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.
And I don't want anyone to view an inability to answer this challenge, or a decision to reevaluate a long-held belief, as some kind of personal failure.
The purpose of this challenge is not to embarrass, ridicule, or humiliate anyone. Quite the opposite.
If anything, I have respect for those who are willing to set aside assumptions about my being Catholic and honestly engage the textual argument itself.
If someone carefully considers these questions and concludes that their current position should be reevaluated, I would see that not as a weakness but as an intellectual and spiritual strength.
My hope is not victory over other Christians, but greater understanding, greater honesty with the text, and ultimately greater unity among those who sincerely seek the truth.
