Answer to Gabriel

[BobRyan]

Please, explain. Why do you say this, the LXX says "the virgin shall conceive" it does say an ambiguous "the young women shall conceive" as the Hebrew may, I say may because it can also be translated "the virgin shall conceive"

Acts points out that the Jews in Jerusalem considered Hebrew scripture, and the Hebrew language to be the gold standard. When Paul switches to speaking Hebrew in Jerusalem the entire rabble becomes quiet. So the LXX was considered a concession to Jews outside of Israel - I doubt that they would view it as a correction to the Hebrew Bible.

In any case I am not trying to argue against the virgin birth as a teaching of the OT - just that the NT non-Christian Jews of Mary's day, of Christ's day did not appear to know about it.

so, why do you claim that Blessed Mary was one among many Jews who were unaware of Isaiah 7:14 in the LXX

Well as your OP points out - she was certainly surprised to hear about the virgin birth idea and as you admit - no one is recorded in the NT as "expecting such a thing" prior to someone telling them about it.

and possibly in the Hebrew too? And, additionally, why would this alleged Jewish lack of expectation of a virgin giving birth to Messiah explain Mary's specific reaction;

Because it shows the context for what she was thinking. She and her peers did not expect such a thing - her own statements show surprise on her part.

namely that she expressed surprise because she is a virgin'

It is very unclear that her "surprise" was that "She is a virgin" . That would be a very difficult idea to prove.

Rather it is the idea that a virgin would give birth.

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

So then we agree that there is no record of his enemies saying He could not possibly be the real Messiah because

I agree up to the word "because" but reject the veracity of the reason your post gives following "because".

 

[BobRyan]

You are correct if by "anyone" you really intend the scribes and pharisees and others who opposed Jesus. They were a kind of unfaithful Israel weren't they, they were the ones who conspired to have the Lord of Glory murdered on the cross and they achieved their wicked goal; these people didn't express faith in Isaiah's prophecy of Christ's virgin birth,

So then we agree that there is no record of his enemies saying He could not possibly be the real Messiah because - they expect the real Messiah to be born of a virgin and Christ (in their view) certainly did not fulfill that requirement. This was not a complaint that they had about Him nor do they ever state that it is an expectation that they had of the real Messiah.

This gets back to your OP - about why Mary is so puzzled by Gabriel's statement. It appears that even she was not expecting a "virgin birth". What is more she seems to have no background info on herself where she could be thinking 'well my mother conceived me as a sinless being so I could be the mother of the Messiah - so of course I have been expecting this announcement".

Rather she seems to be surprised by the whole thing.

I agree up to the word "because" but reject the veracity of the reason your post gives following "because".

you yourself admit that they had no such expectation and therefore no such complaint against Christ saying that He needed to be born of a virgin in order to be the Messiah. You say that apparently we must "imagine it " to be the case since no Bible writer suggests it at all.

Your own OP answers more questions than you are willing to admit.

and would we expect them to? No, because their mission was to oppose and murder Jesus, the Messiah.

Their mission was like that of John the baptizer - the welcome and announce the Messiah.

"He came to His OWN and His OWN received Him not" John 1:10.

"Jerusalem ... how I WANTED to spare you... but you would not" Matt 23

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

you yourself admit that they had no such expectation

This is not correct.

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

You say that apparently we must "imagine it " to be the case since no Bible writer suggests it at all.

This is not correct.

 

[BobRyan]

BobRyan said:

No Jews accused Christ of not being the messiah using the argument that " since the Messiah would be the result of a virgin giving birth" then Jesus could not be the Messiah. It did not occur to them that this would be the case for the Messiah.

Well we both have Bibles with the same four Gospels in them - do you see anyone opposing Christ making the case that "we know your father, mother, brothers and sisters -- and by contrast the Messiah will be born of a virgin so you can't be the Messiah"??

The gospels do not record everything that happened while Jesus was alive so one cannot say "nobody accused him of XXX" all you can rightfully say is that the gospel do not record an accusation about XXX

You say that apparently we must "imagine it " to be the case since no Bible writer suggests it at all.??!!

Your own OP answers more questions than you are willing to admit.

This is not correct.

Your answers seem to waiver

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

Your answers seem to waiver

"That is incorrect" meaning that your post's supposition that "most jews didn't believe that the messiah would be born of a virgin because the scriptures never mention that the Scribes, Pharisees, and Sadducees opposed Jesus' as messiah by saying he was not born of a virgin" looks like a very clear statement.

