Music2 mins ago
Immaculate Misconception
81 Answers
Now then, here is a curious thing. It is Catholic dogma that Anne the Mother of Mary (Mother of Jesus) was a virgin which presents an interesting problem, if Anne was a virgin fertilized by Immaculate conception then Mary would be the daughter of god which means that Jesus was the result of immaculate incest and Mary as well as being his mother was also his sister.
If Anne conceived Mary parthenogenetically that is to say without having her ovum fertilized (by incest) then the chances are very high that Mary could also do the same as she would have the same genes as Anne. This would mean that Jesus was not the son of God as no Immaculate Conception was necessary.
So what is it to be ? Either God is an incestuous Deity and Jesus was his Son and Grandson or Jesus is just the result of parthenogenisis.
However can parthenogenesis produce male offspring? If not then the Immaculate Incest is the best option.
There are other options but they are so far fetched as to not be worth considering as they would imply that the Holy Bible is not entirely true and Christianity has been built on a fiction. I look forward to your suggestions for a solution to this conundrum.
If Anne conceived Mary parthenogenetically that is to say without having her ovum fertilized (by incest) then the chances are very high that Mary could also do the same as she would have the same genes as Anne. This would mean that Jesus was not the son of God as no Immaculate Conception was necessary.
So what is it to be ? Either God is an incestuous Deity and Jesus was his Son and Grandson or Jesus is just the result of parthenogenisis.
However can parthenogenesis produce male offspring? If not then the Immaculate Incest is the best option.
There are other options but they are so far fetched as to not be worth considering as they would imply that the Holy Bible is not entirely true and Christianity has been built on a fiction. I look forward to your suggestions for a solution to this conundrum.
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by Father-Ted. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
naomi, as far as I can see from your link, the church never 'rectified' this teaching - it never held it, it condemned it as erroneous, and the books putting the idea forward were not included in the Bible. I don't know what more it could have done to make clear that it was wrong.
As far as sinful babies go, 'original sin' isn't something you commit, it's something you have by being born to the human race.
As far as sinful babies go, 'original sin' isn't something you commit, it's something you have by being born to the human race.
Jno - “... Mary was conceived immaculately; I don't know quite where this leaves Anne herself...”
This leaves Anne being inseminated (for want of a better word) by God Himself. Apparently, Joachim (Anne's husband) had nothing whatsoever to do with the pregnancy. It could therefore by argued that God has committed adultery since God wasn't Anne's lawful spouse. I'm sure there's some Catholic work-around to this position which claims that all women are 'brides' of the Lord or some other such nonsense.
Regardless, this means that biologically and genetically, Mary's father was the Lord Himself and her mother was Anne.
And then there is the matter of Jesus. Since we are to believe that Jesus was produced as a result of the 'virgin birth' (ie. God once again choosing to impregnate a mortal woman without her permission and without the permission or knowledge of her lawful husband) we are left with the fact that Jesus was the product of both adultery and incest.
Am I missing something?
This leaves Anne being inseminated (for want of a better word) by God Himself. Apparently, Joachim (Anne's husband) had nothing whatsoever to do with the pregnancy. It could therefore by argued that God has committed adultery since God wasn't Anne's lawful spouse. I'm sure there's some Catholic work-around to this position which claims that all women are 'brides' of the Lord or some other such nonsense.
Regardless, this means that biologically and genetically, Mary's father was the Lord Himself and her mother was Anne.
And then there is the matter of Jesus. Since we are to believe that Jesus was produced as a result of the 'virgin birth' (ie. God once again choosing to impregnate a mortal woman without her permission and without the permission or knowledge of her lawful husband) we are left with the fact that Jesus was the product of both adultery and incest.
Am I missing something?
↑ Think about it. God impregnated Anne without the knowledge or permission of her husband Joachim.
A 'work-around' of any kind is a way of rationalising two distinctly opposing positions. It is a fact, if we are buy into this 'immaculate conception / virgin birth' theology, that there is a dilemma that must be addressed. Either God has committed adultery (since He wasn't the lawful spouse of Anne) or He hasn't. If He hasn't, I assume there's some theological explanation for why this isn't the case. Maybe you can help me there?
A 'work-around' of any kind is a way of rationalising two distinctly opposing positions. It is a fact, if we are buy into this 'immaculate conception / virgin birth' theology, that there is a dilemma that must be addressed. Either God has committed adultery (since He wasn't the lawful spouse of Anne) or He hasn't. If He hasn't, I assume there's some theological explanation for why this isn't the case. Maybe you can help me there?
