Deity/Human Interaction = Special Babies
SJAB1958
manifestation of God, the Holy Spirit joining with Mary to producing
Jesus (God made flesh).
Yet those same Christians dismiss as mere mythology any account of a
god joining with a woman and children being born of such unions.
Can anyone explain this apparently contradictory thinking, or should I
chalk it up to Orwellian DoubleThink?
Radix2
<snip>
> Can anyone explain this apparently contradictory thinking, or should I
> chalk it up to Orwellian DoubleThink?
"God works in mysterious ways"?
Oh - and impregnates young women without their prior consent...
Perplexed in Peoria
"SJAB1958" <bal...@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:1177130935.4...@y5g2000hsa.googlegroups.com...
What is to explain? Those other gods are myth. Yahweh is real. No
contradiction.
HTH.
JQ
wrote:
> "SJAB1958" <balf...@hotmail.com> wrote in messagenews:1177130935.4...@y5g2000hsa.googlegroups.com...
How figure? I mean, what evidence suggests that your god is more real
than all the other gods?
Perplexed in Peoria
"JQ" <jac...@writeme.com> wrote in message news:1177134104.8...@l77g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
You are changing the question from whether there is a contradiction in
Christian belief to whether there is evidence. Personally, I don't know
of any evidence, hence I am not a Christian. But that doesn't mean that
I think Christianity is self-contradictory.
SJAB1958 seems to be suggesting that since Christians are wrong about
one thing, it would only be consistent for them to be wrong about everything.
snex
wrote:
> "JQ" <jac...@writeme.com> wrote in messagenews:1177134104.8...@l77g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
actually hes suggesting that they are hypocrites because they rightly
scoff at the silly tales of other religions, but pretend the tales of
their own arent silly.
Bob Jenkins
He gave the right answer. The original poster asked why Christians
were happy with it (Christians usually believe that Yahweh is real and
the other gods are all myth).
SJAB1958
wrote:
> "JQ" <jac...@writeme.com> wrote in messagenews:1177134104.8...@l77g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
Did I say anything about Christains being wrong about anything? No, I
didnt.
I am questioning why they believe the impregnation of Mary by their
God is a true historical event, but they reject the idea that other
accounts exist of non-Christian gods doing exactly the same thing with
other mortal women.
For if one account can be considered true without any solid evidence
to support it, you should consider all such accounts true.
On the other hand if all the other accounts are mere stories because
there is no solid evidence for them, the the Biblical account should
also be considered a mere story.
> - Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Perplexed in Peoria
"SJAB1958" <bal...@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:1177138993....@n59g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
Isn't that what I just said? Wrong about one thing means you should be
wrong about everything to be 'consistent'? Believe one silly story,
and you should believe every silly story, otherwise snex and SJAB1958
will laugh at you. My, my. What absolutely convincing rhetoric. I'm
shocked that Christianity hasn't completely disappeared under the force
of your onslaught!
snex
wrote:
> "SJAB1958" <balf...@hotmail.com> wrote in messagenews:1177138993....@n59g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
being proven inconsistent is indeed quite the onslaught. i suspect it
has produced most of the atheists at this forum.
SJAB1958
wrote:
> "SJAB1958" <balf...@hotmail.com> wrote in messagenews:1177138993....@n59g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
The only person that mentioned anything about the Christians being
wrong is you.
I merely asked for the apparent contradiction to be cleared up.
There is quite a difference between what I said and how you have
interpreted it.
alwaysaskingquestions
"Radix2" <dy...@tcg.com.au> wrote in message
news:1177131649.5...@o5g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
You obviously didn't read the bit about Gabriel appearring to her and
getting her consent.
SJAB1958
<alwaysaskingquesti...@gmail.com> wrote:
> "Radix2" <d...@tcg.com.au> wrote in message
are you suggesting that god didnt feel able to chat her up himself so
he sent an underling, and then only impregnated her via his spirit and
not in person, sounds like god has some social skills to study and
some serious therapy to go through before the second coming.
alwaysaskingquestions
I'm not making any comment on the validity of the story, just that radix
hadn't even got the story right.
Ron O
Genesis 6:1-4. The Bible has an account as plain as the recitation of
the patriarchs that there were other gods that were around and liked
human women and produced the "heroes of old, warriors of renown." The
half gods were not given names, presumably, because everyone knew who
they were. So other gods are real too by the same evidence. Biblical
scholars are pretty much in agreement about the acknowldegment of
polytheism in the Bible.
For those that don't have a Bible handy:
When mankind began to increase and to spread all over the earth and
daughters were born to them, the sons of the gods saw that the
daughters of men were beautiful; so they took for themselves such
women as they chose. But the Lord said, "My life-giving spirit shall
not remain in man for ever; he for his part is mortal flesh: he shall
live for a hundred and twenty years." In those days when the sons of
the gods had intercourse with the daughters of men and got children by
them, the Nephilim were on earth. They were the heroes of old, men of
renown.
