Reposting an interesting article concerning the virgin virth of Christ. Enjoy!
I’ve been writing lately about the “virgin conception” of Jesus. Is this an essential truth claim of Christianity? Is it reasonable Jesus could have been conceived in such a miraculous way? Was the “virgin conception” borrowed from mythologies that preceded Jesus? If the “Virgin conception” is true, why didn’t Paul mention it? Why didn’t Mark include it in his Gospel? Skeptics have assailed the claim on a variety of fronts. Some critics of the “virgin conception” argue that the earliest Christian authors of the Jesus “mythology” inserted this idea regarding His conception in an effort to give Jesus the “heroic” birth that was consistent with other Old Testament heroes.
Remember that the first Christians were raised within the Jewish culture and religious environment, and these first adherents were familiar with the birth stories of Isaac, Moses, Samson and Samuel; these characters had irregular and unusual births. Were the early authors of the New Testament canon simply trying to create a new hero in the tradition of other Jewish heroes who had unusual birth narratives? There are several reasons to reject such an accounting of the birth story of Jesus:
Continue Reading at Cold-Case Christianity with J. Warner Wallace.
Image from WallpaperCave.com
solidrockapologetics.wordpress.com 
It was inserted by the writer of ”Matthew” as supposed fulfillment of prophecy, and all it is is a hash job lifted from Isaiah in an attempt to give the already stupid story a measure of credibility – and failed miserably.
I think you are beginning to scrape the bottom of the barrel with your choice of posts if you are stooping to post nonsense like this.
LikeLike
Hello Ark!
If Mathews motives is your strongest objection then your entitled to it. Luke also mentioned the Virgin birth. But since you view the bible as a fiction I have to wonder what motivates you to comment on a fiction everyday? What hope do you have?
LikeLike
The motive of the writer of Mathew is exactly that – to demonstrate that Jesus’ birth is the fulfillment of prophecy; something every recognised biblical scholar attests to. When the true nature of the story began to be brought to light – that the prophecy was meant for King Ahaz – that apologists devised the duel prophecy.
Do you not believe that Jesus’ birth is a fulfillment of prophecy?
Are you unaware of Matthew Chapter 1 verse 22?
Yes, or no?
LikeLike
Furthermore ….
http://www.religioustolerance.org/xmas_lib.htm
I am truly baffled that a seemingly intelligent person as yourself would even consider the tripe of the virgin birth as having any credibility at all.
Tell me, in all seriousness, when you study apologetics does this not include hermeneutics, language, etymology, and historical origins, or do you simply admit you are a sinner then latch on to every writer ( such as this half-wit Wallace) that can fuel your guilt-ridden beliefs?
LikeLike