Jesus is NOT The Only Virgin Birth

Without a doubt, Christian apologist are long. I can’t emphasize this enough. And it’s not just Christian apologist. There is this apologetic even within scholarship, that keeps going. That Jesus is birth. You know, that virgin birth by Mary, where the Purnima overshadows her and she has.

Jesus is unique and there are no other nonsexual union birth conceptions where the God conceives a child through a mortal woman without sex other than Jesus. This is not true. Let’s share this with anyone who denies it, because the evidence, they just haven’t seen it yet. But Dr.

David, while he has dug deep into this, every serious academic that I speak to goes his work is mind blowing. Be sure to go check out his stuff. Go in the description. Share this for the next fundamentalist or atheist that says otherwise. Ladies and gentlemen, we’re talking about divine births.

Maybe some of these might be virgins. Or we’re going to address this issue today with Dr. Tim David, that he’s got a YouTube channel. He’s got a patron. Go down in the description now. Maybe your children will be conceived of a god. If you do. So, go help them out.

Dr. Little, welcome back to Ms.. Vision. Hi there. Yeah, great to be here. Happy holidays to. You and everybody. It’s it’s good to be back. I’m really thankful you’re back. You’re going to be able to educate us today. And diving into my favorite book that you produced and it’s

I mean, it’s up there like it competes with, you know, the evil creator and some other stuff that I really enjoy, just understanding Jesus in a mediterranean world. Yes, it stays. It’s got a lot of praise among many other scholars as well. Today I’ll be. Looking. At whether. You need to. Have sex.

Between divine beings and human women in order to. Produce a. Divine conception. Because today. When. You know. People think of this on a popular. Level, they kind of have these binary categories set for them. So if they know a. Little bit about Greek mythology, they. Kind of imagine. That. Zuse and Apollo.

Were really. Really horny back in the day and. They would repeatedly have sex with. Human women and that. Would produce the race of demigods. And. Who are they? The heroes of the age of age of heroes. And that’s how we got Heraclius and Romulus. That and Asclepius and so many others.

It’s that you had a sex act. Between. God. And a mortal women, although sometimes. It could be the reverse. Of course, Aphrodite having sex with the, you know. Whoever she wanted to. I mean, she had her own escapades as well. So there’s this idea that that’s sort of what the Greek.

Religion was. Was about. In the time of Jesus. And then. The Jewish. Religion, where. God was or Yahweh was basically. An asexual being. And he didn’t hang around women and he didn’t even like women, you know, didn’t even allow menstruating women to go into the temple. And he was really kind of prudish.

And he never you know. The Jews. Just didn’t imagine their. Deity having sex. Or being involved. With. Sex and. Sexual activity. So it was a. Completely different. Worldview. Now, all this entire. Binary. Is based. On an. Apologetic. Framework. And this is really what do I want to emphasize here? This is exactly the.

Argument that Justin Martyr. Made. Around the year 150 in trying to. Argue for the truth. Of Christianity and this. Very. Contingent. Apologetic. Argument has unfortunately. Passed, has. Become so hackneyed and repeated so much that it. Has passed for historical fact. And that’s just. Not. The case. And it’s really important.

To see that our job. As thinking people and as historians or budding historians is not simply to. Repeat the apologetic. Arguments of ancient Christians as. As if they were fact. Okay. Because and to not. Let. One. Particular. Religion or insider. Discourse control the. Terms and the framework of thinking.

But to step outside of the box. Start afresh and think anew. Okay. I know many of you. You may have taken a course in classical mythology and or you may have a book in classical mythology and, you know, think that. This is all very obvious. But in the time of Jesus. These Greeks.

And Romans. Were as sophisticated as you. Or me in how. They thought about. Divine conception and for. Different reasons. Okay. They had issues with gods having sex. Okay. Now again, if you reading Homer, you know, Homer. Is archaic age. Okay. So doesn’t seem to. Have a problem with. Gods having.

Sex at all. Okay. Agreed. But the New Testament wasn’t written. When Homer or whoever was writing. It wasn’t. Written when he. Was writing. It was written 600 years after that, after the. Development of some of the most complex. Philosophies. And scientific arguments this. World has ever seen. Okay.

The new Testament is post Plato. And with Plato he. Revolutionizes everything. Typically elite, educated. And intellectual. Greeks. Of the time of Jesus and of the time of the New Testament writers. Which is the late first. And early second century. They do not. Believe, literally, that gods have sex

With mortals, because that’s just not what gods do. Okay. If I may, just to poke in here, this is great because I asked the question I’m giving people behind a paywall, a little sneak peek. A recent course was done on other virgin birth. I suppose it other virgin births. And Dr. Bart Ehrman,

Who was your professor at one point, took the stance that, you know, these gods that they had sex are in some way they end up impregnating these women. Like even the interpretation, let’s say in Suetonius, which I think we might mention with Augustus and there’s a serpents there

That is the in the bed with him, with his mother, with Augustus mother. I can’t remember her name, but she ends up going in like bathing. And then nine months later they have the baby and therefore this is somehow a sexual union. But I asked him a question, particularly in the

What you said. And I said, have there been any other gods who have impregnate women through Numa? And I use that specific term and he knew that was a catchy term, even emphasized that when he was saying it, he said no and I’m not trying to be pitting scholars against each other, but,

You know, sometimes I’ll catch Doctor Men where I’ll say, Hey, do you date Luke in the second century? And he’s like 85? And I’m like, Hold on. Steve Macey Steve Mason was Shelley MATTHEWS Like all of these scholars are late, you know, definitely late first

Or at least early second, maybe even the middle second. He’s still on the 85 A.D. So we want to give him a little credit here, but it sounds like he’s kind of holding on to maybe some dated ideas. Yes. Well, yeah, he’s he’s very. Traditional in some. Respects, despite his his reputation. Yep.

