Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
Current time: March 28, 2024, 3:36 pm

Thread Rating:
  • 1 Vote(s) - 1 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Mary is not a virgin by the Bible accounts
#1
Mary is not a virgin by the Bible accounts
So, which Christian denominations believe Jesus was born in a virgin birth by woman called Mary who remained virgin trough her life? Is it just Catholics?
Question is why when it seems the Bible does not support that. For starters virgin birth is completely outside the Jewish tradition and is not demanded by any of the Old Testament prophecies concerning the Messiah.

Out of all gospel writers only Matthew insists that Mary was a virgin, at least sometimes. So he writes:
Matthew 1:20. . . , But after he had considered this, an angel of the Lord appeared to him in a dream and said, “Joseph son of David, do not be afraid to take Mary home as your wife, because what is conceived in her is from the Holy Spirit.

Reason only Matthew insist on virgin conception is because of passage in the Old Testament:
Isaiah 7:14 : Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel.

But in original Hebrew the word so translated is almah and this is actually used to refer to a young woman who might or might not be a virgin. The Hebrew language has a specific word (bethulah) for "virgin" but that is not used here. Even trough history Jews were not allowed to translate that word in their own Jewish Bibles on other languages in countries where they lived because they would get in trouble with the Inquisition. Of course it has led early translations of the Bible, including the King James Version, to make use of the word "virgin" in the Isaiah passage as well.

Matthew being Greek he knew versions of the Bible used the Greek word for "virgin" in the Isaiah quotation and it is quite possible that Matthew followed the Greek version rather than the Hebrew version in supporting the virgin birth, and that he did not deliberately misquote.
Other impulse to making her a virgin was at the time Roman historian Livy had written a history of Rome that proved enormously popular. There he wrote that Romulus and Remus were born of Silvia, who was a Vestal Virgin whose children were fathered by Mars. So there might have been the impulse to feel that if a virgin birth could be used to exalt the founders of the pagan city of Rome, how much more could one rightly be used to exalt the founding of the
kingdom of God.

Then genealogy of Jesus which goes according to Matthew: 1 This is the genealogy of Jesus the Messiah the son of David, the son of Abraham:

2 Abraham was the father of Isaac,
Isaac the father of Jacob,
Jacob the father of Judah and his brothers,
[...]
David was the father of Solomon, whose mother had been Uriah’s wife,
7 Solomon the father of Rehoboam,
Rehoboam the father of Abijah,
[...]
16 and Jacob the father of Joseph, the husband of Mary, and Mary was the mother of Jesus who is called the Messiah.


Matthew's emphasis on the virgin birth would seem to negate emphasis on the Davidic genealogy of Jesus. He shows that Joseph, the husband of Mary, was a descendant of David, but then goes on to show that this same Joseph was not the father of Jesus.

Jesus' bros and sises
Matthew 13:55 Is not this the carpenter's son? is not his mother called Mary? and his brethren, James, and Joses, and Simon, and Judas? And his sisters, are they not all with us?

So yes if you read this you could easily come to conclusion that "historic Jesus" was the member of a large family, and that Joseph and Mary had five sons and several daughters. But Catholics usually defend Mary's perpetual virginity by saying that those might be kids from Joseph's earlier marriage, but then they would be half-brothers and half-sisters. Not to mention no such earlier marriage of Joseph is mentioned anywhere in the Bible.
Also Matthew himself indicated that Joseph and Mary indeed had sex, although not neccecerly before Jesus' birth:
Matthew 1:25. And [Josieph] knew her [Mary] not till she had brought forth her firstborn sons and he called his name Jesus.

There is nothing in this verse which would force us to believe that Joseph had no relations with Mary after the birth of Jesus, and that Mary might not have home a number of children in the normal manner who would then have been younger brothers and sisters to Jesus. One might even argue that a firstbon son implies at least a second-born son and possibly others. It would have been easy to say "only son" or even "only child" if Mary had had no more children.

And also Matthew mentions Mary with her children at the cross:
Matthew 27:56. Among which was . . Mary the mother of James and Joses...

Here we have a James and Joses who are the sons of Mary. Remember James and Joses were mentioned earlier as Jesus' brothers.

Mary wants to put him away

Matthew 12:46  While he yet talked to the people, behold, his mother and his brethren stood without, desiring to speak with him. Then one said unto him, Behold, thy mother and thy brethren stand without, desiring to speak with thee. But he answered and said unto him that told him, Who is my mother?

Mark about the same event: Mark 3:21 When his family heard about this, they went to take charge of him, for they said, “He is out of his mind.”

Mark makes no mention of Jesus' virgin birth or of the miracles attendant thereon, so he has no reason to suppose that Jesus' mother and brethren should more readily have faith in him than anyone else.
teachings of the Bible are so muddled and self-contradictory that it was possible for Christians to happily burn heretics alive for five long centuries. It was even possible for the most venerated patriarchs of the Church, like St. Augustine and St. Thomas Aquinas, to conclude that heretics should be tortured (Augustine) or killed outright (Aquinas). Martin Luther and John Calvin advocated the wholesale murder of heretics, apostates, Jews, and witches. - Sam Harris, "Letter To A Christian Nation"
Reply
#2
RE: Mary is not a virgin by the Bible accounts
And lo, it came to pass, in the land of Electron, that this hair was well and truly cloven in twain.
Reply
#3
RE: Mary is not a virgin by the Bible accounts
Well, one could discount the entire lineage because, there's no proof that he ever actually existed to begin with.
Disclaimer: I am only responsible for what I say, not what you choose to understand. 
(November 14, 2018 at 8:57 pm)The Valkyrie Wrote: Have a good day at work.  If we ever meet in a professional setting, let me answer your question now.  Yes, I DO want fries with that.
Reply
#4
RE: Mary is not a virgin by the Bible accounts
(September 18, 2016 at 10:35 am)Nymphadora Wrote: Well, one could discount the entire lineage because, there's no proof that he ever actually existed to begin with.

