The Trinity and Mary

[vorlon13]

Does it seem appropriate that Jesus was 'conveyed' unto the Virgin Mary via the Holy Spirit ??

Wasn't this something He could have managed on His own ??

IOW, by asserting the Holy Spirit was extant to under take this task, it weakens the case for the Trinity since Jesus seems to not be available at this point and for those claiming He is just as eternal as God and as capable, Scripture is not helping to reinforce this tenant of faith.

[Fake Messiah]

Well of course if it was original, but remember makers of Jesus myth were like Hollywood producers today instead of inventing something new, just re-hash the old and familiar. Even early Christians were aware of this, like Justin Martyr, a second-century apologist who wrote:

And when they tell that Hercules was strong, and travelled over all the world, and was begotten by Jove of Alcmene, and ascended to heaven when he died, do I not perceive that the Scripture which speaks of Christ, “strong as a giant to run his race,” has been in like manner imitated? And when he [the devil] brings forward Aesculapius as the raiser of the dead and healer of all diseases, may I not say that in this matter likewise he has imitated the prophecies about Christ? And when I hear that Perseus was begotten of a virgin, I understand that the deceiving serpent counterfeited also this.

Where is the story of Jesus being as strong as a giant to run his course all over the world? This is obviously one of the many accounts of Jesus that apparently played into the origin and development of Jesus myth, but which was eliminated in tha final draft of Council of Nicaea.

You must understand that bits and pieces of Jesus myth were created and when Constantine proclaimed Christianity they took some bits and pieces of it and took other stuff from Roman religion so that people of Rome can swallow it easier. Like the whole crap about the Trinity was taken from Roman Capitoline Triad of Jupiter (father), Juno (wife), and Minerva (daughter), who took it from the Greeks Olympic triad of Zeus (king of the gods), Athena (goddess of war and intelect) and Apollo (god of the sun, culture and music); who took it from Hellenistic Egypt triad of Isis, Alexandrian Serapis and Harpocrates; and so on.

[Minimalist]

First of all, it is a misnomer to speak of xtianity as a single thing at least until 380 when Theodosius ordered everyone to be catholicks and follow the bullshit Nicene creed which had been cobbled together some years earlier as a result of the Arian "heresy."  ("Heresy" in this case being defined as the guys who lose the battle.)

But early jesusism was replete with numerous other doctrines which the victors subsequently sought to repress.

A fascinating book on the subject is "The Jesus Wars," by J. P. Jenkins.

[Lek]

Well of course if it was original, but remember makers of Jesus myth were like Hollywood producers today instead of inventing something new, just re-hash the old and familiar. Even early Christians were aware of this, like Justin Martyr, a second-century apologist who wrote:

And when they tell that Hercules was strong, and travelled over all the world, and was begotten by Jove of Alcmene, and ascended to heaven when he died, do I not perceive that the Scripture which speaks of Christ, “strong as a giant to run his race,” has been in like manner imitated? And when he [the devil] brings forward Aesculapius as the raiser of the dead and healer of all diseases, may I not say that in this matter likewise he has imitated the prophecies about Christ? And when I hear that Perseus was begotten of a virgin, I understand that the deceiving serpent counterfeited also this.

Where is the story of Jesus being as strong as a giant to run his course all over the world? This is obviously one of the many accounts of Jesus that apparently played into the origin and development of Jesus myth, but which was eliminated in tha final draft of Council of Nicaea.

You must understand that bits and pieces of Jesus myth were created and when Constantine proclaimed Christianity they took some bits and pieces of it and took other stuff from Roman religion so that people of Rome can swallow it easier. Like the whole crap about the Trinity was taken from Roman Capitoline Triad of Jupiter (father), Juno (wife), and Minerva (daughter), who took it from the Greeks Olympic triad of Zeus (king of the gods), Athena (goddess of war and intelect) and Apollo (god of the sun, culture and music); who took it from Hellenistic Egypt triad of Isis, Alexandrian Serapis and Harpocrates; and so on.

How do you know that they took the gospel accounts from these stories? How about the other gods that weren't included in their "trinities"? You just took three gods from each culture and made "trinities" out of them.

[John V]

Does it seem appropriate that Jesus was 'conveyed' unto the Virgin Mary via the Holy Spirit ??

Yes.

Wasn't this something He could have managed on His own ??

Probably. That someone is capable of something doesn't imply that they necessarily do it.

IOW, by asserting the Holy Spirit was extant to under take this task, it weakens the case for the Trinity since Jesus seems to not be available at this point and for those claiming He is just as eternal as God and as capable, Scripture is not helping to reinforce this tenant of faith.

No, it strengthens the trinity, as all persons of the trinity are involved.

[CapnAwesome]

Does it seem appropriate that Jesus was 'conveyed' unto the Virgin Mary via the Holy Spirit ??

Wasn't this something He could have managed on His own ??

IOW, by asserting the Holy Spirit was extant to under take this task, it weakens the case for the Trinity since Jesus seems to not be available at this point and for those claiming He is just as eternal as God and as capable, Scripture is not helping to reinforce this tenant of faith.

None of that really happened, it's all just a made up story. So I wouldn't stress about it too much.

