The Case for the Sinless Ever-Virgin Mary.

[Aunty Jane]

So in other words you are one of the types, that shall I say, grow, roll and smoke their own theology? Good to know. I'll just put you on ignore. Cheers!

Yes…ignore the problem and it will just go away….it happens when those challenged have no reply…..where is your defense man?
If you cannot defend why you believe what your church teaches….then why believe it at all?
Is blind faith the sort we should have?

Is not your own faith “grown, rolled and smoked” by millions to this day?
Jesus and his apostles foretold a “falling away‘ (apostasy) from the true faith….and it happened very early in church history……the apostles even said that it had begun back whilst they were still alive. Since you claim that yours was the original church, then that is what got corrupted. Did that never occur to you?

So, the readers here have yet another indoctrinated, professed Christian, running for cover because someone dared to challenge what they believe…..Peter said we had to defend our faith…..why can’t you?

 

[Jethro2]

We're plowing the same ground again. That's why I am bowing out.

Good, finally.
Earlier might have been best. i.e. God Says do no accept nor have a meal with ANYONE who brings a false gospel (like most caths do) .... don't argue with them, don't let them in the meetings, don't greet them, don't have a meal with them.... SIMPLE DIRECTIONS.... Noplace has God's Approval or His Peace , in a brick and mortar building, or on the internet, that allows the false gospel to be promoted or even treated at all as if it was acceptable. It is abomination.

 

[Soulx3]

Psalm 5:4 says God and sin can't dwell together. John 1:14 says God in the form of Jesus became incarnate and dwelt with sinners -- clearly an exception to the Psalm's statement.

These statements are both true: Evil (sin) cannot dwell with God (Ps. 5:4) and God became man and dwelt among sinners (Jn. 1:14). You believe that since God lived among sinners, then a sinful woman could have had God take human form within her. However, there's the following comparison between Mary Magdalene and God Incarnate (Jesus) and Mary of Joseph and the Holy Spirit/God Incarnate (Jesus):

At the time Jesus appeared to Mary Magdalene post-resurrection, it was just before He was to ascend to God the Father for the first time, and so she couldn't touch Him without contaminating Him, the Son Who goes back to the Father, as she was still impure (Jn. 20:17). Jesus's appearance to Thomas took place after that first ascension to God the Father, which is why He could be touched again (Jn. 20:27).

Now, since Mary Magdalene, a sinful human who God Incarnate lived and stood among, could not yet touch God Incarnate without contaminating Him because she was still impure from sins and He in his glorified human body was about to be in the presence of God the Father (Jn. 20:17), then Mary of Joseph, could not have received the Holy Spirit Himself, nor not contaminate God Incarnate, within Her as a sinful human. It's that simple.

Do you need to have the last word? OK, if that's the way you are wired, go ahead and reply and have the last word. I won't respond.

It's not that I need to have the last word, but rather that I have a strong conviction in what I know to be true. You bowed out long before you decided to let me have the last word. It seems you've now converted your bow out to an assumption that I want the last word and acquiesce, because you think that excuse for not wanting to continue in the discussion makes you look and/or feel better.

 

[RedFan]

Good, finally.
Earlier might have been best. i.e. God Says do no accept nor have a meal with ANYONE who brings a false gospel (like most caths do) .... don't argue with them, don't let them in the meetings, don't greet them, don't have a meal with them.... SIMPLE DIRECTIONS.... Noplace has God's Approval or His Peace , in a brick and mortar building, or on the internet, that allows the false gospel to be promoted or even treated at all as if it was acceptable. It is abomination.

I don't mind debating with Catholics. I used to be one. And I've said several times that I don't know whether Mary was conceived without sin, although I'm leaning against it. I actually see the argument for it, even though it's not persuasive to me. My only objection to @Soulx3 was that Psalm 5:4 didn't hold water as a proof of the thesis. He doesn't accept that. Fine, I've said my piece and given my reasons, and we just disagree. He's not going to convince me otherwise and I'm not going to convince him otherwise -- but I guess I'm the only one who realizes this, because he can't let it go and I can.

Sure, I could address his claim that Mary Magdalene was instructed not to touch Jesus because contact with sinners would contaminate him -- the same resurrected Jesus who instructed his apostles to touch him in Luke 24:39 -- but where would it get us? Is he going to say that they weren't sinners like she was? Or that Mary Magdalene was having her period and ritually unclean -- and that's why Jesus didn't want to be touched by her? None of that is going to advance the ball.

One thing I've learned from 40+ years in the courtroom is the need to anticipate the rejoinder before putting forward an argument. To trumpet Psalm 5:4 as a proof text before carefully considering John 1:14, or to bring up tactile contamination by Mary Magdalene before carefully considering Luke 24:39, shows that @Soulx3 doesn't do the same. That takes the fun out of the debate for me.

 

[Soulx3]

Sure, I could address his claim that Mary Magdalene was instructed not to touch Jesus because contact with sinners would contaminate him -- the same resurrected Jesus who instructed his apostles to touch him in Luke 24:39 -- but where would it get us? Is he going to say that they weren't sinners like she was? Or that Mary Magdalene was having her period and ritually unclean -- and that's why Jesus didn't want to be touched by her? None of that is going to advance the ball.

One thing I've learned from 40+ years in the courtroom is the need to anticipate the rejoinder before putting forward an argument. To trumpet Psalm 5:4 as a proof text before carefully considering John 1:14, or to bring up tactile contamination by Mary Magdalene before carefully considering Luke 24:39, shows that @Soulx3 doesn't do the same. That takes the fun out of the debate for me.

More excuses to avoid an argument that you can't address. Jsyk, I'm a she not a he.

 

[Soulx3]

Psalm 5:4 says God and sin can't dwell together. John 1:14 says God in the form of Jesus became incarnate and dwelt with sinners -- clearly an exception to the Psalm's statement.

These statements are both true: Evil (sin) cannot dwell with God (Ps. 5:4) and God became man and dwelt among sinners (Jn. 1:14). You believe that since God lived among sinners, then a sinful woman could have had God take human form within her. However, there's the following comparison between Mary Magdalene and God Incarnate (Jesus) and Mary of Joseph and the Holy Spirit/God Incarnate (Jesus):

At the time Jesus appeared to Mary Magdalene post-resurrection, it was just before He was to ascend to God the Father for the first time, and so she couldn't touch Him without contaminating Him, the Son Who goes back to the Father, as she was still impure (Jn. 20:17). Jesus's appearance to Thomas took place after that first ascension to God the Father, which is why He could be touched again (Jn. 20:27).

Now, since Mary Magdalene, a sinful human who God Incarnate lived and stood among, could not yet touch God Incarnate without contaminating Him because she was still impure from sins and He in his glorified human body was about to be in the presence of God the Father (Jn. 20:17), then Mary of Joseph, could not have received the Holy Spirit Himself, nor not contaminate God Incarnate, within Her as a sinful human. It's that simple.

Do you need to have the last word? OK, if that's the way you are wired, go ahead and reply and have the last word. I won't respond.

It's not that I need to have the last word, but rather that I have a strong conviction in what I know to be true. You bowed out long before you decided to let me have the last word. It seems you've now converted your bow out to an assumption that I want the last word and acquiesce, because you think that excuse for not wanting to continue in the discussion makes you look and/or feel better.

 

[RedFan]

More excuses to avoid an argument that you can't address. Jsyk, I'm a she not a he.

My apologies, ma'am.

 

[Soulx3]

My apologies, ma'am.

If I were 69 then id be maam, but im 35.

 

[RedFan]

If I were 69 then id be maam, but im 35.

My apologies again, miss.

 

[Soulx3]

Sure, I could address his claim that Mary Magdalene was instructed not to touch Jesus because contact with sinners would contaminate him -- the same resurrected Jesus who instructed his apostles to touch him in Luke 24:39 -- but where would it get us? Is he going to say that they weren't sinners like she was? Or that Mary Magdalene was having her period and ritually unclean -- and that's why Jesus didn't want to be touched by her? None of that is going to advance the ball.

To trumpet Psalm 5:4 as a proof text before carefully considering John 1:14, or to bring up tactile contamination by Mary Magdalene before carefully considering Luke 24:39, shows that @Soulx3 doesn't do the same. That takes the fun out of the debate for me.

