it's not virgin, it's YOUNG WOMAN

Originally posted by madnessinmysoul
his name will be immanuel (i think that rules out jesus....),

Now you're just being silly. Immanuel is a title. "God with us". Your analogy is like saying that the president is "Leader of the Free World" and ruling out George Bush because his last name isn't world.

Madness, a lot of members have already confuted your original argument.

I think it's obvious that you only want to be right all the time. You don't care to admit that you are incorrect, and when the time comes that someone proves you wrong, you start rambling a bunch of nonsense.

Shar presented a good argument here:

Originally posted by shar
2nd your wrong. I did your research for you. Almah---has at least 3 meanings. Just like English words have more than one meaning. Such as fence means a fence for yard or a sword fight. Here your word Almah means virgin, maid, damsels. All the words also means a young female. Your argument makes no sense at all.

And you gave this weak response:

Originally posted by madnessinmysoul
again, the word is dependent on CONTEXT. there is no particular context to make the word mean VIRGIN so it defaults to young woman.

Now, how the hell did you figure that? I think it's obvious your spouting a bunch of BS.

Dbates has also written some good posts that you have not refuted.

All I've seen come out of your mouth is your own twisted and delusional opinions.


[edit on 5-6-2007 by thehumbleone]

Originally posted by thehumbleone
Madness, a lot of members have already confuted your original argument.

no, they've brought up counter-points that can also be true. we have no complete truth in this yet

And you gave this weak response:

Originally posted by madnessinmysoul
again, the word is dependent on CONTEXT. there is no particular context to make the word mean VIRGIN so it defaults to young woman.

Now, how the hell did you figure that? I think it's obvious your spouting a bunch of BS.

or i know that in most indo-european languages with semetic influence (it's odd that semites don't actually speak a true semetic language yet they write in a semetic form) words with multiple meaning tend to default to a particular meaning when not put in specific context. i consulted a friend of mine that happens to be getting a degree in language, a jew, and studying ancient dialects of hebrew and that's what he told me. you're going to really have to take my word on that....

Dbates has also written some good posts that you have not refuted.

that it had to be virgin because it wouldn't be a sign otherwise? i made a counterpoint that there are other parts to the prophecy

you expect refutation here... but the problem is that we're dealing with something that's too vague to go completely one way or another so i'm just advocating a position and pushing my point... but we're not going to come to a complete consensus

how about this counterpoint: you expect a son-of-god messiah, jews expect a messiah that is simply an ANNOINTED MAN. annointed men aren't born of virgins

All I've seen come out of your mouth is your own twisted and delusional opinions.

alright, point out a twisted delusional opinion.

edit to add:

Originally posted by dbates

Originally posted by madnessinmysoul
his name will be immanuel (i think that rules out jesus....),

Now you're just being silly. Immanuel is a title. "God with us". Your analogy is like saying that the president is "Leader of the Free World" and ruling out George Bush because his last name isn't world.

but in the bible he isn't referred to in such a manner. i don't expect him to be called "immanuel son of joseph"
but you'd at least expect them to work it into the story that someone called him immanuel...

but i was, in fact, being silly on this point

[edit on 6/5/07 by madnessinmysoul]

"Even if you would bray a fool in a mortar among wheat with a pestle, yet will not his foolishness depart from him." Proverbs 27:22
"For it is written, I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and will bring to nothing the understanding of the prudent. Where is the wise? where is the scribe? where is the disputer of this world? hath not God made foolish the wisdom of this world? For after that in the wisdom of God the world by wisdom knew not God, it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe. For the Hews require a sign, and the Greeks seek after wisdom...Because the foolishness of God is wiser than men; and the weakness of God is stronger than men." ICor. 1:19-25
"But the natural man receives not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned." ICor. 2:14
"For the wisdom of this world is foolishness with God. For it is written, He taketh the wise in their own craftines." ICor. 3:19

whitewave, how about you contribute something to the conversation instead of throwing veiled insults out in the form of biblical quotation?

we're talking about how the word 'almah can mean one of two things and which one of those things it means in isaiah, get on the ball.

Just interjecting a piece of interesting information here, do you know what the word maid/maiden means? Or meant originally, at least? It's very interesting that the same word in another language got almost exactly the same treatment. Or is there some connection? I guess there are only so many "polite" euphimisms for virgin.

