[MHGinTN]

BTW, you also mischaracterized my post when you accused me of "Now, you are saying that maybe she was, and that we can’t know." I agreed to the stipulation for purposes of the discussion. I apologize if that was too obtuse for you.

As a matter of my personal beliefs, I do not in fact believe that Mary is the genetic Mother of Jesus. I simply do not know how God did it. I do however, most strongly believe that God did IT, conceived Jesus in Mary's womb.

You might want to contemplate the phrase 'conceived in you', because it is entirely possible that The Angel was referring to implantation in Mary's womb, not the union of spermatozoon and ovum conception. My personal belief is that God brought to Mary's womb the already formed embryo-aged Jesus for implantation. God may enter the womb of Mary as easily as Jesus entered the locked and shuttered upper room.

[Belteshazzar]

MNGinTN wrote:
“My personal belief is that God brought to Mary’s womb the already formed embryo-aged Jesus for implantation.”

So, now you make it clear that you are in fact placing yourself outside of the faith enumerated in the Apostles, Nicene, and Athanasian Creeds. That is your prerogative ... unwise though it is ... and you also have demonstrated that the old heresies live on. You really, really cannot bring yourself to say that Mary is the mother of our Lord Jesus Christ, true God and true man, even though that is the explicit teaching of the Holy Scriptures and is confessed rightly in the ecumenical creeds. You are dabbling in the kind of suppositions that in time will morph into full-blown abandonment of the plain meaning of Scripture, as it did for Mary Baker Eddy, Joseph Smith, Charles Taze Russell and others, whether in your life or in the lives of those you touch with your suppositions.