The immaculate conception was a lie

Only Matthew and Luke claim that Mary was a virgin when she conceived. The rest of the New Testament ignore that fact and even deny it. Clearly Matthew and Luke were of the belief that anything to do with sex was dirty and couldn’t have the son of God created in this way. There is no explanation as to why or how Matthew & Luke came to this conclusion and no one else even mentions it. Wouldn’t this have been a huge miracle that everyone would have mentioned on a regular basis when defending/supporting Jesus? And Matthew doesn’t mention telling Mary, only Joseph is told, and only as he is considering putting her away privately (whatever that means) for being pregnant before he had had sex with her. But Luke states that an angel pre warns Mary even before God ‘visits’ her.


6 Responses to “The immaculate conception was a lie”

  1. I dont think the virgin conception was about sex at all. It simply states that God was the father, not man.

  2. Why would all of the authors need to put it in their books? Luke was a physician therefor he would have been more interested in the virgin birth. You have to take into account the occupations and such of these authors, each has a different take on the important things in the time and each has a different perspective on them, just because a few ommit a few things does not make them false. !)avid

  3. doubtingthomas426 Says:


    I don’t care what the occupation of the author was or what was on his mind at the time he was putting quill to parchment, A WOMAN NEVER TOUCHED BY MAN GAVE BIRTH TO A CHILD! If the guy documenting John F. Kennedy’s day on Friday, November 22, 1963, in Dallas, Texas failed to mention the fact that the president got his head blown off, wouldn’t that strike you as a wee bit odd? If you examined all the hundreds of accounts for that day do you think you would find even ONE that wouldn’t mention the assassination? A virgin gave birth to a child, whiteman0o0! How can someone not even mention that miraculous event when writing about the origins of their savior? I’m sorry but this strikes me as a bit peculiar.


  4. It may strike you as peculiar but that does not do anything to disprove the immaculate conception. Different people add different things to what they write, it is differing writing styles. And if it was covered in two of the books already why would you need to cover it in the rest? The books of the new and old testament have things that they adress. Matthew adresses the coming of Jesus as a King, he traces back the geneology to God because it is Jesus’ ties to royalty, Mark adresses Jesus as a servant so why would he need to adress anything before Jesus’ ministry actually began and he began his servant’s ministry Luke was a physician and therefore adressed X human side, leading back to his miraculous conception, John adresses the birth of X as well because he describes him as the son of God. So if I had to give my opinion I’d say that 3/4 isnt half bad. In case you are wondering which reference I used for John its.
    John 1:14 ” And the word became flesh, and dwelt among us, and we saw His glory, glory as of the only begotten from the Father, full of grace and truth.”

  5. doubtingthomas426 Says:


    Willfully seeing a passage that has no mention of birth, mother, Mary or anything close as being evidence of exactly that is just ridiculous. And these other writers of the gospels weren’t writing follow up accounts therefore they didn’t need to mention what was already written, they were writing their own accounts, so yes, failing to mention that their savior was born of a virgin is a GLARING OVERSIGHT.


  6. Thomas,

    The other writers letters would have been copied ad nauseum and word of mouth would have spread around anything that needed to be known, to be perfectly honest the Virgin Birth wasn’t relevant to every gospel it was relevant to a few for the reasons I stated above but not in others. !)avid

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: