I choose to believe Jesus implanted in Mary's womb without sex involved. I choose to believe Jesus left her womb without violating her virginity thus not taking any right away from Joseph. I can't prove it, but I choose to believe it because it fits the CHARACTER of MY GOD. By the same reasoning, it would be cheating Joseph if Mary never had any of his children in their marriage, so I choose to not believe the Blessed Mother Mary remained a virgin after carrying The Christ for nine months.
Your mileage may vary. That's okay with me, since it does not affect/effect our Born from above status. See you in the clouds, Brother.
Normal birth is one of them, and until His birth, it is beyond question that Mary's virginity was unbreached. After His normal delivery, the issue of being born of a virgin is forever settled, and the status of Mary's body is no longer of consequence.
If one wants to force him/herself to believe something of which the Holy Ghost, Jesus, and the Father are silent, and make up one's own unsupported conjecture, that's only backing out into the same briar patch that the Romanists and other cults get themselves into. It's a time-waster and doesn't make sense to me, nor does it jibe with a literal hermeneutic upon which expositional teaching is based.
But as they say, it's a free country.
Yes; it's 'possible'; but that is an example of the Catholic method; used over and over; to 'explain' Rome's version of what happened.
I kinda go along with:
"...woman, why do you involve me? My time has not yet come."
Which indicates (to me at least) that Jesus had not yet used any of His GOD powers.
Water into wine is known as His FIRST miracle for a reason.
Here's why I recommend to start thinking about walking this back:
"And when eight days were accomplished for the circumcising of the child, his name
was called JESUS, which was so named of the angel before he was conceived in the womb.
And when the days of her purification according to the law of Moses were
accomplished, they brought him to Jerusalem, to present him to the Lord;" (Lk. 2:21-22 AV).
On the eighth day from His birth, Mary brought Jesus to the Temple for the brit milah, then went back home to Bethlehem to stay sequestered to complete 33 more days of cleansing, according to law. Forty days after Jesus' birth, she again appeared at the Temple to offer two turtldoves (or pigeons):
"(As it is written in the law of the Lord, Every male that openeth the womb shall be
called holy to the Lord;)" (Lk. 2:22 AV).
If a woman's firstborn is a male child, he is the LORD's possession (cf 1 Sam. 2:27-29), to serve Him. If Mary and Joseph want Him to grow up in their house, they must purchase Him back with an acceptable offering.
And to offer a sacrifice according to that which is said in the law of the Lord, A pair
of turtledoves, or two young pigeons" (Lk. 2:24 AV).
Mary brought two birds, one as a sin offering for herself, according to the Law, and one as an offering to redeem Jesus back to serve her and Joseph and live as their son under their rule as parents.
Here's the actual Greek: καθως γεγραπται εν νομω κυριου οτι παν αρσεν διανοιγον μητραν αγιον τω κυριω κληθησεται (Lk. 2:23 TR)
Let's look here at the words διανοιγον = "open" and μητραν = "womb/matrix" as to their meaning in English.
========
Strong's Number G1272
διανοίγω
dianoigō
dee-an-oy'-go
From G1223 and G455; to open thoroughly, literally (as a first born) or figuratively (to expound): - open.
Thayer Definition:
1) to open by dividing or drawing asunder, to open thoroughly
. . 1a) a male opening the womb (the closed matrix), i.e. the first-born
. . 1b) of the eyes and the earsG1272
. . 1c) to open the mind of one, i.e. to cause to understand a thing
. . . . 1c1) to open one’s soul, i.e. to rouse in one the faculty of understanding or the desire of learning
Part of Speech: verb
A Related Word by Thayer’s/Strong’s Number: from G1223 δια and G455
-------
Strong's Number G1223
διά
dia
dee-ah'
A primary preposition denoting the channel of an act; through (in very wide applications,
local, causal or occasional). In composition it retains the same general import: - after,
always, among, at, to avoid, because of (that), briefly, by, for (cause) . . . fore, from, in,
by occasion of, of, by reason of, for sake, that, thereby, therefore, X though, through (-out),
to, wherefore, with (-in). In composition it retains the same general import.
