First time hearing about the Virgin Mary

[rrosskopf]

Serious question, why does God not show himself

I can only answer this question from my own perspective, as a member of the LDS church. I say this as a heads up that we might not be in agreement on what constitutes a God, so there will probably be some inherent loss of communication. Never-the-less, I would like you to consider several aspects of this question.
Abrahamic religions are based on the idea that God does show himself, but only to carefully selected people. Altars were built on the top of hills, and sacrifices burned upon them, so that one could get God's attention. The idea that Jesus taught - that nothing was below God's notice - was probably a novel idea. So there was a very real notion, that God lived in the heavens and looked down upon the earth, and occasionally interfered with human affairs. This wasn't an everywhere-present spirit, but an actual extraterrestrial being.
Another concept which bears mention, is the idea of a messenger or spokesman. Wherever God is from, wherever his throne resides, he is not alone, but surrounded by other beings that serve him. As a physical God, which exists in space and time, he must exercise power through intermediaries. So he sends messengers or spokesman to represent him, someone to act as if they were him, with his authority. Jacob wrestled with an "angel", but later names the place "Peniel" because he saw God face to face. It was no less dumbfounding to the Jews than it would be to modern Christians, that any man could physically wrestle with God. In Jewish tradition, it was not God, but in fact an angel sent from God. As far as we are concerned - it is the same thing. In the book of Revelations, it is an angel who appears to John and calls himself "Alpha and Omega", acting as if he were God himself. We call this the divine investiture of authority.
When God gives that authority to someone on earth, they too can act in his name, speaking for God. In modern society, one man would suffice as his spokesman over the entire world, because we live in a global society. Anciently, prophets might have been called in many lands, and there may even have been occasional overlaps where two or more prophets relayed the same message to the same people.
A prophet can either be given authority to act on his own, or he can be given authority to call others to assist in the work. We call this formal organization a church, and the leader of the church must be a prophet called of God. The church then serves as a vehicle through which God can rule and reign without physically being present.

 

[FearGod]

And why is he in hiding

It's only a mercy of him to inform us about him, It's like a teacher trying to help
the students while in the test.

As the purpose is testing our morals and behaviors than knowing what God is.

 

[Quintessence]

I understand, however to add fictional roads to the map may actually drive people away.

It boggles the mind to surmise that this would be so, considering the multi-billion dollar entertainment industry of this world. Clearly, the human species loves a good story, regardless of its so-called "truth." Value of story transcends some person labeling it as "fiction" or "non-fiction."

 

[Machavelle]

It boggles the mind to surmise that this would be so, considering the multi-billion dollar entertainment industry of this world. Clearly, the human species loves a good story, regardless of its so-called "truth." Value of story transcends some person labeling it as "fiction" or "non-fiction."

It should not boggle the mind, religion is not entertainment, untruths are expected in entertainment as it's not being sold as fact.

If someone lies to me I struggle naturally to accept any other words as fact, now when it comes to following a book that is full of contradictions from beginning to end, it boggles the mind how it can be taken seriously.

 

[outhouse]

religion is not entertainment

Are you sure about that?

I can see myths like noah and Abraham, adam and eve being read around campfires to entertain and teach.

In a time before literacy, these would have been like going to the movies

 

[Kelly of the Phoenix]

My Wife and I are both Buddhist, I came into it at age 14, my wife since birth.

Recently after being hounded by a Christian woman to convert she politely excused herself and left.

Knowing absolutely nothing about Christianity she asked why the lady refered to Mary as the Virgin Mary, I explained the story of Mary and Jesus.

It was interesting to see the reaction from a woman from a Village who has not grown up with these stories.

she believes she had an affair and lied to her husband, and he convinced himself it's true through Fear of losing his beloved wife, how it grew from there is what really amazed her.

Bottom line, Virgin's Cannot give Birth, and she finds it very amusing.

No offence to Christians, just an interesting moment seeing a point of view of someone completely ignorant of any Bible teachings as we only see generally opinions from those who grew up with these stories.

Technically, parthenogenesis is possible, but for humans it's only been noted in mythology.

I can understand why your wife would feel that way. The Bible reports that even Joseph found Mary's explanation for her pregnancy unconvincing, and intended to divorce her. (Matthew 1:19) He was assured by God that what Mary said was true. (Matthew 1:20) Further, I believe a perfect man was needed to provide a ransom for the sin committed by the first man Adam. No human father could produce a perfect, sinless offspring. As the angel said to Mary; "Holy spirit will come upon you, and power of the Most High will overshadow you. And for that reason the one who is born will be called holy, God’s Son." Thus, I believe God transferred the life of his Son to be born as a perfect human, able to provide "a corresponding [to Adam] ransom for all. (1 Timothy 2:6)

Technically Adam couldn't have sinned because you have to know what you're doing, and he hadn't eaten that knowledge fruit yet. Also, Jesus isn't sinless and breaks several commandments. How can you avoid sin by avoiding a human father but you still need a human mother? God didn't have this issue with Adam and Eve...