It is true that. Historians, even around the time of the late first century. Like Plutarch. Is a great example. He will tell you the story of how. Alexander the. Great was conceived. By means. Supposedly of a gigantic. Snake appearing in the bed. Of. Alexander’s mother. Olympias. But Plutarch will also tell you.

In his life as Alexandria. That he. Doesn’t believe. That story. And he doesn’t believe. That story because that’s just. Not. What gods do. And ever since the days of Plato. There were certain rules of theology. And this is in Plato’s Republic. Plato’s first rule of theology is a God. Does not. Lie.

And a God second. Which is. A more but expanded version of the first. A God does not change. And it’s these two rules of theology that. Revolutionized. All later theology. Including Christian. Theology. It was not acceptable. For a God to. Lie or be involved in a lying action. That is.

To take on the body and pretend to be someone. Else. For instance, in the story. Of Hercules, his birth. This takes on the. Body of Heraclitus. As human father. And between. Plato says, No, he didn’t. Or if he did. That’s not. Zeus, right? Because that’s. Not what. Gods do.

Gods do not deceive and they do not change. And why is it that gods. Do not change? It’s because gods are already perfect. Gods do not need anything. They are not deficient in any respect. Sex is the expression. Of human needs. You know, I’m well aware that, you know,

There are some asexual people. Okay. That’s totally. Fine. But for a large. Proportion of humanity. Sex is a. Biological need. It’s hormone driven, and it’s B and. And because it’s a need, okay? It’s an expression of our own deficiency, right? We’re not complete. Without. A partner. Without a sexual. Partner, we don’t.

Live the full. Flourishing life. We are incomplete. Without that. That is a manifestation of human weakness. Gods do not have that. Gods are not deficient in them. They do not change and they don’t have hormonal fluctuations and they do not get horny. Right. So this is this is Plato. Okay. Sex involves the.

Greatest amount of changes, emotionally and bodily. And that is unacceptable according to the platonic rules of theology. And anyone who is intellectual in the Roman period knows this. Okay. So, yes, historian. Can. Still, you know, tell. Like Suetonius. These. Mythological. Tales. But do they. In their mode. As philosophers, actually believe that.

First of all, women have sex with snakes in. Temples or wherever? No. And this. Is a case where we ask that great. Question. Did the. Greeks believe. Believe in their myths? Well, yes and no. They wanted to protect their sacred cultural lure. But just. Like Christians today, they reinterpret it.

So that it’s updated to the. Scientific and moral standards of the time. So they. Do not. Believe that gods have sex. And the key example. Of this is Plutarch. In talking about. The. Divine conception of. Plato. Okay. Plato is or was a human being, and he. Did not. Need to have or.

His mother did not. Have sex. With any God in order. To produce Plato. His mother was. Perfectly honest. And it was very early. Tradition put out. By Plato’s. Own nephew. Shortly after he died. So we’re talking about the middle fourth century. So 450. Years before Jesus. There was a. Tradition.

That Plato was the. Offspring of. Apollo. And during the time when. The author of Luke was. Writing. You, which. Is, I think in the first edition, the very late first century. You had Plutarch. Who’s writing at exactly the same time, telling us. How. He thinks that. Plato.

Was born from Apollo because he wants to save the myth. Right. It’s his myth. He wants to save the fact that Plato is divinely conceived, but he cannot accept. As an. Intellectual. And as a thinker. Of his time, late first, early second century, that that’s how gods operate.

So in his table talk and in his life of Numa, he presents. A theory that there is no. That general penetration. Of. Corinthian by Apollo. That wouldn’t be. How Apollo works. There is a more subtle way of conceiving. And, you know, the Greeks weren’t stupid. They observed. Things and.

They observed what they thought were. What they weren’t divine conceptions, but what. They called. Wind. Eggs. And wind eggs. Were eggs that produced chicks without. Any male rooster being involved. And they get the name wind eggs, which sounds rather simple. Or silly, but basically the way that the Greeks thought that this.

Happened. Was that these eggs were fertilized by. Panama. Which is wind. But in the New Testament it’s also translated spirit. It also means breath. It’s hot air that you breathe out. And it’s very. Subtle. And according to. Aristotle, it’s it is. That thing which is in male semen. Which fertilizes the female egg.

Inside. The womb. So numa is the natural. Choice, you know. Based on the scientific. Literature of the day, to talk about how. A woman gets pregnant and if a God is going to impregnate a woman, he need not. In fact, morally. He. Cannot impersonate a man with a penis that’s unnecessary.

