you want one question here goes what proof do you have that marry was really a virgin?

Question

can you show any evidence that Marry was really a virgin and as some would say that Joseph came lied and said Marry was a virgin to save face
do you have any references other then the bible that could validate this story
ie Historical documentation form other sources of that exact time that Marry was pregnant but was still yet a virgin

Historical fact only

the whole Christian faith is based on the theory that Mary was a virgin
in order For Jesus to be the son of God he would have to be born of a virgin
to If Mary was a virgin and Jesus the son of god then there would be documeantation other then the Bible to validate this claim

the fact that only the New testament alone gives testimony to this account does make this a very valid question

I do thank you all for your honest answers and your admission that only the new testament makes this statement
thank you again for your honesty

to the cricket
Mary would have had many opportunity to escape from family to meet with Joseph and there is no factual proof that your theory is infact true
its only speculation and in a court of Law speculation and probability are not accepted as evidence there for a jury would not be able to consider such things as fact nor would a judge .

nice try keep trying

Answer 1

there is no proof--i think the story was put out by joesph when jesus ws born with fair skin and blue eyes-his pride wouldnt let him admit that some other man had been with his wife-----smile and enjoy the night

Answer 2

How about this:

The culture of the time would not have allowed for it.

Mary never would have been alone with a man who was not a family member. She would have been escorted to school and to temple by other family members.

And it's rather funny to me that Celsus tried claiming in the 2nd century that Mary had sex with a Roman soldier, when that would have been all but impossible, especially in a town as small as Nazareth, which is where Mary and Joseph both lived before Jesus was born.

So is there proof? No, of course not. But there is circumstantial evidence.

Edit: Actually, circumstantial evidence has been used in court cases, and has actually won out. Many prosecuting attorneys have used circumstantial evidence to place the defendant in the vicinity of the crime they were accused of.

In the court of law, they tend to try to prove that the defendant had a motive, and an opportunity, especially in cases which there was no "hard" evidence, such as witnesses or DNA evidence.

Ever read Ann Rule? A lot of the cases she's written about have depended on circumstantial evidence.

The truth of the matter is, all we have to go on when it comes to Mary is circumstantial evidence and the culture of the time. In the culture of the time, unmarried women were seldom, if ever, unaccompanied.

If it WAS true, however, that Mary and Joseph had relations before marriage, then why didn't anyone say so? I think they would have known when Jesus was born "prematurely," right?

The closest thing we have to anything of the sort is Celsus' writings from the 2nd century, in which he claimed that Jesus was fathered by a Roman soldier. He tried to illustrate that Mary was a whore. That was only ONE of the ways that he tried to defame Christianity, by the way.

Why would it even need mentioning, if the earliest Christians did not believe in the virgin birth? And since they DID believe in the virgin birth, I'm sure they would have needed some kind of evidence of it. Testimony from citizens in Nazareth would have done it.

Answer 3

Jesus was not the only man claimed to have been born of a virgin. Parthenogenisistic birth was claimed for any number of near-deities in the last few thousand years. Pythagorus is but one another example. People didn't understand genetics in those days, another reason why the Bible should be regarded with affection as nothing more than some factual history interspersed with a lot of fable.

Answer 4

There is no way for us today to prove or disprove this historically, we all know this.. Im curios as to why ask this question? It doesnt prove anything, it is of mere secondary importance. The Christian believes in a God that can do anything, even let Mary conceive. (almighty) The Atheist believes in no god and thus that conception is impossible. It doesn't really settle anything.

Answer 5

Learn to spell Mary and maybe we'll talk.

(later): Thank you!

Of course there is no proof. Myths are not built on proof, but rather humans' need for explanations. Below is an interesting link to a 1922 article on the many, many virgin birth stories throughout history.

Answer 6

The word "Virgin" as it was used then simply meant "a woman without a man" as in "not married or otherwise spoken for as with engagement"...the meaning was not "a woman who never had vaginal penetration by a penis".

Meanings and usages of words change over time. Just as "40 days and 40 nights" was not literal but an expression meaning "for a long time or many days and nights".

Answer 7

I got something out of a box of Cracker-Jacks once that was an actual piece of the document. But I was only 12 at the time and didn't realize the important significance. I wanted the whistle instead.

Answer 8

i do not know of evidence of the virginity of any woman who lived more than two thousand years ago.

i cannot imagine what such evidence would be.

we have no evidence that katherine of aragon was a virgin when she married henry viii (also an important point in history), and that was only yesterday by comparison.

'evidence' can sometimes conclusively prove that a particular woman is a virgin, but it can never prove that she is not.

so no such evidence could exist.

why not ask a sensible question.

Answer 9

Actually it was written that way after people claimed that Jesus had No divinity. You see the Gospel of Mark was written first and according to mark Jesus received the holy spirit and was anointed by god(Or to become a son of god as per Judaic Custom) when he was baptized by mark. To add more legitimacy to what was said in Isaiah the writer of Matthew had to add that the Holy Spirit was there at conception. Matth(1:18) as opposed to the Original Version in Mark. (Mrk 1:10-11)


Anyone with a bit of common sense can see that just because Matthew is listed first in the canonized version of the Gospels does not mean it was actually written first. In fact some of the Gospels were written much later, and written to different groups (Greeks,Jews etc)
Not that anyone really cares about history,culture or details.

Answer 10

No, Just the bible validates this event. As a christian I believe in the virgin Mary mother of god (Jesus) Faith is believing in somethings that you can't see. or can't possibly prove.