2007-02-27 03:13:15 · 10 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
Jeancommu...the VB is mentioned only in Matthew & Luke & NOWHERE else in the Bible. Isaia 7:14 is a mistranslation. young woman, not virgin.
2007-02-27 03:28:07 · update #1
I kind of agree with the idea proposed by some Biblical scholars that this shows the story of Jesus was an evolving mythology. Paul was the earliest epistle writer and he wrote almost nothing about Jesus's life other than he was crucified and resurrected. The details seem to have been added in later as Christianity grew and people would want more details. The aspects of Jesus's life also seem to have been borrowed from pre-existing pagan mythologies. Virgin births, miracles, and transcending death were popular themes in the pagan mythologies of the day and getting people to adopt a new theology would mean having to popularize it. Its pretty hard to know anything for sure at this point now and pretty much impossible to prove as well. So people tend to pick and choose what they want to believe. To me this is the most credible scenerio though.
2007-02-27 03:20:43 · answer #1 · answered by Zen Pirate 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Have you read Matthew, Mark, Luke and John (the gospels)? They are like reading the story of Christ four (4) times and Paul was sent to the Gentiles and Jesus knew that the virgin birth would be covered thoroughly by Matthew, Mark, Luke and John and the Old Testament.
God is highly intelligent and He didn't want to be boring so He gave Paul another message.
Inspired Scripture -
2007-02-27 11:20:32 · answer #2 · answered by Jeancommunicates 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
He didn't mention it bc that wasn't the purpose of his letters. He was trying to further expound on Christ's teachings and deal with the corruption of some of those teachings by some people in the church. The virgin birth was accepted as being true already and didn't need any explanation. If Mary wasn't a virgin, why didn't Joseph divorce her as he planned to do? The only reason he stayed with her was bc the angel appeared to him.
2007-02-27 11:19:20 · answer #3 · answered by STEPHEN J 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It had been done in the gospels.
He was in the advanced portion of the New Testament.
Why should he go over what had already been covered?
He was the greatest Apostle.
He also will be one of the judges.
His head was cut off in 67 AD.
2007-02-27 11:19:55 · answer #4 · answered by chris p 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Paul knew Jesus. Mary was not his concern. Teaching Christ was his proclamation.
1CO 11:23 For I received from the Lord what I also passed on to you: The Lord Jesus, on the night he was betrayed, took bread, 24 and when he had given thanks, he broke it and said, "This is my body, which is for you; do this in remembrance of me." 25 In the same way, after supper he took the cup, saying, "This cup is the new covenant in my blood; do this, whenever you drink it, in remembrance of me." 26 For whenever you eat this bread and drink this cup, you proclaim the Lord's death until he comes.
2007-02-27 11:18:38 · answer #5 · answered by Tribble Macher 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
He probably wasn't interested since it had already been mentioned the Crucifixion was the important thing after all.
2007-02-27 11:18:23 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Paul's purpose in the early church (and that of his letters) was to grow the church. He doesn't go into the history of Jesus, he instructs churches and fellow Christians in how to grow the church and behave towards one another.
2007-02-27 11:18:19 · answer #7 · answered by LX V 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Paul didn't know about it because the Gospels were not around while he was teaching. He was teaching hearsay.
2007-02-27 11:16:26 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
If he didn't mention it, as you claim, how do you know what he did or did not believe?
2007-02-27 11:19:08 · answer #9 · answered by V 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
How do you know he didn't?
2007-02-27 11:17:38 · answer #10 · answered by JayDee 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