Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality > Christianity
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 12-14-2014, 09:24 AM
 
Location: Southern Oregon
17,071 posts, read 10,915,177 times
Reputation: 1874

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by trettep View Post
For those of you that don't believe in Original Sin, what is your belief as to why Jesus was born of a virgin? This is comment is for those that use the Bible as a basis for their beliefs.
As is pointed out in the previous two posts this belief hinges on a poor translation and yet ANOTHER obvious peg in the building of a religion on the person rather than a ffaith in the message of Christ. This is like swinging through the jungle on vines with very shaky connections..... one comes loose from your belief system and the whole thing comes crashing down.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 12-14-2014, 09:26 AM
 
Location: Somewhere
6,370 posts, read 7,029,049 times
Reputation: 594
Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard1965 View Post
Or He was born of a Young Woman...
Well it says He was born of a virgin. The LXX shows for sure the interpretation of it being from a virgin.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-14-2014, 09:27 AM
 
Location: Somewhere
6,370 posts, read 7,029,049 times
Reputation: 594
Quote:
Originally Posted by nateswift View Post
As is pointed out in the previous two posts this belief hinges on a poor translation and yet ANOTHER obvious peg in the building of a religion on the person rather than a ffaith in the message of Christ. This is like swinging through the jungle on vines with very shaky connections..... one comes loose from your belief system and the whole thing comes crashing down.
Give me substance nateswift. Give me logical reasoning. What are these other two posts that your talking about. Did they contain substance?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-15-2014, 01:24 AM
 
Location: Tennessee
10,688 posts, read 7,710,208 times
Reputation: 4674
Quote:
Originally Posted by trettep View Post
Well it says He was born of a virgin. The LXX shows for sure the interpretation of it being from a virgin.
There are quite a few misunderstandings concerning the word "virgin" in the English texts. And it goes back to having incorrect Greek texts translating HEBREW words.

The following comes from: What about the "a virgin shall conceive" passage in Isaiah

Most theologians and historians who are not conservative Christians believe that the author of the Gospel of Matthew (or someone who supplied the writer with source material) scanned an unknown ancient Greek translation of the Hebrew Scriptures. He found what he believed to be a reference to Jesus' birth. It was in Isaiah 7:14. This has since become a famous passage; it is often recited at Christmas time. He copied it into Matthew (1:23) to showg that prophecies in the Hebrew Testament were fulfilled in Jesus' life.

As it happens, the Greek translators had made a mistake. When they were translating the Hebrew writings into the Greek Septuagint and similar translations, they converted the Hebrew word "almah" into the Greek equivalent of our English word for virgin. "Almah" appears nine other times in the Hebrew Scriptures; in each case it means "young woman". When the Hebrew Scriptures referred to a virgin (and they do over 50 times) they always used the Hebrew word "betulah". So, it appears certain that Isaiah referred to a young woman becoming pregnant -- a relatively ordinary event.

Some English translators are accurate to the original Hebrew:

Revised English Bible: "...a young woman is with child..."
Revised Standard Version: "...a young woman shall conceive..."
James Moffatt Translation: "...a young woman with child..."
New Revised Standard Version: "...the young woman is with child..."

Other translations mistranslated the Hebrew and referred to the woman as both pregnant and a virgin; that is, a miracle had occurred. This avoids the conflict that would otherwise occur between Isaiah and Matthew 1:22-23. (The author of Matthew quoted Isaiah as describing a virgin who was pregnant before becoming sexually active):

New International Version: "...the virgin will be with child..."
The Living Bible: "...a child shall be born to a virgin..."
Contemporary English Version: "...a virgin is pregnant...". In a footnote, they say that the "Hebrew word did not imply a virgin birth". They give "young woman" as an alternative.

Other translations went part-way. They mistranslated the Hebrew and said that the woman had been a virgin. However, they imply that the woman might have been a virgin, who engaged in sexual intercourse and then became pregnant:

American Standard Version: "...a virgin shall conceive..."
Amplified Bible: "...the young woman who is unmarried and a virgin shall conceive..."
King James Version: "...a virgin shall conceive..."
New Living Translation: "...the virgin shall conceive a child..."
New Century Version: "...the virgin will be pregnant...". They also state in a footnote that the original Hebrew word really means "a young woman".

Some versions are vague and can be interpreted in many ways:

New World Translation: "...the maiden herself will actually become pregnant..."
The Jerusalem Bible: "...the maiden is with child..."
Young's Literal Translation: "...the virgin is conceiving"
__________________________________________________ ______________________________

Reading one version of a story in scripture and not taking the time to research study of that story and the words making it up can result in theology that is questionable. For example, the RCC reveres the "Virgin Mary" but nowhere in scripture are those two words found together. And an entire doctrine of the "Virgin Mary" exists with little or no biblical support.

One time when Jesus was speaking, a woman in the crowd proclaimed, "Blessed is the womb that bore You and the bosoms at which You nursed" (Luke 11:27). There was never a better opportunity for Jesus to declare that Mary was indeed worthy of praise and adoration. What was Jesus’ response? "On the contrary, blessed are those who hear the word of God and observe it" (Luke 11:28). To Jesus, obedience to God’s Word was more important than being the woman who gave birth to the Saviour.

Nowhere in Scripture does Jesus, or anyone else, direct any praise, glory, or adoration towards Mary. Elizabeth, Mary’s relative, praised Mary in Luke 1:42-44, but her praise is based on the blessing of giving birth to the Messiah. It was not based on any inherent glory in Mary.

Was Mary a virgin as we understand virginity? I don't know. But it makes no difference regarding the God/Man she brought into the world, because He changed it like no one else had ever done.

