Do Christians really believe Mary was a virgin?

[Anonymous]

Biological connections were critical in establishing tribal and genealogical lineages. You need not delve into apocryphal writings to establish that Jesus is the biological son of Joseph - the genealogy is explicitly declared at the beginning of Matthew:

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=matthew%201:1-1:17&version=NIV

This would reconcile the various linguistic evolution/discrepancy of the terms (virgin, maiden, young women, etc). Christianity obviously believes in the divinity of Jesus, but according to the Bible, Jesus was the blood child of both Mary and Joseph.

[Anonymous]

Christmas side question: you know the song the little drummer boy? Is this a story from the bible or a fable that's totally separate?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Christmas side question: you know the song the little drummer boy? Is this a story from the bible or a fable that's totally separate?

The 3 wise men part or the part where a little boy actually plays a drum.

[Anonymous]

Why do you say there were 3 wise men?

[Anonymous]

This thread keeps getting nuttier by the minute.

[Anonymous]

Speaking of the 3 wise men/kings/magi... what I don't get is why these people who are believed to be among the first worshipers of Jesus (at infancy), apparently recognize Jesus' divinity. But then there's nothing about Jesus for like 10-15 years. And even then it's spotty, until he was around 30.

If Jesus was recognized as divine at infancy, why are there no accounts of his early childhood and adolescence? Why wasn't anyone keeping track of things?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Christians or Catholics? Catholics definitely yes. Can't speak for all Christians.

I thought Catholics were Christian too

They are but they don't like to be called Christians. They are "Catholic".

Educate yourself. I am Catholic and happily call myself a Christian.

I heard this from other Catholics. Glad to hear differently from you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Speaking of the 3 wise men/kings/magi... what I don't get is why these people who are believed to be among the first worshipers of Jesus (at infancy), apparently recognize Jesus' divinity. But then there's nothing about Jesus for like 10-15 years. And even then it's spotty, until he was around 30.

If Jesus was recognized as divine at infancy, why are there no accounts of his early childhood and adolescence? Why wasn't anyone keeping track of things?

I would guess one reason was that crazy King Herod was ordering the death of all young males because he wanted to kill the king of the Jews.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Massacre_of_the_Innocents

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Speaking of the 3 wise men/kings/magi... what I don't get is why these people who are believed to be among the first worshipers of Jesus (at infancy), apparently recognize Jesus' divinity. But then there's nothing about Jesus for like 10-15 years. And even then it's spotty, until he was around 30.

If Jesus was recognized as divine at infancy, why are there no accounts of his early childhood and adolescence? Why wasn't anyone keeping track of things?

I would guess one reason was that crazy King Herod was ordering the death of all young males because he wanted to kill the king of the Jews.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Massacre_of_the_Innocents

Even if the Biblical account of this were true, I find it hard to believe that there would be no one keeping a journal or personal writings about the apparent savior/messiah born. No one? No letters? At all? No one is keeping any writings, for virtually 30 years?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Speaking of the 3 wise men/kings/magi... what I don't get is why these people who are believed to be among the first worshipers of Jesus (at infancy), apparently recognize Jesus' divinity. But then there's nothing about Jesus for like 10-15 years. And even then it's spotty, until he was around 30.

If Jesus was recognized as divine at infancy, why are there no accounts of his early childhood and adolescence? Why wasn't anyone keeping track of things?

I would guess one reason was that crazy King Herod was ordering the death of all young males because he wanted to kill the king of the Jews.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Massacre_of_the_Innocents

Even if the Biblical account of this were true, I find it hard to believe that there would be no one keeping a journal or personal writings about the apparent savior/messiah born. No one? No letters? At all? No one is keeping any writings, for virtually 30 years?

Because it's a myth.

[Anonymous]

virgin mary is bs. really. it just is not possible.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:virgin mary is bs. really. it just is not possible.

Well neither is walking on water.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Speaking of the 3 wise men/kings/magi... what I don't get is why these people who are believed to be among the first worshipers of Jesus (at infancy), apparently recognize Jesus' divinity. But then there's nothing about Jesus for like 10-15 years. And even then it's spotty, until he was around 30.

If Jesus was recognized as divine at infancy, why are there no accounts of his early childhood and adolescence? Why wasn't anyone keeping track of things?

I would guess one reason was that crazy King Herod was ordering the death of all young males because he wanted to kill the king of the Jews.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Massacre_of_the_Innocents

This is not generally believed by historians to have happened.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Wasn't Mary married? Why would she be a virgin as a married woman? Or was she supposed to have been impregnated before she was married?

Why would anyone have believed her? If your daughter came to you & said, "Guess what mom, I'm pregnant and it is God's baby not my boyfriend's." Would you believe her?

Probably not, but if I saw my grandson hung from a cross and buried and then he was walking around again a few days later, I might have thought "Gee, maybe that girl wasn't lying".

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Don't forget that Mary's mother also had her by immaculate conception. Because lord knows that a woman who has had sex or is of a woman who has had sex is a dirty whore. No way would she be worthy of the son of god.

The Immaculate Conception refers to Mary being born WITHOUT original sin. It has nothing to do with her mother having or not having sex.

Does that not mean that Mary's mother was a virgin when she conceived Mary?

No,it doesn't. It has to do with the concept of original sin, which has nothing to do with sex.