aborton in virgin pregnancies (1 Viewer)

[mikhail]

well theres only one suspected case a lass called mary around 1 BC who gave birth to a healthy baby boy jesusto his friends or christ to you . However should this happen again should aborton be allowed i mean giving birth to the the savour of mankind is alot to take on.What with her career and all and his uncommon tendacies to attract enemys.

Also hasnt she technically been raped by god.

 

[ShamMol]

It is possible to get pregnant without having sex, but I honestly don't want to post how. Frankly, it doesn't matter because there are no reported cases and it would be the same thing that the woman would have to go through-a very difficult decision whether or not to abort. It really isn't different from any other normal situation except she hasn't had sex to become pregnant.

 

[Jerry]

well theres only one suspected case a lass called mary around 1 BC who gave birth to a healthy baby boy jesusto his friends or christ to you . However should this happen again should aborton be allowed i mean giving birth to the the savour of mankind is alot to take on.What with her career and all and his uncommon tendacies to attract enemys.

Also hasnt she technically been raped by god.

My mother does research on this sort of thing....I seem to recall Merry having been asked if she wanted to give birth to Jesus by an angel, and she consented .....I'll call her up and ask...(my mother, not Merry :lol: )

 

[FallingPianos]

well theres only one suspected case a lass called mary around 1 BC who gave birth to a healthy baby boy jesusto his friends or christ to you . However should this happen again should aborton be allowed i mean giving birth to the the savour of mankind is alot to take on.What with her career and all and his uncommon tendacies to attract enemys.

Also hasnt she technically been raped by god.

well, obviously one wouldnt want to abort the son of god.

 

[FallingPianos]

My mother does research on this sort of thing....I seem to recall Merry having been asked if she wanted to give birth to Jesus by an angel, and she consented .....I'll call her up and ask...(my mother, not Merry :lol: )

mary wasnt asked, she was simply told what was going to happen.

 

[::Major_Baker::]

mary wasnt asked, she was simply told what was going to happen.

that's non-consensual non-sex.

 

[Jerry]

mary wasn’t asked, she was simply told what was going to happen.

Negative.
I'll post the info as soon as I have it.

that’s non-consensual non-sex.

Trying to paint God as a rapist will not work.

 

[Kelzie]

that's non-consensual non-sex.

:rofl That's very funny.

 

[talloulou]

I heard that the term that was translanted as "virgin" really doesn't mean virgin so much as it means young unmarried woman. So a very good argument can be made to support the claim that it was never actually stated or claimed that Mary was a "virgin" who did not have sex to conceive Jesus. And that doesn't even get into proving Jesus lived. But regardless I doubt God would pick a woman who'd abort as the vessel to carry the fruit of his loins:shock: :rofl Especially if we're talking the old testament God 'cause he seems like he'd have a fairly low tolerance for rampant feminism and radical liberalism. :mrgreen:

 

[jennyb]

no such thing as a virgin birth, not even with a turkey baster:2bow:

 

[FallingPianos]

Negative.
I'll post the info as soon as I have it.

Trying to paint God as a rapist will not work.

but it was non-sex!!!!!!

 

[FallingPianos]

And that doesn't even get into proving Jesus lived.

I dont think there is any dispute amoung historians about whether he lived and was crucified.

 

[Befuddled_Stoner]

I dont think there is any dispute amoung historians about whether he lived and was crucified.

Maybe among the historians who let their faith supersede their science, but for everyone else, the whole thing is still up in the air. After all, if there was concrete proof that the bible Jesus cavorted with whores and got nailed on a cross and stuff, Christians wouldn't have to take all that muck on faith and there'd probably be fewer agnostics in the world.

:lol: I love the idea of god, in all his infinite wisdom, concocting a grand scheme to save the world, only to be thwarted because he didn't foresee the wench he knocked up getting an abortion. Wow, that sure does convey a stellar opinion of the Xian god. :mrgreen: Glad I can blame Mikhail for thinking it up.

 

[Calm2Chaos]

I dont think there is any dispute amoung historians about whether he lived and was crucified.

I think there is dispute from begining to end.....

Not only if he exsisted but who he was or what he was.

 

[ShamMol]

I dont think there is any dispute amoung historians about whether he lived and was crucified.

No, he is right. There was some guy named Jesus who was crucified by Pilot. Take this from an agnostic Religion Major...some random guy named Jesus existed. We just don't know if he did other stuff too...We also know that a guy named John who baptized existed.

 

[::Major_Baker::]

Trying to paint God as a rapist will not work.

Work for what?? What is the objective here?
What the hell are we talking about anyways?:shock:

 

[talloulou]

No, he is right. There was some guy named Jesus who was crucified by Pilot. Take this from an agnostic Religion Major...some random guy named Jesus existed. We just don't know if he did other stuff too...We also know that a guy named John who baptized existed.

Really I had always heard that there were extensive records kept and Jesus never showed up on any of them in his actual lifetime (one of the reasons that noone can seem to agree on when he lived). Historians kept very precise and accurate records about executions and crucifixitions and the name Jesus isn't found in any of them. To the best of my knowledge Jesus does not appear or get talked about in any historical documents written during his supposed lifetime. We know no birth date nor date of death. Everything mentioning Jesus is written years and years after his life is thought to have ended. Strange, no? Especially considering all the uproar he supposedly caused. It's not as if those people kept no records. They in fact kept pretty extensive records to record their history. Why do the historians of his time fail to note anything about him? I find the idea that Jesus may never have existed quite possible. Especially when his life story so closely resembles the life stories of other "Gods" like the Egyptian God Horus. There have been many "virgin" mothers and the story of Jesus' life, death, and resurrection is an old almost universal sun-god archtype.

