Was Mary, Jesus's mother, a whore?

[TheNoNamedOne]

I wonder if Mary had become pregnant out of wedlock and if after confiding to Joseph, he took pity on her knowing what her fate would be. It could have happened two ways 1) Mary and Joseph had sex before their marriage and she got pregnant, or 2) Mary was promiscuous, had sex with some other(s) and then had sex with Joseph to trick him into believing it was his seed growing in her.

Whichever scenario, they then concocted the whole dream story about being visited by the Holy Ghost and impregnated so as to bear the Son of God.

The motive to engage in such a lie sure is present. Perhaps some satire could illustrate that:

Mary: I'm late.
Joe: What do you mean? You're right here. Late for what?
Mary: No, Joe, I mean I am "laaate".
Joe: But you told me you were counting the days.
Mary: I was, but I must have miscounted a day or two. Hey, what are you doing?
Joe: Packing.
Mary: Why?
Joe: C'mon, haven't you read the scrolls and tablets?
Mary: No, you men are always repressing us.
Joe: Oh, sorry about that. Anyways, it's like they're gonna stone our asses.
Mary: Yeah now that I recall, I think I've seen a few stonings. Doesn't look fun.
Joe: Well, maybe I could just denounce you as a whore and save myself.
Mary: God damn it! Listen, Joe, there is no need for either of us to get stoned. I have a plan.
Joe: Yeah, what?
Mary: Well, you know the old stories. Everyone has dreams and if we just make up some dream stories and say the dreams are from God everyone will believe us.
Joe: lol. Yeah, these people sure are quite gullible aren't they? Why haven't all past whores thought of this?
Mary: Exactly. And if we play our cards right this could really work out for us. You know...like make us famous forever and ever and ever and ever.
Joe: Hmmmm....
Mary: We'll just say I am a virgin mother giving birth to the Son of God and the miracle of the whole thing will save us.
Joe: Yeah, this may just work.

Why not? Motive exists and the means through superstition exists.

[DoctorP]

Muku...if you choose to enter a thread, could you at least post an answer to the original post? What you are doing serves no purpose.

TP...while I suppose either of your scenarios are possible, there is no written record of either one happening, so for you to prove either would be difficult.

[Fonze]

No i do not believe she was, But i do believe you are whore for your xxxxxx xxx views.

Its funny how someone who doesn't believe in religion is always talking about it. How xxxxxxxx that must feel.

[P_chan]

I agree that the possibility is there, but I don't really have a opinion about it. Nor do I care!

Your little narrative between mary and joesph might seem slightly condescending to some. To me, it sounded a little demeaning, and I'm not even religious.

[dk]

Its funny how someone who doesn't believe in religion is always talking about it. How retarted that must feel.
It's possible to be interested in religion yet not be a believer.

I'm interested in how religion has shaped society. I don't give credit to any of the supposed gods who supposedly helped out with this. I believe the ten commandments were man made. I believe religion is man made. But I find the invention of religion to be an interesting topic.

There's no way this thread just pissed off the whole entire Christian world. There's no way I would ever give TP that much credit, and I see this no differently than the funny Jesus and God IM picture or the South Park episode about Family Guy airing an episode with Mohammad.

On topic, Mary was artificially inseminated. X-files stuff, man. Blue light filled the room, an "angel" appeared and told Mary she was pregnant with the son of God. Bam. Conspiracy theory. Dana Sculli shit. How's that for a third option? Any more? Oh, I know, maybe Mary and Joseph never exhisted and were merely characters made up to make the Jesus story more real. Four now. Any others? Or, wildest of all, maybe Mary was a freak of nature and was able to somehow asexually reproduce! Or six... no... I'm not going to say what just came into my mind for six... \:-)

[OCanadaOurHomeAndNativeLand]

No-one watches movies much?! Yeah, TP's a real radical...
Start here:
YouTube - LIfe of Brian (Monty Python) 1/9
Watch the rest of the clips.

Next this:
Channel Four documentary on why the movie was banned, the comedy troupe accused of blasphemy...
YouTube - Monty Python - The secret life of brian (part 1)

[OCanadaOurHomeAndNativeLand]

Part Deux:
Channel Four documentary on why the movie was banned, the comedy troupe accused of blasphemy...
YouTube - Monty Python - The secret life of brian (part 2)

[OCanadaOurHomeAndNativeLand]

Part 3 of the documentary on Life of Brian (the movie formerly known as Jesus Christ: Lust for Glory).

YouTube - Monty Python - The secret life of brian (part 3)

[Muku]

He's just looking for some good debate.

I'm almost starting to believe that the firm believers among Christians just tend to not use forums...

Debate? Hmmm I really doubt it since he started this thread he took off somewhere.....to me knowing darn well that it would have the potential to start a firestorm too.

He'll wait until I and others are off line to have his say free from any interuption to make "his" own points without any interference....that is his pattern of late.

[OCanadaOurHomeAndNativeLand]

Part 4
YouTube - Monty Python - The secret life of brian (part 4)

Part 5
YouTube - Monty Python - The secret life of brian (part 5)

[dk]

Probably pretty smart. Wait for the noise to die down, and then have serious conversation.

[TheNoNamedOne]

....and TP knows that very well but doesnt care, hence his silence. However I expect he will reply sometime after/before maybe who knows I get off line tonight.

Of course I am going to reply, Muku. Was simply out for dinner and at times I like a thread to grow a little with people's posts before I add more replies.

DrP stated a good point in his post on the first page. I am going to get to it quite soon.

[TheNoNamedOne]

TP...while I suppose either of your scenarios are possible, there is no written record of either one happening, so for you to prove either would be difficult.

