So that He could have only one father - God.

Geist:
In other words, one can deduce Mary's immaculate conception from the virgin birth. If this is true, does it not follow that Mary's parents would also have had to undergo some kind of immaculate conception in order to conceive Mary sin less and also the same theory could as well be applied to her grand parents. And the list goes on.
Thank you.

Not really, it was fitting that mary be free from sin to give sinless human nature to Jesus, where God is concerned we will eliminate sin as much as we can for God is holy but mary is not God, it doesnt matter whether or not her parent were free from original sin, only God demands absolute purity.
italo said dat d ark dat contains the word of God show b without blemish, he didnt say d tree from which d seed of d ark's tree was goten shuld b without blemish.

Geist:
..........

In the first instance the Torah commands the Jews to go forth and multiply Gen 1v28, on the other hand we are told that Man is conceived in sin Ps. 51v5 so which is it to be?

There is no evidence that Mary was without sin, even if we ascribe to her a dubious virgin birth it does not negate the other various types of deeds that constitute “sin” which she may have committed thereby rendering her unworthy of being “Mother of God”.

As for the “virgin birth”, the earliest gospel writer the author of Mark who’s work appears around 60-65CE shortly after the writings of Paul has no hint of a virgin birth, he knows nothing about the antecedents of Jesus and neither does Paul. In fact first century Jewish Christians would have no concept of the idea that Jesus was born of a virgin in the intervening years between writings of Mark and later gospels. I should point out also that the Gospel of John similarly makes no mention of a virgin birth

It is to the much later volumes of Matthew and Luke closer to the turn of the century, fully thirty to thirty-five years after the writings of Mark that we look to in order to establish the virgin birth, and even then both accounts are so diverse as to be improbable that it is clear there was no consensus about the early life of Jesus by first century Christians. The story of the virgin birth, more in keeping with pagan mythologies appears to be more important to the sexually repressed Greek Christian biblical writers, who were not accepting of the fact that the “Son of God” would be conceived by an entirely natural process.

Geist:
∆ b]Do you think it was important for Jesus to be born of a virgin? If yes then why?[/b]. I have my own theories but would also like to know what other christians think of the question. Answers from both Catholics and protestants are needed please.

In order for Jesus Christ to be both a descendant of David and of the Eternal characteristics, He had to be born of a human and of God.