Isaiah 7:14 calls mary a "Almah" which is a unmarried but ready to marry woman; and the implication is virgin, which is why it was used for virgin too.
Virgin Mary is almost certainly a mistranslation.
The point was that jesus was the child of a unmarried couple, which was seen as bad, and yet jesus is fucking jesus.
Yeah, but you have to factor in the rabid Christian belief that she’s an eternal virgin. So they have to make up all kinds of complicated explanations for how any siblings could exist.
(According to official doctrine they were either cousins or children of Joseph’s from a previous marriage)
German uses the word Jungfrau (literally young woman), there's no separate word explicitely defining a state of not having had sex.
I'm guessing Almah is similar.
But I heard a different story about the "virgin birth" - problem is I have no idea if it's true or not. Anyhow:
There was some sort of ritual where young women were invited to spend a night at the temple, with priests. Due to the religious nature of this, they were still considered to be virgins ("marriable" I guess?) afterwards. Quite the opposite, it was seen as an honour. Even if they got pregnant.
So there's your "Virgin" Mary who was "visited by an angel" to conceive.
edit: there is some evidence that girls used to work and live at the temples, and my story is likely an interpretation of the Gospel of James.
There was some sort of ritual where young women were invited to spend a night at the temple, with priests. Due to the religious nature of this, they were still considered to be virgins (“marriable” I guess?) afterwards. Quite the opposite, it was seen as an honour. Even if they got pregnant.
This is something I would believe about a Roman temple maaaaaaaybe. I think your source heard a garbled version of the idea of the Vestal Virgins, and got really confused beyond that.
My bet is it's to weed out dissidents, question the obvious fake bullshit and we can cut your head off before you become an opposition leader or something. They did burn and torture so many people because of this.
Isaiah didn't talk about Mary or Jesus but talked about his own time. Messiah is this context meant savior in the political sense. It's not a prophecy for the distant future, only in the Septuagint much later. But don't take it from me, take it from Dan McClellan.
I am very willing to accept that isaiah 7:14 wasn't talking about jesus, but like Dan says later authors do mean mary when talking about parthenos. So my point does seem to stand.
But let's say Dan is 100% correct, then almah got mistranslated and applied to Mary to fulfill the misunderstood prophecy and then my point is still kinda right that almah got mistranslated by Christians to made Mary a virgin.
In short, I think my point kinda stands either way, while I might picked a bad verse to make my case and my argument and understanding was slightly misguided.
I was reacting to the "Isaiah talks about Mary" part of your argument. I'm not a scholar either and I linked a very short video but in other contexts, Dan elaborates that the Greek has been used for a raped woman who therefore isn't a virgin anymore but the main meaning is virgin.
I'm not sure what your point was. I neither up nor downvoted your comment. But since the whole birth story is fabricated by arguably Christians, it either was by applying the mistranslation of Isaiah or, if the intended audience of the gospels understood it to mean "young woman", it was an even later invention. If your point is that Jesus wasn't the son of a virgin and never claimed to be, than sure.
I am sorry if I wrote my comment in a way that sounded aggressive.
My point is basically, (as far as I am aware of) all the "virgin mary" claims come from translating a word (different words in different languages) which could mean young woman or virgin, while she was obviously pregnant, making 1 translation much more likely than the other one and Christians somehow choose "virgin".
Yes and if you continue reading, and listen to Christians, you will see that it is most likely the source of Matthew 1:23. Which was written in greek and used "parthenos", which seems to mean the same thing like almah.
My favourite is the idea that mary was hooking up with the wise men and either kept it secret or was clueless about reproduction and they were tricking her and the wise men came bearing gifts because each thought they were the father
I have a fun head-canon that combines Christian mythology with that of ancient Rome and/or Greece. It all starts with Jesus's animal metaphors. Jesus is a lamb of God. Jesus is a dove of peace. Jesus is represented with a drawing of a fish.
So it seems that Jesus has interesting shapeshifting powers. Sounds reminiscent of another deity, doesn't it? Zeus famously transformed into animals in order to seduce women. He also had a jealous wife, Hera, who frequently punished his extra-marital partners.
My thinking goes that Zeus seduced Mary once upon a time. However, knowing his wife's wrath, he never disclosed it, and advised Mary to say she was a virgin in order to throw her off Hera's radar.
Thus, Jesus the shape-shifting son of God was born. In a manger, of all places. Perhaps Zeus was there to support Mary in the form of a sheep or something.
And God said, Behold, I have given you every herb bearing seed which is upon the face of all the earth, and every tree, in the which is the fruit of a tree yielding seed; to you it shall be for meat.
And to every beast of the earth, and to every fowl of the air, and to every thing that creepeth upon the earth, wherein there is life, I have given every green herb for meat: and it was so. ~Genesis 1:29-30
Let's add the crucifixion story on top of this. Romans historically left the crucified up until they rotted. However, the Romans here said "what Jesus is dead already? Whatever, you can take his body."
Then they put him in a cave and put Myrrh and Aloe on him. Myrrh was used as a medicine and ceremonies .... but Aloe? No, that's medicine. Then Jesus comes back 3 days later.
This is the story of a con job imo. They are trying to show the Romans as inept and them being smart enough to steal Jesus off the cross.
"Come on, just try to imagine Joseph's reaction when Maria suddenly walks to him, pregnant, and goes "God impregnated me", what would he think? "Damn, this bitch's cheating on me!"!"
My dad at a family barbecue, making everyone laugh.
As a non-Christian, what the hell is up with this story? How do people know she wasn't sleeping with some other man? Like is that explained? Were there no other men in the village or whatever? I have no idea how this makes sense. If a woman today said God got her preggo we would all assume it was just some guy she doesn't want people to know about. I'm so confused.
Mary tells Joseph she's pregnant. Joseph realizes right away that she was an adulturer. If people found out, she was gonna be stoned. Joseph still loved her anyways, and was willing to protect her from that, so they went away. Joseph struggled knowing his wife was an adulturer. It wasn't until God came to him in a dream and told him his wife was carrying Jesus that he found peace with it.
Some of the narrative in the gospels is concerned with fulfilling the prophesies of Isaiah, since that would build a case for Jesus being the Messiah, which was something people were interested in at the time.
Isaiah didn't clearly prophesy a virgin birth, but the writers of Matthew and Luke were probably working from the Septuagint, a greek [mis-]translation which turns the prophecy into one of a virgin birth. So, thinking that a virgin birth was required, they wrote it into the story.
The question of whether someone claiming to be made pregnant by God is making a plausible claim, is fairly moot when the whole episode was probably made up anyway.
It is a common trophy for prominent romans to trace their heritage down to the gods in order to add legitimacy to their extraordinariness. Jupiter knocked up virgins left and right, that was a common story why someone would be in a heritage of devine decent. I believe the biblic storytellers did the same to give their protagonist the legitimacy and importance that was required by the times.
Also as a non-christian: I think you've got it backwards. Christians believe that she was a virgin because they believe Jesus was their god. Basically that it doesn't make sense to them that a perfect being could be gestated inside a dirty sex having woman, so it must be that she was a virgin.
Also Jesus had a habit of giving people nicknames (eg Simon Peter - the rock) I could see him having a disciple Mary the virgin and another one Mary the mother that got conflated. There's no evidence for this but idk it still seems more likely than virgin birth.
Concerning the fact that Jesus himself went around and told people he was the son of God didn't do him much good in the end if you for example watch The Passion of the Christ. I think the writers of the Bible (and their sources) may have been a tad on the dramatic side in prospect.
Even dumber in that it's conjured by others after the fact.
... Whatever that fact is.
