₦airaland Forum

If virginity was not important, why did God choose Mary?

What are your thoughts? 🤔

Ibkay32:
If virginity was not important, why did God choose Mary?

What are your thoughts? 🤔

shey you sef wan born Jesus?...





11111111111111111111

So you believe all those fiction stories. Oga virgin or no virgin after birth you go tire for kpekus. Find better wife forget virginity because life is short trip.

Ibkay32:
If virginity was not important, why did God choose Mary?

What are your thoughts? 🤔

In Scripture, women were treated with dignity; Jesus Himself uplifted and respected women regardless of their past. There isn't a single verse in the Bible where God rewarded a woman simply for being a virgin.

Mary being chosen wasn't a reward for her virginity; it was to fulfill prophecy, align with the lineage of David, and emphasize a miraculous birth.

If your logic held, Mary Magdalene wouldn't have been the first to witness the risen Christ. Virginity has never been presented as a qualification to be valued, blessed, or favoured by God.

Merry100:
In Scripture, women were treated with dignity; Jesus Himself uplifted and respected women regardless of their past. There isn't a single verse in the Bible where God rewarded a woman simply for being a virgin

Mary being chosen wasn't a reward for her virginity; it was to fulfill prophecy, align with the lineage of David, and emphasize a miraculous birth.

If your logic held, Mary Magdalene wouldn't have been the first to witness the risen Christ. Virginity has never been presented as a qualification to be valued, blessed, or favoured by God.

That's flawed, in revelation some were honored because of their high purity—The 144,000 comes to mind. Indeed, there's a crown for virgins! Apart from these, I agree with whatever else you chimed in.

Gabrielshow24:
That's flawed, in revelation some were honored because of their high purity—The 144,000 comes to mind. Indeed, there's a crown for virgins! Apart from these, I agree with whatever else you chimed in.

Was the 'some' referring to just women?

Merry100:
Was the 'some' referring to just women?

Women are inherently included except you wish to argue otherwise👀, although given modern standards I'm not surprised at such😅.

Gabrielshow24:
Women are inherently included except you wish to argue otherwise👀, although given modern standards I'm not surprised at such😅.

Just women meaning only women.

Let me repeat it:
There isn't a single verse in the Bible where God rewarded a woman simply for being a virgin.

Merry100:
Just women meaning only women.

Let me repeat it:
There isn't a single verse in the Bible where God rewarded a woman simply for being a virgin.

So your logic is that the 144,000 doesn't include women😂?
Wow, is that how you see your kind—well given history🤔, I think it's really plausible. All in all, you have condemned your kind as ... What word am I looking for here...filthy?.. not quite... Probably befitting will be unchaste—Yeah this will do🤤.

Gabrielshow24:
So your logic is that the 144,000 doesn't include women😂?
Wow, is that how you see your kind—well given history🤔, I think it's really plausible. All in all, you have condemned your kind as ... What word am I looking for here...filthy?.. not quite... Probably befitting will be unchaste—Yeah this will do🤤.

🙄Let me break down and simplify my English: women are included, but not women alone; rather, both women and men are involved.

To better understand what I'm driving at, you should probably take a close look at the question that led to this and try to grasp it first.

Gabrielshow24:
So your logic is that the 144,000 doesn't include women😂?
Wow, is that how you see your kind—well given history🤔, I think it's really plausible. All in all, you have condemned your kind as ... What word am I looking for here...filthy?.. not quite... Probably befitting will be unchaste—Yeah this will do🤤.

What are all these silly projections you added? Does every lady remind you of your sisters or something?😂🤣🤣

Merry100:
🙄Let me break down and simplify my English: women are included, but not women alone; rather, both women and men are involved.

To better understand what I'm driving at, you should probably take a close look at the question that led to this and try to grasp it first.

I understand but as long as women are included then it invalidates your initial assertion. Don't mind me, I am just catching cruise😁. But if you insist solely women then at the top of my head, I can't think of any🤔 save the parable of Jesus 😁—Let me not bother you with my fastidiousness.

Merry100:
What are all these silly projections you added? Does every lady remind you of your sisters or something?😂🤣🤣

Nope, just extending your logic to the extreme 😁.

