virgin birth

daqq

Well-known member
No RBBI, there is nothing to do with the idolatry of fornication with other gods; the whole thing was about a dialogue between Jesus and the Jews who had believed in him. (John 8:31) At a specific point, Jesus probably realized that they were making a fool of him, got upset and said they were of the Devil their father. Since they seemed to have been peers with Jesus from youth, they revealed that they knew about the children who had been born as a result of the many rapes of young Jewish ladies by Roman soldiers. So, in a way of vengeance for Jesus' charge that they were children of the Devil, they revealed their knowledge of Jesus from infancy and that they were aware that Jesus had been born out of fornication as a result of a rape. (John 8:41)

And again, that does not a similarity comparison make. You're taking one line out of the text to build your case upon, but ignoring the literary device used. Peace

Hi RBBI, the statement from the other poster is in itself a microcosm of the problem with the Masoretic text, which is, the unregenerate man inserting his own spirit of the world into the letter of the text. If such a one does this with Greek, which has vowels, what will the same do with ancient Hebrew which had no vowels? The unregenerate Masoretes inserted their own spirit into the "block letters" of the Hebrew text when they added the vowel pointing; and by the resulting text they have revealed themselves as not having been true Jews while at the same time destroying themselves and their own people for rejecting Messiah Yeshua and his Testimony. That is why when the Masoretic Hebrew Text is rendered into English, for the most part, the Father comes across sounding like an angry and vengeful ogre. The Testimony of Yeshua is the only Spirit, (approved and sealed by the Father from above) which correctly interprets the ancient Hebrew Scripture. One is therefore better off to trust the Septuagint, which is quoted extensively in the Gospel accounts and Apostolic writings, and which came from the ancient Hebrew text before it had vowel pointing added by the Masoretes, (the current Masorete Text came a thousand to twelve hundred years later). The ancient Hebrew text was translated into the Greek Septuagint some two to three hundred years before the ministry of Yeshua, (270-240BCE concerning the Torah portions) and therefore the Levite priests, scribes, and Jews, who rendered the Hebrew text into the Greek Septuagint, had neither an agenda nor an axe to grind concerning Yeshua and the first century congregation of the faithful at Yerushalem because they did their work some two to three hundred years before the advent of Messiah. Likewise, in the time of Paul, the Hebrew writings did not have vowels, vowel pointing, or cantillation markings, (ancient Biblical Hebrew is probably the "tongue of angels" of which Paul writes in 1Cor 13:1). The "letter kills" for the same reason, (but not only this reason) because if one attempts to read "the letter" without having the Spirit of the Testimony of Messiah Yeshua then the same has no choice but to input the vowel from somewhere: and the vowels are the Spirit flowing through the "block" letters. Thus, if one does not receive, confess, and uphold the full Testimony of Yeshua, the same cannot understand what is written in the ancient Hebrew text; and the same therefore must insert his or her own spirit, the unregenerate spirit of the flesh-minded man, which is the spirit of the world. The same happened with "Hebrew Matthew" when the unregenerate "church fathers" rendered it into Greek accoring to the mind of the flesh and destroyed the Hebrew manuscripts which they confess were in their possession. :)
 

dialm

BANNED
Banned
No RBBI, there is nothing to do with the idolatry of fornication with other gods; the whole thing was about a dialogue between Jesus and the Jews who had believed in him. (John 8:31) At a specific point, Jesus probably realized that they were making a fool of him, got upset and said they were of the Devil their father. Since they seemed to have been peers with Jesus from youth, they revealed that they knew about the children who had been born as a result of the many rapes of young Jewish ladies by Roman soldiers. So, in a way of vengeance for Jesus' charge that they were children of the Devil, they revealed their knowledge of Jesus from infancy and that they were aware that Jesus had been born out of fornication as a result of a rape. (John 8:41)

Could we have a copy of your linage Levi?
 

