A Theology of Men and Women

1. God made humans—male and female—in His own image and likeness (see Gen. 1:26–27).
    
2. In Christ Jesus, men and women are equal before God (see Gal. 3:28).
    
3. Men and women are interdependent and should serve one another (see 1 Cor. 11:11–12).
    
4. Marriage was designed to be between one man and one woman—for life (see Gen. 2:24).
    
5. Husbands are called to a sacrificial, servant leadership of their wives and to love them as Christ Jesus loves the church (see Eph. 5:25–33).
    
6. Wives are called to yield voluntarily to their husbands—to submit to them as the church submits to Christ Jesus (see Eph. 5:22–24).
    
7. Only qualified men should be ordained leaders in the church (see 1 Tim. 3:1–7).

There are not multiple genders/sexes. Men and women are not equal uniformly. Men are physically stronger than women. There are things men can do that women cannot. There are things women can do that men cannot. Men and women cannot do without each other. Two men or two women is not a marriage. Women, no matter how qualified they may be, cannot be ordained leaders in the church.

More Fit To Be Called A Devil Than A Parent!

by Richard Baxter

"Bring them up in the training and instruction of the Lord." Ephesians 6:4

Parents! Your example and life are a continual and powerful sermon which is always seen by your children!

Parents! Your children have an everlasting inheritance of happiness to attain, and it is that which you must bring them up for. They have an endless misery to escape, and it is that which you must diligently teach them. If you don't teach them to know God, and how to serve Him, and be saved, and to escape the flames of Hell, you teach them nothing, or worse than nothing. It is in your hands to do them the greatest kindness or cruelty in all the world! Help them to know God and to be saved, and you do more for them than if you helped them to be kings or princes.

If you neglect their souls, and bring them up them in ignorance, worldliness, ungodliness, and sin, you betray them to the devil, the enemy of their souls, even as truly as if you sold them to him! You sell them to be slaves to Satan! You betray them to him who will deceive them and abuse them in this life, and torment them in eternity!

If you saw but a burning furnace, much more the flames of Hell, would you not think that man or woman more fit to be called a devil than a parent, who could find in their hearts to cast their child into it? What monsters then of inhumanity are you, who read in Scripture what is the way to Hell, and who they are that God will deliver up to Satan, to be tormented by him, and yet will bring up your children in that very way, and will not take pains to save them from it!

If you love them, show it in those things on which their everlasting welfare depends. Do not say you love them, and yet lead them unto Hell! If you do not love them, yet do not be so unmerciful to them as to damn them! You cannot possibly do more to damn them, than to bring them up in . . .

    ignorance,

    carelessness,

    worldliness,

    sensuality and

    ungodliness!

There is no other way to Hell. And yet, will you bring them up in such a life, and say that you do not desire to damn them?

But if you train up your children in ungodliness, you may as well say that you intend to have them damned! And is not the devil more excusable, for dealing thus cruelly to your children than you who are their parents, who are bound by nature to love them, and prevent their misery?

Let me seriously speak to the hearts of those careless and ungodly parents, who neglect the holy education of their children. Oh, do not be so unmerciful to those who you have brought into the world! Oh, pity and help the souls that you have defiled and undone! Have mercy on the souls that must perish in Hell, if they are not saved! Oh help them who have . . .

    so many enemies to assault them;

    so many temptations to pass through;

    so many difficulties to overcome;

    so severe a judgment to undergo!

Help them who are so weak, and so easily deceived and overthrown!

Help them speedily. before sin hardens them, and Satan makes a stronger fortress in their hearts!

Oh be not cruel to their souls!

Do not sell them to Satan, and that for nothing! Do not betray them by your ungodly negligence, to Hell!

If any of them will perish, let it not be because of you who are so much bound to do them good.

The undoing of your children's souls is a work much fitter for Satan, than for their parents!

Consider how odious soul-betraying parents are who betray their children to be the slaves of Satan here, and the firebrands of Hell forever! O do not join with the devil in this unnatural, horrid wickedness!

"Do not withhold correction from a child, for if you beat him with the rod, he will not die.

 You shall beat him with the rod, and shall deliver his soul from Hell." Proverbs 23:13-14

(Please send this to every parent you know!)

