Virgin vs young woman
Post Reply
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
30-08-2012, 09:35 PM
Virgin vs young woman
I didn't see anything directly related here, so I thought I would ask (who knows, others may know exactly where it was discussed before): One bible I have has Isaiah 7:14 list it as a "virgin" a newer version has it mentioned as "young woman". I believe others have said that from videos/etc.

So I was curious, mistranslation or not:
What was a "virgin" in the bible?
If Mary was a young woman, exactly how is a young woman getting knocked up when married anything of a miracle?
Do churches even mention this potential problem?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
30-08-2012, 09:54 PM
RE: Virgin vs young woman
Mary was a little hottie who hooked up with a Roman Soldier. By her culture she was basically "sold" to a guy twice her age in marriage. Unfortunately she was already pregnant. Old Joe found out and was pissed off, but she was hot. Hot trumps all kinds of things. Crazy, poor, short, pregnant, smelly, etc. It was Joe's call. He could have had her stoned to death, but he didn't. Again, she was hot.

Jesus grew up being known as the bastard son of a Roman. Tough position to be in on top of an already tough life. He grew up hating the Romans and sought to move public opinion to rebellion. Rest is (fabricated) history. Some came up with the virgin thing much later, others missed the memo.

The old gods are dead, let's invent some new ones before something really bad happens.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
30-08-2012, 10:01 PM
RE: Virgin vs young woman
All I can do is imagine a god trying to decide on physical features for the baby jesus like some SIMS game.
"Should the nose be bigger" ?
Color of hair - "Why aren't their more choices. I really like chartreuse" ?
Blood type -
Another million or so DNA choices

"This is taking for ever. Where is that random button" ?

Insanity - doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Rahn127's post
30-08-2012, 10:03 PM
RE: Virgin vs young woman
Matthew spends all of Chapter 1 doing the lineage through Joseph, then says at the very end he was not the father. (I call it his Maurey Moment).

Paul did not believe in the virgin birth, even though they try to say it was Mary, (but no other person EVER is done through the maternal line, so that explanation defies definition).
Romans 1:3 KJV, Paul wrote:
"Concerning his Son Jesus Christ our Lord, which was made of the seed of David according to the flesh;"

The Greek word for "seed" is "sperma"
Only males have "sperma" and woman do not.
"according to the flesh;" indicates a human progenitor.
Paul wrote that Jesus had a male progenitor or father who was a descendant of King David.

But the Gospel writers Matthew and Luke wrote that Jesus had a virgin birth by Mary through the Holy Spirit who is not a flesh human and not a descendant of King David.

As usual, the whole ball of wax is yet another "goof".
The POINT was the child was a sign, not the "gynecological business".

Probably TMI, but here's a cut and paste from a year ago.

From a previous post of mine ....

The so-called "virgin birth" is one of the PRIME examples where there is development of an off-the-wall notion, based on a translation, of a MIS-translation, of a translation, which is then taken out of context, and solidified as doctrine, and driven over the cliff.

To wit :
a. Background :
Isaiah 7 talks about the history of King Ahaz, son of Jotham, the son of Uzziah, who was king of Judah. At the time, King Rezin of Aram and Pekah, son of Remaliah, King of Israel, marched up to fight against Jerusalem, and the campaign was long and protracted. See the Syro-Ephraimite War, (Wikipedia : ), and it happened in the 8th Century (734) BC. When Ahaz was loosing faith, Isaiah went to visit him, and told him to "buck up", keep the faith, and continue the war, and told him that the SIGN from god, that they were favored, was that one of his wives, (a "woman of marriageable age") would be found to be with child. The SIGN was the CHILD, (and NOT the manner of the birth). ...."And they shall name him Emmanuel" which means "god is with us". The CHILD was the SIGN.

b. Any devout Jew in the time of the Roman occupation, (around 60 AD), would know that story, from Isaiah, and when they heard the words "a woman, (of marriageable age) will be found to be with child" they would connect the stories in their brains, and recognize that the gospel text's intention was to remind them of the Isaiah story, and would "harken" back to it, and realize the intent of the author was to claim that THIS child also was a sign. The general intent of the Gospel of Matthew was to claim the fulfillment of the various prophesies regarding the messiah, and this one was another one of those claims/stories of fulfillment.

c. The word "virgin" is a mistranslation, of a translation. So WE have a translation, of a mis-translation, of a translation. Matthew, writing in Greek about the "virgin birth" of Jesus, quotes the Septuagint text of Isaiah 7:14-16, which uses the Greek word "παρθένος" (parthenos,), (we still use the term "parthenogenesis") while the original Hebrew text has "עלמה" (almah), which has the slightly wider meaning of an unmarried, betrothed,or newly wed woman such as in the case of Ahaz' betrothed Abijah, daughter of Zechariah. He NEVER meant to imply that he was asserting "gynecological" claims, and THAT whole business was "off-the-wall", a mistranslation, taken to ridiculous extremes, by interpreters who missed the point. THE CHILD was the sign.

Also interesting that Matthew (1:25) only says that Joseph "knew her not till she brought forth her firstborn son". It does NOT say she REMAINED a virgin. (??)

See also : Mother Goddess, ( ) and Joseph Campbell, ( ) and Courtly Love, ( ). The business of Mary, and her idealized state, was extremely important in the civilization/culture of the West, and in some circles remains very important today, (Lourdes & claims of "Marian" apparitions" etc., etc.)

Over and out. Cool

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein It is objectively immoral to kill innocent babies. Please stick to the guilty babies.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: