It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

mary not a virgin

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 27 2006 @ 12:57 AM
link   
I had read a few years ago that the "virgin" Mary was said to be only a un-wed mother in the original scriptures and some how they changed un-wed to virgin during translation. any one hear of this




posted on Jan, 27 2006 @ 01:05 AM
link   
I haven't heard that theory, but I have often suspected that it could be the case.....due to critisim in that time for unwed mothers. I mean come on...a virgin being pregnant (by the holy spirit). If someone were to come up with that this day in age they would be locked away and forgotten about (not worshipped). I would be interested in hearing more on this topic also.



posted on Jan, 27 2006 @ 07:56 AM
link   
Actually as I recall the word used was Almah, which again as I recall, simply
means Young Woman. It was translated as Virgo but had no reference to
the more sexually explicit Virgo Intacta, a Virgin as the word is understood
today.



posted on Jan, 27 2006 @ 09:20 AM
link   
regurdless of translations .
Just tell me one thing .WHO checked to be sure it wasent just made u
to cover up the oveas.
I mean think about it back in thous days a Un wed woman who got preggers was under threat of being STONED to death .
Id call this incentive to come up with a story.
pluse jOSEPH WAS hanging out with her befor hand and when he found out she was preggers wanted nothing to do with her .
UNtill (GOD) told him to.
Now talk about conventent.
I think it went more like this .
(Mary) Joseph I missed my time of month .(Joseph) OOO boy Im out of here. (Mary) Wate Joseph well tell everone I am still a virgian and God made me preggers .
(Joseph) O come on no one will ever belive that.
(Mary) Mite as well try its that or being stoned to death so what do I have to louse by trying?
(Joseph) I could get In BIG trouble for trying.
(Mary) batting her eyes ,flashing some leg ,sheading a tear or two, saying If you realy love me.
and the rest is history.



posted on Jan, 27 2006 @ 03:20 PM
link   
I've heard this, but I don't think it makes much sense. Un-wed mother is pretty different from 'virgin'. I can buy the 'young woman' bit though, even today a 'maiden' has connotations of a 'young woman' and a virgin. Even in some cultures a woman isn't considered a virigin unless she is over c.f 40, before that its just not relevant apparently. Why would mary be an un-wed mother anyway? If joseph was going to marry her, why would he wait until after she gave birth? That'd be most shameful in that culture. Even if she was pregnant, by him or someone else, before they were married, no one would even know if he was ok with it and married her right away.

I have heard of some jewish commentaries that rank jesus as a 'bastard', or the equivalent thereof, which woudl support this other assertion. However, that might equally just be a slam on him being born with 'god' as a father, ie, not something that the commentor actually knew one way or the other.



posted on Jan, 27 2006 @ 07:03 PM
link   
Just a quick thought...If Jesus was not Joseph's biological son, then he wasn't of the blood line of King David. According to the begats in Matthew:

Mat 1:1 The book of the generation of Jesus Christ, the son of David, the son of Abraham...
Mat 1:16 And Jacob begat Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ.

Of course, Mary could have been artificially inseminated with the seed of Joseph, making Jesus of the line of David; but why would the Holy Ghost do that, when Mary was already engaged to Joseph anyways? Wouldn't any offspring they had automatically be part of the line of David through Joseph?

Just something to consider.



posted on Jan, 27 2006 @ 07:14 PM
link   
Jesus had brothers. Mary was a virgin at the time of Jesus Christ's conception (and very young- 15 perhaps), she then became the wife of Joseph and had children. Why is this so much of a surprise to so many people? -because of the old talmudic blasphemies against Mary perhaps? I'm sure many Catholics don't know Mary had several children, you should though. The scripture is very clear that Mary was a virgin ( for starters- she was 15, second Joseph had a dream alerting him over Mary's conception of Jesus, and third it fit's, and should fit, the prophecy).

[edit on 27-1-2006 by Nakash]



posted on Jan, 27 2006 @ 07:27 PM
link   
Well said Nakash.

