Announcement

Collapse

Judaism Guidelines

Theists only.

Shalom!


This forum is a debate area to discuss issues pertaining to the world religion of Judaism in general and also its relationship to Christianity. This forum is generally for theists only. Non-theists (eg, atheistic Jews) may not post here without first obtaining permission from the moderator of this forum. Granting of such permission is subject to Moderator discretion - and may be revoked if the Moderator feels that the poster is not keeping with the spirit of the World Religions Department.

Non-theists are welcome to discuss and debate issues in the Apologetics 301 forum without such restrictions.

Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less

"Virgin Birth" Questions

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by Teallaura View Post
    You're being a jerk, Shuny. The guy has asked straightforward questions and your efforts to derail aren't cool at all. If you have a legit point to make, start your own thread in Apologetics.
    Serious response. you're playing the jerk. One Bad Pig's response was in part related to these questions. It is much relevant to Judaism as Apologetics.
    Last edited by shunyadragon; 05-17-2014, 06:28 AM.
    Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
    Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
    But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

    go with the flow the river knows . . .

    Frank

    I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by Avraham Ibn Ezra View Post
      1. Why would G-d need to cause a "Virgin Birth?"
      2. What event/events/issue/issues caused a need for a "Virgin Birth?"
      3. Is there clear evidence or are there reasons within the Hebrew bible and the Oral Torah for the need of a Virgin Birth to bring the Messiah into the World?
      From the birth of Cain to the birth of Jesus of Nazareth every pregnancy has been contaminated by the jus primae noctis practiced by the serpent. With Jesus' birth, the reign of the serpent comes to an end. The Hebrew word for "loins" (the serpent) is motan מתן. The first two letters מת spell "death," while the last letter נ symbolizes the male reproductive organ (see Rabbi Ginsburgh). When the letter nun נ is found at the end of a word, it becomes ithyphallic, "extended," ן. A man's loins are the home of the serpent. The serpent is literally wrapped around the Tree of Life forming the Tree of Knowledge ידע. The word "knowledge" ידע (yada) is used as a euphemism for phallic-sex: "so-and-so came to `know' (yada) his wife and she conceived . . .."

      The word motan מתן means the serpent ן of death מת. If the letter symbolizing the womb מ is removed from the word for loins (motan מתן) the remaining letters תן spell "serpent" (tan). Any way it's parsed the word for "loins" reveals the need for Jesus' virgin birth.

      The entire Tanakh, properly interpreted, speaks of the need for a virgin birth. The very foundation of the covenant to Abraham is the bleeding of the motan. Abraham takes a knife and wounds the serpent symbolizing (ritualistically) the death of the serpent of death. Issac is symbolically born of an emasculate pregnancy just like Abraham's greater son, Jesus of Nazareth, who is born not of a ritualistically emasculate pregnancy, but from the real deal.

      Rabbi Samson Hirsch points out that the key symbol of a "Jewish" birth (as opposed to all other births) is set forth when Moses speaks of the firstborn "opening the womb":

      פטר means "to let out," also "to be let out." (פטר is related to פתר), to uncover the hidden-meaning of a dream, and the like [say a closed-statement], and . . . would seem to refer to the child, in which case it would mean: the one expelled from the womb. But then it would refer to every child. Hense, פטר should be taken as referring to the mother's womb, and as denoting the opening of a hitherto closed place.

      Rabbi Hirsch notes that if the Hebrew word used for "opening the womb’ פטר merely talks of opening the womb, then every child (not just the firstborn) would be included in the statement (and thus the statement would be meaningless since all offspring would automatically open the womb). In the same context, Rabbi Hirsch says: "The halachah, which links the consecration of the firstborn to פטר . . . teaches us that the meaning of this law is essentially the consecration of the womb. If the first child is a male, he is not born only unto his home and family, but, rather, unto God."

      Rabbi Hirsch realizes that the scripture makes "opening the womb" the key signifier of the sanctified "firstborn." But he understands that the signifier seems not to have significance since every child opens the womb at birth. There's only one "womb opening" that would set the true firstborn apart from all other births. He must open a closed womb, a closed mem, and the only way it can really be closed is if the membrane of virginity is not tore prior to his birth.

      In ritual circumcision there are two parts. If both parts aren't performed, the circumcision is bogus. The first part is removing the serpent (the orlah) wrapped around the Tree of Life. The second signifies Jesus' birth and Jesus' birth alone. The membrane of virginity is torn (periah) by the nails in a Jewish hand (in this case the mohel) signifying that the true circumcision will occur when the membrane of virginity normally torn by the serpent in a profane phallic pregnancy in this case is torn by the nails in a Jewish man's hand (Matt. 27:51).