 

[ShamMol]

Really I had always heard that there were extensive records kept and Jesus never showed up on any of them in his actual lifetime (one of the reasons that noone can seem to agree on when he lived). Historians kept very precise and accurate records about executions and crucifixitions and the name Jesus isn't found in any of them. To the best of my knowledge Jesus does not appear or get talked about in any historical documents written during his supposed lifetime. We know no birth date nor date of death. Everything mentioning Jesus is written years and years after his life is thought to have ended. Strange, no? Especially considering all the uproar he supposedly caused. It's not as if those people kept no records. They in fact kept pretty extensive records to record their history. Why do the historians of his time fail to note anything about him? I find the idea that Jesus may never have existed quite possible. Especially when his life story so closely resembles the life stories of other "Gods" like the Egyptian God Horus. There have been many "virgin" mothers and the story of Jesus' life, death, and resurrection is an old almost universal sun-god archtype.

No, you are right as well. Everything written about him started in 50BC, but there are records which state that some dude named Jesus was killed by Roman authorities in the early 30s. There is also a ton of writing on John the Baptist, which many believe that Jesus was the heir apparent to.

 

[FallingPianos]

Maybe among the historians who let their faith supersede their science, but for everyone else, the whole thing is still up in the air. After all, if there was concrete proof that the bible Jesus cavorted with whores and got nailed on a cross and stuff, Christians wouldn't have to take all that muck on faith and there'd probably be fewer agnostics in the world.

:lol: I love the idea of god, in all his infinite wisdom, concocting a grand scheme to save the world, only to be thwarted because he didn't foresee the wench he knocked up getting an abortion. Wow, that sure does convey a stellar opinion of the Xian god. :mrgreen: Glad I can blame Mikhail for thinking it up.

I think there is dispute from begining to end.....

Not only if he exsisted but who he was or what he was.

here is what wikipedia has to say:

Jesus
The main sources of information regarding Jesus' life and teachings are the four canonical Gospels of the New Testament: Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. Most scholars in the fields of biblical studies and history agree that Jesus was a Jewish teacher from Galilee who was regarded as a healer, was baptized by John the Baptist, was accused of sedition against the Roman Empire, and on the orders of Roman Governor Pontius Pilate was sentenced to death by crucifixion.[2] As the Gospels were not written immediately after his death and there is little external documentation, a small minority of scholars question the historical existence of Jesus.[3]

 

[ShamMol]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Josephus_on_Jesus

He mentions Jesus twice and he is considered the autority (though traitor) in Judaism becuase he was an outside observer. There is another article called the Historicity of Jesus which you should read which will show you some historical proof as well.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicity_of_Jesus

 

[talloulou]

here is what wikipedia has to say:

None of the Gospels were written during Jesus' lifetime so I don't see how they could possibly "prove" anything and as well they are inconsistent and don't always agree with each other. I'm not sure having "biblilcal scholars" agree on the life of Jesus ends the debate on whether Jesus is historical, mythical, or legend. I play a game with my kids called fiction or non-fiction where we decide which catagory something belongs in. Jesus falls in the "unknown" catagory alohng with aliens. :rofl

 

[americanwoman]

I heard that the term that was translanted as "virgin" really doesn't mean virgin so much as it means young unmarried woman. So a very good argument can be made to support the claim that it was never actually stated or claimed that Mary was a "virgin" who did not have sex to conceive Jesus. And that doesn't even get into proving Jesus lived. But regardless I doubt God would pick a woman who'd abort as the vessel to carry the fruit of his loins:shock: :rofl Especially if we're talking the old testament God 'cause he seems like he'd have a fairly low tolerance for rampant feminism and radical liberalism. :mrgreen:

I have also heard the same thing about the translation of 'virgin.' Also I have heard of a Roman soldier named Panthera that may or may not have raped her and to hide her disgrace or to motivate the "Jesus" story they came up with the immaculate conception. I guess when we die we will find out the truth. You have to wonder though that those people who wrote the final bible must have thought most people to be utterly stupid to take it as it is.

 

[FallingPianos]

None of the Gospels were written during Jesus' lifetime so I don't see how they could possibly "prove" anything and as well they are inconsistent and don't always agree with each other. I'm not sure having "biblilcal scholars" agree on the life of Jesus ends the debate on whether Jesus is historical, mythical, or legend. I play a game with my kids called fiction or non-fiction where we decide which catagory something belongs in. Jesus falls in the "unknown" catagory alohng with aliens. :rofl

there is no definate proof no. but I find it unlikely that all the hoopla could be about someone who never even existed. why would someone make up a story like that, and why would so many people believe them if it had absolutly no truth to it?

 

[ShamMol]

Please look here....it deals with the fact there is evidence of his existene.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicity_of_Jesus

 

[talloulou]

Please look here....it deals with the fact there is evidence of his existene.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicity_of_Jesus

"Nevertheless, there are no extant contemporaneous documents that make mention of Jesus. The earliest known sources are Christian writings - the New Testament - which, according to modern historians, were written several decades after he is said to have died."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicity_of_Jesus

From your own source. The part I quoted says it all in my opinion. The idea that Jesus never existed is quite possible.