I completely agree with you, DrP. There is no physical proof that is for certain, and that makes the final answer not so difinative as to Mary's whoredom.

However, I think proof lies in statistical probability and deduction and motive.

The probability of a virgin birth is quite low. The probability of being promiscuous is much higher. Indeed, TREMENDOUSLY higher!

If we deduce with probability that in all likelyhood she conceived out of wedlock with normal biological sex and we accept Joe's word that he had not "touched" her, then that sex came from outside their relationship from another person(s).

Motive, being the fear of stoning, is what drove her and Joe to concoct the dream stories and make the claim that they did.

Parsimony is the proof and that explanation above is the most probable.

[Fonze]

The thing is that many Mexicans hold the Virgin Mary very high in our hearts and i really felt offended. And the sadder part is TP is not writing this because he wants to know what you think its to tell you what HE BELIEVES to be the truth. Which case none of us religous or not know what the truth is.

[OCanadaOurHomeAndNativeLand]

The thing is that many Mexicans hold the Virgin Mary very high in our hearts and i really felt offended. And the sadder part is TP is not writing this because he wants to know what you think its to tell you what HE BELIEVES to be the truth. Which case none of us religous or not know what the truth is.
There ya go Fonzie! Get us back on track:thumbup1:

JESUS WAS A MEXICAN

Recently, a Manuel Jesus Fortaguez posed an intrigueing question on the origins of the name of our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ. Like many of the people that saw this question, I laughed at its apparent simplicity. However, I have given it some more thought and I believe our duty as Christians is to pursue this fantastic possibility (ie. that Jesus was Mexican).

Mr. Fortaguez's argument was as follows...

(a) No Jews are named Jesus
(b) Many Mexicans are named Jesus
(c) Therefore, Jesus was a Mexican


From a purely logical standpoint, I see nothing wrong with this argument. There must be some truth here! He further pointed out an interesting fact that I had never considered...

(a) The Messiah would be named Emmanuel
(b) Jesus doesn't appear to have been given this name
(c) Perhaps Jesus had the middle name Emmanuel


Here again, the argument has some logic to it, but I don't feel that point (c) necessarily follows from points (a) and (b). I believe I have a theory which explains the apparent discrepancy AND answers the question of the origin of the name 'Jesus'.

Consider these undisputed scientific and historic facts:

(1) Up until about 4400 (circa 2400 BC) years ago, all the continents were joined together into a supercontinent, called Pangaea. (How else could all the 6,000,000 species of land animals walk to Noah's Ark, and then disembark to all the lands of the world?)

(2) At that time, all peoples spoke one language and worked together in peace. However, they put this unity to evil work, almost succeeding in constructing a tower to reach Heaven itself. At this time, the Lord confounded the tongues of the earth and scattered the peoples. (This means that the continents were still joined together for some time after the flood.)

(3) After the birth of Jesus, the Gospel of Matthew tells us that the Holy Family fled to 'Egypt'. (A land of many pyramids.)

(4) There are also many pyramids found in Mexico. (A coincidence? I think not!)

Now for my pontentially controversial hypothesis:

THE SAVIOR AND HIS FAMILY ACTUALLY FLED TO THE YUCATAN PENINSULA AND LIVED AMONGST THE MAYANS, AND THAT IS WHERE HE GOT THE NAME JESUS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

This may seem absurd, but I ask you to consider the facts in an unbiased light. My line of reasoning is as follows.

First, the Old Testament prophet Isaiah clearly foretold that the savior would be born of a virgin and named Emmanuel. Since Mary was a virgin when she gave birth to Jesus, He must have been CHRISTENED Emmanuel Christ.

Second, the Holy Family fled to 'Egypt'. But at that time, North America and Africa were still adjoined, and the Yucatan was adjacent with Egypt. Thus, the Mayans and the Egyptians are actually the same people! It was to the Mayan portion (perhaps Upper Egypt?) to which the Savior and his family fled.

Third, while living among the Mayans, the young God came to be known as Jesus (pronounced Hey-Zeus). They knew He was a God, and mistakenly thought He was the son of Zeus. In fact, the name Jesus means son of Zeus in the ancient Mayan dialect of Egyptian! Some other similarities between the Egyptian and Mayan cultures should be presented here to quiet the critics. Both cultures worshipped a Sun god. Both cultures used a hieroglyphic alphabet. Both cultures depict themselves as red (ie sunburnt) skinned. Both cultures built mighty pyramids (the largest of which was in Mexico!) Could this have happened by accident??? Could it be a coincidence???? Why the very idea is preposterous!!! How could two different peoples get the idea to construct pyramids (a complex geometrical form) independently? Hence, these two cultures must have originally been one and the same (historically they were called Upper and Lower Egypt).

Fourth, after sojourning in Egypt, the Savior began introducing himself as Jesus Emmanuel Christ. This is the name by which his disciples knew him. Thus, the name Jesus is definitely of Mexican origin and not Spanish as Mr. Fortaguez suggests.

Fifth, at the crucifixion of our LORD AND SAVIOR, the whole world was rent by mighty earthquakes. It was only then that the continents began to drift apart. Many scientific theories support this idea of continental drift (of course they have the time scale wrong).

Although each of these items of evidence, considered separately, is not conclusive, taken as a whole they are ironclad proof of the Mexican origin of the name 'Jesus'. Seen in this light, we must wonder whether or not the Spanish conquistadors destroyed references to the boy God (Hey-Zeus) when they burnt the Mayan codices. Clearly they must have thought that this was a reference to a pagan god, when, ironically, it was the same god in whose very name they were slaughtering the inhabitants.

The travesty is, of course, that this evidence of our Lord and Savior is now lost in history and all we have is the Bible. The prophet Isaiah clearly states that God would also send a messiah to the Egyptians. Perhaps He already has.

