Virgin Mary... Miracle or Misunderstanding? (feat. Digital Hammurabi)
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 17 ธ.ค. 2018
- Mary's virgin birth is now as synonymous with Christianity as the cross, but was it always this way? The earliest-written books of the Bible don't know about this miracle... but more importantly, is the prophecy that the immaculate conception is said to fulfill actually a prophecy? Or merely something else the religion has lost in translation?
Subscribe to Digital Hammurabi
/ @digitalhammurabi
Follow me at
/ paulogia
www.paypal.me/paulogia
/ paulogia0
/ paulogia0
teespring.com/stores/paulogia
/ discord - วิทยาศาสตร์และเทคโนโลยี
![เก่งแต่ลับหลัง (FINSTA) - ส้ม มารี (Zom Marie) Ft. Punch 4EVE [Official MV]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/OOolBU2aC70/mqdefault.jpg)
ERRATA -
- the immaculate conception doesn't refer to Jesus
- apologies on sound inconsistencies
did you reall say that it is possible that marx was a virgin when she gave birth? biologically that is not possible if you take the biological definition , i.e. giving birth without any sperm fertilizing the egg. humans cannot do that. all claims of human virgin births have been debunked.
@Paulogia
About Almah and Bethulah, the case for the virgin Mary is even worse:
Not only Isaiah could have used Bethulah for clarity, but he indeed used bethulah 5 times:
Isaiah 23:4
Isaiah 23:12
Isaiah 37:22
Isaiah 47:1
Isaiah 62:5
Do you know how many times he used Almah? Exactly 1.
So:
1) Isaiah was pretty aware of the existence of the word Bethulah (which literally translates directly to virgin).
2) Isaiah was willing to use bethulah in his texts, specifically in places where the virginity was to be highlighted.
3) The very ONE TIME he used almah (which literally translates directly to young woman), was in the context of Mary.
So, it is a very hard case defending that the original intent was to describe Mary as a virgin. With basis in rest of his texts, we know that he would have used bethulah. He gave plenty of motives for us to come to such conclusion.
@@hermione3muller674
It's possible given some possible mutations, however no cases of virgin births in nature produces a male. When it happens in nature the female gives birth to her clone. The egg contains the complete maternal DNA.
@@hermione3muller674 Marx advocated workers control of the means of production - so I'd ask their servants. ;)
@@hermione3muller674 It is "possible" if (and it is a very big "if") there is a supernatural being who is interested in impregnating 13 or 14 year old girls.
I've heard of that theory of a bad translation for the first time when I was in at the age of seven or eight in a documentary and it made totally sense to me. When I brought the idea up for discussion in the next religion lesson in school, the teacher threw me out of the class room and later called my parents. A grown up woman who studied religion wasn't able to argue an eight year old who had seen a documentary about the origin of christianity. Pathetic.
SMH
Read the gospel of the holy twelve
I think the story of the Little Red Hen makes it quite clear that chickens do indeed make excellent bread.
I call that extra-biblical confirmation!
@Richard Ball sounds good, Especally if they use zinger breads. However I hate messy food. So I'd still want the bread.
So ill stick th the zinger tower. With KFC buns wasn't the cheap American style ones though.
Thr flaming hot wrap is a good cheap and probably relativly healthy snack, for £1.49
Bread? In my copy of little red hen she's making corn muffins. I guess your translation of the original story is wrong. 😅
I love that chick analogy!
@@Paulogia we all know that the Little Red Hen is the One Tru God™. NATURALLY breadmaking would come easy as pie.
That was so kind of you!!! Thank you for the shout out! This video is so well done!!!
Megan must be so jealous she didn't get a cartoon character lol
I think you broke my ears bro :(
@Digital Hammurabi
Wouldn't the practice of Euhemerization factor into this as well? Matthew may have been attempting to employ this technique without sufficient linguistic knowledge. The writing styles of the time seem to encourage writers to "up the ante" on previous versions.
great to see you on this channel. i took classical Greek at school and my teacher said that parthenos originally meant woman and only later acquired various more specific meanings, so the meaning virgin was one of those later more specific meanings and finally ended up taking over the place of the most common meaning of the word. so we are also looking at a shift in usage and meaning over several centuries. Could it be that at the time and place of the LXX creation the translator understood parthenos is a more general way as young woman whereas in the days and place of the creation of the new testament gospels the gospel authors or editors understood parthenos mainly as virgon? i mean could it be possible that the actual usage and understanding of the word changed between these times and places, at least between the two persons involved, ie the respective authors of the LXX and the NT passages?
Yay! The hard working Dr Josh of DH on yet another of my favourite channels!
I almost got fired from a Catholic High School for even hinting about this regarding Mary years ago.
This was one of the things that always bugged me, even during my heart-on-fire-for-Jesus years. One pastor I had just straight up lied to me, rather than deal with the linguistic anomalies.
I'll go with the third option... MYTH!
A myth doesn't preclude a core narrative, in fact most mythology invokes a historical tone or makes reference to figures presumed to be historical so as to ground their story to the audience.
"The Amityville Horror" claims to be based on a true story, and it is true that in Amityville, NY, there is a house where an owner was arrested/convicted in the mid-70's for killing his own wife and kids. The next owners claimed that they experienced a lot of supernatural shit going on, and their interview/story was adapted into a movie.
