Luke 1:26 - 33

[Verisimilitude]

Absolutely no difference! Except of course the favored one rather than full of grace. There is still no reason to ask how she shall (in the future) conceive!

I think you are assuming things that shouldn’t be assumed. Before Gabriel visited her, she was living the normal 1st century Jewish life of a young woman who was betrothed to a Jewish man. Every expectation about her future was in that sense before Gabriel spoke.

First she shows discernment as any rational person would when the extra-ordinary happens to them:

29 She was deeply disturbed by these words and asked herself what this greeting could mean,

She is reassured:

30 but the angel said to her, 'Mary, do not be afraid; you have won God’s favour.

At this point it is more reasonable that conclude she accepts this immediately and does not doubt who is speaking to her and so there is no need to question what was said, being the obedient observing Jew than for you to assume her doubt continued. It is another reason Mary is special.

I don’t read this as a question of ‘how’ in the classical sense:

34 Mary said to the angel, ‘But how can this come about, since I have no knowledge of man?’

but in the how in the practical sense. Knowing the messege is from God and that God is always true- to doubt would be an insult to God. She knew how children are conceived and that Gabriel was speaking about her conception as taking place before her marriage to Joseph so the question is logical since, like Peter later, when he dreamed of the many foods once forbidden but commanded to eat; it took three times for Peter to accept the Word and other events for him to realize what the vision meant, but Mary did not question the Word, but accepted it right away.

The answer by Gabriel confirmed to her that it was not a future even, but a ‘now’ event and her response signifies that.

38 Mary said, ‘You see before you the Lord’s servant, let it happen to me as you have said.’ And the angel left her.

John the Baptist recognized Jesus as God upon seeing him, the demons recognized Jesus as God when He came near, the Roman soldier who asked for his servant to be healed recognized Jesus at a minimum as having the authority of God. Paul did not question God but listened the first time. Not everyone does. Mary did.

 

[edjco]

After the groom received his bride together with her female attendants, the enlarged wedding party would return from the bride’s home to the groom’s father’s house.12 Upon arrival there the wedding party would find that the wedding guests had assembled already.

Shortly after arrival the bride and groom would be escorted by the other members of the wedding party to the bridal chamber (huppah). Prior to entering the chamber the bride remained veiled so that no one could see her face.13 While the groomsmen and bridesmaids would wait outside, the bride and groom would enter the bridal chamber alone. There in the privacy of that place they would enter into physical union for the first time, thereby consummating the marriage that had been covenanted earlier.14

Talk about your performance anxiety!

Tom, I got your point from the first post, and I think it is brilliant.
As I read it, there were a lot of things she would/should have asked, but the one she DID ask was “How can this be…” etc.
I don’t think the argument made soon after makes sense to me. If you told an engaged young lady that she would have a child, you would probably get more of a response like: “Well, that’s what I’m planning.”, not something like “How?”.

 

[edjco]

I just thought of something else: What if you made the same statement to a nun, or some other lady who has taken a vow of celibacy: “You will conceive a child…” How would a nun answer? Seems to me she would answer something similar to how the Blessed Virgin answered.

 

[Tom]

I don’t read this as a question of ‘how’ in the classical sense: but in the how in the practical sense. Knowing the messege is from God and that God is always true- to doubt would be an insult to God. She knew how children are conceived and that Gabriel was speaking about her conception as taking place before her marriage

This is where I absolutely disagree, in fact it’s totally illogical! A woman who is betrothed, being told she would conceive, would naturally think the conception was in relation with her marriage. Where does Gabriel even hint the conception would be prior to her having sex with her husband? If she had said “when shall this happen” since I know not man you’d have a point. She wasn’t confused in the when. Where does Gabriel hint it would be prior to being taken into the household of Joseph?

 

[Tom]

The answer by Gabriel confirmed to her that it was not a future even, but a ‘now’ event and her response signifies that.

How can the answer to the question explain the reason for the question? She would have thought her conception was after, not prior to her being taken by Joseph. That’s why she asked “how” and not “when”!

 

[Tom]

I just thought of something else: What if you made the same statement to a nun, or some other lady who has taken a vow of celibacy: “You will conceive a child…” How would a nun answer? Seems to me she would answer something similar to how the Blessed Virgin answered.

True!

 

[Tom]

Let me answer the question Mary asks Gabriel:
Mary: “how shall this be, since I know not man”
Gabriel: “Mary are you stupid or what? You don’t know you’re getting married? You don’t know you’re going to have sex with your husband? You don’t know how children are conceived? What have I told you that would make you ask such a question?”

 

[Tom]

Along the same lines, why does Gabriel stop short of telling Mary who the true Father of her child would be? He was on a roll, why leave out the most important part? If Gabriel had continued on, as he should have, and told Mary who the true Father would be, there would have been no reason for her to ask “how”. Almost like God wanted her to ask so He could have her make the statement “I know not man”.
Now this statement “I know not man” isn’t a statement of her current, at the time, virginity, but in relation to the revelations of Gabriel of what would occur in the future. If you’re told, tomorrow you will conceive, would it make sense to say “how shall this be since today I am a virgin”? Not much sense is it? She’s stating her future, not the present!

 

[agangbern]

Luke 1 :31** And now**, you will conceive in your womb and bear a son, and you will nme him Jesus…

Yes, Mama Mary must have understood it to be NOW. It was at the time of the annunciation that she would conceive. That is why she asked: How could this be? I am a virgin.

But this of course does not erase the possibility that she had committed with Joseph a celibate marriage for the sake of God. When Mama Mary asked that question, she was not thinking of her celibate marriage, but of the now conception, even before that marriage. For that conception, to her view, was simply impossible. Hence the angel said, “For with God, nothing is impossible.”

