The Instigator
ATHOS
Pro (for)
Losing
12 Points
The Contender
angrymen
Con (against)
Winning
15 Points

A virgin birth is impossible.

Do you like this debate?NoYes-1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 6 votes the winner is...
angrymen
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 7/5/2012 Category: Religion
Updated: 4 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 4,493 times Debate No: 24507
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (8)
Votes (6)

 

ATHOS

Pro

In this debate I will argue that the miracle birth of Jesus is impossible.




If a story contains contradictions it can be used as evidence to negate it.

A 'virgin birth" contradicts with what we now know about human biology.


If Mary was parthenogenesis, Jesus would have been female. All parthenogenesis produces females--biological fact.

http://en.wikipedia.org...


I will also argue that the concept of a 'virgin birth' was copied from Pagan religions that were prevalant in Rome
angrymen

Con


I would like to thank my opponent for creating this debate. I will be arguing that it is possible for a virgin to give birth. I will not be using the story in the bible but rather scientific facts for reasons a women 2000 years ago could have had a virgin birth.


Since my opponent offered no definitions I will provide them.


Virgin- A person who has not experienced sexual intercourse.


Sexual Intercourse- Coitus between humans.


Impossible- Incapable of having existence or of occurring.


Birth- The emergence and separation of offspring from the body of the mother.


http://www.thefreedictionary.com...


1. Purposeful Alternative insemination


Alternative insemination is the introduction of semen into female’s genitals by other means than ejaculation into the vagina. When the woman is at the right time in her menstrual cycle, the semen is deposited. This is done using a syringe or other device. The semen can travel in the moisture of the vulva to the egg (1). In a women’s body sperm can survive up to 5 days (2). As you can see a woman could get pregnant if she purposefully put sperm in her vagina without a male partner ejaculating in to it and remain a virgin.



2. Accidental Alternative insemination


If the sperm was on an object or clothing that was inserted or touched the vagina, there is a chance of fertilization of an egg. One common place this is possible is a toilet. Since sperm can live on a dry surface until the semen is dried (2), there is a chance of fertilization. If the semen gets on her hands or clothing and not gotten rid, and then enters the vagina a woman can get pregnant while still having her virginity (3).



3. Anal/oral Sex


As anal/oral sex does not count as sexual intercourse a woman can get pregnant from both. After ejaculation into the anus from anal sex, semen can drip down and still enter the vagina and fertilize an egg. The same is true for oral sex. If the semen drips from the mouth area into the vagina an egg can still be fertilized and the woman can remain a virgin (4).



While the chances of these are low they are still possible. For a women to get pregnant it requires her to be ovulating and for the sperm and egg to meet (1). While unlikely it is still possible for a virgin to get pregnant and give birth to a baby.


All of these possibilities could have happened 2000 years ago and could have caused a virgin to give birth to a child.



Sources:


(1)-http://www.plannedparenthood.org...


(2)- http://www.webmd.com...


(3)- http://www.medicine2life.com...


(4)- http://pregnancy.emedtv.com...


Debate Round No. 1
ATHOS

Pro

In this debate I will argue that the miracle birth of Jesus is impossible.





If a story contains contradictions it can be used as evidence to negate it.

A 'virgin birth" contradicts with what we now know about human biology.




Thanks for accepting, Con!

I'll agree to the definitions.

My opponent makes an excellent argument. Indeed, in the scenarios Con listed a "virgin birth" could be possible. However, in my opening statement I clearly stated:

"In this debate I will argue that the miracle birth of Jesus is impossible.'


I'll concede that 2000 years ago a woman could have got pregnant from any one of the three scenarios Con listed. Perhaps I should've been more specific and provided a detailed resolution. I can see where Con is going with his argument. Mary may have got pregnant through the means Con listed, and it very well could've been interpreted as a "miracle".


It was my intention to debate on the issue of "miraculous conception" as described in the N.T.

34 "How will this be," Mary asked the angel, "since I am a virgin?" 35 The angel answered, "The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you. So the holy one to be born will be called the Son of God.
-Luke 1:34-35

I should've been clearer in my opening statements.

It was also my intention to make the connection between Paganism and Christianity. When christianity was in its early stages and gaining popularity, Rome adopted Christianity. [1] There are parallels between between the Paganism and Christianity. The most likely reason would be ease of conversion. A Pagan myth that was borrowed and applied to Christianity was "Miraculous births". [2]

So, as you can see. A "virgin birth" from this this perspective, is clearly impossible.

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org...

[2] http://en.wikipedia.org...(mythology)#Hinduism


angrymen

Con

I seem to have misunderstood what my opponent wanted to debate. I was focusing on virgin births in general rather than the case in the bible of Mary giving birth to Jesus. But my points stand as any of these cases could have happened and still appear inexplicable by the laws of nature and considered an act of God to the people living in the first century (1).

The resolution of "a virgin birth is impossible" is different from the statement "the miracle birth of Jesus is impossible". I was under the impression that we were going to debate whether it is possible a virgin (Mary) could give birth to a son (Jesus). Miracles are subjective and can be interpreted differently. What one person considers an act of God may just be inexplicable to another.

People in the first century knew very little compared to what we know about science and biology today. With the first reported case of artificial insemination only appearing in 1884 (2), It is very likely the idea of a virgin giving birth was considered "inexplicable by the laws of nature and so is held to be supernatural in origin or an act of God" (1) by these people and called a miracle.