God did not choose Mary because she was a virgin. They were lot more virgins in those days. He rather chose Mary for a fulfillment of the prophecy of a saviour coming from the seed or lineage of David

Bitoin:
God did not choose Mary because she was a virgin. They were lot more virgins in those days. He rather chose Mary for a fulfillment of the prophecy of a saviour coming from the seed or lineage of David

She was rewarded for her virginity😁! She could have decided to throw it away👀. Kindly use this as an addendum to your statement.

Gabrielshow24:
Nope, just extending your logic to the extreme 😁.

Wow, it's interesting that you find my logic faulty, while you're the one actually expressing a flawed idea. Is virginity really a standalone qualification for holiness?

Ask yourself; are there only 144,000 Christian virgins in the whole world, both male and female?

Also, why would Jesus have referred to some virgins as foolish in one of His parables if simply being a virgin automatically meant complete righteousness or qualification for salvation?

Being a virgin doesn't guarantee holiness or salvation; it's about faithfulness and readiness.

Merry100:
Wow, it's interesting that you find my logic faulty, while you're the one actually expressing a flawed idea. Is virginity really a standalone qualification for holiness?

Ask yourself; are there only 144,000 Christian virgins in the whole world, both male and female?

Also, why would Jesus have referred to some virgins as foolish in one of His parables if simply being a virgin automatically meant complete righteousness or qualification for salvation?

Being a virgin doesn't guarantee holiness or salvation; it's about faithfulness and readiness.

Lovely sentiments, it's solely to address your logic. I see you are already using the parable of Jesus 😮‍💨👀—what can you learn from that🤔...For me there was one particular emphasis 🤧👀. Also, my aim wasn't to show it's a criteria for holiness 😂 at least not in that sense👀but it's a criteria for bodily purity 😁. You don't need to tell us why you are a proponent for this stance with such feline veracity👀—We don't judge, We listen! We all are aware that many waters has passed under the bridge 😁.

Pls, don't dismiss the little children by causing them to sin🤔, that's un-Christlike🤨.

Gabrielshow24:
Lovely sentiments, it's solely to address your logic. I see you are already using the parable of Jesus 😮‍💨👀—what can you learn from that🤔...For me there was one particular emphasis 🤧👀. Also, my aim wasn't to show it's a criteria for holiness 😂 at least not in that sense👀but it's a criteria for bodily purity 😁. You don't need to tell us why you are a proponent for this stance with such feline veracity👀—We don't judge, We listen! We all are aware that many waters has passed under the bridge 😁.

Pls, don't dismiss the little children by causing them to sin🤔, that's un-Christlike🤨.

Oh my God; did you really just use the word 'sentiment'? Bro, why do you enjoy throwing around words without fully grasping their meaning?🤣

Be honest with yourself; who's really being sentimental here?

I was simply correcting someone who was biasedly emphasizing female virginity, but you got frustrated and worked up, jumped in, and started spewing nonsense and offering silly logic.

How many virgins did Jesus specifically highlight during His ministry on earth? Jesus came for everyone; especially the sinful. He even praised a particular woman just because of her devotion to Him and explicitly placed her story in history.

So, what exactly is your point? Be clearer.

Are you trying to say non-virgins can't repent? Or that virgins are more favoured by God? Which is it?

You can keep projecting if you want, but the truth is, you're arguing with a virgin who's wise enough to know that virginity alone isn't a qualification for righteousness.

Merry100:
Oh my God; did you really just use the word 'sentiment'? Bro, why do you enjoy throwing around words without fully grasping their meaning?

Be honest with yourself; who's really being sentimental here?

I was simply correcting someone who was biasedly emphasizing female virginity, but you got frustrated and worked up, jumped in, and started spewing nonsense and offering silly logic.

How many virgins did Jesus specifically highlight during His ministry on earth? Jesus came for everyone; especially the sinful. He even praised a particular woman just because of her devotion to Him and explicitly placed her story in history.

So, what exactly is your point? Be clearer.

Are you trying to say non-virgins can't repent? Or that virgins are more favoured by God? Which is it?

You can keep projecting if you want, but the truth is, you're arguing with a virgin who's wise enough to know that virginity alone isn't a qualification for righteousness.

In what way have I said all these😂. Your point of assertion has been disproved and you have gone into some straw man... Although it was fun when I used it—appeal to the extremes—but yours is just rather plain misrepresentation. I have in no way said all these you have imputed upon me🤨. I think it's you that's projecting your insecurities because you seem to infer that I was insisting that only virgins will 'make it'. That was not my intention.