Thayer Definition:
1) through
. . 1a) of place
. . . . 1a1) with
. . . . 1a2) in
. . 1b) of time
. . . . 1b1) throughout
. . . . b2) during
. . 1c) of means
. . . . 1c1) by
. . . . 1c2) by the means of
2) through
. . 2a) the ground or reason by which something is or is not done
Thayer Definition:
1) through
. . 1a) of place
. . . . 1a1) with
. . . . 1a2) in
. . 1b) of time
. . . . 1b1) throughout
. . . . b2) during
. . 1c) of means
. . . . 1c1) by
. . . . 1c2) by the means of
2) through
. . 2a) the ground or reason by which something is or is not done
. . . . 2a1) by reason of
. . . . 2a2) on account of
. . . . 2a3) because of for this reason
. . . . 2a4) therefore
. . . . 2a5) on this account
Part of Speech: preposition
A Related Word by Thayer’s/Strong’s Number: a primary preposition denoting the channel of an act
=======
Strong's Number G455
ἀνοίγω
anoigō
an-oy'-go
Strong's Definition:
From G303 and οἴγω oigō (to open); to open up (literally or figuratively, in various applications): - open.
Thayer Definition:
1) to open
Part of Speech: verb
A Related Word by Thayer’s/Strong’s Number: from G303 and oigo (to open)
------
Strong's Number G303
ἀνά
ana
an-ah'
Strong's Definition:
A primary preposition and adverb; properly up; but (by extension) used (distributively) severally, or (locally) at (etc.): - and, apiece, by, each, every (man), in, through. In compounds (as a prefix) it often means (by implication) repetition, intensity, reversal, etc.
Thayer Definition:
1) into the midst, in the midst, amidst, among, between
Part of Speech: preposition
A Related Word by Thayer’s/Strong’s Number: a primary prep and adv
=========
Strong's Number G3388
μήτρα
mētra
may'-trah
From G3384; the matrix: - womb.
Thayer Definition:
1) the womb
Part of Speech: noun feminine
A Related Word by Thayer’s/Strong’s Number: from G3384
========
The above refers to the Law, the first and definitive mention of which is in Exodus 13:2, as follows:
"Sanctify unto me all the firstborn, whatsoever openeth the womb among the children of Israel, both of man and of beast: it is mine" (Ex. 13:2 AV).
The Greek translation of the Septuagint renders it thus:
Ἁγίασόν μοι πᾶν πρωτότοκον πρωτογενὲς διανοῖγον πᾶσαν μήτραν ἐν τοῖς υἱοῖς Ισραηλ ἀπὸ ἀνθρώπου ἕως κτήνους· ἐμοί ἐστιν. (Exo 13:2 LXX).
Strong's Number G4416
πρωτοτόκος
prōtotokos
pro-tot-ok'-os
Strong's Definition:
From G4413 and the alternate of G5088; first born (usually as noun, literally or figuratively): - firstbegotten (-born).
Thayer Definition:
. . 1) the firstborn
. . . . 1a) of man or beast
. . . . 1b) of Christ, the first born of all creation
Part of Speech: adjective
A Related Word by Thayer’s/Strong’s Number: from G4413 and the alternate of G5088
======
OK, The firstborn is born and "born" means to open the womb, the matrix; and that means to strtch the opening of the womb to the very widest, and the first time this will also be a bloody portal, bringing the Savior Who remits sins into the world of humans (without shedding of blood there is no remission of sins); the passage being one of agony, but the end being joyous. Under the Law, this brings the woman into a state of uncleanness, which has a lawful response of purification, the end of which is a visit to the mikvah, followed by the offering of birds, one as sin offering, the other as redemption price of the male that was born:
"And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying,
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.
And in the eighth day the flesh of his foreskin shall be circumcised.
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.
But if she bear a maid child, then she shall be unclean two weeks, as in her separation: and
she shall continue in the blood of her purifying threescore and six days.
