the scriptures plainly state that Joseph did not have sexual relations with Mary (his wife) until after Jesus was born
..."till".....which means that Mary and Joseph had a blessed marriage and more children as was expected in Jewish families of that time.
1 : to
2 → used as a function word to indicate continuance (as of an action or condition) to a
specified time stayed until morning, e.g., stayed
until morning
3 : before sense 2, e.g., not available
until tomorrow; we don't open
until ten
: up to the time that
: up to such time as, e.g., play continued
until it got dark;
never able to relax
until he took up fishing; ran
until she was breathless
You claim that Scripture "plainly states" in Matt. 1:25 that Joseph and Mary didn't have intercourse and more children
until after Mary gave birth to Jesus, but it doesn't; rather, it states they didn't have intercourse "
until she brought forth her firstborn son." The word "
until" has multiple definitions, not only the one you're inferring by your
insertion of the word "
after." For the sake of argument, say the word "
until" was used to mean Joseph and Mary had intercourse after Jesus's birth, that in itself wouldn't mean Mary bore more children because, for example, having vaginal intercourse doesn't lead to procreation for some men and women. In other words, sometimes the woman is barren or the man is sterile, etc.
Your interpretation that the gospel writer, after writing about the long-anticipated messianic prophecy coming to fruition, basically threw in the tidbit, "After the birth of the Savior, Joseph had intercourse with Mary and 6+ more kids," at the end is quite random. It also isn't in line with the context of Matt. 1:20-25:
"But while he thought on these things, behold, the angel of the Lord appeared to him in his sleep, saying: Joseph, son of David, fear not to take unto thee Mary thy wife, for that which is
conceived in her is of the Holy Ghost. And
she shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call his name Jesus. For
he shall save his people from their sins. Now all this was done that it might be fulfilled that which the Lord spoke by the prophet, saying: Behold,
a virgin shall be with child and
bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God with us. And Joseph, rising up from sleep, did as the angel of the Lord had commanded him, and took to him his wife.
And he knew her not until she brought forth her firstborn son, and he called his name Jesus."
The context of Matt. 1:25 is Joseph's accepting as his spouse
the virgin who
conceived the Savior of mankind
by the Holy Spirit. The gospel writer concludes the passage by stating that Joseph didn't have intercourse with Mary until Jesus's birth,
to dispel any belief that he was the father. In other words, since the gospel writer's intent at the end was to show what Joseph
didn't do until a certain point, so as to dispel any belief that Jesus was conceived by him, and not begotten by the Holy Spirit, they stated he remained chaste until Jesus's birth. Why would implying Joseph had or didn't have intercourse with Mary after Jesus's birth be relevant, when it's only about Jesus's paternal origin? It's not relevant, which is another reason why the definition of "
until" that you're applying doesn't fit here, but rather "up to the time that," because it informs us what Joseph
didn't do until a certain point, not what occurred after that point. The importance of Matt. 1:20-25 is that it primarily pertains to the messianic prophecy, not the sexual relationship, or lack thereof, between Joseph and Mary.
...physically speaking childbirth would have destroyed her virginity.
In a social and, in this case, spiritual sense, virginity is determined by whether or not there was intercourse. If you're referring to the breaking of the hymen, that's just a crude physical indicator that someone
may have lost their virginity. In the modern era, we know that vaginal intercourse isn't the only way that a hymen can break, but we don't consider the women who experience this, for example, through physical trauma, to have lost their virginity.
Jesus had four brothers who are all named, and at least two sisters.
The context of Matt. 13:55-56/Mk. 6:3-4 does show the meaning "kinsman," e.g., sibling, cousin, nephew, uncle, etc., applies to Jesus's brothers Joseph, Simon, James, Judas (Jude/Thaddeus), and unnamed sisters. However, information needed to determine the
type of kinship between Jesus and His kinsmen is lacking in those same verses and others. Do you have evidence that shows the type of kinship that applies between Jesus and Joseph, Simon, James, Judas (Jude/Thaddeus), and unnamed sisters in Matt. 13:55-56/Mk. 6:3-4 was that of siblings?
If Jesus' siblings were believers at the time of his death, he would have entrusted his widowed mother's care to the next oldest brother. Jesus had her spiritual welfare foremost at heart, hence choosing the apostle John to take her in after his death.
What evidence do you have that shows all of Jesus's alleged siblings were unbelievers, and that all of Jesus's alleged siblings being unbelievers was the reason He appointed His apostle, John of Zebedee, to be the guardian of Mary of Joseph prior to His death?
A barren woman in Israel was thought to have offended God in some way, because the bearing of children was seen as a gift from God.
Not only was Mary of Joseph not barren, but She conceived by
God Himself and bore
God Incarnate, the
greatest gift. I know you currently don't agree with that, but we should discuss this in another thread.
That is also a matter of opinion...
It's a fact that Jesus is God Incarnate. Your post is an opinion, according to you, per your own signature: "What I post is my opinion only."