For someone who supposedly spent 40+ years in a courtroom you dont listen well. Again, these statements are both true: Evil (sin) cannot dwell with God (Ps. 5:4) and God became man and dwelt among sinners (Jn. 1:14). You believe that since God lived among sinners, then a sinful woman could have had God take human form within her. However, there's the following comparison between Mary Magdalene and God Incarnate (Jesus) and Mary of Joseph and the Holy Spirit/God Incarnate (Jesus):

At the time Jesus appeared to Mary Magdalene post-resurrection, it was just before He was to ascend to God the Father for the first time, and so she couldn't touch Him without contaminating Him, the Son Who goes back to the Father, as she was still impure (Jn. 20:17). Jesus's appearance to Thomas, another sinful human, took place after that first ascension to God the Father, which is why He could be touched again (Jn. 20:27).

Now, since Mary Magdalene, a sinful human who God Incarnate lived and stood among, could not yet touch God Incarnate without contaminating Him because she was still impure from sins and He in his glorified human body was about to be in the presence of God the Father (Jn. 20:17), then Mary of Joseph, could not have received the Holy Spirit Himself, nor not contaminate God Incarnate, within Her as a sinful human. It's that simple.

 

[TheHC]

I honestly think that if Mary were to see what sinful accolades that have been bestowed upon her name I think she would be outraged to put it mildly.

Don’t you think she does see it?
I bet she is, too!

Jesus sees it, too.

 

[RedFan]

Now, since Mary Magdalene, a sinful human who God Incarnate lived and stood among, could not yet touch God Incarnate without contaminating Him because she was still impure from sins and He in his glorified human body was about to be in the presence of God the Father (Jn. 20:17), then Mary of Joseph, could not have received the Holy Spirit Himself, nor not contaminate God Incarnate, within Her as a sinful human. It's that simple.

Let's grant that the post-resurrection, pre-(first)ascension God Incarnate could not have contact with human flesh. He could, and did, have such contact before His resurrection. He could, and did, after His (first) ascension. But not in between those two events. The Mary Magdalene incident tells us no more than this.

I seem to recall that God Incarnate was in the womb before His resurrection . . .

Can we stop now?

 

[Pearl]

Nowhere is that stated in Scripture, and since your standard is something must be stated in the Bible in order to be true, then you should stop stating that as fact.

(Hebrews 4:15), never committed a sin (2 Corinthians 5:21; 1 John 3:5). The apostle Peter stated it clearly: “He committed no sin and no deceit was found in His mouth” (1 Peter 2:22). Indeed, as Jesus Christ is God, He has no capacity to sin.

 

[Taken]

Mary conceived God Incarnate, fully human and fully divine, by the Holy Spirit.

Disagree.
Scripture does NOT teach Jesus was a human BE-ing.

IS means the SAME.
AS means LIKE.

Humans are Terrestrial, and BE by coming forth OUT of the Earth. Earth is their Habitat/Estate.

Angels are Celestial, and BE by coming forth OUT of the Heaven. Heaven is their Habitat/Estate.

God is WITHOUT BE-ginning. Heaven is Gods Throne.

Jesus IS Spirit, who came forth OUT from God, (who IS Spirit), FROM Heaven, TO Earth, in a BODY OF FLESH, God Prepared, IN the “LIKENESS AS a human man”, For Human’s ON EARTH, TO SEE Him.

(Human seeds, blood, will, sex, had nothing to do with Jesus coming forth OUT FROM God.)

Blood IS the created temporary LIFE of a human.
Spirit IS the created permanent LIFE of an angel.
Holy Spirit IS the non-Created without Be-ginning Ever-lasting LIFE of God.

Jesus Himself proclaimed …
“He IS the LIFE of God”.

Jesus Himself proclaimed…
“He CAME FORTH OUT from God”.

Jesus Himself proclaimed…
“He IS THE CHRIST of God”.

Scripture reveals “JESUS IS the WORD of God”.

Scripture reveals “Gods WORD IS God”.

Scripture reveals “CHRIST IS the POWER, the GLORY, the WISDOM, the SEED of God”.

Scripture reveals “Celestial BE-ing’s ARE Created”.

Scripture reveals “God IS without BE-ginning”.

No. Christ Jesus IS “NOT” a human terrestrial created BE-ing.

Yes. Christ Jesus “APPEARED TO human terrestrial manKIND of created BE-ings AS a terrestrial manKIND of BE-ing s”.

EVEN created “ANGELS”, have the “POWER” to APPEAR, to human terrestrial manKIND of created BE-ings…. in the fashion AS a created HUMAN TERRESTRIAL manKIND of BE-ing, and the Human Being manKIND “would NOT KNOW it was a SPIRIT Being he was Seeing!”

You preach not knowing the difference between “IS” and “AS”.

