Semper Virgo? A Biblical Review of a Debated Dogma
The traditional and still widespread dogma that Mary remained a virgin both before and after Jesus's birth is today widely believed explicitly to contradict the New Testament, which appears to speak unambiguously of Jesus having "brothers and sisters." If held strongly, this view can...
| 發表在: | Pro ecclesia |
|---|---|
| 主要作者: | |
| 格式: | 電子 Article |
| 語言: | English |
| Check availability: | HBZ Gateway |
| Journals Online & Print: | 載入...
|
| Fernleihe: | Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste |
| 出版: |
Sage Publishing
[2019]
|
| In: |
Pro ecclesia
Year: 2019, 卷: 28, 發布: 1, Pages: 78-97 |
| Standardized Subjects / Keyword chains: | B
Maria, von Nazaret, Biblische Person
/ 童貞
/ 婚姻
/ Bibel. Evangelien
/ 教會
|
| IxTheo Classification: | HC New Testament KAB Church history 30-500; early Christianity NBJ Mariology NCF Sexual ethics |
| Further subjects: | B
Mariology
B Virginity (Mary) B Brothers of Jesus B Historical Jesus B Holy Family |
| 在線閱讀: |
Presumably Free Access Volltext (Resolving-System) |
| 總結: | The traditional and still widespread dogma that Mary remained a virgin both before and after Jesus's birth is today widely believed explicitly to contradict the New Testament, which appears to speak unambiguously of Jesus having "brothers and sisters." If held strongly, this view can incline some who hold the dogma to doubt Scripture, and can incline others who reject the dogma to think the Church Fathers willfully ignored Scripture. However, the view that Jesus' siblings are Mary's children is a face-value reading that rests on several assumptions that should be checked, and traditional positions are not without basis. This article reviews the question of Jesus' "brothers and sisters" from an exegetical and historical perspective, demonstrating the warrant of the traditional claim, and concludes with reflections from patristic testimony to address theological objections often lodged against the dogma |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 2631-8334 |
| Contains: | Enthalten in: Pro ecclesia
|
| Persistent identifiers: | DOI: 10.1177/1063851219829935 |