A Textual Challenge to the “Mary and Joseph Had Later Relations” Position

[Moonwood]

Many here — including @Titus, @David in NJ, @Armour of God, @marks, @David Lamb, @sondring7, and @markalan — reject the doctrine of Mary’s perpetual virginity and instead assert that Mary and Joseph had normal marital relations after the birth of Jesus. The usual arguments are:

• Marriage is oriented toward procreation (Genesis 2).
• “To know one’s wife” means sexual relations.
• “Joseph knew Her not until She had given birth to a Son” (Matthew 1:25), therefore they must have had intercourse afterward.
• Paul teaches that spouses owe each other conjugal rights except for limited periods (1 Corinthians 7).

If this position is truly confident, scriptural, and well‑supported — and if those of us who disagree, including myself, @BreadOfLife, @Marymog, and @GodsGrace, are mistaken — then it should be able to withstand these simple, text‑based questions.

​

1. Mary’s Question to Gabriel (Luke 1:34)​

When Gabriel announces that Mary will conceive a son, Mary replies:

“How will this occur, since I do not know man (οὐ γινώσκω ἄνδρα)?”

The text shows Mary:

• betrothed (legally married under Jewish law; cf. Matthew 1:19–20) to Joseph (Luke 1:27),
• responding to the announcement of conception by asking how conception will occur (Luke 1:34)
• explaining Her confusion by stating that She “does not know man” (Luke 1:34)

So the question stands:

If Mary expected normal marital relations with Joseph, why does She ask how conception will occur — and explain Her confusion by saying She "knows not man"?

​

2. Gabriel’s Answer (Luke 1:35–37)​

Gabriel answers Mary’s question by describing a conception brought about by divine action:

“The Holy Spirit will come upon You, and the power of the Most High will overshadow You.”
“Your kinswoman Elizabeth has conceived in her old age… for nothing will be impossible with God.”

The text shows Gabriel responding to Mary’s question with:

• a description of miraculous conception,
• an example of another woman whose conception was naturally impossible,
• and a statement that God overcomes what is impossible.

So the question stands:

If Mary expected to conceive naturally through Joseph, why does Gabriel respond with a description of miraculous, non‑sexual conception and reinforce it by citing Elizabeth — a woman whose conception was naturally impossible? What relevance would Elizabeth’s impossibility have if Mary’s conception were expected to be natural?


These questions arise directly from Luke’s narrative logic. If the text supports the expectation of normal marital relations, it should be possible to explain why Mary and Gabriel speak as though conception is impossible without divine intervention. Impossibilities in Scripture are tied to physical obstructions — barrenness, age, infertility, or lack of a husband. Mary has none of these. Under Her circumstances, natural conception through Joseph is entirely possible. Yet She speaks as though conception is impossible under Her expected future circumstances. I ask that responses address these questions directly, without shifting to unrelated topics or assumptions.

 

[David in NJ]

Many here — including @Titus, @David in NJ, @Armour of God, @marks, @David Lamb, @sondring7, and @markalan — reject the doctrine of Mary’s perpetual virginity and instead assert that Mary and Joseph had normal marital relations after the birth of Jesus. The usual arguments are:

• Marriage is oriented toward procreation (Genesis 2).
• “To know one’s wife” means sexual relations.
• “Joseph knew Her not until She had given birth to a Son” (Matthew 1:25), therefore they must have had intercourse afterward.
• Paul teaches that spouses owe each other conjugal rights except for limited periods (1 Corinthians 7).

If this position is truly confident, scriptural, and well‑supported — and if those of us who disagree, including myself, @BreadOfLife, @Marymog, and @GodsGrace, are mistaken — then it should be able to withstand two simple, text‑based questions.

1. Mary’s Question to Gabriel (Luke 1:34)​

When Gabriel announces that Mary will conceive a son, Mary replies:

“How will this occur, since I do not know man (οὐ γινώσκω ἄνδρα)?”

The text shows Mary:

• betrothed (legally married under Jewish law; cf. Matthew 1:19–20) to Joseph (Luke 1:27),
• responding to the announcement of conception by asking how conception will occur (Luke 1:34)
• explaining Her confusion by stating that She “does not know man” (Luke 1:34)

So the question stands:

If Mary expected normal marital relations with Joseph, why does She ask how conception will occur — and explain Her confusion by saying She "knows not man"?