And gods wouldn’t be involved in that. They have no interest in that. They have no need for that. That’s not what gods do, but it’s still possible. For them to. Breathe. Right? And they breathe. In, in efflux. Of their own. Divine seed, and then enters the woman’s body and makes her pregnant.

To illustrate. How. Concretely. Christians. Thought about this, there’s the later Christian. Tradition that Mary. Conceived through her ear, which means that. Divine tumor entered through an. Orifice is it has to go. Through somewhere. And so the. Theory was that. It went through. Mary’s ear. Why her ear? Well, because she was so obedient.

And if you look. At the route of. Obedience, it’s from audio. Audio and. Audio has to do with. Hearing, hence the. Ear. She is so. Obedient. She receives the spirit through the ear. And that is what makes her pregnant. Because the tumor has. To travel through her ear. Down to the. Uterus. That’s

How concretely they thought about this. This wasn’t some magical event. They actually did think about. You know, the. Actual. Connection of. Cause. And effect. They didn’t think that God snapped his fingers and all of a sudden, Mary was pregnant. No, you needed some. Biological. Material agent. And the natural solution was to Numa.

So this is what Plutarch says that pretty. Only Plato’s mother. Gave birth through. Another kind of divine. Power. Which is Denarius and Numa. And I have the text. Cited in chapter one. Of Yes status. I’ve also got on my YouTube channel an episode on chapter one.

So you can check out the footnotes there and. Read up. On Plutarch. What’s interesting is when you look. Up. Luke 135 we have in the Greek. The. Exact same words. Used by Plutarch. In reference to the pregnancy of. Plato used. Now. For the. Pregnancy for the divine conception of. Jesus.

Luke says in the Greek, and I’ll translate Numa how again? F.O. used to be Seth. Which means. A holy breath as I like to say, a holy breath. Will come upon you. This is the. Angel speaking to Mary. For how she gets. Pregnant. Kadima subsists to discuss sea.

And power of a most high. Will overshadow you. So he uses those exact same. Two terms. That Plutarch. Uses in the exact similar context when talking. About how a. God impregnated woman for Numa and denims. And so what this shows us is that the author of Luke is is probably at least

Trying. To sound as. Sophisticate in it as Plutarch, who is our. Representative Greek intellectual. Of the late. First and early second century. Guy. And Luke, whoever Luke is. I’m just using that. As a placeholder. The author of Luke, let’s say, knows that if he were to tell the story about. You know, God

Impregnating Mary by taking on, you know, the form of. Joseph. Well. That’s not going to fly. That’s not going to work. I mean, no Greek intellectual. Would touch that stuff. Okay. But if. There was a more. Subtle theory. Of divine conception, which involved. These quasar. Scientific terms, humor and dynamics. Well.

Then we’re talking that’s the point where. The author of the tries to get a foothold. Into the. Structures of plausibility for. The Greek intellectuals of this time. Because he’s. Already an. Apologist. He already knows that no one is going to. Believe a story of.

God having sex with a moral, with a mortal woman. Okay. He’s looking over his. Shoulder at people like Plutarch who would. Sneer at that kind of thing. So he’s. Smart enough to. Say that this. Divine conception happened through the mechanics of Numa and Denis. Just as Plato. Plato’s own divine conception happened.

So it ends up. That both Plutarch. And the. Author of Luke. Can have their cake and eat it. Too. Right. Because Plutarch. Can say. Yes, I revere Plato. I call Plato. See us Plato. On the divine Plato. Why do I do that? Because he is the. True son of Apollo.

He can still affirm that. Right. And Apollo is the God of music and the God of harmony. So, yes, that those are Plato’s characteristics. And the author. Of Luke. Can say. Guess what? Jesus is. The true son. Of a God. In this case. Yahweh. And. Yahweh. Doesn’t. Need to get his. Hands. Dirty.

And Yahweh doesn’t need a penis to. Do any of. These things. Yahweh can act. Just like Plutarch’s Apollo. And send his own breath to an pregnant Mary. So this completes Luke. 130. Five. Just to translate. It. So the Greek is Dr.. Token, Roman Hagen theCity. Choir statue. And because. Of this.

The divine. Mechanics. Of non-sexual conception. What is. Born. Will be called sacred. A son of a God. That’s the literal translation of the Greek. And this shows, once and for all that. For intellectuals, at least. And the. Author of Lucas. Trying to pose as an intellectual. You don’t need to. Have sexual intercourse

To produce a. Divine conception. Greeks don’t need. It. And Christians don’t don’t need it. So, yes, even though it’s true that in, you know, Homer. Gods have sex. And in historians. Gods have sex. Apparently by the time. Of the late first in early second century, they aren’t believing it. You know. This we’re.

Long beyond the age when. Yahweh had a life. I mean, he did. Have a wife at some point, but the Jews had ceased to believe that. For maybe half a millennium. Before Christianity. Came on the scene. So when you’re looking at the development of religions

And, you know, we were to take a time machine and go back to the eighth century B.C. And, you know, if we had, you know, archaic Hebrew. We would ask, you know, does Yahweh have a wife? And can he have can you have kids? Can you have. Sex?

Because l gives birth to Baal right. In you know, the Phoenicians say. That. So does his yoga give birth. To somebody or. Does somebody give birth this way? And I think they’d say. Well, yeah, well, because you always got a wife, just like Bill has a wife.

