(August 9, 2016 at 4:36 pm)Crossless1 Wrote:

(August 9, 2016 at 4:32 pm)Huggy74 Wrote: *emphasis mine*
Uh no, it's exactly the same.

What that definition of 'nasha' is saying is that it can be used in a "mental sense" OR in a "moral sense" eg. led astray mentally (deceived), or led astray morally (seduced). Last time I looked, A woman committing Adultery is still considered IMMORAL.

Presumably, so would a woman disobeying an order from her creator to abstain from eating from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil -- you know, the plainly obvious sense of the story.

You must have some really disturbing psycho-sexual flotsam in your head to insist so vehemently on your pet reading of this story.

*sigh*
The bible is not speaking of "literal" trees... if so point me to where an actual tree of the knowledge of good and evil exists. You don't find it the least bit curious that after the serpent and the woman did what they did, that God said there would be enmity between their seed?

Answer me this, If what happened in Eden had nothing to do with sex, then why else are we automatically born into sin? And why was it important for Jesus to be virgin born if sex had nothing to do with original sin? It all ties in together.

If you can't answer those basic questions, then you have no business entering into this discussion.

(August 9, 2016 at 5:01 pm)Huggy74 Wrote:

(August 9, 2016 at 4:36 pm)Crossless1 Wrote: Presumably, so would a woman disobeying an order from her creator to abstain from eating from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil -- you know, the plainly obvious sense of the story.

You must have some really disturbing psycho-sexual flotsam in your head to insist so vehemently on your pet reading of this story.

*sigh*
The bible is not speaking of "literal" trees... if so point me to where an actual tree of the knowledge of good and evil exists. You don't find it the least bit curious that after the serpent and the woman did what they did, that God said there would be enmity between their seed?

Answer me this, If what happened in Eden had nothing to do with sex, then why else are we automatically born into sin? And why was it important for Jesus to be virgin born if sex had nothing to do with original sin? It all ties in together.

If you can't answer those basic questions, then you have no business entering into this discussion.

*sigh*

The Bible is not speaking of literal people, here, either. It's a just-so story, Huggy. It's interesting that you are so eager to equate original sin with a sexual act, rather than willfulness and disobedience. As for Jesus, he was allegedly born of a virgin because the authors who spread that story came to their knowledge of Hebrew scripture by way of a Greek translation. If you don't know that, then you're the one with no business in such a discussion.

(August 9, 2016 at 5:06 pm)Crossless1 Wrote:

(August 9, 2016 at 5:01 pm)Huggy74 Wrote: *sigh*
The bible is not speaking of "literal" trees... if so point me to where an actual tree of the knowledge of good and evil exists. You don't find it the least bit curious that after the serpent and the woman did what they did, that God said there would be enmity between their seed?

Answer me this, If what happened in Eden had nothing to do with sex, then why else are we automatically born into sin? And why was it important for Jesus to be virgin born if sex had nothing to do with original sin? It all ties in together.

If you can't answer those basic questions, then you have no business entering into this discussion.

*sigh*

The Bible is not speaking of literal people, here, either. It's a just-so story, Huggy. It's interesting that you are so eager to equate original sin with a sexual act, rather than willfulness and disobedience. As for Jesus, he was allegedly born of a virgin because the authors who spread that story came to their knowledge of Hebrew scripture by way of a Greek translation. If you don't know that, then you're the one with no business in such a discussion.

*emphasis mine*

Ok buddy, provide the evidence to back that up.

Lol at a theist asking for evidence. There's a first time for everything, I s'pose.

Except they mostly do it disingenuously.

(August 9, 2016 at 5:15 pm)Huggy74 Wrote:

(August 9, 2016 at 5:06 pm)Crossless1 Wrote: *sigh*

The Bible is not speaking of literal people, here, either. It's a just-so story, Huggy. It's interesting that you are so eager to equate original sin with a sexual act, rather than willfulness and disobedience. As for Jesus, he was allegedly born of a virgin because the authors who spread that story came to their knowledge of Hebrew scripture by way of a Greek translation. If you don't know that, then you're the one with no business in such a discussion.

*emphasis mine*

Ok buddy, provide the evidence to back that up.

I'm not your search engine monkey. But here's a road map:

The Hebrew word 'alma' (the word used in Isaiah 7:14) is generally translated as 'young woman'. Yes, most young women would have been presumed to be virgins, but . . .
The Hebrew word 'betulah' actually means 'virgin' and presumably would have been used in Isaiah if that is the plain meaning the author wished to convey.
Furthermore, each of the nine times 'alma' is used, the plain meaning is 'young woman'.


The Greek word used in the Septuagint (which would have been the source "Matthew" would have known of) is 'parthenos'. You're the amateur philologist. You figure it out.

(August 9, 2016 at 5:27 pm)Excited Penguin Wrote: Except they mostly do it disingenuously.

Mostly?

(August 9, 2016 at 5:36 pm)Crossless1 Wrote:

(August 9, 2016 at 5:15 pm)Huggy74 Wrote: *emphasis mine*

Ok buddy, provide the evidence to back that up.

I'm not your search engine monkey. But here's a road map:

The Hebrew word 'alma' (the word used in Isaiah 7:14) is generally translated as 'young woman'. Yes, most young women would have been presumed to be virgins, but . . .
The Hebrew word 'betulah' actually means 'virgin' and presumably would have been used in Isaiah if that is the plain meaning the author wished to convey.
Furthermore, each of the nine times 'alma' is used, the plain meaning is 'young woman'.


The Greek word used in the Septuagint (which would have been the source "Matthew" would have known of) is 'parthenos'. You're the amateur philologist. You figure it out.

The Messiah predates the new testament, the virgin birth was foretold back in Genesis buddy. Also the rejection of the Messiah by the Jews is also foretold in the old testament.

Are the Jews also complicit in this whole conspiracy narrative that you've created?

Were the Romans also involved in this conspiracy, since it was also foretold in the old testament that the Messiah would be crucified, and that "not a bone should be broken"?

*edit*

Also forgot to add that it would require 40 different writers over a span of 1500 years to be in collusion in order for all the pieces to fit together coherently.

(August 9, 2016 at 5:27 pm)Excited Penguin Wrote: Except they mostly do it disingenuously.

You don't say!

(August 9, 2016 at 6:39 pm)Thumpalumpacus Wrote:

(August 9, 2016 at 5:27 pm)Excited Penguin Wrote: Except they mostly do it disingenuously.

You don't say!

1.0 Thumpalumpacus?