RBBI

New member
Hi RBBI, the statement from the other poster is in itself a microcosm of the problem with the Masoretic text, which is, the unregenerate man inserting his own spirit of the world into the letter of the text. If such a one does this with Greek, which has vowels, what will the same do with ancient Hebrew which had no vowels? The unregenerate Masoretes inserted their own spirit into the "block letters" of the Hebrew text when they added the vowel pointing; and by the resulting text they have revealed themselves as not having been true Jews while at the same time destroying themselves and their own people for rejecting Messiah Yeshua and his Testimony. That is why when the Masoretic Hebrew Text is rendered into English, for the most part, the Father comes across sounding like an angry and vengeful ogre. The Testimony of Yeshua is the only Spirit, (approved and sealed by the Father from above) which correctly interprets the ancient Hebrew Scripture. One is therefore better off to trust the Septuagint, which is quoted extensively in the Gospel accounts and Apostolic writings, and which came from the ancient Hebrew text before it had vowel pointing added by the Masoretes, (the current Masorete Text came a thousand to twelve hundred years later). The ancient Hebrew text was translated into the Greek Septuagint some two to three hundred years before the ministry of Yeshua, (270-240BCE concerning the Torah portions) and therefore the Levite priests, scribes, and Jews, who rendered the Hebrew text into the Greek Septuagint, had neither an agenda nor an axe to grind concerning Yeshua and the first century congregation of the faithful at Yerushalem because they did their work some two to three hundred years before the advent of Messiah. Likewise, in the time of Paul, the Hebrew writings did not have vowels, vowel pointing, or cantillation markings, (ancient Biblical Hebrew is probably the "tongue of angels" of which Paul writes in 1Cor 13:1). The "letter kills" for the same reason, (but not only this reason) because if one attempts to read "the letter" without having the Spirit of the Testimony of Messiah Yeshua then the same has no choice but to input the vowel from somewhere: and the vowels are the Spirit flowing through the "block" letters. Thus, if one does not receive, confess, and uphold the full Testimony of Yeshua, the same cannot understand what is written in the ancient Hebrew text; and the same therefore must insert his or her own spirit, the unregenerate spirit of the flesh-minded man, which is the spirit of the world. The same happened with "Hebrew Matthew" when the unregenerate "church fathers" rendered it into Greek accoring to the mind of the flesh and destroyed the Hebrew manuscripts which they confess were in their possession. :)

I couldn't agree more, and I had an interesting picture in my head come forth as you described the Spirit flowing through the block letters. I saw man as one of the block letters, with His Spirit flowing through him. I can also "see" YWHW with the Spirit of the Son flowing through those letters as well. I knew the letters were literally vessels that contained His breath, as a woman's womb carries the seed, but this is a new way to consider that truth.

No wonder the scribes were made to throw away the whole page if an error was found, and they had numbered the amount of the characters as well. The beauty of His intricacies is beyond compare, isn't it? :) Peace
 

beameup

New member
Bs"d
Show me just one genealogy in the Tanach which mentions only the mothers.

There are none because under "normal" circumstances, women were insignificant under true Judaism (ie: Mosaic). Of course, "true Judaism" hasn't existed since 70 A.D., so "Judaism" had to be recreated. Under the "recreation", most anything goes, and historic Mosaic Judaism has been totally forgotten.

I find it ironic that Jews can believe that Adam was created by the elements found in dirt, but it seems incomprehensible to them that HaShem could create a man from the elements found in a woman's womb. :dizzy: :confused:
 

chair

Well-known member
...
I find it ironic that Jews can believe that Adam was created by the elements found in dirt, but it seems incomprehensible to them that HaShem could create a man from the elements found in a woman's womb. :dizzy: :confused:

It's not a question of what God can do- it is a question of whether God did in fact do such a thing.

It is likely that the virgin birth of Jesus was not a universal belief in the early years of Christianity, thus the sources about it are unclear and sometimes contradictory. It does not appear in some of the Gospels, nor, to the best of my limited knowledge, does Paul refer to it.

Attempts to reconcile sources that disagree tend to make matters worse. You are better off just accepting that the sources sometimes disagree.
 

Elia

Well-known member
There are none because under "normal" circumstances, women were insignificant under true Judaism (ie: Mosaic). Of course, "true Judaism" hasn't existed since 70 A.D., so "Judaism" had to be recreated. Under the "recreation", most anything goes, and historic Mosaic Judaism has been totally forgotten.

Bs"d

According to you, "true Judaism" hasn't existed since 70 A.D"

So it did exist before that. But all the books of the Tanach are written before 70 CE.

So then there should be genealogies where the lineage goes through women.

And of course those don't exist, therefore this premise: "That's not true in Israel. Lineage is through the mother which is why Paul had Timothy circumcised." is refuted.

And that is why there is no lineage of a woman in the whole Bible, also not in the NT.

Of course this doesn't stop Christians from claiming a certain genealogy is of Mary when it is clearly written there that it is the genealogy of Joseph, but there is no use trying to argue with willful stupidity.
 

beameup

New member
Bs"d

According to you, "true Judaism" hasn't existed since 70 A.D"

So it did exist before that. But all the books of the Tanach are written before 70 CE.

So then there should be genealogies where the lineage goes through women.

Nope. In rare occasions, women like Ruth (Gentile) and Rahab (Gentile) are mentioned, but that was exceptional. Otherwise, it was a patriarchal society and men were dominant.
However, there are many, many exceptional things in the Tanakh that are puzzling and really not quite "kosher". For example, Joshua and the troops march around Jerico 7 times on the Sabbath in disobedience to Mosaic Law. David eats the showbread which is only for the priests. The Tanakh is full of these anomalies.
In the case of the curse on Jeconiah, that virtually made it impossible to produce a descendant of David as King or Messiah.
Since 70 AD, it has been necessary to create a faux-Judaism devoid of sacrifices and the Temple. So, improvised-Judaism had to be created and the "old system" abandoned. So you are left with minimal knowledge of pure-Judaism as ordained by God through Moses.
So, we have a case of "oranges" and "apples" whereby we are discussing neo-Judaism "oranges" and not clearly discussing Mosaic Judaism "apples".