I mean, this is not a problem, right? Theologically, it’s not a problem. But then you fast. Forward. 500 years. All of a. Sudden it becomes a big problem. For different. Reasons. But both Jews. And. Greeks and Jews who were also. Christians. Were becoming sophisticated. Enough

By the era of the New Testament to say that, no, we don’t. We don’t. Have gods who have sex. We have divine conception, but there’s nothing to do with, you know, an attraction. So this shows you this shows. Everyone that Justin’s argument and the first. Apology. Again, written around 150. Is somewhat double.

Dealing. Let’s say. And not entirely. Accurate, because what Justin says is that. Greeks and Romans. They really do believe that, you know, Jesus dresses up. As somebody else and has sex for the mortal woman. Whereas the. Christians. They’re too good to believe that. Well, Plutarch shows. That that argument falls. Flat.

Greeks and Romans. Who are sophisticated. Intellectually, do not believe. That. Did not believe that, and neither did the Christians. They’re exactly equal. And so we need to lay down forever. That apologetic. Framework and argument. Hmm. There’s so many things here, Doctor, that what you said some great stuff. So I have a question.

We’ll start like a few questions at a time as we go into this, because I’m sure you’ll have plenty to cover. Are there any are there any examples that can be given about gods having sex with women after Plato? Is the tradition? Is it like a dual tradition?

Or would you say like you said, it’s pretty much stamped out, at least you’d say within the first few generations after Plato. Would you say it’s completely stamped out? No, it’s not sent out. No, not at all. Because it’s it’s intellectuals. Who are pushing this line. And, you know, other writers aren’t don’t.

Care. Too much about it. And it’s. Also a question. Of genre, you know, in the historical genre, like. What. Suetonius is writing in that genre, he can say. Oh yeah, I mean, there’s this story that, yeah, Augustus’s. Mother. Was in a temple. At night and had sex with a snake and there.

You go. He’s just reporting a story. He’s not telling you that. He believes. If he was in private conversation. With Tacitus, he’d be like, This is. Garbage, but I’m going to report. It because this will sell books. So, you know, this is exactly how they are. How they’re thinking.

And then when. Plutarch is, you. Can see this dynamic in. Plutarch. Plutarch writes a biography of. Alexander in which he. Talks in which he. He’s under obligation to tell you the common story that his mother had sex. With a snake. Okay. But he. He then. Says. Events, as you know, this.

Is the story is like Herodotus is and this is the story. I have no part in this. But then when he’s in the scientific mode and then the scientific. Treatise. Speaking simply. As a philosopher. Or not. As a biographer, he will say. No, no, we don’t. We don’t believe this.

No intellectual would believe this. We uphold the tradition that Plato is born of Apollo. Yes, but we do not believe. That Apollo had. Sex with a mortal woman. That’s just not. True. So this. At least this grants us that the author of the gospel we call Luke is within the elite, kind of

Maybe the elite isn’t the term, but the highly sophisticate, the thinkers, because I don’t want to give the idea that necessarily they’re rich. I mean, there’s some poor people who become sophisticated philosophers later on, high intellectuals. So they’re highly intellectual. Can we grant Matthew in the same category? Well.

So the way I would put it is these authors are. Trying to sound like they’re elite intellectuals. Whether we want to call them elite intellectuals is another story, but they know at least the modes and codes. Of how. To be most. Plausible. Right.

And so, yes, the author of Luke is of the highest register. He’s the one coming. Closest to Plutarch. Matthew is shows a lot less concern. Matthew is not as interested in the actual mechanics of the divine conception. I think Matthew would deny that. You know, obviously God had sex.

And I and I think. Other readers of Matthew, you know that would be yeah. Greek readers. Contemporary with Matthew you know would they would not be. Cool with that either. But I don’t. Think Matthew is interested in the mechanics. Of the sex. And he’s. He’s happy to tell what is essentially Christian mythology.

And just kind of. Let that sit with you. You know, so he’s got you know, escaped to Egypt in the massacre of the children probably never happened. All of these angels appearing in dreams. I mean. Greek. Greek historians who are trying to. Go up to the level of lucidity is would be like,

No, no, this is trash literature. This is not this is not good enough. This doesn’t come up to snuff. But if you’re just have. The standard of. Herodotus, right. Because Herodotus is the. Father of history and he tells you no more myths than. Matthew. So but Herodotus. Always says, I’m just reporting this.

Folks. I don’t actually believe this, but I’m going to tell you the story. And Matthew’s not that sophisticated. He he he tells the story as if he believes it, and he probably does. So he’s not quite. At the author of of Luke’s. Level. And I don’t think either of them are at the.

Level of two cities or of Tacitus. But they’re they’re. Pushing up. Word they’re. They’re going upward and they’re trying to sound plausible. As they can. So it is fair to say when we hear and I’m using anti apologetics here for a second,

Which I know you don’t care to get into the mix, but it is an interesting question. Christian apologists will go around and say this is unique. In fact, Bart Ehrman himself at least grants that in this case Jesus being born through a non-sexual union of a Virgin

Ad that which we haven’t got to the question of Virgin yet is wholly unique, and we’ve got to give that to Christianity. And where I would agree with BART and go at least every single one of these myths is unique in a sense. Every one of them, if you go to Zeus, you

Go to Hercules, you go to Plato, you go to they all have different narratives, different gods, different stories about maybe how things go. So if you want to be literal, sure, they’re unique. But to argue that this one isn’t within the zeitgeist of thought, that it’s somehow completely unique as Christian

Apologists do, that would be a false statement. Would you agree? Or at least a mistaken statement? Yeah. You haven’t read widely enough. Or you’ve you’ve you’ve. Just read in one genre, you know, you’ve just read in, you know. The Historia. Genre rather than the genre of scientific. Literature.

