Can Christanity provide logical answers for these questions???

Question

The evangelical narratives show that Christ himself did not claim to have a miraculous birth. He did not once allude to such an event; while if, as Christians claim, it is the principal evidence of his deityship, he certainly would have done so.
His paternal genealogy, as made out by Matthew and Luke, completely disproves the story of his miraculous conception by a virgin. For they both trace his lineage through Joseph, which they could not do only on the assumption that Joseph was his father. This, of course, disproves his sireship by the Holy Ghost, ergo, the miraculous conception. It is the lineage and parentage of Joseph, and not Mary, that is given in tracing back his ancestry to the royal household -- a fact which completely overthrows the story of his miraculous birth.
And the fact that his own disciple (Philip) declared him to be the son of Joseph, and that several texts show that it was the current impression, is still further confirmation of the conclusion.
We find the story of the immaculate conception resting entirely upon the slender foundation comprised in the legends of an angel and a dream. We are told that Mary got it by an angel, and Joseph by a dream. And through these sources we have the whole groundwork and foundation of the story of the divinity of Jesus Christ.
It should be noticed that we have neither Joseph's nor Mary's report of these things, but only Matthew and Luke's version of the affair. And we are not informed that either of them ever saw or conversed with Joseph or Mary on the subject. It is probable they got it from Dame Rumor, with her thousand tongues.
If Christ were a miraculously born God, is it possible his mother would have reproved him for misconduct when she found him in the temple, as she must have known his character?
If Mary was miraculously conceived, why was the important secret kept so long from Joseph? Why did she keep the "wool drawn over his eyes" till an angel had to be sent from heaven to let him into the secret?
If she were a virtuously-minded woman, why did she thus attempt to deceive him?
Why did not God inform Joseph by "inspiration" instead of employing the roundabout way of sending an angel to do it?

We are told that "Mary was found with child of the Holy Ghost." But as we are not informed who found it out, or who made the discovery, or how it was made, is it not thus left in a very suspicious aspect?
As the whole affair seems to have been based on dreams, and was carried on through dreams, and has no better foundation than dreams, why should we consider it entitled to any better credit than similar stories found in works on heathen mythology?
And would it not prove that Christianity is rather a dreamy religion?
Should not the astounding and incredible report of the birth of a God be based on a better foundation than that of dreams and angels and the legends of oriental mythology, to entitle it to the belief of an intelligent and scientific age?

Or can any man of science entertain for a moment the superlative solecism of an Infinite God by any special act "overshadowing" a finite human female, especially as modern thought teaches us that God is both male and female, and as much one as the other?

ok answer the last question

Answer 1

--- you have things reasoned out to suit your own purpose and that is to discredit biblical teachings and prove that your own theory is more viable.... using your own way of thinking I could prove Little Red Riding Hood was asking for trouble and deserved to be eaten by the Big Bad Wolf....

Answer 2

Lol. First off, Mary was a direct descendant of King David and her lineage is noted in Matthew. The reason this is important is because in Judasim, if the ONLY CHILD is a female child, as in Mary's case, then the FEMALE CHILD CAN INHERIT, and pass her inheritance to her children. Hence, Jesus the Christ, as her son, inherited King David's throne through HER. NOW, about Jesus' "birth," at this time, much like today, no one really believed that a young girl was going to give "virgin birth." Just didn't happen. Even Joseph didn't believe it. This is why the Angel of God contacted him and made it clear that Mary was indeed "blameless" in THIS instance. She was not a "****" so to speak, but just a girl that was getting a bad rap.

Joseph had two choices at this time: marry her and accept Jesus as HIS son and never say anything OR accuse Mary and have her called before the Sanhedrin and Pharisees. Obviously, he loved her and believed the angel. ::whew::

Second, since Joseph "accepted" Jesus as HIS son now, Jesus also received HIS inheritence from Joseph. Joseph too, was a direct MALE descendant from King David and able to claim the throne as his own. However, the Macabeean Kings had usurped the Line of David after the return from Babylon around 450-400 B.C.E., so there was no throne for Joseph or anyone else from Davids line to claim. God had planned it this way for a reason. He did not want Christ on an actual throne, but out and able to preach to mankind at large and "not be part of this world" which as King, he most certainly would have been.

While Christ WAS MIRACULOUSLY BORN, HE WAS not a GOD-MAN. As God called Christ, he was simply "the second Adam." Nothing MORE than a perfect man. In order to be an acceptable ransom, and to pay what Adam had lost, God needed something EQUAL to Adam. Another perfect man. Not a God-Man, that would have been more than we we're worth and thus we would not have been "worth" the sacrifice.

Also, you must realize, it was NOT UNTIL HIS Baptism that Christ himself remembered his pre-existance in Heaven, when God himself sent down the Holy Spirit in the shape of a Dove and declared himself, "this is my beloved son, in whom I have approved." Then Christs eyes were opened. He was what? 28.5 or 29 years old? So, many people "left out" of lots of stuff "until the time had come to pass" that it should be made clear.

