Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

SarahM32

(270 posts)
44. Petrushka, that's just more Apologetics, and ...
Thu Aug 30, 2012, 08:42 PM
Aug 2012

As for the links you provided, I have to say that Christian Apologists trying to defend and prove the legitimacy of the theology and doctrines (like the virgin birth story) summarized in the Nicene Creed are not correct according to the modern son of man.

Perhaps rather than try to explain myself, I should quote a relevant excerpt from his article on The Virgin Birth Story:

“ ... consider the writings of those who knew. As has been mentioned, James the brother of Jesus didn't say anything about a virgin birth, and later John didn’t even mention it. In fact, in John 1:45 he refers to Jesus specifically as "the son of Joseph."

But of course, the biggest reason that most Christians regard the virgin birth story as reality is because of what was written in the later book of Matthew - that it was to fulfill Isaiah's prophecy that "a virgin shall conceive and bear a son called Immanuel." There is even a corroborating phrase tacked on in the book of Matthew that says an angel had come to the "virgin" Mary and said she would miraculously bear the son of God, to be called Jesus.

However, the reference in the book of Matthew to Isaiah 7:14 about Immanuel is not accurate or appropriate, so the author or later revisionist of those words we now see in the book of Matthew was simply in error about that prophecy in Isaiah. The seventh chapter of Isaiah is actually about a dispute over land, leadership and domain, and it took place during the lifetime of those involved, and during the time Isaiah wrote about it.

Before the child Immanuel in the book of Isaiah was old enough to discern for himself what was good and what was not (Isaiah 7:16), the Assyrians would conquer the lands of Aram and Israel, which they did in 733-732 B.C., led by Assyrian King Tiglath-Pileser II, only a year or two after the prophecy was given and 733 years before Jesus was even born. So, that would mean that the actual child named Immanuel lived and died hundreds of years before the time of Jesus.

Moreover, Isaiah 7:14, which the author or editors of the book of Matthew as we know it used to claim Jesus was born of a "virgin" to fulfill Isaiah's prophecy, does not even speak of a virgin.

The Hebrew word "almah" in Isaiah 7:14 actually means “young woman,” but it was erroneously translated as "virgin" in the Greek (Septuagint) translation of the Hebrew Bible or Tanakh, which is why Christians writers, translators and later editors focused on that. And, while some Christians rationalize that the word almah could also mean virgin, they ignore the fact that there is a Hebrew word that actually does mean "virgin." It is "bethulah," and it is used in Isaiah 23:12, 37:22, 47:1, and 62:5). Therefore, the author of the book of Isaiah was well aware of the word for virgin and yet purposely did not use it in Isaiah 7:14.

Even so, because the Septuagint, the Greek translation of the Hebrew Tanakh (Old Testament), does use a word meaning virgin, Paul, Matthew and the others used it in their search for "evidence" that Jesus fulfilled prophecies. In fact, the Greek translation has always been the preferred text in the theology of Christian Apologetics that attempts to prove Jesus was born by “immaculate conception” and is therefore "God Himself," or "God Incarnate."

However, with modern scholarship and understanding, we can acknowledge that the idea of virgin births are the stuff of myths, such as the virgin birth myths about Mithra, Gautama the Buddha, Hercules, Osiris, Bacchus, Hermes, Prometheus, Perseus and Horus."

