From Physical Virginity to Spiritual Virginity

[John Martin]

What is the significance of virgin birth in Christianity? is it physical or spiritual? Do we need to believe in the physical virginity of Mary? does virgin birth has any universal spiriutal significance?

I feel that the virgin birth of Jesus was the proposition of the early Church, inspired by God. Jesus spoke the good news of the kingdom of God and his oneness with God, 'the Father and I are one'. The disciples of Jesus somehow saw something extraordinary in Jesus and accepted his claim as the Son of God or one with God. They did not believe that they also could have the same experience of Jesus. It was only for Jesus. If so Jesus must be different from the rest of human beings. The proposition of virgin birth has resolved this question.
The story of annunciation which we have in the gospel of Luke( not in other gospels) might have been the personal experience of St.Luke. He had this annunciation experience which he projected onto Mary. In Luke God was calling everyone to be spiritual virgins and give birth to the spiritual child from Above(God). Luke projected it onto Mary and at the physical level.
Five hundred years before Jesus the Vedic Sages had the similar experience of Jesus. The Upanishad sages claimed that they were one with God. They were normal human beings. They were not born of a virgin mothers.
So in order to have the oneness of experience of God, which Jesus had, it is not necessary to be born of a virgin. The theory of virgin birth creates spiritual apartheid between Christ and Christians: one son of God and the rest of the humanity as the creatures of God.
The Virgin mother is a spiritual archetype that has a universal value, both for men and women.Truth or God has two aspects:historical and eternal. When Moses asked God his name, first God said, I am what I am'. Then he also said, 'I am the God of Abraham,of Isaac and of Jacob. The first one is the eternal aspect of God and the second one is the historical aspect of God. The historical aspect of God is that which God has revealed in the human history. The difficulty with the God of history is that he or she divides humanity. Only eternal truth can unite humanity.
Spiritually a virgin is one who discontinues the God of history and gives birth to the God of eternity, from above. The child, born of this virgin, will not be named after the past but will be called the Son of God, the Son of Eternity. This child, which is wisdom of God, breaks down the walls of division and creates one God,one creation and one humanity.
Everyone is called to be a virgin mother of God: to discontinue the God of history(religions and belief systems)and give birth to the God of eternity. Belief in the physical virginity of Mary might have served its purpose so far but now it is necessary to move away from physical virgin birth to spiritual virgin birth.

So it is not necessary to believe in the physical virginity birth of Jesus and but we all should become spiritually virgin mothers of God. When we enter into a religion we enter into the God of history. The God of history is like a nest in which we are born, protected and nourished until the wings are grown. Then we fly into the freedom of the eternal truth. This flying away from the nest into the sky is the virgin act. So rejecting the concept of virgin birth completely is like throwing the baby with the bath water. We need to transform it into spiritual.

 

[Shermana]

What is the significance of virgin birth in Christianity? i

It apparently wasn't significant enough to include in John or Mark, or much of the NT apocrypha (especially not the Gospel of Nicodemus/Acts of Pilate which confirm Joseph as the Father). Most likely was an interpolation and had no significance to the early Jewish Christians such as Cerinthus who explicitly rejected the doctrine.

and his oneness with God, 'the Father and I are one'

This oft-misunderstood verse must be read in conjunction with "Let them be one as we are one", i.e. metaphorically, in purpose.

 

[John Martin]

It apparently wasn't significant enough to include in John or Mark, or much of the NT apocrypha (especially not the Gospel of Nicodemus/Acts of Pilate which confirm Joseph as the Father). Most likely was an interpolation and had no significance to the early Jewish Christians such as Cerinthus who explicitly rejected the doctrine.



This oft-misunderstood verse must be read in conjunction with "Let them be one as we are one", i.e. metaphorically, in purpose.

