The ' Virgin Birth' is problematic for many, because the provision of a ' sinless sacrifice' is at the core of Christian belief. However there are several pointers in Scripture which give some guidance on the morality of a 'Virgin birth’ The technicalities of such a process cannot be explained as to how the process was performed on the Heavenly/Spirit side, on the Earthly side there is one moral method, [at least]. Several points discussed.
2, Mary Stoned?
8, Died Once
10, Lamb of God,
The need of an explanation here is not for the exact how of performing it, but to provide at least one outline solution that does not violate Yahweh's own moral law as given to mankind. As it is, the virgin birth is often under critical attack from the moral standpoint and so any (or many) solutions can serve this useful end if, each suggestion could be morally performed within Yahweh's law.
Miracles are not magic to Yahweh it is work. (Job 38 : Proverbs 3 v 19-
1 Show the virgin birth to be legal by Yahweh's own law. (Job 36 v 3b,24)
2 If possible fit the reasonable natural explanation to the scriptures.(Job 37 v 14)
Would Mary be stoned under God's Law given to Moses? Unlike many societies harsh attitude to the unmarried mother, the God given Law differed in detail now forgotten by many. Yahweh's Law protected the life of the unborn and excluded children from their parents wrong doings. Yahweh's Law demanded two eye witnesses of the sin committed to condemn, so for a virgin birth this could never happen.
1. The Law requirement: Deuteronomy 17 v 6,7 compare Luke 1 v 26a & 35. Just who would these be? Would they come forward to condemn? Would they themselves keep the Law of Deuteronomy 17 v 7 ?
2. Under Yahweh's Law a pregnant woman could not be stoned; Exodus 23 v 6,7 and Deuteronomy 24 v 16, 17.
3. See the problem for eager a stoner of Mary?
The woman stoning at John 8 v 4,5 [-
The first evidence to others of Mary's condition (excluding Elizabeth) Math 1 v 18b; she could not be stoned read;
Exodus 23 v 7 and Exodus 22 v 22 to 24 now compare with 1 Kings 3 v 16,17 interesting?
Comment: The Law was not meant to stone every fault, protection was placed in its structure against self righteous justice (“witch hunts”). The Law always condemned correctly on principle every bad act, in practice it was not a mob charter to stone a lover's accident as some today would have it. (Deuteronomy 22 v 28,29 : Deuteronomy 24 v 1,2 compare Math 1 v 19 ) Certainly a brothel could not exist for long under Mosaic Law, a major cultural step, but a cautious prostitute could. (Proverbs 7 v 5 to 23) However if both were not caught by two eye witnesses, pregnancy would in time often expose her (not always Job 24 v 21a context starts v 15 onwards). Hence this seeming loophole for the protection of the accused in trial and the unborn did not leave her unpunished, since she would have anyway the difficulties of motherhood without a husband's support and a child who asks where is daddy? (Deuteronomy 23 v 2 but compare v 3 to 8).
Thus, sympathetically applied the Law though still condemning on the principle, would allow for lover's accidents but would act with vigour only against dually gross immoral conduct, and then only with two witnesses who were willing to throw the first stones.
End of Mary stoned ? I hope so because this idea of Mary stoned because of God's Law, infers God does not think ahead.
The Law condemned the duel deed of immorality, pregnancy is not a sin. It takes two to commit this type of sin and two eye-
[A child does not inherit either parent’s sin. We are not guilty of Adam and Eve’s sin, we just suffer the consequences. The loss of a full relationship with our creator. This is the missing link mankind should worry about]
The four outline possibilities and some criticisms;
1 Genetic material from Yahweh & Mary: Not legal, Leviticus 18 v 20. Jesus came under Law! Mary also was under Law.(Gal 4 v 4b)Yahweh knew what He was to do long before He gave that Law, what human lawgiver would frame a law he knew he was going to break so openly? See also Luke 2 v 39 & Matthew 5 v 18. Sperm meets ova is a modern use of the word “conception” really only as old as microscopes, such definitions have been made long after the scriptures were written. To Mary's mind it would have nothing to do with male sexual products, as she thought at first, because she was answered ' Holy spirit' and ' power of the Most High' (Luke 1 v 34,35: Genesis 1 v 2). Therefore conception must be qualified as scripture defines it. As sperm is the active constituent of semen [seed], which people knew about, the Angel's statement must exclude any form of sperm donation.
