tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26615646.post6785160188667983540..comments2023-06-25T17:52:46.850+02:00Comments on Rock in the Grass (Pete Grassow): Virginity, Sex and ChristmasPete Grassowhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02871713300314160309noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26615646.post-70108634767075721032009-12-29T20:36:47.112+02:002009-12-29T20:36:47.112+02:00hmm... nice post. Of course there are a couple of...hmm... nice post. Of course there are a couple of holes in your logic, for instance if Mary was not impregnated by Joseph someone/thing else needed to have done it. Joseph is very clear that it was not him. taken that Mary was no slapper and according to Matthew "that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Spirit"... brings us to consider exactly who/what is the Holy Spirit and how does he function. The problem therefore is not about Mary being a Virgin, but about the Holy spirit running around impregnating innocent young ladies. Emphasis should therefore be placed I believe on the Holy Spirit's role rather than on Mary being a virgin. For me however Mary remains a remarkable women, one who remain undefiled before birth because only God lay upon her, she is to be revered because however it "came" about, excuse the pun, she gave birth to Christ.<br /><br /> You are right that the church has screwed up sexuality and sex, however Celibacy in itself does not lead to sexual deviancy, you would be suggesting that without sex one goes a little mad. Celibacy as an institution has however offered the sexually mixed up and deviant a hiding place, one where they are offered social status rather than ridicule. For instance the world of the celibates is mostly homosexual because the church offers them a nice place to be accepted. The church and celibacy is also a rather nice place to hide for the paedophile, which has nothing to do with the homosexual, yet both however find their calling to celibacy based on a foundation of sand and it all comes falling apart. It is rather the churches lack screening, their lack of community support to priests and their instance that celibacy is the only way a person can be a priest that is at fault. Celibacy remains is a liberating calling for only a few or for only a part of ones adult life. <br /><br />Regards:<br />Paul HooperAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26615646.post-2407895429741543162009-12-29T19:45:16.310+02:002009-12-29T19:45:16.310+02:00mmm,
Read what I wrote after I posted it. My spel...mmm,<br /><br />Read what I wrote after I posted it. My spelling and grammer suck. Such is life. Could you please change the <i>"I'm do not care..."</i> to <i>"I do not care..."</i><br /><br />Thanks,<br /><br />MarkAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26615646.post-30947570607613670242009-12-29T19:42:12.017+02:002009-12-29T19:42:12.017+02:00@Steve,
Fighting from the same corner :). We neve...@Steve,<br /><br />Fighting from the same corner :). We never meet up, sorry about that. It would still be good to sit down and have a cup of coffee sometime.<br /><br />@Pete,<br /><br />I meant the nice things I said as well.<br /><br />You said, <i>“The original Greek for what we now choose to translate into English as “virgin” does not insist that this be a woman who has not known sexual activity...”</i> That statement paints the truth in shades of grey.<br /><br />The <b>Hebrew word</b> עלמה (‛almâh) could rightfully be translated as something other than virgin. It could be damsel, maid or virgin. But Matthew, under the influence of the Holy Spirit, was not quoting the Hebrew text at all, but rather the Greek Septuagint. You are correct, the Greek word he used was παρθένος (parthenos) but here’s the missing link, Athena, the Greek Goddess and virgin patron of Athens who never consorted with a lover, earning her the title Athena Parthenos (“Athena the virgin”). The Parthenon was built to worship her. It’s a non ambiguous Greek word rightly translated virgin.<br /><br />Surely Mary’s shocked response to the angel ties up any confusion to her sexual history? Luke 1:34, <i>“Mary said to the angel, "How can this be, since I am a virgin?"”</i><br /><br />I’m do not care, am not influenced nor shall I be swayed by Popery. Scripture alone.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26615646.post-42275462128838438632009-12-28T16:53:11.895+02:002009-12-28T16:53:11.895+02:00Pete,
I think you've got it very wrong, on al...Pete,<br /><br />I think you've got it very wrong, on all counts.<br /><br />The doctrine of the virgin birth of Jesus owes nothing to Augustine of Hippo, but was believed by Christians from the earliest times. It is found in two of the gospels (and thus precedes Augustine by several centuries). It was only a few heretical sects that denied it, otherwise it was generally accepted by Christians. <br /><br />Apart from that it only began to be questioned by liberal Protestant theologians in the 19th century, deductively rather than inductively -- in other words, on the principle that miracles didn't happen. They did not question the English translation from the Greek, but the Greek translation from the Hebrew. But though Matthew's account makes much of that, Luke does not, and is not dependent on that translation.Steve Hayeshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11283123400540587033noreply@blogger.com