breath they tell us that this is only in remembrance and just symbolic, nothing like the Catholics, but then again if you’re not right with God or in sin at that moment, then you’re in risk of God’s wrath. “Being kinda luke warm there, ain’t ya?” Now at this time, I’m going through ALOT, with family, career, my faith, although I can never be an atheist, I was really questioning the church. It was a 2-lid with the cookie and grape juice (😆). I ate the cookie and instantly I’m shaken to the core. Like how you’re just out of a bad car wreck and then witnessed another in front of you. I was trembling and looked around to see if anyone else is feeling this and nah, if they was then they were stone face about it. I was scared but I guess out of pride I didn’t want to not finish it cuz then others would think I was in the middle of something (we had a really bad gossip problem, people have left over it) so I took the grape juice when he said so. Man it hit me again and I couldn’t hold back the tears, (not crocodile tears, just onion like tears) and I remember my Paster eying me the rest of the service but didn’t say anything to me afterwards. I didn’t tell anyone out of fear of being rebuked. I know that transmutation can’t happen out side of apostolic succession, but I think it was like God trying to show me that there was something more to this and it wasn’t what I was taught. Not long afterwards I left, or to put it plainly, pushed out. It was hard to grow up with who you always saw as family but to end up being seen as an outsider. Maybe God was doing it but it sure felt like he hid himself from me too. I ended up deconstructing. At first it was Oneness Pentecostal, then protestant, and then the big C. I then noticed that besides the west east split, there was no longer any shoot off. Instead, I ended up at the beginning. Not gonna lie, at first I wanted so desperately to prove it wrong. After all the anti Catholic training, it was like uncle Ruckus; “Na, na, this… this can’t be?!?!” To read the early Fathers was like having spikes driven into my chest, but none was as deep as the Eucharist. I still haven’t had my first communion but I getting there. What was surprising to me was how…???… wonderful the Rosary is. My birth mother is incarcerated right now and it’s rare that we can keep contact so Our Holy Mother, Mary, slipped perfectly into that empty space, and when I pray, it’s like she’s holding both my hands with the Rosary.

[@mercer179]

As a non-Catholic this is a very thorough breakdown. Thank you for taking the time to delve completely into this topic.

[@alhilford2345]

It's so clear to me. Why can't non-Catholics understand it?

[@CocoWynn]

In Vietnamese culture we literally refer to cousins as brothers and sisters the same way we call our own biological brothers and sisters. We’re that close.

[@johnnyvo2494]

Ahhhh Vietnamese. And yes we call our cousins anh chị.

[@jomidiam]

I worked with a guy from India who told me that they use the same word for brother and cousin in his language. I had been confused, because he talked about his brothers when I knew he was an only child.

[@johnnyvo2494]

@@jomidiam that’s actually kinda funny 😂

[@robertsmith-dt7eb]

You’ve given me a lot to think about. The doctrines and dogmas of Mary are the most difficult aspect of Catholicism for me to deal with. You made some really good arguments. Thank you.

[@AllanKoayTC]

i chuckled at the explanation about the word "brother", because it reminds me how we modern folk call each other "Hey, bro!" (or "Hey, bruh!" as it is fashionable to nowadays) but we're not of the same parents. LOL

[@veronica_._._._]

Cousin was such a widespread greeting in Shakespeare's time that the verb to "cozen" meant to be over friendly in order to swindle. Every culture has the friendly version of cuz, bro, uncle auntie ...

[@SP-td9xj]

Yup, look at black American culture, terms like bro, brother, sis, sister, cuz cousin, auntie, etc. are used for everyone that's either family or close to the family

[@carolinajackson7621]

If the word adelphos does not mean brother in the case of Jesus & his brothers, neither should mean it in the case of Peter & Andrew or James & John.

[@SP-td9xj]

@@carolinajackson7621 sons of Mary's sister were called adelphpoi in relation to Jesus although that would obviously make them his cousin

[@carolinajackson7621]

@SP-td9xj if adelphos means mainly cousin, then John & James, or Peter & Andrew, were not brothers but cousins, since that is the word used. I have checked it in the original Greek (I know the Greek alphabet and a bit more). The idea that Mary did not have other children is a fabrication. Probably, one of the reasons Joarph ; Mary ost Jesus when he was 12 is because they were busy tending to younger children, maybe toddkers & even infants.

[@tonyl3762]

The early Protestant leaders believed Mary was a perpetual virgin, even as they mocked and rejected Christian vows of virginity.

[@ToddJambon]

I can't remember if you touched on this; but I also think about how the Church didn't just come up with this one day. She wouldn't make an infallible doctrine just because someone felt like it. These things are studied, argued, and prayed for over centuries before the doctrine is set in stone. This is why I believe the Catholic Church is truly protected from doctrinal error by the Holy Spirit. If they were just quick to change a teaching because of the current "socially accepted" norms, that would seem like an incredibly weak church that is prone to error and quick to judgement.

[@shamelesspopery]

Right on!

[@onlylove556]

Im a protestant but on a journey. But whats sad is thats exactly how the prots 2day think about the Catholic church, & Maryology... I believe its all spiritual as 1st Timothy 4 explains about seducing spirits; & in Ephesians 6:12; we don't wrestle with flesh and blood, its all spiritual... So I believe that a lot of prots r blinded by Mary staying a virgin, they cant even see the simple title of Mary to understand that Mary is "Theotokos"💯. So whats sad is prots are being intellectually dishonest, & jus assume the Worst judgment about the catholic church, without reading church history, to see the consistent teachings & see the consensus of the church fathers, even b4 the 4th century when they believe a man "Constantine" started the Catholic Church. Not even realizing there is absolutely zero evidence for this in antiquity. But they dnt kno in their ignorance, they don't even want to read anything for themselves on what happened in the 4th century. But yet they will listen to their Pastors from the 21st century as facts of history, from men who didn't even kno the church fathers. Its really Sad... Lord bless u 🙏🏼💯

[@johnhoelzeman6683]

Don't forget that if Protestants are right, this would've been a hard sell on the early Christians

[@onlylove556]

@@johnhoelzeman6683 I think I see what ur saying, that for 100s of yrs prots been trying to get everything just right. So that could make protestantism as a whole still biblical, doing the same thing that took the Catholic church 100s of yrs to perfect doctrines. Is that what you're trying to point out in the argument?

[@johnhoelzeman6683]

@@onlylove556 no, my point was that if Protestants are right, and that early Christians didn't believe in the perpetual virginity of Mary, it would've been hard to persuade them that she had been a perpetual virgin

[@timboslice980]

It's crazy, when I was a protestant I thought the Marian dogmas were the wildest part of catholic belief. The toughest part for me was the papacy but when I realized matthew 16 really meant what it looks like it means I was sold. Back to Mary, once you accept the authority of the church....the extra biblical traditions like that aren't nearly as hard to deal with. I'm a big evidence guy and I'm pretty much sold on many of the major apparitions and the tilma. Once you realize mary is the woman in revelation, it gets really hard to just see her as just Jesus' bio mom.

[@annablazejowski3862]

Mary is Not the woman of Revelation! Woman in Bible prophecy represents The Church- true believers in Jesus Christ! It is the Roman Catholic Church that takes it literally and contributes Gen 3:16 and Rev 12 as well to Mary! It is the biggest deception that could be -to contribute “crashing “the serpent’s head to a woman! It refers to JESUS CHRIST / Joh 12:31, Col 2:14-15. The same with Mat 16 - Roman Catholicism built all their religion on few biblical verses taken out of contest!Like Mat16 and “their” succession from Peter!- the biggest lie ever! JESUS is the head of the CHURCH and THE ROCK and THE CORNERSTONE! Not a mortal sinner! Mat 16 scene happened just before Peter disowned JESUS three times!- and GOD would build HIS CHURCH on Peter?! It looks like you were raised knowing the TRUTHS of THE BIBLE but.. you backslides unfortunately .. Roman Catholicism is Not BIBLICAL religion!They do NOT worship THE BIBLICAL GOD! I am stunned how is it possible that if you knewTHE BIBLE to embrace so many antibiblical doctrines of Catholicism! I was raised Catholic and for 57 years of my life believed and followed all catholic teachings until I started to read The Bible and realized myself how antibiblical this religion is! They deceive millions of people preaching the doctrines nowhere to find in The Bible! Do you know that they even removed the SECOND COMMANDMENT from THE 10 COMMANDMENTS of GOD?- you will Not find IT in their Catchetism- check!- there is an empty space instead! Did you know it? Now you know.. It is the COMMANDMENT that forbids Idolatry!-so Mary worship, worship of thousands of “Catholic saints “, relics, icons, statues etc- all this GOD forbids! All Catholicism is about Idolatry- this is why they just “kick it off”!!!!! Listen to: Walter Veith “Twisting The 10 Commandments “ “The Total Onslaught “!!!!!!!!! Stephen Bohr “Roman Catholic view of tradition-p.5-6” Mike Gendron “What Catholics do not know “ Mark Finley”Revelation Bible study “ 3ABN- 3 Angels Messages!!! Please share!

