BilliardsBall
Veteran Member
The Lord looked upon Matthew's Mary and remarked to Gabriel, 'She's beggin' for it!' Gabe said, 'Aren't you going to ask?' The Lord replied, 'Ask, pask! Who's in charge here?' And he impregnated her without further thought.
That is, he proceeded without her consent.
That is, he raped her.
By definition. But that wasn't the question. The question is, in that situation with only the two options possible, which choice should the moral person make?
What's the answer?
Consistently with what I've already said: if we had six independent eyewitness accounts of a person thought to be some 36-48 hours dead who came back to life ─ that would mean they were present at the moment of resurrection ─, and the reports were reasonably consistent, then I'd take it as likely that the event had occurred and that the person had not actually been dead.
But of course even if we assume that there was an historical Jesus and that he was crucified, we have not a single contemporary mention of such a thing, not a single eyewitness account, just some sketchy mentions twenty years later (Paul is explicit that he never met the historical Jesus, and that everything he says about Jesus comes out of his own head), the first elaborated story 45 years later (Mark's gospel can be mapped bit by bit onto scattered parts of the Tanakh, but not onto history), and differing versions of Mark 55 years and 70 years later. And of course each of the stories contradicts the rest on major points. And of course each is written by a member of a religious faction, no hint of independence.
To make the point that the evidence for the resurrection as a fact of history is, for the reasons I've stated and iterated, of abysmal quality, not at all credible.
And we're arguing because you don't wish to concede the point, even though you've offered nothing to refute it.
We still need to clear up Jesus' chromosomal status. You've said that the Jesuses of Matthew and Luke were intersex XX males.
The question that needs to be clarified is, do you think the Jesuses of Paul, Mark and John (or any of them) were also intersex XX males?
If not, what were they? In particular, if they were normal XY males, whose Y-chromosome did they have?
1) Where do you find that God needs consent to do anything physical to any person? Show me a statute where acts of God are criminal acts?
2) The moral choice would be called the lesser of two evils, the rapist would apologize to their victim for perpetrating evil on them.
3) Your 55 and 70 years later are not even believed by the ultra-liberal Jesus seminar. No one dates the gospels so late.
4) None of the gospels discuss chromosomes, of course. I find the XX blood on the shroud consistent with what we know about Jesus.