2 Genetic material all from Mary: Would not produce a male child. Parthenogenesis is sometimes the cause of occasional virgin births today. This is when the female ova [egg cell] starts to develop without fertilisation, however any offspring is identical to the mother genetically, [a twin]. Some animals and plants use this method of reproduction, termed: asexual generations, or the similar apogamy.
3 Genetic material all from Yahweh: Requires ' moment of death' end of Logos -
4 Yahweh makes a body (foetus) in the womb: Mary not genetic mother. NB points 1 to 4 Mary was a sinner born of Adams stock: Requires explanation of why sin did not pass on. Psalm 51 v 5b
(category 4 type ) Summary; Mary's body caused to react as if pregnant. Yahweh creates a prenatal body for the logos when the womb is large enough and directly transfers the Logos' mind into the new human brain at that same time activating the newly made human frame to life. This baby in the womb is only the empty body, as the existing Logos is transferred into it.(Genesis 2 v 7b&c)
Detail; Mary set into a state similar to ' phantom pregnancy' to bring womb to the required status. Later Yahweh forms a human frame inside Mary's womb with a brain of sufficient size to take the transfer of the living Logos' personal soul, who never enters any death state.(Romans 6 v 10) Person, memory, and all personal traits are transferred, subject only to the limits of the constructed human frame. [Person is in brain, case in point: Phinehas P Gage, 4:30 p.m. 13th September 1848 near Cavendish Vermont, New England. Skull in museum of Harvard Medical School. Ref: The Listener (BBC) 11 November 1976; pages 594 & 595]. A similar but reverse process to the twinkling.(1Cor 15 v 51,52). Considering the capabilities of human brain tissue for it's size, an adult brain meant to last forever; could mean that more memory than we imagine could be present in the child, having said that, perhaps not all memory need be transferred, we do not cease to be ourselves simply because we have forgot something, and although we can reference things that happened years ago, we can also go years without calling them to mind [before Abraham]. So this affects when the transfer would take place, the capacity of the baby brain would have to be enough -
(take care with next paragraph) Not Mary's own child by her female reproductive power, and hence Jesus is not produced ' out of her' that is; as a child of her fleshly power,(1Cor 15 v 47,48) but; as an adopted child, not a relative in a fleshly sense, he did come ' out of her' body in an actual way at birth still perfect. A sign visible to a few men. (Psalm 139 v 13b:note method here meets requirements of Job 14 v 4)(NB;' out of woman [surrogate]' in mechanical sense at birth yes); A gift to her in the first place, then her family, her race, and her kind, us all, for now to call her own, that is more of a gift than the usual. (Isaiah 9 v 6: Psalm 127 v 3) What other child rewarded his parents by saving them from sin? Jesus often said ' Son of man'.(Mark 14 v 62) Logos really was now One of Us. This resolves the problem of having two greatest men, Matthew 11 v 11 that is Jesus and John. Jesus is and was a natural son of God as Adam before he became a man, by gift he became a man born of woman, We are native humans he a naturalised one.(John 8 v 23)
Let me clarify surrogate; it is a surrogate like situation but not wholly. Mary is given the child by Yahweh and in that case, Jesus as her son is just the same as all of us, gifts of God to parents.
Jesus did not need a conception in an original sense like us at that time, we start in the womb after aeons of our personal non-
The important matter is often overlooked in all the religious clutter and argument. Once accepted as God’s gift of a child by Joseph and Mary, humanity gained one member who had a full relationship with Yahweh. [Full relationship with Yahweh your Creator = son of God.]
1/ Full relationship with Yahweh (a later short suspension only)
2/ Live forever on Earth in human form (sacrificed)
3/ Earth care commission (not sacrificed)
4/ A wife would be in the gift of God; who gave the first woman, and at that same time also making marriage an ordained condition of His recently created man kind, (not a gift from mankind, which anyway could not give a complement of the Logos, the glory to which the man Jesus would return , a complement of himself Logos/Jesus, was required.(Rev 21 v 2,9,10:Mark 10 v 40: 1Cor 15 v 49)(not sacrificed) Wife of Logos in glory -
5/ The right to assert that any member of Mankind, should His Majesty be inclined to so bestow, was his brother or sister. (Luke 8 v 21)
The virgin birth is often a ' bit overdone' as a miracle, after all, every baby is a miracle and we believe this happens. It is only a little bit more of a miracle than the normal commonplace miracle, is it not? The need for a virgin birth is one of deference and place, consider the following points; 1, Would it be right for Mankind to provide less than a clean [virgin] presentation? 2, It puts an emphasis on the offspring being a firstborn. 3, It was already promised as such, and therefore would be expected by any in close attendance.
But there is more. Why not simply just turn Logos into human adult form, what is termed an incarnation? An incarnation of a spirit creature is still really in essence a spirit being, it would not be killed by some things which would kill a human. A case in point is the Angels that sinned before the flood were not drowned; Genesis 6 v 1,2,4 compare Jude 6, they survive under restraint. Incarnation is the usual way God sent an Angel, but they do things humans cannot; Genesis 19 v 9-
Azazel return. Two goats mean one. As Azazel goat returns to a place which is the natural home of goats, so Logos returned to his natural home. As Azazel goat carried away sin, so did Logos forever. Goat that lived carried away sin, Hebrews 10 v 26-
Jesus died once and we know when (Hebrews 7 v 27: 1 Pet 3 v 18), on this basis all virgin birth explanations that require a death state must be rejected (2 Tim 3 v 16). Certain explanations proposing a forming of a foetus in the womb from a fresh human start require a period of time where Logos does not exist and the child is not yet formed hence ' died twice'. (or worse Logos is implanted in an independently formed child if both exist alongside each other.) But more than just being alive is required; A transfer of a conscious Jesus into the womb fits a scriptural requirement easily which is often ignored by other attempts to explain a virgin birth, that is Isaiah 7 v 15. Therefore apart from the parts three days and before his original creation by God, Jesus was and is always alive, so the first foods of weaning are immaterial. At 12 before he received Holy Spirit he amazed the teachers! Did Mary and Joseph teach their teacher so well ? (Matthew 10 v 24,25) Who told him he was in his Father's house ? (Luke 2 v 19) And later before Abraham (John 8 v 58) The method supplied removes the problem of 'just when did Jesus get his memory?’ -
All that was required was:
1/ Yahweh to give Logos/Jesus the 'rights to human life
2/ And to give him a human fleshly frame (Hebrews 10 v 5b).
3/ Give him to the human race, to fit scriptural promise.
4/ Be accepted by a family. Hence all others by relationship, if applied for.
Therefore Jesus [Christ/Immanuel] is [if we should wish and strive] our [eldest] brother. [Luke 8 v 21]
Did Isaac picture Jesus? Genesis chapter; 22 & Romans 15 v 4 (Psalm 49 v 7,8,9) or did the ram ? (Rev 5 v 12,13: John 1 v 36)
Jesus' riddle at Luke 20 v 41-
If you agree the following can be said.
1/On moral grounds: Scriptures suggest a transfer (Hebrews 10 v 5b) so no sex relations nor even use of sexual products. Mary also gave permission to be used as the [surrogate and accepting recipient] mother.
2/Adoption: All parties seemed happy with the arrangement, and it was carried on with all best interests a prime concern. The child was fully accepted in his new home and treated in the opinion of local residents as a natural son.(Matthew 13 v 55,56) Legal by Royal assent. (Genesis 49 v 10 : 1 Kings 2 v 4: 2 Sam 23 v 5)
3/ Possible: As the mass of creation demonstrates what Yahweh can do, it would not be reasonable to say it was impossible. He was using a person already existing and the human frame designed much earlier. Perhaps in comparison with other things He has done it was one of the easier work loads?