 

[David Kent]

She made a vow of perpetual virginity since, according to ancient tradition, she was a dedicated temple virgin at age 3.

Tradition does not trump scripture. If that was true scripture would have said.

 

[David Kent]

That's an interesting question. Why should it matter? Why should it matter to anyone either way? You'll find the answer to the question in anti-Catholic protestantism. If the Roman Church says a thing, there are protestants out there who will argue against it and attack the Roman Church over it. The real problem with that is if you attack the Roman Church hard enough you will eventually find yourself attacking Christianity itself.

Most of the people who engage in the attacks see it at as either/or proposition. There is the Roman Church and there is themself. But they either forget or have no knowledge whatever of the Eastern Churches who hold the same beliefs. And that provides us an earmark of heresy. If we look at the Mormon's "Great Abominable Church", meaning the Roman Church, or the Seventh Day Adventists who attack the Roman Church, or the Calvinists who do the same, we find an utter lack of universal knowledge of the Church. And that lack of universal knowledge is an indicator of the lie that those beliefs come from some supernatural or prophetic knowledge.

That is a non answer.

 

[David Kent]

Mathew 1:24 Joseph woke from sleep, he did as the angel of the Lord commanded him: he took his wife, knew her not until she had given birth to a son. And he called his name Jesus.

 

[OldAbramBrown]

1. remaining ... husband.

Immaculate-ish conception isn't so difficult if one abandons the materialistic concept of original sin.

Scripture doesn't say but it's feasible Joseph may have abstained, because he knew why Jesus turned up.

The half brothers were Joseph's,

I understood we were permitted to believe a wide range of hypotheses on matters not mentioned in Scripture, compatible with Scripture.

 

[OldAbramBrown]

...

Why would Mary not having sex with her husband be something we should care about?

The tradition of her being dedicated is not contrary to Scripture and would make sense if He is too. If it's less important to some people what does that matter?

He was Mary's Saviour

Luke 1:47 And my spirit hath rejoiced in God my Saviour.

yes because belief in Him involves belief that He came for others and we should minister to them too, which she did! R T Kendall mischievously published "Saved by Works" about part of James. Doesn't Scripture say our fruitfulness will be judged. Well Mary ministered to us.

 

[BobRyan]

Immaculate-ish conception isn't so difficult if one abandons the materialistic concept of original sin.

Scripture doesn't say but it's feasible Joseph may have abstained, because he knew why Jesus turned up.

The half brothers were Joseph's,

I understood we were permitted to believe a wide range of hypotheses on matters not mentioned in Scripture, compatible with Scripture.

The question Mary asks tells us quite a lot -- about a few traditions not being in pace when she was speaking --

What did she mean then when she said "how can that be?" and added as a reason why she was surprised about the prediction, "since I know not man"?

Mary.. like most Jews in her day - had no expectation at all that the Messiah would be the result of what we call "The virgin birth". She thought that the messiah would be born to a young woman.

And she also must not have suspected she herself was born sinless or that there had been an immaculate conception so that she could be the mother of the Messiah. Else her response would be more along the lines of "well I have been waiting for this all my life"
or "ever since my mother told me about her immaculate conception of me as a sinless being just so I could be the virgin mother of the Messiah"

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

The question Mary asks tells us quite a lot -- about a few traditions not being in pace when she was speaking --




Mary.. like most Jews in her day - had no expectation at all that the Messiah would be the result of what we call "The virgin birth". She thought that the messiah would be born to a young woman.

And she also must not have suspected she herself was born sinless or that there had been an immaculate conception so that she could be the mother of the Messiah. Else her response would be more along the lines of "well I have been waiting for this all my life"
or "ever since my mother told me about her immaculate conception of me as a sinless being just so I could be the virgin mother of the Messiah"

You wrote this before and it is just as unlikely and speculative now as it was then; the only people that scripture records as opposed to Jesus are the Pharisees, Scribes, and Sadducees and all three were implacably opposed to him because at heart they had abandoned God and were enemies of the gospel; they would never have dreamed that the scriptures really spoke about Jesus, they never associated Isaiah 7:14 with Jesus because they were effective apostates from Judaism.