[@timboslice980]

@annablazejowski3862 And a great portent appeared in heaven, a woman clothed with the sun, with the moon under her feet, and on her head a crown of twelve stars; she was with child and she cried out in her pangs of birth, in anguish for delivery. And another portent appeared in heaven; behold, a great red dragon, with seven heads and ten horns, and seven diadems upon his heads. His tail swept down a third of the stars of heaven, and cast them to the earth. And the dragon stood before the woman who was about to bear a child, that he might devour her child when she brought it forth; she brought forth a male child, one who is to rule all the nations with a rod of iron, but her child was caught up to God and to his throne, and the woman fled into the wilderness, where she has a place prepared by God, in which to be nourished for one thousand two hundred and sixty days.

[@annablazejowski3862]

@@timboslice980 Woman in Rev12 ( Gen 3:16as well) -it is the prophecy-represents The Church- Not Mary! Roman Catholicism attributed it literally to Mary but if it was Mary how come she spent 1260 years in the wilderness?- just impossible! Listen to: Stephen Bohr “Roman Catholic view of tradition “-p.5-6 Mike Gendron “What Catholics do not know “ Walter Veith “Twisting The 10 Commandments “ “The total Onslaught “!!!!!!! Mark Finley”Revelation Bible study “ 3ABN- 3 Angels Messages!!!!!

[@NatePewsAndQs]

​@annablazejowski3862 wrong, it's obviously multivial in symbolism. Mary is obviously the ark of the new covenant seen in heaven at the end of Revelation 11 that then goes into 12, she gives birth to He who will reign over all, then it proceeds into representing the Church. To deny this is to deny a glaringly obvious truth because it doesn't fit with what you think your beliefs should be. Catholics don't have this issue. We know that there can be multiple meanings to these things in scripture. Mary is the Regent Queen of Heaven and is typologically seen in the Queen Mother of Solomon in the OT. Just like Matt16 is foreshadowed by the Prime minister Eliakim in Isaiah 22, Jesus worded Matt16 the way He did on purpose. God bless you on your journey friend.

[@timboslice980]

@annablazejowski3862 Oh boy, Gendron says so many false things about catholics that he could fill a book with them. Literally check out his debate on the catholic truth podcast. Brian M owns him throughout the debate and then in the last 5 mins of the debate he throws 15 accusations against the church. Brian only had 5 mins to respond to 15 accusations! The ultimate low blow in a debate... Anyway catholic truth releases a huge video debunking all if his claims one by one there at the end of the debate. The move is what I like to call, the 12 Guage protgun. Fire off a dozen or so accusations, when your opponent can't get to them all, you consider it a point. It's really underhanded, non productive, and sophomoric. I suggest you read a book about catholics not written by an anticatholic. James white, gendron, and so many others mischaracterize the catholic church like it's their job. If you don't think that's true, why don't you pick up a book from a catholic apologist like Joe Heschmeyer or jimmy akin? When I was leaving protestantism, I found catholic answers was a great resource. They have a playlist with over 200 topics on KZbin, you can call weeknights at 6 and talk to a pro, and their online sources are very thorough with tons of citations to church fathers, early Christian writings, evidences for the catholic faith. Keep looking... you'll find it. You seem like a smart one, they almost always find their way home.

[@jmforchrist3889]

Very well explained. Great job. And for those protestants who still dont understand, remember that the longest journey is from the mind to the heart. And I hope one day they can finally meet. God bless!!!

[@oliverclark5604]

Emotionally and or psychologically vulnerable family members in roman catholic church roles are groomed to purport presuming separation of "heart and mind" as "those who believed were one in ..." (NIV Acts 4:32) by teaching of their church role group of a non-economic status of "higher vocation" of consecrated celibate marriage vowed to man in Christ to consecrated male female marriage vowed to God for economic advantage of families of these diseased family member familyist groomers by tax-exemption embezzlements and lower insurance cost by fraud.

[@ingoditrust7784]

​@@oliverclark5604you don't have a clue, yet you pontificate🤠 let us be the judge of our tradition, which incidentally goes back to Christ. You can go with whatever you please, but please spare us your misunderstanding. Peace

[@oliverclark5604]

@ingoditrust, What is the cause of the worldwide catastrophe of sexual abuse of psychologically and or emotionally vulnerable family members by helpers of the family generally, not just those in the roman catholic role group?

[@ingoditrust7784]

@@oliverclark5604 all evil comes from s8n, through temptation, this is the basic explanation. Now every case has its own components, follows its own dynamics. Basically, every time one person treats another person as a means of self-gratification, abuse happens. The sexual component is a special form of degradation involving a general lack of purity in human society.

[@oliverclark5604]

@@ingoditrust7784 So is it in technical terms consequentialism utilitarianism in practice and in ethics?

[@phishphan6596]

Joe --- this is literally the best video summary on the subject of the Blessed Virgin Mary's Perpetual Virginity, that I have ever heard. I like your logical approach (first, negative arguments, then positive assertions). The detail is fantastic, for a relatively short consideration. Lots of good points --- some new to me. I am a Catholic, heavily involved in Adult Faith Formation in parishes. I can say, your channel, your approach is among the best.

[@ericholmberg2963]

Totally agree. And I've listened to a lot of them.

[@georgefuentes4112]

Just bumped in to this channel and I enjoy the Bible verse approach. Since it is all our Christians brothers and sisters accept, we can also play on their field and make AMAZING arguments. The Church Fathers are icing on the cake AND the cherry on top.

[@chrishorton8213]

Totally agree. This is an amazing amazing breakdown/analysis.

[@annablazejowski3862]

But it is antibiblical! Nowhere in The Bible is to pray to or worship Mary! All her titles are nowhere to found in THE Bible! Listen to: Stephen Bohr “Roman Catholic view of tradition “p.5-6 Mike Gendron “What Catholics do not know “ Mark Finley”Revelation Bible study “ Walter Veith “Twisting The 10 Commandments “ “ The Total Onslaught “!!!!!! 3ABN- 3 Angels Messages!

[@phishphan6596]

@@annablazejowski3862 sorry annablaze --- we don't worship Mary --- and our "prayers" to her are petitions, just like us asking each other to pray for us --- except Mary is the Mother of God, the Mother of our Lord. She is NOT divine, but the Mother of Jesus, who IS.

[@derrick7442]

I’m so glad you are doing these in-depth dives like this. Very helpful.

[@tarminas6805]

Hear hear

[@Faithofthefathers12]

Great work brother! I was pumped to see you started a channel. Look forward to seeing more content. I hope you cover the other Marian dogmas as well. I’ve read Tim Staples, Pitre, and working on Gambero now but it’s always great to hear it in video form! Thanks for what you do!

[@ericholmberg2963]

I love everyone at CA. Was a huge part of my journey out of the outer court of Protestantism into the holy of holies. But from a purely teaching gifting (imparting wisdom and understanding - 1 Cor. 12:8), Joe is my favorite. This was awesome.

[@Joel-nz9oj]

I have never ever heard of a more clearer and precise explanation about Blessed Mary's perpetual virginity 😮😇🙏🙏 I am a Syro-Malabar Catholic who had some doubts about perpetual virginity which have now been answered. God bless you brother...🙏🙏 And may The Lord increase your ministry and viewership a 100 fold😇😇

[@robertslusser6753]

This is probably the best and clearest explanation that I have ever heard for the perpetual virginity of Mary. It's like you took a bottle of Windex to a dirty window and allowed us to truly see what is actually on the other side of the glass. Thank you for clearing up something that I always assumed was a Catholic position about Mary that didn't make any sense, looking at it from a modern "Protestant" view point.

[@PuzzlesC4M]

I’m so glad you brought up the gate! I first learned that at an Orthodox Church about 10 years ago, but haven’t heard any apologists mention it since then. Nice job.

[@BrianGondo]

In my native language (Shona) we simply refer to half-brother/sister, step-brother/sister or cousin(s) as brother(s) or sister(s). You often hear people particularly, my parents generation preface a cousin's name with bhudi (i.e brother) then the name of the person e.g bhudi Joe/brother Joe. So this explanation is not strange at all to someone who is of Shona heritage

[@TheRocksolid373]

I enjoyed this. It was very like Aquinas: taking the opposing view and demonstrating it’s strongest arguments and why they fall short, and then demonstrating your position and the reasons for it. Love the content!

[@RealSeanithan]

The pronunciation of "until" in this video reminds me that I need to upgrade my CPU.

[@triconcert]

LOL! He means well. I forgive him for that pronunciation which also threw me off. "In essentials unity, in non-essentials liberty, in all things charity."

[@RealSeanithan]

@@triconcert I know, and there are few people I've learned more from than Joe, but I also never pass up on a good joke...or a lousy joke, as the case may be.

