If Jesus wasn’t a real historical figure, where did Christian theology come from?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If Jesus wasn’t a real historical figure, where did Christian theology come from?

I do not think it's "moving the goal posts" to answer this by saying if Jesus was someone fathered by God of a virgin, then no, there was no such person.
If Jesus was a regular person whose sayings and actions are detailed in Matthew, Mark, Luke and John then yes, he was very likely a real historical figure.

Jesus nevertheless said his mother was a Virgin
I see influences of Hinduism and eastern religion in his teaching

I’m not sure about Hinduism but that’s interesting, could you elaborate? Various modern writers have found compatibility with Buddhism.

There were obviously Greco-Roman influences in Jesus’ era.

He lived in a time when Israel was at crossroads between east and west, there were many travelers
During his birth the 3 wise men, travelers from the east
Also the parable about the traveler who got robbed, when he was asked who is my fellow man
Obviously there was some trade going on to make such a long journey worthwhile
European Gypsys are a people who originally migrated from India

The Greco Roman influence is also there, but a little subtle. That came later to the religion

The point about the Wise Men is interesting, I’ll need to think on that.

The guy who got robbed was a traveler, as you say, but he could have been from anywhere. There was a lot of trade from Greece/Turkey through Palestine to Egypt, and vice versa. Also traders arriving via ships at the port cities. If I had to take bets, I’d say it was more likely to be a trader or simply a local moving around, although obviously that’s not a 100% thing.

The premise here is so weak. C'mon. Buddha was an atheist. The initial comment that there are similarities between his teaching and Jesus' has not been supported with any particulars, and I just don't see it. And Hinduism and Buddhism are not proselytizing religions - but Christianity is - so if anything the contact might have gone the other way -- but there's no support for that either.

[Anonymous]

If Santa Claus never existed, how did we get Christmas? And the Easter Bunny? If the Tooth Fairy doesn't exist, how did the money get under my pillow? HMMM??? Explain THAT

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If Jesus wasn’t a real historical figure, where did Christian theology come from?

I do not think it's "moving the goal posts" to answer this by saying if Jesus was someone fathered by God of a virgin, then no, there was no such person.
If Jesus was a regular person whose sayings and actions are detailed in Matthew, Mark, Luke and John then yes, he was very likely a real historical figure.

Jesus nevertheless said his mother was a Virgin
I see influences of Hinduism and eastern religion in his teaching

I’m not sure about Hinduism but that’s interesting, could you elaborate? Various modern writers have found compatibility with Buddhism.

There were obviously Greco-Roman influences in Jesus’ era.

He lived in a time when Israel was at crossroads between east and west, there were many travelers
During his birth the 3 wise men, travelers from the east
Also the parable about the traveler who got robbed, when he was asked who is my fellow man
Obviously there was some trade going on to make such a long journey worthwhile
European Gypsys are a people who originally migrated from India

The Greco Roman influence is also there, but a little subtle. That came later to the religion

The point about the Wise Men is interesting, I’ll need to think on that.

The guy who got robbed was a traveler, as you say, but he could have been from anywhere. There was a lot of trade from Greece/Turkey through Palestine to Egypt, and vice versa. Also traders arriving via ships at the port cities. If I had to take bets, I’d say it was more likely to be a trader or simply a local moving around, although obviously that’s not a 100% thing.

The premise here is so weak. C'mon. Buddha was an atheist. The initial comment that there are similarities between his teaching and Jesus' has not been supported with any particulars, and I just don't see it. And Hinduism and Buddhism are not proselytizing religions - but Christianity is - so if anything the contact might have gone the other way -- but there's no support for that either.

Christian scholar Marcus Borg wrote a book titled "Jesus and the Buddha". From the website: https://marcusjborg.org/books/jesus-and-buddha/

"The Parallel Sayings

Jesus and Buddha were separated by five hundred years, three thousand miles, and two drastically different cultures. Yet this trade paper edition of the highly acclaimed hardback juxtaposes passages from the New Testament and ancient Buddhist scriptures to illuminate the striking similarity between their lives, deeds, and teachings."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If Santa Claus never existed, how did we get Christmas? And the Easter Bunny? If the Tooth Fairy doesn't exist, how did the money get under my pillow? HMMM??? Explain THAT

The Tooth Fairy is not Christian. Come to think of it, neither are Santa and The Easter Bunny, but at least they recognize Christian holidays.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If Jesus wasn’t a real historical figure, where did Christian theology come from?