Almost embarrassed to say this, she never new who Hitler was either, despite being an accountant, I have met several thai people who don't, very nationalistic teachings at school unfortunately.

Or you live in Texas

Based on what your saying, how do you decide where the line is between fact and fiction.
And could the part about God be fictional to, do you believe in God, or is that a sacred story to.

When one studies literature and how stories are set up by authors, one can tease apart what may have happened and what happened simply because the story style demanded it.

Christians are telling me she was a virgin.

Others are saying it's a story and only the meaning matters.

Others are saying Virgin meant unmarried.

Others said her husband did not believe her and God had to show him.

Four conflicting Christian views, no wonder it's confusing, Christians are not even agreeing with each other, now if her husband did not believe her despite her so called perfection, why would I believe it without gods help.

However, one CAN look up the verse referred to when boosting the virgin Mary story and see that the original Hebrew did not say that. Just because you have conflicting opinions doesn't mean everyone is wrong. Just the people who are.

Serious question, why does God not show himself

What if "Yahweh" was just once some tribal chief who was deified later? I mean, this kinda thing happens a lot in myths. Or what if "eternal" is not a characteristic of the divine? Many pantheons include divine births and deaths.

I disagree. Even though the word/s translated as "virgin" may possibly also be translated as an "unmarried woman," the New Testament makes it quite clear that Mary tells the angel Gabriel that she has "never known a man." She claims to be a virgin in that sense, and Joseph is told in a vision that this is the case. So whether or not people want to believe it, the Bible does tell us that Mary was a virgin (in the way we use the word today) both before she conceived and before she gave birth to Jesus. For the record, though, the Bible does not say -- or even remotely imply -- that she remained a virgin throughout her married life.

But the story was written assuming a mistranslation of a prophecy. Take away the mistranslation and the story is irrelevant.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

It should not boggle the mind, religion is not entertainment, untruths are expected in entertainment as it's not being sold as fact.

If someone lies to me I struggle naturally to accept any other words as fact, now when it comes to following a book that is full of contradictions from beginning to end, it boggles the mind how it can be taken seriously.

You're a Buddhist, so you really have no business denigrating a religion based on its mythology, given the fanciful mythology that has grown around the Buddha over the centuries, which would seem just as ridiculous to a skeptical non-Buddhist as you find Christian mythology. Stop being a hypocrite. You have no room to talk here.

 

[psychoslice]

I see the virgin Mary as our inner being, that place that has not known the outside world, this inner virgin is where our Christ like, or Krishna like, or whatever name you give it, is born, and from there it grows and takes over our carnal self, or carnal self slowly dies and the fullness of Christ is born, or again the Krishna self, no matter what you call it, that can never be what is.

 

[Machavelle]

You're a Buddhist, so you really have no business denigrating a religion based on its mythology, given the fanciful mythology that has grown around the Buddha over the centuries, which would seem just as ridiculous to a skeptical non-Buddhist as you find Christian mythology. Stop being a hypocrite. You have no room to talk here.

We do have a right to discuss it as it has been thrust into our faces by God's witnesses knocking on our doors and entering villages telling us we are worshipping wrong, we therefore had the debate put to us.

We never However knock on doors preaching, our Monks will not even bother you if you enter our temples.

The only reason the curiosity began was from Christians exercising a view that we have no right to worship any religion but theirs.

As a Buddhist I always will be Buddhist but must admit Christians may be right, will find out when I die and deal with the consequences.

Right now logic prevails, as Buddha said only believe what makes sense to you and your senses, not even his teaching if they don't.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

We do have a right to discuss it as it has been thrust into our faces by God's witnesses knocking on our doors and entering villages telling us we are worshipping wrong, we therefore had the debate put to us.

We never However knock on doors preaching, our Monks will not even bother you if you enter our temples.

The only reason the curiosity began was from Christians exercising a view that we have no right to worship any religion but theirs.

As a Buddhist I always will be Buddhist but must admit Christians may be right, will find out when I die and deal with the consequences.

Right now logic prevails, as Buddha said only believe what makes sense to you and your senses, not even his teaching if they don't.

Are you talking about Jehovah's Witnesses? Yes, they can be annoying. Just tell them to leave you alone. If they persist, tell them off. To them, I'm in the same boat as you are so I know how it is.

 

[Neo Deist]

I spent 30 years as a Baptist. I am now a deist. Here's the truth behind the "virgin birth"...

The prophecy of the virgin birth comes from Isaiah 7:14. However, the Hebrew term used was almah, which means "young, unmarried girl." The Hebrew term for virgin is betulah, and it was not used in that verse. So scripturally, the Bible simply states that a "young, unmarried girl" will become pregnant. Nothing miraculous there...happens every day. Interestingly enough, the United States Council of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) has stated that after carefully studying the language of Isaiah 7:14, they agree that the term does not imply virgin!