[@triconcert]

@@RealSeanithan I suppose it's the 'intel' from intelligence - sigh!

[@marlam8625]

Well done and great video! Hopefully it will be fed into many viewing streams.

[@39knights]

Thank you so much for the honest work and effort you put into these vids. I really enjoyed the angles I had not considered before on these topics. It gives a condensed coles-note (that should date me) bundle of information to arm-chair apologists like me.

[@darlameeks]

Wow! I have been a Catholic for an entire year and no one has ever explained this to me properly until now. I've listened to Catholic apologist after Catholic apologist and never have they made a convincing argument like this. I felt like I just had to accept it because it's a dogma, so I did...but it still never made sense. Now I understand. Thank you so much!

[@thedon978]

What a great find! Most informative. I look forward to following your program. Thank you.

[@israelalexandroheredia6879]

Great Video Joe! Hoping you can do a video soon on the basis and backings of the Assumption of Mary. God bless. 👍

[@southpawhammer8644]

This is beautiful, thank you so much for this.

[@BTC-2024]

Joe - I really appreciate your videos. Thank you for all of your hard work. You are a very needed and valuable asset.

[@hyginus72]

I love my Catholic teachings. Always have, always will. Thanks so much for this extraordinarily beautiful and informative video. May God continue to bless you and your works.

[@annablazejowski3862]

You love the catholic teachings? Do you know that they are mostly antibiblical? Are you aware of the fact that Roman Catholic Church removed The Second Commandment of GOD in their Catchetism? Listen to: Walter Veith “Twisting The 10 Commandments “ Mind blowing!!!!

[@noel_112]

​@@annablazejowski3862They compiled the bible so calling them anti biblical is just a brain dead statement. By the way the y never removed the 2nd commandment from their catechism. You only need to look into the book yourself and stop listening to your Pastor's lies. As for the "Twisting the 10 commandments", a lot of rebuttals have been made to that. One was done by Trent Horn.

[@annablazejowski3862]

@@noel_112 I saw with my own eyes the Commandments in The Catchetism of Roman Catholic Church- there is NOT THE SECOND COMMANDMENT at all!- there is an empty space instead! Did you checked?- I don’t think so!

[@noel_112]

@@annablazejowski3862 Blank space?? Perhaps you should check an actual catechism and not the one your pastor showed you. Anyways I suppose you're ignorant so I'll just explain it to you. The original bible had no chapters and verses within the books. Everything was just a seamless connection of texts. Now if you look through the part of exodus where the "10" commandments are, you'd find there are actually 14 individual commandments, however those with similar foundation were compiled making the total number of commandments 10. Therefore, since the "1st" and "2nd" commandments are both referring to idolatry, the church had no problems in compiling them as one. By the way, I noticed your original comment is no longer here. Did you delete it?? And why? Now let's leave out theology and think with just logic. Why would the church omit the 2nd commandment and leave a blank space? The presence of the bank space in a printed text indicates that someone deliberately erased what was supposed to be there. You'd think that people would realise that the church is lying if all their catechisms had a blank space where the 2nd commandment was supposed to be. Don't make anti Catholic attacks like this anymore. They're pathetic, extremely low hanging arguments.

[@anthonymarimpietri8409]

@@annablazejowski3862you are either being dishonest or weren’t looking at the right page. I have a second edition copy of the Catechism. On pages 496 and 497 the Ten Commandments are listed. They are listed as found in Exodus 20:2-17 (which is the ordering of the Eastern Churches and most Protestant communities), Deuteronomy 5:6-21 (which is the ordering of Roman Catholicism and Lutheran confessions), and “A Traditional Catechetical Formula” (in which the commandments are in abbreviated form).

[@AllanKoayTC]

btw, hope you can make the in-picture texts a bit bigger. they're hard to read.

[@shamelesspopery]

Thanks for the input!

[@williammcenaney1331]

Mr. H., thank you for hosting one of my two favorite Catholic podcasts. The SSPX produces the other one.

[@ingoditrust7784]

The SSPX is actually not Catholic, because not in Communion with Rome.

[@godfreym3550]

​@@ingoditrust7784Lies. SSPX is Catholic.

[@ingoditrust7784]

@@godfreym3550 to my best knowledge, the current situation is that the Holy See does not consider it to be in Communion. However, the SSPX itself holds it is. As a matter of fact, its priests operate against the authority of the local bishops. I therefore hold the SSPX to be out of Communion with the RCC. Padre Pio was way holier than any priest within the SSPX and even unjustly treated by the hierarchy, this great saint obeyed. Archbishop Lefebvre was completely out of line most of the time after founding the SSPX and died excommunicated.

[@IRISHBee4]

Wonderful job again, Joe!

[@Servus-Dei83]

This video was absolutely amazing, God bless you

[@craigsherman4480]

Thank you so much for this presentation!!

[@artbykristylalonde4165]

You are being very deceptive about the words “until” in these examples. You are using them as used with the same meaning. In Greek there are different “spelling” of the same word used for different meanings. Anyone and everyone can go online and look up Matthew 1:25 ἕως and 1 Corinthians 15:25 ἄχρι in a Greek to English dictionary and learn about the differences. Do some research.👍😊 And yes, in 1 Corinthians 15:25, the “until” means Jesus will put all of his enemies under his feet then He will immediately hand over to the Father. That’s why this verse says “until”. “Then the end will come; Christ will overcome all spiritual rulers, authorities, and powers, and will hand over the Kingdom to God the Father. For Christ must rule until God defeats all enemies and puts them under his feet.” ‭‭1 Corinthians‬ ‭15‬:‭24‬-‭25

[@crekow]

VERY good! The quote from Rufinus was one I hadn't heard before. I'm going to have to do some more patristic reading!

[@savagemode.]

Fact : The verse numbers in the Bible were added during the Middle Ages and the Renaissance period to facilitate reference and citation. They were not part of the original text but have become a standard way of locating specific passages in the Bible. So, it's important to read and understand the verses in their full context to grasp their intended meaning.

[@srich7503]

Do tell…

[@savagemode.]

@@srich7503 ?

[@peterxuereb9884]

The Blessed Virgin Mary did not have children with Joseph after Jesus was born here is why. The 4th commandment as I referred to earlier is "Honor thy father and mother." At the time of Jesus' crucifixion he said to Mary, "Woman this is your son, and to St. John "This is your mother" then it say's in the bible "from that hour the disciple took her into his home," if one where to take the non-catholic view to this, Jesus broke the 4th commandment because, non-catholic's believe Jesus had biological brother's. And so to say to St John, "this is your mother" has a three fold effect it gives St. John the responsibility to look after Mary, it takes away that responsibility that Jesus' brother's did have, to look after Mary, while at the same time in doing so this say's to them that Jesus' brother's are not worthy to look after Mary, and finally also breaks the 4th commandment. This is why Jesus did not have, biological brother's, he would have broken the 4th commandment by example, and Implicating other's ie; His brother's to also break the 4th commandment, since that responsibility to look after Mary, was given to John. Therefore what Jesus said, completely disavows any responsibility of His brother's thereby breaking the 4th commandment. That is why Jesus did not have brothers. Further text that disprove that Jesus had biological brother's and sister's; 1Timothy 5:4 “But if any widow have children or nephews, let them learn first to shew piety at home, and to requite their parents: for that is good and acceptable before God.” King James Version (KJV) These text are from your heretical kjv so enjoy. This is why the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church/Faith is right and correct in relation to scripture in the understanding of Faith, Morals, Dogma, Doctrine. And because of that fact and so many other's, all non-catholic beliefs, will forever and alway's be in error. Hope this help's in your progression to the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church/Faith. God Bless

[@bertgoat]

stop making stuff up to perpetuate lies. read mark 6 v3-4 and matt 13 v55-57 where it plainly states regarding the siblings of Jesus

[@peterxuereb9884]

@johnnewman52 What does honor thy father and mother mean???

[@bernardauberson7218]

@@bertgoatvous tordez les écritures et vous marchez sur les pieds ! C’est pur blasphème.

[@bernardauberson7218]

@@bertgoatVoilà l’exemple type de celui qui ne comprend pas ce qu’il a lu ! Vous ignorez que l’hébreu n’a pas de mot pour cousin ! On est tous frères à Nazareth! Désolant , pareille ignorance …et ça veut enseigner, c’est gonflé !

[@bertgoat]

@@bernardauberson7218 the vile catholic church twists the scriptures to comply with its pagan doctrine.. I read what was there in plain text. so get over it.

[@benjaminjohnson2848]

As a recent convert who grew up Protestant i appreciate your thorough explanations and have watched several now. Thank you. I got exhausted by the ads though. It seemed like I got one every two minutes. Doesn't feel good.

[@masonshirley4051]

Best video on this subject. Excellent job.