2. Gabriel’s Answer (Luke 1:35–37)​

Gabriel answers Mary’s question by describing a conception brought about by divine action:

“The Holy Spirit will come upon You, and the power of the Most High will overshadow You.”
“Your kinswoman Elizabeth has conceived in her old age… for nothing will be impossible with God.”

The text shows Gabriel responding to Mary’s question with:

• a description of miraculous conception,
• an example of another woman whose conception was naturally impossible,
• and a statement that God overcomes what is impossible.

Every doctrine of man is repelled by the Word of God.
When we embrace the words of God and place our trust in them = this is when God moves on our behalf to grant us understanding.

If Mary expected to conceive naturally through Joseph, why does Gabriel respond with a description of miraculous conception and reinforce it by citing Elizabeth — a woman whose conception was naturally impossible? What relevance would Elizabeth’s impossibility have if Mary’s conception were expected to be natural?

The answer is a very easy to KNOW Truth

 

[marks]

If Mary expected to conceive naturally through Joseph, why does Gabriel respond with a description of miraculous conception and reinforce it by citing Elizabeth — a woman whose conception was naturally impossible? What relevance would Elizabeth’s impossibility have if Mary’s conception were expected to be natural?

Jesus wasn't naturally conceived, while His brothers and sisters were. There is no conflict here.

Much love!

 

[Ronald Nolette]

Many here — including @Titus, @David in NJ, @Armour of God, @marks, @David Lamb, @sondring7, and @markalan — reject the doctrine of Mary’s perpetual virginity and instead assert that Mary and Joseph had normal marital relations after the birth of Jesus. The usual arguments are:

• Marriage is oriented toward procreation (Genesis 2).
• “To know one’s wife” means sexual relations.
• “Joseph knew Her not until She had given birth to a Son” (Matthew 1:25), therefore they must have had intercourse afterward.
• Paul teaches that spouses owe each other conjugal rights except for limited periods (1 Corinthians 7).

If this position is truly confident, scriptural, and well‑supported — and if those of us who disagree, including myself, @BreadOfLife, @Marymog, and @GodsGrace, are mistaken — then it should be able to withstand these simple, text‑based questions.

1. Mary’s Question to Gabriel (Luke 1:34)​

When Gabriel announces that Mary will conceive a son, Mary replies:

“How will this occur, since I do not know man (οὐ γινώσκω ἄνδρα)?”

The text shows Mary:

• betrothed (legally married under Jewish law; cf. Matthew 1:19–20) to Joseph (Luke 1:27),
• responding to the announcement of conception by asking how conception will occur (Luke 1:34)
• explaining Her confusion by stating that She “does not know man” (Luke 1:34)

So the question stands:

If Mary expected normal marital relations with Joseph, why does She ask how conception will occur — and explain Her confusion by saying She "knows not man"?

2. Gabriel’s Answer (Luke 1:35–37)​

Gabriel answers Mary’s question by describing a conception brought about by divine action:

“The Holy Spirit will come upon You, and the power of the Most High will overshadow You.”
“Your kinswoman Elizabeth has conceived in her old age… for nothing will be impossible with God.”

The text shows Gabriel responding to Mary’s question with:

• a description of miraculous conception,
• an example of another woman whose conception was naturally impossible,
• and a statement that God overcomes what is impossible.

So the question stands:

If Mary expected to conceive naturally through Joseph, why does Gabriel respond with a description of miraculous conception and reinforce it by citing Elizabeth — a woman whose conception was naturally impossible? What relevance would Elizabeth’s impossibility have if Mary’s conception were expected to be natural?


These questions arise directly from the text itself. They do not depend on tradition, theology, or interpretation — only on what Luke presents. If the position that Mary expected normal marital relations with Joseph is correct, then clear, text‑based answers to these questions should be straightforward. I ask that responses address these two questions directly, without shifting to unrelated topics or assumptions.

You err for you misunderstand thequestion Mary asked of Gabriel.

When she said I know not a man- it is in the present active indicative which simply means she was saying she was not sexually active. Also in Jewish culture betrothals lasted at least nine months. Let us say she was half way through her betrothal (though we do not know when the marriage was supposed to take place), then she knew she would not be sexuallya ctive for at least four months. It is notthe Roman Catholic concept, but a simple statement of a virgin who would not have sex for a while.

​

 

[Moonwood]

Every doctrine of man is repelled by the Word of God.
When we embrace the words of God and place our trust in them = this is when God moves on our behalf to grant us understanding.

The answer is a very easy to KNOW Truth

Thank you for replying.

My questions are not about “doctrines of man” — they come directly from Luke’s narrative.

Could you please answer the two specific textual questions I asked?

1. Why does Mary ask how conception will occur if She expects normal marital relations?
2. Why does Gabriel respond with a description of miraculous conception rather than simply telling Her it will happen through Joseph?

Your reply didn’t address either of these, and they are the core of the discussion.

 

[Moonwood]

Jesus wasn't naturally conceived...

Thank you for replying.

We all agree Jesus wasn’t conceived naturally — that’s not in dispute.

But Mary did not know that yet when She asked Her question.

My question is about Mary’s expectation before Gabriel explained the miracle.

If Mary expected normal marital relations with Joseph, conception would not be puzzling, and She would not ask how conception could occur.

Likewise, Gabriel would not need to explain a miraculous, non‑sexual conception or cite Elizabeth’s impossible pregnancy.

So the question remains:

Why do both Mary and Gabriel speak as though conception is impossible without divine intervention if Mary expected normal marital relations?

Your reply doesn’t address that textual problem.

 

[marks]

Thank you for replying.

We all agree Jesus wasn’t conceived naturally — that’s not in dispute.

But Mary did not know that yet when She asked Her question.

My question is about Mary’s expectation before Gabriel explained the miracle.

If Mary expected normal marital relations with Joseph, conception would not be puzzling, and She would not ask how conception could occur.

Likewise, Gabriel would not need to explain a miraculous conception or cite Elizabeth’s impossible pregnancy.

So the issue remains:
Why do both Mary and Gabriel speak as though conception is impossible without divine intervention if Mary expected normal marital relations?

Your reply doesn’t address that textual problem.

I don't see this as a textual problem. You are extending Mary's question about becoming pregnant at that time, since she'd never done it, as though she were asking how she would become pregnant ever in her life.

"Pregnant? I'm not even married! How will that happen?" That doesn't mean, "I know I'll never have children the 'old fashioned way', so how will I?"

Much love!

 

[Moonwood]

I don't see this as a textual problem. You are extending Mary's question about becoming pregnant at that time, since she'd never done it, as though she were asking how she would become pregnant ever in her life.

"Pregnant? I'm not even married! How will that happen?" That doesn't mean, "I know I'll never have children the 'old fashioned way', so how will I?"

Thank you for clarifying your view.

If Mary were simply saying, “I’m not married yet,” then pregnancy would not be impossible — only not yet. In that case She would ask when She will conceive, not how conception could occur.

More importantly, how does Gabriel’s response fit your interpretation? Because he does not tell Her She will conceive through Joseph once the betrothal period ends. Instead, he explains a miraculous, non‑sexual conception and reinforces it by citing Elizabeth — a woman whose conception was naturally impossible.

So the question remains:

Why do both Mary and Gabriel speak as though conception is impossible without divine intervention if Mary expected normal marital relations?

Your explanation does not account for Mary’s confusion or Gabriel’s answer.

 

[marks]

Why do both Mary and Gabriel speak as though conception is impossible without divine intervention if Mary expected normal marital relations?

You are making this something it's not, as though Mary thought herself incapable of natural conception. Enjoy!

Much love!

 

[Moonwood]

You are making this something it's not, as though Mary thought herself incapable of natural conception. Enjoy!

I’m not claiming Mary thought She was incapable of natural conception. I’m pointing out that Luke presents both Mary and Gabriel speaking as though conception is impossible without divine intervention.

That is the part your interpretation still hasn’t explained.

If Mary expected normal marital relations with Joseph, then conception would not be impossible — only not yet. In that case She would ask when She will conceive, not how conception could occur.

And Gabriel’s response still doesn’t fit your interpretation. He does not tell her she will conceive through Joseph once the betrothal period ends. He instead explains a miraculous, non‑sexual conception and reinforces it by citing Elizabeth — a woman whose conception was naturally impossible.