 

[BobRyan]

You wrote this before and it is just as unlikely and speculative now as it was then;

No doubt every last person may not agree with my observation below

BobRyan said:
The question Mary asks tells us quite a lot -- about a few traditions not being in pace when she was speaking --

Mary.. like most Jews in her day - had no expectation at all that the Messiah would be the result of what we call "The virgin birth". She thought that the messiah would be born to a young woman.

And she also must not have suspected she herself was born sinless or that there had been an immaculate conception so that she could be the mother of the Messiah. Else her response would be more along the lines of "well I have been waiting for this all my life"
or "ever since my mother told me about her immaculate conception of me as a sinless being just so I could be the virgin mother of the Messiah"

But we could add "not every last person on CF will agree with what you just said" to a great many posts. I think that is a given.

the only people that scripture records as opposed to Jesus are the Pharisees, Scribes, and Sadducees

And the mobs they controlled as we see at Christ's arrest.

and all three were implacably opposed to him because at heart they had abandoned God and were enemies of the gospel; they would never have dreamed that the scriptures really spoke about Jesus, they never associated Isaiah 7:14 with Jesus because they were effective apostates from Judaism.

1. Jewish leaders did not view themselves as apostates from Judaism.
2. Christ commandment His own followers to obey those leaders but not to do as those leaders did.
3. Paul himself accepts the reprimand against his own condemnation of one of the Jewish leaders at Paul's trial.

4. The question you ask in your OP is very instructive. WHY does Mary answer as someone who does NOT already know that she is the one chosen to be the mother of the Messiah or that the Messiah is to be born of a virgin? What does her OWN question reveal about her thinking just prior to that moment in time?

IT tells us a few key things -

1. She is totally surprised to find out that she is to be the mother of the Messiah rather than "oh yes - I was expecting this all along"
2. She is surprised that this is to be done without the normal pro-creation method rather than "of course since He needs a virgin birth"
3. She is not already informed about a supposed immaculate conception and her own sinless state so necessary to be the mother of the Messiah..

HAD she already known all of that we would expect something like
"Of course - I have been expecting all of this from the day I was informed about the immaculate conception"

 

[jamiec]

He was Mary's Saviour

Luke 1:47 And my spirit hath rejoiced in God my Saviour.

Gal 4:4 But when the fulness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, made under the law

Certainly He is her Saviour - that is beyond all doubt. It does not follow that she sinned; for salvation is not from sin alone. Baptism is for the remission of sins; yet Christ, "Who knew no sin", "fulfilled all righteousness" by being baptised by St John.

I think those words fit in with the NT theme of what is - I think - reversal; in which what is lowly is exalted, and the exalted is brought low. This is not my idea - someone with keen insight pointed out this theme in the Gospels some while ago. An obvious & pattern example of this, is the Incarnation, in which the Logos humbles Himself to the Death of the Cross, by humbling Himself to be "born of a woman, born under the Law", to be exalted to the right hand of God only after tasting death for us all.

 

[Dan Perez]

Blessed Mary understood what a man and his wife did to have a child. And Mary said to Gabriel, the angel sent by God, how can your prediction be true? Since I don't don't have sex. (sorry to put it bluntly in English) "I know not man" has the meaning "I never have sex with a man". Blessed Mary's question and the reason she gives for asking it is a statement about her determination to remain a virgin. The prediction seems impossible because Mary will not have sexual relations with any man.

Gabriel's answer is a reply that assures Mary that her virginity will not be ended, she will remain a virgin because God the Holy Spirit will work a miracle and cause her to conceive.

And Matt 13:55 reads , Is not this the carpenter's son ?

is not his mother called MARY ?

and his brethren , James , and Joses and Simon and Judas .

Verse 57 and his sisters , , are they not all with us ?

Also Matt 12:46 and 47 .

dan p

 

[FenderTL5]

And Matt 13:55 reads , Is not this the carpenter's son ?

is not his mother called MARY ?

and his brethren , James , and Joses and Simon and Judas .

Verse 57 and his sisters , , are they not all with us ?

Also Matt 12:46 and 47 .

dan p

Question; does this mean that you believe Jesus was Joseph's natural born son?
Joseph is "the carpenter" in this verse, no?

 

[The Liturgist]

She made a vow of perpetual virginity since, according to ancient tradition, she was a dedicated temple virgin at age 3.

Indeed so, this is correct.