Similarly, a good splattering of horror will attribute "based on a true story" as determined by the genre. Slasher films (especially in the 80's/90's) have/had a 50-50 shot of this seal-of-authenticity because of some loose tie to real-life murderer Ed Gein. Meanwhile, Demonic Possession flicks to this day stand a fair chance of adapting whichever account published by Ed and Lorraine Warren...whether the Amityville account, the Annabelle account, whatever one the Conjuring films are based on.
These far-fetched retellings and embellishments of supposedly real-life events highlight modern-day mythification. And whether or not any of these things actually happened, or how accurate the retelling is to what part of the story did actually happen, is insignificant compared to the impact of the story/stories ultimately told.
(This is largely why scholars in the field of Religious Studies tend to refer to it as the Jesus Myth, even when the scholar is a Christian. Because the literal word to describe the story/stories being told is "myth".)
@Tee Zee the tradition was for girls to marry young... but that doesn't in any way prove the existence of any of these biblical characters.
@@onijester56 Very good explanation! There most likely was a Jewish lay preacher and messiah pretender in the 1st Century in Palestine, and he probably fell afoul of the Romans and was Crucified, as happened to many people who crossed the Romans. The rest is probably embellishments.
There probably was also a King of post-Roman Britain named something like "Arthur" who rallied the Celts to fight the invading Saxons. But the rest is also embellishments.
The more you learn about the bible, the harder it becomes to believe it's the word of a god.
In fact it's....wait for it....... VIRGIN' on the impossible.
oh man I am so sorry.
excellent video as always.
ouch! (thanks)
@@RandomBeing101
not sure what you mean Victor.
It's metaphorlogical. It's a long time since anyone with an ounce of brain has taken it literally. As a metaphor for the human condition it's pretty spot on. What's so wonderful is the Christ story. I can identify with that.
@@patricks1560 I think you misunderstood my point. As a piece of literature, the bible is- well , I won't say fine, because some of it is highly dubious in its moral stance, but at least it does reflect humanity. The religious claim is that it is the inspired word of God- and that's the thing that is impossible to reconcile with the content. Any God who claims divine authorship of the bible is not one who can logically exist, and is a psychopath to boot.
No, I will _not_ wait for it! Especially since I can read over it and finish the sentence immediately!
This was really interesting. More of this please!
Shannon is slightly biased
Shannon is slightly biased
Weird, Shannon... one might think that YOU of all people would get the Logical Paul all the time to the extent of your heart's desire paulogiasing... ;-)
Shannon, is gone I heard
She's drifting out to sea
Just like the one in our back yard
And what is with the letter "Q" ? Why not just use "kw"? And for that matter, lets get rid of the letter "C" since it is only used as a K or S anyway!
Jesus riding in on 2 donkeys is my favorite part of the bible. I want a tattoo of the illustration.
He was planning on running away to join the circus.
He could have made a career in Buffalo Bill’s Wild West Show.
As a skeptical child, I was more than a bit suspicious of the virgin giving birth story. Perhaps, I thought, this might have been an exaggeration of the facts. Even without a complete knowledge of biology, I was fairly certain that at least one sperm was necessary for a human egg to become a child. Many years later, as I studied the events depicted in the bible, I came to a modest conclusion that it was far more likely that an error had occurred in the translation, than the boy named Jesus was a clone of his mother. No Y, no boy.
parthenogenesis is not known in mammals but if possible would likely result in another female; making a male even more miraculous.
I mean we could make a baby from two eggs NOW, but a freak accident like that would make the Christ child a woman.
"Oh, give me a clone of my own flesh and bone with the Y chromosome changed to X. And when it is grown, then my own little clone will be of the opposite sex. Clone, clone of my own with the Y chromosome changed the X. And when I'm alone with my own little clone, we sill talk about nothing but sex!" I think this was written by Isaac Asimov, but I won't swear to it!
@@txvoltaire books.google.de/books?id=mATFyeVI7IUC&pg=PA244&lpg=PA244&dq=oh+give+me+a+clone+of+my+own+flesh+and+bone&source=bl&ots=ZZAaZiPYqJ&sig=ACfU3U02k3NS_cK-VFM3jyN5j89QBbPe_w&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjKv76hvavpAhXM-qQKHXzYDNEQ6AEwBXoECAcQAQ#v=onepage&q=oh%20give%20me%20a%20clone%20of%20my%20own%20flesh%20and%20bone&f=false
Apparently Asimov added four verses to an original that was handed to him by someone else. Here is an actual video of him singing it:-
th-cam.com/video/hAtz2rO-E_0/w-d-xo.html
Enjoy
You were so skeptical you ignored the supra-rational nature of faith and reason. Alexander Pruss has proven conclusively with formal logic that Allah exists and this book: www.amazon.com/Divine-Reality-Islam-Mirage-Atheism/dp/0996545387 and this book: www.amazon.com/Sacred-Path-Islam-Building-Relationship/dp/1733213910/ref=zg_bs_15755551_12?_encoding=UTF8&psc=1&refRID=K4Q5A7445T7R5QJ4KHE3 defend Allah's holy word revealed through his Prophet (peace be upon him). Repent and spare yourself from hellfire.