So the textual issue remains:

Why do both Mary and Gabriel speak as though conception is impossible without divine intervention if Mary expected normal marital relations?

Simply saying “you’re making this something it’s not” doesn’t address the textual issue.

 

[Moonwood]

You err for you misunderstand the question Mary asked of Gabriel.

When she said I know not a man- it is in the present active indicative which simply means she was saying she was not sexually active. Also in Jewish culture betrothals lasted at least nine months. Let us say she was half way through her betrothal (though we do not know when the marriage was supposed to take place), then she knew she would not be sexually active for at least four months. It is not the Roman Catholic concept, but a simple statement of a virgin who would not have sex for a while.

Thank you for replying.

If “I do not know man” simply meant Mary is not sexually active at present, that does not explain why She asks how conception will occur. If She expected normal marital relations with Joseph later, conception would not be puzzling — only the timing would be. In that case She would ask “When?”, not “How?”

More importantly, how does your explanation address Gabriel’s response? Gabriel does not tell Her She will conceive through Joseph once the betrothal period ends. He instead explains a miraculous, non‑sexual conception and reinforces it by citing Elizabeth — a woman whose conception was naturally impossible.

So the question remains:

Why do both Mary and Gabriel speak as though conception is impossible without divine intervention if Mary expected normal marital relations?

Your reply explains neither Mary’s confusion nor Gabriel’s answer.

 

[David in NJ]

Thank you for replying.

My questions are not about “doctrines of man” — they come directly from Luke’s narrative.

Could you please answer the two specific textual questions I asked?

1. Why does Mary ask how conception will occur if She expects normal marital relations?
2. Why does Gabriel respond with a description of miraculous conception rather than simply telling Her it will happen through Joseph?

Your reply didn’t address either of these, and they are the core of the discussion.

1.) Mary asked how can she, being a virgin, conceive the Son of The HIGHEST.

Luke 1:7 - But they had no child, because Elizabeth was barren, and they were both well advanced in years(old).
2.) Elizabeth was:
a.) barren
b.) past child bearing years

Elizabeth and her husband needed a miracle from God = which the angel Gabriel confirmed.

 

[Moonwood]

1.) Mary asked how can she, being a virgin, conceive the Son of The HIGHEST.

Luke 1:7 - But they had no child, because Elizabeth was barren, and they were both well advanced in years(old).
2.) Elizabeth was:
a.) barren
b.) past child bearing years

Elizabeth and her husband needed a miracle from God = which the angel Gabriel confirmed.

Your answers still don’t resolve the textual issue I’m raising.

Why does Mary ask how conception will occur if She expects normal marital relations?
Saying Mary was a virgin does not answer this. If She expected future relations with Joseph, conception would not be impossible — only not yet. In that case She would ask when, not how.

Why does Gabriel respond with a description of a miraculous, non‑sexual conception rather than simply telling Her it will happen through Joseph?
Your comments about Elizabeth being barren and advanced in years explain Elizabeth’s miracle, but they do not explain Mary’s. Gabriel cites Elizabeth precisely because her conception was naturally impossible — which only makes sense if Mary’s situation also appears impossible without divine intervention.

These are the core textual issues. Your reply didn’t address either of them.

 

[David in NJ]

Your response still doesn’t address the two specific textual questions I asked.

Why does Mary ask how conception will occur if She expects normal marital relations?
Saying Mary was a virgin does not answer this. If She expected future relations with Joseph, conception would not be impossible — only not yet. In that case She would ask when, not how.

Why does Gabriel respond with a description of a miraculous, non‑sexual conception rather than simply telling Her it will happen through Joseph?
Your comments about Elizabeth being barren and advanced in years explain Elizabeth’s miracle, but they do not explain Mary’s. Gabriel cites Elizabeth precisely because her conception was naturally impossible — which only makes sense if Mary’s situation also appears impossible without divine intervention.

These are the core textual issues. Your reply didn’t address either of them.

Since when did Mary know that she, as a virgin, can conceive without a man?

 

[Grailhunter]

1. Why does Mary ask how conception will occur if She expects normal marital relations?
2. Why does Gabriel respond with a description of miraculous conception rather than simply telling Her it will happen through Joseph?