A Question For You...

COULD YOU BE WRONG ABOUT EVERYTHING YOU CLAIM TO KNOW?

NO?

According to Christianity, the God of the Bible is the source of all knowledge.
“The fear of the Lord is the beginning of knowledge.” –Proverbs 1:7

THE PROBLEM:
Contradictions amount to lying, as opposing statements cannot both be true. Your worldview contains many contradictions in your source of knowledge, which means that you could be wrong about everything you claim to know!

So, how can you know anything?

Just as breathing requires air, thinking requires knowledge. Without knowledge, nothing makes sense.

WHAT IS OUR ONLY HOPE IN THIS LIFE AND THE NEXT?

THE BAD NEWS:
The possibility that you could be wrong about everything is absurd. If you could be wrong about everything, you really can’t know anything at all—not even that! The fact that you DO know things exposes that you know that God exists, but are stealing your foundation for knowledge from Him.

Without having all knowledge, something you don’t know could contradict what you think you know. In order to know anything, you would have to know everything, OR have revelation from someone who does. Only God knows everything. He also cannot lie and never changes. Unless you start with the God you DO know (Romans 1:18-22), you have no basis for knowledge. God does not condemn people for what they don’t know, but for sin against the God that they do know.

You were created in God’s image, to glorify and enjoy Him forever. When you sin, you fail to imitate God as He commands, and lie about who He is. God alone is good, and the final standard of truth. All have fallen short of His standard and deserve eternity in Hell. This is not because of the severity of sin, but because of the goodness of God. Since God is perfect, no sin can be in His presence, and His perfect justice demands a perfect sacrifice to atone for sin.

THE GOOD NEWS:
Christ Jesus, who is God the Son, came into the world as a man to live in perfect obedience to God the Father. With His death on the cross, Jesus became the perfect sacrifice, cancelling the debt against sinners by taking their full punishment upon Himself. Three days later, He rose from the dead, defeating sin and death, earning eternal life for all those who trust in Him. Through His love and mercy, Jesus satisfied God’s justice and is the only way to peace, assurance, forgiveness, and salvation. To be reconciled to God, you must repent and trust that Jesus died for your sins. Your sins will be forgiven, God will see you as perfect in Christ, and God the Holy Spirit will make you a new creation with a redeemed soul for eternity, and redeemed reasoning NOW. The only answer and only hope in this life and the next is Christ Jesus.

Why Do So Many Marriages Fail?

by Sye Ten Bruggencate

First, no one needs to point out the irony of a man who has never been married telling others why so many marriages fail. I realize that the subject is off topic from this website but I heard a talk recently from a Christian marriage counselor and I felt that the information was important enough to share.

The reason marriages fail is because they are built on the wrong foundation. They are built on the foundation of ‘being in love.’ This may surprise some people, but let me explain. The Biblical definition of love is best summed up in the familiar passage from 1 Corinthians 13:4–8:

Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. It is not rude, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres. Love never fails.

With this definition of love we can see that people do not fall ‘in love.’ Can people ‘fall into kindness?’ Can people fall into ‘not delighting in evil,’ or ‘protecting’ or ‘trusting?’ People fall into arousal, they CHOOSE to love.

The Bible does not teach that people should be ‘in love’ with their spouses, but it does command people to love them.

The Christian marriage, then, is a marriage where a man and woman make a covenant before God to love each other, not a display that they are in love. Sure it would be wonderful to be ‘in love,’ in fact I can’t imagine marrying someone I was not ‘in love’ with, but that is not what Christian marriage is about.

If people get married because they ‘fall in love,’ it makes perfect sense to end that marriage if they ‘fall out of love.’

In Christian marriage, the reason to be faithful and remain married is not because your spouse is wonderful or worthy of love, but because of the vow you made in the presence of Almighty God to love that person.

For those who are not yet married, don’t decide if you are in love with your chosen partner, but decide if you are willing to choose to love this person for the rest of your life, and to make that commitment before God.

Think of the reason God loves you. Would anyone be so deluded as to say that God loves them because they are worthy of love? Surely not! God loves us because he chooses to love us. Our marriages should be built on the foundation of choosing to love as well.

