I went to HuffPo and read most of the stuff. There were over a thousand comments and admittedly I did not read them all but I spent several hours reading them and looking up info. on them. I registered at HuffPo and tried (several times) to post a rebuttal but for some reason it wouldn’t take my posts (I had to break them up as the count exceeded a single post response but that isn’t a problem).
Tried again and still wouldn’t take. So I am posting my “HuffPo” response here. If any of you have a HuffPo account and want to cut and paste this response be my guest. Here is (was) my HuffPo post that wasn’t. . . . .
We’ve heard a lot of people in these comments claim that Christians copy-catted pagan-god myths.
Several people have asked for examples of these myths copy-catted yet we were not given ANY examples that I saw (at least examples that were elaborated, just merely asserted but without backing up these assertions these are merely ipse dixit fallacies or basically: “that’s so because I say it is so”).
Jon Sorensen looks at some of these bogus claims and debunks them.
jonsorensen.net/2012/10/25/horus-manure-debunking-the-jesushorus-connection/
Also lot’s of ignoring the ancient Greek Septuagint from the rabbis that was translated as
“virgin” or parthenos in Isaiah 7 as well. The Septuagint pre-dates the time of Jesus taking a human nature and flesh upon Himself.
Since original sin was a sin against an infinite God (therefore running up an “infinite account”), Jesus-the-Messiah (ONE God yet three Divine Persons which is beyond our earthly capability to understand this) took upon Himself flesh to redeem us and give us the grace and opportunity to go to Heaven by paying an infinite account that we could never pay. Thus instead of flesh being used as condemnation (our flesh), Jesus’ flesh is an instrument of salvation if we are really and actually united to Him. And ALL people can be if they choose to be united to Jesus (on Jesus’ terms). So you wouldn’t expect the usual conception and birth.
The language of Jesus’ conception mirrors the language of God overshadowing the Ark of the Covenant. Google that and read examples on your own to get more insights into this.
Some will try to assert “parthenos” merely means “young woman” too but the term goes beyond “young woman”. For example you can see science uses “parthenos” as a root for “parthenogenesis” or asexual (asexual = without usual sexual intervention) reproduction.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parthenogenesis The parthenon in Athens was the temple of Athena the Virgin or Athena Parthenos and had some aspects in common with Rome’s Vestal Virgins (but the point is that the root “parthenos” goes beyond merely “young woman”)
ancient.eu.com/Acropolis/ .
Also a “young woman” conceiving and bearing a child does not qualify for “a great sign”.
A “Virgin” conceiving and bearing a son DOES qualify as a great sign.
If any copycatting going on, it was likely the pagans copy-catting Genesis 3 where the “seed of the woman” crushes the head of the serpent. Incidentally, the Greek Septuagint in Genesis 3, calls it the “spermatos” of the woman (St. Paul a former student of Rabbi Gamaliel’s in Galatians 4:4 in the original Greek just matter-of-factly echoes this concept as well). So the roots of this teaching of the Virgin Birth go even earlier than Isaiah who taught it and thus the prophet Isaiah was not giving a new teaching when telling us of the Virgin Birth but rather more information. Therefore the copy-catting argument falls like a house of cards.
I could elaborate on other points too.
The other issue is, that we are not sola Scriptura Christians. We use the Bible yes. The Bible is “God breathed” yes. But the Bible itself does not tell us to use the Bible ALONE. You need the proper interpretation. There are people with God-given authority to teach and preach such that the true teachings ARE and WILL BE preserved, even if these men are rotten sinners themselves or exemplary men themselves (the Bishops). These preserved teachings are there for our benefit.
I suspect some of the people here are not so concerned about proper Scriptural exegesis (Scriptural unpacking). I don’t believe that if different words for “virgin” were used that many of these people would now submit saying: “Well NOW I REALLY believe in the Virgin Birth.”
No! The reason many of these people in my opinion reject the Virgin Birth is their incredulity. WHY their incredulity I won’t get into here.
If you really want to study this, look into it from a Christian perspective, but it also takes much meditation on the subject and lots of prayer and some homework. The objections you see posed here are merely a straw-man beating. If you really want the truth on this, PRAYERFULLY (and consider mixing in some fasting as well) approach this Holy and delicate topic. God bless you.