Or the writers who genned up the Bible went through the Torah for "signs" and retrofitted the story to match them.
Reply
#5
RE: Mary is not a virgin by the Bible accounts
actually...

"There is no instance where it can be proved that 'almâ designates a young woman who is not a virgin. The fact of virginity is obvious in Gen 24:43 where 'almâ is used of one who was being sought as a bride for Isaac." (R. Laird Harris, et al. Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament, p. 672.)

https://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/lex...5959&t=KJV

Alma refers to one of reproductive age/a very young what we'd consider girl, but as the above states is a virgin/young woman.

a bethulah was a girl who was separated and without flaw physically or religiously.
https://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/lex...1330&t=KJV

The difference is between the two Alma is a 0 mile mid size Chevy off a new car dealer lot, and a Bethulah is a Brand new custom, hand made Aston Martin DB9 that is literally perfect in every way.

Just because Marry was a new chevy, doesn't mean she had any miles on her....
Reply
#6
RE: Mary is not a virgin by the Bible accounts
Quote:Is it just Catholics?

Mainly, but it is also any sexually uptight repressed religious pricks who just hate the thought of some dick going up god's mom's twat.

What a sorry bunch of shits they are.
Reply
#7
RE: Mary is not a virgin by the Bible accounts
(September 18, 2016 at 12:24 pm)Minimalist Wrote:
Quote:Is it just Catholics?

Mainly, but it is also any sexually uptight repressed religious pricks who just hate the thought of some dick going up god's mom's twat.

What a sorry bunch of shits they are.

So just remind them that the first penis in Mary's vagina was her son's.  Sleepy
Reply
#8
RE: Mary is not a virgin by the Bible accounts
I figured she was supposed to be a virgin until Jesus' birth? Then her and Joseph could go at it all they want.
[Image: nL4L1haz_Qo04rZMFtdpyd1OZgZf9NSnR9-7hAWT...dc2a24480e]
Reply
#9
RE: Mary is not a virgin by the Bible accounts
(September 18, 2016 at 2:16 pm)Aegon Wrote: I figured she was supposed to be a virgin until Jesus' birth? Then her and Joseph could go at it all they want.

Goes back to the days when you could say "It's a wise child that knows its father." The premium on virginity was to prove the paternity of the child. This is just taken to the nth degree here.
Reply
#10
RE: Mary is not a virgin by the Bible accounts
(September 18, 2016 at 2:16 pm)Aegon Wrote: I figured she was supposed to be a virgin until Jesus' birth? Then her and Joseph could go at it all they want.

For most protestants yes, however older branches like Catholics, Coptics and Eastern Orthodox; most of them believe in the "perpetual virginity of Mary". This is mostly because, Catholics moreso than the others, consider marriage to be a sacrament and mostly indissoluble.

It's hard to keep concise, the general idea is that Mary was sinless, so she could only have a child with a lawful spouse (the Holy Spirit); if she ever engaged in intercourse again she'd be commiting "adultery" against the trinity who she conceived Jesus with. For a woman without sin this is impossible, so they conclude she never had sex after giving birth to Jesus. Also as an interesting side note most of them, again Catholics moreso than the others, because they consider the pain of childbirth to be a punishment for sin also insist Mary could not have experienced the pain of childbirth or broke her Hymen, so how Jesus got out of the womb who knows?

There is a problem using the bible to claim that Mary had other children and that Jesus had brothers, because the word it uses (Adelphus and Adelphoi) can be used to describe any male kin as well.
Reply



Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Matt 1:25, not a virgin Fake Messiah 8 576 October 13, 2023 at 11:49 pm
Last Post: Fake Messiah
  Without citing the bible, what marks the bible as the one book with God's message? Whateverist 143 43900 March 31, 2022 at 7:05 am
Last Post: Gwaithmir
  Did Mary and Joseph ever have sex? Fake Messiah 41 7142 March 18, 2020 at 8:05 pm
Last Post: Abaddon_ire
  GOD RAPED MARY Bow Before Zeus 135 21216 November 29, 2017 at 10:30 pm
Last Post: Minimalist
  The Trinity and Mary vorlon13 52 14478 May 30, 2017 at 12:28 pm
Last Post: Lek
  Virgin Births happen all the time?! Jehanne 11 2710 December 20, 2016 at 5:32 am
Last Post: Angrboda
  How does "Science prove that the miracles of the Bible did not happen" ? Emzap 62 11047 November 4, 2016 at 2:05 am
Last Post: dyresand
  What the Bible Does NOT Say About Premarital Sex Rhondazvous 30 6366 January 25, 2016 at 2:40 pm
Last Post: Angrboda
  Mary's Womb Query vorlon13 34 6955 December 30, 2015 at 1:29 am
Last Post: Minimalist
  How Could Anyone Believe the Gospels Are Eywitness Accounts? Jenny A 15 4104 March 1, 2015 at 3:19 pm
Last Post: abaris



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)