Could Jesus be an illegitimate son ?

  • Thread starter Saint
  • Start date
In summary: Kerrie, I do not think that Saint intended on insulting anyone by calling it disgraceful, but merely pointing out that such a birth in christian belief is considered wrong and disgraceful.Saint, I don't think you intended to insult christians when you called it disgraceful for Jesus to be born that way. However, your tone does degrade the religion and that is against the rules of this forum.
  • #1
Saint
437
0
The Talmud of the Jews has an account of Jesus,
his mother committed adultery with a Roman soldier and bore him,
then this Jesus later call himself son of God to cover his disgraceful birth.

Can this be true?

AnywaY, feel hard to believe Son of God who can come again to judge the world.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Judaism, Christianity and Islam come from similar roots, so it is difficult to look to the other sections for independant verification of Jesus.

To get independant verification, need historians accounts written at the time, of which there are none.
 
  • #3
and so what if jesus were an illegitimate son? there are many illegit kids out there today...i think this topic needs to change course or it may be locked...
 
  • #4
Originally posted by Kerrie
and so what if jesus were an illegitimate son? there are many illegit kids out there today...i think this topic needs to change course or it may be locked...
Whoa, easy. Taking that personally? edit: After reading other threads by Saint, I *AM* seeing a common tone to them... Anyway,

I'm a christian, but I certainly am willing to entertain questions such as this. My answer is - I don't know. It is certianly possible.
 
Last edited:
  • #5
I'm a christian, but I certainly am willing to entertain questions such as this. My answer is - I don't know. It is certianly possible

That doesn't really make sense though. As a christian, you should know. If you do not know, it means you've not been reading your bible properly.

If you question the bible's accuracy, then how could you be a christian, as it says that it is 100% accurate since it is "The word of god"? Of course, in these days, people simply make there religion suit there needs.

Kerrie, I do not think that Saint intended on insulting anyone by calling it disgraceful, but merely pointing out that such a birth in christian belief is considered wrong and disgraceful.


And I think near the beginning of this thread is a topic about jesus being a bastard, which I still think is the case whether he is God or Maximus's son.
 
  • #6
I do not think that Saint intended on insulting anyone by calling it disgraceful, but merely pointing out that such a birth in christian belief is considered wrong and disgraceful.

then this Jesus later call himself son of God to cover his disgraceful birth

sorry megashawn, but the tone here is degrading to a religion, and that is against PF rules...
 
  • #7
Originally posted by Saint
The Talmud of the Jews has an account of Jesus,
his mother committed adultery with a Roman soldier and bore him,
then this Jesus later call himself son of God to cover his disgraceful birth.
Well, you’d think if Jesus was embarrassed to be an illegitimate he could have come up with some other story that wouldn’t have had everyone staring at him…
Can this be true?
Well, you didn’t actually believe ‘god’ had his way with her did you, haha. The part about him making up a cover story is one thing, but I certainly have few doubts that some hairy-leg, be it a soldier or someone else, was responsible.
AnywaY, feel hard to believe Son of God who can come again to judge the world. [/B]
?
 
  • #8
LEt me clarify, i do not intend to insult christians.
I analyse this from the point of view of biology.As we know, a baby needs a sperm from a man and an ovum from a woman to be conceived.

Bible claims Mary get pregnant without SEX with any man, that means no sperm from man. However, Jesus is true man and true God by christians faith, to be true man, he must have the X and Y chromosome as all men; from this point, the various explanations on this virgin birth are:

1)You can Assume the sperm is separately created by God, not from sinful man, joined to the ovum of mary, and conceived jesus

2) Mary is just a woman like kerrie, sinful too, if GoD used mary's ovum, then jesus can not be sinless without original sin; to avoid this difficulty, you can assume that God created a sperm and ovum sperately, put it into mary's womb to conceive jesus.


Both explanations are illogical and can not be proven at all.
The explanations just weakly try to make Jesus holy.
 
  • #9
Originally posted by megashawn
If you question the bible's accuracy, then how could you be a christian, as it says that it is 100% accurate since it is "The word of god"? Of course, in these days, people simply make there religion suit there needs.
You are right that to question the bible while saying it is 100% accurate is a contradiction - but I never said the bible is 100% accurate. Quite the contrary the bible is full of clear flaws. How can I say this and still be a christian? The bible was written by MEN. Maybe men inspired by God, but still men and men are by definition fallible.