The virgin birth could also have been inspired by the Greek story of Perseus. After Perseus' grandfather heard a prophecy saying that his grandson will one day killed him, he locked up his daughter in a tower to make sure she would never have sex with anyone and thus never bear children (a much better evidence that she was a virgin than Mary had). Despite having remained a virgin, she became pregnant and gave birth to a son anyway, leading to her father locking both of them in a barrel and throwing them into the ocean.
This is actually something I thought was quite commonly known.
In german, the term for virgin (Jungfrau) and for young woman (junge Frau) are literally just one letter apart, so most people over here - even believing christians - find it quite easy to believe that the immaculate conception was just a translation error.
That's how much difference language can make in understanding a concept.
It was Mary who was conceived immaculately.
Christianity: one teenagers white lie that got way out of hand
@mrbearbear83 No honey, I never slept with those three guys, I am still a virgin, and "miraculously" got pregnant. Funny how those three guys showed up at the birth with gifts....
AntiFaith wasn’t that the plot of Mamma Mia?
"Just who were Jesus's parents?" from chapter two of "The Bible Fraud". From very extensive research that Tony Bushby did concluded that she (Mariamne Herod was Jesus's mother and was most likely raped in the royal palace in Rome. Her mother was royal Jewish - Hasmonian (from the 'Royal Tribe of Dan') and her father was Royal from Nabatean royal lineage. The biological father was in the royal house on vacation - a soldier in the Emperor's army working near the Rhine. He would go on to be adopted into the Juliian Royal family. His father was none other than ... (I won't give it all away that fast now!!!)
salem witch trials, anyone?
@@chaishalom8701 I don't know who Tony Bushby is but he sounds like just one more of the ten's of thousands of authors who have put forth Jesus theories that they claim are based on careful research and analysis. Maybe one of them is right. More likely in my view is that there is no reliable data available to know anything about the life of Jesus including whether he existed or not. You won't find many books if any where that is the underlying premise because there isn't a market for books that are based on the idea that nothing is knowable about Jesus. So people spend their lives poring through ambiguous, unreliable evidence and come up with a theory and write a book or publish a paper. IMO, the process is similar to the way Percival Lowell found canals on Mars.
Yay! The hard working Dr Josh of DH on another of my favourite channels!
So well researched, and a fabulous collab with Digital Hammurabi! I enjoyed this very much.
I believe this is in fact, a miraculous misunderstanding.
Early christians, particularly the author Matthew, did a lot of retro-fitting to make the story of Christ seem to fulfill Old Testament prophecies.
Didn't Aron-Ra do a video on a bunch of biblical prophesies that were never fulfilled?
@@RandomBeing101 Got specific examples?
I thought matthew copied mark. In either case it wasnt written by "matthew." and whether or not it was Matthew (or mark) it was written well after jesus death. So its al hearsay.
Victor Ruiz yes the gospels were written after Jesus’ death but by eyewitnesses. Ie Mathew. There is nothing to say it wasn’t Mathew. But plenty to say it was Matthew who wrote his gospel.
In my opinion, retro-fitting to the Old Testament is quintessential to Christianity. Christianity couldn't exist without both mistranslating the OT and creating stories to fit what they mistranslated and misunderstood.
@@farmercraig6080 We have reason to believe the original Christians didn't write anything, but the later converts decided writing was useful for conversion. Matthew would have believed Jesus' arrival was so imminent that he wouldn't need to write anything, so the closest thing you can get to him being the one that wrote it is someone else wrote down a collection of stories he preached at different times and edited them together.
I’m going to use this knowledge when they knock on my door. Dr. Josh is awesome at teaching and understanding. Both Paul and josh needs a show together. Sunday call in show.
I think you also need to understand the myths and legends of the time and how virgin births and sons of gods play into the stories.
*cough*Zeus*cough*
If I recall correctly, there were 8 previous sons of gods who died and were resurrected before Jesus came along...
Dionysus
Wow! The things you learn!
Happy holidays everyone.
As a native Hebrew speaker I'm delighted to see some of the translation problems of modern day English bibles addressed. I strongly contend that all those who "take the bible literally" are fundamentally wrong because of this. I'm secular and therefore have no emotional/religious affiliation with our bible but I do resent the consequences of such "literal" reading of the bible like flat earth, creationism, etc.
You are forgetting that the King James Version is the One True Bible. All others take second place, at best.
Lol literal or not bro the Bible doesn’t support out of space !!!! Or a spinning globe in any way shape or form… the globe is a lie
One of your best vids so far, Paul!
Thanks, Brynn
Excellent video. You have pointed out what, for me, is the most fundamental flaw in all of Christianity, the mistranslating of old prophesies and the creation of myth to fit the mistranslations. This is what Christianity is
All hail the baby chicken that bakes bread. We worship you Oh Blessed Chicken, may your feathers ever be blonde.
I would also add that it is virgin bread which is similar to virgin olive oil which no one has ever had sex with.
That's FOWL!
@@Swinefeld How dare you take the name of my Lord in vain!
BLASPHEMER! May his noodliness have mercy upon your SOULLLLL!!!!!
great show Paul. always having doctor Josh just makes everything better although Megan puts it over the top
This opening always makes me feel so content
When isiah says "before the child is old enough to know right from wrong". This is in oposition to the thinking that we are born with knowledge of right and wrong imprinted on our hearts.
