Discussion concerning Mariology
- Dear Members,
Below is an exchange I have had on Facebook. I would certainly appreciate your comments.
Mathew 1:23 is a wrong translation when Hebrew was translated to Greek. the writer of gospel of Mathew used the wrong translation too.Isaiah 7:14 ...look the young woman has conceived and is bearing a son and she will name him[his name will be]Immanuel.Christian churches created their fundamental theology based on a wrong translation. for more details visit (I deleted his website)
- Andrews Cherian
There is no evidence that the theology was "created." The theology was an expression of what was believed, not to "fit in" wih any Old Testament notion. Besides the phrase translated "young woman" can also be translated virgin. A "young woman" would generally be a virgin in the first place, otherwise why mention it as it is natural for married women to havie children in the regular way.
Theology is derived from the beliefs. Beliefs came into existence as a product of what that generation regarded as facts. that is why beliefs change as per the political, social and ethical notions of the time.
In ancient manuscripts including dead sea scrolls, Isaiah 7:14 the woman is not a virgin, it is written as young woman and the woman can be traced as Isiah's wife. When OT books got translated from Hebrew to Greek many mistakes took place. The author Mathew carved out his virgin theology from the wrong translation. early christian leaders never regarded Mary as virgin.
when non -Jewish people became Christians they brought with them their legends and myths of their gods.In mythology- gods were born out of virgins. when gentiles out numbered Jewish- Christians; the gentile beliefs became the theology of Christianity
A true christian should not waste his life banging his head on dead theology to prove the virginity of Mary.
Christianity should be a way of life and not a quagmire of dogmatic theo-theories.
- Andrews Cherian
I am so sorry you have made up history to suit your self. The great ecumenical councils that fleshed out the theology of the incarnation and gave us the apostolic creeds did not refer to Isiah for their formulations. They refered to the common faith of the church that was handed down from the apostolic teachings. The apostolic teaching did not derive soley from Isiah! Certainly not every person believed exactly the same thing, hence the need for the council. Certain "modern scholars" have reinterpreted many Christian ideas to fit their own notions. Your idea that Gentiles "produced" the virgin birth does not take into account that Mathew was a Jew. The logical extention of your argument could be applied to any aspect of Christiology (i.e. the resuurection was "made up" so that we would not be serving a dead God.) Your premise is false on its face any way in two ways- the text "young woman" can also be translated "young maiden." A young maiden who was to bear "Immanuel" must have been a virgin - a maiden by definition being unmarried. Secondly you assume a mistranslation of the Septuagint. Mathew was an Aramaic, Hebrew, & Greek speaking Jew. He would certainly have access to the Hebrew scrolls containing the "original." As to your point about "true Christians" - you brought up this subject, I am responding from the true position of the church coming from Apostolic times. You must be completely unfamiliar with the church fathers. Please stop the foolish discussion concerning what the vast majority of Christains believe and focus on what you yourself suggest. I don't need to read your books when I can easily access the truth from a vast array of scholarly works from various churches.
- Dn. Zach
Dn. Zacharia Varghese