1. Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Mary

Discussion in 'Biblical Debates' started by Lycan, Mar 18, 2005.

  1. Lycan

    Lycan Preternatural

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2005
    Messages:
    668
    Ratings:
    +122
    I don't know if this goes here and this may have already been covered but...

    How did they know whether or not Mary was a virgin?
     
  2. Scott1

    Scott1 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2004
    Messages:
    8,303
    Ratings:
    +950
    Well, I guess I'd have to know if you believed in the Biblical account:
    Luke 1:27 To a virgin espoused to a man whose name was Joseph, of the house of David; and the virgin's name was Mary.
     
  3. Lycan

    Lycan Preternatural

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2005
    Messages:
    668
    Ratings:
    +122
    What I mean is, is she know to be a virgin just because the bible calls her a virgin, or because there is a reference in the bible of her being examined and proven to be a virgin, or are there references in the bible of witnesses that knew she was a virgin?
     
  4. Scott1

    Scott1 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2004
    Messages:
    8,303
    Ratings:
    +950
    I don't believe anyone in the Bible put Mary in stirrups and checked to see if her hymen(sp?) was intact..... short of that..... I don't know what you'd consider evidence.
     
  5. Lycan

    Lycan Preternatural

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2005
    Messages:
    668
    Ratings:
    +122
    I am not trying to be tacky, I am just asking. I am not asking for proof that she was a virgin, I am merely asking what the bibles basis is for the virginity of Mary.
     
  6. Scott1

    Scott1 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2004
    Messages:
    8,303
    Ratings:
    +950
    Verbal/Apostolic tradition...... which eventually was written down and become = the Bible.
     
  7. Lycan

    Lycan Preternatural

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2005
    Messages:
    668
    Ratings:
    +122
    So they just took her word on it, or they just assumed she was?
     
  8. michel

    michel Administrator Emeritus
    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2004
    Messages:
    28,675
    Ratings:
    +2,658
    Lycan; I can see why you are having trouble with this; you are trying to find out how, why, what evidence......

    As far as I know, you will never get it. There is no statement typed by a doctor who examined Mary so that the scriptures could be proved to be accurate. This is why religions are often reffered to as 'Faiths'; I realize that you may have a problem with accepting facts which cannot be 'proved', but that is your choice.

    If you want to talk about this further, PM me by all means, and I can tell you how I personally 'cope' with this facet of religion.:)
     
  9. Green Gaia

    Green Gaia Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2004
    Messages:
    19,780
    Ratings:
    +1,925
    Didn't 'virgin' also mean a young, unmarried girl? Not to say Mary wasn't or couldn't have been a virgin as we think of it. But maybe we're putting too much emphasis on the fact that she hadn't engaged in sexual intercourse. Maybe the Bible just means she was a young, unmarried woman?
     
  10. Scott1

    Scott1 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2004
    Messages:
    8,303
    Ratings:
    +950
    You are quite right Maize.... Mary was in fact a young, umarried girl at the time the time the Angels announced to hear that she was to bear a son.

    Take a look at these verses from Luke:
    [26]In the sixth month the angel Gabriel was sent from God to a city of Galilee named Nazareth,
    [27] to a virgin betrothed to a man whose name was Joseph, of the house of David; and the virgin's name was Mary
    [30] And the angel said to her, "Do not be afraid, Mary, for you have found favor with God.
    [31] And behold, you will conceive in your womb and bear a son, and you shall call his name Jesus.
    [32] He will be great, and will be called the Son of the Most High;
    and the Lord God will give to him the throne of his father David,
    [33] and he will reign over the house of Jacob for ever;
    and of his kingdom there will be no end."
    [34] And Mary said to the angel, "How shall this be, since I have no husband?"

    I take a few things from this.... one, Mary was betrothed to a man.... she was going to be married to Joseph.
    When the Angel says to her that she, a woman "engaged" to be married will conveive a child Mary asks "How shall this be.." .... so, Mary was a rather stupid woman or she was never given the "birds and the bees" talk, right?
    I choose a third option.... she was a virgin.... and planned to remain so, even after marriage..... notice the angel does not tell her that she is pregnant at the present moment, but tells her that "you will conceive" (in the future) ..... one can reasonably assume from this that Mary intended to stay a virgin after marriage..... at least that's my take on it.;)
     
  11. Green Gaia

    Green Gaia Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2004
    Messages:
    19,780
    Ratings:
    +1,925
    Thanks Scott. :)
     
  12. Lightkeeper

    Lightkeeper Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2004
    Messages:
    4,634
    Ratings:
    +223
    Wasn't Jesus's lineage traced through Joseph? This makes the virginity less believable.
     