Mel Chizedek

� Joseph Busche and Bill Curry

http://xenon.stanford.edu/~silva/jokes.html#jesus

[TheLastDon]

I don't get it. How can someone say I'm not religious and don't believe in this religion but I believe one of the most sacred persons in that religion is a wh***.

How does that work?

[DoctorP]

I completely agree with you, DrP. There is no physical proof that is for certain, and that makes the final answer not so difinative as to Mary's whoredom.

However, I think proof lies in statistical probability and deduction and motive.

The probability of a virgin birth is quite low. The probability of being promiscuous is much higher. Indeed, TREMENDOUSLY higher!

If we deduce with probability that in all likelyhood she conceived out of wedlock with normal biological sex and we accept Joe's word that he had not "touched" her, then that sex came from outside their relationship from another person(s).

Motive, being the fear of stoning, is what drove her and Joe to concoct the dream stories and make the claim that they did.

Parsimony is the proof and that explanation above is the most probable.


While the likelyhood of a virgin birth was/is low...there is a book and apparently there were witnesses to the fact. Your post however is strictly fiction as you have nothing to back it up. I have the word of GOD! :D

[Mad Hatter]

I completely agree with you, DrP. There is no physical proof that is for certain, and that makes the final answer not so difinative as to Mary's whoredom.



Who's or what "final answer"? you are blasting a person that you have never meet, know nothing about... and your argument is based on something that looks like it came from that $hit show Family Guy. Honestly... did you get that OP from an e-mail of one of the other uptight AR's out there? You just thought that you would kick up some dust with an outrageous post like this? So what's YOUR "final answer"? :-|

[TheNoNamedOne]

Who's or what "final answer"? you are blasting a person that you have never meet, know nothing about...

Why would I have to meet someone to ascertain a motive when just knowing the social background of the situation?

From the story we know that "dreams" were claimed by Mary and Joe telling them of something. We know today that sane people do not accept dreams as truth. I mean, what would be your reaction if Pres. Bush and his wife announced that they had a dream which was a message from God to launch nuclear weapons at Russia?

I also understand the probability of virgin births in humans are quite small -- particularly without advanced science to make it happen.

...and your argument is based on something that looks like it came from that show Family Guy.

To be fair, MH, I did openly say in my OP that I was illustrating it with satire. I am not sure why you are stating an obvious point.

Honestly... did you get that OP from an e-mail of one of the other uptight AR's out there?

No, this was fully written and originated from myself. I think I thought of it when driving today and I past a plastic manger in front of a Catholic church here. Besides, there are religious ARists who may find it insulting, too. ARists are not atheists by default. Or do you have some information showing us that they are?

You just thought that you would kick up some dust with an outrageous post like this? So what's YOUR "final answer"? :-|

Why is it outrageous when a clear motive is given and an explanation, too, is offered? Are you saying religion should be treated more differently than any other topic due to the sensitivities of others? Perhaps SouthPark should be banned since that kid is often saying "God damn it!"???

[Mad Hatter]

Your explanation? I understand the need to discuss everything under the Sun with people you don't even know... that's why we are here on the forums... Honestly I didn't even want to touch this topic, just because it felt wrong right from the title to the OP. But I clicked. and I read. There alot of people that tried to handle this is in an open manner, but there were fewer that protested the issue. After reading it all, I was shocked. We are talking about the mother of Christ being a "whore". Not the fact that she had different lovers (which she didn't), but the fact that she just road it off on Joseph. To say that Jesus Christ's mother was a woman of low morals, deceptive nature, and overall a whore... is revolting... i'll keep reading on to see where this topic final ends, but I will not be apart of this anymore... i know that everything is open to talk about, but this pushing the limits.

Just step back for a minute and tell your self "Jesus Christ's mother was a whore." Say that out loud to yourself... fell how it sounds when you save... think about what that simple sentence means... then tell me something educated.

[TheNoNamedOne]

BTW, I always wonder why people like you are willing to believe that certain figures existed, did this or did that, but "draw the line" when it comes to miracles or any of the other things from the "good book".

The simple answer to your why question lies with evidence and probability, KK. Reason and parsimony, too, can be a big part of it. I am not sure why you have to wonder so much on the point when those things I have just said are there for everyone to utilize.

It doesn't take any balls to "dog-pile" on Christianity. It doesn't take any high intellect to set back and "pooh-pooh" faith. Faith is what it is. Just admit that you don't know shit about this world, this universe, our destiny, this whole "wheel" of life. I do believe in an afterlife, a "force", an "order" in this universe, a reason for being. But you just happily crap on what so many hold dear, no respect shown at all.

KK, can you imagine a woman 2000 years ago having gotten pregnant out of wedlock, and by doing so in that culture to considered to then be a whore, and would, therefore, try to contrive a way to escape getting stoned? Are you saying that is harder to imagine than a Fairy Sky God breathing into mud to form man and then hang around to listen to his prayers and intercede on his behalf? Which is the more parsimonious choice of the two to believe in?

It has nothing to do with "happily crapping" on what someone believes. It just has to do with bringing forth topics without prejudice or favor to one or any particular group.

Which is why I show zero respect to you and your AR campaign. You can't show any strong argument why I shouldn't eat meat, IF, for the sake of argument, I offer that the animals would be killed completely painlessly. You talk of "sentience, they have sentience".....big deal. You try to, on the one hand, dismiss the idea of God, yet there is some deep "wrong" committed against the universe when an animal is killed. You can't have your cake and eat it too. Either we're as worthless as moss on a rock, or each one of us is has a being, a spirit, a life force worthy of being protected and respected.

