Jesus Born of a Virgin?

by patio34 5 Replies latest watchtower bible

• 

  patio34

  Here is an excerpt from 'Middle Eastern Mythology' by S. H. Hooke regarding the viriginity and reasons thereof for Mary:

  "The third tendency at work in the Matthaean birth narrative raises the larger question of the borrowing of mythological material from pagan sources. We have already seen that, in describing the divine activity in Creation the Hebrew writers made use of Sumerian and Babylonian Creation myths . . . We have a precedent for the use of mth in a way transcending its original function in early religions. The problem meets us in its acutest form in connexion with the Christian dogma of the virgin birth.'

  'Mary is "found with child of the Holy Ghost"; and the gospel writer goes on to declare that the event is a fulfilment of an oracle of Isaiah which he QUOTES FROM THE GREEK SEPTUAGINT version of the OT. This verson reads, "Behold the virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Immanuel."

  'HERE THE POINT TURNS ON THE GREEK WORD parthenos, which is rightly translated "virgin."

  'The HEBREW word, however, "almah", which the Septuagine translators have rendered parthenos, DOES NOT MEAN "VIRGIN," but "yound woman", that is, any young woman of marriageable age.

  'If the Isainic oracle be examined in its context, it will be seen that, in a time of trouble and the threat of a foreign invasion, the prophet urged King Ahaz to ask Yahweh for a sign, and . . . this was to be the birth of a child to an unnamed young woman the child was to be named Immanuel . . .'

  'But there is no suggestion in the Hebrew text of a miraculous birth from a virgin. Hence the Christian writer's claim that the virgin birth of Jesus is a fulfilment of the Isaianic oracle is based on a istranslation of the Hebrew. But the fact that Matthew or his source could interpret the oracle in this way shows that the belief in the virgin birth had already taken root in the early Christian community ON OTHER GROUNDS.

  '. . . the current existence of many myths of the divine birth of various heroes of antiquity, such as Herakles, Alexander, and others, played a part in the development of the belief in the virgin birth of Jesus. . . Hebrew writers drew on heathen mythology in describing the divine activity in Creation, so that the larger question of the use of myth in describing the divine activity in NEW CREATION cannot be disregarded.' (Emphasis & paragraphs mine, sorry I don't have italics.) pp. 170-172.

  This book is out of print, but I got a copy from the library.

  I'd be interested in your comments on this.

  Patio
• 

  Francois

  In many religions of middle eastern and far eastern variety there are tales of god coming to mingle with men and invariably they are born of virgins. Christianity is not unique in these claims.

  Frankly, since the personality is separate from the body, it is perfectly acceptable to posit that Jesus' body came about in the normal fashion, and that this fleshly vehicle was then imbued with the personality that was his before his incarnation on this planet.

  And the virgin birth isn't the only hoary story in Christianity. There's the atonement doctrine. What an affront to diety to charge that His tender and compassionate love and forgiveness for his suffering children was not forthcoming until he saw his wholly blameless son bleeding and dying upon the cross of calvary.

  And the illicit idea of original sin. Utter poppycock. Total bullshit. Fostered and conserved and preserved by the churches of christianity in order that it has a club with which to belabor its membership. God is supposed to be higher than we, and we would never presume to visit the sins of the father upon the children. Twaddle. Total twaddle.

  Transubstantiation. Doesn't even merit a rebuttle.

  The Immaculate Conception of Mary. Harrumph. The very term "immaculate" implying that there's something dirty about the act of procreation. It's an ability we share with God, after all.

  However, it's pointless to argue logic with people who hold an emotionally based opinion.

  Francoise
• 

  patio34

  You're right Francoise. Thanks for the answer.

  The book I quoted from goes into many of the myths the Hebrews have borrowed from. It's amazing the things the WTS never addresses. It was a mistake for me to trust them so much.

  Btw, have you seen the thread by ISP about the Jesus puzzle? It's very good.

  Patio
• 

  waiting

  hey patio

  It's amazing the things the WTS never addresses.

  Oh, I think they address these, and many other issues. The WTS just doesn't put it before their followers - us.

  I think it's amazing that the jw r&f followers consider themselves very biblically educated (because the WTBTS told them so) and would never consider themselves "fundamentalists like those other little churches."

  In some ways we're even worse - we didn't even realize we were fundies.

  hey francoise

  You sure have a range with descriptive words!

  poppycock
  twaddle
  harrumph

  Now I know what total bullshit means - but chuckled at this phrase being in the proximity with the above.

  waiting
• 

  patio34

  Thanks Waiting,

  Hope you're doing fine and well! You're right, you don't find out you were a fundamentalist until you leave!
  And the WTS keeps this info from r&f.

  Plus, you know how WTS quotes Bible critics and uses David Hume? Well, there is a lot of newer information they ignore. Deceptive!

  As Truman said in her post: I took the red pill and there's no going back.

  Take care,
  Patio
• 

  Francois

  Thanks Waiting.

  I appreciate how much you appreciate my modest talent with the King's English.

  Francoise