I do not think it's "moving the goal posts" to answer this by saying if Jesus was someone fathered by God of a virgin, then no, there was no such person.
If Jesus was a regular person whose sayings and actions are detailed in Matthew, Mark, Luke and John then yes, he was very likely a real historical figure.

Jesus nevertheless said his mother was a Virgin
I see influences of Hinduism and eastern religion in his teaching

I’m not sure about Hinduism but that’s interesting, could you elaborate? Various modern writers have found compatibility with Buddhism.

There were obviously Greco-Roman influences in Jesus’ era.

He lived in a time when Israel was at crossroads between east and west, there were many travelers
During his birth the 3 wise men, travelers from the east
Also the parable about the traveler who got robbed, when he was asked who is my fellow man
Obviously there was some trade going on to make such a long journey worthwhile
European Gypsys are a people who originally migrated from India

The Greco Roman influence is also there, but a little subtle. That came later to the religion

The point about the Wise Men is interesting, I’ll need to think on that.

The guy who got robbed was a traveler, as you say, but he could have been from anywhere. There was a lot of trade from Greece/Turkey through Palestine to Egypt, and vice versa. Also traders arriving via ships at the port cities. If I had to take bets, I’d say it was more likely to be a trader or simply a local moving around, although obviously that’s not a 100% thing.

The premise here is so weak. C'mon. Buddha was an atheist. The initial comment that there are similarities between his teaching and Jesus' has not been supported with any particulars, and I just don't see it. And Hinduism and Buddhism are not proselytizing religions - but Christianity is - so if anything the contact might have gone the other way -- but there's no support for that either.

Christian scholar Marcus Borg wrote a book titled "Jesus and the Buddha". From the website: https://marcusjborg.org/books/jesus-and-buddha/

"The Parallel Sayings

Jesus and Buddha were separated by five hundred years, three thousand miles, and two drastically different cultures. Yet this trade paper edition of the highly acclaimed hardback juxtaposes passages from the New Testament and ancient Buddhist scriptures to illuminate the striking similarity between their lives, deeds, and teachings."

^ thanks. I'll read that. But it's not surprising if two guys out of a billion people in the world came up with similar ideas. The differences though far exceed any similarities.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If Santa Claus never existed, how did we get Christmas? And the Easter Bunny? If the Tooth Fairy doesn't exist, how did the money get under my pillow? HMMM??? Explain THAT

The Tooth Fairy is not Christian. Come to think of it, neither are Santa and The Easter Bunny, but at least they recognize Christian holidays.

I loved Miracle on 34th Street. And I do believe in Kris Kringle. Now Christmas, on the other hand, is real becaue it's a federal holiday - declared by the US govt. in 1870. Okay? What more do you want? And December 25th was long associated with various pagan holidays, but it is very unlikely to have been the actual birthdate of Jesus Christ.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If Jesus wasn’t a real historical figure, where did Christian theology come from?

I do not think it's "moving the goal posts" to answer this by saying if Jesus was someone fathered by God of a virgin, then no, there was no such person.
If Jesus was a regular person whose sayings and actions are detailed in Matthew, Mark, Luke and John then yes, he was very likely a real historical figure.

Jesus nevertheless said his mother was a Virgin
I see influences of Hinduism and eastern religion in his teaching

I’m not sure about Hinduism but that’s interesting, could you elaborate? Various modern writers have found compatibility with Buddhism.

There were obviously Greco-Roman influences in Jesus’ era.

He lived in a time when Israel was at crossroads between east and west, there were many travelers
During his birth the 3 wise men, travelers from the east
Also the parable about the traveler who got robbed, when he was asked who is my fellow man
Obviously there was some trade going on to make such a long journey worthwhile
European Gypsys are a people who originally migrated from India

The Greco Roman influence is also there, but a little subtle. That came later to the religion

The point about the Wise Men is interesting, I’ll need to think on that.