Have I ever cried foul about people saying negative things about AR to the point where I said there arguments should not be permitted here? Now, so that we don't get into an AR discussion here, and if you want to continue this, which I do not mind, then why don't you take the above para and create a new thread for me to address it in, or post it on the AR thread. I promise I will address it more deeply.

BTW, shows us some real guts and draw a disparaging cartoon of Mohammed and post it with your picture on an Islamic website.

Are you suggesting I don't know the realities of the world where mob mentality from injured sensitivities take over? I think you are confusing guts with prudence and common sense. The wise use all three with good judgement. Acting in a knee-jerk manner from a school yard challenge would be neither.

I think there is a musical group called "Alien Ant Farm". Think about that for a minute....anyone who thinks they're really intelligent here may be just that....an intelligent ant.

Funny you should mention ants, I am going to create a thread on ants pretty soon. Be looking out for it.

[TheNoNamedOne]

Just step back for a minute and tell your self "Jesus Christ's mother was a whore." Say that out loud to yourself... fell how it sounds when you save... think about what that simple sentence means... then tell me something educated.

Is it worse than imagining and saying, or putting forth the hypothesis that Muhammed was a torturer, pedophile, and murderer? I think those three things, calling the servant prophet of Allah is worse than calling Mary a whore, and probably Muslims would agree so, too.

But, should I or anyone not be permitted to start a title or OP stating my opinion that Muhammed was a murderer? How about saying that Thor did not exist? Or that Zeus did not exist? Isn't blasphemy to God even worse?

See, you are getting caught up in your cultural/religio prejudices and want special treatement. By they way, perhaps we should also not permit any negative words towards Ingrid Newkirk, the leader of PETA, because I respect her greatly. You fair game for everyone's favortism?

[DoctorP]

I moved all off topic comments to this thread: http://www.japanupdate.com/forum/showthread.php?t=2721

[Asshat]

I wonder if Mary had become pregnant out of wedlock and if after confiding to Joseph, he took pity on her knowing what her fate would be.

First off TP, you know damn well this topic is very offensive to the Christians here and it not suitable for a public forum. Dude, this topic was meant to incite.

Second of all, I am offended that you would refer to a woman who has premarital sex as a whore. And no, I don't subscribe to the theory that Victorian mores were present in the year 0000.

Thirdly, I have always wondered who she slept with to get pregnant. But she wasn't a whore unless she was paid for it.

[OCanadaOurHomeAndNativeLand]

Monthy Python asked very similar questions and made a movie about it called The Life of Brian. This also resulted in a furor of half-baked complaints. I'm saying that TP, far from being cutting-edge, was merely echoing questions that have been asked in public for a long time. And, I might add, getting a very predictable answer. History indeed repeats itself.

[Fonze]

So TP i see you still cant be adult and change the op so i ask you was your wife a whore for accepting that beer or tofu you bought her? Maybe she was running from her boyfriends that bpought her many thing and saw some chump and used him as a shield which would make her a whore or slut.

[Asshat]

Maybe she was running from her boyfriends that bpought her many thing and saw some chump and used him as a shield which would make her a whore or slut.

Fonze, yer killing me! That's how all us white boys met our women here in Asia! Well, that way, or at the bar they worked at. Right guys? :D

I know I'm a chump!

Hey, is the woman who marries a man because he is a successful buisness man also a whore or a slut? Just wondering.

[Go-Shay]

Hey, is the woman who marries a man because he is a successful buisness man also a whore or a slut? Just wondering.

neither I would call her smart:thumbup:

[Asshat]

neither I would call her smart:thumbup:

Exactly, and the "smart" man rents the motorcycle first to see how she rides.

Someone has to rent motorcycles...oldest proffession around and all that, yet I see a definite need for the rental agencies.

I am sure that if Mary was impregnated out of wedlock, it was out of love, or she was hungry. At any rate, she gave birth to a son who changed the world!

[OCanadaOurHomeAndNativeLand]

Some more food for thought...

Mother and Magdalen as One

"I am the honored one and the scorned one.
I am the whore and the holy one.
I am the wife and the virgin.
I am the mother and the daughter."
(A, p. 55-6)


The Divine Mother and her Consort/Savior Son is a strong theme in World Goddess Myth, making Virgin Mary/Mary Magdalen a likely composite. As noted on the Virgin (http://www.northernway.org/twm/mary/virgin.html) page, the title of Virgin was often bestowed upon sexually active Goddesses. Sacred Temple Prostitutes were often called Virgins (D). In addition, children of The Sacred Marriage, a ritual union of a temple priestess and a king willing to die for his people, were often called "virgin born" or "divine children," just as Christ was (C). As noted on the Virgin (http://www.northernway.org/twm/mary/virgin.html) page, it is possible that Mother Mary was dedicated to a Goddess temple when she was a child. Perhaps Mother Mary was a temple priestess, thus making Jesus (or Yeshua) a divine child (E). There is even stronger evidence that Mary Magdalen was a temple priestess, so perhaps this is the true connection between Mother Mary and Mary Magdalen.

Some feel that Mary the Mother and Mary the Lover were split into two characters--one good, the other evil--because women's sexuality was demonized by the early orthodox church. (See Mother Mary as Bride (http://www.northernway.org/twm/mary/bride.html))
http://northernway.org/twm/mary/magdalene.html

[OCanadaOurHomeAndNativeLand]

No i do not believe she was, But i do believe you are whore for your xxxxxx xxx views.

Its funny how someone who doesn't believe in religion is always talking about it. How xxxxxxxx that must feel.