The NT authors, especially in the Book of Matthew, go out of their way to try and make Jesus fit the messiah prophecies. They even have two different lineages for him. Unfortunately, if Jesus had no biological father (immaculate conception) then his lineage can't be traced back through Joseph to King David. Christians have put a spin on this fact and state that Jesus is traced back through Mary, which is why you have the conflicting lineages. However, Jewish ancestry is not traced through the mother.

Lastly, the NT has many anonymous authors, which include the Gospels. Those books were written decades AFTER Jesus' death. 3rd party hearsay years later is not a credible source.

 

[Katzpur]

But the story was written assuming a mistranslation of a prophecy. Take away the mistranslation and the story is irrelevant.

Sorry, I'm not following you.

 

[Machavelle]

Sorry, I'm not following you.

He means if it is a mistranslation of the prophets, then it is not the word of the prophets as it is mistranslated.

Therefore it is meaningless

 

[Muffled]

My Wife and I are both Buddhist, I came into it at age 14, my wife since birth.

Recently after being hounded by a Christian woman to convert she politely excused herself and left.

Knowing absolutely nothing about Christianity she asked why the lady refered to Mary as the Virgin Mary, I explained the story of Mary and Jesus.

It was interesting to see the reaction from a woman from a Village who has not grown up with these stories.

she believes she had an affair and lied to her husband, and he convinced himself it's true through Fear of losing his beloved wife, how it grew from there is what really amazed her.

Bottom line, Virgin's Cannot give Birth, and she finds it very amusing.

No offence to Christians, just an interesting moment seeing a point of view of someone completely ignorant of any Bible teachings as we only see generally opinions from those who grew up with these stories.

I believe it is generally true that virgins don't give birth but that is why it is a miracle and a sign that the child is of God.

 

[Muffled]

Is that how it is taught in church today, unmarried woman.

We are not living in Biblical times after all yet it is still being preached to the masses.

Baptists teach it as virgin.

 

[Muffled]

As a Buddhist I cannot deny it may have happened, I just need to see proof.

Faith based religions are for eg, Jesus telling a desciple he has a rock in his clenched fist, how do I know you have a rock Jesus, have faith my son.

A Buddhist will wait to you open your hand, neither confirming nor dismissing the possibility.

I believe the past can never be proven. You can only see what is in the hand now and not what was in the hand then.

 

[leibowde84]

I can understand why your wife would feel that way. The Bible reports that even Joseph found Mary's explanation for her pregnancy unconvincing, and intended to divorce her. (Matthew 1:19) He was assured by God that what Mary said was true. (Matthew 1:20) Further, I believe a perfect man was needed to provide a ransom for the sin committed by the first man Adam. No human father could produce a perfect, sinless offspring. As the angel said to Mary; "Holy spirit will come upon you, and power of the Most High will overshadow you. And for that reason the one who is born will be called holy, God’s Son." Thus, I believe God transferred the life of his Son to be born as a perfect human, able to provide "a corresponding [to Adam] ransom for all. (1 Timothy 2:6)

I've never understood this completely. Why was a ransom necessary if God is all powerful? I feel like the word "necessary" automatically limits God.

 

[Machavelle]

Some people here said virgin meant unmarried back then.

If so how was it that Joseph was going to divorce Mary when he discovered she was pregnant.

Another thing, if he was going to divorce her, they must have been married, if they were married why had they never had sex yet.

 

[rusra02]

I've never understood this completely. Why was a ransom necessary if God is all powerful? I feel like the word "necessary" automatically limits God.

I believe the true God always acts in accord with his own righteous standards and laws. He does not circumvent his standards to make things easy. Since Adam had lost human perfection and the prospect of everlasting life, a perfect human life was needed to redeem or ransom Adam's descendants from the sin and death they inherited. Jehovah's justice demanded a perfect life in exchange for the perfect life Adam forfeited. This was in accord with God's later stated law that "you must give life for life." (Exodus 21:23) God's Word explains; "So, then, as through one trespass the result to men of all sorts was condemnation, so too through one act of justification the result to men of all sorts is their being declared righteous for life. For just as through the disobedience of the one man [Adam] many were made sinners, so also through the obedience of the one person [Jesus].many will be made righteous." (Romans 5:18,19) Thus, IMO, God satisfied his own perfect standard of justice while showing mercy on us by providing what was needed to ransom us from sin and death.(Romans 6:23)

 

[Kelly of the Phoenix]

Some people here said virgin meant unmarried back then.

If so how was it that Joseph was going to divorce Mary when he discovered she was pregnant.

Another thing, if he was going to divorce her, they must have been married, if they were married why had they never had sex yet.

From what I understand, they were betrothed and divorce could happen even though the marriage wasn't official yet.