Yahweh did not even use His position to over rule human institutions of family or moral law, but behaved by agreement with mankind. A God who is a gentleman.
Much confusion seems to be caused when the terms son or father are applied to Jesus Christ. All men today are sons of another man and many of us are father to yet another. There are two components to the position of father; sire or life giver and a relationship of trainer/teacher. Yahweh/God is life giver to all [in some way all are his sons] and so Yahweh could never be a son of anyone. It is all a matter of lineage either of life or teaching. Humans can no longer inherit 'life before God' via the sire line of Adam, this being lost the very day Adam ate the fruit.
Jesus as Logos was a son of God (Yahweh) in Heaven as the Angels also are. Jesus for the faithful will replace Adam as at Luke 3 v 38 as that connection was broken. There is to be for Mankind a new Patriarchal link to replace Adam; Jesus/Immanuel is to stand in that place instead of Adam. Forgiven Mankind will the trace back to God the Father of all, through Jesus. Try this logic with Revelation 22 v 16 [David], the seemingly circular statement should now make sense, see also; Ephesians 3 v 14,15.
So if Jesus came with his relationship with God from before the earthly sojourn, would he not retain this if the fleshly body was sourced from Mary? Yes, but for himself alone; and this misses the point, Jesus died for us and the body sacrificed had to be unblemished. That the price paid to save Mankind was enough, had to be beyond and without question for eternity to come.
Yahweh was to select, a most excellent woman. Age was not a problem, but only a virgin of King David's family. If she lived or moved later to near Galilee. The birth should take place at Ephrathah. Consider (Luke 14 v 28 : 1 Timothy 3 v 10 & 3 v 11)
Do we make a mistake, when automatically thinking of a young girl? which was she nearer 20 or 50 years old?
Have a think about each of the following points to ponder, separately.
Her mind. Well trained in the Law of God, to grasp the significance of Gabriel's request. Such takes time but also consider Job 32 v 7,8,9.
A person who the Holy Spirit could work with, for the full term. [consider by comparison 1 Timothy 3 v 10]
Was Mary's father dead? [Mosaic Law Numbers 30 v 4] [a] The journey made in haste, is not the action of a young girl under father's or brother’s authority, in those days. [b] Yahweh would have to ask twice, Numbers chapter 30. He sent an Angel a second time for Manoah; Judges 13. Joseph and Mary are mentioned as one expects today, but in the custom of the time we would expect mention of her father because of their proposed marriage. Let me suggest a possibility, Mary had nursed her ageing parent(s) in time running everything, then being left with the house. Mary acts on her own initiative, she must have been free to do so. [Probably modest means but not grinding poverty]
She knew how to keep a burning secret! Luke 2 v 41 to 51.
She was bold in action, [a] the above journey [b] saying yes to being an unmarried mother [c] She was one to corner Jesus into a miracle John 2 v 3-
Did Yahweh consider feminine ways in this matter, women need to talk babies and Mary could not talk openly. The choice of Elizabeth, not only offered Mary a sign to check out but a friend she knew. Does this mean, Mary was perhaps of mature middle age, and nearer Elizabeth in years?
Joseph soon leaves the record, Jesus is concerned for Mary as he is dying and the last mention of Mary is Acts 1 v 14. [she could have been a vigorous 50+ with twenty years to go] As Mary's other sons later became active Christians even prominent and yet no mention of Mary, even a casual greeting. Mary's was a privileged life, but it would be a stressful one. Pick your own figure, this exercise should at least do your knowledge good.
Luke 1 v 26-
Naive, dewy eyed dupe, not this Mary. Those of you who have checked out the triple goddess in her ever virgin stage, will know that we are pre-
Ah; so she is no longer a goddess. But this woman Mary, a daughter of David's royal line brought to birth a King of the said line, so quite legitimately is then; Her Royal Highness Princess Mary of the House of David. Wife of His Highness Prince Joseph of the House of David.
A splendid example of submission when due, of courage when needed, of action when required, of dignity of one's personal prerogative, an intelligent mature woman.
You can place them in which order you like.