Mary, Mother of the Lord, while still Pregnant
Wide Eyed in Wonder
Luke 1:41-43
"41 And it came to pass, that, when Elisabeth heard the salutation of
Mary, the babe leaped in her womb; and Elisabeth was filled with the
Holy Ghost: 42 And she spake out with a loud voice, and said, Blessed
art thou among women, and blessed is the fruit of thy womb. 43 And
whence is this to me, that the mother of my Lord should come to me?"
1. God was using John the Baptist to point to Christ, even before he
was born.
2. Elizabeth called Mary, "mother of my Lord," even though Christ had
yet not been born. Yet, she was already "mother" of an already
existing baby "Lord."
Ken Clifton
christiansuperhero.com
IAAH
Jeez, I can find any number of works of fiction that
refer to unborn children of one sort or another. What
makes your fiction any more worthwhile?
Ray Fischer
>rScripture gives two proofs of Life in the womb below...
Scripture doesn't give proof of ANYTHING.
--
Ray Fischer
rfis...@sonic.net
Ronald 'More-More' Moshki
What Mary said, in fact:
"Moth**f***er--I can feel the kid's huge gourd."
Wide Eyed in Wonder
So, you are not only admitting that Scripture gives proof of life in
the womb, but, you also admit our tradition holds this truth, as well
(in our cultural mythos)?
Ken Clifton
christiansuperhero.com
IAAH
You only wish. I'm pointing out that your magic book is
no more authoritative or correct than any other work of
fiction - because it IS largely fiction.
I can see why you'd feel compelled to entirely and
deliberately mis-state what I wrote, however.
>
> Ken Clifton
> christiansuperhero.com
>
Wide Eyed in Wonder
What mis-statement? You said that other mythos (culture) had stories
of life in the womb, also. Further, you must discredit Scripture to
make your case.
Ken Clifton
christiansuperhero.com
IAAH
No, actually. Scripture must prove itself to be true to
make its case. Not the other way around.
Wide Eyed in Wonder
Are you really that dense? You can't be. We are TALKING about
Scripture, here. Go up and read the subject line. You are saying
that Scripture must prove itself true to be relevant to a discussion
of Scripture?
Ken Clifton
christiansuperhero.com
IAAH
I'm saying that if you want to say your scripture is
true, you get to prove it. Otherwise, it's fiction.
Cary Kittrell
So you are saying that your original point had nothing to do with
the present debate, today, regarding when a fetus becomes a
human being? That you started all this merely to discuss
some fine point of theology, with no relevance to the current
political dispute?
-- cary
Bob LeChevalier
>> > What mis-statement? You said that other mythos (culture) had stories
>> > of life in the womb, also. Further, you must discredit Scripture to
>> > make your case.
>>
>> No, actually. Scripture must prove itself to be true to
>> make its case. Not the other way around.
>
>Are you really that dense? You can't be. We are TALKING about
>Scripture, here. Go up and read the subject line. You are saying
>that Scripture must prove itself true to be relevant to a discussion
>of Scripture?
The discussion is of the nature of life in the womb, and Scripture has
no relevance to that topic unless it is proven true. It cannot be
proven true, so therefore it is irrelevant.
lojbab
Wide Eyed in Wonder
I guess you are that dense. The subject line of this post is about
the Biblical character of Mary and a quote from that text. I guess
that you'd think a literary discussion of Hamlet or King Arthur or a
The Da Vinci code must first start with a detailed proof that the text
is accurate and true. Of course, I doubt you hesitated likewise to
challenge Dan Brown before you bought into his book's fiction.
Let's say we were having a discussion of The Da Vinci code and I
quoted from the book to talk about a theme it stated. Would you say
that before we talk about the book we must establish it is true?
Ken Clifton
christiansuperhero.com
IAAH
You aren't discussing the theme of scripture - you're
claiming some truth to it. So, prove it.
End of discussion. You have no proof of your claims.
>
> Ken Clifton
> christiansuperhero.com
>
Spartakus
> I guess you are that dense. The subject line of this post is about
> the Biblical character of Mary and a quote from that text. I guess
> that you'd think a literary discussion of Hamlet or King Arthur or
> a The Da Vinci code must first start with a detailed proof that the
> text is accurate and true. Of course, I doubt you hesitated likewise
> to challenge Dan Brown before you bought into his book's fiction.
>
> Let's say we were having a discussion of The Da Vinci code and I
> quoted from the book to talk about a theme it stated. Would you
> say that before we talk about the book we must establish it is
> true?
Waitaminute, just a few days ago, you were arguing that Luke was describing
what he had learned first-hand from Mary herself. Now you are saying that
she's merely a "Biblical character" in the same way that Robert Langdon was
a "Da Vinci Code character"?
Is Liberty University aware of your apostacy and hypocrisy? Is your pastor?
Wide Eyed in Wonder
Thus, my point is proven. You must discredit Scripture in order to
justify yourself. Scripture teaches life in the womb.
Ken Clifton
christiansuperhero.com
Ray Fischer
>justify yourself.
You must lie about scripture in order to justify your agenda.
--
Ray Fischer
rfis...@sonic.net
Wide Eyed in Wonder
Quoting Scripture is lying about Scripture? Luke says that Mary was
"mother" of the Lord, Jesus, while pregnant. Do you reject that
Scripture or not?
Ken Clifton
christiansuperhero.com
Ray Fischer
Not what I wrote.
> Luke says that Mary was
>"mother" of the Lord, Jesus, while pregnant.
The Bible says that we are created in the depths of the Earth.
Jesus says that you are not to prevent women from getting abortions.
--
Ray Fischer
rfis...@sonic.net
Bob LeChevalier
Claiming incorrectly to know what the scripture means is lying about
Scripture.
> Luke says that Mary was "mother" of the Lord, Jesus, while pregnant.
Luke was never pregnant, so he never said that while pregnant. When
Luke wrote, Mary was mother of the Lord Jesus and probably already
dead, but certainly not pregnant.
>Do you reject that Scripture or not?
Since he apparently believes that the Bible is a fairy tale, the
question is meaningless. People who don't believe that the Scriptures
have authority reject the ***authority*** of Scripture, regardless of
what verse is being considered.
And nothing you post is going to change that. Indeed, the nonsense
that you post makes it more likely that readers will NEVER be open to
the Scriptures, which is why you serve Satan rather than God by
posting.
lojbab
Pinch
> Scripture...
Something you blatantly ignore.