Why do you say this when it’s completely false? You are spreading misinformation.

That's what set me off. You get to argue your point, you don't get to call me a liar.

Then, using a modern English dictionary entry as "evidence" of a biblical "fact" is dishonest. As if Luke used said online modern English dictionary when writing his letters in Aramaic, or any of the subsequent translators.

Now, asserting that the whole story is fake, still claim that a translation of Aramaic to Greek to Latin to English correctly preserved the description of a young pregnant woman as being a (modern) virgin rather than, maybe, just unwed, or without 'sin', or blessed, or fair, or whatever.

Which is it? The perfectly preserved word of God or dubious translation of a translation of a translation?