Amaleq13

It seems to me there is a significant difference between losing one's faith in a virgin birth and losing one's faith. IIUC, you have only lost the former.

It is my understanding that every pastor, preacher, and priest learns all of this information in seminary. They also, I assume, learn the primary apologetics offered in response. Whether they accept those apologetics or not, I would hope that they continue to have faith in some aspect of their religion if they choose to continue to become "men of the cloth". It has also been my understanding that it is generally thought best to keep this kind of information out of the pulpit since most folks don't go to church to engage in critical thinking.

If this is a Bible discussion class, aren't you underestimating the intelligence and faith of your students by keeping this information from them? You don't have to present it as you have (ie full argument with conclusion) but you could certainly engage them in a discussion of the relevant facts you presented in your OP and let them reach their own, informed decisions.

That is, IMO, the primary job an educator.

If you are concerned that your superiors or whoever is charge of giving you the job will fire you, I don't know why they would have a problem with an explanation that you are simply trying to prepare the class against the inevitable assaults against their beliefs they will experience by atheists.

Anat

OTOH there is a talmudic passage that says both parents contribute to the child - the man contributes its 'whiteness' and the woman its 'redness'. (I guess that means we inherit our bones, fat tissue and nervous tissue from our fathers, blood, muscles and most internal organs from our mothers?) The soul comes from God. When a child dies, God takes his share back, and tells the parents - what's left is yours, do with it as you wish. (Obviously a reflection of high rates for infant and childhood mortality.) I still have no idea when and where this idea originated.

John A. Broussard

I agree with your last sentence.

However, you are very much mistaken if you think a theist group hires someone to "teach" a bible class. As with the instructors of Nazi Youth, the job is to get them to believe, to hold on to their beliefs, and to do no thinking beyond that. That's why I advised Johnny earlier to quit fighting it. Forget all the evidence against the virginity of some Jewish maiden, the fall of man, the existence of god and the rest of the religious myths. Just believe. It's so much easier, and will make indoctrination of the young far less frustrating.

Naked Ape

Now Johnny, you of all people should know that thinking is not encouraged in church, as it tends to interfere with simply believing. Once you start thinking, you are bound to start asking questions. No good can come of thinking and asking questions. (Well except for things like the germ theory of disease, but how important is that?)

Last time I checked, I could not find a single verse in the bible in praise of intelligence. Sure there are some positive things said of wisdom in the OT, but the NT seems to think rather poorly of both wisdom and intelligence.Speaking of destroying the wisdom of the wise and frustrating the intelligence of the intelligent, how do you explain the part about god being required to sacrifice part of himself to himself in order to save us from him? That has always confused me.

Cheers,

Naked Ape

Godless Dave

Not necessarily. There's no reason Jesus has to be born of a virgin to be divine. The idea of "original sin", that anyone conceived via sexual intercourse is sinful, does not necessarily follow from the Bible in its original languages. As I understand it, part of the justification for the idea of original sin came from a Latin mistranslation and as such never caught on in the Orthodox church. (Source: The Closing of the Western Mind by Charles Freeman. I'd look up chapter and page number but my house is full of construction guys and I've been awake for 25 hours so I can't be bothered).


I mean, I sure as hell don't think he's divine, but I'm just sayin'. What the Scholar has run into is a bad apologetic that you don't have to believe to be a Christian, but that his particular flock insists on believing.

funinspace

Yes, and that can be metaphorically said of all humans, but it hardly makes a tall tale any closer to a reality. Paul missed a whole bunch of stuff that one would think worthy of mention to challenge a crowd to think about from the recent past. And since he got a private audition with Jesus-God as well as much time with the other Apostles, it seams doubly odd that hardly a Jesus detail was ever uttered in his letters. I see no suave oils from Aramaic/Syriac primacy arguments…unless you are trying to turn Christianity on it's head.

Johnny Scholar, the "baa a a" of the sheep did not make me laugh, I can relate too well (ok, maybe a grin). I was lucky enough that it was not a profession. You have not said of what sect you are part of, but there are lots of Liberal Mainstream Protestant sects out there where such question are allow to be honestly and earnestly asked. Nor have you alluded to the whole of your predicament, either way good luck on where ever you need to head.

Johnny Scholar

can i get back to you on that? :rolling:

Johnny Scholar

i went to christiananswers.net to find an answer to the virgin birth problem. what i found was ludicrous...

Critical claim #1: The idea of a virgin birth is scientifically impossible.

Answer: Really? Where have you been for the past 21 years? Ever since in vitro fertilization and embryonic transfer came on the scene in 1978 (not to mention artificial insemination), it is quite possible for a woman who has never experienced sexual intercourse to give birth.

Of course, the Bible makes it clear that it was Almighty God, not some high-paid gynecologist, who worked the details of Jesus' Divine-Human conception, i.e. "And the angel answered and said unto [Mary], The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God."
--Luke 1:35, KJV.

Sound miraculous? Of course. But these days, who would deny that miracles occur? And such a 'small' one for the God who created the entire universe!

Um... many of us deny that there is sufficient evidence to show that miracles occur. And the bit about God creating the entire universe is an unproved assertion.

Johnny Scholar

not only is she still a virgin, her visage appears under overpasses!
LOOK

judge

For all I know you may be right.

But I think you are forming conclusions without enough evidence. I would imagine you need to comprehensively deal with the HB quotes in Matthew arther than making assertions without dealing with the facts of the matter. That is all.