 

[Tom]

Yes, Mama Mary must have understood it to be NOW. It was at the time of the annunciation that she would conceive.

Why would a woman who was about to be taken into a mans house as his wife, think an angel of God is telling her she shall commit a sin of fornication?

 

[Tom]

Yes, Mama Mary must have understood it to be NOW. It was at the time of the annunciation that she would conceive.

If Mary thought it was going to happen right then, she would need to commit fornication, right then, with someone! After all she knew how children were conceived. So, did Mary think Gabriel was telling her to sin or not?

 

[Verisimilitude]

This is where I absolutely disagree, in fact it’s totally illogical! A woman who is betrothed, being told she would conceive, would naturally think the conception was in relation with her marriage.

Your reasoning is illogical and/or you prefer to dismiss the rest of the conversation.

35 The angel answered, 'The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will cover you with its shadow. And so the child will be holy and will be called Son of God.

She is told the conception is supernatural, not in relation to her upcoming marriage or by natural means as with sex with a man. You assume she places it in the context of her marriage. I conclude she knew it was independent from her statement of acceptance as well as the general knowledge she would have about how children are conceived.

Where does Gabriel even hint the conception would be prior to her having sex with her husband? If she had said “when shall this happen” since I know not man you’d have a point. She wasn’t confused in the when. Where does Gabriel hint it would be prior to being taken into the household of Joseph?

The requirement of proof is on you to show Mary was ignorant of how children are conceived. Agreed, she was not confused in the when- you are. Her question of ‘how’ was qualified by a statment of fact- she knew no man. She was not asking how out of ignorance, but in the sense of if Mary was to remain pure in the sight of God, how would this come about. She did not question the when because it was not relevant to being obedient. That is what you are missing I think. She trusted God implicitly. Rare among humans.

 

[Tom]

Your reasoning is illogical and/or you prefer to dismiss the rest of the conversation.

This is in reply to “I don’t read this as a question of ‘how’ in the classical sense: but in the how in the practical sense. Knowing the messege is from God and that God is always true- to doubt would be an insult to God. She knew how children are conceived and that Gabriel was speaking about her conception as taking place before her marriage”
My question is why would she think Gabriel is speaking of her conception as taking place before her marriage. That’s the point that doesn’t make sense! She’s betrothed, she will soon be married, she would naturally think either:

1. Her conception would be natural and in conjunction with her marriage.
2. She was being told she would conceive outside of her marriage with Joseph.
   The logical answer would be she thought it would be a natural conception AFTER she had “known” Joseph. You think this is illogical? Why? Where do you get any other idea?

 

[Tom]

She is told the conception is supernatural, not in relation to her upcoming marriage or by natural means as with sex with a man.

Where do you find this said in verses 26 – 33? It isn’t! Verses 26 -33 is WHY she asks in verse 34! She had no reason to believe it would be supernatural! It isn’t until AFTER she asks that she finds out it is supernatural. It isn’t until AFTER she asks that she finds the true Father of the child is God Himself.

 

[Tom]

You assume she places it in the context of her marriage.

Absolutely! Why would a woman about to be wed, believe an angel of God was telling her she would sin? If the conception was not in conjunction with her marriage, she would need to fornicate outside of her marriage. What logic tells you she believed that?

 

[Tom]

I conclude she knew it was independent from her statement of acceptance as well as the general knowledge she would have about how children are conceived.

Her statement of acceptance come ONLY AFTER she asks, and is told her child will be conceived by the Holy Spirit.
You can’t say she asked because she knew what the answer was going to be!
She would have had no clue prior to verse 34 that her child would be anything other than from natural conception within her marriage to Joseph.

 

[Tom]

Agreed, she was not confused in the when- you are. Her question of ‘how’ was qualified by a statment of fact- she knew no man.

Gabriel was telling her what would happen IN THE FUTURE! Not what had happened, or was happening at that moment, but what was going to happen. Her answer, about knowing no man, was NOT her current state of virginity! That makes no sense! She was responding with her future state of virginity! I know no man, today, tomorrow, forever. Mary, sometime in the future you will conceive. How since today I’m a virgin? Think about it!

 

[Tom]

I think you are assuming things that shouldn’t be assumed. Before Gabriel visited her, she was living the normal 1st century Jewish life of a young woman who was betrothed to a Jewish man. Every expectation about her future was in that sense before Gabriel spoke.
First she shows discernment as any rational person would when the extra-ordinary happens to them:
She is reassured:
At this point it is more reasonable that conclude she accepts this immediately and does not doubt who is speaking to her and so there is no need to question what was said, being the obedient observing Jew than for you to assume her doubt continued. It is another reason Mary is special.

O.K. let’s get this straight. My point is there is no reason for a woman about to be wed, told she would conceive, to question “how”.
She asks “how” in verse Luke 1:34, so only her knowledge prior to verse 34 is available to her. In other words, she doesn’t yet know the child will be conceived supernaturally by the Holy Spirit. She doesn’t know the child will not be Josephs’ natural son. She doesn’t know the conception will be prior to her marriage to Joseph. So, based on Luke 1: 26 -33 (and anything she would know PRIOR to asking her question in verse 34), why is she confused as to “how”?

 

[Tom]

She knew how children are conceived and that Gabriel was speaking about her conception as taking place before her marriage to Joseph

There’s my question! Why? What did Gabriel say to make her feel the conception was to take place prior to her marriage?

 

[Tom]

She is told the conception is supernatural, not in relation to her upcoming marriage or by natural means as with sex with a man.

Not before she asks! You’re going past her question to the answer of her question! She doesn’t know that at all when she asks!!!