>>509555916 (OP)The texts of the Bible (like those of Quran and the Torah) are a collection of stories, teachings and historical records, loosely woven together by a central theme, written by dozens of different authors. Like do you know why all three of the books forbid you from eating pork? It's because back then there were no ways to store meat properly, and pork was quick to spoil compared to beef due to Trichinosis. So bronze age people with no access or knowledge of actual science just assumed that pork is somehow filthy. So there's almost always some logic behind the stories, and despite with zealots and fundamentalists say, they're not to be taken literally. The story of virgin birth is likely something like you've said, that a woman got pregnant by someone else and lied about it being an act of god, or perhaps she even told her husband who then came up with the story to avoid shame. Either way, there's always an explanation behind anything in the Bible that can be even remotely assumed to be "true". That said, it doesn't mean it's true, it might be a fictitious story inspired by something the writer had encountered during his life.
It's also almost certain that Jesus, if he existed, is a fictitious version of several people, and that most of his teachings were either warped during the recording, or added by the writer/s. That said (again - despite what fundamentalists want you to think) there's no actual evidence that Jesus even existed. As said, it's likely that the Jesus of the bible is a fabrication based on several people, the name Jesus is not unlike John today, as in, very common. Jesus Christ means basically "John the Anointed One", and Jesus was one of the most common every-man names back then, which fits the idea that it's just a fictitious version made to appeal to as many people as possible in order to spread the teachings the writers saw to be true. The "virgin birth" probably was relatively common, so it was attached to his story.