Considering the many popularly held mistranslations, and the efforts to correctly translate... like elohim, basically meaning aliens, not monotheistic cosmic creator god...
72 Comments
logicbomb@lemmy.world · 113 pts · 243d
The God she tells you not to worry about.
RaoulDuke25@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 11 pts · 242d
Plus, I think he's gay, so really don't have to worry. He's harmless.
Tartas1995@discuss.tchncs.de · 82 pts · 242d
Isaiah 7:14 calls mary a "Almah" which is a unmarried but ready to marry woman; and the implication is virgin, which is why it was used for virgin too.
Virgin Mary is almost certainly a mistranslation.
The point was that jesus was the child of a unmarried couple, which was seen as bad, and yet jesus is fucking jesus.
GreenKnight23@lemmy.world · 63 pts · 242d
vaultdweller013@sh.itjust.works · 10 pts · 242d
Personally I prefer Christ on a cock. Which because I have had my mind poisoned by the French invokes the image of Jesus riding a giant rooster.
MajorMajormajormajor@lemmy.ca · 4 pts · 242d
Die for my sins harder, daddy.
kamenlady@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 242d
That's how i always meant it, when i said this.
Pringles@sopuli.xyz · -9 pts · 242d
I hardly think this was necessary.
0ops@piefed.zip · 5 pts · 242d
I think it nailed his point to a t
UnrepententProcrastinator@lemmy.ca · 3 pts · 242d
No you don't understand it had to be done
massive_bereavement@fedia.io · 18 pts · 242d
Didn't Jesus have brothers and sisters? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brothers_of_Jesus
tetris11@feddit.uk · 28 pts · 242d
The name's Christ, James Christ.
massive_bereavement@fedia.io · 9 pts · 242d
From now on I'll exclaim "JOSES CHRIST!" Instead because I don't want his brothers to feel different..
tetris11@feddit.uk · 14 pts · 242d
Well, Jermaine and Janet Christ both had decent solo careers after the death of Jesus
Digit@lemmy.wtf · 2 pts · 242d
Hoe say Christ.
lugal@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 5 pts · 242d
Jesus was the first born. Even if Mary was a virgin when he was born, this isn't necessarily the case for his younger siblings
Seleni@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 242d
Yeah, but you have to factor in the rabid Christian belief that she’s an eternal virgin. So they have to make up all kinds of complicated explanations for how any siblings could exist.
(According to official doctrine they were either cousins or children of Joseph’s from a previous marriage)
A_norny_mousse@feddit.org · 13 pts · 242d
German uses the word Jungfrau (literally young woman), there's no separate word explicitely defining a state of not having had sex.
I'm guessing Almah is similar.
But I heard a different story about the "virgin birth" - problem is I have no idea if it's true or not. Anyhow:
There was some sort of ritual where young women were invited to spend a night at the temple, with priests. Due to the religious nature of this, they were still considered to be virgins ("marriable" I guess?) afterwards. Quite the opposite, it was seen as an honour. Even if they got pregnant.
So there's your "Virgin" Mary who was "visited by an angel" to conceive.
edit: there is some evidence that girls used to work and live at the temples, and my story is likely an interpretation of the Gospel of James.
andros_rex@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 242d
I don’t think there’s any evidence of this.
The Bible has a story with a character pretending to be a temple prostitute to secure her inheritance. But when she becomes pregnant, she is supposed to be put to death. I don’t think temple prostitution was at all a thing by 700 BCE, much less 3 BCE, and it seems more like a holdover from extremely uncomfortable ancient at the time of writing practices - kinda like some of the remnants of child sacrifice that you can find in the OT. I think this is also something the Romans would have noted.
This is something I would believe about a Roman temple maaaaaaaybe. I think your source heard a garbled version of the idea of the Vestal Virgins, and got really confused beyond that.
HK65@sopuli.xyz · 1 pts · 242d
From what I found, Mary supposedly lived at the temple from childhood as a consecrated virgin.
