|
Freethought & Rationalism ArchiveThe archives are read only. |
06-08-2008, 10:21 AM
|
#21 | ||
|
Veteran Member
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 3,058
|
Quote:
Jeffrey |
||
|
|
06-08-2008, 10:36 AM
|
#22 | ||
|
Contributor
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: the fringe of the caribbean
Posts: 18,988
|
Quote:
Luke 1.35......THE HOLY GHOST SHALL COME UPON THEE, AND THE POWER OF THE HIGHEST SHALL OVERSHADOW THEE....... How did the Ghost get the holy thing in Mary's womb, Jeffrey? |
||
|
|
|
06-08-2008, 11:21 AM
|
#23 |
|
Veteran Member
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Eagle River, Alaska
Posts: 7,816
|
Is there a reason why you are ignoring the rather obvious answer to your question, aa5874 (ie the magical power of God)?
|
|
|
|
06-08-2008, 11:36 AM
|
#24 | ||
|
Veteran Member
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 3,058
|
Quote:
Nor, quite contrary to what you think (if that activity can, in the light of what you post here, actually be attributed to you), does Luke say, even if he did make such a reference, that it "got" anything, let alone a holy thing, into Mary's womb. Your reading of this text is as good, and as all well informed, as the the one you previously proposed regarding how another Lukan text spoke of Jesus leaping in Mary's womb. Jeffrey |
||
|
|
|
06-08-2008, 11:38 AM
|
#25 | |
|
Contributor
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: the fringe of the caribbean
Posts: 18,988
|
Quote:
Jeffrey may not agree that a God has "obvious magical powers". I am waiting for Jeffrey to respond, he may know if the "obvious magical power of God" involves sexual activity by His Holy Ghost and Mary. |
|
|
|
|
06-08-2008, 11:48 AM
|
#26 | ||
|
Contributor
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: the fringe of the caribbean
Posts: 18,988
|
Quote:
How did this Ghost get baby Jesus in Mary's womb? |
||
|
|
|
06-08-2008, 11:57 AM
|
#27 | ||
|
Veteran Member
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 3,058
|
Quote:
May I have a show of hands, please? Jeffrey |
||
|
|
|
06-08-2008, 12:15 PM
|
#28 | |||
|
Veteran Member
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Eagle River, Alaska
Posts: 7,816
|
Quote:
Quote:
|
|||
|
|
|
06-09-2008, 03:41 PM
|
#29 | |||
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: New York
Posts: 742
|
Quote:
Amaleq13 is incapable of understanding the euphemism so I provided evidence. I showed that in two different places ( Midrash Genesis Rabbah 39.7; Midrash Ruth Rabbah 3.9) Jewish Hebrew scholars in the 6th century said that in Ruth 3:9, spreading a cloak over a women was a euphemism for having sex. If you read Ruth 3:9 EzI believe that you would agree. Ruth 3:9 And he said, Who art thou? And she answered, I am Ruth thine handmaid: spread therefore thy skirt over thine handmaid; for thou art a near kinsman. In Ezekiel 16, the Lord describes making Isreal his bride: Ezekiel 16:8 Now when I passed by thee, and looked upon thee, behold, thy time was the time of love; and I spread my skirt over thee, and covered thy nakedness: yea, I sware unto thee, and entered into a covenant with thee, saith the Lord GOD, and thou becamest mine. I have not reviewed the following: Kruger, P.A., "The Hem of the Garment in Marriage. The Meaning of the Symbolic Gesture in Ruth 3:9 and Ezek 16:8," JNSL 12 (1984), 79-86. Francis Landy, Ruth and the Romance of Realism, or Deconstructing History. I also showed that in Hebrew 'shadow' was a synonym for 'cloak', so that God spreading a shadow over Mary was the same thing as God spreading a cloak over Mary which is a documented euphemism for God having sex with Mary. Your response was that I should find more examples of this Jewish euphemism in Ancient Greek literature between the 4th and 8th century and provided a list of places to look. What a silly non-response! I will remind you of the words of Amaleq13, Quote:
|
|||
|
|
|
06-09-2008, 04:27 PM
|
#30 |
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: New York
Posts: 742
|
Luke 1:35 And the messenger answering said to her, `The Holy Spirit shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee, therefore also the holy-begotten thing shall be called Son of God' (YLT);
I also claim that the phrase "The Holy Ghost will come upon thee" is a euphemism for sex. I also claim that God having 'power' over Mary is a euphemism for having sex with her. I think its bizarre that a Christian would claim that God did not have sex with Mary when there are so many euphamisms for having sex in the passage where she conceives Jesus. The usual way for someone to get pregnant is having sex. If God got Mary pregnant then we should presume that they had sex. We are made in God's image and he is clearly a man in the OT, presumably with all his parts (unless you think him a eunich). I do not know of any reason why we should not presume that early Christians believed that God had physical sex with Mary. Of course it was magical sex - after all he is God. Christians are just applying their unreasonable presuppositions to read "did not have physical sex" into the story. -------------------------- I have another issue: Mary says that she does not know a husband. That seems like an obvous euphemism for not being sexually active. I can try to prove that it is a euphemism for not being sexually active by reference to the Jewish Scriptures: Genesis 19:8 Behold now, I have two daughters which have not known man; let me, I pray you, bring them out unto you, and do ye to them as is good in your eyes: only unto these men do nothing; for therefore came they under the shadow of my roof. Genesis 24:16 And the damsel was very fair to look upon, a virgin, neither had any man known her: and she went down to the well, and filled her pitcher, and came up. Numbers 31:17-18 Now therefore kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman that hath known man by lying with him. But all the women children, that have not known a man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves. Numbers 31:35 And thirty and two thousand persons in all, of women that had not known man by lying with him. Judges 21:12 And they found among the inhabitants of Jabeshgilead four hundred young virgins, that had known no man by lying with any male: and they brought them unto the camp to Shiloh, which is in the land of Canaan. I doubt that I would find any support in pagan Greek literature regardless of Jeffery's silly claims above that I should expect to find such things. All these references to the Jewish scriptures using 'know' with 'man', which are usually assumed to indicate virginity, are interesting for two reasons. 1) they are all in the past tense e.g. 'have not known'; and 2) every one, except the first, is more explicit then just saying "not known man" - each also includes either 'virgin' or further explanation e.g. 'know man by lying with him'. It is possible that 'knowing man' means something else related to be different than not being a virgin e.g. having seen an erect penis, having naked sex, being married, consummating a marrage, or having been pregnant. However, Mary says in the present tense that she does not know a husband, and she does not add 'by laying with him' and she does not add that she is a 'virgin'. The early Christians in Judea were Christianized Jews. It is possible that Mary's words 'I do not know a husband' would not have been interpreted by a Christianized Jew as a claim of virginity at all, but just an indication that Mary was not sexually active with another man (Joseph) at the time she conceived Jesus. Later, both Luke and Matthew claim that Mary was a virgin, but they could have simply misinterpreted what she said accoring to an earlier Christian source that did not even intend to indicate that Mary was a virgin. |
|
|
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
