Does the Bible teach that Mary was a virgin when Jesus was conceived?

[Ben Lomond]

In reply to TyRockwell's Post #120.

To reply to this post in detail would surely test the boundaries of the Opening Post and presumably Geoffrey's patience too.
Nevertheless I will cogitate the matter and post a response later. If Geoffrey protests, then I shall take my bat and ball and go home and sulk.

At this stage Ty I invite you to compare some translations of John's use of theos in his Gospel 1:1 which is here "anarthrous" ie. not an absolute and without the definite article.

I also refer you to a similar use of theos in Acts 7:20 where Moses is variously described as being exceedingly beautiful or fair to God depending on the translation consulted.

Regarding John 3:16:
I regard this as being one of the most quoted and at the same time one of the most misunderstood texts of the whole Bible.

I suggest that John 3:16 refers to Jesus AFTER he had been resurrected by his God from death and become "begotten of God" (Acts 13:33 and other texts in my previous post).

It was after Jesus was resurrected that John saw Jesus on the stage of eternity as the example in which to have faith and emulate if one wished to enter the kingdom of God and attain eternal life in the spirit.

To have faith in Jesus as God's anointed is to manifest this faith in ethical work - after all we are told that faith without good works is dead.

Neither by only faith or works, but by both in tandem.
Faith and good works feed off or compliment each other.

And all this voids the doctrines and creeds of "original sin", "virgin birth" and "trinity" which are only traditions created by men - and we know what Jesus thought of man made traditions don't we???

Ben Lomond.

= = = = = = = = = =

[John Goddard]

And all this voids the doctrines and creeds of "original sin", "virgin birth" and "trinity" which are only traditions created by men - and we know what Jesus thought of man made traditions don't we???

I relate to the spirit of your ideas, but the Bible says Mary was a virgin:

Luke 1:27 To a virgin espoused to a man whose name was Joseph, of the house of David; and the virgin's name was Mary.

And Original Sin is just the curse from Adam that all his children die, the Sour Grape:

Jeremiah 31:29-30 In those days they shall say no more, The fathers have eaten a sour grape, and the children's teeth are set on edge. But every one shall die for his own iniquity: every man that eateth the sour grape, his teeth shall be set on edge. Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah:

Original Sin is erased by the New Covenant, starting with Jesus doing what Adam didn't as you suggest. So it's not a thing that makes anyone filthy exactly, and so there is no reason to think Mary and Jesus weren't also born with it. Jesus just conquered by his obedience to God confirmed by his resurrection.

So if you don't accept the usual Church ideas, that Mary needed to be a virgin to avoid Original Sin in Jesus, then we can look for other reasons she needed to be a virgin.

One is that she just happened to be a virgin when she became pregnant with Jesus, no particular reason. Another more prophetic reason is that she represents virgin Israel undefiled by other gods, giving birth to the true Messianic Kingdom.

So her virginity doesn't have to be for some pagan reason, but a symbolic one.

[Antony]

I relate to the spirit of your ideas, but the Bible says Mary was a virgin:

Luke 1:27 To a virgin espoused to a man whose name was Joseph, of the house of David; and the virgin's name was Mary.

So if you don't accept the usual Church ideas, that Mary needed to be a virgin to avoid Original Sin in Jesus, then we can look for other reasons she needed to be a virgin.

One is that she just happened to be a virgin when she became pregnant with Jesus...

John,

I am not sure if you think Luke 1:27 says that Mary was a virgin when she became pregnant with Jesus.

It doesn't.

It certainly says that Mary was a virgin when she was visited by the angel Gabriel.

But Mary became pregnant sometime after Gabriel's visit, see Lk 1:31, 1:35, 2:21.

Luke says nothing about Mary being a virgin after Gabriel's visit.

People too often imagine things to be in the Bible that are not there, and the claim that Luke says she was a virgin when she became pregnant is one such example.

[John Goddard]

John,

I am not sure if you think Luke 1:27 says that Mary was a virgin when she became pregnant with Jesus.

It doesn't.

It certainly says that Mary was a virgin when she was visited by the angel Gabriel.

But Mary became pregnant sometime after Gabriel's visit, see Lk 1:31, 1:35, 2:21.

Luke says nothing about Mary being a virgin after Gabriel's visit.

People too often imagine things to be in the Bible that are not there, and the claim that Luke says she was a virgin when she became pregnant is one such example.

The following makes it clear to me she is going to be pregnant without knowing a man:

Luke 1:34 Then said Mary unto the angel, How shall this be, seeing I know not a man?

Luke 1:35 And the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God.

And here:

Matthew 1:23 Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God with us.

[Antony]

The following makes it clear to me she is going to be pregnant without knowing a man:

Luke 1:34 Then said Mary unto the angel, How shall this be, seeing I know not a man?

Luke 1:35 And the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God.

John,

I seem to think that you have not read Post 117. It might well be worth your while to do so.