So apparently she was groomed by the priests?
andros_rex@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 242d
This is your source.
HK65@sopuli.xyz · 1 pts · 241d
To be honest, I was more into ancient Greek, Egyptian and Norse than Christian mythology as I was growing up, so yeah, it might be.
I am not a scholar on these things by far.
jaybone@lemmy.zip · 8 pts · 242d
At what point did the mistranslation occur? There have been many translations.
massive_bereavement@fedia.io · 18 pts · 242d
It was between the anime and the first OVA, the original manga used the previous sentence.
yermaw@sh.itjust.works · 4 pts · 242d
lugal@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 1 pts · 242d
In the Septuagint, so still in the Jewish context. For more details watch this short video.
Valmond@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 242d
Oh ot all makes sense now!
/s
Tartas1995@discuss.tchncs.de · 21 pts · 242d
It makes sense that mary literally just had premarital sex and got pregnant.
It is insane that Christians get it wrong.
Valmond@lemmy.world · 13 pts · 242d
My bet is it's to weed out dissidents, question the obvious fake bullshit and we can cut your head off before you become an opposition leader or something. They did burn and torture so many people because of this.
andros_rex@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 242d
The idea that Mary was a virgin predates Christianity having any sort of power. It’s more the influence of Greek philosophy (anti materialism)
lugal@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 2 pts · 242d
Isaiah didn't talk about Mary or Jesus but talked about his own time. Messiah is this context meant savior in the political sense. It's not a prophecy for the distant future, only in the Septuagint much later. But don't take it from me, take it from Dan McClellan.
Tartas1995@discuss.tchncs.de · 4 pts · 242d
Frankly, I am not a scholar but a willing listener. So Dan probably knows better than me.
But what i don't understand about his point is the claim of mistranslation by using parthenos.
parthenos does seem to mean the same thing as almah
https://www.billmounce.com/greek-dictionary/parthenos
https://biblehub.com/greek/3933.htm
I am very willing to accept that isaiah 7:14 wasn't talking about jesus, but like Dan says later authors do mean mary when talking about parthenos. So my point does seem to stand.
But let's say Dan is 100% correct, then almah got mistranslated and applied to Mary to fulfill the misunderstood prophecy and then my point is still kinda right that almah got mistranslated by Christians to made Mary a virgin.
In short, I think my point kinda stands either way, while I might picked a bad verse to make my case and my argument and understanding was slightly misguided.
lugal@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 1 pts · 242d
I was reacting to the "Isaiah talks about Mary" part of your argument. I'm not a scholar either and I linked a very short video but in other contexts, Dan elaborates that the Greek has been used for a raped woman who therefore isn't a virgin anymore but the main meaning is virgin.
I'm not sure what your point was. I neither up nor downvoted your comment. But since the whole birth story is fabricated by arguably Christians, it either was by applying the mistranslation of Isaiah or, if the intended audience of the gospels understood it to mean "young woman", it was an even later invention. If your point is that Jesus wasn't the son of a virgin and never claimed to be, than sure.
Tartas1995@discuss.tchncs.de · 2 pts · 242d
That is my point, yes.
I am sorry if I wrote my comment in a way that sounded aggressive.
My point is basically, (as far as I am aware of) all the "virgin mary" claims come from translating a word (different words in different languages) which could mean young woman or virgin, while she was obviously pregnant, making 1 translation much more likely than the other one and Christians somehow choose "virgin".
ytg@sopuli.xyz · 2 pts · 242d
Isaiah is Old Testament, it doesn't refer to anything Jesus-related (unless you're Christian and really love bending the text to your will).
