Christian Virgin Birth - Why Jews didn't buy it.

originally posted by: JimNasium
a reply to: glend


What about Horus? Or are You just dis-counting anything that doesn't abide what Pastor Dave said down at Church?

elpidiovaldes.wordpress.com...

Wow I am never not amazed by you people
The bible is a written word and you have trouble understanding it but some pictographs on walls are you read and decipher it like a little golden book story

Hu, hu haaaaa

Love you guys

a reply to: Seede

Thanks for clearing that up Seede. I knew reincarnation is mentioned in Zohar, written by Rabbi Shimon Bar-Yochai (Rashbi) in 2nd Centry AD, but didn't realise it wasn't mainstream until much latter,

Personally I see reincarnation as conceptional similar to going to sleep each night and putting new cloths on, each morning. So if reincarnation exists or not, it really is meaningless to spirituality.

It doesn't really affect the teachings of Christianity either, if one considers reincarnation, as the fire that can never be quenched (Mark 9:43). Given re-experiencing the pain of birth and death, time and time again, is hell compared to experiencing the one absolute death.

originally posted by: JimNasium
a reply to: glend


What about Horus? Or are You just dis-counting anything that doesn't abide what Pastor Dave said down at Church?

elpidiovaldes.wordpress.com...

Who is Pastor Dave and what about Horus????

originally posted by: TheConstruKctionofLight
a reply to: Raggedyman

And it seems you are not widely read as to the formation of early Christianity. Why am I not surprised.

We are going to disagree on what you know understand and are taught and believe

I bet you are a big fan of zietgist and have never questioned its accuracy and you question me

You are so clever

a reply to: andy06shake

If we possess an essence, spirit, soul, it most lightly resides/emanates from within the quantum realm.

In Hinduism reality is called Maya, an illusion. a dream from which Brahman (Supreme Soul) deceives himself. So looking for substance within-in the dream might be futile.

I would love to try meditation, but to be honest i just don't know if i have the attention span.

That's part of mastering meditation. By realising that neural activity of brain will continue to throw thoughts our path. The trick is too witness the thoughts as neural activity, not become part of them, and they will die out on their own accord. At a certain level all neural activity seems to stop. But have only reached that a few times.

If the ego-brain is the serpent in The Book of Genesis then who was talking to Eve? Or was she talking to herself or ego-brain?

The tree is an upside down representation of our spine/nervous system with the apple representing sexual gratification. Adam (masculine) represents our subtle spiritual mind whilst Eve (feminine) represents our physical conscious mind which is programmed by DNA to procreate etc. So eve was more or less talking to herself, be it one or more of 3 theoretical constructs (sorry have never read any of Freud books) seeking sense gratification as joy. The act of receiving sense gratification, in any form, expends the makers light/energy that would otherwise enter our vessel. Thus blocking us from attaining spiritual enlightenment.

For example.....
In Gospel of Thomas, Peter said to them, "Make Mary leave us, for females don't deserve life." Jesus answered, "Look, I will guide her to make her male, so that she too may become a living spirit resembling you males. For every female who makes herself male will enter the kingdom of Heaven"

So male represents our spiritual side.

originally posted by: Raggedyman

originally posted by: TheConstruKctionofLight
a reply to: Raggedyman

And it seems you are not widely read as to the formation of early Christianity. Why am I not surprised.

We are going to disagree on what you know understand and are taught and believe

I bet you are a big fan of zietgist and have never questioned its accuracy and you question me

You are so clever

I have watched zietgist and it didn't like it. I am also not clever. So your strike rate is dismal.

originally posted by: glend

originally posted by: Raggedyman

originally posted by: TheConstruKctionofLight
a reply to: Raggedyman

And it seems you are not widely read as to the formation of early Christianity. Why am I not surprised.

We are going to disagree on what you know understand and are taught and believe

I bet you are a big fan of zietgist and have never questioned its accuracy and you question me

You are so clever

I have watched zietgist and it didn't like it. I am also not clever. So your strike rate is dismal.

Yet you are preaching zietgist doctrine at me
Sorry buddy, you want an education don't start it there

My strike rate against you is inconsequential
Anyway I think I was discussing with the "construction" and it was him telling me

There is little evidence of a pre Christ virgin birth
www.christiancourier.com...

a reply to: glend

Interesting how you discuss Maya and Hinduism and then sneakily introduce Christianity

Just a heads up, in Christianity women, ladies girls whatever, well they are equals, the same as men
In the bible Paul describes females as sons of God, equal to men
Funny little nuance but so very deep if you understand what it is actually saying

So in Christianity, male does not represent the spiritual side

The gospel of Thomas, stupid crap that only Gnostics are attracted to as truth, sorry

originally posted by: Raggedyman
a reply to: glend

Interesting how you discuss Maya and Hinduism and then sneakily introduce Christianity

Just a heads up, in Christianity women, ladies girls whatever, well they are equals, the same as men
In the bible Paul describes females as sons of God, equal to men
Funny little nuance but so very deep if you understand what it is actually saying

So in Christianity, male does not represent the spiritual side

The gospel of Thomas, stupid crap that only Gnostics are attracted to as truth, sorry

Females are equal to men in Chris†ianity™? Well, then thank Lilith, Adamu's first wife...

Is that why ThePope™ has a chair to make sure a set of balls drop?

better research "Your team™" better.. Or You don't classify the Catholic™ as being Chris†ian™?

What does the 'rule book' read? I am typing about King James Version III, 3rd re-write; 4th re-vision..

females are equal hahahahahaha

a reply to: glend

I always considered Woman to be rather more spiritual than Man just down to the fact that they can bring life into the world.

Men more often than not, do the opposite and seem better predisposed to take life.

These Gospel, holy scripture and other religious dogmas are nothing more than the works of Man with all his fear and fallibility at play.

No direct word of God just us trying to shape and control the minds of our people.

originally posted by: JimNasium

originally posted by: Raggedyman
a reply to: glend

Interesting how you discuss Maya and Hinduism and then sneakily introduce Christianity

Just a heads up, in Christianity women, ladies girls whatever, well they are equals, the same as men
In the bible Paul describes females as sons of God, equal to men
Funny little nuance but so very deep if you understand what it is actually saying

So in Christianity, male does not represent the spiritual side

The gospel of Thomas, stupid crap that only Gnostics are attracted to as truth, sorry

Females are equal to men in Chris†ianity™? Well, then thank Lilith, Adamu's first wife...

Is that why ThePope™ has a chair to make sure a set of balls drop?

better research "Your team™" better.. Or You don't classify the Catholic™ as being Chris†ian™?

What does the 'rule book' read? I am typing about King James Version III, 3rd re-write; 4th re-vision..

females are equal hahahahahaha

You are going to have to work a little harder than make stuff up and then demand I justify your fallacy

If you can find me some Catholic doctrine then post it for me to comment the please but just saying stuff, I can do that

King James, great book, don't get your point, seems a little vague, try again, use a bit of your God given intelligence

Anyway, according to the New Testament, nothing related to Lilith because that is make believe Gnosticism, Jesus made women equals in every way.
Again, Jesus made women equals to men in Christianity, they hold the same office, Priests

Moan and carry on, if you want to argue with me, do better than Lilith and the pope please....

a reply to: Raggedyman

"they hold the same office, Priests"

Then why are they called Nuns?

And why no female pope in the history of the religion?

Abrahamic religions consider Woman to be not much more than chattel, or even such, as history clearly illustrates throughout the ages.

a reply to: andy06shake

Galatians 3/28
Describing Judaism Islam and Christianity as abrahamic religions, as a group is infantile
Each is significantly different in just about every way

As for Catholicism,,ask the women who choose it or men who enforce it, I don't understand why they do it

There is not much point continuing this conversation with you

a reply to: Raggedyman

"Describing Judaism Islam and Christianity as abrahamic religions, as a group is infantile."

"Each is significantly different in just about every way"

Except, essentially they all worship of the God of Abraham and claim descent from the practices of the ancient Israelites.

Have you considered the whole notion of organized religious practice could be considered to be "infantile"?

"There is not much point continuing this conversation with you."

Why? Its ok I'm not a Woman. LoL

Don't you find the subject interesting?

Or have i somehow offended your religious sensibility by possing serious questions?