The Practice of a Good Preacher

PERSONAL:
INDIVIDUAL STUDY: YOU’RE ACCOUNTABLE TO GOD!
“Study to present yourself approved to God as a workman who does not need to be ashamed, accurately handling the word of truth.” 2 TIMOTHY 2:15

PRACTICAL:
SEEK, OBEY, THEN TEACH!
“For Ezra had set his heart to study the Law of the LORD and to practice it, and to teach His statutes and rules in Israel.” EZRA 7:10

PUBLIC:
EXPOSITORY PREACHING: READ, THEN TRANSLATE (INTERPRET)!
“They read from the book, from the Law of God, translating to give the sense so that the people understood the reading.” NEHEMIAH 8:8

One Man's Commitment...

One Man's Commitment to Communism

We Communists have a high casualty rate. We're the ones who get shot and hung and lynched and tarred and feathered and jailed and slandered, and ridiculed and fired from our jobs, and in every other way made as uncomfortable as possible. A certain percentage of us get killed or imprisoned. We live in virtual poverty. We turn back to the party every penny we make above what is absolutely necessary to keep us alive.

We Communists don't have the time or the money for many movies, or concerts, or t-bone steaks, or decent homes and new cars. We've been described as fanatics. We are fanatics. Our lives are dominated by one great overshadowing factor, THE STRUGGLE FOR WORLD COMMUNISM.

We Communists have a philosophy of life which no amount of money could buy. We have a cause to fight for, a definite purpose in life. We subordinate our petty personal selves into a great movement of humanity, and if our personal lives seem hard, or our egos appear to suffer through subordination to the party, then we are adequately compensated by the thought that each of us in his small way is contributing to something new and true and better for mankind.

There is one thing in which I am dead earnest and that is the Communist cause. It is my life, my business, my religion, my hobby, my sweetheart, my wife and mistress, my bread and meat. I work at it in the daytime and dream of it at night. Its hold on me grows, not lessens as time goes on. Therefore I cannot carry on a friendship, a love affair, or even a conversation without relating to this force which both drives and guides my life. I evaluate people, books, ideas and actions according to how they effect the Communist cause and by their attitude toward it. I've already been in jail because of my ideas and if necessary, I'm ready to go before a firing squad.

**********************************************************************

One Man's Commitment to Christianity
I'm a part of the fellowship of the unashamed. The die has been cast. I have stepped over the line. The decision has been made. I'm a disciple of His and I won't look back, let up, slow down, back away, or be still.

My past is redeemed. My present makes sense. My future is secure. I'm done and finished with low living, sight walking, small planning, smooth knees, colorless dreams, tamed visions, mundane talking, cheap living, and dwarfed goals.

I no longer need preeminence, prosperity, position, promotions, plaudits, or popularity. I don't have to be right, or first, or tops, or recognized, or praised, or rewarded. I live by faith, lean on His presence, walk by patience, lift by prayer, and labor by Holy Spirit power.

My face is set. My gait is fast. My goal is heaven. My road may be narrow, my way rough, my companions few, but my guide is reliable and my mission is clear.

I will not be bought, compromised, detoured, lured away, turned back, deluded or delayed.

I will not flinch in the face of sacrifice or hesitate in the presence of the adversary. I will not negotiate at the table of the enemy, ponder at the pool of popularity, or meander in the maze of mediocrity.

I won't give up, shut up, or let up until I have stayed up, stored up, prayed up, paid up, and preached up for the cause of Christ.

I am a disciple of Jesus. I must give until I drop, preach until all know, and work until He comes. And when He does come for His own, He'll have no problems recognizing me. My colors will be clear!

Proof of Life: Miscarried Fetus

This is what a 14-week fetus looks like. It is a fully developed human being—not a "cluster of cells," a "lump of tissue," or a "blob of unformed flesh." The baby is perfectly and wonderfully formed, right down to the amazing tiny toes and fingers. Even the fingernails are formed and visible. Tiny veins that carry blood throughout the precious body can be seen through the delicate skin.