And when the days of her purifying are fulfilled, for a son, or for a daughter, she shall bring a
lamb of the first year for a burnt offering, and a young pigeon, or a turtledove, for a sin
offering, unto the door of the tabernacle of the congregation, unto the priest:
Who shall offer it before the LORD, and make an atonement for her; and she shall be
cleansed from the issue of her blood. This is the law for her that hath born a male or a female.
And if she be not able to bring a lamb, then she shall bring two turtles, or two young pigeons;
the one for the burnt offering, and the other for a sin offering: and the priest shall make an
atonement for her, and she shall be clean" (Lev 12:1-8).
FRiends, either Jesus was born of Mary, or He was not. But if He was not "born", and Mary was still "virgin," why should Mary have to go through a period of purification from a very real birth process, and offer for both herself and the Babe to complete the obligations to the Law (which Jesus was in the process of fulfilling, whether passively or actively).
Eh, what? Inserting an escape from a normal, natural birth by passing out of the womb without being born does not make sense. It does great vilence to the promises of Scripture:
"For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall
be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God,
The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace" (Is. 9:6; see 7:14)
"And Jacob begat Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ" (Mt. 1:16)
"For unto you is born this day in the city of David a Saviour, which is Christ the Lord" (Lk. 2:11). What more can be said?
That's not a proven. One evidence is that the face napkin was neatly folded apart from the shroud.
The I noticed that the stone was rolled away by the Angel so the women would see the empty tomb.
If I recall correctly, you have insisted that the body of Jesus left the tomb while it was still sealed. The reason I reject that interpretation is as follows:
"And they said among themselves, Who shall roll us away the stone from the door of the sepulchre?
And when they looked, they saw that the stone was rolled away: for it was very great" (Mk. 16:3-4 AV).
When the women got there, the stone had already been rolled away. The verb is in the perfect tense, meaning the act of removing the stone was finished earlier, and perhaps nowhere around.
"Now upon the first day of the week, very early in the morning, they came unto the sepulchre,
bringing the spices which they had prepared, and certain others with them.
And they found the stone rolled away from the sepulchre.
And they entered in, and found not the body of the Lord Jesus" (Lk. 24:1-3 AV).
"Rolled away" is in the perfect tense: the tomb was already opened when they got there, with continuing results that it would not close if they walked inside.
"The first day of the week cometh Mary Magdalene early, when it was yet dark, unto the
sepulchre, and seeth the stone taken away from the sepulchre.
Then she runneth, and cometh to Simon Peter, and to the other disciple, whom Jesus loved,
and saith unto them, They have taken away the Lord out of the sepulchre, and we know not
where they have laid him" (Jn. 20:1-2 AV),
"Taken away" is also in the perfect tense, but the stone not merely rolled away to the side, but taken away; it was gone.
"And, behold, there was a great earthquake: for the angel of the Lord descended from heaven, and came and rolled back the stone from the door, and sat upon it" (Mt. 28:2 AV).
In this verse, the verb is in the aorist tense, active voice, meaning that at some point the stone was removed by the angel being. If this was the sole verse describing the event, it could be supposed that the stone was removed in the presence of the women. But the tense of the verb precludes the interpreter from absolutely confirming that view. In fact, the three other gospels show that the stone was removed before they got there, so it cannot be that the grave was opened in their presence. And that means there is no reason to suppose that the Risen Jesus did not just walk out of the tomb, rather than work some kind of unnatural migration of His reassembled Person through solid rock.
So that theory is more than doubtful--it is very unrealistic, as well as being a completely unnecessary offense to common sense.
Nowhere in the gospels is it shown that Jesus dematerialized or rematerialized His pre-resurrection natural body of flesh, bone, and blood. There is simply no reason that we should think that the processes bestowed by God on humans were not operating throughout Jesus' inhabitayion of the human body as well.
But there is a deeper problem with these innovative conjectures about the body of Jesus that are unsupported directly or indirectly. In fact, they are being manufactured after the same way that not only do the Catholics wrongly handle the Word of God, but they claim post-Apostolic works and wonders that smack of an extension of special revelation and prophetic sayings even into our time.