Answer to Gabriel

[BobRyan]

I am not sure that is true, Jews in the centuries before the Virgin Birth wrote the LXX and in it the word virgin is explicitly in Isaiah 7:14.

¶ “Therefore the Lord [So 1QIsaa; MT reads Lord] himself will give you a sign. Watch! The virgin [So LXX; 1QIsaa MT read The young woman] is conceiving a child, and will give birth to a son​

"the young woman" does not have to be a virgin in that case.

I think Isaiah was writing to convey that it would be a virgin but the language used does not insist on it and Mary was obviously not aware that such a thing were required for the Messiah. Or else she would say something like "well if this is to be the Messiah it is a good thing I am a virgin" or something of that sort.

It does not appear that anyone recorded in the Gospels was expecting a virgin birth for the Messiah - not even Mary.

Now you could say that they had an imperfect understanding of the Is 7 text - but be that as it may -- the point is that in the context of Mary's culture in her day - it does not appear that any of them were predicting a virgin birth for the Messiah.

I am not trying to blame that on scripture - just saying that this appears to be what was happening in her day.

, and his name will be called [So 1QIsaa; MT LXX read she will name him; MT alt. reading and you will name him] Immanuel. [The Heb. name Immanuel means God with us]​

(Isaiah 7:14 ISV*)

No doubt Jesus was the incarnate God - but the question is "what was Mary thinking" - what was her POV as and the expectation of her people at that time?

 

[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.

That is an interesting comment. How do you know it is true?

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"??

 

[BobRyan]

Fireinfolding said:
How does Mary remaining a virgin affect any regarding Jesus Christ?

It is related to the other Marian Dogma, the immaculate conception, which together with her perpetual virginity as the faithful handmaid of the Lord, relates to Christ's unstained-by-original-sin humanity.

1. remaining a virgin or not after the birth of Christ would have no bearing at all on Mary sinning or Christ having sin - unless you first stipulate that according to scripture it is a sin for two married people to have relations with each other.

2. The immaculate conception is an idea that maybe Mary's mother gave birth to Mary as a sinless being -- which is never mentioned in the Bible - but even if it were an event that took place 17 or 18 years before Mary conceived Jesus - it would not be a past event that "was changed" due to some future event where after the birth of Christ -- Mary then had marital relations with her husband.

So I am totally not following your logic in that case.

 

[BobRyan]

Why would Jesus have to be born of a woman without any sin as if such a woman who had sin would somehow defile him when you see how the women in scripture who were laden with sins did touch him in life and were healed by him?

If Mary could be born sinless even though her mother was a sinner (as some would like to suggest for their idea of an immaculate conception of Mary by Mary's mother ) - then the same could be said of Christ. Why would Mary then need to be born sinless??

 

[The Hour IS AT HAND]

Mary, was the living tabernacle of our dear Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God. A pure vessel, unblemished to carry our Saviour.

God wouldnt place His Son in anything that was less than 100% pure, and would forever remain so.

God placed Jesus in the world, which was definitely not pure.

What about?
Mar 6:3 Is not this the carpenter, the son of Mary and brother of James and Joses and Judas and Simon? And are not his sisters here with us?” And they took offense at him.
Were the brothers and sisters of Jesus also conceived by the Holy Spirit?

 

[Fireinfolding]

If Mary could be born sinless even though her mother was a sinner (as some would like to suggest for their idea of an immaculate conception of Mary by Mary's mother ) - then the same could be said of Christ. Why would Mary then need to be born sinless??

Excellent point

 

[Fireinfolding]

Many things Jesus taught are not contained in the Bible, as John said:

John 21:25​

25 But there are also many other things that Jesus did; if every one of them were written down, I suppose that the world itself could not contain the books that would be written.​

Do you think that the Apostles dismissed everything that Jesus said because it wasn't written down?

Theres a difference between what Jesus DID and SAID, see highlighted below



John 21:25 And there are also many other things which Jesus DID, the which, if they should be written every one, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that should be written. Amen. (John 7:3, John 20:30 etc)



John 18:20 Jesus answered him, I spake openly to the world; I ever taught in the synagogue, and in the temple, whither the Jews always resort; and in secret have I SAID nothing.