The guy who got robbed was a traveler, as you say, but he could have been from anywhere. There was a lot of trade from Greece/Turkey through Palestine to Egypt, and vice versa. Also traders arriving via ships at the port cities. If I had to take bets, I’d say it was more likely to be a trader or simply a local moving around, although obviously that’s not a 100% thing.

The premise here is so weak. C'mon. Buddha was an atheist. The initial comment that there are similarities between his teaching and Jesus' has not been supported with any particulars, and I just don't see it. And Hinduism and Buddhism are not proselytizing religions - but Christianity is - so if anything the contact might have gone the other way -- but there's no support for that either.

Christian scholar Marcus Borg wrote a book titled "Jesus and the Buddha". From the website: https://marcusjborg.org/books/jesus-and-buddha/

"The Parallel Sayings

Jesus and Buddha were separated by five hundred years, three thousand miles, and two drastically different cultures. Yet this trade paper edition of the highly acclaimed hardback juxtaposes passages from the New Testament and ancient Buddhist scriptures to illuminate the striking similarity between their lives, deeds, and teachings."

^ thanks. I'll read that. But it's not surprising if two guys out of a billion people in the world came up with similar ideas. The differences though far exceed any similarities.

What's surprising is that they both were known during their own time and written about and worshipped as part of two very different religions.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If Santa Claus never existed, how did we get Christmas? And the Easter Bunny? If the Tooth Fairy doesn't exist, how did the money get under my pillow? HMMM??? Explain THAT

The Tooth Fairy is not Christian. Come to think of it, neither are Santa and The Easter Bunny, but at least they recognize Christian holidays.

I loved Miracle on 34th Street. And I do believe in Kris Kringle. Now Christmas, on the other hand, is real becaue it's a federal holiday - declared by the US govt. in 1870. Okay? What more do you want? And December 25th was long associated with various pagan holidays, but it is very unlikely to have been the actual birthdate of Jesus Christ.

Christians don't pretend to think that Jesus was actually born on 12/25 and freely acknowledge that the birth of Christ is celebrated on an already existing pagan holiday associated with the winter solstice -- Dec 22, Yuletide. THis is when people put Yule logs on the fire to provide warmth and light during the darkest and coldest days of the year, with Dec 25 being proof that the days were getting longer again and the sun would surely be coming back.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If Santa Claus never existed, how did we get Christmas? And the Easter Bunny? If the Tooth Fairy doesn't exist, how did the money get under my pillow? HMMM??? Explain THAT

The Tooth Fairy is not Christian. Come to think of it, neither are Santa and The Easter Bunny, but at least they recognize Christian holidays.

I loved Miracle on 34th Street. And I do believe in Kris Kringle. Now Christmas, on the other hand, is real becaue it's a federal holiday - declared by the US govt. in 1870. Okay? What more do you want? And December 25th was long associated with various pagan holidays, but it is very unlikely to have been the actual birthdate of Jesus Christ.

Christians are well aware they don’t know Jesus’ true birthdate. This isn’t news.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If Santa Claus never existed, how did we get Christmas? And the Easter Bunny? If the Tooth Fairy doesn't exist, how did the money get under my pillow? HMMM??? Explain THAT

The Tooth Fairy is not Christian. Come to think of it, neither are Santa and The Easter Bunny, but at least they recognize Christian holidays.

I loved Miracle on 34th Street. And I do believe in Kris Kringle. Now Christmas, on the other hand, is real becaue it's a federal holiday - declared by the US govt. in 1870. Okay? What more do you want? And December 25th was long associated with various pagan holidays, but it is very unlikely to have been the actual birthdate of Jesus Christ.

Christians are well aware they don’t know Jesus’ true birthdate. This isn’t news.

great. so we all agree then No no knows for sure. Or the year for that matter

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If Jesus wasn’t a real historical figure, where did Christian theology come from?

I do not think it's "moving the goal posts" to answer this by saying if Jesus was someone fathered by God of a virgin, then no, there was no such person.
If Jesus was a regular person whose sayings and actions are detailed in Matthew, Mark, Luke and John then yes, he was very likely a real historical figure.

