The Anointed
Well-Known Member
So you are saying that Mary had a child with a human father and that Jesus was "begotten" by God only at his baptism?
That is an interesting concept but it does not fit in with the prophesies concerning Jesus nor with the accounts about his conception in Matthew and Luke. Why do you dismiss the gospel accounts? Is the Bible the word of God or not? You can't pick and choose bits that suit your views....it either all is...or it all isn't "inspired by God". (2 Timothy 3:16-17)
If Jesus was a mere son of Adam, then he did not have the price in himself to pay the ransom demanded by God's law.....which indicated that equivalency was needed to cancel a debt.
The debt that Adam left for his children (sin and death) could only be paid by a sinless human being offering his life in exchange. None of Adam's children were sinless. This is why God had to send his trusted son into the world through a virgin birth, so as to produce a sinless man....born of a woman (making him Jewish) but not conceived in the natural way. (meaning he was not a sinful son of Adam.)
It was the Catholic Church who made Jesus into an incarnated god. No such god exists in scripture. The anti-Christ was already at work when the apostles were alive......so after they died, the foretold apostasy rose rather rapidly and spread like gangrene. By the 4th century, all was ripe for the introduction of Constantine's Roman inspired church, incorporating all manner of pagan concepts, cloaked in a thin veneer of Christianity.
Those raised with those God-dishonoring doctrines are not aware that the devil was the one who planted those seeds of apostasy, introducing all manner of false teachings. He corrupted Christianity just as thoroughly as he had corrupted Judaism. We are told to remove ourselves from that rabble. (Revelation 18:4-5)
Jesus was not the seed of sinful Adam, but was born as a sinless human in the line of King David, of the tribe of Judah as it was prophesied. His life was an exchange for ours....a perfect sinless life was lost for all of Adam's children, and a perfect sinless life was offered to redeem them. There was no way for Jesus to be a sinful son of Adam...he was the sinless son of God...literally created by him through transference from the spirit realm to the earthly one. Joseph was not his natural father....Jehovah was.
The virgin birth is not a false teaching....it explains exactly why Jesus had to be born of a virgin. It proves that no human was his father.
I see your scenario is full of holes....but so close sometimes.....
I ask again...are these your personal beliefs or do you have a brotherhood who shares it? This is important for a number of reasons.
The Gospel of Matthew was originally written in Hebrew, and Jerome, who translated the Hebrew scriptures to Latin in the 4th century C.E, was no great expert in the Hebrew language, and translated the Hebrew 'almah' as 'VIRGO,' and biblical uneducated people, who have never studied the scriptures, in any great detail, believe Jerome's translation meant 'VIRGIN.' Those poor ignorant souls would believe anything.
“The Greek word parthenos (παρθένος) is ambiguous but the Hebrew term “Almah” [Unmarried Female] is absolute, and is erroneously translated from Isaiah 7: 14, to Greek in Matthew 1:23; as “virgin,” whereas according to Young’s Analytical Concordance to the Bible, the Hebrew term “Almah,” carries the meaning, (Concealment---unmarried female.)”
The word “Virgin” in reference to the mother of Jesus was not introduced until the Latin Bible ‘The Vulgate’ was translated to English, when the Latin word ‘VIRGO’ was translated to Virgin. For just like the early Greek language, the Latin did not have a specific term for ‘VIRGIN’, their word “Virgo” refers to any young woman of marriageable age, whether or not she had previous sexual relations with a man.
Isaiah 7: 14; Jewish Translation: “Therefore the Lord, of his own, shall give you a sign; behold the 'almah,' ‘YOUNG WOMAN’ [IS WTH CHILD] and she shall bear a son and she shall call his name Immanuel.”
A young unmarried woman (An almah) can be a virgin, but an almah, unmarried woman who is pregnant cannot be a virgin.
In translating the Hebrew words of the prophet Isaiah, that an “Almah” an “unmarried female” 'WHO IS PREGNANT' and will bear a son,” into Greek, which unlike the Hebrew language, does not have a specific term for ‘virgin,’ the authors of the Septuagint and The Gospel of Matthew, correctly used the Greek word ‘Parthenos,’ which carries a basic meaning of ‘girl,’ or unmarried youth, and denotes ‘virgin’ only by implication.
To translate something from the Hebrew to the Greek, or from any language to another, one must not lose the essence of the original, and the original was, that “An unmarried woman IS WITH CHILD and will bear a son, etc.”
In 1973, an ecumenical edition of RSV was approved by both Protestant and Catholic hierarchies, called the common bible. A New English Translation of the Bible, published in 1970 and approved by the council of churches in England, Scotland, Wales, the Irish council of churches, the London Society of Friends, and the Methodist and Presbyterian churches of England, all translate Isaiah 7: 14; “A young Woman IS WITH CHILD, and she will bear a son.”
Also The Good News Bible, Catholic Study Edition, with imprimatur by Archbishop John Whealon reads, Isaiah 7: 14; “A young woman WHO IS PREGNANT will have a son, etc.”
As these religious bodies, all now accept that Isaiah was not referring to a virgin in that famous passage, they must now accept that the authors of the Septuagint and The Gospel of Matthew, who were forced to use the Greek term “Parthenos” in reference to Isaiah’s prophecy, were in no way implying that the pregnant Mary, was still a virgin.
Matthew 1: 22-23; should now read; ‘Now all this happened to make come true what the Lord had said through the prophet [Isaiah],’ “An unmarried woman, [an almah] who is pregnant will bear a son, etc.
Mark, who is believed to be the son of Peter, and John the beloved disciple, both ignore the physical birth of Jesus as being totally irrelevant, and begin their account of the salvation, with the baptism when he was filled with the spirit of the Lord God our savior, as the heavenly voice was heard to say, "You are my son, this day I have begotten thee."
Galatians 4: 29; At that time, the child born according to the flesh [Ishmael] despised and persecuted him, [Isaac] who was born according to God’s promise and the workings of the Holy Spirit.
Isaac, who is the prototype of Jesus, was born of a brother/sister relationship and born of God’s promise according to the power/workings of the Holy Spirit, and Isaac was the biological son of Abraham and his half sister Sarah, who were both sired by Terah: just as Jesus, who was born of God’s promise according to the power of the Holy Spirit, was the biological son of Joseph and his half sister Mary, who were both sired by Alexander Helios=Heli.
Isaac, was offered up as a sacrifice by his father on the same mountain that Jesus, who had been chosen as the heir to our Fathers throne, was offered up. But both lived on, as God had prepared a replacement sacrifice for them. The replacement for Isaac, was a sheep, the replacement for Jesus, was the one-year old unblemished lamb of God, [Enoch] who, at the age of 365, the number of days in a calendar year, was taken to the throne of the Most High in the creation and anointed as his successor, to serve God before the body of Adam/mankind into all eternity.
Just as Isaac the promised seed of Abraham was born through the union of Abraham and his half-sister Sarah according to the workings of the Holy Spirit, so too, the man Jesus, the reality of God’s promise to Abraham, was born according to the workings of the Holy Spirit and born of the union of Mary and her half-brother Joseph, who were both sired by Heli=Alexander Helios.
Would you care to see how Isaac, who is a prototype of Jesus, was born of God’s promise according to the workings of the Holy Spirit?
Last edited: