Virgin Mary, Ark of the Covenant

[Bucky Ball]

Just like I thought, all you know how to do is talk shit.
As I mentioned, the author of the Gospel according to Mathew translates almah in Isaiah 7:14 as 'virgin', are you suggesting that his translation is incompetent? Because his translation very closely follows the MT in that instance, and in fact is a pretty literal reading throughout the rest of his gospel - so on what evidence are you saying that Matthew was an incompetent translator? FYI the book of Matthew contains the earliest translation of Is 7:14 that we have...

So I see you can support nothing you say, and have no names or references. How pathetic. The POINT is the CONTEXT matters. Isaiah did NOT intend to say (gynecological) "virgin" so copying it as "virgin" is preposterous, irrelevant, and in CONTEXT, that was not the meaning. Are YOU claiming the "woman with child" (one of the King's wives) in Isaiah was a "virgin" when SHE was found to be with child ? Hahaha. The Gospel of Matthew uses the Greek word "parthenos". You didn't even read the link, about the origins of the entire business. Your claim about "the earliest" translation is laughable, and completely irrelevant. Matthew also (alone of all the gospels) says many others rose from the dead and walked around Jerusalem. Really ? REALLY ? You buy that crap ? If THAT had happened, you're actually trying to tell us NOT ONE OTHER author from the time talks about the zombie invasion, the "split rocks", and the "never happened" earthquake ? Sure. Now take you pills. You'll be ok.


You are utterly incompetent to even begin to discuss either the NT or the OT. YOU told me I was incompetent. The fact is YOU do not possess the education to discuss any of this. If YOUR point about MY incompetence was legitimate, YOU must live with the SAME standard.

BTW, the Sermon on the Mount was a rip-off of the Essene Beatitudes.
--- from the Dead Sea Scrolls. From Scroll 4Qbeat :
[Blessed is] …with a pure heart
and does not slander with his tongue.
Blessed are those who hold to her [Wisdom’s] precepts
And do not hold to the ways of iniquity.
Blessed are those who rejoice in her,
And do not burst forth in ways of folly.
Blessed are those who seek her with pure hands,
And do not pursue her with a treacherous heart.
Blessed is the man who has attained Wisdom,
And walks in the Law of the Most High.
He directs his heart towards her ways,
And restrains himself by her corrections,
And always takes delight in her chastisements.
He does not forsake her when he sees distress,
Nor abandon her in time of strain.
He will not forget her [on the day of] fear,
And will not despise [her] when his soul is afflicted.
For always he will meditate on her,
And in his distress he will consider [her]

Lists of "beatitudes" were ubiquitous in the ancient world.

[Chas]

I admire an atheist even more when they sacrifice, suffer, and die for what they believe to be true.

Since atheism is simply a lack of belief in gods, what is there for an atheist to suffer or die for?

---

You have no authority to claim what the NT books are.

He has scholarship - no 'authority' needed.

Who has this alleged authority? The Queen? She's head of your church - can you cite her scholarly treatises?

They are IN NO WAY, "factual".

I'm not even going to dignify that bullshit, go troll elsewhere.

Oh, fuck, that's hilarious. You are the outsider and troll here.

YOU are the one that "needs to provide evidence" that even ONE thing in them is "factual". You can't even provide ONE piece of evidence that Jesus even existed.

I don't need to prove something that's already agreed upon by historians as fact. If you're going to disagree with history it's up to you to provide evidence. Explain the letters of Paul? Explain the book of Acts? Explain Josephus and James the Just?

He already has, but you're too butt-hurt to read his actual words.

What the fuck are you talking about? Isaiah 7:14? The author of the Gospel according to Mathew translates almah as 'virgin', so what? How do you know that it's a mistranslation?

Because it is an objective fact.

You're clutching at straws. How about the sermon on the mount? How many scholars do you know that doubt that Jesus delivered that? How about the Last Supper - an event recorded in 5 books in the Bible - how many scholars do you know that doubt that occurred?

You simply ignore the scholars who do, in fact, doubt the historicity of the Bible, and justify that with evidence.

[Phatt Matt s]

Bucky Ball,

You are the most abrasive person so far I've had dialogue with here. I really don't give a shit what you call me, but you might want to consider that often when people are abrasive and insulting, it is because they are insecure about themselves. I've known many such people and see it in Alcoholics Anonymous all the time.

If it's all a front that's one thing; but if this is you, you'll be the first belligerent person I've met who isn't full of self-pity (feels good about self).

The person that is confident about themselves remains calm and collected during a debate. It also doesn't make you sound very intelligent either.

Not saying I'm any better, but still, what I'm saying has merit, and it's something you might wanna think about.

[Minimalist]

there does exist an ancient prophecy saying the messiah would be born in Bethlehem.

Have you ever read it....or are you just listening to xtians beat their gums again?

[Phatt Matt s]

It's in micah
Yup! Read it! BTW, I don't know that Christian Dogma is true.

[Minimalist]

Then you did not understand what you read.

[a]Marshal your troops now, city of troops,
for a siege is laid against us.
They will strike Israel’s ruler
on the cheek with a rod.

2 “But you, Bethlehem Ephrathah,
though you are small among the clans[ b] of Judah,
out of you will come for me
one who will be ruler over Israel,
whose origins are from of old,
from ancient times.”

3 Therefore Israel will be abandoned
until the time when she who is in labor bears a son,
and the rest of his brothers return
to join the Israelites.

4 He will stand and shepherd his flock
in the strength of the Lord,
in the majesty of the name of the Lord his God.
And they will live securely, for then his greatness
will reach to the ends of the earth.