... and more importantly, it's in opposition to the Christian claim that their Jesus is a perfect, all-knowing god.
The real problem with citation of the so-called virgin passage in Isaiah is that it was actually about a child born during Isaiah's time and by reading the context in Hebrew preferably one could have easily seen that this was not a long term "prophecy" but a short term commentary on events of Isaiah's time
The original young woman was most definitely not a virgin when the child was born in Isaiah's time
As was typical of New Testament writers the writer of Matthew needed a plot for a birth narrative because there were no oral traditions to draw on
The writer of Matthew's only clue was Paul's short statement in Galatians about being "born" of a woman
Of course it's convenient that Isaiah citation is only a few chapters in to the book and of course the writer of Matthew decided that he had found out the "real story" by checking out what an old prophet had to say
Carelessly he "ripped it out" and copied the short statement to build his story around
When he had collected enough citations (I'm sure the readers are familiar with quote mining) he felt a strong wave of emotion because he suddenly "knew" the right story and could write it
Maybe a bit of bibliomancy was at play but he eventually teased out the story from the prophets
Of course if Isaiah "foretold" the story it must be true
And so the writer of Matthew invented the whole story from snippets that he had gleaned
He was obviously clever at gematria and found a way to arrange the genealogy in 3 sets of 14 to say David 3 times and thereby magically transform Jesus into the son of David
So the moral of the story is randomly find some verses from the old testament and you too can write a "divinely inspired" story
Reminds me nearly word for word of the opening scene of the movie Snatch for Dr Josh explanation.
I like all of your videos, but I like the ones like this better than the Spam & Yegg ones because everything about Ham and AIG gives me intellectual heartburn and righteous rage. Have a merry Christmas and Happy New Year, and keep up the good work.
understood
False dichotomy: Miracle or Misunderstanding. There is of course another explanation... It's a lot of old bollocks! LOL. Good video.
It can be a load of bollocks and still be a misunderstanding. The author of Matthew misunderstood the meaning of words and literary devices of the time to embellish a story (myth, legend) already being shared at the time.
@TheRelihunter Homer? Oh please, don't attack an ambiguous collection of writings with even more ludicrous statements. In matters pertaining to the true foundations of christianity, a certain brand of fanatical atheism - btw an actual religion embraced by millions, especislly thanks to social media-fueled thirst for popularity - doesn't apparently care for truth or accuracy, as long as it trashes Christians and their beliefs.
@@trashedpanda586 -- this is what happens when uneducated people are allowed to create narratives to explain reality...we are living in a similar situation right now!
Yep...this confirms what I started to speculate when I was sixteen years old. Which is right around the time I started questioning the Seventh-Day Adventist church and Christianity in general.
"Miracle or Misunderstanding?"
neither, just pure fiction.
Hey Paul, just a reminder that immaculate conception refers to the doctrine stating that Mary was conceived, herself, without the original sin. She was "un-stained", hence the word "immaculate". It does not refer to the virgin birth!
(I feel like my Catholic background is showing hahaha.)
My Protestant brain has gaps.
Actually, "immaculate conception" doesn't refer to Mary's birth, either. It refers to the event which takes place approximately 9 months before a birth. So it definitely cannot refer to the virgin birth.
@@bdf2718 I didn't say her birth, I literally said "her conception" ;)
@@marie-helenemoreau5968
"She was "un-stained", hence the word "immaculate". It does not refer to the virgin birth!"
There was ambiguity there.
Really, thank you Paulogia for the video. It is very clever and has gotten a lot of people talking about the [supposed] Virgin birth of "Jesus Christ ".
I always figured she just lied. Mary got knocked up, was unwed, and living in a time where premarital sex could result in people being stoned to death. It's very hard to conceal a pregnancy to term and then how do you hide a tiny human when he's born? It's not like Mary could leave a note saying she was going to spend some time backpacking in Europe and was heading to the airport. People back then, ESPECIALLY women, MORE ESPECIALLY young, unwed women, did not just leave home for a few months, have secret babies and arrange an adoption with an agency and then go back home after a 4-6 month "vacation". What if Mary was just in love? Or (ugh, I really hope not) she was sexually taken advantage of against her will. Back then, if a man raped a young girl the way he was expected to atone for the offense was to MARRY THE VICTIM. Maybe Mary (so, so, sadly) got raped by some nasty old dude and disclosing his identity as the baby's father meant she'd end up as this monster's WIFE. Maybe Mary was smarter than some of the men in her time. Females were not regarded as Intelligent and so men would've bought a well-staged story not considering a woman capable of fooling them with a big ass cover-up. I don't know...
Perhaps in the day virgin and young girl were effectively synonymous.
Yeah, I have pulled that translation issue out for people on occasion too, they never seem to care.
I for one find a blonde chicken who can make bread more believable than the whole Jesus story.
At least we've seen chickens.
@@Paulogia I'm sure we can train them to make bread too.
ooooo!! I want to believe in the Blonde Chicken ... any additional super powers? .. and what's in it for me if I believe?
Someone train a chicken to make bread....
Ratatouille is proof animals can cook.
