What would the World be like if JESUS had never been Born?

It makes one think, doesn't it?

Mary, a virgin, becomes pregnant by God, yet Joseph remains her husband!

Bib says:



Or was she just a consort? And, then God wasn't the active particpant, it was the Holy Ghost. Now where does that put us?

perhaps it was an immaculate deception?

A "pure" "trick", what a concept!

Main Entry: im·mac·u·late
Pronunciation: i-'ma-ky&-l&t
Function: adjective
Etymology: Middle English immaculat, from Latin immaculatus, from in- + maculatus stained -- more at MACULATE
Date: 15th century
1 : having no stain or blemish : PURE
2 : containing no flaw or error
3 a : spotlessly clean b : having no colored spots or marks <petals immaculate>

Main Entry: de·cep·tion
Pronunciation: di-'sep-sh&n
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English decepcioun, from Middle French deception, from Late Latin deception-, deceptio, from Latin decipere to deceive
Date: 15th century
1 a : the act of deceiving b : the fact or condition of being deceived
2 : something that deceives : TRICK
- de·cep·tion·al /-sh&-n&l/ adjective
synonyms DECEPTION, FRAUD, DOUBLE-DEALING, SUBTERFUGE, TRICKERY mean the acts or practices of one who deliberately deceives. DECEPTION may or may not imply blameworthiness, since it may suggest cheating or merely tactical resource <magicians are masters of deception>. FRAUD always implies guilt and often criminality in act or practice <indicted for fraud>. DOUBLE-DEALING suggests treachery or at least action contrary to a professed attitude <a go-between suspected of double-dealing>. SUBTERFUGE suggests the adoption of a stratagem or the telling of a lie in order to escape guilt or to gain an end <obtained the papers by subterfuge>. TRICKERY implies ingenious acts intended to dupe or cheat <resorted to trickery to gain their ends>.

Sorry to backtrack a bit here, but I haven't been keeping up with this thread recently. There were a couple things you said here, Biblio, which I wanted to comment on.


-- Much of the shaping of the Church came from Paul's own views and not Christ's.



1. Physical abuse. -- According to what you said here (as well as my version of morality), wouldn't that also make the barbaric, vengeance-loving God of the Old Testament one of the world's greatest charlatans? Do you think Jesus' father conducts his business in a Christian manner?

2. Pedophilia. -- The only scriptures I can think of right now to back up what you said are ones similar to Matthew 18:6 ...
About this particular verse, well, to begin with, it just isn't about sex. Even if it does apply to that, this threat only goes out against those who "offend" Christian children, which doesn't settle too well with me.
I can't think of scriptures that specifically talk against any sexual practices other than male homosexuality. I'd be very interested in any Bible verses dealing with pedophilia, as I grew up in a Christian organization which preached that having sex with kids was Biblically okay so long as "it was done in love", which is completely revolting to me. I'm curious whether what you said can be backed up from the Bible or not.

I wish there wasn't so much in the Bible that CAN be used to support human abuse.


Edit: fixed 2 typos

Monger, Bill and Dyslexia, I'll come back to your latest comments this evening. I'm off to a Christmas Carol Service now.

Sing clear and sweet!

Take care, Biblio.

Just watched a programme on Channel 4 which suggests Mary may have been raped by a Roman Soldier. Now I know this might be offensive to many, but only reporting what I watched.

OK guys, I'm back. So, as promised, I'll get back to your comments.

Bill: you said, "Or was she just a consort? And, then God wasn't the active particpant, it was the Holy Ghost. Now where does that put us?"

Good point, and I understand how you reached that conclusion, however, Luke does say that Mary's baby, Jesus, would be called the "SON of GOD!"

Now tell me, if Jesus was born of Mary, a mortal human, and "conceived" by the Holy Ghost, an immortal divine, then what did that make Jesus? Human or Divine? Human with some divinity, or Divine with some humanity?

Interesting, isn't it!

Dyslexia: you said, "perhaps it was an immaculate deception?"

Nice quip; I know you weren't being sacreligious, so I saw the humour in it.

I don't believe Mary's conception was deception, however, it certainly was a case for divine interception which has caused certain apperception and misconception about the perception of contraception! If you get my meaning?

Monger: nice to see, and there's no problem in backtracking on this topic; I welcome it.

You said, "Much of the shaping of the Church came from Paul's own views and not Christ's."

You are absolutely correct in pointing that out. The Pauline epistles certainly did shape the CHURCH, or to be more specific, the first century AD churches of Asia Minor, such as Ephesus, Galatia, Philippi, Corinth, Colossi, and Thessalonica.

However, my comment was with regard to CHRISTIANITY, not the CHURCH. It is important to make a distinction between these two forms of terminology.

Monger: you made the follwoing comment:

"1. Physical abuse. -- According to what you said here (as well as my version of morality), wouldn't that also make the barbaric, vengeance-loving God of the Old Testament one of the world's greatest charlatans? Do you think Jesus' father conducts his business in a Christian manner?"

There is a clear moral distinction, in the eyes of God, between "human abuse," which is rightly abhorrent and certainly not Christian, and "Divine retribution" for lives which He has deemed are utterly wicked or an abomination; the final result being their execution and demise.

Of course, this (Divine Judgment) is another huge topic in itself, which is somewhat off the topic which we are dealing with here, viz. "The Birth of Christ" et al.

