What do you think of the virgin birth of Jesus ?

[Awoon]

Was the proof of Mary's virginity shown to the towns people?

Deuteronomy 22:17 Now he has slandered her and said, 'I did not find your daughter to be a virgin.' But here is the proof of my daughter's virginity." Then her parents shall display the cloth before the elders of the town,

 

[Ingledsva]

Was the proof of Mary's virginity shown to the towns people?

Deuteronomy 22:17 Now he has slandered her and said, 'I did not find your daughter to be a virgin.' But here is the proof of my daughter's virginity." Then her parents shall display the cloth before the elders of the town,

Oh the horrors of women under patriarchal religious rule.

Not all women have hymen, and they can be ruptured through normal activities, or some are stretchy enough to have no bleeding.

And these women whom didn't bleed, faced horrific torture deaths!

Yet these cultures claim their God and his laws are LOVE! BULL!

*

 

[Awoon]

Oh the horrors of women under patriarchal religious rule.

Not all women have hymen, and they can be ruptured through normal activities, or some are stretchy enough to have no bleeding.

And these women whom didn't bleed, faced horrific torture deaths!

Yet these cultures claim their God and his laws are LOVE! BULL!

*

But what about Mary?

 

[Godobeyer]

What Sura does God say this?

I think this link is very good source about verses of Quran which talking about creation and evolution .

Creation and Evolution in the Holy Qur'an By Hassan El-Najjar

The majority of other animals in existence, which have sperm and egg, and existed before humans.

who produce sperm and egg if humans were exited before !!!?

same thing for animals and their sperms and eggs.

Not really. Some people have an inoperable cervix; makes them sterile. Some's appendix bursting and killing them, when all one has to do is remove it. Fetuses are born with a tail and lose the tail over time (most of the time, except the really unlucky ones). People can live without eyes and noses. So eyes don't really complete the body at all. Nice to have though.

i am not talking about handicap , i am talking about position of eye , let's suppose it's will be just under the mouth , is that could be better place , or it's better for the eyes to be above the mouth?

So, God doesn't design everything?

Yes .

God is first designer so it's just an expand , by giving the ability to design to His creatures .

for exemple :
the birds design their nests and human design homes and cars and tools .

the Humans are best designers in all His creatures because a gift "the mind"

 

[Godobeyer]

Don't worry about it. Anyone can make ask numerous of unanswerable questions, so don't sweat it.

Like I said, I can take a watch or a body and view it at atomic level (assuming a had access to electron microscope), but there is nothing that allows me to see the design of god in any of it. There is a disconnect between what God created and where he resides. I have no way of knowing or verifying anything about anyone's God claims because I have no means to access them. I would like to, but I can't. So, whats a guy to do. I'd rather risk hell, than being swindled by a religious leader, and wasting the only life I'm aware of.

Just i had a note about soul .

the soul is secret that make the body alive , then why the scientists/doctors could not revive a death person (someone die for an hour ago or day ...) .

 

[Ingledsva]

But what about Mary?

They stole a Tanakh text about Isaiah and a Temple Virgin/Maiden having a son named Immanuel, - as a sign that God was with them in the war -

and ran with it, - saying it was a prophecy of Jesus' birth. Thus they had to make up a virgin-birth story for Mary - at Jesus' birth.

These stories are not accurate, - and were written long after Jesus' death.

You can make a prophecy appear to be true, by writing the end of the story, - after the event, the main person, and all witnesses are dead.

*

 

[Eileen]

If you believe in a creator God who created the whole universe then it is easy to see how He could make a woman pregnant. If you don't believe in God then you won't understand a virgin birth

I believe in the Creator-HaShem and yes I suppose He is capable of making a woman pregnant except that HaShem set certain rules in place in dealing with humanity and He limits Himself to not violating His rules- I.e. He does not make another man's wife pregnant.

 

[Awoon]

They stole a Tanakh text about Isaiah and a Temple Virgin/Maiden having a son named Immanuel, - as a sign that God was with them in the war -

and ran with it, - saying it was a prophecy of Jesus' birth. Thus they had to make up a virgin-birth story for Mary - at Jesus' birth.

These stories are not accurate, - and were written long after Jesus' death.

You can make a prophecy appear to be true, by writing the end of the story, - after the event, the main person, and all witnesses are dead.

*

I know all that. What I'm asking is why no one (Christians who use Jewish laws to condemn) asks for the wedding cloth to be produced. Her parents should have seen it and shown to the town Elders, that should be in the story.
Goes to show anyone that the creator of the "Virgin birth story of Jesus" didn't know Jewish Law and just used the Isaiah story.

BTW I enjoy reading all your posts.

