As one opens a New Testament, he or she cannot get past the first page without confronting the doctrine of the virgin birth. The writer Matthew says: "When his mother Mary had been betrothed to Joseph, before they came together she was found with child of the Holy Spirit" (Matthew 1:18). Joseph, perplexed over the fact that his wife-to-be was pregnant, was given this explanation by an angel in a dream: "Joseph, thou son of David, fear not to take unto thee Mary thy wife: for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Spirit" (Matt. 1:20).
Another Gospel writer tells of Mary's pregnancy from her perspective. He tells how the angel Gabriel appeared to her to help prepare this young girl for the great event which would occur in her life. He told her, "And behold, thou shalt conceive in thy womb, and bring forth a son, and shalt call his name Jesus" (Luke 1:31). Startled at such a thing, for she was a virgin, the angel continued: "The Holy Spirit shall come upon thee, and the power of the Most High shall overshadow thee: wherefore also the holy thing which is begotten shall be called the Son of God " (Luke 1:35).
All four of the Gospels assume the doctrine of the virgin birth; two of them give de- tails about it. And it is all the more amazing that one of these writers (i.e., Luke) is a physician whose training and experience would incline him to deny the possibility of such a birth. Careful historian that we know Luke to have been, he investigated thoroughly and affirmed without hesitation that Jesus of Nazareth was born of a virgin.
Some seven hundred or more years before the birth of Jesus, the Holy Spirit had moved the prophet Isaiah to foretell the miraculous birth of the Messiah. "Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign; Behold a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel" (Isaiah 7:14). Skeptics have tried to eliminate the phenomenon of predictive prophecy from the Bible, but this and many other divinely revealed predictions - all of which came to pass - make their efforts futile.
Isaiah predicted the virgin birth, New Testament writers recorded its occurrence, and it stands as a sign from God as to the identity of Jesus of Nazareth as the Son of God and Savior of the world.
2006-11-17 01:03:53
·
answer #1
·
answered by K 5
·
1⤊
2⤋
Where indeed. It's called the Bible. And it doesn't matter what "they" say. What matters is what you do with what you truly know. And you can't truly know the truth unless you read THE BOOK! If everyone gets all their information from Hollyweird, TV and other such media (who only are interested in shock & ratings), then what they get is twisted information. Why does everyone think that the movie, which was based on a NOVEL (which is FICTION), has any truth to it? I've read lots of novels, who took a little bit of truth, and made it into quite a thrilling story. But, that's all it was. A story. Entertainment for the brain. The book of Matthew clearly states that the Holy Spirit overshadowed Mary, and that's how she came to be with child. What's so horrible about that? Isn't God powerful enough to do such a thing? After all, since He created the universe, I would think that a little thing like creating life within a human would be pretty simple. Why would this be a slap on the faces of Christians? I'm a Christian and I'm not offended by this. It's just one part of the most wonderful thing in the Bible. The fact that God became man, and walked among us. He put aside His majesty and became a lowly servant, walking in the dust alongside fishermen and poor people. Before thinking that everything in that movie was real, read the real story for yourself. I hear people say so many untrue things about the Bible, but they won't read it for themselves. I guess they'd rather believe the lies than to read the truth. After all, the ones who wrote the four gospels were there. They met Him, walked with Him, ate with Him, and saw Him die...yet met Him three days afterward & ate with Him on the beach. I once studied with a couple of Mormons, because I wanted to get it straight from them about their teachings. I didn't want to just believe what other people said about them. I made up my own mind by hearing what they had to say about their teachings & faith. It's the only true way you can make an informed decision about anything. It's like saying that you heard that broccoli tastes nasty, so you're not going to eat any. "O taste and see that the Lord is good: blessed is the man that trusts in Him." Psalm 34:8 <*)))><
2006-11-17 01:07:44
·
answer #2
·
answered by Sandylynn 6
·
0⤊
2⤋
answer: Jews do not say some thing about Jesus because he replaced into and is irrelevant in Judaism. No, Jesus isn't observed contained in the Talmud and surely not that pretend declare through many Muslims and anti-Jewish ranters. there's a Yeshua that predates the Christian account of Jesus. He replaced right into a blasphemer who replaced into stoned to lack of life, impaled on a stake and left to rot without followers. not some thing about "virginal" delivery or rape, he replaced into the son of a prostitute and not likely who the Jesus tale replaced into in accordance with. Jesus wasn't the Jewish Messiah nor a prophet for Judaism so Jews do not care if Mary replaced into married or not even as Jesus replaced into born.
2016-11-25 00:20:28
·
answer #3
·
answered by szewc 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
The story you cite is from the Talmud (the collection of ancient Rabbinic writings consisting of the Mishnah and the Gemara, constituting the basis of religious authority in Orthodox Judaism.)
A story about a man named Yeshu can be found in the Talmud. There is debate whether this Yeshu in the Talmud is the same Jesus who later became a Christian divinity.
