The Christian birth story of Jesus is contradictory with other information in the bible.

“Isaiah 7:14: "Therefore the Lord himself will give you a sign: the virgin will be with child and will give birth to a son, and will call him Immanuel." (NIV)” “Matthew 1:23: ""The virgin shall be with child, and will give birth to a son, and they shall call him Immanuel; which means, 'God with us.'" (NIV)” Virgin just means an unmarried woman of marriageable age. Virgin is almah in Hebrew and according to the Strong's Concordance it means, "[1] virgin, [2] young woman of marriageable age [3] maid or newly married." Therefore, the word almah does not always mean virgin (woman who has never had sexual intercourse). Matthew 1:23 is quoted from Isaiah 7:14, therefore, the word “virgin” has the same meaning as “virgin” in Isaiah 7:14. “So Mary was part of David"s offspring and her lineage is to be found in Luke 3:23-31. And that was the biological line from Jesus, being the son of Mary, to David.” Both Joseph and Mary were descendants of David. Matthew 1:1-16 gives the genealogy of both Joseph and Christ and Luke 3:23-38 gives the genealogy of Mary and Christ. Everyone has 2 genealogies because everyone has a father & mother. Luke 3:23 And Iesus himselfe began to be about thirty yeeres of age, being (as was supposed) the sonne of Ioseph, which was the sonne of Heli, {The parenthesis were added later to the Scriptures.} “Ioseph, which was the sonne of Heli,” – Let’s go back to Matthew 1:16. Matthew 1:16 And Iacob begat Ioseph the husband of Mary, of whom was born Iesus, who is called Christ. So who was Joseph’s father? Jacob; now this is not talking about the Jacob you read about in Genesis. Joseph’s dad’s name was also Jacob. But there is a problem here. Luke 3:23 says, “the sonne of Heli,” and Matthew 1:16 says, “Iacob begat Ioseph”. I have a little red bible and Heli reads, Heli6 Son-in-law. So Joseph was the son-in-law of Heli because he was married to Heli’s daughter, Mary. Why would Joseph be mentioned in the genealogy of Christ? “ (2) (3) It becomes very clear that the translation for seed doesn't imply male: it implies descendant.” Leviticus 15:16 And if any mans seede of copulation goe out from him, then hee shall wash all his flesh in water, and bee vncleane vntill the Euen. So again seed means sperm. A descendant is a person, plant, or animal that is descended from a particular ancestor. Copulation - sexual intercourse. A woman does not have “seed”, a woman has eggs. The seed fertilizes the egg and a child begins to develop. So if you want to say that the “seed does not imply male: it implies descendant” it’s still saying the same thing, just in a different way because a descendant is someone who is genetically related to someone else. The keyword in “genetically” is gene. Gene - a unit of heredity that is transferred from a parent to offspring and is held to determine some characteristic of the offspring. Christ descended from Joseph’s seed or sperm, therefore He is related to Joseph by blood. “In Jeremiah 22:24 and 30, it says: As I live, saith the LORD, though Coniah the son of Jehoiakim king of Judah were the signet upon my right hand, yet would I pluck thee thence;Thus saith the LORD; no man of his [Coniah] seed shall prosper, sitting upon the throne of David, and ruling any more in Judah." Because Joseph was a directed descendant of Coniah, none of his offspring would be qualified to sit on David's throne. Since, according to scripture, Jesus will one day ascend to David's throne, it can be deducted that Jesus was not a blood relative to Joseph.” This does not mean that none of Jehoiakim’s seed would be ruling at all, if that was the case, Israel would have no savior. Matthew 1:12 And after they were brought to Babylon, Iechonias begat Salathiel, and Salathiel begate Zorobabel. 1 Chronicles 3:16-17 [16] And the sonnes of Ioakim: Ieconiah his sonne, Zedekiah his sonne. [17] And the sonnes of Ieconiah, Assir, Salathiel his sonne, So Jechonias had 2 sons, Assir and Salathiel and out of those 2 Christ came through Salathiel. Jeremiah 36:30 Therefore thus saith the Lord of Iehoiakim king of Iudah; He shall haue none to sit vpon the throne of Dauid, and his dead body shall be cast out in the day to the heate, and in the night to the frost. So nobody descending from Joakim would be on the throne; that’s not saying that there isn’t going to be a king. This is what a lot of Christians don’t understand and they will come to verses such as this one to say Christ didn’t come from Joseph’s seed because Joseph’s line was cursed. Isaiah 7:16 For before the childe shall know to refuse the euill and choose the good; the land that thou abhorrest, shalbe forsaken of both her kings. “the land that thou abhorrest, shalbe forsaken of both her kings.” – So neither Kingdom, Judah nor Israel, would have a king when Christ was born….there would be no king from Israel when Christ was born….that’s what it is saying. So Joakim had sons (1 Chronicles 3:16) but they didn’t sit on the throne. 