Not only have I negated the resolution of a virgin birth being impossible, I have also shown how the virgin birth of Jesus could be considered a miracle by the people living during that time.

(1)- http://www.thefreedictionary.com...
(2)- http://en.wikipedia.org...
Debate Round No. 2
ATHOS

Pro

Clearly, Con has negated the resolution of a virgin birth being impossible.

The purpose of this debate was to negate any supernatural claims concerning the birth of Jesus(and Con did an excellent job at achieving this). I should have been explicit with my resolution.

I rather enjoyed Con's approach at this debate. Had my opponent been a Christian fundamentalist, Con's line of reasoning would have served me well.


I would like to thank Con once more for accepting, maybe we can do it again some time (on a different topic of course).
angrymen

Con

In conclusion I would like to thank my opponent for debating me on this topic. I am sorry for the misunderstanding about the resolution.

While I do not believe god got Mary pregnant, I do know that it is possible for virgins to have babies. I thought we were going to debate whether or not it was possible for Mary to get pregnant while staying a virgin. I believe I have shown enough proof that it was possible for a woman living 2000 years ago to become pregnant while still keeping her virginity.

Once again I am sorry for the misunderstanding, and I hope maybe Pro can find someone who would like to debate him on this subject the way he would like.

Vote con
Debate Round No. 3
8 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 8 records.
Posted by earlw62 11 months ago
earlw62
Con,

With all do respect, you are missing the entire point of your initial argument: "In this debate I will argue that the miracle birth of Jesus is impossible."

Definition as taken from my MacBook's Dictionary App.

MIRACLE~
a surprising and welcome event that is not explicable by natural or scientific laws and is therefore considered to be the work of a divine agency: the miracle of rising from the grave.

You see, God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, or "logic." And furthermore, as the author of ALL logic that we see in the universe, most of the Bible can be explained through logical reasoning, except that which you acknowledged: "MIRACLE."

Miracles on the other hand, are that which we mortal humans in our finite state observe the Supernatural crossing paths with our natural.

So, there is a better explanation than either "Con" or your counter conspirator, "Pro," have given...It's a Supernatural explanation. One by which only the God of the universe, the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, the Creator God, YHWH, Jesus the Christ could perform.

That my debtors is what separates the God of the Bible from all of gods.
Posted by waterskier 4 years ago
waterskier
@JamesMadison,
there are many explanations for this
1.you are lying
2.she cheated on you
3.she is lying about being pregnant
4.you jacked off, then came on her vagina
5.she got pregnant artificially without telling you
6.you are delusional
Posted by AnalyticArizonan 4 years ago
AnalyticArizonan
@JamesMadison, you got cuckolded
Posted by ATHOS 4 years ago
ATHOS
@JamesMadison, If you can't figure out how your girlfriend got pregnant without you having sex with her, I guess it's better for you- ignorance is bliss.
Posted by JamesMadison 4 years ago
JamesMadison
If virgins can't get pregnant, somebody has to explain how my girlfriend got pregnant without us having sex.

Checkmate, ATHOS.
Posted by elvroin_vonn_trazem 4 years ago
elvroin_vonn_trazem
Even without using actual Bible verses, there are various claims to consider. There is the generic claim that God is all-powerful, for example. Does that mean God can teleport physical matter from Point A to Point B? If so, then God can teleport sperm from some chosen man into a virgin, and, lo!, the pregnancy is a miracle!
Posted by ATHOS 4 years ago
ATHOS
I don't think it will be a stalemate. Many christians believe their god loves unconditionally despite how the bible describes him.
Posted by ADT_Clone 4 years ago
ADT_Clone
Just going to say, this debate will already end in a stalemate. By using only the Bible as a source, you will have conflicting evidence. The simplest example of this is the Old and New testaments. In a nutshell, the Old testament has a lot of content in which God murders and does not show unconditional love, whereas the New Testament is all "God loves everyone".

So I don't see this debate going anywhere.
6 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 6 records.
Vote Placed by mongeese 4 years ago
mongeese
ATHOSangrymenTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: Con clearly negated the resolution as stated, as acknowledged by Pro.
Vote Placed by whyt3nn3rdy 4 years ago
whyt3nn3rdy
ATHOSangrymenTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Reasons for voting decision: I don't believe that this misunderstanding was sincere, I give all points to Pro because this debate was sincere until Con ignored the real purpose of this debate.
Vote Placed by Kinesis 4 years ago
Kinesis
ATHOSangrymenTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: Interesting response by Con. Pro conceded.
Vote Placed by Stephen_Hawkins 4 years ago
Stephen_Hawkins
ATHOSangrymenTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Reasons for voting decision: Counter-VB the vote in favour of ATHOS: Not only did CON debate the resolution as shown, but ATHOS later agreed this, and conceded. The extra 2 points are my vote in favour of angrymen: three votes for winning argument, 1 less point for athos conceding humbly.
Vote Placed by baggins 4 years ago
baggins
ATHOSangrymenTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:40 
Reasons for voting decision: The resolution was obvious enough and Pro was sincere about the debate. The 'misunderstanding' was deliberately created by Con.
Vote Placed by Microsuck 4 years ago
Microsuck
ATHOSangrymenTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:13 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro cnceded in the end that the resolution was negated. Pro gets conduct for humble concession.