Profile
Search
Register
Log in
Question for Luke and Doctrine (very civil)
View previous topic | View next topic >

Post new topic Reply to topic
Strange Famous Forum > Hall of Fame

Author Message
August Spies



Joined: 09 Aug 2002
Posts: 1979
Location: D.C.
Question for Luke and Doctrine (very civil)  Reply with quote  

serious question for you guys; what are your thoughts on the virgin birth? I know Luke, that you asked for something contradictory in the fundamental faith...

well I keep reading things from Christians who say that the virgin birth and some other aspects of Mary are contradictory and shouldn't be believed by christians.


Quote:

most Biblical scholars regard the evidence for the Virgin Birth, and for Mary's assumption into Heaven (which was proclaimed as Catholic dogma only in 1950), as so shaky that it pretty much has to be a leap of faith. As the Catholic theologian Hans Küng puts it in "On Being a Christian," the Virgin Birth is a "collection of largely uncertain, mutually contradictory, strongly legendary" narratives, an echo of virgin birth myths that were widespread in many parts of the ancient world.

Jaroslav Pelikan, the great Yale historian and theologian, says in his book "Mary Through the Centuries" that the earliest references to Mary (like Mark's gospel, the first to be written, or Paul's letter to the Galatians) don't mention anything unusual about the conception of Jesus. The Gospels of Matthew and Luke do say Mary was a virgin, but internal evidence suggests that that part of Luke, in particular, may have been added later by someone else (it is written, for example, in a different kind of Greek than the rest of that gospel).



do you guys have any thoughts on this? Is it contradicotry or false? if not why do so many christian scholars think it is?

http://www.cnn.com/2003/US/08/15/nyt.kristof/index.html
Post Tue Aug 26, 2003 1:56 pm
 View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website AIM Address
hugh grants hooker
Guest




 Reply with quote  

i know this wasnt directed at me, but i just wanna say that the only argument i've ever heard agaisnt the virgin birth is: "it would be such a big deal if she was virgin, so why is only really spoken of by luke".

well, it wasnt really as big of a deal back then so it wasnt really something that was thought about the same way that we think about it. also, luke was a physician, so i trust his knowledge on hymenal presence.
Post Tue Aug 26, 2003 2:47 pm
 
August Spies



Joined: 09 Aug 2002
Posts: 1979
Location: D.C.
 Reply with quote  

why don't you think it was a big deal back then? As the article I quoted points out, there were many virigin birth stories in those times amongst other religions/mythologies/folk lore.

Seems to me it was important back then.
Post Tue Aug 26, 2003 2:50 pm
 View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website AIM Address
hugh grants hooker
Guest




 Reply with quote  

because if it was a big deal when it happened, it wouldve been printed in the National Enquirer. :wink:

just kidding. but i can see that this thread is going to revolve around the quote you found on the internet. so, since i dont agree with the actual premise, i will just walk away now before this thread turns ugly.
Post Tue Aug 26, 2003 2:55 pm
 
MessiahCarey



Joined: 01 Jul 2002
Posts: 10924
 Reply with quote  

If you're saying it was no big deal in the culture of the time for a married Jewish woman to get pregnant (allegedly) without copulation, you're nuts.

It was VERY taboo for Mary in HER circumstance - even if we are talking about the height of Roman acceptance...it's akin to a certain joke being acceptable in a locker room and not somewhere else - in the position Mary was in, being pregnant by someone other than her husband was entirely UNACCEPTABLE.

This, of course, could lead to a....hmmm...lie?

It's all soooooo shaky. We don't know what really happened with these people. We most likely won't ever know. I'm fine with that, my morality is in place even if Mary fucked the whole town and did a bukkake flick while she was at it.

- Shane
Post Tue Aug 26, 2003 2:59 pm
 View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
August Spies



Joined: 09 Aug 2002
Posts: 1979
Location: D.C.
 Reply with quote  

or before you have to actually put any arguments in ey :wink:

we are still waiting for you artgument that Hindus/Sikhs are either 1. of the bible or 2. aethists. and also your sources for the biblical contradictions you kept saying you would bring.
Post Tue Aug 26, 2003 2:59 pm
 View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website AIM Address
MessiahCarey



Joined: 01 Jul 2002
Posts: 10924
 Reply with quote  

August Spies wrote:
or before you have to actually put any arguments in ey :wink:

we are still waiting for you artgument that Hindus/Sikhs are either 1. of the bible or 2. aethists. and also your sources for the biblical contradictions you kept saying you would bring.


Sikhism is actually Hinduism with a touch of Christianity. How cute.

Don't look for logical backup for faith, August....you won't get it. It's made that way - so that the more you question it the more you're instructed to "just beleive". It's really quite ingenious.

- Shane


Last edited by MessiahCarey on Tue Aug 26, 2003 3:03 pm; edited 1 time in total
Post Tue Aug 26, 2003 3:01 pm
 View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
duke_city



Joined: 05 Jul 2002
Posts: 3208
Location: San Diego,CA
 Reply with quote  

This is a Catholic belief not a Christian one. (There is a difference)

Catholics are in fact commanded to not read the Bible. Also they don't realize the Bible that the Bible they use contains 15 extra books called the "Apocrypha" which are not recognized to be valid scripture.