Ron Okimoto
Radix2
<alwaysaskingquesti...@gmail.com> wrote:
> "SJAB1958" <balf...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
That is quite possible (in fact rather likely). I may well have
mistaken details of this fairy-tale. I can't remember the details of
the 3 bears either. Except that there were 3 beds and 3 temperatures
of porridge. And a thief.
But your god does work in mysterious ways yes?
alwaysaskingquestions
Misquoting stories you can't remember doesn't exactly help your arguments
Inez
<alwaysaskingquesti...@gmail.com> wrote:
> "Radix2" <d...@tcg.com.au> wrote in message
Did he? I remember him showing up and announcing to her that she was
about to get pregnant, but not asking any questions.
Inez
There were also 3 chairs of differing hardness. I don't know how you
expect anyone to take you seriously if you forget the chairs.
> But your god does work in mysterious ways yes?- Hide quoted text -
prospero33
It's really quite simple and logical. I tell you that the Christian
God is real and the others mere fabrication. If after vigorous debate
you don't come to see my point, I kill you.
mev...@gcfn.org
Maybe he just doesn't give his real name "just in case". Cuts down on
paternity suits.
Mark Evans
Libertarius
===>According to the story Mary was seduced into consenting to the
impregnation by being promised her baby would be the next king. -- L.
Libertarius
===>Those "other gods" are as "real" to others as "Yahweh" is to you.
All gods exist only in the minds of believers, where they are created
by human imagination. -- L.
Libertarius
> "JQ" <jac...@writeme.com> wrote in message news:1177134104.8...@l77g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
>
>>On Apr 21, 2:16 pm, "Perplexed in Peoria" <jimmene...@sbcglobal.net>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>"SJAB1958" <balf...@hotmail.com> wrote in messagenews:1177130935.4...@y5g2000hsa.googlegroups.com...
>>>
>>>>I find it odd that Christians can be perfectly happy with a
>>>>manifestation of God, the Holy Spirit joining with Mary to producing
>>>>Jesus (God made flesh).
>>>
>>>>Yet those same Christians dismiss as mere mythology any account of a
>>>>god joining with a woman and children being born of such unions.
>>>
>>>>Can anyone explain this apparently contradictory thinking, or should I
>>>>chalk it up to Orwellian DoubleThink?
>>>
>>>What is to explain? Those other gods are myth. Yahweh is real. No
>>>contradiction.
>>>HTH.
>>
>>
>>How figure? I mean, what evidence suggests that your god is more real
>>than all the other gods?
>
>
> You are changing the question from whether there is a contradiction in
> Christian belief to whether there is evidence. Personally, I don't know
> of any evidence, hence I am not a Christian. But that doesn't mean that
> I think Christianity is self-contradictory.
===>The history of Christianity and its constant production of newer
sects, seen by others as "heresies", is living proof of the internal
contradictions in it.
THE LAW OF SECTS:
"FOR EVERY SECTARIAN DOCTRINE THERE IS AN EQUAL AND OPPOSITE
SECTARIAN DOCTRINE -- EACH CLAIMED TO BE BASED ON THE BIBLE." -- L.
Free Lunch
Libertarius <Liber...@nothingbutthe.truth> wrote in
<qJadnZdYO_Altbfb...@comcast.com>:
Do stories never change?
Free Lunch
Libertarius <Liber...@nothingbutthe.truth> wrote in
<qJadnZZYO_C8tLfb...@comcast.com>:
You may say that, Perplexed may know that, but that isn't the
explanation that believers give.
The most important god to many Christians is the Devil, yet the are so
obsessed with their religious doctrines that they refuse to even admit
that Satan is a god.
Melchizedek
"Free Lunch" <lu...@nofreelunch.us> wrote in message news:joak23tdkuv3n9v2e...@4ax.com...
> The most important god to many Christians is the Devil, yet the are so
> obsessed with their religious doctrines that they refuse to even admit
> that Satan is a god.
>
Nope!
Satan is a created being, was an archangel, but lost his authority,
he has been defeated at the Cross, and his time is very short.
Maranatha!
Free Lunch
"Melchizedek" <in...@bibleweb.info> wrote in
<QkqWh.12516$XU4....@bignews8.bellsouth.net>:
Then why is he the focus of so many sermons. There is group of
Christians who are obsessed with him, and, if you pay attention, Satan
gets a lot more credit/blame for things that happen on earth than God
does. Satan by any objective standard is a god of Christianity.