Answer to 1. Why did she ask how conception will occur?
Because of what the Angel said.....31 You will conceive and give birth to a son, and you are to call him Jesus.
Just that she will conceive.......She knows she is virgin and she is not involved with a man. So she is wondering how that is going to happen.

Answer 2. The phrase miraculous conception does not occur in the scriptures, nor is it implied. Matthew 1:35 The angel answered and said to her, “The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you; and for that reason the holy Child shall be called the Son of God. Now what does this imply? Overshadow you....normal missionary position? It also mentions the Holy Spirit and Matthew 1:18 Now the birth of Jesus Christ was as follows: when His mother Mary had been betrothed to Joseph, before they came together she was found to be with child by the Holy Spirit. And Matthew 1:20 But after he had considered this, an angel of the Lord appeared to him in a dream and said, “Joseph son of David, do not be afraid to take Mary home as your wife, because what is conceived in her is from the Holy Spirit. So Yahweh and the Holy Spirit are involved with Miriam's conception. Exactly what does this mean? No one knows.....centuries of speculation.

But what is for sure.....
1. Yeshua is the son of Yahweh. Yeshua is not the creation of Yahweh. To be His son, Miriam had to conceive from Yahweh's seed. The scriptures do not say that Yeshua was miraculously conceived. But if He was He was a creation or a manifestation.....NOT the Son of God. But not to worry.....God so loved world that He gave His only begotten Son. Check with the Old Testament if you do not know what begot means.

2. The phrase "virgin Mary" does not occur in the scriptures. But Miriam was a virgin before she conceived. But she is not referred to or implied to be a virgin after she conceived.

3. Did Miriam and Joseph ever have "relations"? Did she have children by Joseph? We do not know that for sure. What we have is.....Matthew 1:25 but kept her a virgin until she gave birth to a Son; and he called His name Jesus. And the scriptures indicate that Yeshua had brothers and sisters. Did Joseph have children through other wives? Did Joseph have multiple wives? Did he have a previous wife? The scriptures say none of this. Were Joseph and Miriam married? It appears so. In Judaism you cannot be married without having sex. And the scriptures do not say or imply they were married without sex.
Matthew 1:20 an angel of the Lord appeared to him in a dream, saying, “Joseph, son of David, do not be afraid to take Mary as your wife; for the Child who has been conceived in her is of the Holy Spirit.
So it would not be wrong to assume that Miriam gave birth to Joseph's children.

 

[Moonwood]

Since when did Mary know that she, as a virgin, can conceive without a man?

I’m not asking when Mary learned She could conceive without a man.
I’m asking why She speaks as though conception is impossible if She expects normal marital relations with Joseph.

If She expected future relations, conception would not be impossible — only not yet. In that case She would ask when, not how.

And Gabriel’s response reinforces the same point:
He describes a miraculous, non‑sexual conception and cites Elizabeth’s naturally impossible conception. None of that makes sense if Mary’s conception is expected to be natural.

So the textual issue remains:

Why do both Mary and Gabriel speak as though conception is impossible without divine intervention if Mary expected normal marital relations.

 

[Moonwood]

Answer to 1. Why did she ask how conception will occur?
Because of what the Angel said.....31 You will conceive and give birth to a son, and you are to call him Jesus.
Just that she will conceive.......She knows she is virgin and she is not involved with a man. So she is wondering how that is going to happen.

Answer 2. The phrase miraculous conception does not occur in the scriptures, nor is it implied. Matthew 1:35 The angel answered and said to her, “The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you; and for that reason the holy Child shall be called the Son of God. Now what does this imply? Overshadow you....normal missionary position? It also mentions the Holy Spirit and Matthew 1:18 Now the birth of Jesus Christ was as follows: when His mother Mary had been betrothed to Joseph, before they came together she was found to be with child by the Holy Spirit. And Matthew 1:20 But after he had considered this, an angel of the Lord appeared to him in a dream and said, “Joseph son of David, do not be afraid to take Mary home as your wife, because what is conceived in her is from the Holy Spirit. So Yahweh and the Holy Spirit are involved with Miriam's conception. Exactly what does this mean? No one knows.....centuries of speculation.

