The Virgin Mary

by J. Miller | Category: General | Oct 1960

The vitally important facts to all men of the death and resurrection of the Lord rest upon the all-important fact that the Lord was born without sin, and was consequently, in His human nature, free from all the effects of the fall of Adam. All true believers in Christ must, in the nature of things, accept as a matter of faith the virgin birth of the Lord. What is alleged to have been said by an angel of the Lord to Joseph, who became the husband of Mary, and what was said by the angel Gabriel to Mary, are either true records, in Matthew 1 and Luke 1, or they are pieces of the greatest deception ever imposed upon men. There is no intermediate ground on which we may safely stand between accepting and rejecting what is written. Those who believe the Scriptures to be true, and not only true, but inspired of God, will readily accept the sacred narratives.

Joseph, we are told, was a righteous man, who, when he discovered Mary's condition that she was with child [and evidently in her modesty Mary had not confided in him to tell what the angel Gabriel had told her (Luke 1.26-33)], was unwilling to make her a public example, but rather to put her away privily (probably for love's sake). As he thought on these things, an angel of the Lord appeared to him, and said, "Joseph, thou son of David, fear not to take unto thee Mary thy wife: for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Spirit" (Matthew 1.20).

The genealogy of the Lord as given in Matthew 1, is that also of Joseph, and reaches back through forty-two generations to Abraham. In verse 16 the Holy Spirit is careful to tell us that Jesus was born of Mary, and that the Lord was born in wedlock, but reading this verse with the narrative which follows and with that of Luke 1, we see that, whereas in the long line of generation each father begat his son, as it says, "Abraham begat Isaac," and so forth, it does not say that

Some who have argued blasphemously against the Lord's virgin birth have contended that the word for "virgin," in Isaiah 7.14, means simply "a maiden without any regard to the matter of virginity." No one would deny, who has looked into the use of the Hebrew word in the Scriptures, that the word means a "maid or maiden," but in certain, if not in all, of the uses of the Hebrew word Bethoulah, more is implied than simply a damsel or young female. Gesenius, one of the great authorities on the Hebrew language, says of Bethoulah, "A virgin, so called as being separated and secluded from intercourse with men." The root idea in the word is "to be separate from and not joined to a man." The first use of the word in the Scriptures is in Genesis 24.16 (and usually the first use of a word in the Scriptures fixes its use afterwards), speaking of Rebekah who became afterwards the wife of Isaac, " The damsel was very fair to look upon, a virgin (Bethoulah), neither had any man known her." The Hebrew word for damsel signified a young person, such as a girl from infancy to adolescence. Rebekah was a maiden, a damsel, but she was also a virgin, for she had not known man. From the same root from which Bethoulah is derived is derived also Bethoulim, which is the Hebrew word for "virginity, the condition of a virgin." Where is the case of those who allege that virgin means simply a maiden with no regard to whether she is pure or unmarried? It is gone! The Greek word used, in Matthew 1.28, in the quotation from Isaiah 7.14, means a virgin, beyond any shadow of doubt. The Greek word used (Parthenos) means a "virgin or maid", and signifies also a person in a virgin state, whether male or female. Parthenia is the word for virginity.

Immanuel (God with us) was to be the Son of a virgin. There would have been no sign whatever had Mary conceived naturally, which is one of the commonest things throughout the whole world. Isaiah's prophecy was, "Therefore the Lord Himself shall give you a sign; behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a Son, and shall call His name Immanuel." Let it be noted what is said in Matthew 1.22: "Now all this is come to pass, that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the Lord through the prophet." Wherever in the New Testament you have reference to an Old Testament prophecy being fulfilled, that is the fulfilment of the prophecy and there is no other. There was no son born to a virgin in Isaiah's time, or in any other time of the world's history. There is one virgin birth and one only, and that the birth of the Lord. It was a virgin birth and also a miraculous and sinless birth. The Lord's being here as a Child was a miracle of grace, and His being born of a woman who herself, like all persons of mankind, "was shapen in iniquity," and in sin did her mother conceive her (Psalm 51.5), is a miracle beyond the powers of man to understand or explain. She was not born immaculate as Rome teaches, for she herself spoke of God being her Saviour.

"And Mary said, My soul doth magnify the Lord,

And my spirit hath rejoiced in God my Saviour"

(Luke 1.47, 48).

Had Mary been born immaculate, pure, without original sin, she would have needed no Saviour. This teaching of Rome, that Mary was born without sin, is yet another of Rome's lies, and Rome's lies are many. Indeed the Romish system, first and last, is founded on lies.

In the inspired narrative, in Matthew 1.24, 25, we are told,

"And Joseph arose from his sleep, and did as the angel of the Lord commanded him, and took unto him his wife; and knew her not till she had brought forth a Son: and he called His name JESUS."

This little word "till " (he knew her not till the Lord was born) is sufficient in itself to demolish the colossal lie of Rome that Mary is "ever virgin." All who fear God and love His word will have no difficulty in rejecting, in its entirety, Rome's lie in this matter of Mary, Joseph's wife. If Rome's teaching were true, then Joseph also remained a virgin. The Greek church teaches that Joseph was married before he married Mary and had children by his first wife. This again finds no foundation in the Scriptures, and once persons venture in matters of faith outside the word of God their feet are in the quicksands in a lying world, and we are told that the devil is the deceiver of the whole world.

Let us now consider whether Mary, the Lord's mother, was "ever virgin." First of all in approaching this subject let us look at the women who were standing by the cross.

"And many women were beholding from afar, ... among whom was Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James and Joses, and the mother of the sons of Zebedee" (Matthew 27.55, 56).

"And there were also women beholding from afar: among whom were both Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James the less and of Joses, and Salome" (Mark 15.40).

Luke does not give any names of the women who stood by the cross (Luke 23.49).

"But there were standing by the cross of Jesus His mother, and His mother's sister, Mary the wife of Cleopas, and Mary Magdalene" (John 19.25).

James the less was the son of Alpheus (Matthew 10.3), who was the same as Clopas. He may have been the Cleopas, in Luke 24.18. Of the Gospel writers only John mentions that the Lord's mother was there with the other women, when were fulfilled the words of Simeon, "Yea and a sword shall pierce through thine own soul; that thoughts out of many hearts may be revealed " (Luke 2.35). This piercing she knew as she stood by the cross. John mentions four women, two whose names he does not mention, the Lord's mother and His mother's sister, and two whom he names, Mary the wife of Clopas (Alpheus) (the mother of James the less and Joses), and Mary Magdalene. These three women, without the Lord's mother, are mentioned in Matthew and Mark, (1) Salome, the Lord's mother's sister, the wife of Zebedee, and mother of James and John the sons of Zebedee, (2) Mary the wife of Clopas, and (3) Mary Magdalene. Thus James and John the sons of Zebedee were cousins of the Lord. This may in part account for the Lord leaving His mother in the care of John.

The mother of the Lord and His brethren are mentioned, in Matthew 12.46,47;

"While He was yet speaking to the multitudes, behold, His mother and His brethren stood without, seeking to speak to Him. And one said unto Him, Behold, Thy mother and Thy brethren stand without, seeking to speak to Thee."

Then we are told, in Matthew 13.55, 56, who His brethren were;

"Is not this the carpenter's Son? is not His mother Mary? and His brethren, James and Joseph, and Simon, and Judas? And His sisters, are they not all with us.

It is, I judge, straining scripture, where a father and mother and their children, brothers and sisters, are spoken of in the manner in which the people spoke of the family to which the Lord belonged, to say that the Lord's brethren here were His cousins, or more distant relatives. Indeed I consider the mentioning of sisters settles the matter that we have here given the family of Joseph and Mary. For ourselves we reject as unsound and heretical the Romish doctrine that Mary was "ever virgin."