Chronology of Major English Bible Translations

Date	Name	Abbreviation	Comments
10th Century AD	West Saxon Gospels	n/a	Earliest surviving English translation. Translated from the Latin version. Contained only the gospels.
11th Century AD	Old English Hexateuch	n/a	Translated from the Latin version. Contained only the Hexateuch, meaning the first six books of the Old Testament (Genesis- Joshua).
11th Century AD	Old English Psalter	n/a	Translated from the Latin version. Contained only the Psalms. Exists in two versions, one in straightforward prose and the other in stylized verse.
14th Century AD	John Wycliffe Bible	WYC	Translated from the Latin Version. First translation of the entire Bible in English.
1526	Tyndale New Testament	Tyndale	Translated by William Tyndale. First translation into English from the Greek text. Contained only the New Testament.
1530	Tyndale Pentateuch	Tyndale	Translated by William Tyndale. First translation into English from the Hebrew text. Contained only the Pentateuch, or the first five books of the Old Testament (Genesis-Deuteronomy).
1531	Tyndale Jonah	Tyndale	Translated by William Tyndale. Translated from the Hebrew text. Contained only the book of Jonah.
1535	Coverdale Bible	Coverdale	Translated by Miles Coverdale. First complete Bible in modern English. New Testament was translated from the Greek text, but the Old Testament from Latin and German translations.
1537	Matthew's Bible	Matthew	Translated by John Rogers under the pseudonym "Thomas Matthew." Mostly a composite of the work done by Tyndale and Coverdale with minor edits.
1539	The Great Bible	n/a	Primarily translated by Miles Coverdale. First "authorized version," or version sanctioned by the English Crown. Also known as the "Cranmer Bible" and "Whitchurch's Bible."
1560	The Geneva Bible	GNV	First English Bible translated entirely from the original languages. First English Bible translated by a committee. First English Bible to contain verse numbers. First English Bible to contain study notes.
1568	The Bishop's Bible	Bishop	Second authorized version of the English Bible. Went through several substantial revisions.
1611	The King James Version	KJV	Also known as the "Authorized Version" or AV. Supposed to have used the "Bishop's Bible" as its starting point. Reveals much more influence from the "Geneva Bible" instead. Underwent a substantial revision in 1769, where it took the basic form it has today.
1885	The Revised Version	RV	Used the KJV as its starting point and made changes to bring it in line with later manuscript discoveries and linguistic studies.
1901	American Standard Version	ASV	A substantial revision of the RV. Especially known for its consistent use of the name "Jehovah" rather than the title "the LORD" in the Old Testament.
1952	Revised Standard Version	RSV	An often controversial translation, particularly for its rendering of Messianic passages like Isaiah 7:14 and Genesis 49:10, among others.
1971	New American Standard Bible	NASB	Used the ASV as its starting point. Considered by many to be the most literal and "word for word" of all the major translations. Underwent a notable update in 1995.
1978	New International Version	NIV	Fresh translation not based on a previous version. Underwent significant revisions in 1984 and 2011.
1982	New King James Version	NKJV	Based on the same Greek and Hebrew texts as the KJV, but rendered in 20th century English.
1989	New Revised Standard Version	NRSV	A significant update of the RSV. Often used by scholars but still controversial among many churches for the same reasons as its predecessor.
2001	English Standard Version	ESV	Used the RSV as its starting point. Made significant changes based on further manuscript discoveries and corrected many of the RSV's problematic passages, such as Isaiah 7:14.
2004	Holman Christian Standard	HCSB	Fresh translation not based on any previous version. Especially known for its (somewhat inconsistent) use of the name Yahweh rather than the title "the LORD" in the Old Testament.
2006	New English Translation	NET	Fresh translation not based on any previous version. Especially known for its detailed notes on alternative readings in manuscripts and on how they arrived at their textual choices.
2014	Modern English Version	MEV	A contemporary English translation of the same Greek and Hebrew texts used in the KJV.
2017	Christian Standard Bible	CSB	A substantial revision of the HCSB. In most cases, the revisions brought the CSB closer in wording to other modern translations and away from the distinctive phrasing of the HCSB.