According to the Talmud, Yeshu was the son of a Jewish woman named Miriam who was betrothed to a carpenter. "Betrothed" means she was legally married to him, but she was not yet living with him or having sexual relations with him. The story says that Miriam was either raped by or voluntarily slept with Pandeira, a Greek or Roman soldier. Miriam than gave birth to Yeshu, who was considered a "mamzer" (bastard), a product of an adulterous relationship. The Talmud describes Yeshu as a heretic who dabbled in sorcery and lead the people astray. Later, the Sanhedrin (the Jewish "Supreme Court") ordered Yeshu stoned to death and his dead body was hung from a tree until nightfall after his death, in accordance with the ancient Jewish punishment for heretics.
While some believe there is no connection between the Talmudic Yeshu and the Christian Jesus, others believe there is a connection. The main inconsistency between the Talmudic and Christian story is that during the time that Jesus was killed, the Romans ruled and the Sanhedrin did not have the power to impose the death penalty. Thus, some Jews believe that today's popular Christian ideas about Jesus are based on a melding of the Talmudic story of Yeshu and the historian Josephus' writing about Jesus, which included his execution by the Romans.
After Jesus' death, a group of simple fishermen and artisans, called "Nazarenes" after Jesus' hometown of Nazareth, became his followers. Jesus' brother James, headed the Nazarenes in Jerusalem for approximately thirty years, until 62 C.E. when he was also executed by the Romans. The Nazarenes observed Jewish laws, and they believed that Jesus would return soon to inaugurate God's kingdom on earth. Thus, Jesus was a founder of a religious movement, or more specifically of the sect of the Nazarenes within Judaism.
The Nazarene sect, however, did not last more than four centuries. The Romans killed many Nazarenes, for being observant Jews, during the Jewish revolt of 70 C.E. The faith of the remaining Nazarenes, who awaited Jesus to return and save them, was greatly tested by the Roman conquest.
With the weakening of the Jews and Nazarenes, early Christianity, led by Paul, flourished in the major cities of the Roman world - Rome, Antioch, Alexandria, Ephesus and Corinth. Christianity claimed Jesus as its founder and also as God incarnate. >
http://judaism.about.com/od/beliefs/a/jesus.htm
2006-11-17 01:12:24
·
answer #4
·
answered by Sweetchild Danielle 7
·
1⤊
1⤋
Why you believe to someone what they say.Noone can rape Marry even the whole Roma army get together cant touch Her.She was under God protection.And She never had a sexual life before Jesus born.She was engaged with a nice person named Youssef.But Youssef saw Marry is pregnant he wanted
to leave Her without any quarrel but he dreamed at night and informed that Marry is pregnant with Allah order without a husband and She will be the mother of coming prophet.
2006-11-17 01:55:56
·
answer #5
·
answered by nezih batgun 3
·
1⤊
1⤋
For thousands of years, and still if this earth lasts, thousands more people will try anything to discredit Jesus' claims. I have not seen anyone who cliams this put up historical documents that proves that this had been the way it went. Granted, it is possible that it could have happened that way, but it is not beyond a shadow of a doubt that it did. I believe what I believe about Jesus, no one or claims or anything can take that away.
2006-11-17 00:55:57
·
answer #6
·
answered by newcovenant0 5
·
2⤊
2⤋
Mary raped by a farm?
o_0;
I'm getting this twisted image going through my mind of various sheep, cows, horses, chickens, pigs and whatnot all queueing up to shag Mary.... and her parts getting horribly stretched by the experience...
That she was raped is a very likely explanation....
Then again its equally likely that she was just impotent and had to involve some trickery and another mother-to-be in order to make it seem like she had a son.... which what with the awkwardness of managing that without getting pregnant... probably led to the "immaculate conception" story...
People in those days were SO gullible. ^_^
2006-11-17 00:50:57
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
4⤊
3⤋
I would agree that there has to be some other explanation for Mary and the birth.
If indeed the holy spirit visited Mary and Jesus left the Holy Spirit as a comforter after his death and Resurrection why indeed does the Holy Spirit not visit virgins anymore
2006-11-17 00:50:16
·
answer #8
·
answered by Cherry Berry 5
·
1⤊
5⤋
the most sensible answer I heard(outside of what is said in the bible) is that mary was engaged to Joseph, they made out without actual intercourse, but nevertheless, his semen got into her
since Joseph though they didn't do actual sex(this was 20 centuries ago, science has not progressed enough), he though she cheated
as far as mary knew, she was still a virgin(technically true)
somehow mary and joseph got messages from God, telling them not to worry, they should get together
2006-11-17 00:58:40
·
answer #9
·
answered by Fabperson 3
·
1⤊
2⤋
Please learn to spell and refrain from using "txt spk" when you have a perfectly capable keyboard in front of you.
IfJoseph wasn't his true father then it's likely that Mary did engage in pre-marital sex to conceive Jesus, yes. However I think you should have perhaps worded your question differently, I think you're asking "Was the idea of Jesus being the son of a god just a cover up for Mary's unfaithfullness?"
2006-11-17 00:52:59
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
3⤋