  13. Scott1

    Scott1 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2004
    Messages:
    8,303
    Ratings:
    +950
    The genealogy of Jesus is traced through Joseph, but Joseph had nothing to do with Jesus' conception. The following explanation sheds light on what seems to be a confusing issue.

    We have two genealogies of Jesus- Matthew 1:1-17 and Luke 3:23-38. Because there are so many substantial differences between these two (for example, many of the ancestral names don't match), they have given scholars a headache through the ages. For example: Who was Joseph's father? Was it Jacob (according to Matthew), or Eli (according to Luke)?

    One answer is: both lists are family records, but Matthew is giving us Joseph's record, and Luke is giving us Mary's. But that answer goes against the text - Luke makes it clear that he is tracing Jesus' descent through Joseph. Nor does it fit with what we know of ancient middle eastern peoples. A genealogy traced through the mother would not have been normal at that time and place in history.

    We have to remember that Israel's origin was tribal. The clan leader was, of necessity, a dominant male. The individual's survival depended on being able to claim membership within the tribe. Since in real life many things could happen to a bloodline, a number of supplementary laws and customs developed. A person could become a member of a clan without actually being born into it. One way was by adoption. Another was to be born of a woman who was married to a man of that clan. Even when the husband was not the child's biological father, he was still officially the legal father, simply because he was husband to the child's mother.

    In the Bible, genealogies can serve different purposes. Besides establishing identity, they can also be used to structure history into epochs and to authenticate a line of office-holders. That's why an individual can be accorded two or more genealogies according to the purposes for which they were drawn up. Rarely do ancient biblical genealogies afford us a list of strictly biological ancestry.

    What were Matthew's and Luke's purposes in giving Jesus a genealogy? They list different ancestors but agree totally on the most important fact: Joseph was not the biological father of Jesus. To see how Matthew made a strong statement about this, read slowly Matthew 1:1-17. Let the repeated, rhythmic phrases "A the father of B," "B the father of C," and so forth, almost lull you to sleep. What happens when you get to verse 16? The lilting, fixed pattern is suddenly altered: "Jacob was the father of Joseph the husband of Mary. It was of her that Jesus who is called the Messiah was born." By using his genealogical list in this way, Matthew was able to proclaim both that Jesus was virginally conceived and that he was also legitimately a "son of David, son of Abraham" (1:1). For Matthew's Jewish Christian audience this was like calling Jesus the Messiah.

    Luke proclaims our Lord's virginal conception when he speaks about Jesus as being - so it was supposed - the son of Joseph in 3:23. He then takes his genealogy back to Adam and even to God himself. In doing this he is stating that Jesus is nothing less than the Son of God. Because neither evangelist was principally concerned with Jesus' biological ancestry, the lists could differ, and each evangelist could present a different popular tradition suitable to his own specific purpose.

    So we see that Joseph was not Jesus' biological father, but he was his legal father. The two genealogies make that point emphatically. Because of that, all of us can now proclaim with the Scriptures that Jesus was, indeed, son of David, son of Abraham, and Son of God.
     
  14. andyjamal

    andyjamal servant

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2005
    Messages:
    192
    Ratings:
    +29
    "They" didn't know that Mary was a virgin. We know that Mary was a virgin because the divinely inspired scriptures tell us so.

    The lineage of Jesus connecting Him to David can be traced through both Joseph and Mary; I think the Quran gives Mary's lineage.

    I think that the miracle of the immaculate conception is relatively insignificant when compared to the greater miracle of Christ's transformation of the hearts of men all over the globe for over 2000 years. If not having a father is the test of greatness, surely Adam would be considered the greatest Manifestation of God; for, He had neither father nor mother.
     