So you pick up Plutarch’s Table Talk or you pick up Aristotle’s. Discussion of, of. How, how. You can have, you know, hen’s giving. Birth to chicks without roosters. And, you know, they’re talking on a different register and a different level, and they’re. Happy to talk about. Things as intellectuals,

Not just, you know, reporting the common story. But even so, the. Case of Apollonius of Tiano is an interesting one. And I’ll just say. A little bit of about this while I have. Time. So I think Bart and I differ on reading Apollonius Tiano because. This is a. Third century.

Okay, so it’s it’s post post-Christian, it’s philosophers and philosophers. This tells the story about how Apollonius his mother gave birth. And he it’s. Quite a funny story, I think. But he. Says and I’m not including all the. Details, but he says that basically. His mother fell asleep in a field.

Of flowers, sort of like. Stephanie, and. That she was. Surrounded by. These birds, basically. I think he calls them geese. But I’ll have to check that book. And. That. In unison. These birds lift their. Wings and then beat them. And at that moment, his mother wakes. Up. Because she’s pregnant. So what are.

The assumptions. Of that story? Well, I think this is another instance of a nonsexual conception. What happens when birds beat their wings, moving air for numa? That’s how the Greeks thought of it. Panama’s moving air moving. Warm gust of air. Enters the woman. That’s how she gets pregnant. The mechanics are the same.

Right. It’s Panama. And who gets those birds together? Who fertilizes. The wind? Well. In. In this case, it’s Proteus. The Proteus, because Proteus is the real father of Apollonius. So here’s another case of a nonsexual birth. But it appears. In. History. You know, and in my book. How the Gospels.

Became History, I explained, you know, that there’s a difference between ancient history and modern history. But we’re talking. About ancient historia. This appears in a book of ancient history. It looks like a mythical tale. Greeks would call it a mythical tale. But it’s still. Based on the.

Presuppositions of the day of how a. Woman could give birth, not sexually. It would happen through two months. Wow. Okay, this is great. Now, question is, are there any virgins. And in I ask this of Dr. Airman and I even went so far to say, does it even matter?

I mean, at the end of the day, it’s the conception of the deity to the to having the child, I mean, through a mortal woman. Is virginity a valuable thing in the world at this time, or is that a later anachronistic kind of development as we see?

Eventually, Mary couldn’t even have had sex with Joseph. We have to have her be a perpetual virgin and these ideas start to kind of develop over time. I’m not sure how much time, but virginity can you touch this topic? Yeah, definitely.

I don’t have a lot of time, but I’ll try to give you as much background as I can. So. So if. You’re. And this will. Take us all the way back to Leviticus. Okay and Leviticus. Is, you know. Everyone’s favorite nighttime reading. And I’m sure.

All of your your viewers read this every day. But there’s all these rules. Menstruating women, and they can’t go into the temple. And so this. There’s something polluting. About. Sex and. Childbirth that goes back way, way back, way back. And then you. Have to ask, well, are the Greeks and the Jews,

Are they are they different on this one? No, they’re actually not. Because if you go to the Greek ritual law codes, they also say that, yeah. Women who are men are or. Who are after childbirth, they have to wait, you know, 30 or 40. Days

Before coming into the temple or the presence of the. God. And if you’ve just had sex last. Night, please don’t. Don’t go to the temple, okay? You have to wait a day. At least. You have to abstain from. Sex a day, at least. And if you’re really serious.

Like in the of ices, right? You’re reading Apollonius in the metamorphoses. He can’t appear before ices. Unless he’s abstain from sex and meat. For least. Ten. Days. So the gods, both Jewish. Gods and Greek. Gods, they do care about sex. And impurity and. Blood. And childbirth, and they don’t like. That stuff.

And they. Haven’t liked that stuff for. Thousands of. Years. So there’s a discourse. Of. Impurity. When you’re talking about sex. You are sex is ritually defiling. Okay? And Greeks and Jews are. Ah, hold that presupposition. Okay, long before. Plato didn’t know Plato for. You know, adds an. Extra.

Reason why gods don’t don’t have sex and why they don’t. Like sex. He tries to rationalize it and says, But they don’t lie and they don’t change. So rationally, we. Figured this out. But when you’re just. Talking on the level of of of. Impurity, then yes, this there’s something. Very. Very primitive.

About this idea that sex is is. Something that would make you impure. Therefore. A god wouldn’t be involved in that. Activity. And. It would be defiling for a God to have sex. With a mortal woman. And it would. Also be defiling. If a son of God was born from.

A mortal who had sex. With a man. It’s just. Not how it. Works. So if you’re going to. Have a true divine conception, then yes, you you need. To you need to get over this. You need to have. A. You need to have a virgin. Which is just to say.

