this post was submitted on 01 Aug 2023
684 points (93.0% liked)

Atheism

1662 readers
1 users here now

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
all 25 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Wirrvogel@feddit.de 47 points 2 years ago (3 children)

She also could have been the victim of rape and Joseph trying to protect her, instead of her being a cheater and Joseph being dumb. If they both did exist of course.

[–] omginput@feddit.de 17 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Jesus did exist too but he was a regular human and some kind of pop star at the time

[–] u202307011927@feddit.de 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

I doubt he was a pop star at the time as the genre pop wasn't invented back then :P

[–] omginput@feddit.de 1 points 2 years ago

That's why I wrote "some kind of"

[–] MaxPower@feddit.de 1 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

She could also have been a hotwife and he could have been a cuckold. The possibilities are endless.

What's impossible is the holy ghost impregnating her.

[–] atheist@feddit.de 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Never thought about it. Thank you.

[–] becool@kbin.social 24 points 2 years ago (1 children)

"Which is more likely — that the whole natural order is to be suspended, or that a Jewish minx should tell a lie?" - Christopher Hitchens

[–] Nechesh@beehaw.org 9 points 2 years ago (1 children)

The same sentiment could be stated without reference to religion or objectifying women.

[–] irmoz@reddthat.com 8 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

I thought the same.

"Which is more likely — that the whole natural order is to be suspended, or that a cheater should tell a lie?"

Sounds better. You could say "adulterer" or "cuckolder" for different flavours.

[–] WhiskyTangoFoxtrot@lemmy.world 21 points 2 years ago

The thing is, the earliest versions of the gospels didn't contain a nativity story at all, instead starting with Jesus' baptism. The whole "virgin birth" thing was retconned in after the religion was already up and running.

[–] normalmighty@lemmy.world 10 points 2 years ago (1 children)

To be fair if picking the first option meant getting stoned to death for adultery, I would try my luck at the second option too.

[–] cooopsspace 2 points 2 years ago

Absolute gold

[–] NocturnalMorning@lemmy.world 7 points 2 years ago (3 children)
[–] genfood@feddit.de 10 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

“Yes, (…) [but] the chances of these all happening in real life are virtually zero.”

“(…) one of her eggs would have to produce, on its own, the biochemical changes indicative of fertilization, and then divide abnormally to compensate for the lack of sperm DNA.“

[–] NocturnalMorning@lemmy.world -1 points 2 years ago

Yes, I read the article too.

[–] Streetdog@lemmy.world 1 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

The movie "Bringing Out the Dead" taught me that!

Edit: URL: https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0163988/

[–] kylua@lemmy.world 1 points 2 years ago

this is interesting. Thank you

[–] doppelgangmember@lemmy.world 5 points 2 years ago (1 children)

"It was all because of that damn APPLE, im tellin' ya!"

[–] Dangeresque 5 points 2 years ago

...hey Joseph. Yeah. You know how we never have sex? YEAH! Well an angel came to me and I'm pregnant. JESUS CHRIST! Oh you already know about it!

[–] Willer@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago

I guess the pilgrims must have been on the good shit to not see the cap.

[–] lars@lemmy.sdf.org 1 points 1 year ago

But wait. Assuming this isn’t Flortucky, how’s a 12-year-old pregnant person have the ability to consent to:

  1. choose to marry
  2. marry
  3. sex
  4. cheat, and then
  5. sex again?
[–] Cornerspace@lemmy.world 1 points 2 years ago

Mary was not married though.