It was not meant as an insult, madness. It was meant to convey that, from what I've read of your many posts on many threads, you will not receive clear answers to your questions. You seem a bit obsessed with trying to prove (at least to your own minds' satisfaction) that Christians are idiots. We are not. If we chose not to argue with people who are clearly adamant in their pre-conceived and deeply entrenched belief system then it may be because some of us have better things to do.
"After the first and second admonition, excuse yourself." Titus 3:10
Excuse me.

What about this for a theory for mary and joseph. They were betrothed to each other, engaged in a bit of 'slippy slippy' before they were supposed to and mary ends up pregnant. They concoct a story that she was impregnated by god to account for the fact she was going to have a child a few months early and thats how the story gets started.

Don't tell me that young couples don't get amorous and go that tiny bit too far and get caught out, and it wouldn't be to unimaginative that it suggest that it couldn't happen 2000 years ago now would it?

There is also the fact that a percentage of people have a tendency to deny and lie to cover things up that they feel guilty or embarrassed about. This is also evident 2000 years ago.

So why would it be such a big NO NO to suggest that mary and joseph lied?


G

Originally posted by shihulud
So why would it be such a big NO NO to suggest that mary and joseph lied?

i don't know, some people would have you believe that the entire account of an angel visiting mary is 100% true and that she wouldn't lie to an angel and that an angel wouldn't lie to her...

anyway, why do they even have to be people that lied? why can't they just be fictional characters?
we have no evidence to suggest that jesus was a living being. we have no evidence to show that his parents were either.
yet people that would have been their contemporaries wrote about dozens of other people claiming to be the messiah at the exact same time. back then you couldn't go anywhere without seeing at least one messiah.

Originally posted by madnessinmysoul
anyway, why do they even have to be people that lied? why can't they just be fictional characters?
we have no evidence to suggest that jesus was a living being. we have no evidence to show that his parents were either.
yet people that would have been their contemporaries wrote about dozens of other people claiming to be the messiah at the exact same time. back then you couldn't go anywhere without seeing at least one messiah.

Oh don't get me wrong, I totally subscribe to them being fictional (or based upon others) but was just giving a fairly plausible explanation (I think anyway). Its quite similar to job being 'seduced' by his daughters -Don't you think job would have lied through his back teeth to say that his daughters seduced him just so that he could have sex ( he came from soddom or gomorrah after all).


G

It was Lot, not Job. Carry on.

Originally posted by whitewave
It was Lot, not Job. Carry on.

it's hard to keep those monosyllabic characters straight in that book. job, lot, ham, etc. all of them have bad things happen to them

You have to keep in mind that ministers and priests are very much stage hypnotists (with much more responsibility)
and as such you have to make very simple things seem irresistible like the best salesmen in the world.

but what I mean is, ...

You have to hype this stuff up, make it seem mystical, taboo, spiritual, or just plain intelligent.

without adding a bit of pizazz the next guys cult/religion is going to seem a whole lot more appealing.

Truly intelligent people don't add a lot of "extra" crap to their information/instructions or whatever you want to call it, and you have to keep in mind a lot of people are going to read it... and when you read something plain, simple and practical you CAN usually add some of your own experience or flavour to it which results in the mistranslations and exaggerations people attribute to all of their different religious texts/books.

Here is what the Essenes offer regarding the conception of Jesus.

1. AND in the sixth month the angel Gabriel was sent from God, unto a city of Galilee, named Nazareth, to a virgin espoused to a man whose name was Ioseph, of the house of David; and the virgin’s name was Mary.
2. Now Ioseph was a just and rational Mind, and he was skilled in all manner of work in wood and in stone. And Mary was a tender and discerning Soul, and she wrought veils for the temple. And they were both pure before God; and of them both was Iesu-Maria who is called the Christ.
3. And the angel came in unto her and said, Hail, Mary, thou that art highly favoured, for the Mother of God is with thee: blessed art thou among women and blessed be the fruit of thy womb.
4. And when she saw him, she was troubled at his saying, and cast in her mind what manner of salutation this should be. And the angel said unto her, Fear not, Mary, for thou hast found favour with God and, behold, thou shalt conceive in thy womb and bring forth a child, and He shall be great and shalt be called a Son of the Highest.
5. And the Lord God shall give unto him the throne of his father David: and he shall reign over the house of Jacob forever; and of his kingdom there shall be no end.
6. Then said Mary unto the angel, How shall this be, seeing I know not a man? And the angel answered and said unto her The Holy Spirit shall come upon Ioseph thy Spouse, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee, O Mary, therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Christ, the Child of God... ...further reading

The conception of Jesus by Mary is more properly called the "Incarnation of Christ." The phrase "Immaculate Conception," by Catholic interpretation, is not directly connected to the concept of the "Virgin Birth." The Catholic Church celebrates the Immaculate Conception on 8 December, exactly nine months before the official birthday of Mary. The Incarnation of Christ is celebrated on 25 March, nine months before Christmas Day.