A woman who is. Pure so that she gives birth to a pure child. And that’s exactly. The language. That that Luke or the author of Luke uses, that. Hagen, Hagen. Says. And because. Of because of. These divine. Mechanics, the child will be called. Hagen, which means sacred. And why sacred? Because it’s pure.

So he he’s he’s. Involved in purity, ideologies. And the best book that I can recommend. For people. Interested in ideologies. Of purity. And. Impurity is. Is Mary Douglas. Called. Purity and danger. I think that’s the title. Anyway, we can correct that later. But this book. Basically is an interpretation. Of.

Leviticus and shows you. Why why. Ancient people were so concerned about. Purity. Purity is different than cleanliness, right? It’s related. They overlap. But it’s different. And with a god, if you’re going to have any interaction with God, you need to be pure. So that’s why the. Virgin virgin birth becomes. Both a ritual.

And a rational necessity by the time. Of the author of the book. Wow. Okay, that makes a lot of sense of a lot of information. It is Christmas time and a lot of people right now are celebrating Christmas. They’re looking at this is the time which Jesus was born. And I figured this.

This would be like a perfect episode to give people who want to go deeper than maybe a surface level examination on the topic. Of course, you’re both. Yes, the status goes deeper. Are you is there anything in particular on your page you’re on that you’re doing that might actually take people further?

That should join up or anything else? Maybe other classes, ideas, topics, things like that that you have exclusive over there? Oh, definitely, yeah. I have I of an article on Divine. Births. And on the patron patrons. Get book deals with me. And I.

Also have a I also have a I teach Greek over the. Patron. For those. Getting introduced. To Greek. Who just want. To deal with a little bit of Greek to. Eventually, you know, free themselves from English translations or. Mistranslations that are, which are so frequent and. So yeah. I mean, I’m.

I hope that. Yeah, I can. Provide a service to. Anyone who wants to, to join and to. Get a little deeper. And. Yeah, just get out of this, these apologetic. Frameworks which. Unfortunately. You know, even. Scholars get trapped. In and, you know, it’s like quicksand. You know, you you’re trained

To think in a certain way and you never really. Get out of it. But we want to use the hammer and break. The apologetic. Framework so that we can think. Outside the box. And not only have found that the method you’re describing here and what you’re teaching more freeing

From the apologetics world, of course, but also it is allowed me to view a lot of this stuff more artistically and actually value it as a human. Like. Like divorce it from the dogma and the stigma that comes with it and see it and go, wow, that’s clever.

That’s an interesting story. How humans thought about that. I thought about how pine trees and pollen, you know, passes in the wind and how it pollinates other trees. And I thought about that with the the numa of, you know, God, it just made me think nature itself is a gift to humans.

And we have tried to interpret the world through these natural world, the natural observations and then, you know, put it into this category of the gods and stuff. So they might be more sophisticated than we give them credit for. Definitely. And, you know, in the end, you know, everyone.

Will have to decide. On what myths. They hold to be true. But I think. You’ve get to the. Point where you enjoy the myth as the myth. And then that frees. You to. Think about. Deeper levels of of truth. So yeah, we all. Eventually I think we come back.

To our. Tradition and we think think through how we may or may not be. Able to believe it. And that. Should be a. Joyful journey. It shouldn’t be a stressful one. We’re worried about. Being, you know, poked. With a pitchfork by. Screaming devils. You know, in the afterlife. Life should.

Be so much more enjoyable than worrying. About that. I agree. Are you working on any book right now? Before I let you go, is there any any book that’s coming out sometime in the next year or so? Well, I’m working on three. Books.

And I am not sure if any of them will come out. I’m hoping that I have a book on Alexandria. Or there’s. Christianity in Alexandria. Which is a. Revisionist. History of that earliest place where we see early. Christian diversity and. The birth. Of Christian theology in a way. That. Isn’t.

Like. The Roman form. Which people are so used to. And you know, we’ll be looking at people. Like. Bi-Lo and Apollo and. Barnabas facilities, Socrates products. You know. Julius. Cassiano Valentinian XV palace and the Nazi preacher. And I’ll be. Expanding my reflection on the nastiness in a in a. Complete book, which.

I hope to make. Accessible to a popular. Audience. And then I’m also seeing if I can finish up a book on Simon of Samaria. So there’s a lot coming down the pike. And yeah, very happy to. Help anyone in their journey. As they wade through. Some of this material,

Some of this both hidden and unfortunately. Yeah, unknown, inaccessible material. Thank you so much, Doctor Livia. Until next time. Sure thing. Happy holidays to you as well.

#Jesus #Virgin #Birth

Are There Other Virgin Births Beside Jesus? | Bart D. Ehrman PhD

Welcome back to Mythvision Podcast, Dr. Ehrmen. We have a course that everybody should go check out and it is on other virgin births in antiquity. That is the question. Tell us briefly about this course. Right. So we’re we’re in the Christmas season now. And one of the things

That’s obviously celebrated is Jesus birth to a Virgin. There are lots of elements of the Christmas story that are very much worth talking about. And this one is particularly intriguing for several reasons. You find the virgin birth in the New Testament only in the Gospel of Matthew and Luke.