      Last edited by Xtian Rabinovich; 05-17-2014, 11:10 AM.

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by Xtian Rabinovich View Post


        From the birth of Cain to the birth of Jesus of Nazareth every pregnancy has been contaminated by the jus primae noctis practiced by the serpent. With Jesus' birth, the reign of the serpent comes to an end. The Hebrew word for "loins" (the serpent) is motan מתן. The first two letters מת spell "death," while the last letter נ symbolizes the male reproductive organ (see Rabbi Ginsburgh). When the letter nun נ is found at the end of a word, it becomes ithyphallic, "extended," ן. A man's loins are the home of the serpent. The serpent is literally wrapped around the Tree of Life forming the Tree of Knowledge ידע. The word "knowledge" ידע (yada) is used as a euphemism for phallic-sex: "so-and-so came to `know' (yada) his wife and she conceived . . .."

        The word motan מתן means the serpent ן of death מת. If the letter symbolizing the womb מ is removed from the word for loins (motan מתן) the remaining letters תן spell "serpent" (tan). Any way it's parsed the word for "loins" reveals the need for Jesus' virgin birth.

        The entire Tanakh, properly interpreted, speaks of the need for a virgin birth. The very foundation of the covenant to Abraham is the bleeding of the motan. Abraham takes a knife and wounds the serpent symbolizing (ritualistically) the death of the serpent of death. Issac is symbolically born of an emasculate pregnancy just like Abraham's greater son, Jesus of Nazareth, who is born not of a ritualistically emasculate pregnancy, but from the real deal.

        Rabbi Samson Hirsch points out that the key symbol of a "Jewish" birth (as opposed to all other births) is set forth when Moses speaks of the firstborn "opening the womb":

        פטר means "to let out," also "to be let out." (פטר is related to פתר), to uncover the hidden-meaning of a dream, and the like [say a closed-statement], and . . . would seem to refer to the child, in which case it would mean: the one expelled from the womb. But then it would refer to every child. Hense, פטר should be taken as referring to the mother's womb, and as denoting the opening of a hitherto closed place.

        Rabbi Hirsch notes that if the Hebrew word used for "opening the womb’ פטר merely talks of opening the womb, then every child (not just the firstborn) would be included in the statement (and thus the statement would be meaningless since all offspring would automatically open the womb). In the same context, Rabbi Hirsch says: "The halachah, which links the consecration of the firstborn to פטר . . . teaches us that the meaning of this law is essentially the consecration of the womb. If the first child is a male, he is not born only unto his home and family, but, rather, unto God."

        Rabbi Hirsch realizes that the scripture makes "opening the womb" the key signifier of the sanctified "firstborn." But he understands that the signifier seems not to have significance since every child opens the womb at birth. There's only one "womb opening" that would set the true firstborn apart from all other births. He must open a closed womb, a closed mem, and the only way it can really be closed is if the membrane of virginity is not tore prior to his birth.

        In ritual circumcision there are two parts. If both parts aren't performed, the circumcision is bogus. The first part is removing the serpent (the orlah) wrapped around the Tree of Life. The second signifies Jesus' birth and Jesus' birth alone. The membrane of virginity is torn (periah) by the nails in a Jewish hand (in this case the mohel) signifying that the true circumcision will occur when the membrane of virginity normally torn by the serpent in a profane phallic pregnancy in this case is torn by the nails in a Jewish man's hand (Matt. 27:51).



        You're odd.
        Enter the Church and wash away your sins. For here there is a hospital and not a court of law. Do not be ashamed to enter the Church; be ashamed when you sin, but not when you repent. – St. John Chrysostom

        Veritas vos Liberabit<>< Learn Greek <>< Look here for an Orthodox Church in America<><Ancient Faith Radio
        sigpic
        I recommend you do not try too hard and ...research as little as possible. Such weighty things give me a headache. - Shunyadragon, Baha'i apologist

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
          Serious response. you're playing the jerk. One Bad Pig's response was in part related to these questions. It is much relevant to Judaism as Apologetics.
          If you were being serious, then I apologize - but I don't believe you were. It looks like trolling to me - you normally give better answers when you're serious.
          "He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain that which he cannot lose." - Jim Elliot

          "Forgiveness is the way of love." Gary Chapman

          My Personal Blog

          My Novella blog (Current Novella Begins on 7/25/14)

          Quill Sword

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by Teallaura View Post
            If you were being serious, then I apologize - but I don't believe you were. It looks like trolling to me - you normally give better answers when you're serious.
            The title of the thread is Virgin Questions, plural, in the Judaism forum. I am serious to stimulate responses from the Jewish perspective concerning the use of the OT quotations interpreted as a prophecy of 'Virgin birth' of the Messiah. This is the correct forum for this.