  15. Halcyon

    Halcyon Lord of the Badgers

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2005
    Messages:
    6,411
    Ratings:
    +1,002
    Was it traditional for a girl to be a virgin until she was married? If so there would probably have been a big ruckus like in Tess of the D'Urbavilles (sp?) if she had had sex before marrying joseph, Joseph might have even rejected her. I dunno, i'm just speculating.:rolleyes:
     
  16. Studies

    Studies Member

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2005
    Messages:
    25
    Ratings:
    +6
    Young women of that time were closely whatched , they where to keep themselves pure untill marriage. So I am convinced that she was a virgin. Although I'm not sure after Jesus was born she remained that way. It says in the Bible that Joshep knew her not untill after the birth of Jesus, not in those words but close, I can not find the verse now that I need it. As far as the bible giving anyone a direct quote as to how they knew she was a virgin no one will find that. You have to read about the customs of the Jewish people back then, and it should anserw the question.:)
     
  17. precept

    precept Member

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2004
    Messages:
    184
    Ratings:
    +13
    The question and subsequent answers show how little understanding those who try to interpret scripture do have re Truth.

    Mary was Jewish and so was Joseph and so was Jesus! Christians today choose to forget the importance of the Jewish heritage and its relationship to the Christianity spawned by Judaism.

    Joseph was espoused to be married to Mary. Mary was the only one who knew if she was a virgin or not...However, God also knew; but just only because only Mary and God who made her, would have had such knowledge.

    All those who believe in God would think twice before questioning God; but those who do not believe in God are deserving of an answer as to how anyone can be sure that Mary was a virgin.

    The onus was on Mary to prove that she was a virgin to her husband; and this proof was demanded by Jewish law the first time husband and wife consummated the marriage. The proof was the 'bloodied cloth" which had to be presented to Mary's parents; and which if not presented would be taken as proof that Mary was not a virgin. If therefore, Mary was then proven not to be a virgin; the marriage would be annulled and Mary stoned to death.

    It is because Joseph was aware of this punitive law; that he was ready to break off the engagement to Mary; which he would have done had not the angel told him to "not fear to take Mary as his wife". He knew that despite her being pregnant with child that he was her one and only love and that she was totally faithful to him.

    The "hombojumbo" about Mary being a virgin after giving birth is as unnecessary and without value as the discussion about her being born without sin.
    Neither of these two discussions is relevant to the salvation of humanity. Jesus had to be born human; and in all points as human he was born. The human channel had to wholly human; and this was exhibited so from his being born in a "fly infested unsanitary enviornment" to Mary's having to ride an uncomfortable donkey so soon after giving birth on dusty, bandit infested roads for upwards of a month on their flight into Eygpt from the horrible king Herod.
    The only One Special was the New Born Saviour of humanity--Not Mary!

    Her being singled out to bear the Saviour of humanity was a most Godly honor any female of humanity would humbly be suited for; if such was the female God chose to bear His Son.
    All humans of humanity as chosen by God, such as Mary, His disciples; handpicked by Him; Saul of Tarsus, also handpicked by Him. Moses and all His prophets--They are the chosen directly by God; and yet they are just God's children as any are today. We, like Mary and His disciples are all the same; sons and daughters of God.

    Those who have deified Mary have shown how little they understand the plan of salvation.They have taken the story in a literal subjective sense and speculated as to the circumstances surrounding the story; thus arriving at these preposterous assumptions; which they pass of as biblical mysteries....and mysteries certainly they are; but to those bereft of scriptural knowledge.


    precept
     
  18. jewscout

    jewscout Religious Zionist

    Joined:
    Sep 29, 2004
    Messages:
    9,497
    Ratings:
    +927
    Well i would say the concept of the "Virgin Mary" comes from a mistranslation of Jewish prophecy about the coming Moshiach that says that he will be born of a virgin when actually the translation should say, of a young woman. Then the writers of the Gospels took the translation and ran with it when scribing the story...
     
  19. Halcyon

    Halcyon Lord of the Badgers

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2005
    Messages:
    6,411
    Ratings:
    +1,002
    Seems possible, i think i've heard that explanation before, similar to the Red Sea/Sea of Reeds thingy.

    Also, she couldn't have been a virgin after Jesus, because he had a sister also called Mary. And wasn't John his brother, "John behold your mother, woman behold your son"?
     
Loading...