No Immaculate Conception, No Immutable God

[hope]

Again not sure about such postulation…unless you think holy Mary was unaware of biblical prophecy surrounding virgin birth of the awaited Messiah.

You believe that Mary understood the angel to be telling her that she was to be the mother of the savior and did not know biblical prophecy that is why she asked about not knowing man? BTW there is a discussion over the prophecy of a virgin since the Jewish people say that is a mistranslated verse and what was said was a young girl.

 

[MarysLurker]

BTW there is a discussion over the prophecy of a virgin since the Jewish people say that is a mistranslated verse and what was said was a young girl.

And most Protestants use the Masoretic Text which says “young girl” and not the Septuagint which says “Virgin” (and includes the Deuterocanonical books.)

The Masoretic Text wasn’t made until 1000 AD. And that was by the Jews who didn’t accept Christ.

 

[mcq72]

You believe that Mary understood the angel to be telling her that she was to be the mother of the savior and did not know biblical prophecy that is why she asked about not knowing man

No. She knew of prophecy. I am scratching, putting aside, my whole scenario of why Mary asked the question and your rebuttal of why would Mary ask that if she was already married, that it must have been a vow. I dont think you and I have had proper reasoning. A vow , or union with a husband were not in question, and as we might have said, no surprise to God or angel , or Mary. The only mystery was how was a virgin going to conceive. This is the simplest rationale for her question.

 

[hope]

Let me see if I understand.
Mary is not telling the angel she is a virgin but asking the angel how she as a virgin was going to conceive that would be a good rationale for her intending to remain a virgin. Otherwise were back to my original belief a woman who is married and waiting for the second part of her marriage would not ask that question.

 

[mcq72]

Mary is not telling the angel she is a virgin but asking the angel how she as a virgin was going to conceive that would be a good rationale for her intending to remain a virgin.

Well, she intended to remain a virgin thru the conception. It makes no sense to ask about future virginity with Joseph after Jesus was born. She is not asking about that. She is asking how does a virgin (me/Mary) conceive ? Pretty simple.

 

[hope]

She wasn’t asking how a virgin conceives. Although I guess you might phrase it that way. The angel never says that her child would be the messiah. Why would she think she would be a virgin? There is nothing that would suggest it. If as you claim she expected a normal marriage life, there would be no reason for her to ask about her virginity… Her expectations should have been that Joseph would be the father. Further going back to the Greek. She expressed her virginity as permanent not just until Jesus was born.

 

[mcq72]

She wasn’t asking how a virgin conceives.

She wasn’t ? How was she to know how one does?

The angel never says that her child would be the messiah

So the name Jesus itself, though common, then “Son of the Highest, sit on the throne of David to reign forever, of His kingdom will be no end” is not a clue to a devout temple servant ?

 

[hope]

She wasn’t ? How was she to know how one does?

It is more likely that she wasn’t asking how a virgin conceives but if she were to remain a virgin. What she was asking was am I not to keep my vow? Since she was married your scenario makes no sense. Her question entailed a permanent condition of being a virgin not until she had Jesus but always. You have not addressed that the meaning of a virgin would have the messiah actually was a young women. Mary then would not have thought she had to be virgin just young. If so, then there would be no reason for her to ask about virginity.

 

[mcq72]

It is more likely that she wasn’t asking how a virgin conceives but if she were to remain a virgin.

hope:

You have not addressed that the meaning of a virgin would have the messiah actually was a young women

Then it wouldn’t be a virgin birth. Why would she ask that?

I thought a lot of bibles have virgin prophesy in Isaiah, not young women. Not an issue with me. The “sign” to the House of David is a virgin birth, not a normal young women’s birth, which happens all the time.

A virgin birth is certainly a sign as deep as antything and high as heaven.

 

[hope]

Because she knew what makes a baby. It is only your musings that have her understanding that she was giving birth to the Messiah and that would be a virgin birth. No. It is not what scripture says. It says that she states that she knows not man and that is stated as a permanent condition. We know what that is an euphemism for. It meant that even after the second part of marriage there would be no knowing. We see this when she was married and does not assume that it will be Joseph’s baby. Doesn’t even mention Joseph. I did a little search about what Jews at the time believed and what I found was that it is us looking back that sees a virgin birth as being prophesied but that the common Jew did not understand that it would be a virgin birth. . It is doubtful that Mary would have thought oh I am having the messiah and I will have to remain a virgin. That is not at all supported by scripture or the people of that day.
What she was asking was not how but if. That is not how she would remain a virgin, why would she ask that?, But if she should engage in relations. Why would she ask that because a vow to God could only be released by God.

 

[mcq72]

Since she was married your scenario makes no sense

Well I think it does but point is mute. My point doesnt matter in light of more overiding point or question of understanding of Isaiah prophecy…just how does a virgin bear a child…an eternity of an event!

What she was asking was am I not to keep my vow?