I lean towards misunderstanding with perhaps a smattering of dissembling. Cheers :)
7:30 Very interesting point about Matthew inventing story elements to match up with the OT- even to the point of saying Jesus rode into Jerusalem on two animals.
The new music opening makes paul sound like a news cast
It's a hymn... interesting.
I read some fascinating anthropology studies about the long term trends on "virgin births" which have varied between 1% and 2% throughout history!
Well made video! Great content! For the record, it is Johns Hopkins!
You're giving far too much credit. I don't think anyone (that is, anyone who published peer reviewed articles) thinks the infancy narrative in Mt or Lk has anything to do with historical events. They were both composed by the authors scouring the LXX to find whatever texts they could mash together into a text.
Matthew is believed penned about 10 years after Mark about in about 80-85 c.e. and the Gospel of Matthew translate very well. Which lends us to believe it was conceive and written solely in Konic Greek. We believe that Matthew used the Septuagint. Your right on!
Matthew was talking about the coats the disciples put on the colt “and he sat on them”. The amplified bible has coats.
7:00 I just thought this was Jesus riding on a donkey that was riding on a colt that was riding on the foal of a donkey.
I think the idea of Jesus riding on a pile of equines is better. It's way more bad ass than just riding on a donkey (which isn't really bad ass at all)
You wanna know what's badass?
A donkey with broken legs.
The city of Bremen approves of this message, Eric :D
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Town_Musicians_of_Bremen
+Eric Taylor - It's actually turtles, all the way down.
My mule don't like people laughing. He gets the crazy idea you're laughing at him.
A mule isn't a donkey, Clint.
What's the best place to start for a scholarly look at the Bible as opposed to the religious one I grew up with?
One of the guys who kicked off critical analysis of the Bible also fomented the American Revolution, gave critical support to Washington's army when their morale had been broken, helped kick off the French revolution, was on the point of starting a British revolution when he had to go back to France after their revolution went off the tracks, and penned the first volume of the book that got him excised from US history while in a French prison awaiting execution for saying the revolutionaries shouldn't apply the death penalty to their ex-king. It's available for free here: www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/3743 Ignore the introduction which has confusing historical detail you don't need, amongst which are the two facts you do need: Paine uses "Bible" to mean the Old Testament and "Testament" to mean the New Testament.
After that, these two works by John E Remsburg: www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/46737 and www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/46986
Those should keep you occupied for a while. :)
Something that I always explained as a confirmation of my faith when I believed were the "typologies" or parallels you mention in the NT. Now it's so obvious: if you have a group of people who claim a fulfillment of an older text, OF COURSE they're going to make parallels to the original source material to make their claims seem more like an authentic prophetic event. It's kind of like how George Lucas wanted to parallel the Star Wars prequels with the originals to feel like more of a unified story (in that example, not just in the story, but even in cinematography choices etc.) Not a perfect example by any means, but it's a similar idea
you can compress things up to over neg 6 dec and then limit it all and your voices will be the same volume , they should all be in your audio effects
"Much ink has been spilled on this issue ... "
Am I the only one who finds this funny?
I love how nearly every one of your videos has a religious ad of some sort loo
Soren Jensen, PragerU has paid for me to watch a lot of episodes of the Atheist Experience.
And here I was thinking I was the first ... Anyway good video ! Do you have a video alk about when was written each part of the bible?
Paul: I love your site, but the Immaculate Conception refers not to the virgin birth, but to the equally absurd idea that “Mary was conceived without sin.”
I think this could be a good video series, looking at word usages in the bible and what that means for the text as a whole. I once had a very long conversation with someone for example on wither or not "young children" in the Elisha story with the two bears actually meant children. He argued (as it seems people like AiG do as well) that if you track the words back it was actually more like "young hoodlums" and does not denote that they were kids. However when i did my own looking into the Hebrew (from a non-scholar stance of course lol) it seems that assertion did not hold water. Iv also had similar conversations around Jephthah and wither or not the bible meant she was sacrificed or merely lived her life in servitude.
I would love for you to have Digital Hammurabi back on and maybe go over a few more parts of the bible that are up for debate like this. A lot of times i hear apologist go to the "well if you read it in the original Hebrew (or Greek for the NT) then you would understand". Which is a blatant cop out and ironically the same thing Muslims say about the Quran and it's original language.
You missed one of my favourite points about this fake prophecy; nobody in the history of ever referred to Jesus as Emmanuel. So basically the only part they got right was that a young woman got knocked up in ancient Israel. Gee, way to go out on a limb...
Red Hunteur well Emmanuel means “God with us”.. and Jesus was the son of God.. and this is mentioned heaps in the New Testament.. Jesus the son of God dwelled with men on earth.
💚 *quality content* 💚
Good work as always. However, I think you need to research a bit more into whem the Gospel of Mathew was written because it was much later than the date you provided. Other than that, GREAT JOB!!!
I think you have an exaggerated idea of how reliable any Gospel dating is. I realize that dates are put forth often with an implication that the dating is based on reliable information and analysis. IMO, the dating is based on analysis that is sketchy and the dates may be substantially off. The fact is that we don't know who wrote the Gospels, where they were written, when they were written or even what group the people who wrote the Gospels belonged to.
