Question to Christians about Jesus's family

1246

Comments

  • MakingWavesMakingWaves Posts: 1,293
    then they should call her the virgin birth mary, not the virgin mary. I think that maybe the virgin mary term helps the church's cause, because they want her to be seen as something untouched except by god. For whatever reason. Personally, I don't know which is more wierd, the fact that the church wanted everyone to believe that, or the fact that nearly everyone did!

    That is why it is called faith.
    Seeing visions of falling up somehow.

    Pensacola '94
    New Orleans '95
    Birmingham '98
    New Orleans '00
    New Orleans '03
    Tampa '08
    New Orleans '10 - Jazzfest
    New Orleans '16 - Jazzfest
    Fenway Park '18
    St. Louis '22
  • dkst0426dkst0426 Posts: 523
    Nothing about a person's name changes the essence of their being.
  • gue_bariumgue_barium Posts: 5,515
    I have a question. Would it be possible to introduce sperm into the vagina of a virginal woman, and could it bypass the hymen thereby potentially impregnating the woman?

    all posts by ©gue_barium are protected under US copyright law and are not to be reproduced, exchanged or sold
    except by express written permission of ©gue_barium, the author.
  • gue_bariumgue_barium Posts: 5,515
    gue_barium wrote:
    I have a question. Would it be possible to introduce sperm into the vagina of a virginal woman, and could it bypass the hymen thereby potentially impregnating the woman?

    Well, not "bypass", I guess I mean, "go through". I've seen pictures of hymens and I recall some of them have a hole in the center.

    all posts by ©gue_barium are protected under US copyright law and are not to be reproduced, exchanged or sold
    except by express written permission of ©gue_barium, the author.
  • catefrancescatefrances Posts: 29,003
    gue_barium wrote:
    Well, not "bypass", I guess I mean, "go through". I've seen pictures of hymens and I recall some of them have a hole in the center.

    well how on earth do you think women menstruate if the hole is blocked off?
    hear my name
    take a good look
    this could be the day
    hold my hand
    lie beside me
    i just need to say
  • gue_bariumgue_barium Posts: 5,515
    well how on earth do you think women menstruate if the hole is blocked off?

    right. lol. sorry for my ignorance (and to think i pride myself on knowledge of the females zonal zones).

    So! It is possible! To impregnate a virgin without intercourse.

    all posts by ©gue_barium are protected under US copyright law and are not to be reproduced, exchanged or sold
    except by express written permission of ©gue_barium, the author.
  • catefrancescatefrances Posts: 29,003
    gue_barium wrote:
    right. lol. sorry for my ignorance (and to think i pride myself on knowledge of the females zonal zones).

    So! It is possible! To impregnate a virgin without intercourse.

    why yes it is. how do you think lesbians get pregnant?* no need for a penis ALL the time boys. :D


    *i am in no way saying that ALL lesbians or even ANY lesbians get pregnant by what could be considered bizarre ways. but surely we've all heard about the turkey baster method?
    hear my name
    take a good look
    this could be the day
    hold my hand
    lie beside me
    i just need to say
  • gue_bariumgue_barium Posts: 5,515
    gue_barium wrote:
    right. lol. sorry for my ignorance (and to think i pride myself on knowledge of the females zonal zones).

    So! It is possible! To impregnate a virgin without intercourse.

    Let us now all mull over the sexual act that must have assuredly produced Mary's virginal conception. Mull slowly.

    Back then, trusted midwives, and even mothers of the newlywed husband would insert a finger to verify the virginity of the new bride.

    all posts by ©gue_barium are protected under US copyright law and are not to be reproduced, exchanged or sold
    except by express written permission of ©gue_barium, the author.
  • JeanieJeanie Posts: 9,446
    gue_barium wrote:
    right. lol. sorry for my ignorance (and to think i pride myself on knowledge of the females zonal zones).

    So! It is possible! To impregnate a virgin without intercourse.


    Oops! Sorry to throw a spanner in the works here kids but a friend of my mother's was impregnated and gave birth with her hymen still considered to be intact, well it was until the birth started anyway.:) I believe that it is a miniscule percentage but impregnation is still possible with the hymen still intact. So watch out for the evils of heavy petting!;)
    NOPE!!!

