# Was the Virgin Mary really a virgin? **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [February 17, 2001, 8:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-the-virgin-mary-really-a-virgin/54867 "2001-02-17T08:56:43Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 14\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Mirage](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/eb9ed0/32.png) [@Mirage](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mirage)\ **Post date:** [February 17, 2001, 8:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-the-virgin-mary-really-a-virgin/54867/1 "2001-02-17T08:56:43Z")
I was watching the movie Snatch tonight, and at the beginning there are a group of robbers dressed as Rabbi’s debating biblical philosophy as they enter the building they are about to rob. On their way into the elevator, one rabbi talks about how “they mistranslated the Hebrew word for ‘young woman’ into the Greek word for ‘virgin’”. (hope I got the quote right) I’m not taking Guy Ritchie’s word on this, but the whole virgin birth scenario was always one of those biblical tenants which I had trouble accepting as historical fact. Is there any truth to this? I would like to believe that Jesus was a real person, a carpenter living during the first century AD in Israel, who had some pretty enlightened ideas about how to live one’s life, but I’m far more interested in what really happened than what four centuries of word-of-mouth and sixteen centuries of translation would tell us. Where did Jesus get his Y chromosome from anyways? ---
**Author:** ![Sir\_Rhosis](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/d9b06d/32.png) [@Sir\_Rhosis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sir_Rhosis)\ **Post date:** [February 17, 2001, 9:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-the-virgin-mary-really-a-virgin/54867/2 "2001-02-17T09:12:57Z")
First of all: prerequisite statement to “virgin” poster about forums. This is probably one that will elicit replies containing the O-word. Therefore, I have heard the O-word that Jesus may have been the son of a Roman Centurion or somesuch. Far more erudite posters than I will be in to refute/agree, I’m sure. I have also heard the O-word that, like the dialogue you quoted, “young woman” (the word is something like "p-a-r-t???) was indeed mistranslated into “virgin.” Now that I think of it, this may go to the forum with the D-word. Word… Sir ---
**Author:** ![Diceman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/22d042/32.png) [@Diceman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diceman)\ **Post date:** [February 17, 2001, 12:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-the-virgin-mary-really-a-virgin/54867/3 "2001-02-17T12:54:35Z")
This is a debate that’s been going on for 2001 years and you expect us to solve it now? :rolleyes: The Straight Dope is this: you either believe that Jesus was divinely conceived or you don’t. That’s as much of an answer as you’ll ever get. Now about what was said in the movie: both Luke’s and John’s gospels were not written in Hebrew, so in 50% of the possible cases this theory must be false. There are alot of theories, and damn near every one of them is complete speculation. Here’s a helpful hint: never, _ever,_ believe anything Hollywood says is a “fact.” Not with any subject. 90% of the time, it’s wrong. ---
**Author:** ![HeyHomie](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/heyhomie/32/207_2.png) [@HeyHomie](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HeyHomie)\ **Post date:** [February 17, 2001, 1:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-the-virgin-mary-really-a-virgin/54867/4 "2001-02-17T13:49:28Z")
If I may… The word that is translated as “virgin” in the English gospels comes from a Greek word that can also mean “girl.” In fact, in ancient Greek there is only one world for the two; that is, there isn’t a world for “girl” and another word for “virgin.” They’re both the same word. Likewise, there is only one word for both “woman” and “wife.” Looking at the culture of the day, it makes perfect sense. First of all, girls were married shortly after puberty in those days. Therefore, there was no need for a word for both “virgin” and “girl,” as they were one and the same. If a girl was a _little_ girl (pre-pubescent), she was by default referred to as a “virgin.” And no, I don’t know if there was an exception for the pre-pubescent girl who had been raped. And I’d rather not go there anyway. Likewise, since it was unheard of for a grown woman _not_ to marry (apart from those who chose to remain virgins for religious reasons, such as the Roman Vestal Virgins), there is no word for just plain “woman.” There _were_ words for “prostitute,” “concubine” and “widow,” these three being the only alternatives