So TP i see you still cant be adult and change the op so i ask you was your wife a whore for accepting that beer or tofu you bought her? Maybe she was running from her boyfriends that bpought her many thing and saw some chump and used him as a shield which would make her a whore or slut.
Let's see, in response to a question about some woman who may or may not have existed, and is very most likely an embellished character if she did indeed exist, you decide to call the OP and his wife "whore" because you are unable to answer the question or discuss the issue?

I've seen several warnings elsewhere on the forum to not bring members' personal relations into the discussions, yet you get a pass? And, what - with your history? Who do you have to bl--, I mean know, to get away with that?

[dk]

Dude got 7 infractions. It's already been discussed. Sorry you don't have access to the mod/admin room.

[Galina]

I wonder if Mary had become pregnant out of wedlock and if after confiding to Joseph, he took pity on her knowing what her fate would be. It could have happened two ways 1) Mary and Joseph had sex before their marriage and she got pregnant, or 2) Mary was promiscuous, had sex with some other(s) and then had sex with Joseph to trick him into believing it was his seed growing in her.

Whichever scenario, they then concocted the whole dream story about being visited by the Holy Ghost and impregnated so as to bear the Son of God.

The motive to engage in such a lie sure is present. Perhaps some satire could illustrate that:

Mary: I'm late.
Joe: What do you mean? You're right here. Late for what?
Mary: No, Joe, I mean I am "laaate".
Joe: But you told me you were counting the days.
Mary: I was, but I must have miscounted a day or two. Hey, what are you doing?
Joe: Packing.
Mary: Why?
Joe: C'mon, haven't you read the scrolls and tablets?
Mary: No, you men are always repressing us.
Joe: Oh, sorry about that. Anyways, it's like they're gonna stone our asses.
Mary: Yeah now that I recall, I think I've seen a few stonings. Doesn't look fun.
Joe: Well, maybe I could just denounce you as a whore and save myself.
Mary: God damn it! Listen, Joe, there is no need for either of us to get stoned. I have a plan.
Joe: Yeah, what?
Mary: Well, you know the old stories. Everyone has dreams and if we just make up some dream stories and say the dreams are from God everyone will believe us.
Joe: lol. Yeah, these people sure are quite gullible aren't they? Why haven't all past whores thought of this?
Mary: Exactly. And if we play our cards right this could really work out for us. You know...like make us famous forever and ever and ever and ever.
Joe: Hmmmm....
Mary: We'll just say I am a virgin mother giving birth to the Son of God and the miracle of the whole thing will save us.
Joe: Yeah, this may just work.

Why not? Motive exists and the means through superstition exists.

OMG!! Thats like so funny and thats what I think happened but I couldnt put it into a story like you did. That broke me out of my pout/strike. Not muku giving me some credits but what YOU posted. Pfft.. I pray to everything and anything when I am in trouble :P

[Galina]

eelecurb, I like you. you are reclusive but there when needed.

I like you too dk :) because you welcomed me. And took the time to answer my silly questions. Thanks :)

And no, mary wasn't a whore ... she just kinda got pregnant with a guy. out of wedlock like was posted by TP

I don't think being pregnant by a boyfriend classifies one as a whore. I think a whore is one who sleeps with anyone for something/like a prostitute

Sorry, I type along as I think. Typing my thoughts.

[TheNoNamedOne]

no, mary wasn't a whore ... she just kinda got pregnant with a guy. out of wedlock like was posted by TP

I don't think being pregnant by a boyfriend classifies one as a whore. I think a whore is one who sleeps with anyone for something/like a prostitute

Well, that was the point of the OP question -- to get people's opinion on it in a very straightforward manner.

But, a page or two ago Eel posted a very interesting quote from a source that referenced that perhaps Mary was a temple priestess and that is why she and Jesus were maybe considered to be divine. Some scholars have written that these women in temples were akin to prostitutes -- or whores for the priests.

I'm not sure and do not have all the answers about Mary being a whore or not, but I find the whole point interesting -- even that Mary Magdalene and Mary were in fact one but then divided. If that is so, then it gives more credence to the point that she was far from a virgin.

Sorry, I type along as I think. Typing my thoughts.

lol. No problem.

[Galina]

Well, that was the point of the OP question -- to get people's opinion on it in a very straightforward manner.

But, a page or two ago Eel posted a very interesting quote from a source that referenced that perhaps Mary was a temple priestess and that is why she and Jesus were maybe considered to be divine. Some scholars have written that these women in temples were akin to prostitutes -- or whores for the priests.

I'm not sure and do not have all the answers about Mary being a whore or not, but I find the whole point interesting -- even that Mary Magdalene and Mary were in fact one but then divided. If that is so, then it gives more credence to the point that she was far from a virgin.



lol. No problem.

I am seriously thinking here. Endless possiblities

[TheNoNamedOne]

And here is another link, IF Mary and Mary Magdelene in fact are the same person divided from one, then Mary is a whore according to the Bible, for Mary Magdelene is believed by some scholars to be referred to as The Great Whore of Babylone in the very pages of the Bible.

So, by that (if they are the same person), then Mary is a whore. Not my words, but just connecting the dots here, and the vocabularly word whore being thrown at Mary Magdelene is in the Bible and stated by scholars and wholey appropriate. That some disagree with this scholarship is irrelevant. The point is the link is there.

See, things are fitting rather neatly into place and not at all a far stretch of the imagination to see these links.

[Galina]

i dont think mary ( his mommy) and mary magdalene were the same person.

[Isaak Brodsky]

Sounds a bit Cornholio-ish.

[DougP]

Sounds a bit Cornholio-ish.

Are you talking about the Great Cornholio :D
http://japanupdate.com/forum/showthread.php?t=203&page=23

[TheNoNamedOne]

Sounds a bit Cornholio-ish.