    *~You're IT Bert!~*

    Hold on to the thread
    The currents will shift
  • gue_bariumgue_barium Posts: 5,515
    why yes it is. how do you think lesbians get pregnant?* no need for a penis ALL the time boys. :D


    *i am in no way saying that ALL lesbians or even ANY lesbians get pregnant by what could be considered bizarre ways. but surely we've all heard about the turkey baster method?

    right. it's just that i've never seen the plausible virgin pregnancy brought up in regard to mary and jesus before.

    all posts by ©gue_barium are protected under US copyright law and are not to be reproduced, exchanged or sold
    except by express written permission of ©gue_barium, the author.
  • catefrancescatefrances Posts: 29,003
    you think the virgin mary is a difficult enough concept to get your heads around? think about mary's immaculate conception for a minute.
    though mary's parents had sex to conceive her, mary was exempted from the burden of original sin(which we are all born with and from which we are all cleansed of when we are baptised), purely because she was pregnant with the christ child.
    hear my name
    take a good look
    this could be the day
    hold my hand
    lie beside me
    i just need to say
  • catefrancescatefrances Posts: 29,003
    gue_barium wrote:
    right. it's just that i've never seen the plausible virgin pregnancy brought up in regard to mary and jesus before.

    oh g_b you know faith requires no plausibility.
    hear my name
    take a good look
    this could be the day
    hold my hand
    lie beside me
    i just need to say
  • The bible does state the Jesus had younger brothers and sisters (well it states half-brothers and sisters due to the virgin birth). I haven't seen any evidence linking Jesus and Mary Magadelene at all, as far as I can tell there is no historical evidence to back that up whatsoever. Just a good bit of fiction from Dan Brown's sources.
    The wind is blowing cold
    Have we lost our way tonight?
    Have we lost our hope to sorrow?

    Feels like were all alone
    Running further from what’s right
    And there are no more heroes to follow

    So what are we becoming?
    Where did we go wrong?
  • you think the virgin mary is a difficult enough concept to get your heads around? think about mary's immaculate conception for a minute.
    though mary's parents had sex to conceive her, mary was exempted from the burden of original sin(which we are all born with and from which we are all cleansed of when we are baptised), purely because she was pregnant with the christ child.


    I fully agree with this, this catholic doctrine here doesn't make any sense at all. How could she be exempt from this when no-one else was? Its the same as the body of Jesus literally becoming being consumed during communion....a little creepy if you ask me. Hard to believe someone could be born of a virgin birth, I guess that is where a great deal of faith is required.
    The wind is blowing cold
    Have we lost our way tonight?
    Have we lost our hope to sorrow?

    Feels like were all alone
    Running further from what’s right
    And there are no more heroes to follow

    So what are we becoming?
    Where did we go wrong?
  • catefrancescatefrances Posts: 29,003
    I fully agree with this, this catholic doctrine here doesn't make any sense at all. How could she be exempt from this when no-one else was? Its the same as the body of Jesus literally becoming being consumed during communion....a little creepy if you ask me. Hard to believe someone could be born of a virgin birth, I guess that is where a great deal of faith is required.

    it's indicative of the redeeming power of christ that mary was absolved from original sin.


    and i agree i always thought the communion wafer = the body of christ was bit weird.
    hear my name
    take a good look
    this could be the day
    hold my hand
    lie beside me
    i just need to say
  • it's indicative of the redeeming power of christ that mary was absolved from original sin.


    and i agree i always thought the communion wafer = the body of christ was bit weird.


    This is a whole other debate but I find it quite strange how the Catholic church has many doctrines that don't have any sort of biblical basis to them whatsoever, such as this and also infant baptism. Tradition plays a much bigger role in this sect of christianity obviously. Religion is a curious subject that could be debated for hours. In the end all religions require you to use an element of faith and believe that which you would never do otherwise eg: believe that someone could rise from the dead.
    The wind is blowing cold
    Have we lost our way tonight?
    Have we lost our hope to sorrow?