John 16: (Jesus speaking)
[27] For the Father himself loveth you, because ye have loved me, and have believed that I came out from God.
[28] I came forth from the Father, and am come into the world: again, I leave the world, and go to the Father.

Mark 13: (speaking OF Jesus)
[34] For the Son of man is as a man taking a far journey, who left his house, and gave authority to his servants, and to every man his work, and commanded the porter to watch.

Phil 2: (how human men SAW Jesus)
[8] And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross.

Where DID Jesus’ BODY of FLESH come FROM?

Heb 10:
[5] Wherefore when he cometh into the world, he saith, Sacrifice and offering thou wouldest not, but a body hast thou prepared me:

What WORLD? Earth.
Why DID Jesus require a BODY to be Prepared for Him? So Earthly manKIND could SEE Him.

What WORLD, did Jesus COME FROM? Heaven, where Earthly BODY’s DO NOT exist!

Earth is a terrestrials’ WORLD.
Heaven is a celestial’s WORLD.
Heaven is ABOVE Earth.

John 3:
[31] He that cometh from above is above all: he that is of the earth is earthly, and speaketh of the earth: he that cometh from heaven is above all.

John.8 (Jesus speaking)
[23] And he said unto them, Ye are from beneath; I am from above: ye are of this world; I am not of this world.

Do you Believe Mary’s WOMB IS / WAS “HEAVEN”? A “World ABOVE the EARTH?”

Do you Believe A created Human mans SEED and A created Human woman’s EGG…
“Created God” ?

And Do you Believe, that a created Human woman’s BLOOD fed and nourished the BODY SENT FROM God IN HEAVEN TO Mary’s WOMB?

Read Again…
John 1:
[13] Which were born , not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.

God, Jesus, Christ…IS the creator and maker…..NOT the created.

Humans ARE the created.

Unto the Glory of God…Set yourself APART from made-up MANS false teachings.

Glory to God,
Taken

 

[Taken]

The Case for the Sinless Ever-Virgin Mary.

Mary was naturally born from the (corrupt Human) SEED of her Earthy Father and EGG of her Earthly Mother.

While she was Betrothed (ie a modern Engagement), promis-ED to become Wedded to Joseph….she was a virgin (meaning having NOT had Engaged in a sexual intercourse).

While she was “Betrothed”…she was visited by an Angel of God, revealing to her, Gods Desire for HER VIRGIN WOMB to “receive”, A BODY God had “prepared”.

Mary Agreed…

Luke 1:
[38] And Mary said, Behold the handmaid of the Lord; be it unto me according to thy word. And the angel departed from her.

According TO the Angels’ word….
A son would be sent to Mary, come forth from Mary, be called JESUS, and later WOULD Be called, The Son of God.

To Mary’s Betrothed…(Joseph) an Angel came unto him, with Similar Knowledge, and a STIPULATION….to NOT have “sexual intercourse”….DURING her pregnancy…and “of course”…Neither have “sexual intercourse” AFTER the child’s BIRTH, “UNTIL” the number of DAYS PASS, “according to the Mosaic LAW” regarding the birth of A SON.

Lev 12: (40 days total)
[1] And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying,
[2] Speak unto the children of Israel, saying, If a woman have conceived seed, and born a man child: then she shall be unclean seven days; according to the days of the separation for her infirmity shall she be unclean.
[3] And in the eighth day the flesh of his foreskin shall be circumcised.
[4] And she shall then continue in the blood of her purifying three and thirty days; she shall touch no hallowed thing, nor come into the sanctuary, until the days of her purifying be fulfilled.

Both Mary and Joseph were ISRAELITES.
There is NO indication either Mary or Joseph were Unfaithful to God.

Mary willingly became CONCEIVED (pregnant) in her Virgin Womb, WHILE Betrothed (Engaged) to Joseph.

Mary and Joseph WED After the news of her pregnancy.

Mary and Joseph LIVED together, TRAVELED together, SLEPT in the same quarters.

Mary remained a Virgin DURING her pregnancy and for 40 days after giving Birth.

Nothing whatsoever scripturally reveals Mary was an UNFAITHFUL WIFE to her Husband and would Go AGAINST GODS WILL, deny her Husband the marriage RIGHT of consecrating her Marriage, VIA sexual intercourse of becoming physically ONE with her Husband … AFTER the birth of her first born son, and 40 day Mosaic Law waiting period.