You mean like in a talking snake kinda way and people turning into pillars of salt? Eeeeeerrrrr...ok.

[Isaak Brodsky]

ahhhhhhhhhh .... kinda - like - not really.

more like the relative inability of some commentators to perceive differences among metaphor, allegory, parable, literal language and other figures.

[TheNoNamedOne]

ahhhhhhhhhh .... kinda - like - not really.

more like the relative inability of some commentators to perceive differences among metaphor, allegory, parable, literal language and other figures.

Funny you should mention the inability of some (for it is not just nonbelievers, but even Christians amongst themselves -- witness the number of different denominations), seeing that even early Christians disagreed amongst themselves about points such as literal or allegorical and whatnot.

The relationship between Gnosticism and Christianity during the early first and the whole of the second century is vital in helping us to further understand the main doctrines of Gnosticism, due in part to the fact that much of what we know today about gnosticism has only been preseved in the teachings of early church fathers. The age of the Gnostics was highly diverse religiously, and due to there being no fixed church authority, syncretism with pre-existing belief systems as well as new religions was often embraced. Above all, the central idea of Gnosticism (a knowledge superior to and independent of faith) made it welcome to many who were half-converted from paganism to Christianity. According to gnostics, faith was for the multitude, knowledge for the few (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gnostics).

So, if the talking snake were allegorical, what sets it apart that Jesus himself, too, is not allegorical -- or of his resurection. A snake talking, a dead man rising after 3 days and going to heaven 40 days later. Why is one any harder or easier to swallow than the other?

Surely you are not in a cherry field picking the ones that look good to you, are you? What criteria do you go by, rather than a warm fuzzy feeling?

The Bible is quite clear when it is using an allegorical device -- such as Jesus asking his "cup" pass from him. In this case, we know Jesus is not holding a real cup, but that he is referring to the fate of death which he feels (but doesn't seem to be too sure of) is coming. This clarity shouldn't allow for mistakes, and that is why we don't have denominations in Christianity that hinge on this "cup".

Now, if one is going to say a talking snake is allegorical, I ask them to explain what criteria do they use. Surely it cannot be the fact of defying physics or biology, because Jesus himself does that.

[OCanadaOurHomeAndNativeLand]

i dont think mary ( his mommy) and mary magdalene were the same person.
Yes, they were different people (in the story/biographies). But, as Christendom was wont to do, certain elements of certain stories were emphasized, minimized, cut, added, and mixed. I would say the Bible is shaken AND stirred :)

[OCanadaOurHomeAndNativeLand]

Another Bible classic...

My favorite example on articles comes from Genesis 1:1 whose opening is translated as “In the beginning, ....” However, Biblical Hebrew has a definite but no indefinite article; there is no definite article used in the opening of Genesis 1:1 – it should read “In [a] beginning, ...,” which changes the meaning tremendously because it implies the possibility of more than onebeginning! This “subtle” aspect caused so much consternation that a congress of rabbis was convened at the beginning of the second millennium to take up the issue of interpretation; in essence, they said that although it says “In [a] beginning, ...,” it really means “In the beginning, ...,” that is, there was only one creation. Such is the politics of religion – all this fuss due to an assumed “missing” article.
http://ejmas.com/jalt/jaltframe.htm (endnote #4)

[Isaak Brodsky]

Interesting. Maybe my copy of the Torah is faulty. I see no problem here.

[TheNoNamedOne]

Sorry to revisit this quote below again, Ian, but I think I should have addressed it more directly with a simpler question.

...more like the relative inability of some commentators to perceive differences among metaphor, allegory, parable, literal language and other figures.[/SIZE][/FONT]

Is that why there are so many denominations? Because they all the inability to perceive the differences among those things you list?

Is it your denomination that has accurately done so and is the right one? Why all the different denominations? I don't think the inability lies with us on the out looking in, but between all those on the in amongst themselves.

They can't get their story straight on the details.

[OCanadaOurHomeAndNativeLand]

http://www.israelect.com/childrenofYahweh/Comparet/mystery.htm
THE MYSTERY OF THE AGES
By
Bertrand L. Comparet
It is amazing how much there is in the Bible, which is not even known to the most devout Christians. It is concealed from them by the many mistranslations in the commonly used King James Bible. Because of these mistranslations, many false doctrines have developed among people who faithfully believe what they have read, not knowing that what they read is sometimes incorrect.
One of these errors, which has misled many, is the mistranslation of the Greek word aion, meaning an age, as everlasting, eternal, etc. For example, we see many places where the King James Bible speaks of everlasting life and many others where it speaks of eternal life. Some fine, devout people have worked up elaborate doctrines about the supposed difference between everlasting life and eternal life.
Would it shock you to learn that the Bible makes no such distinction at all? The New Testament is where we find these references. Almost all of our English New Testaments are translated from ancient manuscripts, written in the Greek language. In Greek, aion, commonly called aeon in English, means an age, a period of time of long, but indefinite duration. The Greek word aionios commonly called aeonian, in English means, to the age, to the end of the age...

http://www.bluelight.ru/vb/archive/index.php/t-74771.html
Elohim meant "They" before it was ever translated. So "They made man in Their image," is a pretty important passage when considered again..

[GODH8SU]

I wonder if Mary had become pregnant out of wedlock and if after confiding to Joseph, he took pity on her knowing what her fate would be. It could have happened two ways 1) Mary and Joseph had sex before their marriage and she got pregnant, or 2) Mary was promiscuous, had sex with some other(s) and then had sex with Joseph to trick him into believing it was his seed growing in her.

Whichever scenario, they then concocted the whole dream story about being visited by the Holy Ghost and impregnated so as to bear the Son of God.