 

[Godobeyer]

It is called abuse which anyone can criticize. Such acts reflect a malicious nature the same way a human abusing children or lower forms of life like their pets.

honestly are you Vegetarian ? do you ate meat usually , because eating animals is malicious against animals for some people .

Sorry I am not sure what you mean by this sentence.

EDITED for typo error
I mean if you believe that nature is God , so is not natural allowed kids die ?

Again you are dehumanizing people down to inanimate objects in order to make a comparison. This is exactly a point I raised that God does not teach people as humans but merely tools with no emotions, no thoughts, nothing.

where is the abuse if you turn off the light of your home ?

I gave exemples to understand my point , you seems you always decline the ideas .

Maybe. However this a vastly different from creating a child which only purpose is to die in order to teach the parents a lesson or test

child will goes to Paradise , and you may goes to Hell , is not better to care about your self ?

All you have done is accept a divine dictator regardless of how malicious it is.

God will make you die , could you reject His decision ?

Still does not give anyone the right to kill anyone else. Just as it does not give the parents a right to kill their children as their children can not "self-life"

Who said the parents had right to kill their childern ?

 

[Ingledsva]

I know all that. What I'm asking is why no one (Christians who use Jewish laws to condemn) asks for the wedding cloth to be produced. Her parents should have seen it and shown to the town Elders, that should be in the story.
Goes to show anyone that the creator of the "Virgin birth story of Jesus" didn't know Jewish Law and just used the Isaiah story.

BTW I enjoy reading all your posts.

Ahhh! A convenient item for them to leave out of the story.

*

 

[roger1440]

who designed eggs and sperm? do you believe in a God who is so limited He can't cause an egg to become fertilized but He can make the whole universe

"As I have said so many times, God doesn't play dice with the world." (Albert Einstein)

 

[Shad]

honestly are you Vegetarian ? do you ate meat usually , because eating animals is malicious against animals for some people .

Red Herring, it is not the same. An animal is not raised only to be killed to teach other animals a lesson. "You cows better see what happens if you disobey the farmer, he makes you into a burger!"

EDITED for typo error

I mean if you believe that nature is God , so is not natural allowed kids die ?

That is not natural as natural does not include the supernatural, ie god. God purposely gave a child an illness which would cause it's death for the purpose of teaching someone else a lesson. Nature does not do this as nature has no purpose nor goals driving it. More so you raise the issue that any illness one can have is placed upon them by god thus is not a result of free will and our acts but sole based on god's whims.

where is the abuse if you turn off the light of your home ?

Nonsensical reply as it has nothing to do with my comment about dehumanizing people.

I gave exemples to understand my point , you seems you always decline the ideas .

You examples are incoherent and dehumanizing. I have no reason to accept an explaination that reduces humans down to the level of glass or tools. Your explanations lack empathy while borderline psychopathic.

child will goes to Paradise , and you may goes to Hell , is not better to care about your self ?

Unlike you I am not that selfish nor think of other humans as nothing but tools with no emotions or minds of their own. You are also arguing the ends justify the means which is an excuse used by every dictator. Also by making this statement you can no longer object to civilian casualties if the West bombs a village to kill a member of IS. Remember the ends justify the means, the civilian deaths were worth the cost of killing a single IS member.

God will make you die , could you reject His decision ?

By rejecting the concept of god. Simple. Just because you hold a presupposition does not mean I am required to do so.

Who said the parents had right to kill their childern ?

The parents created the child, without the parents the child would not exist. It is the same creator/created relationship you used to justify god's acts. The same can be applied to humans. You will respond with special pleading which is fallacious.

 

[Godobeyer]

Red Herring, it is not the same. An animal is not raised only to be killed to teach other animals a lesson. "You cows better see what happens if you disobey the farmer, he makes you into a burger!"

The humans are dailly killed and eating animals , and humans are dailly killing each other .

That is not natural as natural does not include the supernatural, ie god. God purposely gave a child an illness which would cause it's death for the purpose of teaching someone else a lesson. Nature does not do this as nature has no purpose nor goals driving it. More so you raise the issue that any illness one can have is placed upon them by god thus is not a result of free will and our acts but sole based on god's whims.

then
why the kids die ?

Nonsensical reply as it has nothing to do with my comment about dehumanizing people.

You examples are incoherent and dehumanizing. I have no reason to accept an explaination that reduces humans down to the level of glass or tools. Your explanations lack empathy while borderline psychopathic.

Since God will make us all die , and some punished and tested us in this life, and punished and reward in afterlife , and He did what he want , that dehumanizing and dictator ?

Unlike you I am not that selfish nor think of other humans as nothing but tools with no emotions or minds of their own. You are also arguing the ends justify the means which is an excuse used by every dictator. Also by making this statement you can no longer object to civilian casualties if the West bombs a village to kill a member of IS. Remember the ends justify the means, the civilian deaths were worth the cost of killing a single IS member.

