Freethought & Rationalism Archive

01-03-2003, 09:09 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by CX
Ultimately there is virtually no evidence of any kind with respect to Jesus birth. The most we can tell for the current state of the evidence is that there was some controversy surrounding his infancy which impinged on his followers claims that he was the Messiah. My guess is that he was born the usual way somewhere in Galilee, possibly to parents who weren't married, and that the virgin birth stories in GLk and GMt are simply made up out of whole cloth for theological reasons.

We can always make it a gang-bang and settle the argument once and for all.

CX · 01-03-2003, 09:11 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Amos
We can always make it a gang-bang and settle the argument once and for all.

Maybe they were making an Ancient Hebrew porno?

Apikorus · 01-03-2003, 09:56 AM

CX, I agree. I never suggested that the Panthera stories had any solid basis. There is surprisingly little material in the Talmud on Jesus, probably because the bavli was assembled in Babylonia, under Parthian and Sassanid (rather than Christian) influence. Most of the references that are to be found are likely purely reactive, and of little historical value.

The scenario I proffered was done so largely in jest.

Proxima Centauri · 01-04-2003, 07:41 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by lpetrich
That Roman soldier's name is Panthera, sometimes given as Pantera or Pandira. That theory is most likely a sarcastic comment about Jesus Christ's alleged virgin birth (parthenos in Greek).

I watched the programme by the BBC on television. The programme suggested that a grave of a Roman soldier with the correct name, what ever it is, has been founnd. Because of this the programme makers suggested, the Roman soldier story was plausible. The programme conceded that Joseph was a more likely father for Jesus.

01-04-2003, 08:52 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by B.Shack
[ The programme conceded that Joseph was a more likely father for Jesus.
[/COLOR]

It gets a lot more complicated when Jesus becomes the father of man, who therefore came for the body of Jesus to be burried in the tomb that he had carved as if out of rock with his own hands.

Woodworths "Intimations of Immortality" is dedicated to this same idea: "To the child that is to become the father of man."

zwi · 01-04-2003, 05:21 PM

This link may interest readers

http://www.geocities.com/birthofjesus/enchr7.htm

Zwi

RED DAVE · 01-05-2003, 02:03 AM

This question always reminds me of the old joke:

How do you know Jesus was a Jew (as am I)?

1. He didn't leave home till he was over 30.

2. He went into his father's profession.

3. He thought his mother was a virgin.

4. His mother thought he was God.

RED DAVE

Jan Haugland · 01-05-2003, 05:07 AM

I still think it is more likely that the virgin birth myth was a result of the mistranslation of "young girl" into "virgin" in the Septuagint. Considering how notoriously especially Matthew misquotes and even invents OT prophecies and makes them fit Jesus, it is not at all unlikely that the very early Christians read Isaiah 7:14 in LXX, concluded that Jesus must be born of a virgin, and thus originated the story that ended up in the elaborate contradictory birth myths we find in Lk and Mt.

Of course, it is a possibility that there was something messy about Jesus' family background (like an out-of-wedlock birth) and that the virgin story was a reaction to it, but I simply think the above scenario is so much more likely. It is unlikely that both are true.

- Jan

...who rants and raves every day at Secular Blasphemy

Proxima Centauri · 01-06-2003, 06:14 AM

Your suggestion is plausible Jan Haugland. In English the word, "maiden" can mean a virgin or a young girl. This could well be so in other languages.
A great deal of what is said about the birth, life, death and believed resurrection of Jesus is heresay and speculation. Very litle or nothing is provable fact.

Jan Haugland · 01-06-2003, 07:35 AM

B. Shack,

The story about the "virgin" mistranslation is widely known and accepted among Bible scholars (conservatives excepted, but I have not seen any good counter-arguments).

A quick googling gave this page which explains what happened pretty well.

Again, as I see it, both cannot reasonably be true. If this mistranslation was the cause of the virgin birth myth, there is no reason to assume Jesus was an illigetimate child.

- Jan

...who rants and raves every day at Secular Blasphemy

01-04-2003, 05:21 PM	#26
zwi Junior Member Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Sarasota FL Posts: 60	Yeshu Pandera This link may interest readers http://www.geocities.com/birthofjesus/enchr7.htm Zwi

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

01-03-2003, 09:56 AM	#23
Apikorus Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: Chicago Posts: 1,396	CX, I agree. I never suggested that the Panthera stories had any solid basis. There is surprisingly little material in the Talmud on Jesus, probably because the bavli was assembled in Babylonia, under Parthian and Sassanid (rather than Christian) influence. Most of the references that are to be found are likely purely reactive, and of little historical value. The scenario I proffered was done so largely in jest.

01-05-2003, 02:03 AM	#27
RED DAVE Banned Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: NYC Posts: 10,532	This question always reminds me of the old joke: How do you know Jesus was a Jew (as am I)? 1. He didn't leave home till he was over 30. 2. He went into his father's profession. 3. He thought his mother was a virgin. 4. His mother thought he was God. RED DAVE

01-05-2003, 05:07 AM	#28
Jan Haugland Junior Member Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Bergen, Norway Posts: 70	I still think it is more likely that the virgin birth myth was a result of the mistranslation of "young girl" into "virgin" in the Septuagint. Considering how notoriously especially Matthew misquotes and even invents OT prophecies and makes them fit Jesus, it is not at all unlikely that the very early Christians read Isaiah 7:14 in LXX, concluded that Jesus must be born of a virgin, and thus originated the story that ended up in the elaborate contradictory birth myths we find in Lk and Mt. Of course, it is a possibility that there was something messy about Jesus' family background (like an out-of-wedlock birth) and that the virgin story was a reaction to it, but I simply think the above scenario is so much more likely. It is unlikely that both are true. - Jan ...who rants and raves every day at Secular Blasphemy

01-06-2003, 06:14 AM	#29
Proxima Centauri Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: England, the EU. Posts: 2,403	Your suggestion is plausible Jan Haugland. In English the word, "maiden" can mean a virgin or a young girl. This could well be so in other languages. A great deal of what is said about the birth, life, death and believed resurrection of Jesus is heresay and speculation. Very litle or nothing is provable fact.

01-06-2003, 07:35 AM	#30
Jan Haugland Junior Member Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Bergen, Norway Posts: 70	B. Shack, The story about the "virgin" mistranslation is widely known and accepted among Bible scholars (conservatives excepted, but I have not seen any good counter-arguments). A quick googling gave this page which explains what happened pretty well. Again, as I see it, both cannot reasonably be true. If this mistranslation was the cause of the virgin birth myth, there is no reason to assume Jesus was an illigetimate child. - Jan ...who rants and raves every day at Secular Blasphemy

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.