Reminder that according to christian belief, God was 90 years old when he fucked 12 year old Mary

reminder that according to christian belief, God was 90 years old when he fucked 12 year old Mary

Other urls found in this thread:

skepticsannotatedbible.com/contra/jesus_dad.html
harpercollins.com/9780062089946/did-jesus-exist
kenyatalk.s3.amazonaws.com/2015/08/77905_e6c9182b87da35bb6d4e297f60cff907.jpg
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

Mary was a virgin you sick fuck.

>Mary was a virgin
Nope, Wildly known translation error

>Almah: is a Hebrew word for a maiden or woman of childbearing age who may be unmarried or married.[1] It does not, in and of itself, indicate whether she is a virgin

You can check this for yourself with Biblical Scholars
Just another case of 'What we want the Bible to say'

>muh climate change
>muh atheism
>doesn't realize that the global warming cult requires blind faith in whatever he's told by the high priests of (((climate science))) or, in other words, "what we want the data to say"
Oh, the irony

She will always be a virgin in my eyes. She is so pure, why else would our gracious God choose her to bare his child?

I`d rather believe in scientists than in pedos

>Listen to science that say smoking kills.
>Same % says that climate change is real.
>Don't belive science any more.

Both of you fags are dumbfucks blindly trusting prominent figures

Now sit down and eat your ice cream

>ooh look at me, the special snowflake that never gets fooled nor controlled by anyone

>why else
The literal definition of the 'argument from ignorance fallacy'

The irony is comparing Religion to Science as if they where the same thing in order to say "Look where both as stupid as each other"

You will regret it when you are burning in hell. I will pray for you.

>believing a 90 year old god impregnating a 12 year old girl (who is still considered to be a virgin) will make you go to heaven
your life needs to end

...

Even though I dont really believe that, I agree my life needs to end

I should burn in hell for all eternity for correcting your misunderstanding of the Bible? I actually suggest you go read it, you might learn something
I'll prey you stop trying to condemning people to death for your own ignorance.

I always wanted to run into one of these doomsday nutters so I could tell them to transfer all their money and possessions to me and call their bullshit

He was much older than that and also he didn't fuck her. Where the fuck did you get 90 years from? Shit Methuselah himself was said to be nearly 1000 and he was long dead by then.

But the Christian scriptures are in Greek, user. You're thinking of the Old Testament "prophesies" supposedly predicting Jesus. A little knowledge is a dangerous thing.

>But the Christian scriptures are in Greek, user
What, we still have hebrew originals. Maybe you know the caves of golan? And some histotion 100 ac told the translation error.

historian

>You're thinking of
Yes, because that's what the thread is about, Americanized Christianity. Did you have some kind of point? Are you saying there is something wrong with the Old testament (as it is)?

>Greek
That's the problem, the word for "young woman" and the word for "virgin" are the same in Greek, so when the books were translated into koine greek suddenly we get a "prophesy" about a virgin giving birth.

Side note: people knew about that error already 70 A.D. But rumors stay and in this case it may be the longest ever existing rumor in human mankind.

what rumor?

That mary was a virgin. Happened after some egyption godking ordered to translate the hebrew letters into greek for his library.

But the Christian bible, in the Greek original, claims unambiguously that Mary was a virgin. I'm not saying I believe that, I'm saying it's ridiculous to claim that isn't part of valid Christian doctrine. Almah was misconstrued in Hebrew, the Greek accounts were not.

The bible was written hundred and some years latter just collecting the letters written about jesus and stuff.
In the original it was written as "young woman" and the translator changed it into virgin in the greek translation. There is a lot more bs in the bible, but that is clear if you think about it, when someone writes about something happened a hundred years ago, especially in that times.

Not sure where you want to go with this. A virgin birth is a tenant of modern Christianity, talking about when and where it all went wrong is a little off topic to the matter of it being false.
I mean if you had chapter and verse from the originals and said "here it is", that's something, But saying hurr 'insert the obvious here followed by thinly veiled insult "little knowledge is a dangerous thing"' - That's something else

Please tell me you're trolling. Nothing indicates Christian scriptures (which were written well after Jesus) were based on ambiguous source material as opposed to oral tradition. And anyway such "original" material would be in Aramaic or Greek.

Ok look at like 1:26-38. The context makes it clear Mary was allegedly a virgin, since she asks "how can I become pregnant since I'm a virgin." Young woman would make no sense there. And in Matthew 1 it's clear Joseph hadn't had sexy with Mary, so what's being alleged in this thread, that he married a slut and waited for marriage with her?

*luke

>ambiguous source material
>oral tradition
Of all the compelling arguments you could have made, this was not one of them, Not to mention a quick study of most Biblical stories are clear plagiarisms or mashups of much earlier (Non Christian) material.
The 'Epic of Gilgamesh' comes to mind as an example
Further more there is NO records outside the Bible itself to support any claimed made in it

> tfw Christians literally believe a guy can live inside a living whale for 3 days

Because your looking at the 'New' international version
>34 “How will this be,” Mary asked the angel, “since I am a virgin?”
Vs
>1:34 Then said Mary unto the angel, How shall this be, seeing I know not a man?

The second does not imply she's a virgin, just that she hadn't known a man to have become pregnant

If you get to go back and re-write the stories, they can say whatever you want them to, that's the POINT

You can argue this all you want with apologetics, But the fact of the matter is Biblical Scholars accept the virgin birth to be untrue.