Scripture reveals MARY having HER “children” expressly WITH her, even identifying some of the “children” by their NAMES.

To proclaim otherwise, IS merely falling for a LIE, perpetuated by HUMAN MEN, under the INFLUENCE of anti-God angel spirits…
WHICH “By the Way”….Gods WAY, gives stern WARNINGS, to be aware of anti-God angel spirits and AVOID.

Glory to God,
Taken

 

[Pearl]

The Case for the Sinless Ever-Virgin Mary.

Mary was naturally born from the (corrupt Human) SEED of her Earthy Father and EGG of her Earthly Mother.

While she was Betrothed (ie a modern Engagement), promis-ED to become Wedded to Joseph….she was a virgin (meaning having NOT had Engaged in a sexual intercourse).

While she was “Betrothed”…she was visited by an Angel of God, revealing to her, Gods Desire for HER VIRGIN WOMB to “receive”, A BODY God had “prepared”.

Mary Agreed…

Luke 1:
[38] And Mary said, Behold the handmaid of the Lord; be it unto me according to thy word. And the angel departed from her.

According TO the Angels’ word….
A son would be sent to Mary, come forth from Mary, be called JESUS, and later WOULD Be called, The Son of God.

To Mary’s Betrothed…(Joseph) an Angel came unto him, with Similar Knowledge, and a STIPULATION….to NOT have “sexual intercourse”….DURING her pregnancy…and “of course”…Neither have “sexual intercourse” AFTER the child’s BIRTH, “UNTIL” the number of DAYS PASS, “according to the Mosaic LAW” regarding the birth of A SON.

Lev 12: (40 days total)
[1] And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying,
[2] Speak unto the children of Israel, saying, If a woman have conceived seed, and born a man child: then she shall be unclean seven days; according to the days of the separation for her infirmity shall she be unclean.
[3] And in the eighth day the flesh of his foreskin shall be circumcised.
[4] And she shall then continue in the blood of her purifying three and thirty days; she shall touch no hallowed thing, nor come into the sanctuary, until the days of her purifying be fulfilled.

Both Mary and Joseph were ISRAELITES.
There is NO indication either Mary or Joseph were Unfaithful to God.

Mary willingly became CONCEIVED (pregnant) in her Virgin Womb, WHILE Betrothed (Engaged) to Joseph.

Mary and Joseph WED After the news of her pregnancy.

Mary and Joseph LIVED together, TRAVELED together, SLEPT in the same quarters.

Mary remained a Virgin DURING her pregnancy and for 40 days after giving Birth.

Nothing whatsoever scripturally reveals Mary was an UNFAITHFUL WIFE to her Husband and would AGAINST GODS WILL, deny her Husband the marriage RIGHT of consecrating her Marriage, VIA sexual intercourse of becoming physically ONE with her Husband … AFTER the birth of her first born son, and 40 day Mosaic Law waiting period.

Scripture reveals MARY having HER “children” expressly WITH her, even identifying some of the “children” by their NAMES.

To proclaim otherwise, IS merely falling for a LIE, perpetuated by HUMAN MEN, under the INFLUENCE of anti-God angel spirits…
WHICH “By the Way”….Gods WAY, gives stern WARNINGS, to be aware of anti-God angel spirits and AVOID.

Glory to God,
Taken

You will never convince a Catholic @Taken but trying keeps us sharp.

 

[Taken]

You will never convince a Catholic @Taken but trying keeps us sharp.

Likely true, However, remember a Converted man SERVES God; BY speaking “HIS” Truth, which IN-TURN Glorifies God, which IN-TURN God Re-PAYS His DEBT of a man Glorifying God, VIA Treasures “stored up” IN Heaven, AND GIVEN A man, When the Lord Returns. And that “GIVING” is Called a “REWARD” (for Glorifying God before other men, which is called “a mans works”.)

Regardless IF one can “convince” another to TRUST Gods Word over mans word…The reward for Glorifying God, Shall be given and received by the man.

Matt 6:
[20] But lay up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where neither moth nor rust doth corrupt, and where thieves do not break through nor steal:

Rom 15:
[6] That ye may with one mind and one mouth glorify God, even the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ.

Rev 22:
[12] And, behold, I come quickly; and my reward is with me, to give every man according as his work shall be.

