(December 18, 2013 at 9:43 pm)Lemonvariable72 Wrote: I'm I think I missed the part in the op where aIn the OP I did write:
Xpastor actually said that the virgin is proof of divinity, because what I read demonstrated a possible origin of the story and didnt really address the deity bit. Maybe drich read a different post.
Quote:Personally, I think the claim [of virgin birth] was more likely to have originated with his fan club after they started to claim divine status for him. There are plenty of examples in the ancient world of hero-figures whose birth was said to have resulted from a human woman being impregnated by a god—e.g., Alexander the Great.
If Drich wants to insist on calling virgin birth a sign of divinity, that's OK with me. It is in no way inconsistent, as he seems to think, with what I said above, that the belief in the virgin birth is associated with a claim to divine status.
Of course, we differ profoundly on whether it actually happened. Just to clarify a phrase which the rest of you probably got but may have gone past my clueless critic, when I speak of Jesus' "fan club" I mean the early Christians, the ones telling the stories about Jesus, some accurate recollection of his teaching and some legendary miracle stories to make a point, both of which were later incorporated into the written gospels.
If you could reason with religious people, there would be no religious people — House