All Christian Gospels were originally written anonymously with titles added more than a century latter. The titles identify probable authors, not necessarily, eyewitness accounts by apostles. With the possible exception being Gospel of Mark. Gospel of Mark is thought to be authored by John Mark, a companion and interpreter for the apostle Peter whilst in Rome. Its perhaps the only first hand account of Jesus, thorough the eyes of an apostle. Other gospels used Gospel of Mark as one of their sources but they had one glaring problem.

Gospel of Mark refers to Jesus as son of Mary. The Gospel of Mark doesn't have virgin birth (nor resurrection in oldest Gospels of Mark). Nor does it mention Joseph in the entire gospel.

As for other Gospels:
Gospel of Luke with its Pauline connections is thought to be written by physician Luke, a companion of Paul;
Gospel of John: Possible a christian called John the elder.
Gospel of Matthew: Possibly modified from an Aramaic Gospel written by Apostle Matthew: Ebionim state Aramaic version didn't include birth and post resurrection that were added latter to Greek version.

Its possible that Gospel of Luke and Matthew were written and modified by Paul/Saul followers. Adding Davidic ancestry to Jesus to gain acceptance by Jewish communities. Telling them that all messianic prophecies are fulfilled in Jesus. But in trying to link Jesus to King David whilst as same time saying Jesus was born from a seed from GOD presents a logical problem. Only male descendants of Jews are recognised. So if GOD is not a descendant of King David, the entire notion defeats itself.

My primary religion/philosophy is Buddhism but source other religions for spiritual knowledge. Buddhism also contains mythology. So to get to the Gold we need pan through the dirt. So falsehoods don't stagnant our spiritual growth,

Anyone denying that there aren't falsehoods in the bible are only fooling themselves.

originally posted by: glend
a reply to: andy06shake

At a certain level all neural activity seems to stop. But have only reached that a few times.

That doesn't sound too healthy.

I believe the medical term is: brain-dead.

a reply to: whereislogic

I am sure somethings going on but as far as thoughts go they seize to exist. The emptiness within.

a reply to: andy06shake


Serious question?
I have no interest in discussing faith with someone who has no common sense and who can't acknowledge the obvious differences between faiths LoL

I find the subject interesting, but not youLoL

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: Raggedyman

Except, essentially they all worship of the God of Abraham ...

The God of Abraham is Jehovah.

Genesis 28:13

And look! there was Jehovah stationed above it, and he said:

“I am Jehovah the God of Abraham your father and the God of Isaac. The land on which you are lying, to you I am going to give it and to your offspring.* [Lit., “seed.”]

They don't worship Jehovah. Most of the times they won't even mention him, and when they do, it is to slander, especially when someone else uses that particular spelling in the English language (obscuring the subject with vagueness and confusion is a popular tactic as well, starting a debate about which spelling should be used or making an issue out of which exact spelling is used to obscure the God of Abraham's identity and as a red herring from the point that the God of Abraham is still Jehovah, not any of the ones mentioned below).

The majority of Christendom (Trinitarianism) worships Jesus as the God who is described at Eph. 1:3 as "the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ" (making that an obvious contradiction, in case you didn't realize why I brought up Eph.1:3 which is clearly referring to Jehovah there in light of the rest of the Scriptures and for example the information in "App.A5" linked below, Jesus obviously can't be the God of Jesus). Judaism worships a mysterious God whose name, according to some Rabbinic claims, is "ineffable". Sometimes they'll even go as far as typing "G-d", so in that case they worship "G-d" (ridiculous). Islam worships a nameless God that they simply call "God/Allah" (Allah being the Arabic word for God). In the end though, they all belong to "the god of this system of things" (2 Cor. 4:4), Satan the Devil; and have been misled by him to "render sacred service" to him.

Matthew 4:10

Then Jesus said to him: “Go away, Satan! For it is written: ‘It is Jehovah* your God you must worship, and it is to him alone you must render sacred service.’” [*: See App. A5.]

Jesus was quoting from the Hebrew Scriptures, see Appendix for more details why this is significant for those excuses made by bible translators who also won't mention Jehovah in that verse. Even when they are fully aware of what Jesus was really quoting (and saying) there (given the evidence for the use of the Tetragrammaton in the Hebrew Scriptures and oldest manuscripts).

