Virgin Birth

The Immaculate Conception. Was Jesus really conceived from a sexless miracle between Mary and the one true God? For me, this was the straw the broke the camel's back. Once I realized that God would have had to commit an abomination in his own eyes to do this, the entire Bible came crashing down. The reason Christians believe there are no contradictions in the Bible, is because they have to take that position or else they have to admit the truth...that the Bible is just human philosophy (with false claims). The believer in Jesus must also believe that God inspired the writers of the New Testament with infallible truth, even for the things that the authors did not witness with their own eyes. Matthew certainly was not an eye witness to the birth of Jesus, so the only way he could know about it is if Mary or someone else told him. The Christian claim is that the authors of all the new testament were divinely inspired by God to know the truth. This is an obvious scam, but you have to be willing to admit the obvious, if you are interested in truth.

​

Getting straight to the point, how do I know Jesus was not born of a virgin? Deuteronomy 22:23-25 says, if there is a young lady who is a virgin pledged to be married to a husband, and a man finds her in the city, and lies with her, then you shall bring them both out to the gate of that city, and you shall stone them to death with stones; the lady, because she didn't cry, being in the city; and the man, because he has humbled his neighbor's wife. So you shall remove the evil from among you. But if the man finds the lady who is pledged to be married in the field, and the man forces her and lies with her, then only the man who lay with her shall die. Now, people who want to make excuses for God to violate his own definition of evil, can come up with a justification for anything. They will say God didn't have sex with Mary, or God is not a man, or God is not bound by the morals that he establishes for us. Common sense tells you that getting another man's betrothed virgin pregnant by any means is immoral. Just imagine a young virgin, who is too young to be married, walking around in ancient Israel while nine months pregnant. What would people say, and what would be Mary's defense? They would say Mary had violated God's law for betrothed virgins and she should be stoned to death, and when they asked Mary for her response, she would suggest that the baby just magically started growing in her belly after an angel spoke to her in private. Christians have to completely separate themselves from reality, to even think this would be a justifiable excuse to exonerate Mary of adultery. God said if a woman is pregnant when she shouldn't be pregnant, then she had committed a sin worthy of the death penalty. Christians do not care what is rational or logical or even moral, they only care about defending their religion. 

​

Matthew says Jesus had to be born of a virgin, in order to fulfill the prophecy from Isaiah 7:14, but Isaiah 7:14 is not remotely about Jesus or a distant future Messiah. All you have to do is read the whole chapters of Isaiah 7 and 8, to realize it is not predicting the birth of Jesus. Once you realize how Matthew misused Isaiah 7, then you can understand how all Christians misused all Hebrew Scriptures to create a new narrative to fit their agenda. Christianity is not the miraculous fulfillment of the Jewish Scriptures. Christianity is the Roman replacement religion for Judaism. When you realize that Christians have to manipulate the text to make it fit their agenda, then you can know there is nothing divine or miraculous about these religions or their religious texts. I know it is very upsetting to realize that lying men wrote the Bible instead of honorable men who were divinely  inspired by God to reveal hidden Spiritual truths, but this is where you have to decide if you want to live your life in truth or in deception.

Matthew 1:22-23 says, now all this has happened that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the Lord through the prophet saying, Behold, the virgin shall be with child, and shall give birth to a son. They shall call his name Immanuel, which is being interpreted, God with us. Matthew does not say that Jesus is the hidden meaning behind a previous prophecy that was already fulfilled once. Matthew makes the claim that Isaiah was predicting Jesus, not some other son. So, if Isaiah is about another son, then Matthew was wrong, and if Matthew was wrong, he is a liar, and if Matthew is a liar, then Christianity is false. Either God miraculously inspired Matthew to write the truth, or people wrote lies and expect you to believe it is the truth. The virgin birth lie is really all you need to know, to realize Christianity is built on lies. 