The title of " Mother of God" as applied to Mary was confirmed at the Council of Ephesus, A.D.481. This title may convey an entirely wrong conception of a created being, as Mary was, being the mother of God who is Spirit, eternal and uncreated. The Scriptures are careful to speak of the Lord's two natures, natures which are distinct and never co-mingle, as that which is according to the flesh, as derived from Mary (Romans 1.8; 8.8; 9.5), and that according to His divine nature as the only begotten Son of God (John 1. 18; John 3.16, 18; 1 John 4.9), His own Son (Romans 8.8). That Christ, who is God, was born of Mary cannot be denied, but He did not become God by that birth, nor did He become the Son of God by His human birth. He became Man by the substance of His mother.

Now we come to the matter of the bodily Assumption of Mary to heaven. Assumption means "to be taken up." Did Mary ascend to heaven at death? We have not the least doubt that she did, even as all saints who depart this life go, as to their souls, to be with Christ, which is very far better, and are at home with the Lord (Philippians 1.28; 2 Corinthians 5.8). But why should Mary be taken up bodily to heaven? The answer of the Romanist must be, because she was born sinless and remained so all her life. Saints, as God accounts saints, go to heaven at death solely on the merits of the cleansing blood of the Redeemer, the Lord Jesus. Alas, the outlook for popes and priests and nuns and laymen is grim and dark, for all go to purgatory as Rome teaches, that fiction of Rome's invention, to have the venial sins which they have committed consumed by the intense and terrifying fires of purgatory. Roman Catholics who die in mortal sin go to hell; such sin is unforgivable. Venial means that which is forgivable or pardonable. Human suffering, here or hereafter, cannot atone for the sins of a sinner; only the sufferings of the sinless Son of God and His precious blood can avail to remove sin and put it away for ever (Acts 10.48; 1 Peter 2.24; 3.18; 1 John 1.7). Many, many other scriptures bear testimony to the all availing merits of the Lord's death on behalf of sinners. There is no purgatory or limbo to be found in the Scriptures, anywhere. The whole Romish system of the paying for masses for the souls of the dead, priest]y forgiveness, suffering in purgatory, is the invention of men in a commercialized religion. There is forgiveness for every sinner who comes by faith to the Lord Jesus who died for them, and apart from the shedding of His blood there is no remission (Hebrews 9. 22).

For almost two thousand years the corporal or bodily assumption of Mary to heaven was not an article of faith of the Roman Catholic church. It was not necessary to salvation for a Roman Catholic to believe that Mary was taken up to heaven in bodily form. But the late pope, a few years ago, issued the dogma and made it an article of faith for all Catholics of his communion to believe. How changeable are Rome's ways! How different from God's! Faith in Christ and faith only is necessary to salvation. Did Mary go to heaven in bodily form? No, she did not! Was she raised from the dead? No, she was not! You may ask, How do we know? The Scriptures are quite plain on the point. Listen to the word of Paul, in 1 Corinthians 15.20-28

"But now hath Christ been raised from the dead, the firstfruits of them that are asleep. For since by man came death, by Man came also the resurrection of the dead. For as in Adam alt die, so also in Christ shall all be mode alive. But each in His own order : Christ the firstfruits then they that are Christ's, at His coming."

The next to rise from the dead, after Christ, are such as are Christ's, and this will take place at His coming. Has the Lord come as He promised in John 14.1-8? No, He has not come yet.

Let us now tabulate points to which we have referred previously.

1.Mary was the betrothed wife of Joseph (Matthew 1. 18).

2.The Miraculous Conception was the result of the Holy Spirit coming upon Mary, and the power of the Most High overshadowing her (Luke 1.35).

3.The Lord was therefore born without sin, that is, He did not partake of original sin, the effect of the Fall of Adam. He was not conceived in sin as a persons of the human race are (Psalm 51.5). In Him is no sin (1 John 3.5). He was separated from sinners (Hebrews 7. 26).