Did i said human are tools with no emotions ?

seems we don't agree in views , you mixed the treatement of human to human , God to humans .

By rejecting the concept of god. Simple. Just because you hold a presupposition does not mean I am required to do so.

whatever you can't reject His decision by not allowed to you live forever .

The parents created the child, without the parents the child would not exist. It is the same creator/created relationship you used to justify god's acts. The same can be applied to humans. You will respond with special pleading which is fallacious.

God which creat the child by causing the parents to produce from their bodies sperms and egg to be combine . as the tongue/mouth produce the sound/words .

then why the parents could not decide the gender/weight/color/beauty/life-time of child (without help of doctor ) ?

why some parents could not had kids ?

who created the first parents in the world ?

 

[dust1n]

who produce sperm and egg if humans were exited before !!!?

same thing for animals and their sperms and eggs.

Again, no one did, as far as I can tell by looking at the world. We exist without the knowledge as to why we are here.

i am not talking about handicap , i am talking about position of eye , let's suppose it's will be just under the mouth , is that could be better place , or it's better for the eyes to be above the mouth?

I can't see a possible way to put an eye under a mouth, because some sort of optic nerve would have to travel to a brain or, general nervous system. The mouth however, connects to the digestive system, and has to downwards through the body. That doesn't mean there isn't a possible way. If I'm a Creator God, it's really superfluous what's better or possible to make, because a Creator God could make any reality be the best possible reality. What I mean is, if God wanted the eyes to be better under mouth, he could make them so. So it doesn't really matter to God where the eyes go.

 

[roger1440]

If you don't believe in God then you won't understand a virgin birth

Why is the belief in God a prerequisite to understand a virgin birth?

 

[Godobeyer]

Again, no one did, as far as I can tell by looking at the world. We exist without the knowledge as to why we are here.

Indeed i know why we are here , to know our God and to prepare to next life .

Umm, it's behind your knowledge !!!

if you don't know , then ,so Why you blame people if they believed, they are created by "God", is not could be they right ?

I can't see a possible way to put an eye under a mouth, because some sort of optic nerve would have to travel to a brain or, general nervous system. The mouth however, connects to the digestive system, and has to downwards through the body. That doesn't mean there isn't a possible way. If I'm a Creator God, it's really superfluous what's better or possible to make, because a Creator God could make any reality be the best possible reality. What I mean is, if God wanted the eyes to be better under mouth, he could make them so. So it doesn't really matter to God where the eyes go.

But it's matter to human if eyes below the mouth , the respiration and liquid that's come out nose and mouth , will disturbance the eyes . so it's very wise that eyes is above the nose and mouths , is not ?

so you tell me that gene design the eyes to be above the nose and mouths , just like that , (i mean who programmed the gene) ?

 

[roger1440]

Do you believe a woman can get pregnant without a man being involved ?
Does science support it ?

Using the laws of probability it’s extremely unlikely the virgin birth of Jesus is factual. There are no known documented cases of any virgin birth among mammals including humans on record in the history of mankind. Each and every known birth has required a male and female. By using these numbers it would be foolish to believe in any virgin birth. When we add to the equation how science believes people are conceived it makes the virgin birth even more unlikely.

If the virgin birth was literally true it is very unlikely only two people would write about it. The story is found only in the Gospels of Matthew and Luke, unless this sort of thing happens a lot in ancient Israel. No other writer thought this story was news worthy.

Let’s now add to the equation the Apostle Paul. Thirteen of the twenty-seven books in the New Testament have been attributed to Paul. Never once does he mention a virgin birth, yet he claims to have met some of the other Apostles. Did Paul forget to mention it? According to the New Testament, Paul did use a lot of time and effort to make converts. You would think a virgin birth would be a good sell. He never says a word about it.

I’m not saying the virgin birth isn’t true. I’m saying most people don’t understand the style of writing. I found it unlikely that the Old Testament is filled with symbolism and allegory from the very first page to the last page and when we turn to the New Testament everything is literal. It is more likely the same style of writing continued into the New Testament.

 

[JM2C]

The only problem with this is that they refer to Isaiah - which has nothing to do with a prophecy of a future Jesus born to a virgin.


Immanuel is Isaiah's son by the Temple Virgin/Maiden, given by YHVH as a Sign that God was with them in the war.


They stole it - ran with it - and wrote the erroneous Jesus birth story - long after his death.


*

Where did you get that “Temple Virgin”?

 

[dust1n]

Indeed i know why we are here , to know our God and to prepare to next life .

Umm, it's behind your knowledge !!!

if you don't know , then ,so Why you blame people if they believed, they are created by "God", is not could be they right ?

