Results 1 - 6 of 6
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | Mary's virginity remained intact | Bible general Archive 3 | Parable | 180511 | ||
My summary of the circumstances was perhaps too cursory; it was to provide context rather than prove anything. The core of my question is this: does what happened between Mary and the Holy Spirit constitute adultery? Mary and Joseph were betrothed, which in those days was part of marriage. Adultery is defined as illicit sexual relations with a person other than the marriage partner. The Holy Spirit is a person, and impregnation is about as sexual as it gets. I'm asking for the biblical basis that this act, committed by a willing Mary and God, is not adultery. Either it is by virtue of the fact the law does not apply to God or what happened was somehow not illicit, sexual or both. I favor the latter, because Mary's virginity remained intact, at least until after the birth of Jesus, when Mary had children by Joseph. |
||||||
2 | Mary's virginity remained intact | Bible general Archive 3 | Wild Olive Shoot | 180577 | ||
Question: "The core of my question is this: does what happened between Mary and the Holy Spirit constitute adultery?" Answer: No! There was nothing sexual that took place. If it had, it would not have been a "virgin birth". It would have been a "had intercourse one time birth". The last time I checked, to remain a virgin, which Mary was at the time of Christ's birth, meant that you had no sexual relations. Matthew 1:24 Then Joseph being raised from sleep did as the angel of the Lord had bidden him, and took unto him his wife: Matthew 1:25 And knew her not till she had brought forth her firstborn son: and he called his name JESUS. It was a miracle. And according to Easton’s Bible Dictionary, a miracle is: “An event in the external world brought about by the immediate agency or the simple volition of God, operating without the use of means capable of being discerned by the senses, and designed to authenticate the divine commission of a religious teacher and the truth of his message. It is an occurrence at once above nature and above man. It shows the intervention of a power that is not limited by the laws either of matter or of mind, a power interrupting the fixed laws which govern their movements, a supernatural power. “The suspension or violation of the laws of nature involved in miracles is nothing more than is constantly taking place around us. One force counteracts another: vital force keeps the chemical laws of matter in abeyance; and muscular force can control the action of physical force. When a man raises a weight from the ground, the law of gravity is neither suspended nor violated, but counteracted by a stronger force. The same is true as to the walking of Christ on the water and the swimming of iron at the command of the prophet. The simple and grand truth that the universe is not under the exclusive control of physical forces, but that everywhere and always there is above, separate from and superior to all else, an infinite personal will, not superseding, but directing and controlling all physical causes, acting with or without them.” God ordinarily effects his purpose through the agency of second causes; but he has the power also of effecting his purpose immediately and without the intervention of second causes, i.e., of invading the fixed order, and thus of working miracles.”… It was a miracle. Don’t attempt to logically explain it away by use of natural and even understood laws. God said it would be so and it was. Stand in His Grace WOS |
||||||
3 | Mary's virginity remained intact | Bible general Archive 3 | Parable | 180585 | ||
Of course it was a miracle. That wasn't the question. Please bear with my process, there is a point to it, and its maybe not to "logically explain it away." Legalistically, since Mary was still a virgin, no sex act occurred, so technically it can't have been adultery. Yet, there are many broken people who have experienced the pain of a spouse who was for all practical purposes unfaithful, but perhaps not sexually, rather emotionally with someone else. This is perhaps even more of a betrayal than the physical. For them, the question of what constitutes infidelity is not just about whether or not intercourse occurred. Certainly what happened between Mary and the Holy Spirit was intimate. In other words, does it not qualify as adultery by virture of the fact it was God who was involved, or that it was not sexual? (I think perhaps both, and seek scriptural support for the former aspect of that.) That is, if it were possible for a man to impregnate Mary without having sex with her, or even physical contact, how would it be seen and more importantly, would Joseph feel betrayed? I think we would have a problem with that scenario, and would expect no less from Joseph. So, my purpose is to illuminate why it may be different because it was God, not man. Scripture tells that Joseph, a righteous man, considered divorcing Mary because she was pregnant not by him. The angel told him not to do so because the child she carried was from God. Either this means that what happened was somehow not was not adultery, or if it was, it was somehow justified, like not all killing is murder, e.g. self-defense or execution by the state. This is exegesis, not an attempt to disparage God. |
||||||
4 | Mary's virginity remained intact | Bible general Archive 3 | srbaegon | 180587 | ||
Hello Parable, Under the Mosaic Law (applicable at the time that Mary became pregnant) adultery occurred when there was a sex act. There was none between God and Mary. You mentioned emotions, and that has some bearing since lusting after another woman was to be considered adultery. There was no lust of God for Mary. Conclusion: There was no adultery on any level. You speculate about impregnating a woman without intercourse. Since this was an impossibility, there is no point in mentioning it. And even if it was possible at the time, it is still not adultery since no intercourse nor the desire of it took place. You need to remember something of paramount importance here. God said that the two would become one flesh (Gen 2:24). That requires a physical act. It seals the emotional and spiritual bond between man and wife. Nothing like this happened between God and Mary. Steve |
||||||
5 | Mary's virginity remained intact | Bible general Archive 3 | Parable | 180592 | ||
Your conclusions may have merit, but upon what do you base them, specifically? As for my hypothetical situation, it was to get at the point of whether the issue centers on who was involved, and perhaps not on the means by which it was done. So there was a point in mentioning it. As for it not being adultery if there was no intercourse, that's understood. However, my purpose was to consider the deeper question of what constitutes infidelity. For example, in Jeremiah 28:8, God says "I gave faithless Israel her certificate of divorce and sent her away because of all her adulteries." If physical intercourse is necessary, this can only mean that the nation of Israel had physical intercourse with someone besides God, when most understand this to refer to Israel's idolatry with other religions. |
||||||
6 | Mary's virginity remained intact | Bible general Archive 3 | Parable | 180593 | ||
correction, make that Jer 3:8, not 28:8. | ||||||