what year was the virgin birth doctrine introduced into Christianity?

[jay7]

specific doctrines introduced late by the church were..
hell
virgin birth
and a few others......

what year was the virgin birth doctrine introduced prior to it, it was a pagan dogma which mirror's tamuz and horus

 

[theologynut]

Because the gospel writers (70-100 AD) quoted from the Greek Septuagint translation of Hebrew scriptures, they encountered the word PARTHENOS (Greek for virgin) rather than ALMAH (Hebrew for young woman). This variant only affected Matthew and Luke, as they were the only ones to have birth narratives about Jesus.

Scholars date Matthew and Luke close to 80 AD. Had they been quoting from Hebrew scriptures, the virgin birth concept would never have been a factor in developing Christianity. They seem to have copied the bulk of Mark, adding birth and post-resurrection scenarios, as well as five sermons dubbed Q. This is known as the Two-Source Theory to New Testament scholarship.

Since Mark began at the baptism of Jesus, both Matthew and Luke felt incumbent to add birth narratives. Matthew's and Luke's genealogies differ, but both endorse the virgin birth variant, because that is how the Greek Septuagint described the young woman of Isaiah, who was about to give birth during the reign of King Ahaz.

This ALMAH or young woman was used as the prototype for Jesus' mother. That Matthew and Luke quoted from the Greek translation of Hebrew scriptures (as did all of the New Testament writers), thereby employing the word PARTHENOS instead of ALMAH, places them outside of Judea--native Judeans would have quoted from their own native Hebrew scriptures.

 

[Yeshuaman]

325 when Constantine proclaimed the mystery pagan church of Rome was the new church. All the pagan traditions of witchcraft of old was (from Nimrod, Semiramis, Tammuz, etc) put under one cover of mystery Rome. He was a pagan and he started a pagan church called the Roman catholic church. It took all the demonic pagan traditions, symbols, and customs under one cover and called it the RCC. She in turn has many daughters who follow her pagan teaching. They are the SUNday worship type churches pro-claiming to follow the bible.

Rev. 17:5 and on her forehead a name [was] written, a mystery, “BABYLON THE GREAT, THE MOTHER OF HARLOTS AND OF THE ABOMINATIONS OF THE EARTH.â€￾

Rev. 18:4 I heard another voice from heaven, saying, “Come out of her, my people, so that you will not participate in her sins and receive of her plagues;

 

[HTacianas_II]

Neither Tamuz nor Horus were claimed to have been born of virgins.

And the Christian idea of hell comes from the Jewish idea of hell.

 

[Ann]

It happened when an angel appeared to Joseph and told him that Mary was carrying the Son of God.

 

[thundercatt9]

Church preceded the New Testament, not the New Testament the Church. First there was not a Constitution of the United States, and then Americans, who in the light of that Constitution decided to form a government and a nation. The Founding Fathers preceded the Foundation; so the Mystical Body of Christ preceded the reports written later by inspired secretaries. When finally the Gospels were written, they did not prove what Christians believed, nor did they initiate that belief; they merely recorded in a systematic manner what they already knew. People did not believe in the Crucifixion because the Gospels said there was a Crucifixion; they wrote down the story of the Crucifixion, because they already believed in it. The Church did not come to believe in the Virgin Birth because the Gospels tell us there is a Virgin Birth; it was because the living word of God the church already believed it that they set it down in the Gospels.

Pick up the Gospel of Luke, which was written sometime before the year 67, and read the opening lines: "For as much as many have taken hand to set forth in order, a narration of the things that have been accomplished among us: According as they have delivered them unto us, who from the beginning were eye-witnesses and ministers of the Word: It seemed good to me also, having diligently attained to all things from the beginning, to write to thee in order, most excellent Theophilus, that thou mayest know the verity of those words in which thou hast been instructed" (Lk 1:1-4). Luke did not write to Theophilus to tell him something brand new about someone who died over thirty-four years before. Theophilus, like every other member of the Apostolic Church in the Roman Empire, already knew about the miracle of the loaves and fishes, about the Resurrection and the Virgin Birth. It is similar to this. If we pick up a history book that tells us that in 1914 World War I began, it does not create that belief in us, it just confirms what we already know. So, too, the Gospels set down in a more systematic way what was already believed.

Edit: The Tamuz and Horus has been debunked so often its really not worth going into detail again here. What I find interesting is that the people who tend to subscribe to the Horus-Jesus connection hypothesis also laugh at YECs. Hypocrisy at its finest. If it was Christians attempting to use non-scholarly sources to disprove something established by professional mythologists, historians, or scientists, they would be rightly laughed at and disregarded.

 

[Sam]

"Britain, partly through Joseph of Arimathaea, partly through Fugatus and Damianus, was of all kingdoms FIRST TO RECEIVE THE GOSPEL." (Even before Palestine).

The antiquity of the British church had been challenged by the ambassadors of Spain and France before the Roman Catholic Council of Pisa (A.D. 1417). The British (catholic) delegates Robert Hallam, Bishop of Salisbury, Henry Chichele, a former Archbishop of Canmassageplanetury and Thomas Chillendon, won the day, the council affirmed that the British church (not the Church of England and not catholic because it was pre-catholic) was the first Christian church (community).

The ambassadors appealed to the Roman Catholic Council of Constance, also in A.D. 1417, and that council confirmed the findings of the Council of Pisa.

A third decision by the Roman Catholic Council at Sienna 1424 again confirmed the antiquity of the British church and, finally at the Council at Basle in 1434 it was laid down that the churches of Spain and France had to accept the precedence of the British Church, which it was affirmed, was founded by Joseph of Arimathaea (Mary's uncle) "immediately after the passion of Christ."