Source of virgin myth in Christianity? Biblical Mistranslations

page: 1
3
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 23 2012 @ 10:02 PM
link   
here is a video that provides a mechanical translation of biblical text from 3 sources that explains how the term "virgin" came to replace the term "maiden". The Virgin mother was added to emulate the divine mother goddess

Makes you wonder how much the bible was rewritten using pagan myth.


www.youtube.com...

oh and here is why the entire new testament has to be re-translated. All of Christianity is based on misconceptions about what the whole thing is really about. Evidence of Semitic origin of the NT

www.youtube.com...

edit on 23-1-2012 by casenately because: fix




posted on Jan, 23 2012 @ 10:05 PM
link   
reply to post by casenately
 


I prefer to believe that it's just a book of stories that people read in order to make them think that when their brain shuts off, they live in a happy cloud land of winged people and smiles.



posted on Jan, 23 2012 @ 10:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by casenately
here is a video that provides a mechanical translation of biblical text from 3 sources that explains how the term "virgin" came to replace the term "maiden". The Virgin mother was added to emulate the divine mother goddess

Makes you wonder how much the bible was rewritten using pagan myth.



The whole bible is based on Pagan Myth!



posted on Jan, 23 2012 @ 10:22 PM
link   
wow, first vatican ufos, now more bibilcal mistranslation? well looks like we need a crazy new age translation for all you believers



posted on Jan, 23 2012 @ 10:29 PM
link   
the virgin is a symbol of the constellation and zodiac sign of Virgo. it's all about astrology, the only science that sustains true OVER TIME.



posted on Jan, 23 2012 @ 10:44 PM
link   
reply to post by casenately
 



Makes you wonder how much the bible was rewritten using pagan myth.


Hello, even if it is a "maiden", a devout Jewish girl 2,000 years ago wasn't sleeping around like your average 14 year olds today. This was before miniskirts and clear heels. And also, how would a simple "maiden" having a child be a miraculous sign from heaven?



posted on Jan, 23 2012 @ 10:49 PM
link   
Funny, the Catholic priests at the mission church on my reservation were fond of calling traditional native Americans pagans. And odd that our savior, the Peacemaker, Tekanawita, was born of a virgin birth. It's not just in Christianity. I don't think it's a myth. Krishna was born of a virgin. Buddha was born of a virgin.



posted on Jan, 23 2012 @ 10:52 PM
link   
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 


A "maiden" having a child isn't a sign from heaven. I think that's the point the OP was trying to make.



posted on Jan, 23 2012 @ 11:07 PM
link   
First of all, no virgin birth is possible. Either you get knocked up or you don't, and if you don't then no baby arrives expectedly or unexpectedly. In Mary's case, if the incident is real at all, she obtained sperm from someone. Joseph, that's a guy we don't know much about. He comes, he goes, he's around carpentering, then suddenly he's gone. If he married this young girl and then she had a baby, he surely was the father and his wife, as the thread starts off, was a "maiden" not a virgin.

Then again, did you hear the one about the virgin who walked into a bar? The only question is, how far in before she wasn't a virgin walking into a bar anymore.



posted on Jan, 23 2012 @ 11:23 PM
link   
reply to post by Aleister
 


Virgin births are technically possible. If a man ejaculates around the vaginal opening there is a minute possibility that some sperm could find their way up. Again minute, but possible.



posted on Jan, 23 2012 @ 11:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by randomtangentsrme
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 


A "maiden" having a child isn't a sign from heaven. I think that's the point the OP was trying to make.


That was a fail then. Also it's translated "virgin" in the Greek Septuagint (LXX) which was in black and white 3 centuries before Christ was born.



posted on Jan, 23 2012 @ 11:32 PM
link   
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 


I have heard many scholar argue (2 close to home, my ancient Greek, prof, and my mother [ex-nun]), that maiden (i.e. young woman) and virgin, was the same word in Greek.
edit on 23-1-2012 by randomtangentsrme because: fix parentheses



posted on Jan, 23 2012 @ 11:36 PM
link   
reply to post by Aleister
 

And "carpenter" is not the correct word either!

Line 2



posted on Jan, 23 2012 @ 11:41 PM
link   
reply to post by freedom12
 


What is the correct word? This is one I haven't heard.

Glad to see you got your avatar working again.



posted on Jan, 24 2012 @ 02:38 AM
link   
another example of how the word virgin was emphasized during translation and how the entire translation process has over simplified the collective works of the Bible. The next time it seems silly just go to the source and get the true meaning of what it says.

Genesis 24:43.