What do you want to tell me? Are rumors facts? And that translation back then never destroyed any information?

The trollin is hard with you. You really believe the 1600th century bible has the same information as the original.

>what's being alleged in this thread, that he married a slut and waited for marriage with her?
I should add, No. The point of the thread is that these story's are untrue in their entirety.

Nice strawman bait

>strawman
Actually it's a 'reductio ad absurdum': Latin for "reduction to absurdity"

def not true about the translation error, unless you look into some jew shit. I took a class from an athiest could read latin.

>Biblical stories are clear plagiarisms or mashups
>doesn't know the new testament is the same story 4 times

>jew shit
You realize the Bible, and Jesus are Jewish right?

I'm really not understanding where you're going. I personally don't believe any of this shit for the reasons you give and more. All I'm saying is that the (bullshit) Christian scriptures very clearly claim a virgin birth. You say bible scholars say that isn't so, then provide a source.
Bible scholars (and the pope) have said that Isaiah 7 does not foretell a virgin birth, but that doesn't mean the Christian scriptures don't claim one happened. How does that not make sense?

not a whale but a great fish

People seriously believe in climate change? You're not trolling like flat earthers?

>then provide a source

Joseph was the father of Jesus.

These verses claim that Jesus is son of David -- "the seed of David", "the fruit of his loins" "according to the flesh". For this to be true, Jesus would have to have a real father (presumably Joseph).

Therefore being a prophet [David], and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him, that of the fruit of his loins, according to the flesh, he would raise up Christ to sit on his throne. Acts 2:30

Of this man's seed [David's] hath God, according to his promise, raised unto Israel a Saviour, Jesus. Acts 13:23

Concerning his son Jesus Christ our Lord, which was made of the seed of David according to the flesh. Romans 1:3

Remember that Jesus Christ of the seed of David. 2 Timothy 2:8

For verily he [Jesus] took not on him the nature of angels, but he took on him the seed of Abraham. Hebrews 2:16

I Jesus have sent mine angel to testify unto you these things in the churches. I am the root and the offspring of David. Revelation 22:16

>skepticsannotatedbible.com/contra/jesus_dad.html

Start here
(David was Josephs ancestor fyi, so Jesus was of David's lineage through Joseph)

Big book of multiple choice

Jesus basically tried to dismantle the fucked up shit in Judaism

For example Wikipedia (for convenience). These scholars are saying the virgin birth did not happen (duh) but they all start from the premise that Matthew and Luke claim it did happen. And you haven't given me a translation of those gospels that don't imply virgin birth.
Knowing man = non virgin

Except he didn't. The only law he changed was the sacrificial law, that is you don't have to blood sacrifice animals, people and children to God anymore
He said he would not change "one jot or one tittle" from the other Old laws, then he build a whip and went to beat up some merchants

Are you serious? It takes a quick google search on scholar to show, it was a translation error. Should I post them for you and waste both our times? There is even an hebrew to english direct translation showing the error.

You're pointing out contradictions in the Bible, big deal. Show me where legitimate bible scholars say Matthew and Luke don't claim a virgin birth, it's all a translation error

Hebrew to English translation of what? The lost sources of the gospels? See my post here

...

muh omnipotent supernatural master in the sky!

...

...

so he just added more laws? I don't think this was it but i'm not here to argue. Anything else to add to your claim?

>don't imply
We are not concerned with your interpretation

...

...

...

...

>Anything else to add to your claim?
Go read the Bible?
He didn't add any laws, He just said "Now i'm here the only way to God is through me, Oh and stop slaughtering children as an offering to God" - Seriously that second point was a really big problem at the time

...

...

>bible says παρθένος
Is mostly translated as young woman, only fourth translation is virgin

harpercollins.com/9780062089946/did-jesus-exist

New English Bible

Fuckin hell, even bible and theology professor call her young woman. At this point you are just trolling

...

thanks faggot

>New English Bible
FAKE NEWS

...

>but,but,but... muh faith
having science bring actual facts and evidence is not the same as having blind faith.
sorry I have to bring the world shattering revelation to you but the sooner you hear the sooner you can start to recover my friend.

This is putting aside there is no documentation of Jesus's existence outside of the bible itself, As the entire story is a Copy / paste of an earlier story about Horus (An Egyptian god)

>Was translated from hebrew and greek
>fake news because the other english bible was translated from teutonic and latin
k, mang, the bait is good. At least I replied some 4 posts in, but trying to be retarded is no good bait.

...

fake news...because it's fake

retarded, because you think you are baiting

...

this fish keeps putting my hook in its mouth

You are right, but that was not part of the thread. Jesus was long born at 0 and was born in summer, not winter. Germans introduced 90% of that christian holidays and dates.

Still behaving retarded is not baiting. Everyone newer than 13 thinks that, but you just seem like a downie.

>Jesus was long born at 0

meanwhile in China...

hold on, let me get my pliers to pull that out

kenyatalk.s3.amazonaws.com/2015/08/77905_e6c9182b87da35bb6d4e297f60cff907.jpg

Best thing is: some german (rather germanian king) added about 100 years to the calendar to be reigning at some important date as caiser. We are in 1917 if we would go with the christian calendar.