I have made my intention clear that I came to correct the inaccuracy of your assertion; nothing more, nothing less. The rest of my responses were me just having fun🤔—something you have taken personally 😂 and become worked up about. With the fact, that you started talking off point, 🤨bringing stuffs such as "virginity isn't the yardstick" —this also wasn't even my argument 🤔 at all.

Lady, once again, I am catching cruise. I also didn't say all these fuzzy-logic you wrote up there. Your cognitive bias inferred this!

Gabrielshow24:
In what way have I said all these😂. Your point of assertion has been disproved and you have gone into some straw man... Although it was fun when I used it—appeal to the extremes—but yours is just rather plain misrepresentation. I have in no way said all these you have imputed upon me🤨. I think it's you that's projecting your insecurities because you seem to infer that I was insisting that only virgins will 'make it'. That was not my intention.

I have made my intention clear that I came to correct the inaccuracy of your assertion; nothing more, nothing less. The rest of my responses were me just having fun🤔—something you have taken personally 😂 and become worked up about. With the fact, that you started talking off point, 🤨bringing stuffs such as "virginity isn't the yardstick" —this also wasn't even my argument 🤔 at all.

Lady, once again, I am catching cruise. I also didn't say all these fuzzy-logic you wrote up there. Your cognitive bias inferred this!

Don't mind me 😂; we don't cruise like that in my circle, so I couldn't tell it was a joke. All I saw was passive-aggressive shade with a grin, aimed at degrading women. It was giving frustrated and insecure.

You mean you wrote those shady essays just to 'catch cruise'? That kind of energy only works in your own circle, but in public, it's not impressive, it could even be seen as a disorder.

Why is that so hard to grasp? I was clearly responding to someone who was overemphasizing female virginity. Your attempt to twist that only shows you're more interested in assumptions than actually reading what was said.

Where exactly is the inaccuracy you claim to be correcting? How do you 'correct' a clear fact? There isn't a single verse in the Bible where God rewarded a woman simply for being a virgin? Let me believe comprehension is still the issue here and break it down again: I specifically singled out women in my statement. I wasn't talking about men, or both men and women. I said nothing about a shared or symbolic reward; I was referring to a personal reward for women alone, based solely on virginity. That's it.

Merry100:
Don't mind me 😂; we don't cruise like that in my circle, so I couldn't tell it was a joke. All I saw was passive-aggressive shade with a grin, aimed at degrading women. It was giving frustrated and insecure.

You mean you wrote those shady essays just to 'catch cruise'? That kind of energy only works in your own circle, but in public, it's not impressive, it could even be seen as a disorder.

Why is that so hard to grasp? I was clearly responding to someone who was overemphasizing female virginity. Your attempt to twist that only shows you're more interested in assumptions than actually reading what was said.

Where exactly is the inaccuracy you claim to be correcting? How do you 'correct' a clear fact? There isn't a single verse in the Bible where God rewarded a woman simply for being a virgin? Let me believe comprehension is still the issue here and break it down again: I specifically singled out women in my statement. I wasn't talking about men, or both men and women . I said nothing about a shared or symbolic reward; I was referring to a personal reward for women alone, based solely on virginity. That's it.

Stop repeating yourself, I understand what you meant and I have addressed it earlier.

It's also termed an inaccuracy because you failed to account for the 144,000 that inherently included women . I believe women there encapsulates whatsoever personal reward ploy you aim to use for the singular. This aside, it's nice having a conversation with you, seeing you took the op's question as "degrading" 😂—indeed it's your insecurities at work!

You had hoped to achieve a sentiment "that no woman was rewarded for virginity and you argue that you are not concerned with shared reward"? This is awful because 144,000, if women are indeed there faults your analogy. Each woman there was rewarded for their purity among other things—that's why they get to follow Jesus around and learn a new song!

Invariably that verse solely negates your allusions. Bodily purity is also rewarded by God! I know yours is lost but you still have hope, because in that same chapter there were multitudes of tongues and nations which you are included in—all things being equal 👀—although, they do not meet this criteria but are present with God because they believed in him!

Once again, don't dissuade those that have taken purity as an oath👀!

Gabrielshow24:
Stop repeating yourself, I understand what you meant and I have addressed it earlier.

It's also termed an inaccuracy because you failed to account for the 144,000 that inherently included women . I believe women there encapsulates whatsoever personal reward ploy you aim to use for the singular. This aside, it's nice having a conversation with you, seeing you took the op's question as "degrading" 😂—indeed it's your insecurities at work!

You had hoped to achieve a sentiment "that no woman was rewarded for virginity and you argue that you are not concerned with shared reward"? This is awful because 144,000, if women are indeed there faults your analogy. Each woman there was rewarded for their purity among other things—that's why they get to follow Jesus around and learn a new song!

Invariably that verse solely negates your allusions. Bodily purity is also rewarded by God! I know yours is lost but you still have hope, because in that same chapter there were multitudes of tongues and nations which you are included in—all things being equal 👀—although, they do not meet this criteria but are present with God because they believed in him!

Once again, don't dissuade those that have taken purity as an oath👀!

So because I don't think like the gullible virgins you're used to meeting on the street, I couldn't possibly be one myself? I get it now; you're confused by the idea that a woman can have sense and self-control. Wild concept, right? 😂🤣

If only you realized; I'm not some 18 year old being swayed by fairy tales or wrong information. I'm a grown woman, doing well for myself, and I have absolutely no reason to be obsessed with virginity, let alone fake anything about it.

Neither I nor the people around me are that shallow, impressionable, or fixated on that topic. You might be used to women who are, but don’t project that onto me.

No, clearly you don't understand. If you did, you'd realize that the mention of the 144,000 has no relevance here. Since comprehension is still pending, let me explain again; this time in layman's terms:

My comment specifically addressed the overemphasis on female virginity. I was referring to women. Not both genders or men. I wasn't talking about a symbolic or shared reward. I said nothing of the sort.

I referred to a personal reward for women alone, based solely on virginity.

That was the entire point. But somehow, you took a detour; into wild assumptions and personal projections.

Bitoin:
God did not choose Mary because she was a virgin. They were lot more virgins in those days. He rather chose Mary for a fulfillment of the prophecy of a saviour coming from the seed or lineage of David

You got it completely wrong!!!

Isaiah 7:14
Therefore the Lord himself will give you a sign: The virgin will conceive and give birth to a son, and will call him Immanuel.

From the prophecy, virginity was a criteria.

There was no way God would have chosen a woman who wasn't a virgin.

Jesus will not grow up in a body that was used for fornication. E get why.

Merry100:
In Scripture, women were treated with dignity; Jesus Himself uplifted and respected women regardless of their past. There isn't a single verse in the Bible where God rewarded a woman simply for being a virgin.

Mary being chosen wasn't a reward for her virginity; it was to fulfill prophecy, align with the lineage of David, and emphasize a miraculous birth.

If your logic held, Mary Magdalene wouldn't have been the first to witness the risen Christ. Virginity has never been presented as a qualification to be valued, blessed, or favoured by God.

You just dey mix things upside down. The op didn't talk about reward in the question he asked. He simply asked why God chose a virgin named Mary to give birth to Jesus.

Inasmuch you attempted to answer the question by saying it was prophecy, you still missed the main point.

Main point: There was no way God would allow Jesus grow up in a body used for fornication. God circumvented the transmission of the sin nature.

jmoore:
You just dey mix things upside down. The op didn't talk about reward in the question he asked. He simply asked why God chose a virgin named Mary to give birth to Jesus.

Inasmuch you attempted to answer the question by saying it was prophecy, you still missed the main point.

Main point: There was no way God would allow Jesus grow up in a body used for fornication. God circumvented the transmission of the sin nature.

True, the OP didn't use the word "reward," but the structure of the question; 'If virginity was not important, why did God choose Mary?'; implies that her virginity was an absolute qualification that influenced God's choice. That's why I addressed the underlying assumption that Jesus birth was a reward for Mary's virginity.

Mary's virginity simply fulfilled Isaiah 7:14 and highlighted the miraculous nature of Jesus' birth; it wasn't about God avoiding a "used" body. Scripture never teaches that sexual history defiles someone to the point where God can't use them.