This oft-misunderstood verse must be read in conjunction with "Let them be one as we are one", i.e. metaphorically, in purpose.[/quote]

this is not as simple as you propose: Jesus Christ transcended the relationship of creator and creature and realized himself as one with God. In that oneness the statement you mention is also included. For Jesus God is not a creator.He manifests creation. Creation is like ice that comes from water and returns to water. We need to understand Jesus statements from this theological position. This is called a transition from a dualistic relationship with God to a non-dualistic relationship with God. This is not a metaphorical statement as you propose, it is a metaphysical statement. Of course Christianity has limited this possibility only Christ but Jesus opened it to every person.

 

[Ingledsva]

What is the significance of virgin birth in Christianity? is it physical or spiritual? Do we need to believe in the physical virginity of Mary? does virgin birth has any universal spiriutal significance?

I feel that the virgin birth of Jesus was the proposition of the early Church, inspired by God. Jesus spoke the good news of the kingdom of God and his oneness with God, 'the Father and I are one'. The disciples of Jesus somehow saw something extraordinary in Jesus and accepted his claim as the Son of God or one with God. They did not believe that they also could have the same experience of Jesus. It was only for Jesus. If so Jesus must be different from the rest of human beings. The proposition of virgin birth has resolved this question.
The story of annunciation which we have in the gospel of Luke( not in other gospels) might have been the personal experience of St.Luke. He had this annunciation experience which he projected onto Mary. In Luke God was calling everyone to be spiritual virgins and give birth to the spiritual child from Above(God). Luke projected it onto Mary and at the physical level.
Five hundred years before Jesus the Vedic Sages had the similar experience of Jesus. The Upanishad sages claimed that they were one with God. They were normal human beings. They were not born of a virgin mothers.
So in order to have the oneness of experience of God, which Jesus had, it is not necessary to be born of a virgin. The theory of virgin birth creates spiritual apartheid between Christ and Christians: one son of God and the rest of the humanity as the creatures of God.
The Virgin mother is a spiritual archetype that has a universal value, both for men and women.Truth or God has two aspects:historical and eternal. When Moses asked God his name, first God said, I am what I am'. Then he also said, 'I am the God of Abraham,of Isaac and of Jacob. The first one is the eternal aspect of God and the second one is the historical aspect of God. The historical aspect of God is that which God has revealed in the human history. The difficulty with the God of history is that he or she divides humanity. Only eternal truth can unite humanity.
Spiritually a virgin is one who discontinues the God of history and gives birth to the God of eternity, from above. The child, born of this virgin, will not be named after the past but will be called the Son of God, the Son of Eternity. This child, which is wisdom of God, breaks down the walls of division and creates one God,one creation and one humanity.
Everyone is called to be a virgin mother of God: to discontinue the God of history(religions and belief systems)and give birth to the God of eternity. Belief in the physical virginity of Mary might have served its purpose so far but now it is necessary to move away from physical virgin birth to spiritual virgin birth.

So it is not necessary to believe in the physical virginity birth of Jesus and but we all should become spiritually virgin mothers of God. When we enter into a religion we enter into the God of history. The God of history is like a nest in which we are born, protected and nourished until the wings are grown. Then we fly into the freedom of the eternal truth. This flying away from the nest into the sky is the virgin act. So rejecting the concept of virgin birth completely is like throwing the baby with the bath water. We need to transform it into spiritual.

The Bible doesn't say she was a perpetual virgin. That idea is ridiculous.

She was just a "virgin" in the young unmarried woman sense, or perhaps a Temple Virgin.

*

 

[John Martin]

The Bible doesn't say she was a perpetual virgin. That idea is ridiculous.

She was just a "virgin" in the young unmarried woman sense, or perhaps a Temple Virgin.

*

I am not concerned with the physical virginity of Mary. My concern is the relevance of spiritual virginity as a necessary condition to every person, both male and female, to grow into a deeper relationship with God.

