Replies

Mary would not be "full of grace" nor "blessed" nor a good woman at all, if she were a liar; nor would the Incarnation of Our Lord be predicated upon a lie or upon God adulterously taking a married woman, "understood in the normal sense" as being married to someone else. God is all-honorable and all-just. He doesn't "do" adultery. Therefore though Mary was in one sense of the word, "legally" married to Joseph, we can safely presuppose that both Mary and Joseph knew she was not married married to him "understood in the normal sense" --- and therefore she was not lying to Joseph nor guilty of marital fraud towards him. A mutual vow of chastity (I presume that here you actually mean abstinence) would not be false if Joseph had known and agreed. If he did NOT know, then, yes, it would be marital fraud on the part of Mary; and God would be committing adultery.

Your premise and reasoning are clearly in error. That Mary and Joseph knew she was not married married to him "understood in the normal sense" is simply not Scriptural, as the "normal sense" Scripturally is that being betrothed mean that sexual relations with someone else was the capital crime of adultery, and thus Joseph sought to put Mary away privately. How can you contradict Scripture to support Rome?

The penalty for consensual relations with a betrothed women:

23 If a damsel that is a virgin be betrothed unto an husband, and a man find her in the city, and lie with her; 24 Then ye shall bring them both out unto the gate of that city, and ye shall stone them with stones that they die; the damsel, because she cried not, being in the city; and the man, because he hath humbled his neighbour's wife: so thou shalt put away evil from among you.

Now the birth of Jesus Christ was on this wise: When as his mother Mary was espoused to Joseph, before they came together, she was found with child of the Holy Ghost. Then Joseph her husband, being a just man, and not willing to make her a publick example, was minded to put her away privily. (Matthew 1:18-19)

However, God never even said He was married to Mary, nor had any sexual relations with her, but her impregnation was purely was spiritual means, thus the whole adultery charge, which is based upon laws of physical relations, is invalid, and in a word, bogus. . God can also talk to a women in private, behind her husband's back or consent if He wanted to, without any impropriety.

Moreover can marry a command the killing of innocents, and marry a wife again who was put away, contrary to the law, (Jeremiah 3:1) as He can violate certain laws given to man, since being omniscient and almighty, then He alone can make such work out for the greater good, which is consistent with the intent of the Law, which man cannot presume to be able to do an unjust

They say, If a man put away his wife, and she go from him, and become another man's, shall he return unto her again? shall not that land be greatly polluted? but thou hast played the harlot with many lovers; yet return again to me, saith the Lord. (Jeremiah 3:1)

Moreover, according to OT law, a vow that a women took was subject to the binding or loosing of her husband, or if not married, to her father. (Num. 30)

This is why the Muslims do not believe in the Gospel account of the Incarnation. They say it casts God as an adulterer.

Nonsense for the above reasons, but they make God after their own image. As do Mormons.

I did not say God had physical intercourse with Mary! However, conceiving a child --- like intercourse itself, an aspect of the sexual relation --- is an activity reserved to the spouses. A woman getting artificially inseminated with "donor" sperm (actually "vendor" sperm in most cases), or getting implanted with a baby via IVF made by some other couple, is violating the vowed sexual exclusivity of marriage as surely as a woman who willfully commits physical intercourse outside of marriage.

One problem of our sexually corrupted modern world is that we have so effectively split apart intercourse and procreation. We don't see that they are part of the same thing. They are both aspects of conjugal union. It's only recently (comparatively, 15 minutes ago) that they got split apart into garbled fragments via contraception and artificial reproductive technologies.