fallingblood
Agnostic Theist
First, I used common sense. My explanation is how babies are born. Second, I've stated that the birth stories are just later creations superimposed onto the Jesus tradition. It is the same thing that happened with Buddha, or closer to Jesus, Augustus.And I will ask you again: if you are talking about Joseph the son of Jacob from the tribe of Judah who is a direct descendant of Solomon the son of Bathsheba and David, as recorded in the gospel according to Matthew, which states that he wasn't even married to the pregnant unmarried Mary when the angel appeared to him in a dream, and that this Joseph did not have sexual intercourse with Mary until after she had given birth to her first son.
The fact that you personaly believe without any evidence whatsoever, that Joseph the son of Jacob from the tribe of Judah, had unprotected sex with Mary and that the sperm of Joseph then fertilized Mary's egg, and Jesus was conceived, and that nine months later, Jesus was born. Then this is all but a figment of your own imagination.
There is much more evidence for my idea then your idea that no respectable scholar, minister, or anyone serious about the history of Christianity would even accept as somewhat true.
Make up stories? The fore most authorities on the historical Jesus support what I'm saying. This is not something I "made up in my sick own head," it is something that has the backing of the majority of authorities on the subject of a historical Jesus, as well as the majority of scholars who deal with Jesus and the New Testament. Anyone serious about a historical Jesus will have read all that I've stated, as it is the most widely accepted conclusion.Of course it was clear what you were saying, and you may as well say that Jesus was born as a nine foot giant, I mean, when you wish to make up stories out of your own sick head, without any supporting evidence whatsoever, you can say what ever you want to. Mind you, no one is going to believe you, but you can say whatever you wish.
Also, personally attacking me on the same grounds that one could attack you simply does not fly for a logical debate. You have no evidence, your only support is a spirit that one can not logical debate as all logic goes out the window once you start ranting off that mumbo jumbo, as another poster put so well.
This is just one more reason a logical debate can not be had with you. Instead of actually debating, you just dismiss evidence right out by some logical fallacy.And so say all the godless.
Don't worry about answering any questions though, because you've shown that you simply can't. Spouting off stuff that a supposed inner spirit tells you does not equal evidence. You have no evidence. Your ideas fly in the face of modern scholars, as well as the authorities on the subject. Why should one though away all of the credible knowledge that we have that has been accumulated over many years just because an inner spirit told you otherwise? It is not logical to do. Being a rational person, I would rather believe the authorities on the subject, as well as the scholars as they have dedicated themselves to learning as much about this subject as possible. And, unlike you find the need to state, many of them are not godless, and even if they are, it means absolutely nothing. Logical fallacies do not count as credible debate.