Perplexed in Peoria
"snex" <sn...@comcast.net> wrote in message news:1177144409.1...@o5g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
Well, we are in agreement on the subtext of that! Internal inconsistencies
are a much more compelling reason to reject a belief system than mere lack
of supporting evidence.
And that is where I came in. SJAB1958 suggested there was a logical
inconsistency. I pointed out that there isn't. He then took a step
back and claimed mere inconsistent weighting of the supporting evidence.
He can, if he wishes, debate that claim with a Christian. But it is a
weaker claim, and not necessarily a devastating one.
Earle Jones
SJAB1958 <bal...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> I find it odd that Christians can be perfectly happy with a
> manifestation of God, the Holy Spirit joining with Mary to producing
> Jesus (God made flesh).
>
> Yet those same Christians dismiss as mere mythology any account of a
> god joining with a woman and children being born of such unions...
*
There was a young girl from Cape Cod,
Who thought babies came from God.
'Twas not the almighty
That lifted her nighty,
'Twas Roger the lodger, the sod!
earle
*
Earle Jones
JQ <jac...@writeme.com> wrote:
> On Apr 21, 2:16 pm, "Perplexed in Peoria" <jimmene...@sbcglobal.net>
> wrote:
> > "SJAB1958" <balf...@hotmail.com> wrote in
> > messagenews:1177130935.4...@y5g2000hsa.googlegroups.com...
> > > I find it odd that Christians can be perfectly happy with a
> > > manifestation of God, the Holy Spirit joining with Mary to producing
> > > Jesus (God made flesh).
> >
> > > Yet those same Christians dismiss as mere mythology any account of a
> > > god joining with a woman and children being born of such unions.
> >
> > > Can anyone explain this apparently contradictory thinking, or should I
> > > chalk it up to Orwellian DoubleThink?
> >
> > What is to explain? Those other gods are myth. Yahweh is real. No
> > contradiction.
> > HTH.
>
>
> How figure? I mean, what evidence suggests that your god is more real
> than all the other gods?
*
Dr. Prof. Rev. Lenny Flank's pizza delivery boy told him so.
earle
*
Earle Jones
Libertarius <Liber...@nothingbutthe.truth> wrote:
*
Right!
"Man created God in his own image."
--Marvin 3:16
earle
*
Bob D
> In article <1177130935.498364.147...@y5g2000hsa.googlegroups.com>,
>
> SJAB1958 <balf...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > I find it odd that Christians can be perfectly happy with a
> > manifestation of God, the Holy Spirit joining with Mary to producing
> > Jesus (God made flesh).
>
> > Yet those same Christians dismiss as mere mythology any account of a
> > god joining with a woman and children being born of such unions...
>
> *
> There was a young girl from Cape Cod,
> Who thought babies came from God.
> 'Twas not the almighty
> That lifted her nighty,
> 'Twas Roger the lodger, the sod!
>
> earle
> *
Nice, but doesn't scan.
Bob D
> In article <1177130935.498364.147...@y5g2000hsa.googlegroups.com>,
>
> > I find it odd that Christians can be perfectly happy with a
> > manifestation of God, the Holy Spirit joining with Mary to producing
> > Jesus (God made flesh).
>
> > Yet those same Christians dismiss as mere mythology any account of a
> > god joining with a woman and children being born of such unions...
>
> *
> There was a young girl from Cape Cod,
> Who thought babies came from God.
> 'Twas not the almighty
> That lifted her nighty,
> 'Twas Roger the lodger, the sod!
>
> earle
> *
Nice, but doens't scan.
SJAB1958
wrote:
> "snex" <s...@comcast.net> wrote in messagenews:1177144409.1...@o5g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
I am not moving my position I was attempting to clarify it after you
misinterpreted it, and now you are misinterpreting my postings again.
Why do you persist in doing this?
snex
wrote:
> "snex" <s...@comcast.net> wrote in messagenews:1177144409.1...@o5g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
but there is a logical inconsistency. the christian says that "x is
sufficient evidence to believe y" but refuses to accept z, when x also
implies z. it is inconsistent to claim that x is sufficient to believe
only a subset of the things it implies.
Libertarius
===>WOW!
That "defeated" being is still said to be in full control of this planet!
You guys are so credulous, gullible! ;-) -- L.
snex
<alwaysaskingquesti...@gmail.com> wrote:
> "Radix2" <d...@tcg.com.au> wrote in message
>
> news:1177131649.5...@o5g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
>
> >> chalk it up to Orwellian DoubleThink?
>
>
> > Oh - and impregnates young women without their prior consent...
>
> getting her consent.
complete lie. the angel never asked her consent, he merely told her
what was going to happen.
