ding
Confront reality
- Oct 25, 2016
- 120,139
- 21,297
I don’t think it does necessarily imply devious intent. At least not how that word is used today. I believe it necessarily implies intent to obfuscate. Which I don’t believe was the intent which I believe was more of a clarification. I’m not necessarily in agreement with your understanding of the original text. I’ve seen another interpretation and that interpretation suggested it wasn’t originally young girl which in itself wouldn’t have been noteworthy. That interpretation implied it was unusual as in it was something out of the ordinary.Thank you but conspiracy implies devious intent and I don't think that was the case. The majority of early Christians were converted pagans. some of whom may have been able to read the Greek Septuagint. Since the Greek form of Isaiah was 'virgin' and, since Jesus was the messiah, it follows that the stories about his birth assumed a virgin birth. Those stories ended up in the NT.
Another, similar example is the OT prophesy that the messiah would be born in the City of David, Bethlehem. Since it was well known Jesus was from Nazareth, his family must have been gone there. Mathew and Luke separately created different reasons.
I posted 24 or so verses the Christian belief that Jesus is the Word was based upon. So unless every single one is proven false I’m not inclined to be swayed by arguments that nip at the margins.
As for your latest argument the gospels were written for different purposes. I’m sure if you research it you will find an explanation.