Jesus nevertheless said his mother was a Virgin
I see influences of Hinduism and eastern religion in his teaching

I’m not sure about Hinduism but that’s interesting, could you elaborate? Various modern writers have found compatibility with Buddhism.

There were obviously Greco-Roman influences in Jesus’ era.

He lived in a time when Israel was at crossroads between east and west, there were many travelers
During his birth the 3 wise men, travelers from the east
Also the parable about the traveler who got robbed, when he was asked who is my fellow man
Obviously there was some trade going on to make such a long journey worthwhile
European Gypsys are a people who originally migrated from India

The Greco Roman influence is also there, but a little subtle. That came later to the religion

The point about the Wise Men is interesting, I’ll need to think on that.

The guy who got robbed was a traveler, as you say, but he could have been from anywhere. There was a lot of trade from Greece/Turkey through Palestine to Egypt, and vice versa. Also traders arriving via ships at the port cities. If I had to take bets, I’d say it was more likely to be a trader or simply a local moving around, although obviously that’s not a 100% thing.

The premise here is so weak. C'mon. Buddha was an atheist. The initial comment that there are similarities between his teaching and Jesus' has not been supported with any particulars, and I just don't see it. And Hinduism and Buddhism are not proselytizing religions - but Christianity is - so if anything the contact might have gone the other way -- but there's no support for that either.

Christian scholar Marcus Borg wrote a book titled "Jesus and the Buddha". From the website: https://marcusjborg.org/books/jesus-and-buddha/

"The Parallel Sayings

Jesus and Buddha were separated by five hundred years, three thousand miles, and two drastically different cultures. Yet this trade paper edition of the highly acclaimed hardback juxtaposes passages from the New Testament and ancient Buddhist scriptures to illuminate the striking similarity between their lives, deeds, and teachings."

^ thanks. I'll read that. But it's not surprising if two guys out of a billion people in the world came up with similar ideas. The differences though far exceed any similarities.

What's surprising is that they both were known during their own time and written about and worshipped as part of two very different religions.

?? What in the world is surprising about that. You could say the same thing about Muhammed or Zoroaster or Confucius. Not see ing your point here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If Santa Claus never existed, how did we get Christmas? And the Easter Bunny? If the Tooth Fairy doesn't exist, how did the money get under my pillow? HMMM??? Explain THAT

The Tooth Fairy is not Christian. Come to think of it, neither are Santa and The Easter Bunny, but at least they recognize Christian holidays.

I loved Miracle on 34th Street. And I do believe in Kris Kringle. Now Christmas, on the other hand, is real becaue it's a federal holiday - declared by the US govt. in 1870. Okay? What more do you want? And December 25th was long associated with various pagan holidays, but it is very unlikely to have been the actual birthdate of Jesus Christ.

Christians are well aware they don’t know Jesus’ true birthdate. This isn’t news.

great. so we all agree then No no knows for sure. Or the year for that matter

No, we don’t all agree. Why do you persist in pretending you are in charge of getting anonymous posters to agree on something? It’s bizarre.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Pp with the link. It worked fine for me when I clicked on it in the post above. Here it is again:

https://knowingscripture.com/articles/is-virgin-the-correct-translation-of-isaiah-7-14

Almah is used a total of 9 times in the Bible. “When the context does offer a hint, as in Genesis 24:43, alma does clearly refer to a “virgin.” Another example is Song of Solomon 6:8, “There are sixty queens and eighty concubines, and [almot, plural] without number.” Here virgins (almot) are distinguished from queens and concubines.”

No, as TIME says, “almah” clearly means “young woman, virgin or not:

https://newsfeed.time.com/2011/03/04/controversial-bible-revision-about-that-virgin-thing/

Instead of flinging more links, how about you address the points about almah only being used 9 times, and in some of those cases it clearly refers to a virgin. Is this the battle of the links?

In those days, all young girls were considered to be virgins, unless they were concubines

yeah, I'm a DP, but in those days a young woman was pretty synonymous with virgin. Maybe the prophesy of Isaiah is somewhat questionable for other reasons, but it was pretty much understood a young woman was a virgin. No?