Tartas1995@discuss.tchncs.de · 1 pts · 242d
Yes and if you continue reading, and listen to Christians, you will see that it is most likely the source of Matthew 1:23. Which was written in greek and used "parthenos", which seems to mean the same thing like almah.
https://biblehub.com/greek/3933.htm
Grass@sh.itjust.works · 70 pts · 242d
My favourite is the idea that mary was hooking up with the wise men and either kept it secret or was clueless about reproduction and they were tricking her and the wise men came bearing gifts because each thought they were the father
Whats_your_reasoning@lemmy.world · 35 pts · 242d
I have a fun head-canon that combines Christian mythology with that of ancient Rome and/or Greece. It all starts with Jesus's animal metaphors. Jesus is a lamb of God. Jesus is a dove of peace. Jesus is represented with a drawing of a fish.
So it seems that Jesus has interesting shapeshifting powers. Sounds reminiscent of another deity, doesn't it? Zeus famously transformed into animals in order to seduce women. He also had a jealous wife, Hera, who frequently punished his extra-marital partners.
My thinking goes that Zeus seduced Mary once upon a time. However, knowing his wife's wrath, he never disclosed it, and advised Mary to say she was a virgin in order to throw her off Hera's radar.
Thus, Jesus the shape-shifting son of God was born. In a manger, of all places. Perhaps Zeus was there to support Mary in the form of a sheep or something.
HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world · 8 pts · 242d
animorph jesus ?
PiperTheJournalist@discuss.online · 6 pts · 242d
Jezeus
prex@aussie.zone · 6 pts · 242d
drhodl@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 242d
This sounds just as believable as the bible, with it's magical sky daddy.....
Grass@sh.itjust.works · 2 pts · 242d
oh gods...
DarkCloud@lemmy.world · 10 pts · 242d
Maybe they were wise for not bringing it up until they'd seen the baby.
HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 242d
bible says jesus was ugly as ugly babies get.
artifex@piefed.social · 2 pts · 242d
Like a reverse Mama Mia! situation.
Digit@lemmy.wtf · 29 pts · 242d
Side-note, FYI (For those on about Christ throughout this thread), consider:
Christ means the anointed one.
Anointed with the holy oil.
The holy oil made with large quantities of "Kaneh Bosm".
Kaneh Bosm correctly translated, fitting the description and effects, is Cannabis.
So, the return of Christ, is the restoration of Cannabis.
"All of these things I have done, you shall do too, and more."
(See Sula Bennet, and Chris Bennett's work on this for more info.)
Whats_your_reasoning@lemmy.world · 30 pts · 242d
A long-haired, sandal-wearing man preaching peace and love, who probably smelled like cannabis?
Jesus was a hippie, it's confirmed.
village604@adultswim.fan · 12 pts · 242d
Also, his name loosely translates to Josh, so he's Oily Josh.
HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 242d
I am still working on The Ballad of Greasy Josh tyvm
Mulligrubs@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 241d
Now go forth and sin no more!*
*Sin in this context means being a square
sundray@lemmus.org · 19 pts · 243d
No one's going to believe this story rn, and certainly not for over 2,000 years.
ivanafterall@lemmy.world · 5 pts · 242d
One of those times you're glad to just be a random nobody in the middle of nowhere, so you know your humiliation will soon just be forgotten.
the_visitor@sh.itjust.works · 19 pts · 242d
And after the child birth, a group of three mysterious men show up!
DarkCloud@lemmy.world · 17 pts · 242d
This is more coherent than the actual bible story.
Wilco@lemmy.zip · 2 pts · 242d
Let's add the crucifixion story on top of this. Romans historically left the crucified up until they rotted. However, the Romans here said "what Jesus is dead already? Whatever, you can take his body." Then they put him in a cave and put Myrrh and Aloe on him. Myrrh was used as a medicine and ceremonies .... but Aloe? No, that's medicine. Then Jesus comes back 3 days later.
This is the story of a con job imo. They are trying to show the Romans as inept and them being smart enough to steal Jesus off the cross.