Here is part of that post:

"The angel Gabriel appeared to Mary, who was betrothed to Joseph, and told her that she would conceive and have a son. The angel spoke of a future event. (Lk 1:26-33)

Then Mary said to the angel, “How can this be, since I do not know a man?” (Lk 1:34)

Most readers have been led to believe Mary is saying, “But how can this come about, since I am a virgin?” In more recent times, many “translations” of the Bible have even taken it upon themselves to render Mary’s question this way.

If you think about it, this interpretation portrays Mary as either very naïve or a simpleton. It has her saying that because she is presently a virgin, she does not know how at some future time she can conceive and have a son.

In order to analyse why Mary asked the question she did, the first thing is to see what prompted Mary’s question ..."

[John Goddard]

Most readers have been led to believe Mary is saying, “But how can this come about, since I am a virgin?” In more recent times, many “translations” of the Bible have even taken it upon themselves to render Mary’s question this way.

If you think about it, this interpretation portrays Mary as either very naïve or a simpleton. It has her saying that because she is presently a virgin, she does not know how at some future time she can conceive and have a son.

The context is that it was happening immediately with Mary not yet having sex with Joseph, since she went with haste to see Elizabeth and was already pregnant by the Spirit, Luke 1:39, which is why she asked.

Far-fetched to think she was just utterly naive then had a quickie with some other guy besides Joseph before she left.

[Antony]

John,

It is not me but the traditional interpretation of Mary’s question that portrays her as either very naïve or a simpleton — it has her saying that because she is presently a virgin she does not know how at some future time she can become pregnant !

Let me ask you:

1. Was Joseph a descendent of Jeconiah? (see Mt 1:11)

2. Did God ban all descendants of Jeconiah (Coniah) from ever sitting upon the throne of David? (see Jer 22:30)

3. Did the angel tell Mary that she would have a son who would be given the throne of David? (see Lk 1:32)

4. Does this mean that Joseph, as a descendant of Jeconiah, could not be the father of such a child?

5. Do you think Mary’s question had anything to do with this conundrum?

6. What do you think the angel said to Mary that prompted her question?

7. What does the word ‘know’ mean in Mary’s question? (see Lk 1:34)

8. How do you interpret Mary’s question?

If you number your answers to correspond to the questions, it will easier for readers to follow.

[John Goddard]

It is not me but the traditional interpretation of Mary’s question that portrays her as either very naïve or a simpleton — it has her saying that because she is presently a virgin she does not know how at some future time she can become pregnant !

That's an interesting interpretation aside from Mary asking how it would be an immediate conception for 8. I'm a YES on 1-4. Gabriel described Messiah on 6. 7 could be "I don't know any royalty that could be father of Messiah." So for 5, it's possible.

But she was still a virgin when Gabriel spoke to her.

Luke 1:26 And in the sixth month the angel Gabriel was sent from God unto a city of Galilee, named Nazareth,

Luke 1:27 To a virgin espoused to a man whose name was Joseph, of the house of David; and the virgin's name was Mary.

[Antony]

John,

I have taken the liberty of reproducing my post / questions and adding your answers at the end of each question. Your answers are in RED. Please advise any error on my part.

______________________________________________________________

John,

It is not me but the traditional interpretation of Mary’s question that portrays her as either very naïve or a simpleton — it has her saying that because she is presently a virgin she does not know how at some future time she can become pregnant !

Let me ask you:

1. Was Joseph a descendent of Jeconiah? (see Mt 1:11) YES

2. Did God ban all descendants of Jeconiah (Coniah) from ever sitting upon the throne of David? (see Jer 22:30) YES

3. Did the angel tell Mary that she would have a son who would be given the throne of David? (see Lk 1:32) YES

4. Does this mean that Joseph, as a descendant of Jeconiah, could not be the father of such a child? YES

5. Do you think Mary’s question had anything to do with this conundrum? IT’S POSSIBLE

6. What do you think the angel said to Mary that prompted her question? GABRIEL DESCRIBED MESSIAH

7. What does the word ‘know’ mean in Mary’s question? (see Lk 1:34) COULD BE "I DON'T KNOW ANY ROYALTY THAT COULD BE FATHER OF MESSIAH."

8. How do you interpret Mary’s question? THAT'S AN INTERESTING INTERPRETATION ASIDE FROM MARY ASKING HOW IT WOULD BE AN IMMEDIATE CONCEPTION. ( “interesting interpretation” — this refers to opening paragragh of this post )


If you number your answers to correspond to the questions, it will easier for readers to follow.

______________________________________________________________

Your answer to Q. 7 is pretty close to the money.

I have commented on Luke's account in earlier posts, including Post 104, also 109, 116.

Mary's question had nothing to do with sex.

[John Goddard]

Please advise any error on my part.

Yeah that's all correct.

[TyRockwell]

All the conditions are met for the traditional interpretation here:

Matt 1:18-20
18 Now the birth of Jesus Christ was on this wise: When as his mother Mary was espoused to Joseph, before they came together, she was found with child of (by) the Holy Ghost.

19 Then Joseph her husband, being a just man, and not willing to make her a publick example, was minded to put her away privily.