But what about the mediclorians? And the one who will bring balance to the Force? ;)
And thanks for the new channel to check out, looks like they cover some cool anthro/arc stuff
I'm trying to have a calm holiday season so I will refrain from showing this video to my family.
chicken! :)
I appreciate your material and the respectful way that you critique various aspects of religion. I am familiar with this line of reasoning however, both gospels of Luke and Matthew do have Mary claiming she is a virgin. Let's grant that the translation error occurred, it doesn't really negate the claim of virgin birth only that it doesn't fulfill a prophecy. If it occurred, parthenogenesis is arguably more remarkable than fulfilling Isaiah's prophecy. Yes, it happens in some animals.
And the result is invariably female offspring.
In addition the word ‘run’ can mean entering into an election as one of the candidates.
An alternative view of this 'virgin' thing is that the birth narratives are additions to the gospel as in the 2nd century. Given there were rumours that Mary may have 'known' a Roman soldier, these passages were added to make it quite clear that Jesus was legitimate.
Matthew's narrative seems to be completely written from OT writings - even though some of his quotations of the OT are not actually found in the OT.
No "OT writings" have anything to do with the "New Testament ".
The birth narratives predate the 2nd century. In both Matthew and Luke (both written in the 1st century) the birth narratives were clearly added into the Markian core, but by the same authors. We know this through textual criticism. Because the authors of both Matthew and Luke added the narratives themselves and they lived in the 1st century, this indicates that the birth narrative was already in existence at the time.
The rumors of Mary having an affair (or raped) by a Roman soldier (named Panthera, btw) came about in the 3rd century BECAUSE the birth narratives existed. They were a direct byproduct of Christians accidentally creating the possibility by insisting that Jesus had a virgin birth. The idea might sound awesome to Christians at the time, but that's only because their personal biases made them unable to see the direction their opponents would obviously take this argument into.
The story of Jesus ben Panthera has had a brutally painful impact on the Jewish community that most people don't know. While Romans who disputed against Christianity came up with the story, the character of Jesus ben Panthera (or That Man) finds his most enduring legacy in the Babylonian Talmud, where an entire mythology of him can be found. Personally my favorite is the one where he had a fight with his rebbe and as he tried to reconcile he interrupted the rebbe mid-prayer, so the rebbe raised his left palm to tell him to wait and Jesus, pissed off by the rejection, decided to sod off and found Christianity instead.
Well, this was fine and dandy when there were 4 million Jews and less than 500k Christians. Things were decidedly NOT fine and dandy when 6 million Jews were living together with 100 million Christians a few centuries later. The Jewish convert to Catholicism Nicholas Donin betrayed the Babylonian Talmud to Papal authorities and pretty soon the Roman Catholic Church found good old Jesus ben Panthera there in the pages. Let's just say that if Jews were unhappy in Christian lands before, they were about to become even less happy. We have to appreciate the supreme irony here of Romans doing very very bad things to Jews for putting in their Talmud a character those same Romans' pagan ancestors had invented. Ah, the vagaries of history.
@@chaishalom8701 Have you even read a bible? Those little thingies all over the pages between the text, you know the a's b's and so on that at the foot of that paragraph or page are connected to a citation of an Old Testament verse... that is what the greco-jewish authors of the gospels did cite to make their writing seem more legitimate and seeped in "prophecy".
If you do not know that you do know NOTHING about the bible and are not qualified to debate such a thing.
@@Ugly_German_Truths Wow!! Such a viscous pronouncement due to disagreement!!! Yes, I have read the "Old Testament" (and the "New Testament ") more times than you ever dreamed possible.
Did you follow all the notes, read the commentaries, taken the cross referencing, studied the encyclopedia references, looked up entries in Strong's and other Bible dictionaries for decades - as well as attending sermons, prayer meetings, havurahs and many more events for decades on end??? (Do you know me?) No, you do not!! So, why do you speak to me so harshly????
@@Ugly_German_Truths How can I not know nothing about the Bible when one has studied it as much as I have? Do you know me? No, you do not - so you do not know that I know that the Tanaach has actually nothing to do with the "New Testament ". The Greek Septuigent translators, (probably as early as 3rd century BCE 285-246 BCE) translated the Tanaach (Genesis through Deuteronomy and Joshua through 2nd Chronicles) into Greek from Hebrew. They in fact mistranslated it and other translators continued to change the "original Greek translation". It was purposely changed to adhere to Greek philosophies (and perhaps Greek and Egyptian politics) from the Hebrew Bible. [I read the Hebrew Bible which was not corrupted by the translators.]
I remember the almost antique nativity scene mom always put up around christmas. Baby jesus had dissappeared so she had one of my dollhouse babies instead. XD
My only question for now is what was to gain by spreading Christianity? And WHO was to gain? Thanks and keep up the great videos!
always figured it was a misunderstanding, although as others have said, "if god could make Adam out of dust, couldn't he have done the same thing for Jesus?" (yes yes, I know, he's supposed to have been born as a human in order to be a sacrifice, I'm more pointing out the miracle part )
Parthenos might have referenced Athena's aspect of Parthenos, an archetype of "righteous virgin/virgin of justice", given this context, maybe?
They borrowed from plenty of other, older traditions, so why not.