[@julianwagle]

Absolutely amazing video man thanks a ton for this! Always felt awkward having to defend Mary’s perpetual virginity using only Scripture. This will make it very easy to spread the truth to anyone with ears to hear

[@KarenBoman-pb3vn]

You couldn't only use scripture to find Mary's perpetual virginity? Where did you find it?

[@veronica_._._._]

​@@KarenBoman-pb3vnIn the video

[@lbee8247]

I often thought the reason Mary and Joseph didn't know Jesus was missing is because they were obviously looking after all those little ones when Jesus who was always responsible didn't need looking after.

[@benabaxter]

Just a note to be helpful: The slides have very small text. It would be easier to read on mobile if the text took up the whole slide.

[@rebeccaboukouvalas3137]

Loved the video, thanks!

[@timmcvicker5775]

I have no reason as to why, but as I was pulling weeds today, these thoughts popped into my mind regarding the topic being discussed in this video. I was thinking about St. James, who is said by Protestants to be the half-brother of Jesus. Catholics submit St. James was a cousin or relative of Jesus or maybe a son of Joseph by an earlier marriage. In the Bible, it records that Jesus's family stated, at one point, they thought Jesus was not in His right mind, and they were probably somewhat embarrassed by Him. I invisioned Jesus' siblings being confronted by friends asking what the deal was with their brother, Jesus. Though St. James initially did not believe Jesus was the Messiah, he became a true believer after becoming a witness of Jesus's resurrection. He became a leader in the early Church, the Bishop of Jerusalem, and died a martyr by stoning. So, you are probably asking yourself, what's my point? It simply occurred to me that historical support of Christ's resurrection has much more credibility if Christ's actual brother finally came to believe who He was as opposed to say, a cousin. There was obviously a little unrest or even some sibling rivalry taking place in the family over the years. But Christ's brother, someone who said Jesus was out of His mind, came to believe that Jesus was the Messiah and rose from the dead as opposed to a more distant relative such as a cousin. I agree this is not a groundbreaking revelation. But it just seems more plausible to me.

[@johnphipps4105]

Problem is cousins weren't distant in their culture, nor are they in the vast majority of cultures. America's culture, and that of most of the west is incredibley sick unfortunately. Take care and God bless

[@fintan3563]

I started watching today’s podcast on TWISTED Teaching but mentally can’t handle that kind of back and forth. I prefer to be here on perpetual virginity. That’s more my speed! Our Lady of Fátima, pray for us. 💙💙💙

[@johnmackall8243]

@shamelesspoperypodcast do you have sources on if s*x was permitted during Kiddushin? It makes sense but I am having trouble finding sources either primary or scholarly.

[@mikeyangel1067]

This video is what I was looking for, Amen!!

[@megrose711]

So helpful, thank you! Do you have plans to explain the dogma of the Assumption? I find that one difficult to explain to someone who is Protestant.

[@ingoditrust7784]

Mary's Assumption is the way we should all have accessed Heaven... had Adam and Eve not betrayed and disobeyed God (Original sin). Now Mary, "Full of Grace", not only never committed a single sin, but She was also Immaculately Conceived without the burden of Original sin. So death could not touch/enter Her. When Her time came to ascend, Body and Soul, to Heaven, She did not have to die. Jesus died, but His Victory through Passion (mystery) demanded that He defeated death by Resurrecting.

[@megrose711]

@@ingoditrust7784 Thank you! :)

[@ingoditrust7784]

@@megrose711 Also, Mary is the only human creature to have her glorified body in Heaven. I mention this because some believe that other saints also have this privilege. They will, you and I will, hopefully 🌹but for now She's the only one. Read Maria Valtorta, she received 14'000 pages' worth of dictations and visions in private revelation and Padre Pio, as well as Pope Pius XII, strongly encouraged reading "her" writings. Pax Christi

[@megrose711]

@@ingoditrust7784 excellent information for me to look into. Thank you so much!

[@BasilTU]

​@@megrose711 I would also like to recommend Dr Brant Pitre's book, Jesus and the Jewish roots of Mary. He talks about all the Marian dogmas and their foreshadowing in the Old Testament.

[@GumbyJumpOff]

Dang. You're good at this. I hope a lot of people see or hear this.

[@julielabrecque6416]

Thoroughly enjoyed this !

[@tarminas6805]

God bless you Joe Heschmeyer, your videos are succinctly and expertly answering so many questions and ponderings I've had for some time. I'm striving to deepen my faith and relationship with God and you are such a timely blessing. Thank you 🙏🏻

[@DUZCO10]

This was great stuff. Id like to add, as you stated, but to put in writing - that in Jewish tradition during the time of Jesus, there were two stages to a marriage: the betrothal (erusin or kiddushin) and the wedding ceremony (nissuin). Betrothal (Kiddushin/Erusin): The first stage was the betrothal, also known as the kiddushin or erusin. During this period, a formal ceremony took place, and the couple was legally bound to each other, much like an engagement in modern times. Although the couple was legally married at this point, they did not live together as husband and wife. Wedding Ceremony (Nissuin): The second stage was the actual wedding ceremony, known as the nissuin. This event typically took place some months after the betrothal, and it involved the husband taking his wife to his home to begin their married life together. According to Jewish tradition, the angel Gabriel's visit to Mary occurred during the betrothal period before the actual wedding ceremony took place. So, while Mary and Joseph were legally married during the betrothal (kiddushin), they had not yet consummated the marriage or started living together as husband and wife.

[@femaleKCRoyalsFan]

Thank you. Do you know when the wedding canopy and breaking a glass started? I’m guessing it would’ve been a few centuries after

[@veronica_._._._]

​@@femaleKCRoyalsFan ln the era of cheap mass produced factory made .wine glasses not cups or goblets.

[@biblicalanarchy13]

First, a disclaimer. I'm not a Christian, but I was raised Protestant. I'm enjoying your videos because they're very informative on the differences from the Catholic perspective. Generally, they convince me of the superiority of the Catholic perspective. This is an exception. I find your arguments for the perpetual virginity to be weak. Here are several problems. 1. In Luke you point out that Joseph and Mary could legally be active, but the aren't. You say we should expect them to be. However, if we carry that expectation to Matthew's "he didn't know her until" then we should expect them to be active after. 2. To establish the looseness of the word "brother" you took us to a text written in Hebrew. This establishes nothing about Greek. 3. For Holiness, you took us to the ark of the covenant. Yet I'm not aware of any Jewish vows of chastity for women. And Deuteronomy 23:17 says "none of the daughters of Israel shall be qadesha." While this is generally translated as "cult prostitute" it literally means "set apart" but it's used in a sexual context. This, combined with a lack of a female Nazarite vow would seem to forbid women being sexually set apart. 4. You claim John sees Jesus as a fulfillment of Ezekiel, and you see Mary as such. But John never mentions her virginity. In fact, he never even mentions her name. Not once. 5. To an outsider, it seems that when the Catholic church can't find their view in the text, they resort to extended stretches of extraordinarily weak typological arguments. So if we ignore the long drudgery of measuring doors, walls, and windows in Ezekiel's temple, but make huge leaps from things mentioned in passing, we can find Jesus in the temple and Mary in the gate. Ezekiel could've saved us hours of reading by saying "I saw the temple, and it was the Messiah born of a virgin." But he didn't. And then we wouldn't have to torture Jesus and Mary out of a few lines in the text while ignoring chapter upon chapter of the same text that clearly describes a building, not a man.

[@lbee8247]

Point 4 was my favorite.

[@lbee8247]

Thank you for this. I enjoy his videos too. I am a Christian. But Roman Catholics would call me a Protestant. As I learn more I would say I'm a Baptist Christian. I follow Jesus and I believe in believers baptism.

[@biblicalanarchy13]

@weaponofchoice-tc7qs The video tries to make the argument from the Bible. If you want to use the protoevangelium of James, for example, my comment wouldn't apply. But he didn't, so it does. I can only respond to what he presented.

[@rachelwarfield5476]

Numbers 30 talks about vows made by men and women. Verse 13, specifically, says "Any vow or any binding oath to deny herself, her husband may allow to stand..." Just something for your consideration. I think there is an arguement to be made that "deny herself" could apply in a sexual context. So while we might expect a woman in Ancient Jewish, Early Stage One Marriage to be sexually active with her husband, I would say Numbers offers an exception to that general rule.

[@ihearthounds]

Spot on!

[@justinbruck9602]

Only two minutes in and I am already stoked for this one. I usually make the gate argument from the perspective of fitting and proper, it's awesome that there is all of this Biblical evidence for the Mary's virginity, and that the argument from Holiness is among those. Since he came so close to mentioning it at the end, in Daniel I believe it's king Balthazar that essentially uses the sacred vessels of the temple for a tea party.

[@henrryanthony3141]

Thank you so much for breaking this down to our understanding. It is clear and decisive. I hope it will put to rest the arguments from the non-Catholics about the virginity of the blessed virgin Mary.