But what is for sure.....
1. Yeshua is the son of Yahweh. Yeshua is not the creation of Yahweh. To be His son, Miriam had to conceive from Yahweh's seed. The scriptures do not say that Yeshua was miraculously conceived. But if He was He was a creation or a manifestation.....NOT the Son of God. But not to worry.....God so loved world that He gave His only begotten Son. Check with the Old Testament if you do not know what begot means.

2. The phrase "virgin Mary" does not occur in the scriptures. But Miriam was a virgin before she conceived. But she is not referred to or implied to be a virgin after she conceived.

3. Did Miriam and Joseph ever have "relations"? Did she have children by Joseph? We do not know that for sure. What we have is.....Matthew 1:25 but kept her a virgin until she gave birth to a Son; and he called His name Jesus. And the scriptures indicate that Yeshua had brothers and sisters. Did Joseph have children through other wives? Did Joseph have multiple wives? Did he have a previous wife? The scriptures say none of this. Were Joseph and Miriam married? It appears so. In Judaism you cannot be married without having sex. And the scriptures do not say or imply they were married without sex.
Matthew 1:20 an angel of the Lord appeared to him in a dream, saying, “Joseph, son of David, do not be afraid to take Mary as your wife; for the Child who has been conceived in her is of the Holy Spirit.
So it would not be wrong to assume that Miriam gave birth to Joseph's children.

Thank you for replying.

But your answers don’t resolve the textual issues I’m raising.

1. Why does Mary ask how conception will occur if She expects normal marital relations?
Saying Mary is a virgin explains why conception has not happened yet, but it does not explain why She treats conception as impossible. If She expects future relations with Joseph, conception would be expected — only later. In that case She would ask when, not how.

2. Why does Gabriel describe a miraculous, non‑sexual conception and reinforce it by citing Elizabeth’s naturally impossible conception?
Gabriel’s explanation (“Holy Spirit will come upon you… power of the Most High will overshadow you”) is not a natural mechanism, and Elizabeth’s conception is cited precisely because it was impossible without divine intervention. That parallel only makes sense if Mary’s situation also appears impossible without divine intervention.

So the textual issue remains:

Why do both Mary and Gabriel speak as though conception is impossible without divine intervention if Mary expected normal marital relations?

 

[Grailhunter]

1. Why does Mary ask how conception will occur if She expects normal marital relations?
Saying Mary is a virgin explains why conception has not happened yet, but it does not explain why She treats conception as impossible. If She expects future relations with Joseph, conception would be expected — only later. In that case She would ask when, not how.

Answer 1 in post 15 answered your question...
Because of what the Angel said.....31 You will conceive and give birth to a son, and you are to call him Jesus.
Just that she will conceive.......She knows she is a virgin and she is not involved with a man. So she is wondering how that is going to happen.
She does not think conception is impossible, or it would be a miracle, she is questioning how it is possible since she is not in a relationship.
And then the Angel answered her question....The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you; and for that reason the holy Child shall be called the Son of God. Question answered, just that simple.

2. Why does Gabriel describe a miraculous, non‑sexual conception and reinforce it by citing Elizabeth’s naturally impossible conception?
Gabriel’s explanation (“Holy Spirit will come upon you… power of the Most High will overshadow you”) is not a natural mechanism, and Elizabeth’s conception is cited precisely because it was impossible without divine intervention. That parallel only makes sense if Mary’s situation also appears impossible without divine intervention.

The Angel definitely does not say that conception will occur without sex. For Yeshua to be the Son of God it can happen no other way than conception from Yahweh's seed. If it is not from Yehweh seed then Yeshua is either a creation or manifestation. And the scriptures do not describe Yeshua as a creation or manifestation. Yeshua describes Yahweh as His Father over 50 times, He never describes Yahweh as His creator. How many times have I explained this to you? You will not find the words miraculous conception in the scriptures. You will not find in the scriptures that Yeshua was created. Your questions have been answered, it is a very simple thing.....Son.....You just will not accept the facts, you will not accept the scriptures.

You want to come up with your own story outside the scriptures.

Elizabeth’s conception was divine but Elizabeth's son was not the Son of God. In the Old Testament Yahweh was involved with making women unbarron.

 

[Taken]

If Mary expected normal marital relations with Joseph,

Nothing says what Mary expected.

why does She ask how conception will occur

Mary asks what “she does not understand.”

— and explain Her confusion by saying She "knows not man"?