So, from your "neo-Judaism" you proclaim that so-and-so simply cannot be done, when in fact the practice was perfectly acceptable under the (now extinct) Mosaic Judaism.
 

chair

Well-known member
Nope. In rare occasions, women like Ruth (Gentile) and Rahab (Gentile) are mentioned, but that was exceptional. Otherwise, it was a patriarchal society and men were dominant.
However, there are many, many exceptional things in the Tanakh that are puzzling and really not quite "kosher". For example, Joshua and the troops march around Jerico 7 times on the Sabbath in disobedience to Mosaic Law. David eats the showbread which is only for the priests. The Tanakh is full of these anomalies.
In the case of the curse on Jeconiah, that virtually made it impossible to produce a descendant of David as King or Messiah.
Since 70 AD, it has been necessary to create a faux-Judaism devoid of sacrifices and the Temple. So, improvised-Judaism had to be created and the "old system" abandoned. So you are left with minimal knowledge of pure-Judaism as ordained by God through Moses.
So, we have a case of "oranges" and "apples" whereby we are discussing neo-Judaism "oranges" and not clearly discussing Mosaic Judaism "apples".

So, from your "neo-Judaism" you proclaim that so-and-so simply cannot be done, when in fact the practice was perfectly acceptable under the (now extinct) Mosaic Judaism.

these are not "anomalies". Joshua did what God commanded. David wasn't perfect. Welcome to the real complex world.

And while you are visiting the real world, consider Judaism. What where the Jews supposed to do when the Temple was destroyed? Just give up and say "Oh, let's wait around for Mohammed, then we can be Muslims?"

You are also under the false impression that "Mosaic" Judaism was complete and stagnant. It wasn't complete and stagnant even in the time of Moses. The Torah is alive, not dead. And guess what- Christians don't get to define what 'proper' Judaism is, any more than I can tell you what the correct Christian doctrine is.
 

jamie

New member
LIFETIME MEMBER
Show me just one genealogy in the Tanach which mentions only the mothers.

The Law of Return
July 5, 1950

Amendment No. 2 5730-1970*
1. In the Law of Return, 5710-1950**, the following sections shall be inserted after section 4:

4B. For the purposes of this Law, "Jew" means a person who was born of a Jewish mother or has become converted to Judaism and who is not a member of another religion."​
 

jamie

New member
LIFETIME MEMBER
And while you are visiting the real world, consider Judaism. What where the Jews supposed to do when the Temple was destroyed? Just give up and say "Oh, let's wait around for Mohammed, then we can be Muslims?"

A better question would have been to ask why the Spirit destroyed his eviscerated temple.
 

Ben Masada

New member
And again, that does not a similarity comparison make. You're taking one line out of the text to build your case upon, but ignoring the literary device used. Peace

Okay, I'll give in to you on that one if you explain John 8:41. Logically, the "in other words" to "at least we were not born out of fornication," can mean only that "you were born out of fornication." Do you understand what
I mean? I hate to think the text is true but, hey! It is written in your NT, not in my Tanach.
 

Ben Masada

New member
They were told their father was the devil, which means that they fornicated with other gods, as He complained about Israel all along going WHORING after other gods, which devils are behind.

It was not a comment about Yeshua's parentage, because it's not a dissimilar comparison being made, as you are trying to portray it. If it were the way you say, then the comment from the Pharisees should have been to relate to their NATURAL fathers as well. It's a literary tool, to compare one thing to another. Peace

I was not speaking about what Jesus told them but what they told Jesus. What reason did they have to charge Jesus with having been born in an illegitimate manner? Besides, I want to understand that the text was a blunder of the Hellenist who wrote that gospel attributed to John. My point is that the text was false and that the author had no reason to interpolate it into the NT.
 

Elia

Well-known member
The Law of Return
July 5, 1950

Amendment No. 2 5730-1970*
1. In the Law of Return, 5710-1950**, the following sections shall be inserted after section 4:

4B. For the purposes of this Law, "Jew" means a person who was born of a Jewish mother or has become converted to Judaism and who is not a member of another religion."​

Bs"d

Which part of "Show me just one genealogy in the Tanach which mentions only the mothers" is it that you don't understand?
 

beameup

New member
funny hearing that from someone whose Messiah (and God) died by crucifixion.

What's even funnier is a people claiming that Isaiah 52:13--53:12 applies to themselves collectively, thus making themselves collectively the Messiah of the world.
 

Elia

Well-known member
Okay, I'll give in to you on that one if you explain John 8:41. Logically, the "in other words" to "at least we were not born out of fornication," can mean only that "you were born out of fornication." Do you understand what
I mean? I hate to think the text is true but, hey! It is written in your NT, not in my Tanach.

Bs"d

It is very simple; Joseph denied paternity of JC. And Mary was married to Joseph when she got pregnant.

So that leaves only the above conclusion as to the origins of JC.
 
Top