Priests say the bible is "the word of God". It says no such thing in the Bible and in any case, you can call it "the word of God" in the figurative, not the literal sense.

That doesn't really make sense though. As a christian, you should know. If you do not know, it means you've not been reading your bible properly.
As a christian I *BELIEVE*, which is not the same as knowing. I believe that Jesus was the son of God, but logically I must admit I don't KNOW it since I have no evidence. I'm both a scientifically AND a religiously minded person - though admittedly more scientifically than religiously.

I know it is tough to accept, but I'm a complicated person :wink: Carl Sagan would probably call it Doublethink (from 1984) but I'll live with that. I'm human after all.
 
Last edited:
  • #10
sorry megashawn, but the tone here is degrading to a religion, and that is against PF rules...

So, anytime that one offers an explanation of a mythological event that takes away the supernatural aspect from the religious versions and offers a more reasonable explanation is considered degrading to a religion?

So then are we to just sit by and not discuss things of this nature?

Russ:

The bible does not say word for word "This is the word of god and is 100% perfect."

However, there are things, such as warnings of not altering the text, or suffer the wrath of god (again, not word for word).

There are also things said like, God cannot lie.

However, upon reviewing reality, we see that if God truly does exist, he's obviously lied about several things. In fact, we see that Christianity is merely a more highly evolved religion then say, Cavemanism (??) You get the point.

Anyhow, with lines such as "Do not alter the bible" and "God cannot lie" a believer would simply assume the bible is accurate on these grounds. Infact, any "clear flaws" would contradict one of the 2 lines above, thus making solid reason for not wasting time on this myth.
 
  • #11
Originally posted by Saint
LEt me clarify, i do not intend to insult christians.
I analyse this from the point of view of biology.As we know, a baby needs a sperm from a man and an ovum from a woman to be conceived.

Bible claims Mary get pregnant without SEX with any man, that means no sperm from man. However, Jesus is true man and true God by christians faith, to be true man, he must have the X and Y chromosome as all men; from this point, the various explanations on this virgin birth are:

1)You can Assume the sperm is separately created by God, not from sinful man, joined to the ovum of mary, and conceived jesus

2) Mary is just a woman like kerrie, sinful too, if GoD used mary's ovum, then jesus can not be sinless without original sin; to avoid this difficulty, you can assume that God created a sperm and ovum sperately, put it into mary's womb to conceive jesus.


Both explanations are illogical and can not be proven at all.
The explanations just weakly try to make Jesus holy.

Does Jesus' birth need an explanation? I thought it was supposed to be a miracle. Either that or quantum mechanics allowed sperm to show up out of nowhere and concieve a perfect child through an engaged teen.
 
  • #12
Originally posted by Psyber freek
Does Jesus' birth need an explanation? I thought it was supposed to be a miracle. Either that or quantum mechanics allowed sperm to show up out of nowhere and concieve a perfect child through an engaged teen.

hey! you may be on to something there! what are the odds of such a thing happening? something like 100,000,000,000,000,000, (and much more) to 1... but hey, the omnipotent should have no problem here. :wink:
 
  • #13
Originally posted by megashawn
However, upon reviewing reality, we see that if God truly does exist, he's obviously lied about several things.
Huh? Since almost nothing in the bible is even claimed to be direct quotes from God, how can there be lies? Do you have any examples?
 
  • #14
Originally posted by Saint
The Talmud of the Jews has an account of Jesus,
his mother committed adultery with a Roman soldier and bore him,
then this Jesus later call himself son of God to cover his disgraceful birth.
That this is what is intended, or that it is even referencing jesus in the Talmud is highly debatable, it's also often looked upon as anti-semitic on a similar level as the blood libel. I'm curious if you've studied the Talmud?
 
  • #15
Originally posted by megashawn
That doesn't really make sense though. As a christian, you should know. If you do not know, it means you've not been reading your bible properly.

If you question the bible's accuracy, then how could you be a christian, as it says that it is 100% accurate since it is "The word of god"? Of course, in these days, people simply make there religion suit there needs.



Megashawn-Sola Scriptura started out as a protestant doctrine, christianity existed for quite some time prior to this, actually there were plenty of practicing christians, who very much considered themselves to be christian...long before the new testament was ever compiled. It's the new testament that is usually referenced in support of Sola Scriptura (scripture alone). Whether Sola Scriptura is legitimate is still highly debated within the christian community..even today.
 
