The Meaning of “Till” in St. Matthew 1:25

The Meaning of “Till” in St. Matthew 1:25

By: Rev. Fr. Dr. Jacob Mathew

"and did not know her till she had brought forth her firstborn Son. And he called His name Jesus." - St. Matthew 1:25

Patristic Witness and the Linguistics of the Text

Among the most debated words in the infancy narratives of the New Testament is a small but weighty term, “till,” found in St. Matthew 1:25: “And he knew her not till she had brought forth her firstborn Son.” Much theological controversy has been built upon this single word, often far beyond what the Greek text or the mind of the Evangelist intends. A careful reading of the passage—guided by the linguistics of Koine Greek and the unified witness of the Church Fathers—reveals that the phrase serves a Christological purpose, not a commentary on the later marital life of Mary and Joseph.

The Greek Expression: ἕως οὗ

The word translated as “till” in English is the Greek expression ἕως οὗ (heōs hou). In biblical Greek, this construction functions as a temporal marker that defines a point of reference, not as a statement about what necessarily happens afterward. It establishes a boundary for emphasis, not a reversal of condition. Scripture itself provides numerous examples of this usage. The Septuagint states that Michal, the daughter of King Saul and wife of King David, “had no child until the day of her death” (2 Sam. 6:23). Until here clearly does not imply any childbirth after Michal’s death. Likewise, Psalm 110:1 speaks of the Messiah seated at the right hand of God “until” His enemies are made His footstool, without suggesting that His exalted position ends thereafter. In these cases, “until” marks the period under discussion, not a change beyond it.

St. Matthew employs ἕως οὗ in precisely this biblical manner. His concern is not to describe events after Christ’s birth, but to affirm with clarity that Jesus’ conception and birth were not the result of any human relations or will. The Evangelist concludes his narrative at the point where this theological truth is established.

The Evangelist’s Intent

St. Matthew’s infancy narrative is driven by one primary concern: the recognition of Jesus as Emmanuel, “God with us.” The statement that Joseph “knew her not till she had brought forth her son” supports the claim that Christ’s origin is divine and without any human initiative. It affirms Mary’s virginity at conception and birth, and portrays Joseph as a righteous man who obeys divine guidance. Nothing in the text indicates that Matthew intends to open a discussion about what happened later. His silence after the birth is deliberate, not accidental.

The Witness of the Fathers

The early Church Fathers, understanding the text within its linguistic and theological context, are remarkably unanimous on this point. St. Jerome, writing against Helvidius, explicitly rejects the idea that “till” implies a later change in Mary’s marital state, noting that Scripture often uses the term without such suggestion. To interpret it otherwise, he argues, is a violent misuse of biblical language.

St. Augustine echoes this view, emphasizing that Scripture states only what is necessary for the mystery of salvation. The Evangelist affirms what must be affirmed—Christ’s virginal birth—without adding unnecessary details. St. John Chrysostom also explains that Matthew’s phrasing dispels suspicion about Jesus’ origin rather than inviting curiosity about Mary’s later life.

In the Syriac tradition, represented strongly by St. Ephrem, the question is hardly raised at all. Mary is venerated as a virgin before, during, and after Christ’s birth, and the phrase in Matthew is understood simply as protecting the mystery of the Incarnation. The linguistic nuance that later readers find troubling never troubled the early Church.

St. Severus of Antioch, following the Church's exegetical tradition, often interprets Ezekiel 44:2—“This gate shall remain shut; it shall not be opened, and no man shall enter by it, for the Lord, the God of Israel, has entered by it”—as a prophetic witness to the perpetual virginity of St. Mary. For St. Severus, this text is not poetic embellishment but a sober theological truth. The “gate” represents St. Mary’s womb, the Lord’s singular entry symbolizes the mystery of the Incarnation, and the command that the gate remain forever closed emphasizes the finality and uniqueness of Christ’s birth. Once the Lord has entered, the gate becomes consecrated and cannot be returned to ordinary use. In this light, the Evangelist’s silence in Matthew 1:25 after Christ’s birth is not accidental but aligns with Scripture’s broader testimony: what God has sanctified for His dwelling is sealed by divine purpose and not reopened by human expectation.

“Firstborn” and Similar Usage

Often linked to the discussion of “till” is the term “firstborn” (πρωτότοκος). In biblical usage, this word signifies legal status and consecration, not the presence of younger siblings. Under the Law, every firstborn male—whether an only child or not—was called “firstborn” and dedicated to God. Therefore, like “till,” the term serves a legal and theological function rather than a biological one.

A Theological Perspective

For the Fathers, the core argument is theological rather than linguistic. St. Mary is seen as the Ark of the New Covenant, the dwelling of God Incarnate. The womb that bore the divine Word is considered consecrated and set apart for a unique purpose. Joseph’s role is that of a guardian and protector of this mystery, not a claimant upon it. Within this framework, the idea that “till” suggests a subsequent change is both linguistically unfounded and theologically incompatible.

Conclusion

When understood through biblical Greek grammar and the Church’s living tradition, the word “till” in St. Matthew 1:25 does not imply a change in Mary’s state after Jesus’ birth. It functions as a temporal boundary highlighting the virginal conception and birth of Jesus, which is central to St. Matthew’s message. The unanimous voice of the Fathers confirms that this small word witnesses to the mystery of the Incarnation—and not to any speculative conclusions beyond the text.