Melchizedek
"Free Lunch" <lu...@nofreelunch.us> wrote in message news:nrck235r69e6mus4k...@4ax.com...
Human beings BOTH secular and Christian are very fallable.
Mostly becaus they do not do Bible Study, and are very illiterate
of the Scruptures. Many "profess" to be Christian, but do not
believe in the tenents, which make them "non" Christians,
but the secular world will still apply the Christian label to them.
That pretty much deestroys the "mix" so to speak.
-- +Sig+
"Do not give dogs what is holy; and do not throw your
pearls before swine, lest they trample them under foot and
turn to attack you. "(Matthew 7:6 RSV)
Investigating Jesus
http://76.162.199.209/_/
"Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep's
clothing but inwardly are ravenous wolves." (Matthew 7:15 RSV)
------------------------------------------------------------
Born Again - Understanding the Gospel - Willing to Believe
For a limited time, these series are available here.
http://76.162.173.93/members/=CD-R=r-c-sproul-2nd-set/
login: guest password: guest
------------------------------------------------------------
Overview the Bible
http://76.162.173.93/bible-study/=CD-R=ltb-24/
There's no hurry?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zrmDWn6awMA
"The best way to drive out the devil, if he will
not yield to texts of Scripture, is to jeer and
flout him, for he cannot bear scorn."
Heaven & Hell
http://76.162.173.93/prophecy/=CD-R=heaven-and-hell/
The Gospel of Matthew
http://76.162.173.93/bible-study/=CD-R=matthew-rv/
A Primer on Prophecy
http://76.162.173.93//prophecy/=CD-R=prophecy-101-small-wmv
Born once, die twice. Born twice, die once.
------------------------------------------------------------
A Workman Approved By God
A Hermeneutical Study on Bible Doctrine
http://76.162.173.93/members/awabg/
login: guest password: guest
------------------------------------------------------------
Wisdom of a Lifetime - Audio MP3 Collection -
http://bibleweb.info/ftp/ftp-members-0002.html
The Last (5th) Horseman
http://bibleweb.info/ftp/ftp-members-0003.html
The Facts About Jesus, the Bible & the Afterlife
http://bibleweb.info/ftp/ftp-members-0004.html
The Way - http://john-14-6.com/john-14-6.pdf
A Tribute to THE KING
http://bibleweb.info/public-a-tribute-to-the-king.pdf
How to Spot a Counterfeit
http://76.162.173.93/guest/ar-mp3/ar-how-to-spot-a-counterfeit.mp3
But there were also false prophets among the people, just as there
will be false teachers among you. They will secretly bring in
destructive heresies, even denying the Master who bought them, and
will bring swift destruction on themselves (2 Peter 2:1).
Scriptural Christianity
http://76.162.173.93/guest/=CD-R=scriptural-christianity/
My Main Collection - http://Bibleweb.Info/
Maranatha!
Melchizedek
"Libertarius" <Liber...@nothingbutthe.truth> wrote in message news:FaOdndLM555o5Lfb...@comcast.com...
Yep! For a season, only, but his time is short.
Melchizedek
"nmp" <add...@is.invalid> wrote in message news:pan.2007.04...@is.invalid...
> Op Sat, 21 Apr 2007 13:54:12 -0700, schreef Libertarius:
>
>> Melchizedek wrote:
>
>>> Satan is a created being, was an archangel, but lost his authority,
>>> he has been defeated at the Cross, and his time is very short.
>>>
>>> Maranatha!
>>>
>> ===>WOW!
>> That "defeated" being is still said to be in full control of this
>> planet! You guys are so credulous, gullible! ;-) -- L.
>
> devil (his creation?) out of business...
He has, but YOU have to be patient and have faith, it is not your battle
it is Christs.
>
> If one were to believe any of this, one would have to conclude that
> "Yahweh" and "Satan" are equally powerful, two deities fighting back and
> forth over the control of mankind.
Nope! Satan is a "CREATED" BEING, READ THE SCRIPTURES!
eze 28
>
> But if one doesn't believe, the whole question becomes just totally
> irrelevant. There is no god, there is no devil, people have to try to
> make the best of their lives without "supernatural" guides.
>
Nope! School is needed here.
Melchizedek
"Earle Jones" <earle...@comcast.net> wrote in message news:earle.jones-C020...@netnews.comcast.net...
Are you going to follow a jerk?
Free Lunch
"Melchizedek" <in...@bibleweb.info> wrote in
<PJvWh.7659$Zm3....@bignews1.bellsouth.net>:
>
>"Free Lunch" <lu...@nofreelunch.us> wrote in message news:nrck235r69e6mus4k...@4ax.com...