-Quin



posted on Jan, 27 2006 @ 10:01 PM
link   
The Jewish work the Talmud mentions Marys bloodline as well as Jesus , he is quite specifically documented that he was born an illegitimate son of a Roman soldier called Panthera. ( Tiberius Julius Panthera, an archer, native of Sidon,Phoenica,who in(AD was transferred to the service Rhineland Germany.) In many Jewish references Jesus is refered to as'ben Panthera' ben' meaning son of . Not only that he was a twin.
Mary or the Hebrew version of her name Mariamne (Stadea ) of Jewish writings is hardly mentioned in current christian writing Her bloodline is of the house of Herod she is the younger sister of Herodias a much loved granddaughter of King Herod Her mother Berenice later remarried and moved with her teenage daughters to Rome were she gained the favor of Emperor Augustus , Mary (Mariamne) and Herodias Herod were of noble birth Through King Herod ((c73-74BC) Mary's mother Berenice was the daughter of king Herods sister Salome . The above information was and has always been kept hidden by scholors with agendas Tony Bushby's book The Bible Fraud has documented older works to back the facts about the true story of Jesus



posted on Jan, 27 2006 @ 10:49 PM
link   
Quote/



The honoring of the Holy Virgin began from the time when the Archangel Gabriel greeted Her with the words: "Rejoice, O Blessed One, the Lord is with Thee! Blessed art Thou among women!" announcing to Her the mystery of the conception of the Son of God..............Mary had become the Mother of the Lord, the promised Savior of mankind (Luke 1:28-42).


God said to the devil: "I shall put enmity between thee and the Woman, and between thy seed and Her Seed" (Genesis 3:15). It should be noted that during the time of the Old Testament the progeny were always called the seed or descendent of a male parent.
Read more


Also more from here.....




'fear not to take unto thee Mary thy wife.'
And he was further instructed to name the Son born of her Jesus (Ieshua), that is, Saviour, since He would save His people from their sins.
Joseph recognized this dream as inspiration from on high and obeyed it, taking Mary as his wife,
but knew her not, that is,
he lived with her not as a husband with a wife,
but as a brother with a sister (or, judging from the enormous difference in years, rather as a father with a daughter

here

And as for the WORD '' almah''........



the Hebrew text for Isaiah 7:14 uses the word almah which really does mean “virgin.” Yes, it can mean “unmarried woman,” though it would have been assumed that unmarried women were virgins. The same word also connotes “concealment,” i.e. not exposed to sexual relations. (If you doubt that the word means “virgin,”
find a Hebrew-speaking Jewish man.................. The Septuagint, a translation of the Hebrew Old Testament into Greek in the third century BC, uses the appropriate Greek translation, parthene.
Note that the Septuagint translation was made by Jews, not Greeks.
Also note that the passage in Isaiah is about seeking a miraculous sign. If the passage had only meant that a “young woman will become pregnant,” that’s not a miracle...........


directionstoorthodoxy.org...
OR
www.orthodoxytoday.org...

IX
helen



posted on Jan, 28 2006 @ 08:14 AM
link   


If the passage had only meant that a “young woman will become pregnant,” that’s not a miracle...........

My point exactly. The Virgin birth, the immaculate conception all of that
myth and fable can be cataloged under two headings, The Immaculate Deception, and The Greatest Story ever Sold.



posted on Jan, 30 2006 @ 01:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by jezebel
Just a quick thought...If Jesus was not Joseph's biological son, then he wasn't of the blood line of King David. According to the begats in Matthew:

Mat 1:1 The book of the generation of Jesus Christ, the son of David, the son of Abraham...
Mat 1:16 And Jacob begat Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ.


The Aramaic Pe#ta of Matthew 1:16 reads "Jacob begat Joseph the kinsman* of Mary..." "Kinsman" is "gavra" which literally means 'protective male,' and thus could be either her father or husband, but from the context it can only be her father. Thus, Mary is also of the house of David and this is her genealogy, and Matthew and Luke do not have conflicting genealogies for Joseph. The Greek translated the wrong meaning for 'gavra.'



posted on Jan, 30 2006 @ 01:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by pantheria
The Jewish work the Talmud mentions Marys bloodline as well as Jesus , he is quite specifically documented that he was born an illegitimate son of a Roman soldier called Panthera. ( Tiberius Julius Panthera, an archer, native of Sidon,Phoenica,who in(AD was transferred to the service Rhineland Germany.) In many Jewish references Jesus is refered to as'ben Panthera' ben' meaning son of . Not only that he was a twin.
Mary or the Hebrew version of her name Mariamne (Stadea ) of Jewish writings is hardly mentioned in current christian writing Her bloodline is of the house of Herod she is the younger sister of Herodias a much loved granddaughter of King Herod Her mother Berenice later remarried and moved with her teenage daughters to Rome were she gained the favor of Emperor Augustus , Mary (Mariamne) and Herodias Herod were of noble birth Through King Herod ((c73-74BC) Mary's mother Berenice was the daughter of king Herods sister Salome . The above information was and has always been kept hidden by scholors with agendas