A Long Way From Orthodoxy

Do Roman Catholics and Eastern/Greek Orthodox Catholics honestly think that the way they conduct their services is the way that the Apostles and the early church practiced it? How about reading through the New Testament. Is there anything in the New Testament that suggests that the way they conduct their services, or the way they dress, is even remotely similar to that of the New Testament church? Do they honestly think that any of the Apostles or their direct disciples (Polycarp, Irenaeus, etc.) wore such fancy garb?

Roman Catholics and Eastern/Greek Orthodox Catholics have forgotten Scripture (or ignore it) and elevated the traditions of men. Nothing the Roman Catholics or Eastern/Greek Orthodox Catholics do in their services is even remotely similar to what took place in a New Testament house church or even in a congregational church.

Baptism certainly did not mean you were suddenly cleansed of all sin and automatically a child of God. Nor was there something you could give someone after baptism in order to grant them the Holy Spirit. The bread and wine do not turn into the literal body of Christ, nor did Jesus ever make such an absurd declaration. It was figuratively representative of his body and blood, which is clearly understood by His words. If you commit a sin, your baptism is not tainted or made impure. We are human. We are going to slip up, fall, and sin. The correct response is to get back up, repent (confess to God—not to some priest or whatnot), and try again (with the help of the Holy Spirit).

The beliefs and practices of the Roman Catholics and Eastern/Greek Orthodox Catholics are so far removed from Scripture and New Testament teachings and practices that it is not even funny in the slightest. Everything they do is for show, much like the proud, arrogant Pharisee standing on the corner praying aloud how he was not like the wretched sinner nearby. It is nothing but pompous haughtiness. God is not impressed with it, nor does He listen to it.

As corrupt and perverse as the Roman Catholic church is in its doctrines and practices, the Eastern/Greek Orthodox Catholic church is just as corrupt, if not more. The Eastern/Greek Orthodox Catholics believe in and practice contemplative prayer, or meditation, and mysticism (that knowledge of spiritual truth can be attained through subjective experience); both of which have no scriptural support whatsoever. They believe that knowledge or truth concerning God and the Scriptures should be derived from some sort of subjective experience, rather than from study and logical inference. Their traditions place heavy emphasis on monasticism (renunciation of worldly pursuits to fulfill spiritual work) and asceticism (abstinence from sensual pleasures to pursue spiritual goals). Much like the Roman Catholic church, the Eastern/Greek Orthodox Catholic church is a cult entrenched in man-made traditions, doctrines of demons, and countless unbiblical errors. Superstition abounds in these two sects.

The practice of church services in the New Testament were simple. Not showy. The services of the Roman Catholics and Eastern/Greek Orthodox Catholics are anything but simple, and extremely showy. They are nothing more than white-washed tombs. The external looks wonderful and spiritual, but the inside is full of dead men's bones. Spiritual emptiness.

Orthodoxy means to hold to the teachings and practices of Christ Jesus and the Apostles. The New Testament and the early church did nothing that resembles the pompous haughtiness seen practiced today by Roman Catholics and Eastern/Greek Orthodox Catholics. Both these groups are properly labeled as cults because they believe, teach, and practice things that are not biblical in the least. They have incorporated doctrines of demons and traditions of men in with biblical Christianity and thus perverted it. They need to return to the Scriptures and reject all else!

Both these churches might be able to trace their practices back 1000 or 1500 years, but that does not in the least, by any way, shape, or form, mean or suggest that their practices are correct and/or biblical. It simply means they have clung to those errors for that length of time because they were afraid to reform and conform themselves to Scripture, or, worse yet, because they did not want to relinquish the power they have obtained, which is power Jesus would condemn them for if He were here today. He would thrash them the same way He thrashed the Sadducees and Pharisees. In the third century, you can already see the errors creeping into the church, corrupting and perverting it. As the Catholic church gained more power and began to exercise unbiblical and non-Christian control, the more corrupt and perverted it became. Individuals such as "St. Jerome" (Eusebius Sophronius Hieronymus) had lost sight of the Scriptures and started teaching false doctrine that was contrary to the Word of God.

Mary's Perpetual Virginity?

A Roman Catholic "study Bible" says this:

The Greek heōs does not imply that Joseph and Mary had marital relations following Jesus' birth. This conjuction is often used (translated "to" or "till") to indicate a select period of time, without implying change in the future (2 Sam. 6:23 [LXX]; Jn 9:18; 1 Tim 4:13). Here Matthew emphasizes only that Joseph had no involvement in Mary's pregnancy before Jesus' birth. Mary's perpetual virginity is firmly established in Church tradition. Its doctrinal formulation is traced to the Lateran Synod of A.D. 649 and was reaffirmed in 1968 by Pope Paul VI.

An Eastern Orthodox "study Bible" says this:

The use of the word till does not imply that Joseph had marital relations with Mary after the Savior's birth. In the Bible, this word (sometimes translated as "to") is often used to express a situation that actually continues after the event mentioned (see 28:20; Gn. 8:7; Dt. 34:6; 2Kg 6:23). The witness of the entire Church throughout history is that Mary remained a virgin for life.

Yes. Mary's perpetual virginity is established in church tradition—not in Scripture and certainly not in fact. Church history certainly does not witness to Mary remaining a virgin for life. Show me the writings of any of the Apostles who taught or believed such a thing. Show me the writings of any disciple of any of the Apostles who taught or believed such a thing. Polycarp? Irenaeus?

What does history actually look like?

It was not until the apocryphal work Protogospel of James (c. 150) that the perpetual virginity of Mary was ever mentioned or postulated. Tertullian (160-220) denied the virginity of Mary after Jesus' birth. Origen (184-253), however, taught it. In the East, Athanasius (296-373) defended it vehemently. Basil the Great (330-379) accepted it, but did not consider it to be a dogma. In the West, Jovinian (?-405) and Helvidius (340-390) denied the perpetual virginity while Ambrose (340-397), Jerome (347-420), and Augustine (354-430) staunchly defended it. As the church became more perverse in its beliefs and practices, and eventually evolved into the Catholic church, the Lateran Synod is when this tradition became entrenched, later to be clutched to by both the Roman Catholic church and the Eastern Orthodox church from the Great Schism of 1054 onward.

The early witness of the early church does not support the perpetual virginity of Mary. Certain Christians began to accept it, from whatever sources of influence, while others rejected it based on the testimony of the Scriptures in Greek. The first appearance of this concept was in an uninspired apocryphal work. Jerome seems to have been the biggest defendant of this error, having condemned Jovinian as a "heretic" not only for speaking against the perpetual virginity of Mary, but also for having praised the excellence of marriage. It was Jerome himself who was the heretic, as Jovinian's argument for marriage was based entirely, and solidly, upon the Scriptures.

"I do you no wrong, Virgin: you have chosen a life of chastity on account of the present distress: you determined on the course in order to be holy in body and spirit: be not proud: you and your married sisters are members of the same Church… Now concerning virgins I have no commandment of the Lord: but I give my judgement, as one that hath obtained mercy of the Lord to be faithful. I think therefore that this is good by reason of the present distress, namely, that it is good for a man to be as he is… See, the Apostle confesses that as regards virgins he has no commandment of the Lord, and he who had with authority laid down the law respecting husbands and wives, does not dare to command what the Lord has not enjoined. And rightly too. For what is enjoined is commanded, what is commanded must be done, and that which must be done implies punishment if it be not done. For it is useless to order a thing to be done and yet leave the individual free to do it or not do it. If the Lord had commanded virginity He would have seemed to condemn marriage, and to do away with the seed-plot of mankind, of which virginity itself is a growth. If He had cut off the root, how was He to expect fruit ? If the foundations were not first laid, how was He to build the edifice, and put on the roof to cover all ! Excavators toil hard to remove mountains; the bowels of the earth are pierced in the search for gold. And, when the tiny particles, first by the blast of the furnace, then by the hand of the cunning workman have been fashioned into an ornament, men do not call him blessed who has separated the gold from the dross but him who wears the beautiful gold. Do not marvel then if, placed as we are, amid temptations of the flesh and incentives to vice, the angelic life be not exacted of us, but merely recommended. If advice be given, a man is free to proffer obedience; if there be a command, he is a servant bound to compliance."