for grown women in that culture that I can think of now. SO, bringing all this information back to the OP: The word that we read as “virgin” in the gospels basically tells us that Mary was a girl/young woman of around marryin’ age. I’m thinking (and I’m certainly not alone in this) that Mary was probably no younger than around 14 and no older than around 16. Matthew 1:18 tells us that Mary became pregnant before she and Joseph “had come together” (New International Version). The words “had come together” is a polite euphemism for “had made sweet love down by the fire.” So clearly Matthew is telling us that she was a virgin in the physiological sense, not just in the sense of “young woman of marryin’ age.” As for whether or not Mary was _truly_ a virgin and became pregnant without benefit of intercourse, regardless of what the gospels say: that is a matter of great theological debate, and I, for one, am _ **not** _ going to try to answer it. My $.03 ---
**Author:** ![Revtim](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/revtim/32/1042_2.png) [@Revtim](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Revtim)\ **Post date:** [February 17, 2001, 2:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-the-virgin-mary-really-a-virgin/54867/5 "2001-02-17T14:19:07Z")
A while back, I started a thread on this very subject, after I read “The Selfish Gene” by Dawkins. He states as fact that “virgin” was a mistranslation. I can’t find the thread now for some reason. Lucky for us, there are a few people on the board who know Hebrew, and if I remember correctly, they stated that the word could mean both “young woman” and/or “virgin”. Wish I could find that damn thread… ---
**Author:** ![BigStar303](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/dec6dc/32.png) [@BigStar303](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BigStar303)\ **Post date:** [February 19, 2001, 7:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-the-virgin-mary-really-a-virgin/54867/6 "2001-02-19T07:29:28Z")
For what it’s worth, as a fairly young lad long ago I stumbled across a book my grandmother owned that made exactly the same point: that one of the primary foundations of Christianity was built on a mistranslation of “virgin,” from its simple meaning of “young girl” to the meaning we now attribute to it. I don’t recall any other details, other than it seemed to be a scholarly work and not some crackpot tome. But it has stuck with me all these years. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Ryan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/7feea3/32.png) [@The\_Ryan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Ryan)\ **Post date:** [February 19, 2001, 8:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-the-virgin-mary-really-a-virgin/54867/7 "2001-02-19T08:16:08Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Diceman \* > Now about what was said in the movie: both Luke’s and John’s gospels were not written in Hebrew, so in 50% of the possible cases this theory must be false. Are you trying to imply that Luke and John make up 50% of the Bible? Did no one notice the fact that **Rabbis** were discussing mistranslations of the Bible? Why would they be discussing mistranslations of the NT? Here’s the [Straight Dope](http://www.straightdope.com/columns/990730.html), guys. Note the seventh paragraph: it was **Isaiah** that was mistranslated. ---
**Author:** ![gigi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/a587f6/32.png) [@gigi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gigi)\ **Post date:** [February 19, 2001, 3:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-the-virgin-mary-really-a-virgin/54867/8 "2001-02-19T15:07:34Z")
> [@](#): > > Luke 31 > Behold, you will conceive in your womb and bear a son, and you shall name him Jesus. > 32 > He will be great and will be called Son of the Most High, 11 and the Lord God will give him the throne of David his father, > 33 > and he will rule over the house of Jacob forever, and of his kingdom there will be no end." > 34 > But Mary said to the angel, “How can this be, since I have no relations with a man?” 12 > 35 > And the angel said to her in reply, "The holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you. Therefore the child to be born will be called holy, the Son of God. When it means virgin or young girl, clearly Mary states that she has not had sex. Why is this such a difficult tenet to believe? “For nothing is impossible with God.” rastahomie said: "Matthew 1:18 tells us that Mary became pregnant before she and Joseph “had come together” (New International Version). The words “had come together” is a polite euphemism for “had made sweet love down by the fire.” " This is a matter of faith too, but Mary remained a virgin throughout her life. [http://www.christusrex.org/www1/CDHN/creed3.html#MARY](http://www.christusrex.org/www1/CDHN/creed3.html#MARY) ---