Answer 3

I will not go into a narrative but...Jesus did say "I and the Father are one" Have you been with me this long and do not know me?

What did Mary do after the angel told her she was to conceive by the Holy Spirit. She was also told of her cousin Elizabeth and this was her concern. Mary didn't have all the answers and must have been at a loss as to what to say to Joseph but she had the faith to know that God would take care of that. If it's the Holy Spirit I guess she must have been pretty virtuous and there was no deceipt involved.

You are thinking as a very worldly person who wants to rationalize everything. All I can say is keep an open mind, you could learn a lot.

I am curious why so many non-believers keep questioning things. I ignore what I don't believe.

Answer 4

Many questions, but I think that the main one that you are getting at seems so be 'Was Jesus Christ the Son of God, or the son of Joseph'? The genealogy given in the Bible is to show that Jesus is a descendant of David. Even though it gives Joseph's lineage it is still valid, even if Joseph isn't the biological father, because he would be Joseph's by adoption. Joseph claimed parenthood for Mary's sake, according to customs of the time Mary could have been stoned for having a child and not being married. This also explains why Jesus was known as Joseph's son.

As for divine conception being the principal evidence of his deityship, I don't believe that it is. Christ didn't point to divine conception as being proof of who he was, but he did point to his works. If you read the New Testament you will notice that there were many instances of Christ claiming divinity, that is why the Jews hated him and crucified him.

Don't look at the divine conception as evidence of who Christ was. Yes, it is important to know that he was 'litterally begotten of the Father', but Christ pointed to his works as evidence of who he was. Once people were convinced that he really was the Christ, then His divine parentage come naturally.

Answer 5

First you are confusing the Catholic concept of immaculate conception with the virgin birth. They are not the same thing. The Immaculate Conception is that Mary was born without sin due to her future as the new ark of the covenant namely Jesus Christ in body blood soul and divinity.

Martin Luther, Ulrich Zwingli, John Calvin and other reformers acknowledged that Mary maintained her virginity after the birth of Jesus Christ. Modern reformers have moved the theology even further away from what was believed by the unified Body of Christ.

One of the clearest connection of the virgin birth of the Messiah is found in the prophesy of Isaiah. He said that the Virgin would bear the Savior of Israel. Next, the Bible never explicitly says that Mary had other children. Brothers were extended cousins in modern terminology.

I think the passage of disclosure by Mary to Joseph was reasonable enough for a young women betrothed to an older man. The angels intervention assisted Joesph a devout Jew to believe that he was actively a part of the fulfillment of Jewish hopes of this Messiah.

I think I answered most of your questions.

Good Questions.

Answer 6

Your question was far too long to read the whole thing but I'll mention a couple things.

Jesus' virgin birth is not his primary claim to being God, but rather his resurrection for which there is extensive proof for.

If you look into it there are good reasons why Matt. and Luke's lineages are the way they are. One traces his line through Mary and the other through Joseph. You can look it up online and get plenty of info to explain this.

Even if Jesus wasn't born of a virgin it really would make little difference in the long run. He could still be who he was and have done what he did without being born of a virgin.

Answer 7

It was the custom to trace the genealogy of a person through the father, and even when the mother's lineage was given, her husband was considered to be the current generation. Luke is thought to have interviewed Mary for his gospel, since he spoke a lot of her thoughts and opinions about her role, and Luke's genalogy was that of Mary.

Mary was an ordinary Galilean woman, and despite the angel visitation before His birth, she didn't catch on to a lot of what was going on with her Son. I believe that she was what today they would call a "Jewish mother". Read the Cana wedding story with a Yiddish accent and you'll know what I mean.

But when she was in the upper room and the Holy Spirit descended on the apostles, she finally realized what had happened. It was after this that she spoke with Luke.

Answer 8

The gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John were written from 70-120AD, which is nearly a Century after his execution (31AD)...

It was during that time that Christianity needed a marketing boost in their campaign, and rumors of an immaculate conception started. By the time, Roman Emperor Constantine got involved with Christianity (circa 313AD), even more fantastic attributes were given to Jesus (i.e. walking on water, etc.)...

The real problem is contained, by translating the New Testament from Hebrew, where 'virgin' simply means, "an umarried young woman", which Mary was...She was unmarried, and betrothed to Joseph. She happened to have delivered her child just before the wedding...So what to tell the parents?
...It was an because of an angel that came to me in a dream...(Allowing her to give birth before 9 months)!

Think about it!
Still, it doesn't subtract from his greatness & humanity. He was just not about all the exagerrations that followed...

Answer 9

well, i agree that if you ask one question at a time, you will get better answers -- but i'm going to try to sift through this . . . in order, if possible. i hope you're open-minded enough to read the responses that you requested. Here goes:

1) Christ never said he was God, either . . . so just b/c he never mentioned his immaculate conception shouldn't mean anything . . . b/c he WAS God, and he DID have an immaculate conception. Besides, cultures haven't changed that much. can you imagine talking about that? . . . "Hey guys, guess what? my Dad didn't have sex with my Mom . . . the Holy Spirit put me in her womb!" Jesus wan't big on making claims, especially ones such as these that would have seemed impossible and ridiculous . . he let his actions do the talking--namely, his death and resurrection.