>> On Sat, 21 Apr 2007 11:45:29 -0400, in talk.origins
>> "Melchizedek" <in...@bibleweb.info> wrote in
>> <QkqWh.12516$XU4....@bignews8.bellsouth.net>:
>>>
>>>"Free Lunch" <lu...@nofreelunch.us> wrote in message news:joak23tdkuv3n9v2e...@4ax.com...
>>>> The most important god to many Christians is the Devil, yet the are so
>>>> obsessed with their religious doctrines that they refuse to even admit
>>>> that Satan is a god.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Nope!
>>>
>>> Satan is a created being, was an archangel, but lost his authority,
>>> he has been defeated at the Cross, and his time is very short.
>>>
>>> Maranatha!
>>
>> Then why is he the focus of so many sermons. There is group of
>> Christians who are obsessed with him, and, if you pay attention, Satan
>> gets a lot more credit/blame for things that happen on earth than God
>> does. Satan by any objective standard is a god of Christianity.
>>
>
> Human beings BOTH secular and Christian are very fallable.
Okay.
> Mostly becaus they do not do Bible Study, and are very illiterate
> of the Scruptures. Many "profess" to be Christian, but do not
> believe in the tenents, which make them "non" Christians,
> but the secular world will still apply the Christian label to them.
> That pretty much deestroys the "mix" so to speak.
Why should anyone accept the Bible as a model? No evidence supports it.
No evidence supports the claim that a god exists. No evidence supports
the claim that the Bible has something to do with any god.
There is plenty of evidence that the Bible is unreliable as far as
history and science is concerned. Why trust it with things that cannot
be tested?
Free Lunch
"Melchizedek" <in...@bibleweb.info> wrote in
<rKvWh.7660$Zm3....@bignews1.bellsouth.net>:
>
>"Libertarius" <Liber...@nothingbutthe.truth> wrote in message news:FaOdndLM555o5Lfb...@comcast.com...
>> Melchizedek wrote:
>>
>>> "Free Lunch" <lu...@nofreelunch.us> wrote in message news:joak23tdkuv3n9v2e...@4ax.com...
>>>
>>>>The most important god to many Christians is the Devil, yet the are so
>>>>obsessed with their religious doctrines that they refuse to even admit
>>>>that Satan is a god.
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Nope!
>>>
>>> Satan is a created being, was an archangel, but lost his authority,
>>> he has been defeated at the Cross, and his time is very short.
>>>
>>> Maranatha!
>> ===>WOW!
>> That "defeated" being is still said to be in full control of this planet!
>> You guys are so credulous, gullible! ;-) -- L.
>
> Yep! For a season, only, but his time is short.
>
in the Christian pantheon.
Please fix your messed up sig.
Cubist
There was a young girl from Cape Cod,
Who believed newborn babes came from God.
Radix2
>
>
>
> > On Apr 21, 9:41 pm, "alwaysaskingquestions"> >>news:1177153804....@p77g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
>
> >> > On 21 Apr, 11:54, "alwaysaskingquestions"
> >> > <alwaysaskingquesti...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >> "Radix2" <d...@tcg.com.au> wrote in message
>
> >> >>news:1177131649.5...@o5g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
>
> >> >> > On Apr 21, 2:48 pm, SJAB1958 <balf...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >> >> > <snip>
> >> >> >> should I
> >> >> >> chalk it up to Orwellian DoubleThink?
>
>
> >> >> > Oh - and impregnates young women without their prior consent...
>
> >> >> You obviously didn't read the bit about Gabriel appearring to her and
> >> >> getting her consent.
>
> >> > he sent an underling, and then only impregnated her via his spirit and
> >> > not in person, sounds like god has some social skills to study and
> >> > some serious therapy to go through before the second coming.
>
> >> I'm not making any comment on the validity of the story, just that radix
> >> hadn't even got the story right.
>
> > That is quite possible (in fact rather likely). I may well have
> > mistaken details of this fairy-tale. I can't remember the details of
> > the 3 bears either. Except that there were 3 beds and 3 temperatures
> > of porridge. And a thief.
>
> Misquoting stories you can't remember doesn't exactly help your arguments
OK - Point taken, but you saying that a spooky dude with wings came
and told a young woman that his boss was going to come and impregnate
her? And she (although betrothed) was perfectly OK with this knowing
that it was likely to result in her being stoned to death for
infidelity (or at least divorce though disgrace)?
You see, sometimes the details are not important to a statement such
as my original throwaway line where I did not even present an argument.
Radix2
Err - bad form to reply to one's own post, but (NWT) Luke, Chapter 1
Verse 26-31:
26 "In her sixth month the angel Gabriel was sent forth from God to a
city of Gal惺損ee named Nazareth,
27 to a virgin promised in marriage to a man named Joseph of David's
house; and the name of the virgin was Mary.