Mary Immaculate

The Immaculate Conception is a Catholic dogma that asserts that Mary, the mother of Jesus, was preserved by God from the stain of original sin at the time of her own conception.

Specifically, the dogma says she was not afflicted by the privation of sanctifying grace that afflicts mankind, but was instead filled with grace by God, and furthermore lived a life completely free from sin.

It is commonly confused with the doctrine of the virgin birth, though the two deal with separate subjects. Mary was conceived by normal biological means, but her soul was acted upon by God blocking sin from perpetuating at the time of her conception.

The Immaculate Conception was solemnly defined as a dogma by Pope Pius IX in his constitution Ineffabilis Deus, published December 8, 1854 (the Feast of the Immaculate Conception).

The Feast of the Immaculate Conception of Mary had been established in 1483 by Pope Sixtus IV who stopped short of defining the doctrine as a dogma of the Catholic Faith, thus giving Catholics freedom to believe in this or not; this freedom had been reiterated by the Council of Trent. The existence of the feast was a strong indication of the Church´s belief in the Immaculate Conception, even before its 19th century definition as a dogma.

The Catholic Church believes the dogma is supported by scripture (e.g. her being greeted by Angel Gabriel as "full of Grace"), and by the writings of many of the Church Fathers, either directly or indirectly, and often calls Mary the Blessed Virgin (Luke 1:48).

Catholic theology maintains that since Jesus became incarnate of the Virgin Mary, she needed to be completely free of sin to bear the Son of God, and that Mary is "redeemed 'by the grace of Christ' but in a more perfect manner than other human beings" (Ott, Fund., Bk 3, Pt. 3, Ch. 2, §3.1.e).

Virgin Birth

The Virgin Birth is a key doctrine of the Christian faith, and is also held to be true by Muslims (Qur'an 3.47), however, they do not call him (Jesus) "Son of God", rather "Servant of God". In the Qur'an, Jesus (Isa in Arabic) is consistently termed "Isa ibn Maryam" - a matronymic - because, in Muslim belief, he had no biological father.

The doctrine asserts that Jesus was conceived in the womb of his mother, the Virgin Mary, without the participation of a human father. Instead, the Miraculous Conception (not the Immaculate Conception) took place when the Holy Spirit "overshadowed" Mary.

This was not understood to mean that the human body of Christ was created ex nihilo (from nothing), for the tradition of the Church is that Christ "took his flesh from Mary." This is also understood to be a miracle, something not possible without divine intervention.

Another reason that Christians who accept the Virgin Birth consider it to be significant is that it shows Jesus' divine and human natures at once united, paving the way for all of humanity to be united with God. Eastern Orthodox tradition says that from the time Jesus was born, the flaming sword was removed from the Garden of Eden, making it possible for humanity to re-enter Paradise.

Scriptural and Philological Controversy

In the wider sense, arguments for and against the Virgin Birth depend on fundamental philosophical assumptions or the Virgin Birth cannot have taken place in any traditionally accepted sense. To many, the Virgin Birth violates natural philosophy and the science based upon it. There are also objections to the doctrine of the Virgin Birth based on scriptural evidence and other ongoing theological debates. The required Sethian and Davidic bloodlines of the Messiah, so meticulously mentioned in the Bible, would abruptly end, without justification, with Joseph.

Essenes

"After my departure there will arise the ignorant and the crafty, and many things will they ascribe unto Me that I never spake, and many things which I did speak will they withhold, but the day will come when the clouds shall be rolled away, and the Sun of Righteousness shall shine forth with healing in his wings" ~Jesus, The Essene Gospel of Peace

[edit on 8-6-2007 by NJE777]

[edit on 8-6-2007 by NJE777]

NJE, we're not referencing the conception story here. we're talking about the "prophecy" in isaiah.