The other two Gospels don’t mention Mark and John, and it’s nowhere else in the New Testament. Of the 27 books of the New Testament only to mention Jesus being born as a virgin. But it becomes a very central feature of Christianity and Christian doctrine, since,

Well, since the Enlightenment, some scholars have pointed out that there are other stories like that floating around in the ancient world where somebody is somebody is born in the union of a divine being, an immortal being in almost all of these cases have a male divinity,

A God who comes down and gets a mortal being a woman pregnant. And so the child is born then is the union of a immortal and immortal, both human and divine. And so the question so these kinds of stories are circulating throughout the Roman world,

And you have a number of cases of political figures, of philosophers, religious figures who are said to have divine parents. And if you go on the Internet, you’ll see that these things are called virgin births, that the virgin birth of Jesus was always a common trope throughout the

Throughout the Greek and Roman world, so that you have these divine followers, immortal mothers. My question in the seminar is, were any of these women in your stories virgins? Were they virgins? And if so, then are Christians just taking over this theme from others? If not, if they were actually weren’t virgins, then

Why did Christians come up with the idea of a virgin birth? Why do they tell that story as opposed to some other kind of story of the miraculous? So that’s that’s what the webinar is about. I’m looking forward to that webinar. And of course, I hope everybody goes down in the description.

WWE dot message and podcast dot com forward slash virgins plural. The link is there. So, Dr. Ehrman, I’d like to focus on something that really has intrigued me. The earliest gospel consensus academics say, is Mark, and if Mark is our earliest, why the heck doesn’t Mark

Capitalize on the birth of Jesus from a virgin? Right. Well, it’s a very interesting question, a really important question. There will be scholars, a different views, although I think my guess is the majority scholars think that Mark didn’t tell us anything about the virgin birth

Because he didn’t know about a virgin birth that this is not a story that would that he had heard yet. It’s not clear whether the story had even come into being yet. It’s gets even more interesting than that with Mark, because in Mark’s gospel, you have a passage.

You don’t you don’t quite get it this way. In the other gospels in March, in the Matthew Luke or John in Mark’s gospel. A couple of chapters late after when Jesus Jesus is ministry, a couple of chapters into his ministry, he is he’s attracted this big crowd.

And there’s a lot of rumors going on around him. And we’re told that his mother and his brothers come to rescue him from the public eye because they think he’s gone out of his mind, his mother. And so she doesn’t seem to know who he is. And Mark.

And that that’s often taken as an indication that in Mark’s gospel, at least, there’s not only not a virgin birth, but there’s a question about whether Mark, I mean, why change arguing against a virgin? Not arguing against because he doesn’t know about it. But his gospel seems to presuppose that it wasn’t

A virgin birth because because Mary doesn’t seem to know Jesus. It’s wow, this is great information. I’ve always wondered that. And I want to make one mention. There’s contemporaneous work to the Gospels. I’ll say, give or take a few decades. Suetonius writes, Actually, in lives the Caesars,

And I’m really impressed with his Augustus angle, because in this documentation on Augustus, you literally hear not only of portents of his birth, there’s like a prophecy where lightning strikes a certain wall and these people fight against the Romans almost to their own self-destruction. But the Senate and this is it’s really interesting

Catch his word that this prophecy is going to be fulfilled in a certain year. So the mothers didn’t want to rear up their children and put them in the census saying, hey, our kids are going to be born and they’re going to kill these children

If they find out that this might be one of them. That sounds a lot like Matthew. Do you think there’s something going on here? Well, it sounds like Matthew. It sounds a lot like Exodus. Same thing with the birth of Moses. They’re actually it’s it’s it’s a trope in an ancient literature

That that the great man had a lot of troubles to begin with and almost didn’t make it out of infancy. And so and so you have these kind of divine interventions to to make it happen. And so you get the divine intervention involved in the birth often,

But then also in the early protection of the child. And so I don’t think Sistani’s is getting this from Matthew. I think this is this trope that you get in in other in other contexts, including, you know, the ancient Greece, the birth of Sargon, the Great

As also a similar kind of story, the king of Assyria. And so, yeah, so I think it is a trope and it is interesting that you get this spectacular birth of Augustus instantaneous. And that is part of part of the trope. I must ask you your thoughts on this.

I watched your debate, the long debate on the resurrection with Mike Lickona and you. And there was a moment during the debate where I felt like maybe Mike was wiggling in his seat a little and you were getting a little hype. And I loved that

Because it’s fun to see this go on with academics. And you said there are so many other stories of other people. And I think you mentioned virgin births or miraculous births. And my and I don’t want to get caught up on whether they’re virgins or not

Because your course is going to get into this. But the point I do want to mention is this seems to be kind of an Achilles heel in my opinion, when the Christians set up a creed that demands you believe this is a virgin birth

And that you need to believe that in order to be a Christian. But we have all these other stories, whether they’re virgins or not. Don’t you see there’s a huge flaw on people being not consistent toward other narratives. There are speaking about other gods or demigods, you name it.

Well, I think I think the consistency is the issue. I mean, I don’t think that it’s necessarily an Achilles heel for Christianity that we have these other stories floating around, because there are there are ways that you can explain that if you’re a theologian and have I mean, you know, I mean, C.S.