Ah well, I can quote a bit from that Appendix if it's not too much I hope:

The Divine Name in the Christian Greek Scriptures

Bible scholars acknowledge that God’s personal name, as represented by the Tetragrammaton (יהוה), appears almost 7,000 times in the original text of the Hebrew Scriptures. However, many feel that it did not appear in the original text of the Christian Greek Scriptures. For this reason, most modern English Bibles do not use the name Jehovah when translating the so-called New Testament. Even when translating quotations from the Hebrew Scriptures in which the Tetragrammaton appears, most translators use “Lord” rather than God’s personal name.

The New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures does not follow this common practice. It uses the name Jehovah a total of 237 times in the Christian Greek Scriptures. In deciding to do this, the translators took into consideration two important factors: (1) The Greek manuscripts we possess today are not the originals. Of the thousands of copies in existence today, most were made at least two centuries after the originals were composed. (2) By that time, those copying the manuscripts either replaced the Tetragrammaton with Kyʹri·os, the Greek word for “Lord,” or they copied from manuscripts where this had already been done.
The New World Bible Translation Committee determined that there is compelling evidence that the Tetragrammaton did appear in the original Greek manuscripts. The decision was based on the following evidence:

- Copies of the Hebrew Scriptures used in the days of Jesus and his apostles contained the Tetragrammaton throughout the text. In the past, few people disputed that conclusion. Now that copies of the Hebrew Scriptures dating back to the first century have been discovered near Qumran, the point has been proved beyond any doubt.
- In the days of Jesus and his apostles, the Tetragrammaton also appeared in Greek translations of the Hebrew Scriptures. For centuries, scholars thought that the Tetragrammaton was absent from manuscripts of the Greek Septuagint translation of the Hebrew Scriptures. Then, in the mid-20th century, some very old fragments of the Greek Septuagint version that existed in Jesus’ day were brought to the attention of scholars. Those fragments contain the personal name of God, written in Hebrew characters. So in Jesus’ day, copies of the Scriptures in Greek did contain the divine name. However, by the fourth century C.E., major manuscripts of the Greek Septuagint, such as the Codex Vaticanus and Codex Sinaiticus, did not contain the divine name in the books from Genesis through Malachi (where it had been in earlier manuscripts). Hence, it is not surprising that in texts preserved from that time period, the divine name is not found in the so-called New Testament, or Greek Scripture portion of the Bible.
- The Christian Greek Scriptures themselves report that Jesus often referred to God’s name and made it known to others. (John 17:6, 11, 12, 26) ...
- Since the Christian Greek Scriptures were an inspired addition to the sacred Hebrew Scriptures, the sudden disappearance of Jehovah’s name from the text would seem inconsistent. ...
- The divine name appears in its abbreviated form in the Christian Greek Scriptures. At Revelation 19:1, 3, 4, 6, the divine name is embedded in the word “Hallelujah.” This comes from a Hebrew expression that literally means “Praise Jah.” “Jah” is a contraction of the name Jehovah. Many names used in the Christian Greek Scriptures were derived from the divine name. In fact, reference works explain that Jesus’ own name means “Jehovah Is Salvation.”
- Early Jewish writings indicate that Jewish Christians used the divine name in their writings. ...
- Some Bible scholars acknowledge that it seems likely that the divine name appeared in Hebrew Scripture quotations found in the Christian Greek Scriptures. Under the heading “Tetragrammaton in the New Testament,” The Anchor Bible Dictionary states: “There is some evidence that the Tetragrammaton, the Divine Name, Yahweh, appeared in some or all of the O[ld] T[estament] quotations in the N[ew] T[estament] when the NT documents were first penned.” Scholar George Howard says: “Since the Tetragram was still written in the copies of the Greek Bible [the Septuagint] which made up the Scriptures of the early church, it is reasonable to believe that the N[ew] T[estament] writers, when quoting from Scripture, preserved the Tetragram within the biblical text.”
- Recognized Bible translators have used God’s name in the Christian Greek Scriptures. ...
- Bible translations in over one hundred different languages contain the divine name in the Christian Greek Scriptures. ...
...

a reply to: glend

Yes it's possible
But wouldn't the people who actually witnessed it then written it was all a lie like you are doing now
Isn't it possible that Buddha was a little golden book written for children by a man who was high as a kite smoking gunja under a bodie tree and someone took it literally