DP and +1. PP can link to all the hostile (Jewish) sources she wants. It’s clear almah was interpreted both as “unmarried woman” AND “virgin” during the first century AD, including twice in the Hebrew Bible and also in the Septaguint. PP’s explanation that only one isolated Jewish translator looked at that particular part of the Septaguint is unconvincing, and she never addressed the link showing other instances in the OT where almah clearly referred to a virgin.

Anyway, these definitional arguments are getting it all back-a$$wards. Wherever you come down on this, there was a very early Christian tradition that Mary was a virgin. Instead of asking whether Matthew tried to shoehorn Jesus’ birth into Isaiah 7:14, Christians marvel at the miracle and find after the fact that it’s compatible with Isaiah. That’s called “faith.” Ask any Jew confronted with conflicting archeological evidence about Abraham.

Wrong. “Young woman” was only pretty much synonymous with “virgin” if the young woman was unmarried. A young married woman is still an “almah” and presumably not a virgin. Moreover, the United Conference of Catholic Bishops (UCCB) which publishes the New American Bible is most definitely NOT a “hostile (Jewish) source” as you put it. It’s a Catholic source which has changed the translation of “almah” from “virgin” to “young woman” in Isaiah 7:14 in the latest edition of the New American Bible because “almah” means “young woman,” not “virgin.”

https://newsfeed.time.com/2011/03/04/controversial-bible-revision-about-that-virgin-thing/

DP here but fine... I don't think the Isaiah prophesy is important to the story or adds any credibility at all. The Christians belive Mary was a virgin, so that's clear enough. The story would continue on that basis without the Isaiah prophesy anyway.

This. Jewish pp appears to be arguing that Mary couldn’t have been a virgin unless Isaiah predicted it. This isn’t logical given there was a long-standing Christian tradition before Matthew. This is a separate issue from the whole translation debate.

Wrong. First, I’m not Jewish. Second, I’ve never said Mary wasn’t a virgin. I’m not taking any position on whether Mary was a virgin or not. I’m merely saying “almah” in Isaiah 7:14 means “young woman,” not “virgin.” Thirdly, I’m saying Isaiah 7:14 has nothing to do with any prophecy about Jesus at all. I’m saying Isaiah 7:14 is about exactly what it says it’s about: A sign to the King Ahaz to obey Isaiah’s warning not to engage in military alliances which Isaiah adamantly opposed. The prophecy is that the ungodly King Ahaz will have a son, King Hezekiah, who will be the first King of Judah to finally obey God’s commandments and will be the best King since Solomon and will bring the Kingdom of Judah into a state of “Immanuel (God with us).”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If Jesus wasn’t a real historical figure, where did Christian theology come from?

I do not think it's "moving the goal posts" to answer this by saying if Jesus was someone fathered by God of a virgin, then no, there was no such person.
If Jesus was a regular person whose sayings and actions are detailed in Matthew, Mark, Luke and John then yes, he was very likely a real historical figure.

Jesus nevertheless said his mother was a Virgin
I see influences of Hinduism and eastern religion in his teaching

I’m not sure about Hinduism but that’s interesting, could you elaborate? Various modern writers have found compatibility with Buddhism.

There were obviously Greco-Roman influences in Jesus’ era.

He lived in a time when Israel was at crossroads between east and west, there were many travelers
During his birth the 3 wise men, travelers from the east
Also the parable about the traveler who got robbed, when he was asked who is my fellow man
Obviously there was some trade going on to make such a long journey worthwhile
European Gypsys are a people who originally migrated from India

The Greco Roman influence is also there, but a little subtle. That came later to the religion

The point about the Wise Men is interesting, I’ll need to think on that.

The guy who got robbed was a traveler, as you say, but he could have been from anywhere. There was a lot of trade from Greece/Turkey through Palestine to Egypt, and vice versa. Also traders arriving via ships at the port cities. If I had to take bets, I’d say it was more likely to be a trader or simply a local moving around, although obviously that’s not a 100% thing.