Catholics believe she was a virgin even after she gave birth to Jesus and never had children after Jesus. This is rooted in blind adhereance to Vatican doctrine.

Its plain to see is simply not true.

Matthew 1:24-25
"When Joseph woke up, he did what The Angel Of The Lord had commanded him and took Mary home as his wife. But he had no union with her until she gave birth to a son. And he gave Him the name Jesus."

This says that Mary and Joseph did in fact have children after the birth of Jesus.

John 7:3-5
"Jesus' brothers said to Him, "You ought to leave here and go to Judea, so that your disciples may see the miracles you do. No one who wants to become a public figure acts in secret. Since you are doing these things, show yourself to the world." For even His own brothers did not believe in Him.""

Evidence of Jesus' brothers.

Brian
Post Tue Aug 26, 2003 3:01 pm
 View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
August Spies



Joined: 09 Aug 2002
Posts: 1979
Location: D.C.
 Reply with quote  


Quote:

This is a Catholic belief not a Christian one. (There is a difference)

Dallasboy, if you will note the poll I quoted the vast majority of americans believe in this. The vast majority of americans are also protestant, not catholic.
Post Tue Aug 26, 2003 3:03 pm
 View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website AIM Address
hugh grants hooker
Guest




 Reply with quote  

see, you have NO idea how to use manners. you are already trying to get rude with this thread. thanks to YOU this forum isnt even a hip hop forum anymore. its just an anti-christian propaganda website now.

you are trying to formulate a whole argument against the virgin birth based on a goofball quote you probably googled up again. it doesnt even deserve my time.

and as luke already pointed out, you 'arent even open' to pro-religion people, quotes, ideas. so whats the point of me spending anytime informing you about anything. the more answers i give you, the more questions you ask. each question more tedious and boring than the last. until eventually everyone gets bored and walks away... then you celebrate thinking you've stumped them.

also, if you wanna keep harping on 'unanswered' questions...
how about answering the fuckin shit i asked you.
also, how about telling me the name of the mother in the chapters we discussed.

get a leg to stand on, then talk to me. i wont even be opening this thread again its far too boring for me.
Post Tue Aug 26, 2003 3:05 pm
 
duke_city



Joined: 05 Jul 2002
Posts: 3208
Location: San Diego,CA
 Reply with quote  

August Spies wrote:

Quote:

This is a Catholic belief not a Christian one. (There is a difference)

Dallasboy, if you will note the poll I quoted the vast majority of americans believe in this. The vast majority of americans are also protestant, not catholic.


Yes but you speak of Christian scholars debating on a "Catholic belief"

That makes little sense.

Brian
Post Tue Aug 26, 2003 3:05 pm
 View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
MessiahCarey



Joined: 01 Jul 2002
Posts: 10924
 Reply with quote  

And both sides of this argument are proving why I stopped having them. ;-)

I used to have it out with a Catholic Monk. It was a good time, he got mad, but I kept turning the other cheek. Go figure.
Post Tue Aug 26, 2003 3:08 pm
 View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
August Spies



Joined: 09 Aug 2002
Posts: 1979
Location: D.C.
 Reply with quote  

I am not being rude at all. It is you who are flinging insults around.


Quote:

also, how about telling me the name of the mother in the chapters we discussed.

The names do not appear. JY, even Sage called you out on your actions in that thread. How you imagine you are on a high horse is beyond me.

Anyway I posted this thread because it is something that Luke asked for, and I wanted his opinions on it.

I don't think anyone has any interest for you to participate JY, since all you do is fling insults and avoid questions.



Dallasboy: this is a belief held by the majoirty of protestants, at least in america, so why call it a "catholic" belief?
Post Tue Aug 26, 2003 3:09 pm
 View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website AIM Address
duke_city



Joined: 05 Jul 2002
Posts: 3208
Location: San Diego,CA
 Reply with quote  

MessiahCarey wrote:
And both sides of this argument are proving why I stopped having them. ;-)

I used to have it out with a Catholic Monk. It was a good time, I got him mad, but I kept turning the other cheek. Go figure.


The absolute best thing to do is to ask a priest what he knows about being a parent or a husband.

Then ask where he gets off telling the families in his church how to behave when he has no experience whatsoever

Brian
Post Tue Aug 26, 2003 3:10 pm
 View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
duke_city



Joined: 05 Jul 2002
Posts: 3208
Location: San Diego,CA
 Reply with quote  

August Spies wrote:
Dallasboy: this is a belief held by the majoirty of protestants, at least in america, so why call it a "catholic" belief?


Where are you getting this Protestant stuff from?

Every single thing in the article you posted references Catholics.

Brian
Post Tue Aug 26, 2003 3:14 pm
 View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail

Post new topic Reply to topic
Jump to:  
Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4  Next
All times are GMT - 6 Hours.
The time now is Fri Oct 31, 2014 4:42 am
  Display posts from previous:      


Powered by phpBB: © 2001 phpBB Group
Template created by The Fathom
Based on template of Nick Mahon