28 And when he went in before her he said: "Good day, highly favored
one, Jehovah is with you."
29 But she was deeply disturbed at the saying and began to reason out
what sort of greeting this might be.
30 So the angel said to her: "Have no fear, Mary, for you have found
favor with God; 31 and, look! you will conceive in your womb and give
birth to a son, and you are to call his name Jesus.
I don't see anyone asking her permission.
alwaysaskingquestions
"Radix2" <dy...@tcg.com.au> wrote in message
news:1177202932.0...@n59g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
> 27 to a virgin promised in marriage to a man named Joseph of David's
> house; and the name of the virgin was Mary.
> 28 And when he went in before her he said: "Good day, highly favored
> one, Jehovah is with you."
> 29 But she was deeply disturbed at the saying and began to reason out
> what sort of greeting this might be.
> 30 So the angel said to her: "Have no fear, Mary, for you have found
> favor with God; 31 and, look! you will conceive in your womb and give
> birth to a son, and you are to call his name Jesus.
>
>
> I don't see anyone asking her permission.
Read on to Verse 38:
"Mary said: "Look! Jehovah's slave girl! May it take place with me according
to your declaration." At that the angel departed from her."
alwaysaskingquestions
<sigh> I'm getting fed up with your lies about lies - as I'm sure most
people are around here. </sigh>
Radix said "Oh - and impregnates young women without their prior consent."
She did give her consent, cf Luke V1:38
Vend
wrote:
> SJAB1958 seems to be suggesting that since Christians are wrong about
> one thing, it would only be consistent for them to be wrong about everything.
Ex falso quodlibet :D
Vend
> On 21 Apr, 06:56, "Perplexed in Peoria" <jimmene...@sbcglobal.net>
> wrote:
>
>
>
> > "JQ" <jac...@writeme.com> wrote in messagenews:1177134104.8...@l77g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
> > > wrote:
> > > > "SJAB1958" <balf...@hotmail.com> wrote in messagenews:1177130935.4...@y5g2000hsa.googlegroups.com...
> > > > > manifestation of God, the Holy Spirit joining with Mary to producing
> > > > > Jesus (God made flesh).
>
> > > > > Yet those same Christians dismiss as mere mythology any account of a
> > > > > god joining with a woman and children being born of such unions.
>
> > > > > chalk it up to Orwellian DoubleThink?
>
> > > > contradiction.
> > > > HTH.
>
> > > than all the other gods?
>
> > You are changing the question from whether there is a contradiction in
> > Christian belief to whether there is evidence. Personally, I don't know
> > of any evidence, hence I am not a Christian. But that doesn't mean that
> > I think Christianity is self-contradictory.
>
> > one thing, it would only be consistent for them to be wrong about everything.
>
> didnt.
>
> I am questioning why they believe the impregnation of Mary by their
> God is a true historical event, but they reject the idea that other
> accounts exist of non-Christian gods doing exactly the same thing with
> other mortal women.
>
> For if one account can be considered true without any solid evidence
> to support it, you should consider all such accounts true.
>
> On the other hand if all the other accounts are mere stories because
> there is no solid evidence for them, the the Biblical account should
> also be considered a mere story.
I think that this is equivalent to asking why Greeks belived that Zeus
and not Thor was the god of thunder.
Vend
> So people claim, yet Satan is still asserted to be the most active god
> in the Christian pantheon.
It depends on the particular form of Christianity.
Catholics, for instance, are relatively Satan-free in their sermons,
while some of them occasionaly engage in exorcism rituals (whose
acceptance is "controversial" in mainstream Catholicism).
Libertarius
> "Libertarius" <Liber...@nothingbutthe.truth> wrote in message news:FaOdndLM555o5Lfb...@comcast.com...
>
>>Melchizedek wrote:
>>
>>
>>>"Free Lunch" <lu...@nofreelunch.us> wrote in message news:joak23tdkuv3n9v2e...@4ax.com...
>>>
>>>
>>>>The most important god to many Christians is the Devil, yet the are so
>>>>obsessed with their religious doctrines that they refuse to even admit
>>>>that Satan is a god.
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Nope!
>>>
>>> Satan is a created being, was an archangel, but lost his authority,
>>> he has been defeated at the Cross, and his time is very short.
>>>
>>> Maranatha!
>>
>>===>WOW!
>>That "defeated" being is still said to be in full control of this planet!
>>You guys are so credulous, gullible! ;-) -- L.
>
>
> Yep! For a season, only, but his time is short.
===>Oh, yeah! Just wait a few more millennia.
By then there will be no "Satan".
Because people will abandon any belief in such nonsense. -- L.
duke
>I find it odd that Christians can be perfectly happy with a
>manifestation of God, the Holy Spirit joining with Mary to producing
>Jesus (God made flesh).