.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Interesting. MineralMan Aug 2012 #1
As a seminary graduate I'd say: Ezlivin Aug 2012 #2
As a scholar help me out here please - Nazareth wasn't in the Bible? dballance Aug 2012 #3
I don't recall discussing that in seminary Ezlivin Aug 2012 #11
So the seminary does not cover the whole Bible in their classes? LiberalFighter Aug 2012 #16
No, not at all Ezlivin Aug 2012 #17
I wasn't referring to Nazareth or anything like that. LiberalFighter Aug 2012 #18
We covered it all Ezlivin Aug 2012 #19
Thank you for the insight. LiberalFighter Aug 2012 #20
I hope not Ezlivin Aug 2012 #24
Madelyn Murray O'Hare and Jim Morrison were seminary students alfredo Aug 2012 #26
Jesus being "from Nazareth" or being a "Nazarene" is mentioned 28 times in the NT. SarahM32 Aug 2012 #12
Thanks for the info. Which Bible Version? dballance Aug 2012 #14
Here are the numbers from KJV and NIV SarahM32 Aug 2012 #23
Most seminary graduates would not say no. They're taught the answer is yes. SarahM32 Aug 2012 #7
K&R - I want to hear from someone who knows the answers to the poster and the commenters. northoftheborder Aug 2012 #4
You're asking for a bit too much. An area of a great deal of disagreement. dimbear Aug 2012 #28
The three Isaiah and Jesus Thats my opinion Aug 2012 #5
Yes, many scholars say the book of Isaiah had three authors. But ... SarahM32 Aug 2012 #10
3 authors from 3 completely diferent periods of Judean History intaglio Aug 2012 #22
The translated quote from Isaiah that you include has a lot of the same cbayer Aug 2012 #6
Handel uses several exclusively Old Testament texts--and this is one. nt Thats my opinion Aug 2012 #8
Handel used Isaiah's words. SarahM32 Aug 2012 #9
Interesting website. Linguistically, historically I'm interested in the course of bible translations pinto Aug 2012 #13
Background and purpose of the site. SarahM32 Aug 2012 #15
One big problem intaglio Aug 2012 #21
It's not really a problem. SarahM32 Aug 2012 #25
The site you so proudly promote intaglio Aug 2012 #27
Not so. In fact, the site refutes the theology of Christian Apologetics. SarahM32 Aug 2012 #29
Being Jeffersonian does not mean that you abandon apologetics intaglio Aug 2012 #30
Intaglio, I disagree. And here's why: SarahM32 Aug 2012 #32
I said he was an apologist. Many faiths have apologists intaglio Aug 2012 #35
No. Jefferson was not an Apologist. And furthermore ... SarahM32 Aug 2012 #36
Well I can forgive you for misreading my sentence about Jefferson intaglio Aug 2012 #38
Well, since you put it that way ... I will say this: SarahM32 Sep 2012 #48
There are literary apologists intaglio Sep 2012 #49
Oh brother. SarahM32 Sep 2012 #50
You have stopped listening intaglio Sep 2012 #51
'Tis the other way around. SarahM32 Sep 2012 #54
You continue in your false description of apologetics intaglio Sep 2012 #55
Please. Let's be accurate. SarahM32 Sep 2012 #57
Again, apologetics is not just Christian, Isa is not the word you used intaglio Sep 2012 #59
Again, that's not relevant and avoids the issue. And ... SarahM32 Sep 2012 #60
I repeat only to be ignored by you again intaglio Sep 2012 #61
Okay, for the last time ... SarahM32 Sep 2012 #62
You distort and ignore, you are trapped in a web of deceit intaglio Sep 2012 #63
The relationship between Old Testament materials Thats my opinion Aug 2012 #31
Well, I wouldn't say that. SarahM32 Aug 2012 #33
Again you are speaking of "The Book of Isaiah" as if it is a singular production intaglio Aug 2012 #34
No, I am not. SarahM32 Aug 2012 #37
A fiat that you are right and others are wrong intaglio Aug 2012 #39
I think both of you have made some serious points. Thats my opinion Aug 2012 #41
Thanks. And ... SarahM32 Aug 2012 #43
Why it's more than mere hope. SarahM32 Sep 2012 #65
It has nothing to do with "profession" or money. SarahM32 Sep 2012 #66
There's an introduction to the 1611 King James Bible by its translators indicating Petrushka Aug 2012 #40
However, Strong in particular, Thats my opinion Aug 2012 #42
Yes. Thank you again. SarahM32 Aug 2012 #45
Petrushka, that's just more Apologetics, and ... SarahM32 Aug 2012 #44
Thanks for the link. Just discovered what the "messenger for the Spirit of truth" believes . . . Petrushka Aug 2012 #46
That story was published in February 2002. There's a more recent one online. SarahM32 Aug 2012 #47
FWIW: The writer of those articles, refers to himself in the thrid person, saying . . . Petrushka Sep 2012 #52
Ah, but you miss some very crucial facts. SarahM32 Sep 2012 #53
"...when he, the Spirit of truth, comes, he will guide you into all truth." ?? Petrushka Sep 2012 #56
So, in other words, you will not address the facts, and simply ignore the truth? SarahM32 Sep 2012 #58
Why it's important that the book of Isaiah is not about Jesus SarahM32 Sep 2012 #64
Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Religion»Does the book of Isaiah s...»Reply #44