20 But while he thought on these things, behold, the angel of the Lord appeared unto him in a dream, saying, 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 Ghost. (KJV)

[Antony]

Antony Post 117

Interpreting the Bible

Apart from the obvious difficulties of interpreting books written in foreign laguages and about a people in ancient times, the main obstacle for today’s reader is overcoming how he or she has been conditioned to read about Jesus in the Bible.

In order to address this problem, it is important to read texts with a fresh mind and where possible to use the Bible to interpret itself. For example, where you read words or phrases applied to Jesus check how these same words and phrases are used elsewhere in the Bible.

Using Mary’s question as an example

The angel Gabriel appeared to Mary, who was betrothed to Joseph, and told her that she would conceive and have a son. The angel spoke of a future event. (Lk 1:26-33)

Then Mary said to the angel, “How can this be, since I do not know a man?” (Lk 1:34)

Most readers have been led to believe Mary is saying, “But how can this come about, since I am a virgin?” In more recent times, many “translations” of the Bible have even taken it upon themselves to render Mary’s question this way.

If you think about it, this interpretation portrays Mary as either very naïve or a simpleton. It has her saying that because she is presently a virgin, she does not know how at some future time she can conceive and have a son.



Antony post 127

Let me ask you:

7. What does the word ‘know’ mean in Mary’s question? (see Lk 1:34)

Young's Concordance is a handy tool to check words in the Bible, both the word that appears in our the KJV Bible and the corresponding word used in the original language.

This is what it reveals about the word 'know' that appears in Lk 1:34 (Mary's question).

1. To know - ginosko

2. Luke used this word in 1:34, and also on 22 other occasions.

3. On these 22 other occasions, not once does it refer to sexual matters.

4. For example, 'For every tree is known by his own fruit'.

5. Luke uses this word in 1:18,34, 2:43, 6:44, 7:39, 8:10,17, 9:11, 10:22, 12:2,39,47,48, 16:15, 18:34, 19:15,42,44, 21:20,30,31, 24:18,35.


After checking these references, do you think Mary was referring to sex when she used the word 'know' ?

[John Goddard]

[After checking these references, do you think Mary was referring to sex when she used the word 'know' ?

You have a good case for "not knowing a royal man who could father Messiah."

[Ben Lomond]

TyRockwell you need to go back to basics and understand that many terms and phrases used in the NT narratives of the nativity of Jesus of Nazareth are also to be found referring to other people in the OT. In this respect the NT nativity accounts reflect Hebrew value concepts.

So why do many people who attribute the doctrines of “virgin birth” “trinity” and “incarnation” to Jesus give totally different meanings to terms and phrases referring to him when they refer to other people???

The concept of Almighty God incarnating into human form through a “virgin birth” always was and always will be an absolute abomination to orthodox Judaism, where as it was a common element of pagan Greek / Latin religious concepts.

When Jesus was born in Palestine about 4BC there was absolutely no expectation among the Jews that their expected messiah would be other than a normal man who found favour with God. It here that we find the meaning of the Immanuel concept.

A search of the Bible for phrases referring to relationships with God shows similarity in many phrases used of Jesus of Nazareth and of other people. To the devout Jew God’s spirit operated in the creation of ALL people. Not all people reciprocated in their sense of responsibility to God.

As examples here are some phrases; do you know to whom they refer??? Do any refer to "virgin birth"???

Now the word of the Lord came unto ... saying: “Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, and before you were born I consecrated you; I appointed you ... to the nations.”

“ ... and the Lord gave her conception and she bore a son.”

“And the Lord visited (her) and she conceived ... and the boy ... grew in the presence of the Lord.”

“... and he shall be filled with the Holy Spirit, even from his mother’s womb.”

“The Spirit of God hath made me and the breath of the Almighty hath given me life.”

“And the angel of the Lord said unto her, “Behold thou art with child, and shalt bear a son and shalt call his name ...” ”

“ ... she conceived and bore (a son) saying, “I have gotten a man with the help of the Lord.” “

“Lo, sons are a heritage from the Lord, the fruit of the womb a reward. Like arrows in the hand of a warrior are the sons of one’s youth. Happy is the man who has a quiver full of them!”

A similar situation prevails with terms like son of man, son of God and holy.

It wasn't lightly that the Jews confronted Jesus with the assertion "We were not born of fornication - we have one father, even God."
Unfortunately they wore this appelation with a sense of deluded grandeur and had forgotten the living values that went with it.

All the beliefs in profound doctrines and creeds aren't worth a cold pie if one overlooks applying ethical values to everyday living.

Ben Lomond.

= = = = = = = = = =

[TyRockwell]

All the conditions are met for the traditional interpretation here:

Matt 1:18-20
18 Now the birth of Jesus Christ was on this wise: When as his mother Mary was espoused to Joseph, before they came together, she was found with child of (by) the Holy Ghost.

19 Then Joseph her husband, being a just man, and not willing to make her a publick example, was minded to put her away privily.

20 But while he thought on these things, behold, the angel of the Lord appeared unto him in a dream, saying, 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 Ghost. (KJV)

Jesus was Fathered by the Holy Spirit. Your assertions are cold bull excrement pie.