>
>Yet those same Christians dismiss as mere mythology any account of a
>god joining with a woman and children being born of such unions.
There is only one God almighty.
duke, American-American
*****
"The Mass is the most perfect form of Prayer."
Pope Paul VI
*****
snex
<alwaysaskingquesti...@gmail.com> wrote:
> "snex" <s...@comcast.net> wrote in message
she was already pregnant at that point, liar.
alwaysaskingquestions
"snex" <xe...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:1177258564.9...@n76g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
Luke V1:31 and, look! you will conceive in your womb and give
birth to a son, and you are to call his name Jesus.
Exactly what part of "you will conceive" do you not understand ?
> liar.
I'll let other people around here decide who the liar is.
I think you should take a holiday or something, you're sounding more and
more pathetic with every post you make here.
Walter Bushell
Inez <savagem...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> On Apr 21, 3:54 am, "alwaysaskingquestions"
> <alwaysaskingquesti...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > "Radix2" <d...@tcg.com.au> wrote in message
> >
> > news:1177131649.5...@o5g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
> >
> > > On Apr 21, 2:48 pm, SJAB1958 <balf...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > > <snip>
> > >> Can anyone explain this apparently contradictory thinking, or should I
> > >> chalk it up to Orwellian DoubleThink?
> >
> > > "God works in mysterious ways"?
> >
> > > Oh - and impregnates young women without their prior consent...
> >
> > You obviously didn't read the bit about Gabriel appearring to her and
> > getting her consent.
>
> Did he? I remember him showing up and announcing to her that she was
> about to get pregnant, but not asking any questions.
In those days women were property. This attitude has been the basis for
law in our culture up until very recently, like in the life of people
now living, and IIUC is still in law and ruling on the books. Rape, for
example, was a crime against the woman's owner. In any event by modern
standards the power differential between the parties was way to big for
consent to be valid.
OTOH, D-G knows what you are thinking before you do, so he would not
have given the blessing to somebody who wouldn't accept it.
Desertphile
> Op Sat, 21 Apr 2007 13:54:12 -0700, schreef Libertarius:
> > Melchizedek wrote:
> >> Satan is a created being, was an archangel, but lost his authority,
> >> he has been defeated at the Cross [sic], and his time is very short.
All gods, not just Satan, are created beings as far as everyone
and anyone knows. Modern Islamists and Christians made Satan a god
even though "satan" was a job title, not a proper noun, before
Christians created Satan as a real being by the name "Satan."
In _Job_ the word "satan" isn't a proper noun: it was a job title
for one of the gods. Since Yahweh was a tribal fertility war god,
his satan may have been a peace god or, more likely, a knowledge
and peace god--- the Yahweh god's opposite.
Christians created Satan.
> > ===>WOW!
> > That "defeated" being is still said to be in full control of this
> > planet! You guys are so credulous, gullible! ;-) -- L.
Christianity has relegated their god Satan to rulership of Earth.
Damn shame is ain't so: knowledge and tolerance would presumably
be more common among humanity.
> And the omnipotent deity does not seem to be able nor willing to take the
> devil (his creation?) out of business...
>
> If one were to believe any of this, one would have to conclude that
> "Yahweh" and "Satan" are equally powerful, two deities fighting back and
> forth over the control of mankind.
>
> But if one doesn't believe, the whole question becomes just totally
> irrelevant. There is no god, there is no devil, people have to try to
> make the best of their lives without "supernatural" guides.
--
http://desertphile.org
Desertphile's Desert Soliloquy. WARNING: view with plenty of water
"I've hired myself out as a tourist attraction." -- Spike
Walter Bushell
prospero33 <conrad...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Apr 21, 12:41 am, JQ <jac...@writeme.com> wrote:
> > On Apr 21, 2:16 pm, "Perplexed in Peoria" <jimmene...@sbcglobal.net>
> > wrote:
<snip>
> >
> > How figure? I mean, what evidence suggests that your god is more real
> > than all the other gods?
>
> It's really quite simple and logical. I tell you that the Christian
> God is real and the others mere fabrication. If after vigorous debate
> you don't come to see my point, I kill you.
That is a very effective way of spreading the faith. It worked for
Christianity, and Islam for sure. Sometime exile was offered, or
acceptance of grossly inferior status.
Desertphile
wrote:
> On 20 Apr 2007 21:48:55 -0700, SJAB1958 <bal...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> >I find it odd that Christians can be perfectly happy with a
> >manifestation of God, the Holy Spirit joining with Mary to producing
> >Jesus (God made flesh).
> >
> >Yet those same Christians dismiss as mere mythology any account of a
> >god joining with a woman and children being born of such unions.