The motive to engage in such a lie sure is present. Perhaps some satire could illustrate that:

Mary: I'm late.
Joe: What do you mean? You're right here. Late for what?
Mary: No, Joe, I mean I am "laaate".
Joe: But you told me you were counting the days.
Mary: I was, but I must have miscounted a day or two. Hey, what are you doing?
Joe: Packing.
Mary: Why?
Joe: C'mon, haven't you read the scrolls and tablets?
Mary: No, you men are always repressing us.
Joe: Oh, sorry about that. Anyways, it's like they're gonna stone our asses.
Mary: Yeah now that I recall, I think I've seen a few stonings. Doesn't look fun.
Joe: Well, maybe I could just denounce you as a whore and save myself.
Mary: God damn it! Listen, Joe, there is no need for either of us to get stoned. I have a plan.
Joe: Yeah, what?
Mary: Well, you know the old stories. Everyone has dreams and if we just make up some dream stories and say the dreams are from God everyone will believe us.
Joe: lol. Yeah, these people sure are quite gullible aren't they? Why haven't all past whores thought of this?
Mary: Exactly. And if we play our cards right this could really work out for us. You know...like make us famous forever and ever and ever and ever.
Joe: Hmmmm....
Mary: We'll just say I am a virgin mother giving birth to the Son of God and the miracle of the whole thing will save us.
Joe: Yeah, this may just work.

Why not? Motive exists and the means through superstition exists.

Well here is an intersting story to go along with this theory.

'Basic Instinct' Director Paul Verhoeven: Jesus Was Son of Mary and Roman Rapist
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,352277,00.html

[OCanadaOurHomeAndNativeLand]

Some folks figure she may have been raped...by a soldier.

"Basic Instinct" director Paul Verhoeven has written a book that contradicts biblical teaching by suggesting that Jesus might have been fathered by a Roman soldier who raped Mary.

An Amsterdam publishing house said Wednesday it will publish the Dutch filmmaker's biography of Jesus, "Jesus of Nazareth: A Realistic Portrait," in September.

Verhoeven is best known as the director of blockbuster films including "Basic Instinct" and "RoboCop," but he is also a member of "Jesus Seminar," a group of scholars and authors that seeks to establish historical facts about Jesus.

Marianna Sterk of the publishing house J.M. Meulenhoff said the book includes several ideas that run contrary to Christian faith, including the suggestion that Jesus could be the son of a Roman soldier who raped Mary during a Jewish uprising against Roman rule in 4 B.C.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080423/ap_on_re_eu/books_jesus

[jimbob17755]

I wonder if Mary had become pregnant out of wedlock and if after confiding to Joseph, he took pity on her knowing what her fate would be. It could have happened two ways 1) Mary and Joseph had sex before their marriage and she got pregnant, or 2) Mary was promiscuous, had sex with some other(s) and then had sex with Joseph to trick him into believing it was his seed growing in her.

Whichever scenario, they then concocted the whole dream story about being visited by the Holy Ghost and impregnated so as to bear the Son of God.

The motive to engage in such a lie sure is present. Perhaps some satire could illustrate that:

Mary: I'm late.
Joe: What do you mean? You're right here. Late for what?
Mary: No, Joe, I mean I am "laaate".
Joe: But you told me you were counting the days.
Mary: I was, but I must have miscounted a day or two. Hey, what are you doing?
Joe: Packing.
Mary: Why?
Joe: C'mon, haven't you read the scrolls and tablets?
Mary: No, you men are always repressing us.
Joe: Oh, sorry about that. Anyways, it's like they're gonna stone our asses.
Mary: Yeah now that I recall, I think I've seen a few stonings. Doesn't look fun.
Joe: Well, maybe I could just denounce you as a whore and save myself.
Mary: God damn it! Listen, Joe, there is no need for either of us to get stoned. I have a plan.
Joe: Yeah, what?
Mary: Well, you know the old stories. Everyone has dreams and if we just make up some dream stories and say the dreams are from God everyone will believe us.
Joe: lol. Yeah, these people sure are quite gullible aren't they? Why haven't all past whores thought of this?
Mary: Exactly. And if we play our cards right this could really work out for us. You know...like make us famous forever and ever and ever and ever.
Joe: Hmmmm....
Mary: We'll just say I am a virgin mother giving birth to the Son of God and the miracle of the whole thing will save us.
Joe: Yeah, this may just work.

Why not? Motive exists and the means through superstition exists.
How do we know Jesus Christ was black?
1-He liked gospel
2-He called everyone BRO
3-He couldn't get a fair trail

[dk]

How do we know Jesus Christ was black?
1-He liked gospel
2-He called everyone BRO
3-He couldn't get a fair trail
Hehehehe....

[TheNoNamedOne]

How do we know Jesus Christ was black?
1-He liked gospel
2-He called everyone BRO
3-He couldn't get a fair trail

Notwithstanding the circumstances of his birth, and whether or not his mother was a whore, prostitute, or raped... it seems that Jesus may have been raised to be a racist or bigot, too... for he does refer to non-Jews as dogs and initially chose only the Jews to be his people simply based on their being Jews.

Though over a period of time, he seemed to have evolve a kinder disposition to non-Jews as well. But only after they rejected him.

I would expect whores to raise their children to be more open and liberal in their views from an early age, seeing the liberal lifestyle they may have chosen to have that caused them to conceive a bastard child.

[Crazysix]

How do we know Jesus Christ was black?
1-He liked gospel
2-He called everyone BRO
3-He couldn't get a fair trail

trial jackass, i was wondering how trail got into this:D:D

[Crazysix]

I would expect whores to raise their children to be more open and liberal in their views from an early age, seeing the liberal lifestyle they may have chosen to have that caused them to conceive a bastard child.
SO this explains alot about you:D

[TheNoNamedOne]

SO this explains alot about you:D

Nah. I was raised quite conservatively. Took a while to throw a lot of that off.