4.Mary was not born immaculate, that is, pure, without sin. The fact that she spoke of God being her Saviour shows this. She said, "My soul doth magnify the Lord, and my spirit hath rejoiced in God my Saviour" (Luke 1.46, 47). Her Lord and Saviour was the same as Elizabeth's (Luke 1.48). Her Lord was her Son.

5.Mary was not " Ever Virgin." She was only a virgin until the Lord was born. There can be no doubt that the Lord was born of a virgin. There is no doubt also that the Greek word for "virgin," used in reference to Mary (Parthenos, Virgin), means a woman who has not known man. See the words of Paul, in 1 Corinthians 7. 25-40, on the subject of virgins and marriage. He says, "There is a difference also between the wife and the virgin. She that is unmarried is careful for the things of the Lord, that she may be holy both in body and in spirit but she that is married is careful for the things of the world, how she may please her husband (verse 34). It is a slight on Mary's character to accuse her of lying to the angel, and implies a vile slander on her moral behaviour, for she said to Gabriel, "How shall this be, seeing I know not a man? " If it is true, and we have not the shadow of doubt that Mary told the truth, then there can be no doubt whatever about the virgin birth of the Lord. If it is not true, then we may close our Bibles for ever, for then the Lord was born in sin like us all and was a sinner as each of us is. We say, Perish the thought! He was both in His Godhead and in His Manhood the Holy One of God. See what is said in Revelation 14.8, 4 of the male virgins of the heavenly choir of 144,000, "even they that had been purchased out of the earth. These are they which were not defiled with women; for they are virgins. These are they which follow the Lamb whithersoever He goeth."

6.Joseph did not know Mary until after the birth of the Lord (Matthew 1.25). After the Lord's birth she bore to Joseph at least six children, James and Joseph and Simon and Judas and their sisters (Matthew 13.55, 56). Thus she was not "ever virgin."

7.Mary and her sons, the Lord's brothers, had no place of privilege above His disciples, as He said, "And He stretched forth His hand toward His disciples, and said, Behold, My mother and My brethren! For whosoever shall do the will of My Father which is in heaven, he is My brother, and sister, and mother" (Matthew

12.46-50).

8.Mary did not ascend to heaven in bodily form, for the Lord alone has immortality, which means, not subject to physical death. No one has been raised to immortality since the Lord was raised from the dead. The order as stated by Paul is, "Christ the firstfruits; then they that are Christ's, at His coming" (1 Corinthians 15.28). The Lord has not come yet.

An error has occurred in the use of the Hebrew word Bethoulah for Almah, in Isaiah 7.14, in the article" The Virgin Mary," in Needed Truth, October, 1960, page 155. This has evidently been caused by taking the wrong line in Dr. Strong's concordance, where the word Bethoulah is used, both before and after the reference to Isaiah 7.14, in which verse the word for virgin is Almah. Though we are very sorry that this mistake has occurred, it in no way alters the truth of what we wrote, for both Bethoutch and Almah are used in reference to Rebekah, Bethoulah in Genesis 24.16, and Almah in verse 48. Although Almah is a different word from Bethoulah, it is clear from these two verses that both words mean a virgin.

Let me quote from Gesenius as to the meaning of these two words

Bethoulah: "A virgin, so called as being separated and secluded from intercourse with men."

Almah: "A girl of marriageable age, Genesis 24.48; Exodus 2.8; Isaiah 7.14."

LXX. "Parthenos." (Parthenos is the Greek word for virgin).

Dr. Strong says of Almah, "a lass (as veiled or private) damsel, maid. virgin." He says that Almah is derived from Alam, to veil from sight, i.e., conceal. The thought seems to be that virgins were concealed or secluded.

It is clear, if we are to believe the Scriptures as infallibly true, that Rebekak and Mary the Lord's mother were virgins, and that the Hebrew words Bethoulah and Almah, and the Greek Parthenos, all refer to virgins.

J. Miller | Oct 1960
General