MeowerMisfit817@lemmy.world · 13 pts · 242d
OldChicoAle@lemmy.world · 13 pts · 242d
As a non-Christian, what the hell is up with this story? How do people know she wasn't sleeping with some other man? Like is that explained? Were there no other men in the village or whatever? I have no idea how this makes sense. If a woman today said God got her preggo we would all assume it was just some guy she doesn't want people to know about. I'm so confused.
alwaysorg@lemmy.world · 8 pts · 241d
In the book of Matthew, the story goes like this:
Mary tells Joseph she's pregnant. Joseph realizes right away that she was an adulturer. If people found out, she was gonna be stoned. Joseph still loved her anyways, and was willing to protect her from that, so they went away. Joseph struggled knowing his wife was an adulturer. It wasn't until God came to him in a dream and told him his wife was carrying Jesus that he found peace with it.
bampop@lemmy.world · 6 pts · 241d
Some of the narrative in the gospels is concerned with fulfilling the prophesies of Isaiah, since that would build a case for Jesus being the Messiah, which was something people were interested in at the time.
Isaiah didn't clearly prophesy a virgin birth, but the writers of Matthew and Luke were probably working from the Septuagint, a greek [mis-]translation which turns the prophecy into one of a virgin birth. So, thinking that a virgin birth was required, they wrote it into the story.
The question of whether someone claiming to be made pregnant by God is making a plausible claim, is fairly moot when the whole episode was probably made up anyway.
eldain@feddit.nl · 4 pts · 241d
It is a common trophy for prominent romans to trace their heritage down to the gods in order to add legitimacy to their extraordinariness. Jupiter knocked up virgins left and right, that was a common story why someone would be in a heritage of devine decent. I believe the biblic storytellers did the same to give their protagonist the legitimacy and importance that was required by the times.
m0darn@lemmy.ca · 4 pts · 241d
Also as a non-christian: I think you've got it backwards. Christians believe that she was a virgin because they believe Jesus was their god. Basically that it doesn't make sense to them that a perfect being could be gestated inside a dirty sex having woman, so it must be that she was a virgin.
Also Jesus had a habit of giving people nicknames (eg Simon Peter - the rock) I could see him having a disciple Mary the virgin and another one Mary the mother that got conflated. There's no evidence for this but idk it still seems more likely than virgin birth.
ofak@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 241d
Concerning the fact that Jesus himself went around and told people he was the son of God didn't do him much good in the end if you for example watch The Passion of the Christ. I think the writers of the Bible (and their sources) may have been a tad on the dramatic side in prospect.
Digit@lemmy.wtf · 12 pts · 242d
It's weirder than that...
If I recall correctly, I heard ... Joseph was something like 80, and Mary was something like 12.
That does not get said a lot.
Is fun to dig into the apocryphal sources on that to check for plausibility.
FranciscoLopez@lemmy.world · 7 pts · 242d
His expression is the exact moment you realize you’re in a story you didn’t consent to.
Limonene@lemmy.world · 6 pts · 242d
In those days, the predecessors that would become Christianity hadn't invented the abstinence rules yet.
SCmSTR@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 5 pts · 242d
Fucking puritan imperialism
aeternum@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 2 pts · 241d
Jimjim@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 241d
Its funny and all, but God never asked Joseph to practice "abstinence"
cliffracer_cloaka@piefed.social · -24 pts · 243d
stardustpathsofglory@lemmy.world · 13 pts · 242d
I had a stroke reading this.
Agrivar@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 242d
I'm pretty sure I lost IQ points by the time I parsed it all.
Passerby6497@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 242d
The shit some people goon to....
Smh my head
Digit@lemmy.wtf · 2 pts · 242d
Even dumber in that it's conjured by others after the fact.
... Whatever that fact is.
Considering the many popularly held mistranslations, and the efforts to correctly translate... like elohim, basically meaning aliens, not monotheistic cosmic creator god...
The fact may be... aliens impregnated her.
Truth stranger than fiction?
Depends what strangeness has grown normal to us.