FRDB Archives

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.


Go Back   FRDB Archives > Archives > Religion (Closed) > Biblical Criticism & History
Welcome, Peter Kirby.
You last visited: Today at 03:12 PM

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 09-25-2008, 07:37 AM   #1
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Leeds, UK
Posts: 5,878
Default Bastard

If the money lenders had yelled "Bastard!" at Jesus after he threw his strop in the Temple, might they have been right - legally speaking?
Stephen T-B is offline  
Old 09-25-2008, 07:42 AM   #2
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Canada
Posts: 2,305
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stephen T-B View Post
If the money lenders had yelled "Bastard!" at Jesus after he threw his strop in the Temple, might they have been right - legally speaking?
As in born out of wedlock, an illegitimate child of Mary?
bacht is offline  
Old 09-25-2008, 07:45 AM   #3
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Leeds, UK
Posts: 5,878
Default

Yes
Stephen T-B is offline  
Old 09-25-2008, 07:53 AM   #4
Contributor
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Falls Creek, Oz.
Posts: 11,192
Default

Just like Constantine and Helena, only in th case of the boss he actually invented an alternative fraudulent lineage (as did most of the Roman emperors).
mountainman is offline  
Old 09-25-2008, 08:42 AM   #5
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: MidWest
Posts: 1,894
Default

Quote:
Gospel of Thomas 105. Jesus said, "Whoever knows the father and the mother will be called the child of a whore."
I don't know if that's actually supposed to be about his momma but kind of relevant.
Elijah is offline  
Old 09-25-2008, 10:13 AM   #6
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Leeds, UK
Posts: 5,878
Default

So I suppose if one wantd to be disparaging, one might refer to Jesus as a "bastard demi-god" rather than just a "demi-god" ?
Stephen T-B is offline  
Old 09-25-2008, 10:22 AM   #7
Regular Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: On a hill.
Posts: 288
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stephen T-B View Post
So I suppose if one wantd to be disparaging, one might refer to Jesus as a "bastard demi-god" rather than just a "demi-god" ?
Can you think of a demi-god who wasn't a bastard? Seems to be the norm...
Wedge is offline  
Old 09-26-2008, 03:05 AM   #8
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: San Bernardino, Calif.
Posts: 5,435
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stephen T-B View Post
If the money lenders had yelled "Bastard!" at Jesus after he threw his strop in the Temple, might they have been right - legally speaking?
Probably, if you assume that everything in the gospels is factually correct except for the supernatural parts like the virgin birth. But I don't know any good reason to assume anything like that.

If Jesus really existed, then we know nothing about his parents or their legal relationship. But most people were born legitimately, and so the odds are that he was, too.
Doug Shaver is offline  
Old 09-26-2008, 05:29 AM   #9
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Alberta
Posts: 11,885
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Elijah View Post
Quote:
Gospel of Thomas 105. Jesus said, "Whoever knows the father and the mother will be called the child of a whore."
I don't know if that's actually supposed to be about his momma but kind of relevant.
Yes it relevant to say that the child was not born at midnight, midwinter, midlife but was untimely ripped from the temple tramp by an evangelist in broad daylight.
Chili is offline  
Old 09-26-2008, 09:42 AM   #10
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: On the path of knowledge
Posts: 8,889
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stephen T-B View Post
If the money lenders had yelled "Bastard!" at Jesus after he threw his strop in the Temple, might they have been right - legally speaking?
When Mary was "found with child of the Holy Ghost" (Matt 1:18, 20 & Luke 1:34-35)
These birth narratives seem to indicate that "Jesus" did not come into being by being conceived through normal sexual intercourse with any human and earthly father.
The idea of his "virgin" birth seems to be that Mary conceived her son without ever having engaged in sexual intercourse with any man, Joseph only becoming his earthly "father" by virtue his of marrying the as yet "virgin" Mary.
If this was the case, then the child would have no flesh and blood male progenitor, having been spontaneously generated within Mary's womb without any act of sexual intercourse ever involved.
Would such a child, so conceived, actually be illegitimate? or actually a "bastard", being that no "sex act" was involved, and there being no flesh and blood "father" whose "bastard son" that one being so conceived could rightly be?
And Mary, How could she be justly or rightly be accused, judged and deemed a "whore", if as the narratives relate, she had never "known" a man, and remained a virgin at the least until she had married Joseph and had given birth to her first born son?

Certainly this would be a "miraculous" birth, but then Christianity has never had much problem with the accepting of, and boasting of this miracle.

The pregnant question in all of these types of discussions is, does the text indicate that Mary played the whore, by getting knocked up out of wedlock, and then lying about the circumstances of her pregnancy?
No doubt, some would like to successfully put such a creative interpretation upon the story, but does the text at all support such allegations?
Sheshbazzar is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 08:21 PM.

Top

This custom BB emulates vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.