There was a religious leader in the Essene movement ("the way") born around 160 - 104 BCE. He was called "the 'Son' of Righteousness". It is possible that the 'Toldot Jesu' originally referred to that man and that seems like an ambiguous, complicated topic in Judaism.
Virgin births have their origin in many pagan myths . See Pagan origins of the Christ Myth entheology.org.
Douglas Davis " With man this is impossible but with God all things are possible. " Matthew 19:26
I am a reader in my parish (in German-speaking Switzerland) and had to read that passage by Jesaja. When coming to the mentioned verse I slipped up: instead of saying the German word for virgin (Jungfrau) I read young woman (junge Frau). Oh yes, and a junior bishop was in attendance. Luckily nobody put me at the stake LOL
It seems to me like the word 'maiden' would be a better translation. It carries the double meaning too: usually it would just mean a young woman, but in some contexts (maidenhood) it would mean virgin.
Two of the most satisfying and hopeful words for the human race to run across in a sentence: former Christian.
This is one explanation of what was meant by Mary being a virgin. Another explanation (which is not mutually exclusive with the mistranslation hypothesis) is that in stories the mother of an important character was a virgin when she conceived said character in the normal way. It was simply a case of, "Xavier must be the Emporer's son, because the Empress was a virgin when she met the Emporer." So the remark about Mary being a virgin may simply be meant to show that Jesus had to be God's son, because Mary was a virgin when Yahweh knocked her up.
Paul: * brings in a hebrew expert *
Me, a fluent hebrew speaker: look at what he needs to do to mimic a fraction of my power
I read and understand biblical Hebrew pretty well being raised learning it. When I first read the New Testament as an adult, the translation didn't make sense to me, nor did the prophecy.
I kinda think every Catholic needs to see this video, possibly starting with the Pope
4:01 the word "run" can mean anything from a slow jog, to explosive diarrhea
That the immaculate conception and whole birth story doesn't appear until 70AD is very interesting. This was after the fall of the temple and the Diaspora, which is to say that the exile was complete. Judaism itself was changing, and more than just under threat - it was about to be extinguished. So calling up Isaiah makes a lot more sense. This is very interesting.
Remember that Paul, whose writings are older, had no notion of any of these claims.
Shannon must not be up yet.
His father was a Roman. That explains the big nose.
@@OctyabrAprelya No, it's Naughtius Maximus. Promised her the known world...
First Cynic he has a wife you know.You know what she’s called?
@@johnbiggscr wrong part of the film.
th-cam.com/video/pS9UWeoq7WA/w-d-xo.html
Yes, but where did you see a big nose? Was it on the biggest forgery of all time 'the Shroud of Turin'? That "conformation of the resurrection" was craftily created in the Middle Ages.
@@OctyabrAprelya perhaps Dickus
I love the intro music so much, man! What is it called?
Personally, I've always wondered if perhaps the whole of the bible was something like this. That if the bible was based around any kind of true story, it was mistranslations and exaggerations. I've always wondered if perhaps the story of Jesus was simply based around a medical practitioner who was ahead of his time.
Like that thing where one person tells a story of something that happened, but adds a bit onto it to make it sound better. And that through the years and generations, so many people added so much onto it that it became what it is today. Not to mention so much of it is probably metaphors that nobody understands anymore because of enormous time-period differences.
Sort of like Onanoko and Shoujo in Japanese. Shoujo very much is Virgin, but in the sense that Maiden from english is. The status of "virgin" is assumed. While onanoko is a young (usually a child) girl.
In Ralph Kramden's voice, "Oh Mary, it betta be immaculate...it betta be!"
Of course, *Jerry* Christ wasn't so immaculate.
0:27-0:29 "Matthew" was more likely written in the 80's or 90's.
The one thing that I'm still wondering... I could look it up, but I could also misunderstand, so does anyone know. Did the greek language at the time, have a word that meant young woman, or was that one word, basically all they had?
A miracle has never been proven to happen. The laws of physics have never been broken.
Unfortunately this truth has been perverted by Christians. "Since the laws of physics have obviously been broken so many times in the bible, then they are not laws and anyone who espouses these laws should not be believed."
Have a happy FESTIVUS.
@A B Quantum behavior is not an expression of physical laws bending or breaking.
@A B thermo = miracle? nope
@A B It's just a word for a magic spell that god casts. The point is that there has never been any evidence for these spells occurring, so there's no point in considering them real.
@A B There's no evidence that there has ever been "nothing". The vacuum of space is "something". The development of cells was probably a very complex lineage of replicating chemistry. Our lack of understanding doesn't equate to a miracle. I will check out James
About Almah and Bethulah, the case for the virgin Mary is even worse:
Not only Isaiah could have used bethulah for clarity, but he indeed used bethulah 5 times:Isaiah
23:4 Isaiah 23:12
Isaiah 37:22
Isaiah 47:1
Isaiah 62:5
Do you know how many times he used Almah? Exactly 1.
So:1) Isaiah was pretty aware of the existence of the word Bethulah (which literally translates directly to virgin).
2) Isaiah was willing to use Bethulah in his texts, specifically in places where the virginity was to be highlighted.
3) The very ONE TIME he used almah (which literally translates directly to young woman), was in the context of Mary.