**Author:** ![The\_Ryan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/7feea3/32.png) [@The\_Ryan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Ryan)\ **Post date:** [February 19, 2001, 11:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-the-virgin-mary-really-a-virgin/54867/9 "2001-02-19T23:53:44Z")
Yes, we’ve established that the NT refers to Mary as a virgin when she conceived Jesus. I don’t see how anyone would conclude, however, that Mary remained a virgin **after** she got married. What possible reason would she have? and here’s some of the “logic” used by the Catholic Church > [@](#): > > Faith in the virginal conception of Jesus met with the lively opposition, mockery or incomprehension of non-believers, Jews and pagans alike;[151] so it could hardly have been motivated by pagan mythology or by some adaptation to the ideas of the age. Since **some** pagans didn’t believe in the possibility of virgin birth, **none** of them did? Faith presented as faith is one thing, but faith masquerading as logic is dishonest. ---
**Author:** ![Homebrew](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/c89c15/32.png) [@Homebrew](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Homebrew)\ **Post date:** [February 20, 2001, 12:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-the-virgin-mary-really-a-virgin/54867/10 "2001-02-20T00:15:19Z")
Other Virgin births (not exhaustive): Buddha Alexander the Great Heracles ---
**Author:** ![Johanna](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/johanna/32/8318_2.png) [@Johanna](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Johanna)\ **Post date:** [February 20, 2001, 12:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-the-virgin-mary-really-a-virgin/54867/11 "2001-02-20T00:39:27Z")
If it would help to have any corroboration from a non-Christian source . . . The Qur’ân does not use the word “virgin”, but certainly does convey the idea of virginity: > [@](#): > > \*When the angels said, > “Mary, God gives thee good > tidings of a Word from Him > whose name is Messiah, > Jesus, son of Mary; > high honoured shall he be > in this world and the next, > near stationed to God. > He shall speak to men > in the cradle, and of age, > and righteous shall he be.” > “Lord,” said Mary, > “how shall I have a son > seeing no mortal has > touched me?” “Even so,” > God said. “God > creates what He will. > When He decrees a thing > He does but say to it > ‘Be,’ and it is.” As to the Catholics’ issue of whether Mary remained a virgin after the birth of Jesus, the Qur’ân is silent. Neither is there any mention of Joseph the carpenter. The Qur’ân goes on to say that after Mary gave birth to Jesus under a palm tree, she brought the babe back to her people. They were surprised, given that she had always been chaste. Silently she pointed to baby Jesus. He spoke from the cradle so that everyone could see his birth had been miraculous. ---
**Author:** ![Diceman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/22d042/32.png) [@Diceman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diceman)\ **Post date:** [February 20, 2001, 1:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-the-virgin-mary-really-a-virgin/54867/12 "2001-02-20T01:45:25Z")
> [@](#): > > Are you trying to imply that Luke and John make up 50% of the Bible? No. What makes you think that I am? When you’re discussing the Virgin Mary, the relevant texts are the gospels. Last time I checked, there are four of them. In Luke’s and John’s cases, there couldn’t possibly be mistranslation from Hebrew because they were written in Greek. That eliminates 2 of 4 gospels right off the bat. Regardless, I agree that it’s pretty silly to have rabbis discussing the New Testament. ---
**Author:** ![kanicbird](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/5f8ce5/32.png) [@kanicbird](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kanicbird)\ **Post date:** [February 20, 2001, 3:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-the-virgin-mary-really-a-virgin/54867/13 "2001-02-20T03:03:19Z")
The quotes from the Bible like Luke 31-35 show God telling Mary she \*\*will \*\* conceive that means she was not pregnant at that time, just that she will become pregnant. By Mary saying she had not been with a man - she was refering to her past. ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [February 20, 2001, 3:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-the-virgin-mary-really-a-virgin/54867/14 "2001-02-20T03:33:33Z")
The General Question here is what the original Biblical texts said, and whether what they said was the result of a mistranslation. That question has been answered. If you want to discuss the rest of the issue, take it to Great Debates.