Virgin Birth? Did it happen?

[Irvine511]

the powers that be of the Church were seeking a way to "sell" virginity to their congregations?

 

[dandy]

the powers that be of the Church were seeking a way to "sell" virginity to their congregations?

i can't contemplate the immaculate conception without pondering the madonna/whore dichotomy, and then i get angry.

 

[nbcrusader]

For those of you who believe it, why would God have to creat his own son in a manner completely different from every other person on the planet?

Because Jesus is different than any other person on the planet, being fully God and fully man.

Why Mary as the surrogate, I don't know.


To the original question, is the virgin birth outside the capability of God? Is there some reason God could not place a child in the womb of Mary?

 

[angel_of_L.A.]

I believe it happened.

I see no reason why faith and reason should be at odds. As Pope John Paul II once said, "Faith and reason are like two wings on which the human spirit rises to the contemplation of truth and the spirit cannot take rise without both."

 

[Dreadsox]

i can't contemplate the immaculate conception without pondering the madonna/whore dichotomy, and then i get angry.

The Immaculate Conception is not about Mary becoming pregnant.

It is about Mary's mother becoming pregnant.

THis is a common mistake.

 

[nbcrusader]

The Immaculate Conception is not about Mary becoming pregnant.

It is about Mary's mother becoming pregnant.

THis is a common mistake.

Doesn't also suggest that Mary is without sin?

I get lost as to why this concept exists.

 

[dandy]

i just learned something new. thanks, dread.

and, yes, i agree with nbc--it's confusing as heck.

 

[speedracer]

For those of you who believe it, why would God have to create his own son in a manner completely different from every other person on the planet?

Because sin is transmitted biologically?

 

[deep]

historical evidence doesn't seem to support that it was an accepted tradition in the early church and that it was incorporated later.

this is what i understand also.


the story was changed to serve certain purposes.

 

[Dreadsox]

Because sin is transmitted biologically?

BINGO!!!!!!!

And that led to the Immaculate Conception. This is the doctrine that Mary's soul was placed inside of her developing body in the womb by God, so that she too would not have the transfer of Original Sin.

Jesus, to be free from sin had to have a Mother and a Father free from sin.

See, God can create life inside a woman's womb without a male being part of it, but he cannot create Jesus without original sin, he does not have that power because MAry would transfer her link to original sin to Jesus. So God, did not create mary the same way he created Jesus. She had human parents creating her human body through fornication just like you or I, but instead of her soul developing like you or I he placed a soul in her free without sin.

Makes sence?

Shoot, my headache just got worse.

 

[Dreadsox]

Dang theologians...lol Forgot that Mary had to be sin free too....not just God. His power is limited....

 

[sulawesigirl4]

Interesting issue in all of this being the obvious conclusion that sex of any kind is automatically SIN. Even for Mary's legally married parents to conceive her was seen by some early Church folk as tainting her and therefore Jesus with sin. To me it smacks of one of those early heresies that I forget the name of...the one that says that only the spiritual and the non-physical parts of us are truly good.

 

[MrsSpringsteen]

That CNN special about the two Marys is on again this Saturday the 18th 8PM ET if anyone's interested

 

[verte76]

Interesting issue in all of this being the obvious conclusion that sex of any kind is automatically SIN. Even for Mary's legally married parents to conceive her was seen by some early Church folk as tainting her and therefore Jesus with sin. To me it smacks of one of those early heresies that I forget the name of...the one that says that only the spiritual and the non-physical parts of us are truly good.

You're talking about the Gnostics. This philosophy had alot of appeal to alot of people all the way through the Middle Ages in Europe. It spread all over Europe and got so powerful that they had an actual Crusade against it in France in the thirteenth century. The Church really felt threatened by this movement and they finally just squashed it. I don't think it went away, it just went "underground". I wouldn't be surprised if there were Gnostic groups today.

 

[stammer476]

I wouldn't be surprised if there were Gnostic groups today.

There are. From what I understand, it's a movement that has been growing over the last 50 years. I don't think it'll ever see the large numbers of the first/second century, but it's becoming more popular nonetheless.

Remember the movie Bruce Almighty? Some of the major doctrines of Gnosticism were presented in that film. Sneeky Hollywood.

 

[stammer476]

Dang theologians...lol Forgot that Mary had to be sin free too....not just God. His power is limited....

Just another reason I can't stand systematic theology. Once you paint yourself into a corner, you have to start creating new rules.

 

[nbcrusader]

BINGO!!!!!!!

And that led to the Immaculate Conception. This is the doctrine that Mary's soul was placed inside of her developing body in the womb by God, so that she too would not have the transfer of Original Sin.

Jesus, to be free from sin had to have a Mother and a Father free from sin.

See, God can create life inside a woman's womb without a male being part of it, but he cannot create Jesus without original sin, he does not have that power because MAry would transfer her link to original sin to Jesus. So God, did not create mary the same way he created Jesus. She had human parents creating her human body through fornication just like you or I, but instead of her soul developing like you or I he placed a soul in her free without sin.

If God can create Mary in Mary's mother, why can't God create Jesus without Mary or Joseph's help?

I guess we get mixed up with the idea that original sin comes from the birthing process. I would see no reason to believe that Jesus carried Mary's blood or dna - thus no link to original sin.