[@lbee8247]

Is there any new testament scriptures that say those verses were about Mary? The fact that Jesus instructed to do something different than bless His mother for the sake of being His mother He said Rather bless those who hear the word of God. This obviously includes Mary but He took all praise away from her in the catagory of being His mother alone. Harsh but Jesus said it not me. We should honor her for her faith as all are blessed who hear and observe. I don't know why Catholics need Mary to have stayed a virgin when apparently the Bible didn't need us to believe this. Even if it is true the Bible didn't want us to even know it let alone believe it. It's an argument from silence at best and just ignoring and downplaying what the Bible says at worse. I still like listening to Mr. Joe though.

[@lbee8247]

@weaponofchoice-tc7qs well one of us obviously is

[@lbee8247]

@weaponofchoice-tc7qs if I write a letter and it includes instructions and how I feel about things and my love ones say but that isn't Mom that's just her letter that would be disrespectful and dishonoring.

[@lbee8247]

@weaponofchoice-tc7qs if you don't believe in the Bible why are you addressing me at all? This is a conversation for people who believe the Bible. You are your own holy word apparently.

[@lbee8247]

@weaponofchoice-tc7qs yeah The Romans have been doing that spoken of in 2 Peter 3:16. I don't twist the scriptures. The Bible is the revelation of God and His plan of salvation for us. I believe in and worship the Father , Son and Holy Spirit. God saved and justified me and started a good work in me that He is sure to finish. May God continue to use me to spread the gospel of Jesus Christ until Christ return. Repent and believe that Jesus is Lord. For all things were made by Him and for Him and through Him. And nothing was made that was not made by Him. This means me, you, Mary, everything and everyone. For He formed us in the womb. He formed Mary in her mother's womb. The womb He picked to be in. Mary is a decent of the 1st Adam. And her and I have the same savior. My God and my Savior Jesus the Christ. Hallelujah!

[@carolynmcgrory1729]

​​​​​​​​​@@lbee8247couldn't really deduce what you were trying to say here, but it seems like you're implying Jesus sinned or even fell short by dishonoring His Mother? Which of course is untrue. And about your next comment. Truly, with humility, the person you were engaging with is not their own authority. They've humbly submitted to a higher, Divine authority Christ in/and His Church, with an authoritative teaching office. And is simply espousing the Church's teachings. It is in reality Protestants who, when they don't like or agree with or comprehend something, have felt and feel they have the authority to start their own church. How is Jesus building His Church, then? How can He? Where's the Rock He founded it on in Matthew 16 : 18-19? Protestants are often their own Bible authority. Think their or their pastor's interpretation is better than anyone else's, when it's a novel invention of man and may fly in the face of over a milennia of Christian teaching, understanding, practice, or thought. It's wild to me, not when a Christian just hasn't thought about or heard about or looked into Church history. But when they hear about it? How does it not humble them and make them sincerely question things? But yeah, I know a few Christians who I love and who love the Lord who do almost or no public worship. It literally is just them and their Bible and the fellowship they have whenever they have it. They believe that is all they need to do, that public worship isn't required of them (Hebrews disagrees, "not forsaking the assembling of ourselves together, as some would"). Where did they get those ideas? Themselves. It isn't supposed to be like that for us, thankfully. The Church is the bomb diggity. I recommend joining to any and all people. There is not one doctrine, not a single one, of the Catholic faith that, if one is confused about or in objection to, cannot be overcome and held to confidently. P.S. - of course God still loves and works in and through Protestants. They're just not fully part of the one Church Christ founded, where He works most efficaciously. As shown for one by the holiness of Catholic saints and their miracles while living on earth and from Heaven too.

[@ColleenB10]

Interesting thing about “brothers”, when I have watched videos and heard Jewish men speak to each other, they refer to each other as “you’re my brother, we are blenders, we are Jewish brothers”. Is that significant still today when using that same language of “brother”?

[@rosemarybaxter9120]

No, it’s not the same thing at all. In the Bible someone says words to the effect, ‘Who does he think he is? Aren’t Mary and Joseph his parents, and aren’t these his brothers and sisters?’

[@rosemarybaxter9120]

Didn’t Jesus ever say, ‘Mum, I wish I had siblings!’

[@rosemarybaxter9120]

I think Catholics tie themselves in knots trying to prove Mary and Joseph never slept together and had other children.

[@rosemarybaxter9120]

Where does it say Mary was immaculately conceived?

[@rosemarybaxter9120]

You seem obsessed with Mary. She was a wonderful and obedient young lady, but surely not divine? I’m sure she has a special place in her Son’s heart, but she cannot hear the prayers of millions of Catholics. Only God can do that.

[@BobMarch]

Thanks for the enlightenment. Very useful information.

[@richardjackson7887]

WOW, how long did it take you to be so good at eisegesis

[@Madman-2023]

Sheesh! That connection between the ark and mary (new ark) was the nail in the coffin for me to put to rest all of my doubts on this topic

[@ruthmaryrose]

Thank you so much for this. More Catholics need to know the truth so they can refute the story about Mary being an unwed mother. I met some people from Nepal once and found out that they still to this day call their relatives brother or sister regardless of relationship.

[@annablazejowski3862]

TRUTH is in THE BIBLE! Are you sure that he is talking according to THE SCRIPTURE? Do you read GOD’s WORD? I was Catholic for 57 years of my life and blindly believed all the teachings of The church until I started to read THE BIBLE and realized how antibiblical Roman Catholicism is. Do you know that they even removed The Second Commandment- that forbids Idolatry from The 10 Commandments of GOD?- check! - you will Not find IT in “their Catchetism “- which is “their” bible! Listen to:( get knowledge!) Stephen Bohr “Roman Catholic view of tradition “-p.5-6 Walter Veith “Twisting The 10 Commandments “ “The Total Onslaught “ Mark Finley”Revelation Bible study “ Derek Prince-(true Bible preacher

[@alhilford2345]

​: Right. The truth is in the Bible. And that is what the Catholic Church teaches, because the Holy Bible is a Catholic book! The New Testament was written by Catholic Saints, and Catholics pray the Bible every day! It's unfortunate that you didn't learn any Catholic doctrine during those 57 years, and have fallen for Protestant lies.

[@annablazejowski3862]

@@alhilford2345 THE TRUTH is in THE BIBLE- true! but; THE BIBLE is Not Catholic Book!- all NEW TESTAMENT was written and completed before the end of first century ( with the Book of Revelation written by John around 95AD). Roman Catholicism came into existence as institutionalised religion in 538AD when bishop of Rome received the state seat from the Roman Emperor! I was Catholic for 57 years of my life but I never really read The BIBLE. I do blindly believed the church teachings - to the point - that it would be the last thing I would expect that what they preach and teach more than billion people worldwide may be antibiblical! - it is the fact! unfortunately! Thanks GOD - HE directed me to HIS WORD and led me out of this deceptive religion! I consider it NOT loss at all that I did NOT study or memorize the Catholic doctrines as they all turned out antibiblical- “in vain” they worship ME !-as JESUS warned / Mat15:9,13 Listen to: Walter Veith “Twisting The 10 Commandments “ “The Total Onslaught “!!!!!! Stephen Bohr “Roman Catholic view of tradition “-p.5-6 Mike Gendron “What Catholics do Not know “ Mark Finley”Revelation Bible study “ 3ABN- 3 Angels Messages “It is written “

[@kateguilfoyle5155]

Also monks and priests call each other ‘brother’.

[@ThatGuy-nr5sp]

@@alhilford2345 The apostles weren’t catholic and the church they created was turned into a Catholic Church until 10 years after the last apostle John died. I’m curious though what Protestant lies are you talking about?

[@donaldbandy7051]

Fantastic exegesis of the Word my brother in Christ! The way you laid it out in its entirety, these aren’t arguments anymore, they’re facts. Top notch explanations on the parallels to Ezekiel and 2 Samuel 6 with John and Luke. The East Gate parallel is now my favorite. Thank you so much for your service, dedication and defense of our Lord and Saviour and His Holy Mother, Saints and His Church… May God bless and keep you and your loved ones all the days of your lives… Glory be to The Father! Glory be to the Son, The Lord Jesus Christ! Glory be to The Holy Spirit!!! Praise be to God! Hallelulah !!!

[@Hokum48]

Mary had other children... All eyes on Jesus! Much love!

[@barbdenise9908]

It is not an exegesis but an eisegesis. The examination starts with the desired premise that Mary is a perpetual virgin and then he seeks proof of that premise, that is eisegesis. An exegesis does not start with a premise at all but uncovers truth from the reading. Eisegesis study is faulty at best. I am not claiming either way about Mary and virginity. But the method of study is prejudiced by feelings of what he wants Mary to be, that is my claim.

[@gainsofglory6414]

The single handed best explanation of this topic that I have come across. Makes it pure common sense.

