Difference between revisions of "Debate:Why do fundamentalists take mistranslations seriously?"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
(Created page with "The original Bible says the savior will be born ''not'' from a virgin, but from a woman who has never given birth before. In other words, the savior has to be a first-born. Funda...") |
m (cat) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
The original Bible says the savior will be born ''not'' from a virgin, but from a woman who has never given birth before. In other words, the savior has to be a first-born. Fundamentalists have taken this mistranslation to "virgin" seriously, and it has become important in many churches that Mary was a virgin rather than a first-time mother. Why has this point become so important? [[User:SEdwin|SEdwin]] 01:48, 4 June 2012 (EDT) | The original Bible says the savior will be born ''not'' from a virgin, but from a woman who has never given birth before. In other words, the savior has to be a first-born. Fundamentalists have taken this mistranslation to "virgin" seriously, and it has become important in many churches that Mary was a virgin rather than a first-time mother. Why has this point become so important? [[User:SEdwin|SEdwin]] 01:48, 4 June 2012 (EDT) | ||
| + | [[Category:Debate]] | ||
Revision as of 09:13, June 26, 2012
The original Bible says the savior will be born not from a virgin, but from a woman who has never given birth before. In other words, the savior has to be a first-born. Fundamentalists have taken this mistranslation to "virgin" seriously, and it has become important in many churches that Mary was a virgin rather than a first-time mother. Why has this point become so important? SEdwin 01:48, 4 June 2012 (EDT)