You're kidding right? Right? The Talmud was compiled hundreds of years after the Gospels were written. And Toledoth Yeshu and the other references to Yeshua are simply polemical slurs with little historical value, for instance you don't really think that Yeshua and Judas both flew up into the air and fought a superhero like battle before Judas defeated Yeshua do you?



posted on Jan, 30 2006 @ 01:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by Paul of Nisbis

The Aramaic Pe#ta of Matthew 1:16 reads "Jacob begat Joseph the kinsman* of Mary..." "Kinsman" is "gavra" which literally means 'protective male,' and thus could be either her father or husband, but from the context it can only be her father. Thus, Mary is also of the house of David and this is her genealogy, and Matthew and Luke do not have conflicting genealogies for Joseph. The Greek translated the wrong meaning for 'gavra.'



And this also explains why the Greek only has 41 people (ending at Joseph (40) the husband of Mary from whom was born Yeshua (41)) in the genealogy, although Matthew clearly sets out 3 sets of 14 generations (42). The Aramaic ends at Joseph (40) the father of Mary (41) from whom was born Yeshua (42).



posted on Feb, 2 2006 @ 06:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by ironjello
I had read a few years ago that the "virgin" Mary was said to be only a un-wed mother in the original scriptures and some how they changed un-wed to virgin during translation. any one hear of this


Big surprize...NOT!
I mean come on...a woman pregant by a spirt?
Thats something you read about in the Globe..right next to the "Titanics last lifeboat WITH survivor found!!"



posted on Feb, 2 2006 @ 07:35 PM
link   
There is a conflict between the genealogies of Matthew and Luke in that Matthew traces Jesus line through Solomon and the kingly line of descent, while Luke traces it through Nathan, the priestly line of descent (if I remember correctly), I'll have to look at my old notes, but it has something to do with a prediction regarding th Melchizedek.
*New Jerusalem Bible used*
Matthew 1:6 - "Jesse fathered King David. David fathered Solomon..."
Luke 3:31 - ". . . son of Nathan, son of David. . .".

[edit on 2-2-2006 by TheDTs]



posted on Feb, 3 2006 @ 11:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by ironjello
I had read a few years ago that the "virgin" Mary was said to be only a un-wed mother in the original scriptures and some how they changed un-wed to virgin during translation. any one hear of this


Bass-ackwards. The new Bibles change it to "young girl" and the like, but what that is doing is attempting to take the Divine out of it.
If but G-d, who is Christ's Father? He says G-d is His Father.

It is obvious that the world would prefer not to have Christ as G-d, and prefers to attempt to remove theDivinity from the gift.

The conspiracy is in the attempt to deny Christ.



posted on Feb, 5 2006 @ 06:41 PM
link   
Catholics would have you believe that Mary was immaculately conceived and remained a virgin the rest of her life.

Talmudic Jews would have you believe Mary was a whore.

Actually--Mary was a virgin at the time of the conception and birth of Jesus. She and her husband Joseph went on to have other children after that. She was not immaculately conceived, and she's not to be worshiped/venerated/whatever word Catholics want to use.

Honestly--would you want to be married to a woman and never, EVER have sex with her?



posted on Feb, 6 2006 @ 10:21 AM
link   
Minor point of info - In ancient times, the word "virgin" simpy meant a woman who was single, a woman who didn't need a man to take care of her. This might be an indication that Mary was pregnant, but unwed.
Jesus was supposed to be of humble birth, right? Just a thought.

-Forestlady



posted on Feb, 6 2006 @ 07:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by forestlady
Minor point of info - In ancient times, the word "virgin" simpy meant a woman who was single, a woman who didn't need a man to take care of her. This might be an indication that Mary was pregnant, but unwed.
Jesus was supposed to be of humble birth, right? Just a thought.

-Forestlady


But you're forgetting something--Luke 1:30-34, note especially v. 34:

And the angel said unto her, Fear not, Mary: for thou hast found favor with God.

And, behold, thou shalt conceive in thy womb, and bring forth a son, and shall call his name JESUS.

He shall be great, and shall be called the Son of the Highest; and the Lord God shall give unto him the throne of his father David:

And he shall reign over the house of Jacob for ever; and of his kingdom there shall be no end.

Then said Mary unto the angel, How shall this be, seeing I know not a man?

Keep in mind that Joseph didn't "know" her until AFTER Jesus was born. That's because Jesus had to be born of a VIRGIN. If Mary wasn't a virgin at Jesus' conception, why would that have mattered?




top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join