[@poorbanishedchildrenofEve]

Jesus came to fulfill the law of Moses. I'm looking for more evidence of confirmation for what I'm about to present. This is a product of my own study and meditation. There are family purity laws that Jesus cannot fulfill on his own. We see how he is baptized by John (mikveh per the scapegoat, Jesus takes on the sins washed away in the water and then goes out into the wilderness..) and John objects--then Jesus says it must be done to fulfill righteousness. The family purity laws were fulfilled by Mary and Joseph. 1. The presentation of Jesus in the temple we see Mary and Joseph have Jesus circumcised on day 8, and then we see that when the days of purification had been completed for her, they bring him to the temple. 40 days after birth. For those who believe Jesus is God the son, how would it be possible for Mary to 1. Have God inside of her if she were impure 2. Be able to hold and feed Jesus per the aftermath of birth--she is ritually impure by Jewish law and 3. Be able to take care of Jesus for the 33 days after his circumcision as she is ritually impure per mosaic law? This establishes her Immaculate state allowing for God the son to dwell within her and for her to care for her divine child while she is deemed ritually impure due to childbirth--and for the sake of argument, let's say she had a normal childbirth and there is blood involved. How did her blood not defile Jesus and everything she touched in her home? --look to the care the priests went to be ritually pure before they went about their duties in the Temple. As for perpetual virginity for her and for Joseph....again, family purity laws per the mosaic law--that must be fulfilled to bring about righteousness. Sexual intercourse rendered both man and woman ritually impure until they entered the mikveh--and even then, they were impure until evening. Any ejaculation renders the man impure. In this, whatever they touch, sit on, etc was made impure. Jesus is not just another child. He is God the son. Where he is, they are on holy ground. Their home was holier than the Temple--especially at this time because the ark of the covenant was not in the holy of holies. So, let's say Mary and Joseph had sexual intercourse.....neither could touch their divine child until they were ritually pure lest they defile him....and everything in their home. It is safe to say, that Jesus enabled them to remain ritually pure...thus the immaculate conception and perpetual virginity of Mary are examples of the good things the Lord had done for her as she sings in her Magnificat. There is much more to this, but for a comment section on YT, this is a good start. Jesus fulfilled every mitzvot. Mary and Joseph (and John the baptist) were invited by God to assist in this holy work for the salvation of humanity.

[@miracles_metanoia]

super interesting. thanks!

[@jonatasmachado7217]

Ezequiel 44:2-3 are important typological verses on this subject, as was pointed out

[@andrewscotteames4718]

You say that thinking of holiness as being morally upright or pious is a very incomplete view of holiness…I agree. And I have been coming to the conclusion that one of the reasons Protestantism is persistent with me or perhaps others is that it’s not that the view is totally wrong, it is simply incomplete. It has pared down the catholic faith to something easier for modern man, with his assumptions about rationalism and the supernatural, to swallow. I do enjoy listening to you, Joe. You’re very convincing. I am sold on the perpetual virginity.

[@MariaDoll]

Thsnk you for this excellent teaching. Is it correct to say that Mary made this vow as a young girl in the Temple? And in light of the excellence of virginity, how do we make sense of Christ calling Himself the Bridegroom?

[@ninjason57]

I'm left questioning not IF Mary was a perpetual virgin but WHY she needs to be a perpetual virgin?

[@shamelesspopery]

Great question! Her virginity was a sign that she was set aside for God. In the biblical sense, that's what "holiness" is: someone or something that is dedicated to God. And so the Gospel writers tells us that the tomb in which Jesus was laid was "a new tomb in which no one had yet been laid" (John 19:41; see Matt. 27:60). That's a weird detail, unless you get that they're saying the tomb is set aside for God alone. Likewise with Mary's womb, she's the fulfillment of Ezekiel 44:2's prophecy of the Temple Gate: “This gate shall remain shut; it shall not be opened, and no one shall enter by it, for the LORD, the God of Israel, has entered by it. Therefore it shall remain shut.”

[@ruleofthespirit]

I’m always perplexed when people keep referring to Mary as a virgin. My understanding is that Mary was a virgin only for the conception by the Holy Spirit to bring Jesus into the world. Afterwards, having always being betrothed to Joseph during her pregnancy with Jesus she went on and had a number of children, did she not? In Mark 6:3 we see Jesus visiting Nazareth where he grew up and worked until he was 30. The people who lived there turned on Him when he was preaching in their synagogue saying “Is not this the carpenter, the son of Mary and brother of James and Joses and Judas and Simon? And are not his sisters here with us?”

[@iggyantioch]

She is full of grace, proclaimed to be entirely without sin- something exceedingly great. For God's grace fills her with everything good and makes her devoid of all evil. (Personal {"Little"} Prayer Book, 1522) Martin Luther on Mary's Perpetual Virginity Christ, our Savior, was the real and natural fruit of Mary's virginal womb . . . This was without the cooperation of a man, and she remained a virgin after that. {Luther's Works, eds. Jaroslav Pelikan (vols. 1-30) & Helmut T. Lehmann (vols. 31-55), St. Louis: Concordia Pub. House (vols. 1-30); Philadelphia: Fortress Press (vols. 31-55), 1955, v.22:23 / Sermons on John, chaps. 1-4 (1539)} Christ . . . was the only Son of Mary, and the Virgin Mary bore no children besides Him . . . I am inclined to agree with those who declare that 'brothers' really mean 'cousins' here, for Holy Writ and the Jews always call cousins brothers. Another perspective from Luther.

[@iggyantioch]

Gotcha

[@mcChurch7]

​@@iggyantiochIggy, you see and hear what you want to see and hear. It says what it says. IDOLATRY is a serious Sin. Be careful with men in church wearing hats and ties.

[@iggyantioch]

Thanks. Hats and ties? Too early. Maybe I need some coffee. Explain hats ties. Peace

[@mcChurch7]

When Jesus was left behind accidentally and found in the temple later, would this have been possible if he was the only child? Common sense says no. If Mary was who Catholics say she is, why didn't Peter,Paul,or John confirm it? The man who made this video probably stretches for hours before he picks up a weight. Mary wasn't a God, she was mortal, and there is only one mediator Worthy of the Father - Jesus Christ our Lord.

[@michaeljefferies2444]

Joe, can you provide a source for the perpetual virginity vow in the Dead Sea scrolls? I was under the impression from a book by Dr. Bergsma that there is no explicit reference to women making a vow of virginity in the scrolls

[@rishanborrymbai1104]

There is no source. But the source you can find them in Romans traditions. They are called Vestal Virgin

[@Deep34536]

🤌💥👏✝️👑 very well explained. Thank my brother. God Bless you.

[@rosemarybaxter9120]

I can’t believe Mary was born sinless. Where in the Bible does it say so? Also, it says she gave birth to her firstborn, implying there would be more children to come.

[@ianmiller07]

Okay, I can't believe you watched the video if you are using that objection to her perpetual virginity. Mary was sinless. The Bible proves this, here's how: In Luke 1:28-30 it says, "And [the angel Gabriel] came to [Mary] and said, “Hail, full of grace, the Lord is with you!” But she was greatly troubled at the saying, and considered in her mind what sort of greeting this might be. And the angel said to her, “Do not be afraid, Mary, for you have found favor with God." Mary was "greatly troubled" at this greeting. Certainly part of this is simple because an angel appeared to her. But why was she so troubled? The Greek phrase used to greet Mary is "kaire, kekaritomene." In Greek, the word "kaire" is almost always followed by a name (ex: John 19:23, Acts 23:6). You see, Mary is being given a new title ("kekaritomene"). Kekaritomene literally translates to "She who has been graced" and is a passive participle. This verbiage is not simply describing a past action, there is another tense for that. It's the perfect tense, meaning an action being fully completed. Mary was perfectly completed in grace and this is a permanent state. The average Christian is not fully completed in grace but Mary was. We sin because of a lack of grace, but Mary was completed with grace therefore she never sinned, not once.

[@iggyantioch]

John Calvin (1509-1564), the second most important Protestant “Reformer” after Martin Luther, and probably more historically influential than even Luther himself, believed in the perpetual virginity of Mary. Here are the usual proofs offered in favor of his beliefs: “Helvidius displayed excessive ignorance in concluding that Mary must have had many sons, because Christ’s ‘brothers’ are sometimes mentioned.” (Harmony of Matthew, Mark and Luke, on Matthew 13:55) “Under the word ‘brethren’ the Hebrews include all cousins and other relations, whatever may be the degree of affinity.” (Commentary on John 7:3) “The inference he [Helvidius] drew from it was, that Mary remained a virgin no longer than till her first birth, and that afterwards she had other children by her husband. ... No just and well-grounded inference can be drawn from these words … as to what took place after the birth of Christ. He is called ‘first-born’; but it is for the sole purpose of informing us that he was born of a virgin. ... What took place afterwards the historian does not inform us. ... No man will obstinately keep up the argument, except from an extreme fondness for disputation.” (Harmony on Matthew 1:25)

[@GMAAndy333]

Nowhere in the Bible does it say that everything has to be in the Bible or else it’s not True. For the first few hundred years of Christianity there wasn’t even a Bible. There were writings but most did not have access to these writings on their own. Tradition and through the disciples of Jesus was how people learned about Jesus. Look up popes on Wikipedia and it will list all the popes starting with St Peter. There is a church established. The gates of hell will not prevail against the church. There is no way that a church filled with sinful and sometimes evil men could survive for 2000 years without divine intervention and protection. Ponder the fact that many will believe what their pastor tells them in a church established say 10 years ago. The beliefs present during the reformers have changed greatly in the last 500 years. The beliefs are getting further and further away from the early church.