5 And he will be our peace
when the Assyrians invade our land
and march through our fortresses.
We will raise against them seven shepherds,
even eight commanders,
6 who will rule[c] the land of Assyria with the sword,
the land of Nimrod with drawn sword.[d]
He will deliver us from the Assyrians
when they invade our land
and march across our borders.

This particular bullshit story is about the Assyrian invasion which ended in 722 BC. Unlike this fairy tale, the Assyrians kicked their asses.

So much for your fucking bible.

[Phatt Matt s]

John 7:42

"Does not Scripture say that the Messiah will come from David's descendants and from Bethlehem, the town where David lived?"

[Bucky Ball]

Bucky Ball,
You are the most abrasive person so far I've had dialogue with here. I really don't give a shit what you call me, but you might want to consider that often when people are abrasive and insulting, it is because they are insecure about themselves. I've known many such people and see it in Alcoholics Anonymous all the time.
If it's all a front that's one thing; but if this is you, you'll be the first belligerent person I've met who isn't full of self-pity (feels good about self).
The person that is confident about themselves remains calm and collected during a debate. It also doesn't make you sound very intelligent either.
Not saying I'm any better, but still, what I'm saying has merit, and it's something you might wanna think about.

Sorry dude. No one EVER has called me 'abrasive" IRL. I just don't "suffer fools" when it comes to people talking about religious/Biblical things they have NO clue about. Being assertive is no crime. I had a couple friends read your post, and you have them rolling. You are so wrong. But...whatever. Sorry if being told you're full of shit, (which your "virgin birth" crap is, and which I have demonstrated), is "belligerent". It's simply wrong. And as I said, Freshmen in college are taught EXACTLY what I said, by mainline scholars, (at least the "virgin birth part".) No one can answer the other questions I posed about the veracity of whether Jebus actually existed. I don't know if he did. I used to be sure he probably did, (because why would a nascent cult, fight like cats and dogs, which the early church did, and publicly write about it ?). Now I think is there is no way to know. But I DO know, that having watched men in power today, (from the advantage of an inside view), and then reading the proceedings of the Councils, arguing and cooking up your cult, there is, and was, NOTHING "spiritual" or "supernatural" about any of it. Did you tell Aractus HE was "belligerent" ? No. You just don't want to be told you're full of crap. You don't know me from Adam. IRL people criticize me for joking around WAY too much. So, sorry. You got it all wrong. But the Bible is something I have made it a point to know about, for the very reason we are here. YOU and Aractus actually know next to nothing about the history of you own cult. If you're sincere, fine. You just don't know me. If you're attempting to deflect the thread away from the facts of the senselessness of the mistranslation and meaning of the original quote for one of the three authors of Isaiah, its not gonna work. If you think I am going to stop telling theists who know nothing about the Bible what scholars have written for decades about, and yet what is little known by the public, you can forget it. I'm just getting started. It's not going to be my career, but it IS going to be one of my major life pursuits.
The question is, "What exactly are YOU doing here ?" It's more than a little odd you're spouting stuff about a "virgin birth" in 2014.

What WOULD be interesting would have been if you had placed the Marian myths in Western Civilization's history, as it relates to Courtly Love, and the Arthurian legends, and the original search for the Holy Grail, instead of the infantile Fundie literalism you pose.
( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chr%C3%A9tien_de_Troyes ), but I suppose you've never even watched Campbell's Mother Goddess video.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DPkOcXWSiew
).

---

John 7:42

"Does not Scripture say that the Messiah will come from David's descendants and from Bethlehem, the town where David lived?"

Now all you have to do is demonstrate the "authority" of the texts that were non-unanimously VOTED into the canon, (which today some people call "scripture"). Then prove there ever was a "King David", and that he was from where you say he's from.

Why are you posting this shit on an atheist forum ? What do you think you're going to accomplish ?

[Phatt Matt s]

I really don't give a shit. Also, originally it was someone else on this thread (an atheist) that told you chill out you're being abrasive.

Actually I don't know that the Virgin birth took place and you don't know it didn't. You probably know I'm not passionately Christian as soon as you view my username.

If you want to call Mary a Whore and Jesus a Dishonest Dicksucking Fag, I can't judge you, because I have done the same thing and worse. Be far more abrasive, I don't give a shit. I just thought I'd point out how that it isn't helping your cause much.

You showed some friends my post. C'mon get a life.

[Bucky Ball]

I really don't give a shit. Also, originally it was someone else on this thread (an atheist) that told you chill out you're being abrasive.

Actually I don't know that the Virgin birth took place and you don't know it didn't. You probably know I'm not passionately Christian as soon as you view my username.

If you want to call Mary a Whore and Jesus a Dishonest Dicksucking Fag, I can't judge you, because I have done the same thing and worse. Be far more abrasive, I don't give a shit. I just thought I'd point out how that it isn't helping your cause much.

You showed some friends my post. C'mon get a life.

No one said Mary was a whore, (well some do and some say she had a affair with a Roman soldier). Where in the hell did THAT come from ? Actually WE all absolutely know it didn't happen. NO HUMAN, in all of human history has been born with 23 chromosomes. It's not possible. It means he wasn't really human. I see that not only do you have no knowledge of scripture, and can prove NOTHING about it, you also have no clue about Biology and science. I think we begin to see your problem. Actually the Gospel of Thomas DID say Jesus was gay. But you know nothing about the Nag Hamadi discoveries or the Gnostic Gospels,,as that would require an education. BTW, you forge=ot to answer the question about what you think you are doing here. I don't have a "cause". If people don't want to hear facts, it's their problem. If all you want is nicey-nicey, go play in the "Let all pray to Jebus and his Holy Mother" forum.