> There is only one God [sic] almighty.
So the Bible is wrong on the subject. Thank you for your opinion
on the subject, but what evidence do you have to support that
opinion?
snex
<alwaysaskingquesti...@gmail.com> wrote:
> "snex" <x...@comcast.net> wrote in message
i understand it perfectly. it is *you* who insists that it really
means "is this ok with you mary?" im still waiting for you to show me
where she was asked for consent. your own post demonstrates that she
wasnt. the angel said she *will* conceive, meaning her consent is
irrelevent!
Desertphile
<in...@bibleweb.info> wrote:
>
> "Free Lunch" <lu...@nofreelunch.us> wrote in message news:nrck235r69e6mus4k...@4ax.com...
> > On Sat, 21 Apr 2007 11:45:29 -0400, in talk.origins
> > "Melchizedek" <in...@bibleweb.info> wrote in
> > <QkqWh.12516$XU4....@bignews8.bellsouth.net>:
> >>
> >>"Free Lunch" <lu...@nofreelunch.us> wrote in message news:joak23tdkuv3n9v2e...@4ax.com...
> >>> The most important god to many Christians is the Devil, yet the are so
> >>> obsessed with their religious doctrines that they refuse to even admit
> >>> that Satan is a god.
> >>>
> >>
> >> Nope!
> >>
> >> Satan is a created being, was an archangel, but lost his authority,
> >> he has been defeated at the Cross, and his time is very short.
> >>
> >> Maranatha!
> >
> > Then why is he the focus of so many sermons. There is group of
> > Christians who are obsessed with him, and, if you pay attention, Satan
> > gets a lot more credit/blame for things that happen on earth than God
> > does. Satan by any objective standard is a god of Christianity.
> Human beings BOTH secular and Christian are very fallable.
The secular ones being far less "fallable." (Maybe you meant
"falafel.")
Walter Bushell
Libertarius <Liber...@nothingbutthe.truth> wrote:
> Perplexed in Peoria wrote:
>
> > "SJAB1958" <bal...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> > news:1177130935.4...@y5g2000hsa.googlegroups.com...
> >
> >>I find it odd that Christians can be perfectly happy with a
> >>manifestation of God, the Holy Spirit joining with Mary to producing
> >>Jesus (God made flesh).
> >>
> >>Yet those same Christians dismiss as mere mythology any account of a
> >>god joining with a woman and children being born of such unions.
> >>
> >>Can anyone explain this apparently contradictory thinking, or should I
> >>chalk it up to Orwellian DoubleThink?
> >
> >
> > What is to explain? Those other gods are myth. Yahweh is real. No
> > contradiction.
> > HTH.
> >
> ===>Those "other gods" are as "real" to others as "Yahweh" is to you.
> All gods exist only in the minds of believers, where they are created
> by human imagination. -- L.
And that is the glory of Gods. In the best one can create a Deity with
the attributes one want to strive for and then try to embody the God.
Walter Bushell
Free Lunch <lu...@nofreelunch.us> wrote:
> On Sat, 21 Apr 2007 11:45:29 -0400, in talk.origins
> "Melchizedek" <in...@bibleweb.info> wrote in
> <QkqWh.12516$XU4....@bignews8.bellsouth.net>:
> >
> >"Free Lunch" <lu...@nofreelunch.us> wrote in message
> >news:joak23tdkuv3n9v2e...@4ax.com...
> >> The most important god to many Christians is the Devil, yet the are so
> >> obsessed with their religious doctrines that they refuse to even admit
> >> that Satan is a god.
> >>
> >
> > Nope!
> >
> > Satan is a created being, was an archangel, but lost his authority,
> > he has been defeated at the Cross, and his time is very short.
> >
> > Maranatha!
>
> Then why is he the focus of so many sermons. There is group of
> Christians who are obsessed with him, and, if you pay attention, Satan
> gets a lot more credit/blame for things that happen on earth than God
> does. Satan by any objective standard is a god of Christianity.
Anyway archeologist working in the Middle East have found evidence of
Yahuwahu's (or is it Yohowoho authorities vary) parents. He apparently
began life as Yet Another Middle Eastern Tribal Deity )YAMETD).
alwaysaskingquestions
I have insisted no such thing.
For the record, Radix said:
"Oh - and impregnates young women without their prior consent."
I said:
"You obviously didn't read the bit about Gabriel appearing to her and
getting her consent."
Which the story says he did.
Now, will YOU please stop telling lies.
> im still waiting for you to show me
> where she was asked for consent.
I didn't comment on whether or not she was *asked* for consent, I said she
*gave* her consent. Were you born this thick or did you have to work at it?
BTW - I'm still waiting for you to explain how she was already pregnant.