    Feels like were all alone
    Running further from what’s right
    And there are no more heroes to follow

    So what are we becoming?
    Where did we go wrong?
  • i read a post that forgot to click the quote for and i'm not going back to look for it, but it questioned the sin of homosexuality and well, sex in general not in the ten commandments.

    sex itself isn't a sin, the sin is adultery... sex outside of marraige. that's in the top ten. as homosexuals are unable to be married [well, to each other] than any sexual intercourse between them is adultery.

    also, just because people don't know if jesus was married or had siblings, why do you assume there is a cover up? not everything is done by the US government.

    and why can people cannot accept that dan brown writes fiction? bad fiction.
    waiting for the great leap forward

    12 people may make the one decision but that doesn't make it right.

    Free Rob Farquharson, wrongfully imprisoned!!

    www.factbeforetheory.net
  • Carlos DCarlos D Posts: 638
    but why is there a cover-up then?

    The 'cover up' that Jesus had a secret family is as likely to be true as the 9/11 conspiracies.......ie not true at all because the only people who believe it are unemployed nerds who spend their whole day on the internet.
    It may be the devil or it may be the Lord
    But you're gonna have to serve somebody.

    www.bebo.com/pearljam06
  • JeanieJeanie Posts: 9,446
    Carlos D wrote:
    The 'cover up' that Jesus had a secret family is as likely to be true as the 9/11 conspiracies.......ie not true at all because the only people who believe it are unemployed nerds who spend their whole day on the internet.

    Well I don't think that's correct CarlosD. There have been thousands of books and documents discussing and putting forth arguments on this topic and most of them were written long before the internet existed.
    NOPE!!!

    *~You're IT Bert!~*

    Hold on to the thread
    The currents will shift
  • cornnifercornnifer Posts: 2,130
    In the end all religions require you to use an element of faith and believe that which you would never do otherwise eg: believe that someone could rise from the dead.

    Maybe so, (i'm not catholic by the way), but again, these things are only impossible when you take away the element of the supernatural. We're talking about God here. A God who, acording to those who believe in God, created the universe, nature, and the people that live there, is certainly capable of bending its natural laws. God is certainly capable of willing a woman pregnant with divine child without the element of sexual intercourse, walking on water, or rising from the dead. None of these occur within the realm of nature. As a Christian, i understand these things just as well as any other sensible individual. i'm pretty sure they understood it in Jesus' day as well, which is kinda what made it such a big deal! Still makes it such a big deal. As i stated earlier. it is intellectually unsound to say these supernatural things could not have occured. We're discussing God, a supernatural being certainly capable of such things. If God created people, he could certainly supernaturally impregnate one or raise one from the dead. If you believe in God, none of these other events are hard to believe at all.
    "When all your friends and sedatives mean well but make it worse... better find yourself a place to level out."
  • soulsingingsoulsinging Posts: 13,202
    dkst0426 wrote:
    It is kinda funny--if you paint in broad strokes.

    no, it's just plain funny. unless you intend to offer a totally reasonable and logical rationalization for why it is ok to have sex outside of marriage but wearing a condom while doing it is going too far. that's kinda like saying it's wrong to steal, but if you're going to do it anyway, you should ask for their wallet politely while pointing the gun at them.
  • dkst0426dkst0426 Posts: 523
    no, it's just plain funny. unless you intend to offer a totally reasonable and logical rationalization for why it is ok to have sex outside of marriage but wearing a condom while doing it is going too far. that's kinda like saying it's wrong to steal, but if you're going to do it anyway, you should ask for their wallet politely while pointing the gun at them.
    And you're assuming that those who think it is ok to have sex outside of marriage also think wearing a condom is going too far. THAT is what I meant about painting with broad strokes.
  • CollinCollin Posts: 4,931
    cornnifer wrote:
    Maybe so, (i'm not catholic by the way), but again, these things are only impossible when you take away the element of the supernatural. We're talking about God here. A God who, acording to those who believe in God, created the universe, nature, and the people that live there, is certainly capable of bending its natural laws. God is certainly capable of willing a woman pregnant with divine child without the element of sexual intercourse, walking on water, or rising from the dead. None of these occur within the realm of nature. As a Christian, i understand these things just as well as any other sensible individual. i'm pretty sure they understood it in Jesus' day as well, which is kinda what made it such a big deal! Still makes it such a big deal. As i stated earlier. it is intellectually unsound to say these supernatural things could not have occured. We're discussing God, a supernatural being certainly capable of such things. If God created people, he could certainly supernaturally impregnate one or raise one from the dead. If you believe in God, none of these other events are hard to believe at all.

