How old was the Virgin Mary when she gave birth to Jesus?

It must be because of your limited brain capacity that you don’t remember that I have always said that Luke was not an eye-witness to the life of Jesus. I mean, even a child who has read the first chapter of Luke would know that, but Luke did use the words of reliable witness’s in recording his Gospel.


Luke 1: 1-4; Dear Theophilus:
Many people have done their best to write a report of the things that have taken place among us. They wrote what we have been told by those who saw these things from the beginning and who proclaimed the message. And so, your Excellency, because I have carefully studied all these matters from their beginning, I thought it would be good to write an orderly account for you. I do this so that you will know the full truth about everything which you have been taught.

Does that sound like Luke is saying that he wrote his Gospel according to his own personal eye-witness account? Now run along child and come back when you know what you are talking about.

So if I write an introduction to a book that says eyewitnesses of God gave me all the details of what I am documenting, you would believe that I am providing eyewitness testimony of God? Isn't that what Muhammad says about the Quran? Do you believe him too?

No I wouldn't mate. Having listened to the results of your supposed investigations, I would believe nothing that you have to say. But I do believe what the Holy Scriptures have to say.

As to your question; "How old was the virgin Mary when she gave birth to Jesus: Mary was no longer a virgin when she gave birth to Jesus who was sired by her half-brother Joseph ben Heli.

You have barely scratched the surface of my investigation details and results. That being said, it would be useless to share evidence with someone who has no interest in evaluating it because you "would believe nothing that you have to say."

BTW, I don't question how old Mary was when she gave birth to Jesus because it doesn't matter to me. It has no impact on the story of Jesus.

You claim to be investigating the biblical story of Jesus, and yet you say that the belief in the virgin birth has no impact on the story of Jesus. Do you possess a brain at all?

The apostles did not teach the false doctrine of the so-called non-biblical VIRGIN conception and birth, of Jesus by his mother Mary.
In the days of the Apostle Paul, the people were already beginning to fall away from the truth, and following another gospel that was not taught by the word of God or the apostles. In his 2nd letter to the Corinthians 11: 4; Paul says, “You gladly tolerate anyone who comes to you and preaches a different Jesus, not the one we preached; and you accept a spirit and a gospel completely different from the spirit and the gospel you received from us.”

So, what was that other gospel that was leading the people away from the truth and away from the Jesus as preached by the Apostles, to another false Jesus? That gospel was the word of the anti-Christ, that refused to acknowledge that Jesus had come as a human being, and instead, they believed that he was a spirit, whose humanlike body was able to pass through Mary’s Hymen without breaking it, and who, like some Hologram, would appear and disappear at will.

Even in the days of John the beloved disciple, ‘Docetism,’ the concept that Jesus had existed as a spirit rather than a human being, and could appear and disappear like some hologram, had begun to rear its ugly head. That’s why it is written in 1 John 4: 1-3; My dear friends, do not believe all who claim to have the Spirit (Teaching), but test them to find out if the spirit they have comes from God. For many false prophets have gone out everywhere. This is how you will be able to know whether it is God's Spirit: anyone who acknowledges that Jesus Christ came as a human being has the Spirit who comes from God. But anyone who denies this about Jesus does not have the Spirit from God. The spirit that he has is from the Enemy of Christ; you heard that it would come, and now it is here in the world already.

2nd letter of John verses 7-10; “Many deceivers have gone out all over the world, people who do not acknowledge that Jesus came as a human being. Such a person is a deceiver and an enemy of Christ.”
Where would one expect to find the teaching that Jesus was not a true human being, “Born of the seed of Adam” which teaching has been spread ALL OVER THE WORLD?
By the second century, ‘Docetism,’ the concept that Jesus had existed as a spirit rather than a human being, had all but theoretically been stamped out. Yet there still persisted the belief that their Jesus, although seen as a sort of human being, did not have our normal bodily needs, such as eating, drinking and excretion, and Clement the bishop of Alexandria, wrote: “It would be ridiculous to imagine that the redeemer, in order to exist, had the usual needs of man. He only took food and ate it in order that we should not teach about him in a Docetic fashion.” Even though the scriptures state that it was because Jesus was hungry, that Satan tried to tempt him into turning the stones into bread.

Their Jesus was not the Jesus as taught by the apostles, but that other Jesus, taught by the Anti-Christ, who unlike we mere HUMAN BEINGS, did not need to eat, drink, or go to the toilet, as was taught by one of the great teachers that the authorities of Emperor Constantine’s universal church, used as one of their authorities when trying to defend their false doctrines.

Saint Clement of Alexandria, who was a saint in the Martyrology of the Roman universal church, in support of the great lie, speaks of the time that some imaginary midwife, who was supposed to be at the birth of Jesus, (Non-biblical) told some woman by the name Salome, that the mother was still a virgin after the birth and that her hymen was still intact, and that this supposed Salome, stuck her finger into the mother’s vagina to check, and her hand immediately withered up, but the baby Jesus reached out and touched her hand and healed it. (All non biblical).

Down to the 17th century, Clement was venerated as a saint. His name was to be found in the Martyrologies, and his feast fell on December 4. But when the Roman Martyrology was revised by Clement VIII (Pope from 1592 to 1605), his name was dropped from the calendar on the advice of his confessor, Cardinal Baronius. Pope Benedict XIV in 1748 maintained his predecessor's decision on the grounds that Clement’s life was little-known; that he had never obtained public cultus in the Church; and that some of his doctrines were, if not erroneous, at least highly suspect. "ERRONEOUS--HIGHLY SUSPECT," they certainly got that right, but by then the false teaching of the so-called virgin birth had become firmly established in the minds of the gullible multitude.

Your Quote: You claim to be investigating the biblical story of Jesus, and yet you say that the belief in the virgin birth has no impact on the story of Jesus. Do you possess a brain at all?
------------------
I never said that. I said, "it doesn't matter HOW OLD MARY WAS WHEN SHE GAVE BIRTH TO JESUS." It doesn't matter, but it does matter that Mary was a virgin. Please address my comments rather than what you want me to say.

But now you have said that it does matter that Mary was a virgin. And all girls are virgins before the act by which they conceive the child they are to bear, but no girl who is pregnant with a human baby remains a virgin, unless she is artificially inseminated and the child is born through cesarean section and her hymen is still intact when she produces the child of the human semen donor, and not some son of an alien being who created the universe.