Because angels announce purely natural births. Given that Mary was betrothed, the only reason she would wonder about how she was to give birth is if she planned on remaining a virgin.How does that relate to your OP ?
And his brothers aren't all spiritual...here's another, distinguishing his fleshly brothers from his spiritual...Yeah, his followers aren't all relatives.
An angel came to a young betrothed woman and told her she would bear a son. She then asked how this would happen.
But this question makes no sense. She knows how babies are made. There is only one explanation: she was intending to remain a virgin. Otherwise, it's obvious how she would get pregnant.
Brothers refers to more distant relatives as well, like Abraham and Lot. Don't play dumb.And his brothers aren't all spiritual...here's another, distinguishing his fleshly brothers from his spiritual...
"So his brothers+ said to him: “Leave here and go into Judea, so that your disciples may also see the works you are doing."
One example indicates that? Sorry, need a better Bibilcal source than that. What other kinds had their been up to that point?Because angels announce purely natural births
Why does it matter that she was betrothed at all? And why wouldnt she wonder about the method of impregnation?Given that Mary was betrothed, the only reason she would wonder about how she was to give birth is if she planned on remaining a virgin.
You are the one playing dumb here...verse 5 of John 7...Brothers refers to more distant relatives as well, like Abraham and Lot. Don't play dumb.
One example indicates that? Sorry, need a better Bibilcal source than that. What other kinds had their been up to that point?
No. She would just assume that she would get pregnant by having sex with JosephWhy does it matter that she was betrothed at all? And why wouldnt she wonder about the method of impregnation?
His RELATIVES. The Bible wasn't written in English, you know.You are the one playing dumb here...verse 5 of John 7...
"His brothers were, in fact, not exercising faith in him.+}
So what other types of births besides 'natural' had there been up to that point?Abraham and Isaac is a famous example that all Jews knew about.
And we're back to my original post...that it's not about getting pregnant it's about communicating God's plan. That would have to be communicated before OR after marriage. In either case the holy son being inside her would still need to be communicated.No. She would just assume that she would get pregnant by having sex with Joseph
A more accurate translation is brothers...His RELATIVES. The Bible wasn't written in English, you know.
So what other types of births besides 'natural' had there been up to that point?
Why would it have been questioned????
No. Look at the differences in the questions. Zechariah asks "how will I know this." He doubted and was punished. Mary asks "how will this be, since I know not man." She wasn't punished because she didn't doubt. Her question was a reasonable one. How can a virgin who intends on remaining a virgin get pregnant? The angel then explains that it will be a virgin birth.And we're back to my original post...that it's not about getting pregnant it's about communicating God's plan. That would have to be communicated before OR after marriage. In either case the holy son being inside her would still need to be communicated.
So again, please explain your point.
As even in English the word brethren can have a wider meaning.A more accurate translation is brothers...
Then that wasnt a valid argument. You just demonstrated that.There hadn't been. All of the announced births were natural births. The only reason Mary would have asked is because she intended to not have sex.
He doubted God. Mary was being informed, prepared. Big difference.No. Look at the differences in the questions. Zechariah asks "how will I know this." He doubted and was punished.
Exactly.Mary asks "how will this be, since I know not man." She wasn't punished because she didn't doubt. Her question was a reasonable one.
She asked 'how.' Why wouldnt she? Virgin or married, it's 'magic' basically.How can a virgin who intends on remaining a virgin get pregnant? The angel then explains that it will be a virgin birth.
If the angel told her it would be a virgin birth she'd have no idea how that would 'happen' so it makes sense ANYONE would ask. Even a man. But since the angel was telling her that, obviously it was going to be before they did consummate the marriage.Again, if she is planning on having sex, her question makes no sense.
Can you read the chapter? The angel never said virgin birth.Then that wasnt a valid argument. You just demonstrated that.
Again, God's plan had to be communicated to her anyway...so
He doubted God. Mary was being informed, prepared. Big difference.
Exactly.
She asked 'how.' Why wouldnt she? Virgin or married, it's 'magic' basically.
If the angel told her it would be a virgin birth she'd have no idea how that would 'happen' so it makes sense ANYONE would ask. Even a man. But since the angel was telling her that, obviously it was going to be before they did consummate the marriage.
It just doesnt seem like rocket science.
I read what you posted...she's asking 'how,' period. I think my posts have supported that and why.Can you read the chapter? The angel never said virgin birth.
True and she did, after Jesus' birth...I've got a dumb question. What's with all the focus on whether Mary or anyone else intended to have sex or not? I understand the significance of the miracle of the virgin birth but fail to see how any other intentions Mary may have had help fill out the story. She was betrothed to Joseph and certainly would have consummated the marriage if it had happened but I simply don't see how that has any bearing on anything else.
Are you asserting that she didn't know how babies are made?I read what you posted...she's asking 'how,' period. I think my posts have supported that and why.
Or post the passage please.
No, I'm saying she's asking how she'd be get pregnant. It could involve when, who (is someone knocking at her door?), is it magic, is it somehow thru Joseph, is a fully formed fetus being teleported into her uterus, etc? There are a million questions anyone would have when approached by an angel.Are you asserting that she didn't know how babies are made?
They were married but she remained a virgin. It's a part of why she's regarded so highly by those who trace their tradition back to the time of Christ. In fact the oldest hymn that we know of was written in praise of Mary!I've got a dumb question. What's with all the focus on whether Mary or anyone else intended to have sex or not? I understand the significance of the miracle of the virgin birth but fail to see how any other intentions Mary may have had help fill out the story. She was betrothed to Joseph and certainly would have consummated the marriage if it had happened but I simply don't see how that has any bearing on anything else.
She asked how, and said this is because she "knows not man" (a euphemism for her virginity). She's asking how she's going to get pregnant because virgins don't get pregnant. So if she were planning on having sex, the question is ridiculous. She would have gotten pregnant the same way everyone else gets pregnant.No, I'm saying she's asking how she'd be get pregnant. It could involve when, who (is someone knocking at her door?), is it magic, is it somehow thru Joseph, is a fully formed fetus being teleported into her uterus, etc? There are a million questions anyone would have when approached by an angel.
Please include the passage you mentioned.
What a bogus citation of the Catholic Encyclopedia. Here's what it actually says:Many Catholics Are in Doubt
Catholic reference works reveal that Catholic scholars have had doubts that Mary remained a virgin all her life. The Bible itself several times mentions Jesus’ “brothers” and “sisters.” (Matthew 12:46, 47; 13:55, 56; Mark 6:3; Luke 8:19, 20; John 2:12; 7:3, 5) Some Catholics, however, claim that these words designate “relatives,” such as cousins. Is this true?
The New Catholic Encyclopedia states: “The Greek words . . . that are used to designate the relationship between Jesus and these relatives have the meaning of full blood brother and sister in the Greek-speaking world of the Evangelist’s time and would naturally be taken by his Greek reader in this sense.” Also, The New American Bible, a Catholic translation, admits in a footnote on Mark 6:1-6, where Jesus’ brothers and sisters are mentioned: “The question of meaning here would not have arisen but for the faith of the church in Mary’s perpetual virginity.”
The Bible clearly shows that Mary had other children besides Jesus; the Catholic Church’s teaching that she did not is what has created a controversy. Catholic author J. Gilles, who thoroughly examined all the Scriptural evidence on the subject, concluded: “Briefly and in measured language, out of faithfulness to the [Catholic] Church, I believe I can sum up my investigation as follows. . . . The FOUR CANONICAL GOSPELS provide concordant evidence . . . that Jesus had real brothers and sisters in his family. . . . In the face of this coherent block of proof the traditional position [of the Catholic Church] seems vulnerable and fragile.”
https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/101985803?q=perpetual+virginity+of+Mary&p=sen
It's not ridiculous He came to her before she was married. She didnt know 'when.' And if it was via God or some Holy plan, why wouldnt she question it.She asked how, and said this is because she "knows not man" (a euphemism for her virginity). She's asking how she's going to get pregnant because virgins don't get pregnant. So if she were planning on having sex, the question is ridiculous. She would have gotten pregnant the same way everyone else gets pregnant.
Luke 1:34
She was betrothed. It's like engagement. She was soon to be married.It's not ridiculous He came to her before she was married. She didnt know 'when.' And if it was via God or some Holy plan, why wouldnt she question it.
And please explain why the issue here is about your presumptions about her concerns...or who's concerns...about her virginity?
IMO you're still off-base because she DID get pregnant AFTER she married but before consummation. Why didnt they consummate the marriage that night?
26 In the sixth month of Elizabeth’s pregnancy, God sent the angel Gabriel to Nazareth, a town in Galilee, 27 to a virgin pledged to be married to a man named Joseph, a descendant of David. The virgin’s name was Mary. 28 The angel went to her and said, “Greetings, you who are highly favored! The Lord is with you.”
29 Mary was greatly troubled at his words and wondered what kind of greeting this might be. 30 But the angel said to her, “Do not be afraid, Mary; you have found favor with God. 31 You will conceive and give birth to a son, and you are to call him Jesus. 32 He will be great and will be called the Son of the Most High. The Lord God will give him the throne of his father David, 33 and he will reign over Jacob’s descendants forever; his kingdom will never end.”
34 “How will this be,” Mary asked the angel, “since I am a virgin?”
35 The angel answered, “The Holy Spirit will come on you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you. So the holy one to be born will be called[b] the Son of God. 36 Even Elizabeth your relative is going to have a child in her old age, and she who was said to be unable to conceive is in her sixth month. 37 For no word from God will ever fail.”
38 “I am the Lord’s servant,” Mary answered. “May your word to me be fulfilled.” Then the angel left her.
So she asked, the angel answered her (in 35), and she said, cool, ok (in 38).
So it seems normal she asked and altho the answer was supernormal, she accepted it. Now please explain: about your presumptions about her concerns...or who's concerns...about her virginity? She seems to have accepted the angel's answer.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?