 

[BVS]

I guess we get mixed up with the idea that original sin comes from the birthing process. I would see no reason to believe that Jesus carried Mary's blood or dna - thus no link to original sin.

How much blood or DNA is transferred through the umbilical chord?

 

[stammer476]

How much blood or DNA is transferred through the umbilical chord?

What's sad is that there are probably well-meaning theologians who are huddled in a tight circle debating this very question right now.

Personally, I think the reason for the virgin birth came down to the Jewish understanding of a father-son relationship. Culturally, a father and son were considered identical in thought, ideas, opinions, influence, and actions. Thus, if the biological father of Jesus can be God Himself, the case for Messiah makes much more sense.

 

[Spiral_Staircase]

Makes sence?

nope.

is sin a biological condition? Is it a genetic defect?

 

[AvsGirl41]

Interesting issue in all of this being the obvious conclusion that sex of any kind is automatically SIN. Even for Mary's legally married parents to conceive her was seen by some early Church folk as tainting her and therefore Jesus with sin.

Yes, that is my hesitation with accepting the whole story. I try to see the story seperate from the church's doctrine, but it's difficult.


Its important to remember that was more of a Greco-Roman idea. The Hebrew culture celebrated marriage, sex and fertility, it's a major theme within the OT. Virginity and celibacy was not something they would emphasize.

 

[Lemon Meringue]

The virgin birth was a sign from God that was fortold in the Old Testiment.

Isaiah 7:10-14 

10 Again the LORD spoke to Ahaz, 11 "Ask the LORD your God for a sign, whether in the deepest depths or in the highest heights."

    12 But Ahaz said, "I will not ask; I will not put the LORD to the test."

    13 Then Isaiah said, "Hear now, you house of David! Is it not enough to try the patience of men? Will you try the patience of my God also? 14 Therefore the Lord himself will give you a sign: The virgin will be with child and will give birth to a son, and will call him Immanuel.

 

[Pearl]

I think whether or not the Virgin Birth happened depends on who Jesus was. If Jesus was the Son of God, then the Virgin Birth did happen. If He was just some ordinary man with an extraordinary faith, then he was conceived the normal way.

I know I said here I believe in the Virgin Birth, but I should rephrase that and say I believe it is possible it occured, because I think its possible Jesus was the Son of God.

 

[cell]

Of course it happens. That's the beauty of the whole dogma. You can take it or leave it. And by believing - without seeing - you are blessed. That is faith. The minute you know something it stops being faith and it becomes knowledge.

 

[beli]

Douglas Adams "The Hitch Hiker's Guide to the Galaxy"

"The argument goes something like this: `I refuse to prove that I exist,' says God, `for proof denies faith, and without faith I am nothing.'

"`But,' says Man, `The Babel fish is a dead giveaway, isn't it? It could not have evolved by chance. It proves you exist, and so therefore, by your own arguments, you don't. QED.'

"`Oh dear,' says God, `I hadn't thought of that,' and promptly vanished in a puff of logic.

 

[Angela Harlem]

 

[sallycinnamon78]

I don't think so. But then again I don't believe that Jesus was the son of God any more than anyone else is. And I also don't believe in God in the form of a person or person-like being either...perhaps a powerful life-force, but not an omniscient creator.

Agreed. To me, the idea of God is as an underlying force permeating everything, in all that exists.

That's not as articulate as I would like it to be, but hey, it's late! I know what I mean!

 

[Dreadsox]

Douglas Adams "The Hitch Hiker's Guide to the Galaxy"

Love that book! Two thumbs up!

 

[AvsGirl41]

13 Then Isaiah said, "Hear now, you house of David! Is it not enough to try the patience of men? Will you try the patience of my God also? 14 Therefore the Lord himself will give you a sign: The virgin will be with child and will give birth to a son, and will call him Immanuel.

There's a really interesting thing about that prophecy.

Matthew quotes it in his Gospel based on the Greek, which translated "young woman" as "virgin." It's simply young woman in Hebrew. The early church knew of the translation "error" and explained it in a variety of ways.

That's not to say it didn't happen, of course, but Matthew's reference to it is definitely inaccurate. Luke has the story without the verse.

 

[Angela Harlem]

Agreed. To me, the idea of God is as an underlying force permeating everything, in all that exists.

That's not as articulate as I would like it to be, but hey, it's late! I know what I mean!

I love it when people sum up in 2 sentences, something I could wander around in circles for 2 hours trying to formulate a sentence on.


I'm not sure we actually have the same views, but to me the God I prefer to subscribe to (actually I have trouble believing anything else) is everywhere, in us and all around us. Perhaps in many forms, perhaps only in one. Perhaps parts are here and there. Much like in the song Heaven by Live, I can look at my daughter and believe. Gawd I used a cliche. Anything that is beautiful or remarkable or reliable. Anything bad is a result of us being given a gift iif you will, to experience life very richly. It is not always a great life or an easy life, but there is this balance and I believe in the Chinese proverb that we must know pain to know joy, hurt to know love. Zen etc. It's too big and all encompassing to be left entirely up to chance, I'm pretty sure. Sorry, I believe, is more accurate. We dont know, but my generic God fits me. Or maybe I fit him/Him.

Ignore this lol. I told ya's I could ramble