I do not think it was a local moving around simply because the story was to answer the question of who is my fellow man.
Middle East was and still is very tribal, with it being very unlikely that anyone would have helped a foreigner

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Pp with the link. It worked fine for me when I clicked on it in the post above. Here it is again:

https://knowingscripture.com/articles/is-virgin-the-correct-translation-of-isaiah-7-14

Almah is used a total of 9 times in the Bible. “When the context does offer a hint, as in Genesis 24:43, alma does clearly refer to a “virgin.” Another example is Song of Solomon 6:8, “There are sixty queens and eighty concubines, and [almot, plural] without number.” Here virgins (almot) are distinguished from queens and concubines.”

No, as TIME says, “almah” clearly means “young woman, virgin or not:

https://newsfeed.time.com/2011/03/04/controversial-bible-revision-about-that-virgin-thing/

Instead of flinging more links, how about you address the points about almah only being used 9 times, and in some of those cases it clearly refers to a virgin. Is this the battle of the links?

In those days, all young girls were considered to be virgins, unless they were concubines

yeah, I'm a DP, but in those days a young woman was pretty synonymous with virgin. Maybe the prophesy of Isaiah is somewhat questionable for other reasons, but it was pretty much understood a young woman was a virgin. No?

DP and +1. PP can link to all the hostile (Jewish) sources she wants. It’s clear almah was interpreted both as “unmarried woman” AND “virgin” during the first century AD, including twice in the Hebrew Bible and also in the Septaguint. PP’s explanation that only one isolated Jewish translator looked at that particular part of the Septaguint is unconvincing, and she never addressed the link showing other instances in the OT where almah clearly referred to a virgin.

Anyway, these definitional arguments are getting it all back-a$$wards. Wherever you come down on this, there was a very early Christian tradition that Mary was a virgin. Instead of asking whether Matthew tried to shoehorn Jesus’ birth into Isaiah 7:14, Christians marvel at the miracle and find after the fact that it’s compatible with Isaiah. That’s called “faith.” Ask any Jew confronted with conflicting archeological evidence about Abraham.

Wrong. “Young woman” was only pretty much synonymous with “virgin” if the young woman was unmarried. A young married woman is still an “almah” and presumably not a virgin. Moreover, the United Conference of Catholic Bishops (UCCB) which publishes the New American Bible is most definitely NOT a “hostile (Jewish) source” as you put it. It’s a Catholic source which has changed the translation of “almah” from “virgin” to “young woman” in Isaiah 7:14 in the latest edition of the New American Bible because “almah” means “young woman,” not “virgin.”

https://newsfeed.time.com/2011/03/04/controversial-bible-revision-about-that-virgin-thing/

DP here but fine... I don't think the Isaiah prophesy is important to the story or adds any credibility at all. The Christians belive Mary was a virgin, so that's clear enough. The story would continue on that basis without the Isaiah prophesy anyway.

This. Jewish pp appears to be arguing that Mary couldn’t have been a virgin unless Isaiah predicted it. This isn’t logical given there was a long-standing Christian tradition before Matthew. This is a separate issue from the whole translation debate.

Wrong. First, I’m not Jewish. Second, I’ve never said Mary wasn’t a virgin. I’m not taking any position on whether Mary was a virgin or not. I’m merely saying “almah” in Isaiah 7:14 means “young woman,” not “virgin.” Thirdly, I’m saying Isaiah 7:14 has nothing to do with any prophecy about Jesus at all. I’m saying Isaiah 7:14 is about exactly what it says it’s about: A sign to the King Ahaz to obey Isaiah’s warning not to engage in military alliances which Isaiah adamantly opposed. The prophecy is that the ungodly King Ahaz will have a son, King Hezekiah, who will be the first King of Judah to finally obey God’s commandments and will be the best King since Solomon and will bring the Kingdom of Judah into a state of “Immanuel (God with us).”

Just wondering, do you have any idea how your repetition of “wrong, Wrong, Wrong!” comes off as a sad combination of arrogance, rigidness of thought, and proof of your pathological inability to either see other sides or simply stop pressing your point on people who won’t ever agree with you? Also, now we’re all thinking you’re a Jew turned atheist, because your arguing style is so slippery that it’s likely something like this. At this point you’ve repeated your points and links ad nauseum over many pages. None of us were around at the nativity, and even you just admitted it could have been a virgin birth—so what is this morbid and pathological compulsion you have to be right, and to prove everybody else wrong?