"Am I missing something?"
Only to point out that the original sin which all humans had and which the Messiah necessarily couldn't have and which therefore necessitated this whole nonsense about immaculate conceptions and virgin births is itself an obvious myth.
It's no different from how ardent Doctor Who ofans try to "retcon" (retrospective continuity) explanations to cover over obvious errors made by the show's various writers over the years. Doing one of those things occasionally gets described as a legitimate career choice. I shall leave you to decide which one.
Only to point out that the original sin which all humans had and which the Messiah necessarily couldn't have and which therefore necessitated this whole nonsense about immaculate conceptions and virgin births is itself an obvious myth.
It's no different from how ardent Doctor Who ofans try to "retcon" (retrospective continuity) explanations to cover over obvious errors made by the show's various writers over the years. Doing one of those things occasionally gets described as a legitimate career choice. I shall leave you to decide which one.
jno - the RC doctrine of the Immaculate Conception refers to the birth of a fictitious Anna, mother of Mary. What do you think that 'immaculate conception' means and is meant to mean, if not another virgin birth?
Coming down to earth, can someone explain how the unknown authors of "Luke" and "Matthew" knew about Mary's virginity nearly a century after the event when no previous author (Paul and the author of "Mark") had never mentioned it? In whom did Mary confide, and how did she pass the secret on, through three generations, to be discovered by those two authors near the end of the century? And why should we believe them anyway? All they do is make bald statements without offering an iota of evidence. To take it seriously is foolish.
Coming down to earth, can someone explain how the unknown authors of "Luke" and "Matthew" knew about Mary's virginity nearly a century after the event when no previous author (Paul and the author of "Mark") had never mentioned it? In whom did Mary confide, and how did she pass the secret on, through three generations, to be discovered by those two authors near the end of the century? And why should we believe them anyway? All they do is make bald statements without offering an iota of evidence. To take it seriously is foolish.
This whole thread is absurd. Father Ted (?) writes "It is Catholic dogma that.."
No it is not Catholic dogma that....
In fact there is no biblical support or scriptural basis for the Immaculate Conception of Mary doctrine. Mary, although favored of God, was an ordinary human being. According to Scripture, only Jesus Christ was immaculately conceived, born of a virgin, and born without sin.
If you are going to knock beliefs (as ever on this thread) at least get the beliefs correct or keep your crazy ramblings to yourself.
No it is not Catholic dogma that....
In fact there is no biblical support or scriptural basis for the Immaculate Conception of Mary doctrine. Mary, although favored of God, was an ordinary human being. According to Scripture, only Jesus Christ was immaculately conceived, born of a virgin, and born without sin.
If you are going to knock beliefs (as ever on this thread) at least get the beliefs correct or keep your crazy ramblings to yourself.
I'm having trouble with this. I believe some are answering without having read all the answers - which is adding to my confusion.
Could someone outline how Anne "came to be" with a supporting quote from scriptures please?
My, very limited, knowledge had be believe that Mary was the only case where god stuck his oar in (so to speak).
Could someone outline how Anne "came to be" with a supporting quote from scriptures please?
My, very limited, knowledge had be believe that Mary was the only case where god stuck his oar in (so to speak).
Since the Catholic Church has changed its position on the issue (that good old Papal Infallibility again there, folks!), it's hardly surprising that there's disagreement over exactly what's meant.
For the record, my understanding is that Catholic dogma currently believes that Mary was conceived in the usual manner. Despite "coitus resulting in inpregnation" supposedly being the sum total of sufficiency required for every other person to be tainted by the concept of original sin (itself a concept originating with Evil Eve eating the fruit of the tree of knowledge in Eden), Mary is given special dispensation to have been born free of original sin. The reason for this is that she could not have given birth to a sinless Jebus Crimbo had it been otherwise.
Like I say, it's ret-conning by fanboys.
For the record, my understanding is that Catholic dogma currently believes that Mary was conceived in the usual manner. Despite "coitus resulting in inpregnation" supposedly being the sum total of sufficiency required for every other person to be tainted by the concept of original sin (itself a concept originating with Evil Eve eating the fruit of the tree of knowledge in Eden), Mary is given special dispensation to have been born free of original sin. The reason for this is that she could not have given birth to a sinless Jebus Crimbo had it been otherwise.
Like I say, it's ret-conning by fanboys.
Latest Posts
Quizzes & Puzzles18 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles33 mins ago
Don't Eat Celery In The Sun, Folks!
Body & Soul65 mins ago
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.