2 Samuel 7:12 -14 [12] And when thy dayes be fulfilled, and thou shalt sleepe with thy fathers, I will set vp thy seede after thee, which shall proceede out of thy bowels, and I will establish his kingdome. What is seed? Sperm. This is where a Christian will say, “this is talking about Solomon” David’s son Solomon, but watch this! [13] Hee shall build an house for my Name, and I will stablish the throne of his kingdome for euer. What is the word that lets you know it’s not talking about Solomon? Foreverbecause Solomon’s throne was not “forever”. Luke 1:33 And hee shall reigne ouer the house of Iacob for euer, and of his kingdome there shall be no end. This is talking about Christ. It says, “and of his kingdome there shall be no end.” What does no end mean? It means it will last forever, there is no end to His kingdom. So 2 Samuel 7:13 is talking about Christ. “While Joseph was not biologically related to Jesus, the two were legally related in the eyes of Rome.” Do you have the Scripture for this? Remember as I stated in R1, show proof of your points using the Scriptures. If you make a statement and don’t back it up with the Bible, it is more than likely your own private interpretation. The Bible can interpret it self, if you know how to read it precept upon precept – Isaiah 28:10. “Then he provides in verse 15 a reason why: "The Lord your God will raise up for you a prophet like me from among you, from your countrymen, you shall listen to him."” In Deut 18:15, of course it may seem that this could be any prophet from Israel, but you have to read Deut 18:18 very carefully to see who it is speaking of. Deuteronomy 18:18 I will raise them vp a Prophet from among their brethren, like vnto thee, and will put my wordes in his mouth, and hee shall speake vnto them all that I shall command him. The LORD did not put HIS words into every prophet’s mouth. Who was the only prophet that was exactly like The Most High God? Jesus Christ. Of course Moses spoke what God told him to speak, but Moses also disobey TMH God in Numbers 20:8-11. Christ spoke everything that the LORD told Him to speak. The LORD put HIS words into the mouth of Christ and Christ spoke them. So Deut 18:18 is talking about Christ. It is also saying that Christ is going to be risen up just as Moses, through a father and mother and He was also going to speak what God told Him to speak, just as Moses spoke what The Most High God told him to speak, except Christ did not disobey the commandments of God. “Does Jesus have to speak the same language to be "like" Moses?” Moses was an Israelite (tribe: Levi – Ex 2:1-10) and Jesus was an Israelite (tribe: Judah – Heb 7:14), therefore, they spoke the same language. “Because I am running out of characters very quickly, here is a link to a professional and effective summary of several of the arguments I am trying to make. You will find more detail here under "Benson Commentary": http://biblehub.com......” This is what Christians don’t understand about the Bible. When it says Jesus was born of a virgin, it does not mean that He was born of a woman that never had sex. When the Bible says Christ was born of the Holy Ghost, it does not mean that a Spirit had sex with Mary because the Holy Ghost (spirit) is simply the Laws – Acts 7:51-53. The number one thing that Christians don’t understand is the birth of Christ because the Bible is not in order that is why to get the understanding of the Scriptures, we must read precept upon precept. 1 John 4:3 “Being in the flesh does not mean he had to have come from man.” So if He didn’t come from a man that had human flesh, where did He come from? The Bible tells us that He did not take on Him the nature of angels, He took on Him the seed of Abraham – Hebrews 2:16, and again “seed” is sperm as you had defined it to mean “sperma” in Greek. “You are discounting the possibility of miracles, which is not what this debate is about. We are assuming in this debate that miracles can happen since we are in the Bible.” Miracles do happen, but the Bible is not a miracle, it is the Word of God. The topic of this debate is: The Christian birth story of Jesus is contradictory with other information in the bible. The Christian doctrine or imagination, does contradict what the Bible says about the Birth of Christ because Christians don’t believe Christ had an earthly father. 1 Corinthians 15:39 All flesh is not the same flesh, but there is one kind of flesh of men, another flesh of beasts, another of fishes, and another of birds. So there is the flesh of men, the flesh of beasts, fishes and of birds. So if Christ did not come from the flesh of a man, then how was He in the flesh of man? Wisdom of Solomon: “This is not in the protestant Bible, its in the Apocrypha...the resolution says the Bible.” The Apocrypha does nothing but quote the OT & NT and gives additional history on the real Israelites. The Apocrypha is also in my Holy Bible KJV 1611, therefore, the Apocrypha is part of the Holy Bible. Thank you CON, I await your response.