So, it is a very hard case defending that the original intent was to describe Mary as a virgin. With basis in rest of his texts, we know that he would have used Bethulah. He gave plenty of motives for us to come to such conclusion.
The word ALMAH doesn't mean 'virgin' but is always used to describe a young women who's also a virgin, and would not be used to describe either a young mom or wife nor a young woman who's had premarital sex.
The thing I find funny about the virgin birth thing, is that Jesus was suppose to be a descendant of King David and Mattew and Luke both supplied geneologies of Jesus to show he was a descendant of David. And both geneologies are clearly going through Josephs blood line. But if Jesus' father wasn't Joseph, then a geneology of Joseph couldn't be used to show Jesus was a descendant of David. And Mary's blood line couldn't be used either from what I understand, because things like Kingly inheritance could not be passed down from the mothers (womans) side (blood line), it could only be passed on through the fathers (mans) line.
Correct. Family line was traced through the man, not the woman. What Mary's geneology was was irrelevant. Only Joseph's counted, but he wasn't Jesus' father.
Happy Hanukkah, kwanzaa, st Lucia day, Saturnalia, Krampusnaugnt, St Nick's, Winter Solstice, Festiveus,Boxing day,Fiesta of Our Lady of Guadalupe,Bodhi day, Advent,St Barbra's day, Feast of immaculate inception,Longest night, st Steven's day, Mother's night,Pancha Ganapati, Malkh, Day of the Birth of the unconcerned sun, Humanlignt,yalda,Koliada, Yule, 3 kings day, St john the evangelicalist day,Hogswatch, St Sylvester's day, holy innocents day, international day of disabled persons, Newtomas, Watch night, Zamenhof day, feast of the winters veil, soyal, life day, Merry Christmas and a Happy New year Paul!
But .... (not that I agree with the Matthew argument) I was surprised you didn’t mention it.. Luke also mentions the Virgin Mary, and judging by his writings, he got the story straight from the horses mouth.. Mary herself.
Took a major world religion course in college, virgin also meant "young woman of child bearing age". Why has no one covered the elephant in the young earth creationist room, Bishop James Ussher?
Think you need the audio levels sorted out , your own voice seems to fade in and out then the expert came on and nearly blew my buds !
Paul! Buddy! It's "Johns" Hopkins University. I know you are only a Canadian, but still!
:p
Parthenos is also the Greek term for Virgo the constellation/Zodialogical house.
The turn of the millennia was accompanied by a precession of the spring equinox moving from Aries into Pisces (the fish). The corresponding autumnal equinox is Virgo. Matthew is the gospel that refers to the "wise men", who were very clearly Chaldean astrologers following heavenly signs to discover the new king.
The usage of the term for Virgo/Parthenos and the association of Jesus with Fish and the corresponding appearance of astrologers in Matthew was not a coincidence, it was part of the "secret knowledge" provided by many of the mystery cults in the time period (none of which need to work with each other, since they're all basing their doctrine on the same astrological roots). It's the same root as Mithraic Bull sacrifice representing the prior move from Taurus (the Bull) into Aries (the Ram). They're both cultic representations of the power of their overgod being able to shift the entire heavenly sphere.
To put an even finer point on it, Jesus riding "two asses" (also only in Matthew) seems ridiculous on the face of it, and many would point to poorly interpreted old-testament "prophecies", but in actuality the sign we know as Cancer today contains "the two asses" to Babylonian/Chaldean astrologers.
It's basically all an attempt by astrologers to remain relevant in light of the relatively recent popularization of the precession of the equinoxes that was rediscovered by Hipparchus around 100 years prior to 0 CE.
"If the zodiac has moved, how can you say you know anything based on star sign?"
"Oh, because _our_ god moved it! Join our club now for all the latest info!"
After this marketing campaign got misinterpreted by lay folks, you get a bunch of weird religious doctrine.
And if you want to stretch it back even further, the move from Golden Calf worship by the Aaronite priesthood to the ram-sacrificing Levite priesthood and all the corresponding links to fiery bushes and pillars of fire replacing the original cultic practices around bull motifs it's potentially the same mythic root of the Exodus myth - which was coincidentally compiled while the Jews were in exile in Babylon, a culture deeply steeped in astrology. Just as Moses heralded the replacement of Taurus (a bull) by Aries (associated with rams and fire), Jesus heralded Aries being replaced by Pisces; which was heavily associated with Virgo.
I once heard that at at the time, virgin could also mean an unmarried woman.
If Isaiah 7:14 meant Virgin, King Ahaz should have been amazed. Or were virgin births so common back then as to not merit more notice than a passing reference?
Is it possible that the translator of the Septuagint did not understand the word Almah correctly and the translation is just a mistake? For example , maybe the apparent cognate in 3rd century BCE Aramaic meant virgin.
This was very interesting! I wonder if the author of Matthew and NT Christians twisted things a little to promote their religion, then what about Mary and Joseph themselves? Did Mary herself claim to be a virgin? Did Jesus genuinely believe that? Did Mary hallucinate an angel actually telling her she was going to birth the Messiah????? I'm a new ex-Christian and I just have so many questions now!!!
No one knows whether they even existed. It is just a story with no evidence, after all.
The NT is the claim/fan fiction.