​

Now, lets look at Isaiah 7. The scene is set in the days of Ahaz, king of Judah, when the northern Kingdom of Israel (also called Ephraim) had joined forces with the northern country of Syria to attack Judah (and its King Ahaz). Verse 2 speaks to David's house, which is a reference to Ahaz and the southern tribe of Judah (David was from the tribe of Judah). God tells Isaiah to go tell King Ahaz not to be afraid of these two "smoking torches" who want to do evil to him, because God is going to protect Ahaz and Judah. Verse 8 makes a supposed prediction of the destruction of Ephraim/Israel within the next 65 years. If you want to be gullible and believe what there is no evidence to believe, just so you can maintain your illusion, then you could believe this is actually a miraculous prediction of the future. Or you could be a rational person and understand that it was written after the events it supposedly predicts. Verse 10 says Yahweh (God) spoke again to Ahaz saying, ask for a sign from Yahweh, either in the depths or the height above. So God apparently wants Ahaz to ask for any miracle he wants just to prove God is real, but Ahaz refuses to ask for a sign, because he doesn't want to tempt Yahweh. Isaiah rebukes Ahaz for trying the patience of his God, then says God will give you a sign anyway, and that sign will be the birth of a son to a young maiden (Hebrew word - alma) and the boy will be called Immanuel. The boy will eat butter and honey when he knows to refuse evil and choose good, for before the boy knows to refuse evil and choose good, the land whose two kings you abhor will be forsaken. Verse 17 indicates that God is bringing the King of Assyria to destroy Ahaz enemies (Israel and Syria). 

​

Now, did you see a prediction of Jesus anywhere in that context? Of course you didn't, because it is not there. It is exclusively about the enemies of Ahaz and God's plan to rescue Ahaz, the King of Judah, which is also the house of David. It is not even about a miraculous sexless birth of anyone. The Hebrew word "alma" means young maiden, and the prophecy is all about the age of the boy when Ahaz enemies are defeated, rather than some miraculous sexless pregnancy. Chapter 7 continues to suggest what will happen in that day. In that day, everyone left in Judah will eat butter and honey for the abundance of milk produced, but in Ahaz enemies land, all their vines will be turned into briers and thorns. It is poetic language for how God would protect and bless the land of Judah, while destroying their enemies. 

​

Chapter 8 is simply the fulfillment of the chapter 7 prophecy, even though dishonest people want to pretend it is something completely unrelated to chapter 7. Isaiah 8:3 says, I went to the prophetess, and she conceived and bore a son, and Yahweh said to call his name Maher Shalal Hash Baz, for before the child knows how to say my father and my mother, the riches of Damascus and the plunder of Samaria will be carried away by the king of Assyria. Damascus was the capital of Syria and Samaria was the capital of Israel, the same two countries mentioned in the previous chapter. A son is born and instead of naming him Immanuel, Yahweh said to give him a name that means "quick to the plunder, swift to the spoil." Neither Jesus, nor this boy was actually named Immanuel, but this boy is a much better fit for Isaiah 7 than Jesus. So we have a baby boy born from a female, whose name is associated with the quick plunder of Syria and Israel by the Assyrian army. You have to go out of your way to pretend like chapter 8 is not talking about the exact same thing as chapter 7. As chapter 8 describes how the Assyrian army will sweep through the land and destroy the enemies of Ahaz, verse 8 concludes with the word "Immanuel." Immanuel means "God is with us." It does not mean the baby is God. Whenever good things happen, people say God is with us, for if God is with us, who can be against us (Romans 8:31). In verse 10, those who are saved by Yahweh will confidently say "God is with us." Isaiah 8:18 says that Isaiah's children will be for signs and wonders in Israel, so it is likely that Maher Shalal Hash Baz was Isaiah's child and the young maiden was Isaiah's wife. Some Christians will say this is impossible, because even though the Hebrew word for "virgin" (betula) was not used, the Hebrew word "alma" would negate the possibility of the mother having other children. Go here to study Genesis 24 and how these words are used to reference wives, women, females, and virgins.  Isaiah 8 is not specific enough to even conclude that the woman was Isaiah's wife or not. We don't know how many wives Isaiah had or if Isaiah took a new wife for this purpose. The bottom line is, you have to work really hard and look really foolish to suggest that Isaiah 8 is not expressly stating the fulfillment of Isaiah 7. 

​

When you combine Deuteronomy 22 with Isaiah 7-8, it is abundantly clear that Matthew is a liar. We could add in Genesis 6 when the "sons of God" mated with the "daughters of men" and had giant babies, which resulted in God sending the flood to destroy all the evil in the land. We could study all the instructions and examples of how God told men and women to be fruitful and multiply, or how even miraculous births still included sex between a man and a woman (Abraham and Sarah). We could even study all the Greek mythology about God's mating with mortal women, but that would just be far too much evidence that Matthew was a Greek philosopher, rather than a Jewish Apostle of Jesus. Once you realize Matthew is telling a story to fit a specific Greek narrative, then you are on your way to Mastering the Bible.