            If you want to see a 'Road Kill Troll,' check out Jorge.
            Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
            Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
            But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

            go with the flow the river knows . . .

            Frank

            I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by Avraham Ibn Ezra View Post
              For as long as I can remember my friends, who are Christian, often ask "Can't G-d do all things?" and "Couldn't there be a Virgin Birth if G-d desired to create one?" These are very complex questions and deserve an answer but, I have never heard the answer to a few questions some of us on the Jewish side would ask of Christians. I am not a Counter Missionary so dont assume I am. I happen to think that their positions are fallacious.

              1. Why would G-d need to cause a "Virgin Birth?"
              2. What event/events/issue/issues caused a need for a "Virgin Birth?"
              3. Is there clear evidence or are there reasons within the Hebrew bible and the Oral Torah for the need of a Virgin Birth to bring the Messiah into the World?

              The reason I included the Oral tradition is because Judaism is not Sola Scriptura and should not be treated as such. I am curious as to what the answers are or will be.

              Shalom,

              Avraham Ibn Ezra
              Because of sin and death.

              The ressurrected one (Jesus Christ) lives eternal.

              Which means that he was already there before his mother did conceive.

              But since he has been born also his mother must have been eternal.

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by Geert van den Bos View Post
                Because of sin and death.

                The ressurrected one (Jesus Christ) lives eternal.

                Which means that he was already there before his mother did conceive.

                But since he has been born also his mother must have been eternal.
                Your conclusion does not follow.
                Enter the Church and wash away your sins. For here there is a hospital and not a court of law. Do not be ashamed to enter the Church; be ashamed when you sin, but not when you repent. – St. John Chrysostom

                Veritas vos Liberabit<>< Learn Greek <>< Look here for an Orthodox Church in America<><Ancient Faith Radio
                sigpic
                I recommend you do not try too hard and ...research as little as possible. Such weighty things give me a headache. - Shunyadragon, Baha'i apologist

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by One Bad Pig View Post
                  Your conclusion does not follow.

                  Eh, it does, but not necessarily so. He's assuming that Mary was eternally pregnant - until she wasn't.


                  I didn't say it was good logic, mind you...
                  "He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain that which he cannot lose." - Jim Elliot

                  "Forgiveness is the way of love." Gary Chapman

                  My Personal Blog

                  My Novella blog (Current Novella Begins on 7/25/14)

                  Quill Sword

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by One Bad Pig View Post
                    Your conclusion does not follow.
                    Originally posted by Teallaura View Post
                    Eh, it does, but not necessarily so. He's assuming that Mary was eternally pregnant - until she wasn't.


                    I didn't say it was good logic, mind you...

                    Revelation 12:

                    1 And a great sign was seen in heaven: a woman arrayed with the sun, and the moon under her feet, and upon her head a crown of twelve stars;

                    2 and she was with child; and she crieth out, travailing in birth, and in pain to be delivered.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by Avraham Ibn Ezra View Post
                      For as long as I can remember my friends, who are Christian, often ask "Can't G-d do all things?" and "Couldn't there be a Virgin Birth if G-d desired to create one?" These are very complex questions and deserve an answer but, I have never heard the answer to a few questions some of us on the Jewish side would ask of Christians. I am not a Counter Missionary so dont assume I am. I happen to think that their positions are fallacious.

                      1. Why would G-d need to cause a "Virgin Birth?"
                      2. What event/events/issue/issues caused a need for a "Virgin Birth?"
                      3. Is there clear evidence or are there reasons within the Hebrew bible and the Oral Torah for the need of a Virgin Birth to bring the Messiah into the World?

                      The reason I included the Oral tradition is because Judaism is not Sola Scriptura and should not be treated as such. I am curious as to what the answers are or will be.

                      Shalom,

                      Avraham Ibn Ezra
                      There are a few verses that come to mind. Perhaps the book of Samuel could be used to draw a similar connection between the two women,"His mother Hannah had been barren, and at the shrine of Shiloh she prays for a son. Eli, the priest, assures her that her prayer will be granted, and Hannah vows: 'I will give him to You God for all the days of his life' (1:11).