Obvious, Mary Understood How, a Conception occurs between a human males seed fertalizing a human females egg, via an intercourse event, which she reveals she had not been a participant in such an event.

If Mary expected to conceive naturally through Joseph,

Already established…
Mary only Knew of Conception to occur, after intercourse between a male and female.

Mary’s Curiousity and Wonderment prompted her own Questions and Answer she received.

why does Gabriel respond with a description of miraculous, non‑sexual conception and reinforce it by citing Elizabeth — a woman whose conception was naturally impossible?

Elizabeth was older.
She had not had children.
She had no expectation to have children.
Yet … Mary was informed … Elizabeth unexpectedly (even in her older age) was expecting a child.

I simply understand, what humans do not think possible, IS possible through God, simply being regarded as A MIRACLE via God.

What relevance would Elizabeth’s impossibility have if Mary’s conception were expected to be natural?

Mary Was NOT being TOLD any kind of “CONCEPTION” would occur.

Conception meaning…
The moment a male sperm fertalizes a female egg.

Mary Was expressly TOLD she would be “Conceived” IN “her womb”.

Conceived meaning…
Be Pregnant
AND..
For Mary specific…
The child would be:
* by Gods intervention…
* her FIRST born…
* the child would be a Boy…
* That one day…that Child would BE called …the Son of God.

Mary was according to mans law…
…Jesus’ legal mother.
Joseph was according to mans law…
…Jesus’ legal father.

According to Gods word…Jesus had no beginning / ending / mother / father

Mary’s role was her being a faithful servant…and rememberance of her being a faithful servant…
Holds no higher importance of remembrance than Other specifically Scripturally mentioned faithful servants…

Glory to God,
Taken

 

[Moonwood]

Answer 1 in post 15 answered your question...
Because of what the Angel said.....31 You will conceive and give birth to a son, and you are to call him Jesus.
Just that she will conceive.......She knows she is a virgin and she is not involved with a man. So she is wondering how that is going to happen.
She does not think conception is impossible, or it would be a miracle, she is questioning how it is possible since she is not in a relationship.
And then the Angel answered her question....The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you; and for that reason the holy Child shall be called the Son of God. Question answered, just that simple.



The Angel definitely does not say that conception will occur without sex. For Yeshua to be the Son of God it can happen no other way than conception from Yahweh's seed. If it is not from Yehweh seed then Yeshua is either a creation or manifestation. And the scriptures do not describe Yeshua as a creation or manifestation. Yeshua describes Yahweh as His Father over 50 times, He never describes Yahweh as His creator. How many times have I explained this to you? You will not find the words miraculous conception in the scriptures. You will not find in the scriptures that Yeshua was created. Your questions have been answered, it is a very simple thing.....Son.....You just will not accept the facts, you will not accept the scriptures.

You want to come up with your own story outside the scriptures.

Elizabeth’s conception was divine but Elizabeth's son was not the Son of God. In the Old Testament Yahweh was involved with making women unbarron.

Your answers still don’t resolve the textual issue I’m raising.

I’m not asking whether Mary is a virgin or “in a relationship.”
I’m asking why She speaks as though conception is impossible if She expects normal marital relations with Joseph.

When you say Mary is “not in a relationship,” you seem to mean She is betrothed but the marriage is not yet consummated. But in that case She still expects future relations with Joseph. And if She expects future relations, conception is not impossible — only not yet. In that situation She would ask when, not how.

And Gabriel’s response reinforces the same point:
He describes a miraculous, non‑sexual conception (“Holy Spirit will come upon you… power of the Most High will overshadow you”) and cites Elizabeth’s naturally impossible conception. None of that makes sense if Mary’s conception is expected to be natural.

You’re shifting the discussion to theology, but my question is about Luke’s narrative logic, not biological speculation.

Gabriel’s explanation (“Holy Spirit will come upon you… power of the Most High will overshadow you”) is never used as a sexual description in Greek, Hebrew, or Aramaic. It is consistently a divine‑presence term, not a physical act. And Gabriel reinforces this by citing Elizabeth’s naturally impossible conception — a miracle, not intercourse.

So the textual issue remains:

Why do both Mary and Gabriel speak as though conception is impossible without divine intervention if Mary expected normal marital relations?