    I'm with you on this one, except I don't believe in god and I don't believe it happened. But if you are debating god what's the point in saying it's impossible, if he exits it's possible, if he doesn't well than it's not possible but it wouldn't matter anyway because he wouldn't be the son of god, right?
    THANK YOU, LOSTDAWG!


    naděje umírá poslední
  • chopitdownchopitdown Posts: 2,222
    what denomination are you? do you have female priests?

    I attend a Community church; they have men and women working together. They don't have a woman's pastor or anything but they have women that lead the womens ministries.
    make sure the fortune that you seek...is the fortune that you need
  • brainofPJbrainofPJ Posts: 2,361
    in time, James, Joseph, Simon, and Judas (no, not that one) were born to Mary and Joseph...they became parents to girls as well...


    Esther's here and she's sick?

    hi Esther, now we are all going to be sick, thanks
  • Does it make any difference to you if Jesus had a family? As in brothers and sisters? Or children and a wife (such as mary magdalene)? What about if the church was found to be involved in a big cover-up of any evidence that these people existed?

    I'm just curious how christians and catholics would feel about this because they showed a programme here on Christmas day about the fact that the church had covered up information on Jesus's family. According to the programme, which kind of followed along the da vinci code line, there is apparently evidence in bible which indicates Jesus had brothers and sisters with their names, which contradicted with the image of the Virgin mary so was covered up. I can't remember the passages now but the church has said these names were actually joseph's kids or they were jesus's friends or cousins or whatever. Apparently whatever the truth is, the cover-up continues.

    So my point is if the church is so interested in covering-up any so-called evidence, what difference will it make to you, as a follower of Christianity, if Jesus did have a family, or the virgin mary hadn't been a virgin, or that Jesus had had a wife and kids?

    Will it really make a difference to your faith, or your understanding of your faith? Just curious really!


    what?
    i think the bible says he has bothers or half brother james
  • cornnifer wrote:
    Maybe so, (i'm not catholic by the way), but again, these things are only impossible when you take away the element of the supernatural. We're talking about God here. A God who, acording to those who believe in God, created the universe, nature, and the people that live there, is certainly capable of bending its natural laws. God is certainly capable of willing a woman pregnant with divine child without the element of sexual intercourse, walking on water, or rising from the dead. None of these occur within the realm of nature. As a Christian, i understand these things just as well as any other sensible individual. i'm pretty sure they understood it in Jesus' day as well, which is kinda what made it such a big deal! Still makes it such a big deal. As i stated earlier. it is intellectually unsound to say these supernatural things could not have occured. We're discussing God, a supernatural being certainly capable of such things. If God created people, he could certainly supernaturally impregnate one or raise one from the dead. If you believe in God, none of these other events are hard to believe at all.


    That is certainly true, God could do whatever he wanted and bend whichever natural laws he so chose to do. Its not really a question of could he do it, but more why all these miracles occured in biblical days but nothing (that has being documented) has occured in the last 2000 years?
    The wind is blowing cold
    Have we lost our way tonight?
    Have we lost our hope to sorrow?

    Feels like were all alone
    Running further from what’s right
    And there are no more heroes to follow

    So what are we becoming?
    Where did we go wrong?
  • JeanieJeanie Posts: 9,446
    That is certainly true, God could do whatever he wanted and bend whichever natural laws he so chose to do. Its not really a question of could he do it, but more why all these miracles occured in biblical days but nothing (that has being documented) has occured in the last 2000 years?

    Oh come on! Don't forget the toast!!;)
    NOPE!!!

    *~You're IT Bert!~*

    Hold on to the thread
    The currents will shift
  • That is certainly true, God could do whatever he wanted and bend whichever natural laws he so chose to do. Its not really a question of could he do it, but more why all these miracles occured in biblical days but nothing (that has being documented) has occured in the last 2000 years?

    These sorts of miracles happen every day around the world, but we always dismiss them. These days, all we want is a 'perfectly reasonable scientific explanation' for them which, obviously, the ancient jews and Christians weren't looking for.
    'We're learning songs for baby Jesus' birthday. His mum and dad were Merry and Joseph. He had a bed made of clay and the three kings bought him Gold, Frankenstein and Merv as presents.'

    - the great Sir Leo Harrison
Sign In or Register to comment.