                      See listings in Leviticus:
                      • 26 You are to be holy to me because I, the Lord, am holy, and I have set you apart from the nations to be my own. Leviticus 20
                      • 28 “‘But nothing that a person owns and devotes to the LORD—whether a human being or an animal or family land—may be sold or redeemed; everything so devoted is most holy to the LORD. Leviticus 27



                      Also, and quoting from Esdras - there's a line that keeps popping up in my mind that was said about shortening the days, 4 Ezra, chapter 1: 24: "What shall I do to you, O Jacob? You would not obey me, O Judah. I will turn to other nations and will give them my name, that they may keep my statutes. 13: Ask and you will receive; pray that your days may be few, that they may be shortened. The kingdom is already prepared for you; watch! Matthew 24:22, If those days are not cut short no one would live, but because of the chosen ones, those days will be cut short. - The reasoning's is in the crucifixion, there may not be a full understanding but what had to happen saved the many and might have shortened the days.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by Avraham Ibn Ezra View Post
                        If G-d didn't need to cause a "virgin birth" why would it be claimed that he did cause a "virgin birth?" Couldn't the Messiah then come from a natural conception if there wasn't a need to cause such an event for the coming of the messiah?

                        Asking if G-d needs to cause X and asking if G-d needs X are two different questions. Wouldn't you agree?

                        Getting into interpretive methods and how they are applied to translations is not high on my priority list at the moment. There are a host of theories on why the main version of the LXX read a certain way and why some ancient versions read another way.

                        Shalom,

                        Avraham Ibn Ezra
                        To make the messiah unique, and credentialed; the virgin birth is sort of a requirement. The christ is a normal human being but also a uniquely begotten son, which only God could start. Bar Kochbas and Rabbi Akibas wouldn't cut it. There are no predicted miracles for the Jewish King Messiah, nor Priest Messiah.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by Omniskeptical View Post
                          To make the messiah unique, and credentialed; the virgin birth is sort of a requirement. The christ is a normal human being but also a uniquely begotten son, which only God could start. Bar Kochbas and Rabbi Akibas wouldn't cut it. There are no predicted miracles for the Jewish King Messiah, nor Priest Messiah.
                          . . . Since original sin is passed down through sexual copulation (it resides in the male seed) it seems pretty obvious that if Jesus is to be born without original sin he needs to be born of a pregnancy that usurps the organ through which original sin is spread.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Originally posted by Xtian Rabinovich View Post
                            . . . Since original sin is passed down through sexual copulation (it resides in the male seed) it seems pretty obvious that if Jesus is to be born without original sin he needs to be born of a pregnancy that usurps the organ through which original sin is spread.
                            I thou thee thou troll.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Originally posted by Omniskeptical View Post
                              I thou thee thou troll.
                              Last edited by Xtian Rabinovich; 05-25-2014, 11:29 AM.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Originally posted by Omniskeptical View Post
                                To make the messiah unique, and credentialed; the virgin birth is sort of a requirement. The christ is a normal human being but also a uniquely begotten son, which only God could start. Bar Kochbas and Rabbi Akibas wouldn't cut it. There are no predicted miracles for the Jewish King Messiah, nor Priest Messiah.
                                A requirement for the messiah? Are you saying that the requirement (the virgin birth) was to a line towards the Levites or Priesthood - perhaps? Because I don't ever remember it being a requirement for being a King- Messiah? Actually I thought that the announcement of Jesus birth by the Angel Gabriel made him more "separate" and "holy" - like a priest or levite, where this tribe had held themselves distant from the rest of the people or set apart from the rest of the tribes, to show a distinction. In the announcement - "The angel answered and said to her, “The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you; and for that reason the holy Child shall be called the Son of God".

                                Also, I don't understand why this would be difficult to understand considering Genesis (Bereshit) - the beginning of creation or the fact of the Exodus - was the creation or the beginning's of a nation. “I am Adonai, ... forming light and creating darkness.” Sound familiar? In otherwords, and for us - the birth of Jesus, would then be the beginning of the Christian faith, Bereshit (Out of the Wisdom of God - " In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was in the beginning with God. 3 All things came into being through Him, and apart from Him nothing came into being that has come into being. 4 In Him was life, and the life was the Light of men. 5 The Light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it.)

                                Comment

                                widgetinstance 221 (Related Threads) skipped due to lack of content & hide_module_if_empty option.
                                Working...
                                X