[@rosemarybaxter9120]

@@ianmiller07But Mary referred to Jesus as her Saviour. If she was sinless she would not have needed a saviour.

[@jawojnicki]

​@@rosemarybaxter9120Jesus is ABSOLUTELY the savior of Mary. He saved her in a very special way that's different from how ALL other humans are saved. He applied the grace He won through His death and resurrection to Mary by creating her soul WITHOUT original sin! For the rest of us, original sin is removed through the sacrament of Baptism. It's the same grace for us and Mary that saves us! God just applied that grace in a unique, special way to Mary. He REMOVES original sin from our souls after birth. For Mary, He CREATED her soul without it! God is OUTSIDE of time! Thus, Mary being born before Jesus death and resurrection is not problematic for this explanation.

[@tylerrossjcl]

I always struggled with understanding the connection between the holiness of Mary and her perpetual virginity. Like when the Fathers and saints talk about how unthinkable it would be for her to have had sex. Phrasing it this way makes it seem like sex is beneath her, which I know is not a Catholic approach to sex. But then it clicked for me. The necessity of her perpetual virginity arises from her Immaculate Conception...but why? The answer lies in the doctrine of original sin. OS is passed down through biological generation, so the condition of the child is the condition received from the parents. Conveniently, every one of us is born in sin and so we all inherit and pass on the same condition. But what if - hypothetically - there were a married couple where one person didn't have original sin and one did? What about that child(ren)? I contend that such a child would be metaphysically/theologically impossible because a child cannot inherit both a fallen nature from one parent and an unfallen nature from the other. So it's not that sex is somehow beneath Mary, it's precisely that no one else on earth could satisfy the conditions for her being able to actually produce offspring on a metaphysical level - biologically speaking it seems possible, but it would still be a metaphysical impossibility. This is why the doctrine is so vigorously held by the Church. To deny Mary's perpetual virginity would result in a warped view of original sin, and that's a very slippery slope to a host of other heresies that are beyond the scope of this KZbin comment!

[@drjaybirdc]

Very cool point. Thank you.

[@littledrummergirl_19]

This is really interesting!

[@tammymullins1151]

We inherit sin from Adam. Everyone had/has an earthly father except Jesus Christ. That’s why he could be born of Mary yet without sin. Yes both Adam and Eve sinned but Romans attributes sin entering the world through Adam (5:12. ) Even though technically Eve sinned first it is Adam to whom the blame is given. The promise in the Garden to Eve that her seed would crush the Serpents head was manifested in Mary. Eve’s seed doesn’t carry the sin curse. Adam’s does. That’s how Mary even though she herself was sinful like every human being could bear the sinless Christ. Her seed was United with the Holy Spirit’s seed. We don’t need immaculate conception nor perpetual virginity. Neither are in Scripture. Read Romans 5. Sin comes through Adam. Forgiveness through Jesus Christ.

[@anthonymarimpietri8409]

@@tammymullins1151You admit that we inherit sin from Adam so you admit that we all inherit sin. If sin is in man and woman then sin is in our entire self. So if sin is in our entire self then sin is in “the seed” of every woman as well. Every woman except the one that Gabriel called, “FULL OF GRACE.” Which is actually a title, an identity (FULL OF GRACE). Hail (ave in Latin) is his greeting to Mary. The Greek word used by Gabriel (Kecharitomene) appears for the first time in Luke’s Gospel. The root of the word is charitoo (which means to give grace). The word is in the past perfect tense meaning that the action has already occurred, it is something that has already been accomplished. And Mary is completely full of grace, there isn’t any room for sin. Mary is married to Joseph from the beginning of the Gospels. Betrothed is the English word used for the part of the marriage that existed before Mary and Joseph lived under the same roof. So Mary is married when Gabriel tells her that she will conceive and bear a son. The natural reaction would be of joy, happiness, or at least that Gabriel is being captain obvious here. “But Mary said to the angel,’How can this be, since I do not know man?’” Do you think that Mary didn’t know how children were conceived? Why would she ask Gabriel such a question if she were planning on having normal marital relations with Joseph?

[@bernardauberson7218]

Tout ce blabla pour dire quoi, au juste ! De l’enfumage pour cacher votre problème de comportement sexuel? Vous ignorez donc que la Vierge est entrée au Temple à 3ans et elle y est restée 12 ans et ce n’était pas une vierge sacrée ! C’est tout une formation que vous ignorez ! Vous avez sûrement des nonnes ou des moniales, autour de chez vous et, voire même , des moines qui resteront vierges leur vie durant ! C’est donc possible, et plus sûrement pour la Vierge ! On dirait un discours d’obsédé sexuel , non ?

[@johnblack5197]

Thank you for a fantastic video. Its the best argument for the Perpetual Virginity that I've found to date. God bless you.

[@Robert-bm2jr]

This is the best description of the perpetual virginity of Mary. The prophecy by Jeremiah (I think) is the piece that I have been missing in my understanding of Marianne Doctrine.

[@carolinajackson7621]

Isaiah says the virgin shall conceive. He does NOT SAY PERPETUAL VIRGIN

[@rosemarybaxter9120]

Why does it matter so much to the Catholic mind that Mary should be a virgin? There is nothing sinful about sex within marriage. In fact, you are not officially married if it’s not consummated.

[@srich7503]

It doesnt. It matters to the non-Catholic so that if this, or any Catholic doctrine, can be picked apart the house of Catholic cards begin to fall, so to speak.

[@rosemarybaxter9120]

@po18guyI believe only Jesus was without sin. Even if He had been born of a prostitute, He would still be sinless.

[@bdwoody]

Seems like you didn't watch the video...

[@j8000]

​@@srich7503that doesn't make sense. If it wasn't important for Catholics that Josef and Mary didn't consummate their wedding, there wouldn't be a doctrine to attack.

[@srich7503]

@@j8000 It seems like what you are saying is - If it’s not important then disregard “a small truth” so that we dont need to have a doctrine to attack. Is that another way of saying what you mean? Because that sure seems so.

[@lbee8247]

Good job on showing weaknesses in the verses that protestants use to say Mary and Joyhad sex. However there is no mention of perpetual virginity in marriage anywhere in the Bible. Not one verse. No where does it say they never had sex. At the most the argument is made from silence. It's something that there is no biblical reason, verse, quote or example to assume Mary and Joseph were virgins all their lives.

[@jayschwartz6131]

Read Numbers Chapter 30. It says virginity vows are to be respected by husbands if their wives took them before their marriage and they were not contested at the time ofntheir marriage.

[@lbee8247]

@@jayschwartz6131 I think you are twisting this scripture. It says nothing about a vow of abstaining from your husband. To have an intact man share a bed with a beautiful maiden in matrimony and tell him not to touch her. It does not say anything like that in that chapter. Joseph was not said to be a eunuch. God does not tempt man. He isn't cruel. And it would be physically unhealthy for an intact man to share a bed with his beautiful bride and have no enjoyment of her as the Bible tells him to in Proverbs 5. You Catholics do more than honor Mary. You elevate her and Joseph to beings that the Bible NEVER not 1 TIME mention. It's just your desire and tradition to want to make them holier. Mary carried her Savior. That is honorable. But it doesn't change she needed a Savior. Our same Savior. Joseph was a man. A real, normal man. The Bible doesn't say he was anything different.

[@jayschwartz6131]

@@lbee8247 Samuel, Elijah, John the Baptist, John the Apostle, Paul and Jesus Himself were no Eunuchs either but had healthy normal human bodies. They all disregarded the be fruitful and multiply mandate, at least in the flesh. Their God must be cruel not letting them marry and have a wife and children of their own. It must be the same cruel God who stroke a man dead because of touching a gold lined wooden box and whom asked Moses to step shoeless in the wilderness soil around certain bush. Come on, why did God make them with sexual organs in the first place if they were not intended to use them to multiply themselves.

[@jayschwartz6131]

The Ark of the Covenant, the Burning Bush and the soil around it, the Temple, the priestly vestments and the Temple vessels, they were all Holly but Jesus' mother was not? Is Jesus less worthy than what made that those objects Holy?

[@jayschwartz6131]

@@lbee8247 Numbers 30: 7 "And her husband heard it, and held his peace at her in the day that he heard it: then her vows shall stand, and her bonds wherewith she bound her soul shall stand." What vows do you think this chapter refers to? Waking up early every morning? Eating no fish every Thursday? Not braiding her hair? Wearing a nose ring? Are you that naive?