Lewis, for example, was an apologist, not a theologian, but C.S. Lewis claimed somewhat famously that that you have to and he’s actually borrowing it’s from Justin Mark from the second Christian century, who first of all argues that that you have kind of foreshadowing to what’s going to happen

With with when God comes into the world in other religions, because religions are all completely false, are also claims of truth in other religions that are actually true. And so they have reflections of what’s going to happen. And so, you know, you can get around these things on a theological level.

The problem is the historical level, which is the one that you’re talking about. If someone like an apologist like Michael Cohen wants to say, we’ve got proof of Christianity, here it is. It’s bam, bam, bam, bam. And the exact not the exact same thing, but the parallel thing, the exact parallel

Things can be claimed for other gods and other humans. Then why is it proof for Christianity and not for these other things? And when you come to it, so when you come to the miraculous proof, okay, I’m going to claim that the God was my was my literal fault,

And I’m going to claim that and my followers are going to believe me and they’re going to convince other people, how are you going to convince somebody that your father actually was God? I mean, isn’t that your mother going to say, oh, I actually never had sex or I didn’t want to?

But the others, God came down and he had his way with me. And so it’s based on what the woman said. What okay. Is that evidence? I mean, suppose marriage some people say, look, the only way the gospel writers could have gotten it is if Mary told them.

And so it had to be right. Well, okay. So today, if there’s a woman who gives birth and she says, look, I never had sex before, really, trust me, it’s like I’m not married, I never had sex. And she gives birth. You think, Oh, well, that’s evidence then. Okay. Yes. You accurate? Yes.

No. Okay. I think you had sex and so, you know. So what kind of evidence would be that somebody could say for the Virgin birth, what would be the other team that would be different from the evidence that Romulus, who was born of a Virgin

Or Alexander the Great or or any of these other who are who are not considered right now or born of a virgin. By the way, I am saying they were said to be born miraculously with the Divine Father. That’s not the same as the one. Being a virgin. And I understand that

Every narrative of every God is unique and special in its own way. But there’s also differences. There’s similarities. So I think that that’s also this like copout thing that apologists use this to say This is so unique and it’s like they’re all unique and different and there’s always something special about them.

Yeah, that’s exactly right. So you have you have apologist, though. They’ll take five divine men from the age of five sons of God and who are doing miracles, you know, do those things. And then they’ll say, Yeah, but Jesus is different because He does that. So let’s see.

So Jesus really is different or people ascending to heaven. Yeah, well the this year. Yeah, but Jesus is different because of that and it’s true Jesus is different because of that. But if you put that, if you’ve got five other divine men, if you put the pile of six, including Jesus and

You take one of the others out, you could do the same thing. Oh, yeah, those others, including Jesus, this isn’t but this versus that, you know. And so everybody’s different. So it doesn’t, you know. But I don’t know why apologists who want to argue objectively

For the for the historical truth and use logical argument. I don’t understand why they don’t understand logic, but it summed up. The idea of philosophy. I have found from reading books like Francesca Staver, Orkopoulos book, which takes your away and places him in his ancient Near Eastern context, where she spends

Multiple chapters talking about God’s penis. I mean, like the physical body of the deity. Over time, though, we find Plato comes in and the impact of the philosophers in the Mediterranean world, there seems to be this trickle down effect where they’re kind of even shit like, Oh, hold on, Jesus did what?

No, that must mean something else. It’s an allegory or a metaphor or something. Yet they still hold on to the idea that the gods have children. And my question, zeroing in specifically on Jesus is this He’s called son of God.

And Mark, how can he be a son of God if he isn’t born? At least Matthew’s narrative is trying to say, Hey, the poor numa, which is a whole nother thing. I think your course will probably get into is what births Jesus and Mary as a virgin

Using the Septuagint, which is a whole nother sidetrack. But the question is why is he a son of God? And Mark, if he isn’t birthed by God in Mark? So it’s a very good question, a very important question, because to understand what Mark means,

It’s important to understand what the term son of God met in the Roman world at the time. Son of God was a term in familial relationships. You would be in you could be the son of somebody if if they were your biological parent or if they adopted you. And so that’s why

That’s why Octavian could claim to be the son of Julius Caesar, who is who was declared a god. And so he declared himself the son of God within apart from apart from the theological things about Sons of God, it’s important that within family relationships, the the upper elite people who were adopting people,

If you were adopted in the ancient world by an elite person, you were normally adopted as an adult. So they’re not adopting a baby and raising. All of you probably do that sometimes. But like Julius Caesar adopted an adult or an older boy, Octavius, to be his to be his son.

Julius Caesar had another son with both Cleopatra and Cleopatra had a child, Kazarian, who was his biological son. But being the biological son was not as important as being the adopted son. The adopted son became Caesar Augustus Kazarian, whom you’ve probably never heard of, became a nobody.

They adopted son was the one who was given all the status, the power, the money, everything. And so being an adopted son was a big deal. And you’re still considered the son. Jesus is the son of God and Mark, probably because He’s the adopted son of God. God makes him his son.

So He doesn’t have to be born to be the Son of God. And around the world He can be adopted. Thank you so much, Doctor. Airman, go sign up. I hope to see you there. And let’s learn something together.

#Virgin #Births #Jesus #Bart #Ehrman #PhD