(Some men shall receive the REWARD of the “Crown of Life”….others will not. :-(

God Bless you Pearl.
Glory to God,

Taken

 

[Ronald Nolette]

Jesus referred to Himself as God in various ways more than once (Jn. 8:58;10:22-36), even the Pharisees understood that He did,
which is why they told him they were going to stone Him for "blasphemy" for "making Himself God." (Jn. 10:33)

"...for all have sinned" (Rom. 3:22)
"Christ ... Who committed no sin" (1 Pet. 2:21-22)

In verse 1 Pet. 2:22, it doesn't say, "only Christ committed no sin," but rather, "Christ ... Who committed no sin." Jesus, God Incarnate, fully divine and fully human, experienced temptations of evil, and through His will in cooperation with God the Father's help, He did not commit sins. Jesus, including, for example, children who have died without having committed sins, are exceptions to the "all have sinned" (Rom. 3:22). For these reasons, Rom. 3:22 isn't proof Mary sinned.

Now, consider that only the High Priest was allowed into the Holy of Holies to offer sacrifice to God for the sins of humanity. Would Mary not have to be so Holy and Perfect, to the point of being Second to God, as to conceive God Incarnate, the Messiah, and offer Him to God the Father as a sacrifice for the sins of humanity?

Peter says, “...like the Holy One who called you, be holy yourselves also in all your behavior; because it is written: “You shall be holy, for I am holy” (1 Pet. 1:15-16, cf. Lev. 19:2;20:7;20:26;21:8). Jesus, God Incarnate, was holy in all His behavior because He was without sin (1 Pet. 2:22), and thus He was completely Holy. If Mary was not without sin in all Her behavior, then She was not completely Holy and Perfect. Sin is disobedience, evil, and unholy (1 Jn. 3:4;8), and "no evil can dwell with God" (Ps. 5:4). Regarding Ps. 5:4 and Jn. 1:14, there's a difference between God Incarnate taking form inside a sinful human and living among sinful humans. Consider that Mary Magdalene, a sinful human, lived among God Incarnate, but she couldn't even touch Him after His resurrection yet because of her impurity from sins (Jn. 20:17). Therefore, how could God, the Most Holy and Perfect One, allegedly take form and dwell in a sinful body?

Do you believe or not believe that God, in advance, could have or could have not Thought of creating the soul that was to be the soul of the Mother of God Incarnate, and because He knew Her soul would've been subject to the law of Adam and thus inherit the stain of original sin, He preserved it from inheriting the stain of original sin, and thus it became an immaculate soul capable of possessing the fullness of His Grace, then He infused it into the embryo at the moment of Her conception? Do you believe or not believe that these factors, coupled with being conceived by and born of two Just human parents and having a natural good will, could have or could not have resulted in Mary being without sin, and thus a worthy dwelling place for God Incarnate, the Son of God, the Messiah, the Savior, the most Holy and Perfect One, to take form in and live a divinely Holy life with in Spirit and Body on earth and in Heaven?​

God can do whatever he wants. But the bible declared ALL have sinned (except Jesus) and fallen short of the glory of God. No parentheses no exclusions.

Remember jesus is the God man- He got His humanity from Mary and His sinless divine nature from God the Father. Mary was just a tool to carry the body of Jesus for 9 months.

 

[Taken]

False.

Nowhere is that stated in Scripture, and since your standard is something must be stated in the Bible in order to be true, then you should stop stating that as fact.

Pearl’s words are not required to appear in Scripture to be TRUE.

The meaning of Pearl’s words are Verified by Scripture to be TRUE.

Rom 3:
[23] For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God; <—- ALL MEN.

EXCLUSION…ONLY JESUS.

Heb 4:
[15] For we have not an high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin. <—- JESUS.


Glory to God,
Taken

 

[Soulx3]

Can we stop now?

You can stop if you want. I'm choosing to respond to the following because I can, and the right thing to do is address falsehood with the truth:

Let's grant that the post-resurrection, pre-(first)ascension God Incarnate could not have contact with human flesh. He could, and did, have such contact before His resurrection. He could, and did, after His (first) ascension. But not in between those two events. The Mary Magdalene incident tells us no more than this.

The point you're missing is since Jesus, God Incarnate, could not be contaminated by sinful (impure) humans by touch because of His glorified state and going to be in the presence of God the Father (Jn. 20:17), Mary of Joseph would've had to be completely pure in order to receive the Holy Spirit Himself and not contaminate God Incarnate taking form within Her.