2) As to Christ's lineage, sure they talk about Joseph's paternal status. but you have to look at this in the right way. Mary was Jesus' mother, right? you're not questioning that. (i don't think!) Joseph was married to Mary, right? No objections to that either? okay.

well, the Bible says that when a man marries a woman, and is physically joined with her as well, they become ONE. so, if Jesus is Mary's son, and Mary and Joseph are One, then he is Joseph's son as well. that is how Jesus can claim to be "of the branch of David" through Joseph, even though Joseph did not physically create him through Mary.

therefore, the fact of Jesus's miraculous birth stands.

3) Mary's reproving Jesus when He was in the temple doesn't say anything about his birth, or disprove that he was the son of God. up until this point, Jesus had pretty much been a normal kid -- all of a sudden, first he disappears for an entire day, putting his parents through a frantic and harrying search, after which Mary must have been pretty stressed out--then, they find him PREACHING IN THE TEMPLE -- to the old, wise, revered men who were the kind of people Mary and Joesph were used to taking instruction from -- not the kind they expected THIER SON to be teaching!

i mean, for crying out loud, he's only twelve! most 12-year-olds these days are learning long division; how shocked would you be if you walked into a college classroom one day and found one teaching your calculus 4 class?!?

i can understand Mary's schock, both as a mother and as a person! it's no wonder she overreacted and gave her son a hard time! she knew perfectly well that he was the Son of God, it just took her by surprise when Jesus suddenly stepped into that role at such a young age -- and didn't tell her anything about it! you might freak out a little too if you were in her place!

4) As to Mary's not telling Joseph about her pregnancy, give me a break! i can tell you're a guy or you wouldn't have to ask this! put yourself in Mary's place again . . . . imagine you're a young, chaste woman who is engaged to the man of her dreams, an angel shows up and tells you YOU'RE PREGNANT, even though you try to explain that you've never had sex, you CAN'T be pregnant. but it's the angel of God, so what are you gonna do but accept it? if God says you're carrying his son and the savior of mankind, then so be it! Now . . . imagine how you're going to tell your fiancee about this. it's an unbelievable story, you say -- how much more for Joseph!

he's not going to believe her; he's going to assume that she's been messing around with some other guy! the ONLY WAY he (or pretty much anyone) would believe something like that is if they heard it straight from the horse's mouth . . . so the angel shows up on his doorstep, too.

Mary wasn't "deceiving" Joseph, as you say -- she was just letting a much more convincing speaker deliver that particular message. i would be all too grateful!

5) You don't call an angel an inspiration? how else would you define a heavenly messenger. you can't play the "why didn't" game . . . for that matter, why didn't God write it in fire in the night sky? why didn't he give Joseph "x-ray" vision so he could see the baby inside of Mary? Why didn't God just skip the whole husband thing -- she's already pregnant, who needs Joseph?

the reason God sent an angel is because he wanted to. he doesn't need to be straightforward about things if he doesn't want to. besides, i don't think sending an angel to wake you in your bed with a specific, worded, audible message straight from God is "roundabout" at all!

6) the use of the passive voice in this sentence doesn't mean anything. it's not suspicious, it's just the English language. and it's pretty easy to figure out "who" found out -- i would think "MARY" would have at least crossed your mind. "JOSEPH" would be another good choice on your part.

it's not like Mary just woke up one day and was like, "oh my goodness, i'm pregnant by the Holy Spirit! that's weird . . ." They had the angel come tell them what was happening, remember? stop trying to infuse ambiguity into what is merely the use of the passive voice. for that matter, different versions of the Bible might use the active voice, so your whole question is irrelevant.

7) you're gonna have to reword that last question . . . good grief, are you TRYING to make your questions so confusing that ppl can't answer them?

anyways, there's a start on some logical answers for ya . . .

Answer 10

First of all all of these points are very good. But what would actually disprove christianity would be if they Found Jesus's corpse. Because Christians believe in the resurection of ones soul to heaven and that jesus will rise again (and did rise again)

Further more even if jesus was not born by miraculous conception that would not disprove his ability to be a god loving man or son of god. Throughout history there are many advanced spiritualist that have come forth and graced our world with their wisdom.

Point being you dont have to buy the christian version but if you choose to believe jesus exhisted you might say he was one of the most advanced spiritualist to exhist in that time.

Good post though im serial!

Answer 11

Wow.
Once you accept the existence of an all-powerful Creator, how can you then limit that Creator in any way? If the Creator decides to...erm...create...a body, in the womb of a virgin, and inhabit that body, be born, live, and die, and then arise from the grave, and ascend into heaven...well, why could not the all-powerful Creator not do that?
How could you even hope to try to approach the very idea that you could explain, much less understand, that Creator?
I've heard people say, "God said it, I believe it, that settles it."
Well and good, but I say
God said it--and that settles it. Doesn't really matter if I--or you, either--believe it or not, does it? Not if God exists.
And I believe God exists......