[vorlon13]

Does it seem appropriate that Jesus was 'conveyed' unto the Virgin Mary via the Holy Spirit ??

Wasn't this something He could have managed on His own ??

IOW, by asserting the Holy Spirit was extant to under take this task, it weakens the case for the Trinity since Jesus seems to not be available at this point and for those claiming He is just as eternal as God and as capable, Scripture is not helping to reinforce this tenant of faith.

None of that really happened, it's all just a made up story. So I wouldn't stress about it too much.

Ah, but realize every time a 'believer' realizes(s)he has encountered 13 Biblical inconsistencies, screw ups, contradictions, and/or idiocies, we get a new recruit.

It's why we're here.

[Cyberman]

No, that's all just further proof that the bible is perfect and inerrant.

[Fake Messiah]

How do you know that they took the gospel accounts from these stories?

What do you mean "how do I know"? The elements were already there and you see Justin Martyr saying it. And when it comes to Jesus moral teaching we already had discussion in the topic "Love thy neighbor" on the 5th page that all the so called sentiments attributed to Jesus are were familiar in the Jewish schools, and to all the Pharisees, long before the time of Christ, as they were familiar in all the civilizations of the that time - Egyptian, Babylonian, and Persian, Greek and Hindu.

Also even many theologians now admit that it is not likely that we have the actual words of Christ at all. One example in Matthew 11:28-30: “Come to me, all you who are weary and burdened, and I will give you rest. Take my yoke upon you and learn from me, for I am gentle and humble in heart, and you will find rest for your souls. For my yoke is easy and my burden is light.”
We may say with confidence that Christ never spoke those words. The doctrinal implication of divinity is late: the words are inconsistent with his constant insistence that his burden is heavy and grievous (to sell all one's property, to separate from one's family, to take up one's cross, etc.); and, most decisive of all, the words are simply borrowed, with little alteration, from Ecclesiasticus (51, 23-27). It is, therefore, extremely difficult to say anywhere that we have the actual words of Christ and it is quite certain that many of the passages we cannot attribute to him are as fine and impressive as the doubtful passages.

You just took three gods from each culture and made "trinities" out of them.

I didn't took them. When it comes to Roman Capitoline Triad the Romans took them.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capitoline_Triad

[Lek]

What do you mean "how do I know"? The elements were already there and you see Justin Martyr saying it. And when it comes to Jesus moral teaching we already had discussion in the topic "Love thy neighbor" on the 5th page that all the so called sentiments attributed to Jesus are were familiar in the Jewish schools, and to all the Pharisees, long before the time of Christ, as they were familiar in all the civilizations of the that time - Egyptian, Babylonian, and Persian, Greek and Hindu.

So your saying that because his morals and sentiments were reflected by earlier cultures, that proves that the gospels were made up?  How does that demonstrate that the gospels were made up?  Because Jesus believed that we should treat our neighbor well and the Greeks already believed that, then he wasn't for real?

Also even many theologians now admit that it is not likely that we have the actual words of Christ at all. One example in Matthew 11:28-30: “Come to me, all you who are weary and burdened, and I will give you rest. Take my yoke upon you and learn from me, for I am gentle and humble in heart, and you will find rest for your souls. For my yoke is easy and my burden is light.”  We may say with confidence that Christ never spoke those words.

Some theologians say he didn't, some say he did.  There is no way at all to historically determine whether he did or didn't.  Either we believe the writers or we don't.

The doctrinal implication of divinity is late: the words are inconsistent with his constant insistence that his burden is heavy and grievous (to sell all one's property, to separate from one's family, to take up one's cross, etc.); and, most decisive of all, the words are simply borrowed, with little alteration, from Ecclesiasticus (51, 23-27). It is, therefore, extremely difficult to say anywhere that we have the actual words of Christ and it is quite certain that many of the passages we cannot attribute to him are as fine and impressive as the doubtful passages.

The message of the new testament is that we can't do it by ourselves, but must rely on Christ for our salvation.  We go through life with difficult burdens, but we find rest when we give those burdens to God.  He is the one who gets us through.  He lightens our burdens.  As for him speaking of his divinity, I think this is pretty explicit:

John 10:30-38English Standard Version (ESV)
30 "I and the Father are one.”

I didn't took them. When it comes to Roman Capitoline Triad the Romans took them.

You referenced cultures that had multiple gods, more than three, but grouped some into triads and decided that the writers of the new testament copied them to form the trinity.  What about all the other gods?  I guess the christians didn't want to copy those parts.  Here's a quote from the very first book of the bible written long before the existence of the Roman civilization:

Genesis 1:26English Standard Version (ESV)
Then God said, “Let us make man in our image, after our likeness."

Here's one from the book of Isiah, also written long before the Romans:

Isaiah 9:6English Standard Version (ESV)
6 For to us a child is born,
   to us a son is given;
and the government shall be upon his shoulder,
   and his name shall be called
Wonderful Counselor  (Holy Spirit), Mighty God,
   Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace (Jesus).

What you're doing is searching for similarities among christianity and other religions, and if there is some some similarity that was manifested earlier in another, then you're saying that christianity copied it.  There are countless similarities in our modern culture to ancient civilizations.  Does this mean that we copied them or that we just share some common ideas?