Merry100:
So because I don't think like the gullible virgins you're used to meeting on the street, I couldn't possibly be one myself? I get it now; you're confused by the idea that a woman can have sense and self-control. Wild concept, right? 😂🤣

If only you realized; I'm not some 18 year old being swayed by fairy tales or wrong information. I'm a grown woman, doing well for myself, and I have absolutely no reason to be obsessed with virginity, let alone fake anything about it.

Neither I nor the people around me are that shallow, impressionable, or fixated on that topic. You might be used to women who are, but don’t project that onto me.

No, clearly you don't understand. If you did, you'd realize that the mention of the 144,000 has no relevance here. Since comprehension is still pending, let me explain again; this time in layman's terms:

My comment specifically addressed the overemphasis on female virginity. I was referring to women. Not both genders or men. I wasn't talking about a symbolic or shared reward. I said nothing of the sort.

I referred to a personal reward for women alone, based solely on virginity.

That was the entire point. But somehow, you took a detour; into wild assumptions and personal projections.

Thanks, ChatGpt for such enunciations but still she didn't explain the concept properly to you. Her logic was flawed, once again, women in 144,000 have encapsulated the singular—Be it symbolic or not. Also, she has drawn straws as I am not fixated nor projecting—she is!

I have in no way said all the shallow things she imputed as my own! She projected such faulty logic onto me; logic that can only be found in little children. Obviously, virginity isn't the sole factor for a reward! As well, virginity/purity is rewarded as exemplified in Revelation. This fact is what bothers her as she doesn't fit such a categorization, which I am not bothered about!

Anyone sensible can go through the write up. Her case can be likened to saying there is no verse for rewarding Benjamin when such verses exists in multiple places for Israel! —I suppose her conclusion is that the 144,000 do not contain woman!🤔

Anyway, keep your dissuasions to yourself! Virginity is not the yardstick but it also has its rewards! —that's a biblical fact!

I don't know how someone can be so disinclined to look for personal reward for women alone, based on virginity when the generic term encapsulates it. Pls, woman. Don't be bitter. I'm less concerned if you are, you came on strong implying that "virginity doesn't have rewards"! Which is false!

No logic survives a contradiction! As that simple verse, be it symbolic or not, negates that. The only way to go about this is to negate the inclusion of women in such😂. Thanks, bye as I don't have time for redundant conversations!

jmoore:
You just dey mix things upside down. The op didn't talk about reward in the question he asked. He simply asked why God chose a virgin named Mary to give birth to Jesus.

Inasmuch you attempted to answer the question by saying it was prophecy, you still missed the main point.

Main point: There was no way God would allow Jesus grow up in a body used for fornication. God circumvented the transmission of the sin nature.

😂 That's what I have been battling with—projection of insecurities! Thanks for the eye opener.

Gabrielshow24:
Thanks, ChatGpt for such enunciations but still she didn't explain the concept properly to you. Her logic was flawed, once again, women in 144,000 have encapsulated the singular—Be it symbolic or not. Also, she has drawn straws as I am not fixated nor projecting—she is!

I have in no way said all the shallow things she imputed as my own! She projected such faulty logic onto me; logic that can only be found in little children. Obviously, virginity isn't the sole factor for a reward! As well, virginity/purity is rewarded as exemplified in Revelation. This fact is what bothers her as she doesn't fit such a categorization, which I am not bothered about!

Anyone sensible can go through the write up. Her case can be likened to saying there is no verse for rewarding Benjamin when such verses exists in multiple places for Israel! —I suppose her conclusion is that the 144,000 do not contain woman!🤔

Anyway, keep your dissuasions to yourself! Virginity is not the yardstick but it also has its rewards! —that's a biblical fact!

I don't know how someone can be so disinclined to look for personal reward for women alone, based on virginity when the generic term encapsulates it. Pls, woman. Don't be bitter. I'm less concerned if you are, you came on strong implying that "virginity doesn't have rewards"! Which is false!

No logic survives a contradiction! As that simple verse, be it symbolic or not, negates that. The only way to go about this is to negate the inclusion of women in such😂. Thanks, bye as I don't have time for redundant conversations!

Bro, dismissing things emotionally doesn't make them any less valid. I get it; my reasoning hit hard, so the easiest way to reject it is to project that it was artificially generated. Nice try😂

Anyway, case closed. No point going back and forth when you're clearly unwilling to submit to facts.