Freethought & Rationalism Archive

excreationist · 07-24-2002, 05:10 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Stephen T-B:
I understand that the Hebrew for Maiden was mis-translated as Virgin,...

You would be talking about Isaiah (see <a href="http://www.jewsforjudaism.org/j4j-2000/html/library/rabbi02.html" target="_blank">this "Jews for Judaism" article</a>)... it is pretty clear that Mary was a virgin (not just a maiden) in some of the gospels.

DarkBronzePlant · 07-24-2002, 08:08 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Gemma Therese:


Yo ho, the Gospels were written around 130 AD.

Was that supposed to demonstrate that my point was wrong or something?

Boro Nut · 07-24-2002, 08:46 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Veil of Fire:
However, I personally believe that Mary'd just had a grand old time at the Ostara festival and just told Adam "Why... It... it must be the Son of God!" when she started showing.

We were always taught that Mary was pure and chaste. I just assumed she must have been caught occasionally.

Boro Nut

rebelnerd · 07-24-2002, 09:33 AM

"Near as I can figure Jim, they're born pregnant!" - Bones, The Trouble With Tribbles

Filo

abe smith · 07-25-2002, 06:02 AM

My 1996 one-page paper *Congratulations He's A Girl" (of wh anyone here can have a copy if you'll send me an emailaddress or a snail address)explains the *mere biological* FACT that if (impossibly & improbably) Their Lord Jesus was born of a never-impregnated human female (="virgin") THEN "he" the Chrxx's Lord has to have been a FEMALE, because, not having had a human father , "he" could not have had a YYYYYYY =MALE Chromosome. ( Of course human males are the *defective* sex to begin w/ : the male Y chromosome is missing critical parts = as the human MALE body is missing critical parts.) Hope this helps. Note that this tiny argumant is NOT a JOKE!. Go tell the Pope....Abe

lpetrich · 07-25-2002, 12:33 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by DarkBronzePlant:

(Gemma Therese: Gospels only written ~ 130 CE)
Was that supposed to demonstrate that my point was wrong or something?

It does, because it's a much smaller gap, and the Virgin Birth appears when the canonical Gospels appear.

Mark is generally considered the oldest of the four canonical Gospels, and that gospel starts out with Jesus Christ being baptized by John the Baptist (or Baptizer).

The other two Synoptics, Matthew and Luke, do feature the Virgin Birth -- alongside of two different genealogies for JC's nominal father Joseph.

John pictures JC as being "the Word" (logos), going beyond a typical human-style origin.

HelenM · 07-25-2002, 01:41 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Boro Nut:


We were always taught that Mary was pure and chaste. I just assumed she must have been caught occasionally.

Boro Nut

I guess it depends how fast she could run...

Anyway, the real Yorkshireman has shown up!

(You are a real Yorkshireman aren't you, Boro Nut?

)

love
Helen

Starboy · 07-25-2002, 05:29 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Veil of Fire:


Well, no, not entirely.

Ya see, if a man and a woman are going ALMOST all the way, and are naked, and petting, and basically rubbing all over each other like almost-lovers are wont to do, the male will typically produce seminal fluid (pre-cum), which contains live active little sperm.

Now, if this fluid happens to come into contact with the vagina, and one of the sperm happens to survive the trip... presto! Virgin birth! (particularly if there's already a tear in the hymen caused by something else, like exercise or fingers)

Of course, that's quite a string of long odds there, but it's happened before according to my Human Sexual Behavior professor.

However, I personally believe that Mary'd just had a grand old time at the Ostara festival and just told Adam "Why... It... it must be the Son of God!" when she started showing.

Hello Veil,

I understand that the real gossip is even juicer then that. Mary got pregnant alright and her family was in a hurry to get her married off in order to keep what little shred of decency they had. So they worked out a deal with Joseph who was a widower with kids from his previous marriage. Joe was just looking for domestic help to take care of his kids. Since Joseph was a carpenter he probably was willing to take on the bastard Jesus since he could train him in the carpentry trade and make some money off of him. In any case, I don�t think he cared much for the kid, since he didn�t show up for the crucifixion or resurrection for that matter and he certainly wasn�t involved in the family business that ensued (the new Jesus cult).

Starboy

excreationist · 07-25-2002, 07:46 PM

abe smith:
God would have placed a fertilized egg inside Mary... so therefore she could have a son... rather than give birth to her clone.

Bible Humper · 07-25-2002, 10:38 PM

Quote:

Sorry if it's an old chestnut (I'm quite new here so don't know what's been covered in the last few years) but isn't it a bit daft to believe in the Virgin Birth?

For God so loved the world, that he gave His only begotten son, that whoever would believe in him would believe in anything Hysterectomy 16:3

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

07-24-2002, 09:33 AM	#24
rebelnerd Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: 47°30'27" North, 122°20'51" West - Folding@Home Posts: 600	"Near as I can figure Jim, they're born pregnant!" - Bones, The Trouble With Tribbles Filo

07-25-2002, 06:02 AM	#25
abe smith Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2001 Location: springfield, MA. USA Posts: 2,482	My 1996 one-page paper Congratulations He's A Girl" (of wh anyone here can have a copy if you'll send me an emailaddress or a snail address)explains the mere biological* FACT that if (impossibly & improbably) Their Lord Jesus was born of a never-impregnated human female (="virgin") THEN "he" the Chrxx's Lord has to have been a FEMALE, because, not having had a human father , "he" could not have had a YYYYYYY =MALE Chromosome. ( Of course human males are the defective sex to begin w/ : the male Y chromosome is missing critical parts = as the human MALE body is missing critical parts.) Hope this helps. Note that this tiny argumant is NOT a JOKE!. Go tell the Pope....Abe

07-25-2002, 07:46 PM	#29
excreationist Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2000 Location: Australia Posts: 4,886	abe smith: God would have placed a fertilized egg inside Mary... so therefore she could have a son... rather than give birth to her clone.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.