Well, I don't really blame people, because of people believe in God and don't do any particular harm in the world, than more power to them. But, the space in which God resides is not of this world, so I see it as impossible that anyone could know God (whether one even existed or not), let alone what that God wants, want supposed prophets God actually sent, etc. The same uncertainly about religious matters for some is why they believe, and it's why I don't.

But it's matter to human if eyes below the mouth , the respiration and liquid that's come out nose and mouth , will disturbance the eyes . so it's very wise that eyes is above the nose and mouths , is not ?

so you tell me that gene design the eyes to be above the nose and mouths , just like that , (i mean who programmed the gene) ?

It would be probably tens of thousands of genes that going into structuring a face. No one programmed them. Genes exist, and mutate over the courses of generations. Any mutation that doesn't allow an individual to reproduce will cease to exist.

Like I said, from God's point of view, it doesn't really matter what me and you think is wise as far as the face is concerned. If God wanted to make the eyes below the mouth, he could have, and he could have made it work, and he could have made it work better than our current scenario. If God is capable of making any scenario work, than it is no more wise for him to do one thing than the other.

 

[Ingledsva]

Where did you get that “Temple Virgin”?

Isa 7:1 And it came to pass in the days of Ahaz the son of Jotham, the son of Uzziah, king of Judah, that Rezin the king of Syria, and Pekah the son of Remaliah, king of Israel, went up toward Jerusalem to war against it, but could not prevail against it.

Isa 7:3 Then said the LORD unto Isaiah, Go forth now to meet Ahaz, thou, and Shearjashub thy son, at the end of the conduit of the upper pool in the highway of the fuller's field;

Isa 7:8 For the head of Syria is Damascus, and the head of Damascus is Rezin; and within threescore and five years shall Ephraim be broken, that it be not a people.

Isa 7:10 Moreover the LORD spake again unto Ahaz, saying,

Isa 7:11 Ask thee a sign of the LORD thy God; ask it either in the depth, or in the height above.

Isa 7:14 Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel.

The word here is alma = maiden/virgin/lass

Isa 8:2 And I took unto me faithful witnesses to record, Uriah the priest, and Zechariah the son of Jeberechiah.

Isa 8:3 And I went unto the Prophetess; and she conceived, and bare a son. Then said the LORD to me, Call his name Mahershalalhashbaz.


Isa 8:4 For before the boy knows to cry, My father, or, My mother, the riches of Damascus and the plunder of Samaria shall be lifted up before the king of Assyria.

As you can see this all - including the birth, takes place as a sign for AHAZ, and he records it.

Mahershalalhashbaz is the ceremonial name of Immanuel. It means Swift To The Plunder - and as you can see from the next verse Isa 8:4, - this name is a prophecy for them of getting the riches and plunder.

*
Isaiah is with Ahaz and Uriah the Priest at the Jerusalem Temple. The Prophetess would be one of those Temple women we read about in Tanakh.

We are told in several places in the Bible that Prophetesses were in the Temple. Jewish sites also tell us they had Temple Virgins. Josephus tells us the same thing.

2 Macc 3:19-20 And the virgins also that were shut up, came forth, some to {High Priest} Onias, and some to the walls, and others looked out of the windows. And all holding up their hands towards heaven, made supplication.

For instance Huldah the Prophetess - 2 Kings 22:14, and Anna the Prophetess - Luke 2 37, are two that lived at the Temple that the Bible names.

“The veil of the Temple was a palm-length in width. It was woven with seventy-two smooth stitches each made of twenty-four threads. The length was of forty cubits and the width of twenty cubits. Eighty-two virgins wove it. Two veils were made each year and three hundred priests were needed to carry it to the pool” (Mishna Shekalim 8, 5-6).

We find another reference to the “women who made the veils for the Temple…baked the showbread…prepared the incense” (Babylonian Talmud Kethuboth 106a).

The first century document by the name of the Apocalypse of Baruch (sometimes called “2 Baruch”) describes the Temple virgins living in the Temple as weavers of the holy veil:

“And you virgins who weave byssus and silk, and gold from Ophir, in haste pick it all up and throw it in the fire that it will return it to its Author, and that the flame will take it back to its Creator, from fear that the enemy might seize it” (2 Baruch 10:19).

Rabbinic Jewish sources also record how when the Romans sacked Jerusalem in AD 70, the Temple virgins leapt into the flames so as not to be abducted by the heathen soldiers: “the virgins who were weaving threw themselves in the flames” (Pesikta Rabbati 26, 6). Here we also learn that these virgins lived in the three-storey building inside the Temple area.

There are a couple more Bible verses about these Temple Virgins/Maidens/Prophetesses, but I can't remember them right now.

*