Is the perpetual virginity of Mary biblical?

Joseph, obedient to the heavenly vision, took Mary as his wife, yet they refrained from all sexual intercourse until after the birth of her divine child, her firstborn, for she later had at least seven others (Ps.69:8; Mt.13:55,56).

The Lord speaks from the cross in tender consideration for His mother, indicating to her that now John was to be her son; and to John, telling him, “Behold your mother!” (vv. 26-27). We know that she did have other sons by natural birth (Mark 6:3; Ps. 69:8), but John 7:5 tells us, “Neither did His brethren believe on Him.” How much more strong is the spiritual relationship than the natural! John took her after this to his own home. Her other sons had deprived themselves of such a privilege through unbelief. Yet after His resurrection His brothers were found in the upper room with the disciples. Apparently through His death and resurrection they were converted to God. Yet they had lost the dignity of caring for their mother.

Mark 15:40. “There were also women looking on afar off; among whom was Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James the less and of Joses, and Salome.” Here we find the Virgin Mary’s name is second to Mary Magdalene’s first. Further she is not described as the mother of our Lord, but of James and Joses. and Salome (see Mark 6:3). The Romish Church denies that the Virgin Mary had other children than our Lord, but Scripture states it plainly. The supernatural did not set aside the natural.

Some have seen a difficulty that the child was to be named Emmanuel, and instead of this name, He is named Jesus. The Jew often comes with this question. We point out to him that this apparent contradiction is really a proof of the inspiration. How easy it would have been for Matthew to have all fit in so that every word would be in harmony with the Old Testament. The Holy Spirit guided his hand in writing. The prophecy in the Old Testament says, "And call His name Immanuel." Here it says, "They shall call his name." In the first chapter of Matthew we read that Joseph called the child's name Jesus, but in Luke we read that Mary calls His name Jesus. The name Emmanuel, God with us, is only given in Matthew. He is Emmanuel, and as such Jehovah the Saviour, so that in reality both names have the same meaning. "And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us (and we have contemplated His glory, a glory as of an only begotten with his Father) full of grace and truth" (John 1:14). He is the exalted One over all.

Joseph was obedient to the word of the Lord as it had come to him through the angel. That Mary had other children is clearly seen from the sixty-ninth Psalm, verses 7 and 8, where it speaks of His suffering: "Because for thy sake I have borne reproach; shame has covered my face. I am become a stranger to my brethren, even an alien to the children of my mother."

Verse 25 Her firstborn son. There are evidences in the New Testament that Mary had other children. These were the Lord's brethren according to the flesh. Terribly unbelieving during His life, the cross brought them out. James the Lord's brother had a distinguished place, but was content to speak of himself as a "servant."

"First born son" of Luke 2:7, proves the perpetual virginity and the mariolatry of arch ritualism to be fictions. To simple shepherds was given the angelic announcement of good news for all. (That they watched their flocks by night disposes of the current idea that the transcendent incident happened in mid-winter). The theme was that the good pleasure of God was manifested in a man towards men. He was and is the Son of God's love. The shepherds were stirred and published abroad what they saw. Their audience wondered, but they did not move a step to see the child! Mankind generally was not in harmony with the angelic testimony. The poverty of the parents was evident in the offering of two birds instead of a lamb. The first mention of "comfort" occurs relative to Simeon who was warned by the Holy Ghost that he should not die until he had seen the Lord's anointed. (The Pharisees were insensible to the Holy Spirit). Simeon's heart was full and he poured out the matchless prophetic statement as he held in his arms the true Ark of the Covenant. Then Anna, like Simeon, did not come in by chance, she was in time to join in the thanksgiving and to testify to all who looked for redemption in Jerusalem (i.e., the counterpart of the consolation of Israel). The subsequent twelve years are tersely summarised in Luke 2:40. His conduct as a child was perfect. The incident in the temple occurred on the occasion of His first visit to Jerusalem. He did not teach, he simply asked questions and heard the answers. Those present were amazed; Luke 2:49, gives His first recorded statement (John 5:17, is analogous). In the 18 years following there was no premature assumption of authority but simple obedience. Mary in faith waited patiently for the solution of her perplexities. She was probably the only one mentioned at the beginning of the Gospel who survived to the end thereof. We may be sure that these obscure years were marked by the same features as emerged in His later years when under the searchlight of scrutiny by carping critics!

137 John 7:3. — As to the Lord's "brethren being uterine" — that is, His mother's children — see Ps. 69:8, and cf. Acts 1:14, 1 Cor. 9:5. This belief is maintained, after Tertullian, by M'Clellan, Farrar ("Early Days of Christianity" chapter 19), Mayor (Introduction to "Commentary on Epistle of James"), and by Professor Swete (Commentary on Mark). For the theory that Joseph was married previously, see Lightfoot ("Dissertation" in his edition of the Epistle to the Galatians) and salmon. It must be borne in mind that Origen and Jerome, who supported the idea of Mary's continued virginity, were influenced by Apocryphal Gospels. Mr. Card seems to have changed his opinion since he wrote the note in his Cambridge edition of Matthew's Gospel (see his note on present passage).

Take Mark 6:3 for instance, and there you will find that what I have just stated is fully acknowledged: speaking of our Lord, it says, "Is not this the carpenter the son of Mary, and brother" (not the cousin, you see) "of James and Joses, and of Juda and Simon?" We do not know what particular place God gave to Joses and Simon, but we do know that James and Judas, or Jude (it is the same name), were both called to an eminent service.

Now if we look at the first of Acts we get more. It appears there were sisters also, but we need not now pursue that subject. In Acts 1:13 we read, "And when they" (i.e. the apostles) "were come in, they went up into an upper room, where abode both Peter and James" (that James is the son of Zebedee), "and John" (his brother), "and Andrew, Philip and Thomas, Bartholomew and Matthew, James [the son] of Alphaeus" (that is, James the Little) "and Simon Zelotes" (to distinguish him from Simon Peter and from Simon the Lord's brother), "and Judas [the brother] of James."

Now leaving the shores of Galilee, He goes to the area of Nazareth, His Own country, where it is emphasized that His kingdom is in reproach and rejection. In this return we learn in the blessed Lord Himself, how to accept this. The wisdom of His teaching is undisputed: people are astonished at this and at hearing of His mighty works. But instead of seeing by faith the reality of God's power in this, they dispute His right to possess such power! Where did He get this? they ask. Was He not only a carpenters son? Did they not know His mother, His four brothers and all of His sisters? Formal religion has claimed that Mary had no other children then the Lord Himself, therefore assuming that these were nephews or nieces; but Psalm 69:8 is conclusive, "I am become a stranger unto my brethren, and an alien unto my mother's children." Mary had at least seven children after the Lord was born, for "all" His sisters implies at least three.

Though the word ἀδελφός is used in the LXX in a wider sense than 'brother,' it has been judged that its use in the N.T. is restricted to those born of the same mother; and therefore the Lord's brother could not have been the same person as the son of Alphaeus. Nor is it probable that he was one of the twelve apostles, for we read that "neither did his brethren believe in him." John 7:5. The first mention of the Lord's brethren being with the apostles is in Acts 1:14, and there they are referred to as distinct from them. James the Lord's brother was seen at Jerusalem by Paul. Gal. 1:19. The being thus designated distinguishes him from the apostle who is simply called James in Gal. 2:9, 12. Learned authorities state that in Gal. 1:19 the construction of the passage in the Greek does not necessarily imply that James the Lord's brother was an apostle. He is mentioned also in Matt. 13:55; Mark 6:3