That's odd. I thought I was the one asking the questions but all you have done so far is answer questions with more questions that really doesn't answer any of my questions. I think you're intelligent enough to understand what reality really is and i don't have to give you a definition. With that said, answer my questions, please and then we can proceed from there. But since you asked, i'll play your little silly game and give you a brief answer. Reality is what is real; it is anything that conforms with fact. Do you find anything like that in scripture? We can start with the virgin birth and the resurrection. Are they part of reality? Do they conform with fact? IF they don't then what category do you think they should be placed in?
"Reality is what is real; it is anything that conforms with fact." Thanks for the clarification.
Regarding the virgin birth reflecting reality. It is my understanding both the writers of Matthew and Luke wrote about the virgin birth in their Gospel narratives to establish credibility of Jesus as God incarnate. For their particular audiences (Jewish for Matthew and Greek for Luke) adding this story was important.
So, the question would seem to be do the virgin birth stories conform with fact? The answer is I don't know. I cannot prove Joseph and Mary existed. Outside of a few writings not in the Bible written soon after Jesus' death, I can't even prove that Jesus existed (depending on who you talk to these writings either support the existense of Jesus or were written after the fact to justify the existense of Jesus). Because I believe that God exists and God is responsible for the entire known universe, then it would seem that causing a woman to be pregnant without a mortal father is not beyond His ability. Since I lack a time machine, I confess I do not know the true facts regarding Jesus' birth. On the other hand, no one else can prove it one way or the other.
I have no problem with those who accept the virgin birth story as literal and factual. I have no problem with those who question it or even reject it. It is not a matter of being wishy-washy but a conclusion that until we can go back in time and record the actual events then bring the information back to our current time, there is no way to prove the virgin birth is a fact.
Was there a resurrection? Outside of the New Testament writings there is nothing written for the times to substantiate the idea to the best of my knowlede. On the other hand, it seems odd a small group of people (maybe 50 or so) would risk social ridicule not to mention Roman persecution if they didn't believe the resurrection happened. But, again with out a time machine, there is no way to prove the resurrection one way or another.
Religion by its very nature is a matter of faith, not fact. I have faith there was a resurrection. Until irrefutable evidence appears to show there was no resurrection, I am OK with believing a resurrection occurred.
So if I am ignoring reality because I choose to believe in God, so be it.
Sincerely,
OldChurchGuy