I glossed over this post and I just wanted to adress this part because what was done and what was said spoken of differently.

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

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

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

Excellent point

It's an irrelevant point.

 

[Fireinfolding]

It's an irrelevant point.

BobRyan said, " If Mary could be born sinless even though her mother was a sinner (as some would like to suggest for their idea of an immaculate conception of Mary by Mary's mother ) - then the same could be said of Christ. Why would Mary then need to be born sinless??"

Thats a GREAT point.

What? Mary could defeat sinful womb disease but Jesus couldn't or something?

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

BobRyan said, " If Mary could be born sinless even though her mother was a sinner (as some would like to suggest for their idea of an immaculate conception of Mary by Mary's mother ) - then the same could be said of Christ. Why would Mary then need to be born sinless??"

Thats a GREAT point.

What? Mary could defeat sinful womb disease but Jesus couldn't or something?

I'm sorry, God be with you.

 

[BobRyan]

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

The Bible record a lot of opposition to Christ as the Messiah. It does not show that anyone in his day expected him to be born of a virgin (here I am not talking about Isaiah not affirming it - just that Christ's contemporaries did not). Rather what we see them doing is arguing that He had an illegitimate birth - so they actually argued that his birth circumstances were a bad thing of out-of-wedlock immorality.

The same is true today if someone were to say that they were conceived before their parents got married we would say it is an "out of wedlock" scenario not "well then you must be an immortal pre-existant being from heaven".

Your point that not every word spoken is recorded is not doubted. But we certainly know what is normal for our day and age and it is pretty certain that in Christ's day - people who claimed to have been conceived just prior to their parent's marriage was viewed the same as it is today.

My point is - that His contemporaries did not view this lack of in-wedlock birth scenario to be benefiting his claim to be the Messiah.

 

[BobRyan]

BobRyan said, " If Mary could be born sinless even though her mother was a sinner (as some would like to suggest for their idea of an immaculate conception of Mary by Mary's mother ) - then the same could be said of Christ. Why would Mary then need to be born sinless??"

Thats a GREAT point.

What? Mary could defeat sinful womb disease but Jesus couldn't or something?

That's a very difficult point to answer - apparently.

 

[BobRyan]

It's an irrelevant point.

how so?

 

[BobRyan]

going back to the OP question -

Mary knew about marriage and - meaning nothing prurient here - knew how babies were made. Mary was to wed Joseph. 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.

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.

They did accuse him of an illigitimate birth scenario -- but never say "well because you were conceived out of wedlock it must have been a virgin birth so then you must be the Messiah since we all think the Messiah is the incarnate Son of God born of a virgin" -- you never see anything like that as a reason someone gives for accepting Christ in the Gospels.

Not doubting the virgin birth on my part or that Isaiah's "young woman" statement in chapter 7 could apply to that - just that Christ's contemporaries did not appear to be expecting/insisting/testing for that in regard to what they thought the Messiah would be.

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

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.

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" so, why do you claim that Blessed Mary was one among many Jews who were unaware of Isaiah 7:14 in the LXX 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; namely that she expressed surprise because she is a virgin and intends to remain a virgin?

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

how so?

Because Jesus' maternal grandmother is not the antitype of the arc of the covenant. so her virginity, and inheritance of the stain of original sin, is irrelevant to Christology while Blessed Mary's freedom from the stain of original sin is Christological as is the virgin birth.

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

The Bible record a lot of opposition to Christ as the Messiah. It does not show that anyone in his day expected him to be born of a virgin (here I am not talking about Isaiah not affirming it - just that Christ's contemporaries did not).

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

 

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

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.

 

[BobRyan]

Because Jesus' maternal grandmother is not the antitype of the arc of the covenant. so her virginity, and inheritance of the stain of original sin, is irrelevant to Christology while Blessed Mary's freedom from the stain of original sin is Christological as is the virgin birth.

The issue is that there appears to be no "immaculate conception" idea taught by any NT writer nor does Mary appear to know about her own birth being of that sort - because if she knew that -- she would be expecting this announcement in your OP - rather than surprised to hear it.