{Genesis 24:43} Behold,stand by the well of water; and it shall come to pass, that when the virgin cometh forth to draw [water], and I say to her, Give me, I pray thee, a little water of thy pitcher to drink;

"Behold,¹ I¹ standªº [here] by¹ the wellª of water;ª and the daughtersª of the men²¹ of the cityª come outªº to drawªº water:ª ... And let it come to pass,¹ that the damselª to whom¹ I shall say,ªº¹ Let downªº thy pitcher,ª I pray thee,¹ that I may drink;ªº and she shall say,ªº Drink,ªº and I will give²º thy camelsª drinkªº also:¹ [let the same be] she [that] thou hast appointedªº for thy servantª Isaac;ª and thereby shall I knowªº that¹ thou hast shewedªº kindnessª unto¹ my master.ª" {Gen 24:13-14}




American Standard Version (ASV 1901)
Behold, I am standing by the fountain of water. And let it come to pass, that the maiden that cometh forth to draw, to whom I shall say, Give me, I pray thee, a little water from thy pitcher to drink.

King James Version (KJV 1769)
Behold,º Iº standºº byº the wellº of water;º and it shall come to pass,º that when the virginº cometh forthºº to drawºº [water], and I sayºº toº her, Give me,ºº I pray thee,º a littleº waterº of thy pitcherºº to drink;ºº

Original King James Bible (AV 1611)
Behold,º Iº standºº byº the wellº of water;º and it shall come to passe,º that when the virgineº commeth foorthºº to drawºº [water], and I sayºº toº her, Giue me,ºº I pray thee,º a litleº waterº of thy pitcherºº to drinke;ºº

Brenton Greek Septuagint (LXX, Restored Names)
behold, I stand by the well of water, and the daughters of the men of the city come forth to draw water, and it shall be [that] the damsel to whom I shall say, Give me a little water to drink out of thy pitcher,

Full Hebrew Names / Holy Name KJV (2008)
Behold,º Iº standºº byº the wellº of water;º and it shall come to pass,º that when the virginº cometh forthºº to drawºº [water], and I sayºº toº her, Give me,ºº I pray thee,º a littleº waterº of thy pitcherºº to drink;ºº



www.qbible.com...

edit on 24-1-2012 by casenately because: more



posted on Jan, 24 2012 @ 05:37 AM
link   
Regarding the virgin birth, the idea is that nothing is impossible for God who created the universe in the first place.
One needs to have faith in the Creator before one can accept ideas such as the virgin birth.



posted on Jan, 24 2012 @ 06:22 AM
link   
I believe that Jesus did live, and I beleive that he was annointed by god to do his work. You can argue the finer points all day. The simple fact is that there is proof, other than the bible, in his existance. You can believe in him or not, that is the cool think about being free to exercise your own beliefs. I feel that beating up older bible translations, and that bringing forth theories of how christianity is a spout of pagan religions is pointless. Christianity is what it is, and there are thousands of variations of the "Christian Religion". Just picking one of those variations, and then proposing a theory that is supposed to encircle the entire religion, is a waste of time. Why does it really matter? What matters is that a person has conviction in what he or she believes, if its in a god, or not, either way.



posted on Jan, 24 2012 @ 06:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by randomtangentsrme
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 


I have heard many scholar argue (2 close to home, my ancient Greek, prof, and my mother [ex-nun]), that maiden (i.e. young woman) and virgin, was the same word in Greek.
edit on 23-1-2012 by randomtangentsrme because: fix parentheses


No it's not



posted on Jan, 24 2012 @ 06:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
reply to post by casenately
 



Makes you wonder how much the bible was rewritten using pagan myth.


Hello, even if it is a "maiden", a devout Jewish girl 2,000 years ago wasn't sleeping around like your average 14 year olds today. This was before miniskirts and clear heels. And also, how would a simple "maiden" having a child be a miraculous sign from heaven?


Sorry but how do you know? We have no idea in reality what the bedroom habits were of people 2000 years ago. At 14, she would most likely have been married for a few years and already have a child.

We know form historical records that people in other places around the ancient world at that time frame were just as sexual as they are today so i would suggest this behaviour was more commonplace than you perhaps wish to believe.



posted on Jan, 24 2012 @ 06:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by remyrange
I believe that Jesus did live, and I beleive that he was annointed by god to do his work. You can argue the finer points all day. The simple fact is that there is proof, other than the bible, in his existance. You can believe in him or not, that is the cool think about being free to exercise your own beliefs. I feel that beating up older bible translations, and that bringing forth theories of how christianity is a spout of pagan religions is pointless. Christianity is what it is, and there are thousands of variations of the "Christian Religion". Just picking one of those variations, and then proposing a theory that is supposed to encircle the entire religion, is a waste of time. Why does it really matter? What matters is that a person has conviction in what he or she believes, if its in a god, or not, either way.



We have probable reason to believe that someone existed around that area and around that time frame - we do not have further proper evidence than that. We have no evidence of any miracles - the first examples of these linked to Jesus are from around 2-3 centuries after the death of Jesus. There are all sorts of other little anomolies like this regarding the Bible and Christianity. All of which leads me think that Pelagius was probably correct and that Jesus (if he ever existed) would not have wanted priests and organised religion like there is today, more that the spirit is all around and available to all.

Man makes his own life - god doesn't do it for him!





new topics
top topics
 
3
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join