[@kurzantema]

Marvelous explanation

[@nancymarv4434]

Amazing explanation!

[@dave_ecclectic]

For those who always ask "But where is it in the Bible"? I ask "where are the children of *Mary* listed? There is no mention of any other children when: The Holy family flees to Egypt. The parents turn back to find Jesus at the Temple. (IE. Mary asked James and Joses if they had seen their brother. Mary told James to watch over his sisters for they were returning to Jerusalem) No other family members mentioned at the wedding at Cana. Even though Jesus managed to show up with some bro's from the beach. Mary's sister has her children listed, but Mary does not. Matthew 27:56 & John 19:25 . Thats twice that Jesus has his cousins listed. Matthew 13:55-58 Here these witnesses claim he is the _carpenters _*_son_* In Mark 6:3 He is the *carpenter* SO these people who claim to know this family don't even know who the Carpenter in their town is! Now with Matthew 1:25 _And knew her not till she had brought forth her firstborn son: and he called his name JESUS._ This isn't saying Mary and Joeseph were blessed with another child. Just because they may have had relations does not mean they had children. It is *not* in the Bible that this shows they had more children. It also _does not list anymore children._ Then there are the people who lived at the time and told others who eventually wrote about it. When Lincoln wrote his short speech, we not only have the original paper he read from, but we also have the reactions of the people who heard it. Do we discount this last since it wasn't present in the original speech?

[@GumbyJumpOff]

Yep. The "show me that in the Bible" talking point is a one-way street sometimes.

[@ColleenB10]

Boost the views! 🎉

[@Vidmr2407]

But I thought Jesus was giving his mother to the world at the cross and not just having John take her in to care for her…

[@alhilford2345]

He was giving her to St. John and to the whole Church. He is the Son of God, and God is our Father! He is the Son of Mary, and Mary is our Mother!

[@melissat9120]

Wow, this was amazing, thank you!! Would you be willing to talk about the sinlessness of Mary, too? It fits with many of the parallels of holiness here, but I sometimes wonder if God can just make Mary a sinless human, why did Jesus come and suffer?

[@scottie8365]

For me Mary wasn’t a perpetual virgin. The word for sister (adelphe) in the NT always refers to either sister by flesh,whether by the same mother,father or both or sister in faith. It never refers to a relative as brother can do and does. As we see from Mark 6:3-6 and Matthew 13:56-58 Jesus isn’t talking about sisters in faith. There are many other Bible Verses that state Mary had other children too. You have to have the preconceived idea that Mary was a perpetual virgin first before reading this out of Scripture,you would never read Scripture,or any text for that matter,this way otherwise.

[@jayschwartz6131]

List the verses you refer to that explicitly say that she had other children after Jesus.

[@scottie8365]

@@jayschwartz6131 why? So you can use iesegesis and hermeneutical gymnastics on them?

[@ianmiller07]

Did you watch the video?

[@alisatourek9176]

Wow, good job explaining & with the parallels in the Bible!! Awesome, we can learn so much from the protestANTS! Thanks & pray they will see the truth! I'm an only catholic convert from 1990 in a whole family of protestors!!

[@user-su4lb9gv8m]

Is there a book on this for further and deeper study? I love this.

[@Hokum48]

I have a great book recommendation; The best selling book of all time... THE BIBLE

[@user-su4lb9gv8m]

@@Hokum48 aren't you cute?

[@charlesiragui2473]

Great video! One point that I'd like you to address regarding "this is your mother": the person Jesus is talking to is simply called "the Beloved Disciple". The Church has taught that this is John. In this context, this tradition is doing a lot of work, as James Tabor has suggested that this Beloved Disciple could be James the Brother of the Lord. This alternative reading would indeed change the sense of the transmission of Mary, to another son. Could you explain why we should believe that the Beloved Disciple is John?

[@ingoditrust7784]

Why is it so difficult for our times to understand the Immaculate Conception (and therefore the perpetual virginity) of the Queen of Heaven? The Church has always understood this, so that in 1854 the Pope was determined to proclaim the Dogma of the Immaculate Conception. The Marian apparitions in Lourdes, as well as an incredible sequence of miraculous healings were meant to confirm this. Whoever wants to shut heart and understanding to this eternal purity manifested in Mary is but a wicked, filthy pervert. I don't see the point in trying to convince perverts, as they must first undergo sincere conversion to the Faith and stop postulating their own wickedness as the norm of human behavior.

[@tonyl3762]

"You don't have sex with the Mother of God" yep, case closed

[@duffripley2440]

Thanks I just sent this to a Protestant friend

[@builditwithbill]

Very well done!!!

[@joelpierce1453]

All of the biblical arguments you make do not give clarity, they obfuscate. The word "until" can have slightly different meaning based on context, but the phrasing in Matthew 1 clearly indicates the normal reading is correct. If I said "I didn't eat lunch until 1:00pm today," you would never interpret that to mean I didn't eat lunch. In the same way, "Joseph knew her not until after Jesus was born" very clearly reads (both in Greek and English) that Joseph DID know her, but not until after. Your argument about Jesus' mother and brothers is very dishonest. You say "Brother doesn't always mean brother, just look at this Old Testament passage!" But the New Testament was written in Greek, not Hebrew. You know that. And Koine Greek is much more specific than Hebrew is. The word used for Jesus' brothers is "Adelphos," not any other kinship term. These were his brothers (half-brothers) pure and simple. Your arguments do not even grapple properly with the biblical text. Abandon this false doctrine and submit to the scriptures, to God's authority.

[@yudan4302]

Exactly what I was thinking. He doesn't even refute or give a definite answer even though the context is very clear. He is being dishonest and doesn't even give an answer to his argument. Not even the first 10 minutes in he says his points don't disprove the protestants standpoint. He admitted he can't disaprove them which would mean that the bible is subjective because you can take away multiple meanings which is false as we know. His stance is grabbing at straws and saying i don't know for sure but you're wrong also. Scripture is pretty clear if you know how to read and have faith in Jesus Christ.

[@joelpierce1453]

@@yudan4302 Yup. Like all Catholics, like the Pharisees, he just values tradition over scripture.

[@anglicanway]

A couple of questions/thoughts. (1) Since sexual relations were ostensibly common during the kiddushin stage, by divorcing Mary quietly, was St. Joseph taking the blame for Mary? Her pregnancy would have been obvious to everyone. Was Joseph shielding Mary? That is, could Joseph be saying in effect, "We had sex in our marriage (kiddushin stage) and I got Mary pregnant, but I have changed my mind about the second part (nissuin) of the marriage. I don't want her to be my wife anymore." That would explain Mary's pregnancy to the the people without bringing shame or the charge of adultery to her. Yet, St. Joseph would voluntarily allow himself to be seen as a jerk in the eyes of the people. He would have taken on her shame to protect her. Thankfully, he did not have too because of the angelic dream which affirmed Mary's purity and God's redemptive purposes through Mary. (2) In the Gospel John, Jesus refers to His Father's house that has many rooms, yet Jesus as the Bridegroom is preparing a place for His bride, the Church. Yet, in Jewish culture, as you point out, the husband would leave his father's house and prepare a separate house for himself and his wife. Could this yet be another of John's statements about the deity of our Lord? Normally, a son would leave his father's house to prepare a new place for himself and his bride, but, in this case, the Son and the Father are one. The Father's house is also the Son's house so there is no separation of distinction between the two. Just an (undeveloped) thought. At any rate, I enjoyed the video. I already affirm the perpetual virginity of the Theotokos, but your discussion, especially the kiddushin and nissuin discussion, was quite clarifying and made sense of the otherwise incomprehensible biblical data. Thank you.

[@anglicanway]

@@po18guyWas an impious comment made?

[@c.theresameltzer5820]

I had never thought of these things. Thank you so much for this explanation. I am a cradle Catholic and always believed in Mary's perpetual virginity but I love your reasoning!!!

[@PuzzlesC4M]

Translations 100 years from now will say “bruh.” 😂

[@tonyl3762]

Accept Jerome's erroneous initial canon but not his interpretations of Scripture? On what basis?

[@EmilioThumbgusset]

You have a very odd pronunciation of 'until'. It sounds like you are saying 'intel', and that is what the closed captioning is presenting.

[@lilnallie05]

I come from zambia I call my cousins sister and brother i have a friend from Zimbabwe I call her sister but we are not related. I feel like it’s a western thing to say cousin etc

[@mikeyangel1067]

Kegget: I would recommend backing most or all of your ideas with early Christian writings and 1st century Jewish thought and practice; there are tons of resources availble; without any of these, it seems your are raising questions from the present understanding of marriage as contract or covenant, engagement, purpose of sex, and social welfare in biblical times. Tnx

[@clarkkent5442]

why is it everytime I hear until, it sounds like in-tell instead of un-till