Touched Mary's egg? Where did you read that the HS "touched" Mary's egg? Is that scriptural? The mechanism of Incarnation, as far as I know, was never scripturally explained. It is, however, described as an event wholly supernatural.
The "instant" was supernatural, the Child was supernatural, the pregnancy therefore could only have been miraculous and supernatural, yet the birth, for some reason, "must" be nothing short of "natural."
So, I am askingyou again: At which point did it become "natural" and where doe sit say so?
Scripturally, the indication is that Mary became pregnant at the time that "The Holy Spirit came upon her" and she was "Overshadowed by the power of the Most High."
It's fairly clear.
I read it in the same scripture Xzins refers to when he quotes: "The Holy Spirit came upon her" and she was "Overshadowed by the power of the Most High." I think that if DNA testing was available at the time, and such a test was done, it would prove that Mary and Jesus were blood relatives. Do you think otherwise? --- Because no sex was involved, the fertilization of Mary's egg was supernatural.
The "instant" was supernatural, the Child was supernatural, the pregnancy therefore could only have been miraculous and supernatural, yet the birth, for some reason, "must" be nothing short of "natural."
What about the pregnancy do you find supernatural? Pregnancy is a nine-month process. How was it different from what we experienced? Just because the baby happened to be Jesus is not evidence that the pregnancy was anything out of the ordinary. When Jesus was scourged, he bled in an "ordinary" manner, wouldn't you say? Or, was His bleeding "supernatural" because it was Him?
So, I am asking you again: At which point did it become "natural" and where does it say so?
I have not seen you argue against my first answer yet. :) We are told that the Spirit came upon Mary and she conceived. This was supernatural because there was no sexual union involved. After the instantaneous event, the rest of it was "natural". I and Ignatius appear to agree that Mary carried Jesus for nine months in the usual and normal way, and then gave birth in the usual and normal way.
I still can't really put my arms around where you are coming from here. If you asked me if I thought that Jesus was subject to being the victim of a miscarriage I would say "no". If you think that would make the entire pregnancy "supernatural" then I could meet you there. However, neither you nor I nor anyone else ever born was subject to miscarriage either. All of us were born according to God's plan. I don't really consider that to be "supernatural" in the context of this discussion.