[Crazysix]

OMG no infraction....you do have a sense of humor

[TheNoNamedOne]

trial jackass, i was wondering how trail got into this:D:D

Please refrain from name-calling. -- TP

[perfect10]

I do not know about the whore or rape stuff. However, in the Jewish old Jewish beliefs, it was not clean to have sex at some times of the year and it was also believed that a woman could not conceive during times of hardship.

My thought on the subject maybe just crap, and I may need to go and do more research on the subject but from the studying I have done, my personal theory is that Jesus was born at the time of the year that he would of been conceived during a forbidden time. I believe he was Joseph’s child.

[Throe]

There ya go Fonzie! Get us back on track:thumbup1:
I find it disturbing that you would commend someone for trying to get us all back on track and then quote something which is almost completely off topic yourself.

I'd like to note that the message you quoted appears to be signed by Mel Chizedek, which is a name pun of Melchizedek, who is a Biblical high preist.

Also, the dissertation contradicts its own logic by mentioning the popularity of the name Jesus in Mexico being a proof of Jesus origination there. If Mexico and Egypt were so close together at the time, then Jesus' name would be as popular in Egypt as it is in Mexico.:scratchchin:

[greenflash]

Please refrain from name-calling. -- TP

Does that include slinging the word whore? How about troll?

[Throe]

I don't understand the concept that Mary, mother of Jesus, and Mary Magdalene are the same person. I think Jesus would recognize his mother, even after He became self-aware in a divine sense.

In any case, I can't abide a thought that the mother of Jesus was impregnated by a man. There are too many things that are too well documented about the life of Jesus to purport that He was the biological son of a human male. What made Him "the Son of Man" while still being the "Son of God" was that He was raised with Joseph as His father. Much the same way that a child adopted at the age of 1 or 2 years old would think of his or her parents as mother and father in a very real, perhaps even biological sense, rather than simply caretakers, despite any evidence to the contrary unveiled later in life.

I also believe that the concept of artificial insemination is flawed. As far as any evidence we have demonstrates, the technology didn't exist at the time. As for extraterrestial involvement, I believe they do exist, but that they didn't have anything to do with this. If there were any physical evidence of Jesus left on Earth, and it were examined, then I think we would find that He only had half as many chromosomes as the rest of us do. While one might immediately draw the conclusion that if He had less chromosomes, then genetically, He must be inferior, I'm also considering His miraculous nature to start with. Much the same way that most people only use 10% of their brain's capability, perhaps a perfect being only needs half as many chromosomes to achieve the same physical existence, and can even do more, with less. I think it truly was a virgin conception and birth, in all ways.

Once again, essentially, this argument brings us back to the question of whether or not you believe in God, the truth and/or accuracy of the Bible, the reality of the Christian faith, etc. If you have faith in the God of the Bible/Jesus, then you're more apt to believe in the miraculous occurence of Jesus' conception offhand, without investigation, until such time as verifiable evidence of its occurence is revealed.

Without evidence either way, you're extrapolating, which is perfectly normal and not in anyway combative in my opinion, but what's your goal?

[OCanadaOurHomeAndNativeLand]

Dude, check out the chart...

http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_jcpa5.htm

[Asshat]

Dude, check out the chart...

http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_jcpa5.htm

Blasphemy! Burn in hell sinner!

[OCanadaOurHomeAndNativeLand]

Go beyond the Davinci Code, Ass...

http://www.truthbeknown.com/sunsofgod.htm

[Asshat]

Go beyond the Davinci Code, Ass...

http://www.truthbeknown.com/sunsofgod.htm

Too bad Acharya only looked at one of the esoteric sect of Buddism! Perfect for the unititiated Western to grasp hold of! Tibet and Nepal get all the glory!

I suppose one of the things in which a Buddist finds the most distressing is the inability of the Western mind to grasp the concept of duality. No, to the Western mind, it's "my way or the hiway!"

Kinda sorts out those who are here "playing Asian" and those who have moved on.

[OCanadaOurHomeAndNativeLand]

Try the main page (http://www.truthbeknown.com/index.html) for more resources, Ass. Plenty of stuff to keep you busy.

[Asshat]

Try the main page (http://www.truthbeknown.com/index.html) for more resources, Ass. Plenty of stuff to keep you busy.

Does her work strike you as aimed towards the Christian American masses?

Some of her work seems interesting, yet I don't have the "need" to prove or disprove anything I might have heard in church some years ago.

I am no where near as educated as she is, (or probably as you are) yet I can find plenty of glaring discrepancies in the Bible.

I don't know if you got it from my last post, but although I claimed once to be Buddhist, that does not mean I have an all-encompassing view of Buddism as the completeness of my spirituality, nor is it (or any other dogma) the thing which drives any aspect of me.

Thus, applying applications towards me as if I have claimed to be a "born again X-stian" have little validity or impact upon me personally...the latter obviously of which it is meant to be vis-a-vis your running buddy.

[OCanadaOurHomeAndNativeLand]

I don't jog.

[Asshat]

I don't jog.

Not down pipeline road near the junk yard on the other side of Futenma? Ok. Wasn't you then. LMAO!

Sorry eele, we do hang out in the same neighborhood. I'm the white boy looking like a Moslem.

[OCanadaOurHomeAndNativeLand]

:scratchchin:Now I'm really lost:clear19:

[Asshat]

:scratchchin:Now I'm really lost:clear19:

That makes three of us!