Monger: you also made the following comment:

"I can't think of scriptures that specifically talk against any sexual practices other than male homosexuality. I'd be very interested in any Bible verses dealing with pedophilia, as I grew up in a Christian organization which at one point actually preached that having sex with kids was Biblically okay so long as "it was done in love, and no one was hurt in the experience," which is completely revolting to me. I'm just curious whether what you said can be backed up from the Bible or not."

Again, this is another huge topic, which would be off-thread. So, I'll leave it for another new topic in the future perhaps.

Steve: Yes, I was aware of the upcoming Channel 4 programme about Mary. A bit contentious to say the least.

Of course, the suggestion that she was raped by a Roman soldier was proposed back in the second century AD, I believe, in order to discredit one of the foundations of Christianity.

Ah well, some things never change.

Steve: an article in the Daily Mirror had this to say about the BBC (not Channel 4...oops!) programme about the suggestion of Mary being raped by a soldier:

O LITTLE TOWN OF BEDLAM

"ALL this debunking of Christmas is becoming offensive.

The Bishop of Lichfield tells us that Jesus's family were asylum-seekers and the Three Wise Men were Herod's assassins.

And on Sunday a BBC1 programme claims the Virgin Mary was a 13-year-old who became pregnant after she was raped by a Roman soldier.

No wonder schools are thinking twice about allowing their Nativity plays to be filmed."

I'll speak to you all tomorrow. I'm off to bed now.

Feel free to backtrack on ANY of the previous questions or comments in this thread.

Can someone find this show being aired in the US?

Bib, I do not believe in the virgin birth simply because it is fairly well accepted that virgins do not bear children. I suppose the doctrine was adopted by the church in order to explain how a human descendant of Adam could be born without the taint of sin. I have always found it interesting that aside from Matthew and Luke none of the other New testament writers seem to know anything about the virgin birth. Paul who, for example, was quick to bring up every conceivable argument to prove the truth of his position, never mentions it.

On the question of responsibility for pedophilia, I think I understand your position. I take it you believe that the true Church is made up of individual, born again, believers in the risin Christ, and that the true Church is not an organization of professing believers who have banded together professing belief in a common creed and set of doctrines, and having property, buildings Etc. Of course, this gives you the perfect "out" because you can always say that any of these so called believers who turns out to be a pedophile or sinner of some other sort is obviously not a true Christian (by their fruits you shall know them). Do you believe that the true members of the spiritual body of Christ, that is the true Church, all live sinless lives? If not, does the committing of a sin, any sin, prove that the person committing the sin was never born again in the first place? Is it possible for a member of the true Spiritual Church to turn to pedophilia? If so, does this reflect any lack of power on the part of God to protect his special born again spiritual believers from the powers of Satan?

Of course, Catholics believe that the True Church consists of the Pope , the hierarchy, the church members, and all it's property. All of the members of the hierarchy, if I understand it correctly, are automatically by virtue of their vows and rituals, under some special relationship with God. This being true, it is hard to see how God could allow his holy church to fall into such disgraceful dishonor.

As I see it, Bib, Christians are not one iota different than anyone else. Maybe you'd say , "True, except that they are children of God." Well, I'd say, "Except that they think they are children of God."

I was looking for a quote by Elizabeth Cady Stanton, but could not find it. Here is a brief description of ground-breaking work, The Womens Bible, which raised a storm at it's publication:

'With fervor about injustices of women, Elizabeth Cady Stanton published The Woman's Bible. She saw that degradation of women was ubiquitous and permeated to even the most sacred place-church. Religion hindered women from reaching their potential because of the religious belief that a woman's purpose in life was to tend and serve and that "the chief obstacle in the way of women's elevation today is the degrading position assigned [to] her in the religion of all countries - an afterthought in creation the origin of sin, cursed by God, marriage for her condition for servitude, maternity a degradation, unfit to minister at the altar and in some churches even to sing in the choir. Such is her position in the Bible and religion."

'Five women were co-authors of The Woman's Bible, although most of the work was composed by Stanton. Pentateuch, the first volume, was completed within a year and contained works dealing with women in the Old and New Testaments. The text was printed at the top while the comments were located below. For example, she displayed both versions of the creation of man from the book of Genesis. She mentioned that the more perceivable passage was that Eve was an outgrowth of Adam's rib. In the less popular passage, however, man and woman were created concurrently by God. Using that case, Stanton argued the existence of an androgynous God and showed how male ministers utilized the Bible to their own advantage. She claimed that the standing of the woman in the Bible projected the bias of male authors.

'Although breathtaking public reaction resulted from the The Woman's Bible, a best seller that was translated into several languages, the book received mixed emotions after learning of Stanton's intention. "We have had hearing before congress for 18 years steadily, good reports, votes, but no action. I am dismayed and disgusted, and feel like making an attack on some new quarter of the enemies's domain. Our politicians are calm and complacent under our fire but the clergy jump round…like parched peas on a hot shovel." Soon afterwards, Stanton was branded a schismatic. The suffragists were angry; they believed that The Woman's Bible would injure any chance of success in the future.'

Stanton was one of the founding mothers of the women's suffrage movement, and a courageous abolitionist, who toured the American South in the 1840's and -50's to preach against the evils of slavery. For whatever else one may say of her, she certainly could not be accused of having no courage of her convictions. The quote i sought, but could not find (my time is limited right now) was to the effect that if a belief in god were natural, we would not need to instruct children, there would be no need for missionaries to take "the word" to tribal peoples, and there would be no need for priests or ministers to teach us of god. I've always greatly appreciated Stanton's plain good sense.