Understand just disagree. She is going to be pregnant .The prophesy is that she will remain virgin . The vow is kept. Why would she ask that ?

Again the vow question only makes sense if you thought she was ignorant of prophecy, and was still thinking pregnancy would be thru normal means. Only then would she ask about her vow.

The Septuagint clearly had virgin, and not sure why she would doubt such probable interpretation of Hebrew…both translations were not foreign to any temple maiden.

 

[mcq72]

It is only your musings that have her understanding that she was giving birth to the Messiah and that would be a virgin birth

Well, we all have our musings
Are you basing your vow scenario based on extra biblical writings? Ok. Some base what I put forth based on understanding of God breathed Isaiah and the ability of select devout Jews to also understand.

It is not what scripture says.

"Ask thee a sign of the Lord thy God either unto the depth of hell, or unto the height above.

Then Isaiah said, "Hear now, you house of David! Is it not enough to try the patience of humans? Will you try the patience of my God also?

Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign. Behold a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and his name shall be called Emmanuel."

Isaiah 7:11-13…not too mention all the other Messianic prophesies in Isaiah, tying in .

 

[mcq72]

It is doubtful that Mary would have thought oh I am having the messiah and I will have to remain a virgin

I agree . Yet out of all the Jews, how many perceived the Christ child as an infant? Just a few, as recorded.

I would totally agree that if Mary had right understanding of prophecies it would have only been by grace and out of a deep relationship with Almighty God, like the few who recognized Jesus as infant.

I would think that the Magnificat was more than utterance of being filled with the Holy Spirit, but also signs of one being graced in the Word of God previously also.

 

[Hodos]

I think your entire argument is based on a number of unsupported philosophical presuppositions that cannot be proven through scripture. You assume that if Mary was subject to sin, then Christ was. Where does it say that? Does not Mary admit her need for a savior in the Magnificat? You seem to assume that Christ did not experience temptation in his humanity. However, Hebrews 2 tells us that Christ partook of humanity in every respect, to include temptation (Hebrews 2:18). You assume God changed because he fulfilled his promise? I don’t understand how God fulfilling his decree that was made before the world was created is somehow creating a mutable God. Essentially you are making the Arius assumption but instead of making Jesus more human and less divine, you are making Jesus less human and more divine. Why can’t we just accept what scripture says and leave it at that without having to contrive philosophical additions to scripture?

 

[hope]

The angle said His name was Jesus. They are not the same. Jesus means Yahweh saves Emmanuel God is with us.
There is nothing in this scripture that even indicates that she is being filled with the Holy Spirit to ask the question you seem to think she asked. What I see you saying is that Mary knew from scripture that the messiah would come from a virgin therefore she knew that Joseph would not be the father and she would conceive Jesus as a virgin and she asked the angel how? I think that is rather presumptuous of her in asking God how He would do something. Why would Mary question how when Scripture, which if she knew about being virgin she would know that God can do all things. It would positively silly for her ask how?

 

[hope]

Could you be more specific. I do not read what you did in the OP

 

[mcq72]

There is nothing in this scripture that even indicates that she is being filled with the Holy Spirit to ask the question you seem to think she asked

What I meant is that any understanding of the Word of God, in particular Isaiah, would be by gracious (name removed by moderator)ut from the Spirit, as was the Magnificat.

For most people the asking the “how” might be presumptuous . Yet for some graced in a deep relationship and seeing how she was partnering with God it seems the most natural question. I think it is fine to know, even presume God can do all things. For a finite being to ask an Infinite being “how” shows that God welcomes and graces partnership, even innocent inquisitiveness. I am sure many how’s and why’s will gladly be revealed in that great day. Why not a few here?

I dont see Mary as presumptuous but as an awed servant asking what’s next or what should I expect? Nothing wrong with the question, just as nothing wrong with her response to the answer.

 

[hope]

Your premise first was based on Mary knowing scripture.

I wondered how much education did a Jewish women have. The answer was not much. She would not have been taught scripture. She went from having a father over her to having a husband over her. Girls were instructed in the domestic responsibilities. It is unlikely that Mary had much knowledge of scripture. Perhaps that is why Simeon had to tell her about what would happen to Jesus. It would also explain why did not understand that Jesus had to be in His Father’s house.
For being inspired by the Holy Spirit when scripture reveals that the Spirit has revealed something it is stated as such. Because such is not stated about Mary’s answer, it was not a inspired revelation.

It has been interesting conversing with you but as the OP has left I think this thread should die. So I won’t be posting anymore unless something egregious happens. God Bless you

 

[Niblo]

It has been interesting conversing with you but as the OP has left I think this thread should die.

‘For this relief, much thanks’ (Hamlet: Act 1, Scene 1)

 

[mcq72]

wondered how much education did a Jewish women have. The answer was not much.

Understand…not sure…yet it would be odd in the scenario of her devoting and vowing virginity to serve God and not be instructed in His Word, instead be insrtucted in domestic affairs.

Yes, thank for your “conversations”.