Jerome, in his blatant ignorance, took an entire book to praise virginity and disparage the state of marriage; that holy state which God in His Holy Word says should be "held in honor among all" (Heb. 13:4). That holy union that is a picture of Christ and His bride, the Church. Why would Jerome disparage something that is a picture of Christ and His Church? Sheer ignorance based on his sources of influence.

According to Scripture, Mary clearly had other children, which strongly implies that she and Joseph had normal marital relations after Jesus. In Mark, a crowd asks of Jesus, “Is not this the carpenter, the son of Mary, and brother (adelphos, ἀδελφὸς) of James and Joses and Judas and Simon? Are not His sisters here with us?” (6:3). In Luke, when Jesus is told by a crowd gathered to hear him speak, “Your mother and Your brothers (adelphos, ἀδελφὸς) are standing outside, wishing to see You,” Jesus famously answers them: “My mother and My brothers (adelphos, ἀδελφὸς) are those who hear the word of God and do it” (8:19-21). John writes that after Jesus had performed His first miracle in Cana, “He went down to Capernaum, He and His mother and His brothers (adelphos, ἀδελφὸς) and His disciples; and they stayed there a few days” (2:12).

The Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox churches attempt to argue that adelphos (ἀδελφὸς) does not merely mean "brothers," but that it can also mean "step-brothers" or "cousins." This was Jerome's argument, but this assertion is false. Regarding Peter and Andrew, they were adelphos (ἀδελφὸς)—brothers. Regarding John and James, they were adelphos (ἀδελφὸς)—brothers. Mary and Martha were adelphe (ἀδελφή)—sisters. The word adelphos (ἀδελφὸς) means "brothers," whether literally or figuratively. The figurative sense is used repeatedly throughout the New Testament in regard to our "brothers" (adelphos, ἀδελφὸς) in the church; our "brothers" (adelphos, ἀδελφὸς) in Christ. The word for "cousin" (relative, kin) is suggenes (συγγενής), which is what Elizabeth was to Mary.

Jerome argued that these "brothers" were either step-brothers, older sons of Joseph from a previous marriage (of which nothing is mentioned in Scripture), or merely cousins. Throughout the entire birth narrative and childhood narrative, there is never any mention of any other children. So where were these older step-brothers during all of this? The argument for them being step-brothers attempts to use two verses for its support. The first verse: In the upper room were "Mary the mother of Jesus, and . . . His brothers" (Acts 1:14). The argument is that it does not say "her sons," but rather "His brothers." The reason it says "His brothers" is because Jesus is the focus here—not Mary. Jesus is the object. The second verse: On the cross, Jesus looks to John, His disciple, and says, "Behold, your mother!" The argument is that He did not say this to any of His family, but to a complete stranger, implying that she must have been alone. Jesus did not give this responsibility to his brothers because they were not sympathetic to His ministry, nor did they believe in Him, and they likely were not present at the time.

Let us assume these "brothers" were indeed older step-brothers. Even if this were the case, Mary still was not a perpetual virgin. "[Joseph] did not have sexual relations with [Mary] until she gave birth to a Son; and he called His name Jesus" (Matt. 1:25). Even if you attempt to argue for the word "to" to be translated instead of "until," the word is pointing toward a specific point—the "birth of a Son." Heōs (ἕως) is a conjunction, preposition, and adverb of continuance. The word signifies something that "continues up to a certain time." She remained a virgin "until the time when" she gave birth. After the birth of Christ, she was no longer a virgin because she and Joseph engaged in normal marital relations. To argue that they did not is to create a huge problem, which Paul addressed in 1 Corinthians 7:3-5. If Joseph never touched Mary, he would have burned with desire and taken that desire elsewhere, which would have made him an adulterer. The doctrine of the perpetual virginity of Mary has many holes and creates many problems within the rest of Scripture.

The Greek does not support the perpetual virginity of Mary. The writings of the Apostles do not support the perpetual virginity of Mary. The writings of the earliest disciples of the Apostles do not support the perpetual virginity of Mary. The perpetual virginity of Mary is entrenched solely in the traditions and errors of the Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox churches. Scripture repudiates these very teachings. Anathema upon any heretic who teaches and proclaims this false doctrine!