Last edited by Wardendresden; 12-15-2014 at 01:34 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-15-2014, 05:57 AM
 
Location: Canada
11,123 posts, read 6,383,510 times
Reputation: 602
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wardendresden View Post
There are quite a few misunderstandings concerning the word "virgin" in the English texts. And it goes back to having incorrect Greek texts translating HEBREW words.

The following comes from: What about the "a virgin shall conceive" passage in Isaiah

Most theologians and historians who are not conservative Christians believe that the author of the Gospel of Matthew (or someone who supplied the writer with source material) scanned an unknown ancient Greek translation of the Hebrew Scriptures. He found what he believed to be a reference to Jesus' birth. It was in Isaiah 7:14. This has since become a famous passage; it is often recited at Christmas time. He copied it into Matthew (1:23) to showg that prophecies in the Hebrew Testament were fulfilled in Jesus' life.

As it happens, the Greek translators had made a mistake. When they were translating the Hebrew writings into the Greek Septuagint and similar translations, they converted the Hebrew word "almah" into the Greek equivalent of our English word for virgin. "Almah" appears nine other times in the Hebrew Scriptures; in each case it means "young woman". When the Hebrew Scriptures referred to a virgin (and they do over 50 times) they always used the Hebrew word "betulah". So, it appears certain that Isaiah referred to a young woman becoming pregnant -- a relatively ordinary event.

Some English translators are accurate to the original Hebrew:

Revised English Bible: "...a young woman is with child..."
Revised Standard Version: "...a young woman shall conceive..."
James Moffatt Translation: "...a young woman with child..."
New Revised Standard Version: "...the young woman is with child..."

Other translations mistranslated the Hebrew and referred to the woman as both pregnant and a virgin; that is, a miracle had occurred. This avoids the conflict that would otherwise occur between Isaiah and Matthew 1:22-23. (The author of Matthew quoted Isaiah as describing a virgin who was pregnant before becoming sexually active):

New International Version: "...the virgin will be with child..."
The Living Bible: "...a child shall be born to a virgin..."
Contemporary English Version: "...a virgin is pregnant...". In a footnote, they say that the "Hebrew word did not imply a virgin birth". They give "young woman" as an alternative.

Other translations went part-way. They mistranslated the Hebrew and said that the woman had been a virgin. However, they imply that the woman might have been a virgin, who engaged in sexual intercourse and then became pregnant:

American Standard Version: "...a virgin shall conceive..."
Amplified Bible: "...the young woman who is unmarried and a virgin shall conceive..."
King James Version: "...a virgin shall conceive..."
New Living Translation: "...the virgin shall conceive a child..."
New Century Version: "...the virgin will be pregnant...". They also state in a footnote that the original Hebrew word really means "a young woman".

Some versions are vague and can be interpreted in many ways:

New World Translation: "...the maiden herself will actually become pregnant..."
The Jerusalem Bible: "...the maiden is with child..."
Young's Literal Translation: "...the virgin is conceiving"
__________________________________________________ ______________________________

Reading one version of a story in scripture and not taking the time to research study of that story and the words making it up can result in theology that is questionable. For example, the RCC reveres the "Virgin Mary" but nowhere in scripture are those two words found together. And an entire doctrine of the "Virgin Mary" exists with little or no biblical support.

One time when Jesus was speaking, a woman in the crowd proclaimed, "Blessed is the womb that bore You and the bosoms at which You nursed" (Luke 11:27). There was never a better opportunity for Jesus to declare that Mary was indeed worthy of praise and adoration. What was Jesus’ response? "On the contrary, blessed are those who hear the word of God and observe it" (Luke 11:28). To Jesus, obedience to God’s Word was more important than being the woman who gave birth to the Saviour.

Nowhere in Scripture does Jesus, or anyone else, direct any praise, glory, or adoration towards Mary. Elizabeth, Mary’s relative, praised Mary in Luke 1:42-44, but her praise is based on the blessing of giving birth to the Messiah. It was not based on any inherent glory in Mary.

Was Mary a virgin as we understand virginity? I don't know. But it makes no difference regarding the God/Man she brought into the world, because He changed it like no one else had ever done.
Almost all bible today are based on the Masorete text, the same text that Justin Martyr said the Jewish scribes changed by deleting scripture that showed Jesus Christ was the messiah. Was Justin Martyr correct? these 2 links seem to thinks so.



http://earlychurch.com/septuagint.php

And this link

http://www.biblebelievers.org.au/masorete.htm
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-15-2014, 06:03 AM
 
1,614 posts, read 1,244,419 times
Reputation: 605
Does the bible actually teach anything? How can a book be a teacher? It sounds similar to a corporation being called a person. Both are illogical.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-16-2014, 03:27 PM
 
Location: Tennessee
10,688 posts, read 7,710,208 times
Reputation: 4674
Quote:
Originally Posted by pneuma View Post
Almost all bible today are based on the Masorete text, the same text that Justin Martyr said the Jewish scribes changed by deleting scripture that showed Jesus Christ was the messiah. Was Justin Martyr correct? these 2 links seem to thinks so.



http://earlychurch.com/septuagint.php

And this link

http://www.biblebelievers.org.au/masorete.htm
As any real textual critic will tell you, the oldest manuscript is generally considered the best. That's why no translation is perfect. None use ALL the oldest texts. And even with the texts they use the translators bring their bias concerning understanding of the culture during the time the texts were written (not just about the time frame which they spoke of).

If one is really interested in knowing what the Bible says, they need to immerse themselves in 40 years of study of Greek, Hebrew, Latin, and the cultures of the peoples speaking those languages. And even then no one can smoke a cigar because in plenty of cases its pure guess work.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality > Christianity
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top