  • #16
Does Jesus' birth need an explanation? I thought it was supposed to be a miracle. Either that or quantum mechanics allowed sperm to show up out of nowhere and concieve a perfect child through an engaged teen.

I think its Occam's Razor, that says the right answer is usually the most simple.

There is no evidence of any humans ever having virgin birth.

There is no factual evidence of any supernatural all powerfull gods.

Therefore, the simplest explanation to Mary and Jesus, is quite simple, she was not a virgin.

Unless you can prove either of the above to points, your ship is sinking, fast.

Kat, thanks for the information. However, I'd say that the Old Testament would have been the bible is use at the time, and is still subject to whatever I said about it.
 
  • #17
Originally posted by Psyber freek
Does Jesus' birth need an explanation?
No, but his conception does.
I thought it was supposed to be a miracle.
I think a lot of people consider their children to be little miracles, but I see no reason to believe more than that. I mean, what are the odds?
Either that or quantum mechanics allowed sperm to show up out of nowhere and concieve a perfect child through an engaged teen. [/B]
Naw, I'm fairly certain this one, like all the others, can be chalked up to good old-fashioned pelvic thrusting...
 
  • #18
Originally posted by megashawn
I think its Occam's Razor, that says the right answer is usually the most simple.

There is no evidence of any humans ever having virgin birth.

There is no factual evidence of any supernatural all powerfull gods.

Therefore, the simplest explanation to Mary and Jesus, is quite simple, she was not a virgin.

Unless you can prove either of the above to points, your ship is sinking, fast.

Kat, thanks for the information. However, I'd say that the Old Testament would have been the bible is use at the time, and is still subject to whatever I said about it.

Uhh..I think you were telling russ he wasn't a good Christian in reference to his biblical knowledge..and I am telling you that if you do not understand the history of sola scriptura...you don't know enough about christianity to make that statement.
 

1. Could Jesus be an illegitimate son?

There is no historical evidence to support the claim that Jesus was an illegitimate son. In fact, the gospels and other historical texts all point to Mary being a virgin at the time of Jesus' conception through the Holy Spirit. Additionally, Jesus was raised by both Mary and Joseph, who were married at the time of his birth.

2. How do we know that Jesus was not an illegitimate son?

There are several reasons why we can confidently say that Jesus was not an illegitimate son. First, the Bible clearly states that Jesus was born to Mary through the Holy Spirit and that Joseph was his legal father. Second, Jesus' lineage is traced back to King David, fulfilling the prophecy that the Messiah would come from the line of David. Finally, the early Christian church, which was made up of eyewitnesses to Jesus' life, never questioned his legitimacy.

3. Could there be any historical evidence to suggest that Jesus was an illegitimate son?

No, there is no historical evidence to suggest that Jesus was an illegitimate son. In fact, all historical accounts of Jesus' life and teachings point to him being born to Mary and Joseph in a legitimate manner. The only sources that claim otherwise are modern theories and speculations, which have been debunked by scholars and historians.

4. What does the term "illegitimate son" mean in the context of Jesus?

In the context of Jesus, the term "illegitimate son" refers to the belief that he was born out of wedlock and therefore not the legal son of Joseph. This belief is based on the assumption that Mary must have had sexual relations with someone other than Joseph in order for Jesus to be conceived. However, as mentioned before, there is no historical evidence to support this claim and it goes against the biblical accounts of Jesus' birth.

5. Why is the question of Jesus' legitimacy important?

The question of Jesus' legitimacy is important because it has implications for his identity and role as the Messiah. If Jesus was not the legal son of Joseph and was born out of wedlock, it could undermine his claim to be the Son of God and the fulfillment of prophecies in the Old Testament. However, as discussed, there is no historical evidence to suggest that Jesus was not the legitimate son of Joseph and therefore this question has no real basis.

Similar threads

Replies
14
Views
2K
  • General Discussion
Replies
8
Views
4K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • General Discussion
2
Replies
65
Views
8K
  • Art, Music, History, and Linguistics
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • General Discussion
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • General Discussion
Replies
6
Views
4K
  • General Discussion
Replies
6
Views
1K
Replies
42
Views
6K
  • General Discussion
4
Replies
129
Views
18K
Back
Top