 

[sojourner]

Mary-as-virgin has more to do with linguistics and authorization. The word translates more closely to "young woman" -- not "virgin." The very early Xtians put forth the idea of virginity to make Jesus look like Augustus, who also reportedly had a virgin birth.

 

[Enai de a lukal]

Not only that, at the time, anyone who was anyone was the son of some god or other (recall how, in Greek mythology, Zeus liked to come down to earth to get freaky with various human females)... So for Christ to be taken seriously, he had to have a similar pedigree, thus we get the idea of God penetrating Mary with his spritual member...

 

[Brickjectivity]

Its a figure of speech full of meaning, probably original and not a late addition to the gospel message. Jesus being "Born of a virgin, Son of God", was about his legitimacy. Its a religious belief that Jesus is the image of his Father. One could also say it is a claim that Jesus message is correct, not made up, who represents the testimony given to the Jewish people. Its like saying that but with a loudspeaker.

Background: Virgin birth laws (in the first 5 books of the Bible) had to do with inheritance laws and also with equality. The first child could be guaranteed to be the father's child since virgins bled their first time, but the second child was not guaranteed to carry the husband's genome at all. No one could guarantee that. It might not always have been surprising for a man to find his second-born did not look like himself. A typical Israeli father made much of his firstborn, but the LORD laid claim to every firstborn son. A man was not to have pride in his bloodline like men in other countries did.

This related to the issue of virgin birth of Jesus firstly by the fact that the patriarchs of Israel, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob were not firstborn sons. They were, in other words, of questionable parentage. "Why" I ask were all of them second born, and why were all of the firstborn sons discredited? It was and is to make very plain that all human blood is red, and all people are the same. Israel was to be a place with all kinds of people in it who could marry each other. With this as the background, saying that Jesus is a firstborn son has specific meaning in Jewish culture. It is a boast about his lineage by which I mean the legitimacy of his claim to represent the Heavenly Father.

Because of the above, the statement Jesus is "Gods Son Born of a Virgin," is likely not a late addition to the gospels nor is it an idle addition having to do only with physical miracles. It is culturally meaningful. The most significant aspect of the statement is that Jesus is legitimate, not of questionable origin, a real representation of God's will. The significance is not that a woman has had a child without a male. The significance is that Jesus is a representation of the Divine. This is more simply stated in the letter Hebrews in the first chapter where it says "The Son is the radiance of God's glory and the exact representation of his being,"

 

[ZVBM]

I dunno.

I think that given the developing church's denigration of the sex act as, at best, a concession to human weakness, and its touting of celibacy as the ideal, proclaiming Christ's virgin birth was a way for Christians to have their spiritual cake & eat it too. You have the deity incarnated in flesh without him being the outcome of an icky-squicky evil sex :hugkiss: act.

Just my $0.02.

ZVBM

 

[Brickjectivity]

That is a good 2 cents. I don't think celibate priests and hatred of sex is a good idea either, and that is just my less than 1/2 cent. Catholics do recognize intermarriage of different kinds of people, so at least they have that as a plus+ on their side. They are also increasingly open to the idea of married priests. I don't know what they will decide of course, and I'm not sure I like the idea of Catholic priests to begin with.

Possibly the 'Icky sex' idea began as a political item around the fifth century. Perhaps it began in the Feudal period? (reference Hans Kung The Catholic Church: A Short History chapter IV The Papal Chuch subsection "Medieval Piety"). Is there any way to mark that the Virgin Birth was not preached before this time? That would mean something.

 

[John Martin]

I will be delighted if people can say something about the necessity of spiritual virginity I refer for everyone to give birth to the God of eternity or now or creativity.

 

[johnhanks]

I will be delighted if people can say something about the necessity of spiritual virginity I refer for everyone to give birth to the God of eternity or now or creativity.

OK, I'll say: "word salad". Delighted?

 

[John Martin]

OK, I'll say: "word salad". Delighted?

I did not mean the things to eat but a spiritual condition which opens us to God of creativity.