Now I have read that Great Britain is going to welcome the Pope in 2010. He is at present visiting the Czech Republic whilst in the Philippines they are being drowned, all their homes ruined. I suppose their god is too busy taking care of the pope to have time to help these poor people and their suffering.
I suppose the tax payer will be paying for his visit. Perhaps the pope would be better taking food to Africa.

Views: 124

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Yes, abstinence is a very effective way of reducing pregnancy and STDs.
It's even 100% safe - you can not be pregnant afterwards and your chances of AIDS are pretty low too.

Someone get Jesus on the horn. This guy just called Mary a cheating lying whore.
interesting assumption
No assumption was made. That sir was a satirical Logical Conclusion. The premise of your religion is predicated on a virgin birth. Without it, Jesus isn't God. Without it, the Bible tells a story predicated on a lie. You state with 100% certainty that you cannot become pregnant through abstinence. I direct you back to your own book. Only one natural option is left, she was impregnated by someone else, and certainly not Joseph, again according to your Bible. Therefore Mary was unfaithful, the descriptive terms are my own, but accurate in conjunction with your own assertions. Unless of course you'd like to propose that a second deity impregnated her.
As a Philosophy student. you know about logic.
I think you know the answer to that question about how Mary became pregnant. What you are saying is nothing new - in fact it is something that Catholics have very often been talking about. I'd recommend you read the holy bible where the angle comes to Mary and tells her she will give birth to a child - it also contains clues about how she will get pregnant. (and no - it wasn't the angle that made her pregnant either)
You are free to think and believe what ever you want. Nobody obliges you to believe in Jesus being the son of Mary. You are absolutely free in chosing what you want to believe! But your argument against Christianity is not very productive in this discussion as it has been used allover again and again and again... And many people much smarter than you and me have answered it or had discussion on it. If you are so interested in it I suggest you go ahead and study catholic theology and join a seminar I am sure they will give you answers to your questions.
He may have meant to attend a seminar on the topic rather than join a seminary.

Of course, that does not change the fact that the so-called immaculate conception is a perfectly valid topic for critical inquiry. Extraordinary claims (and the bypassing of all natural biological functions is certainly extraordinary) require extraordinary evidence, and there is no evidence that it actually occurred.

Indeed, at least one early sect of Christianity not only believed that Jesus was the son of Joseph, but that he was not even divine, but rather God's son by adoption.
And this is what happens when religionists get cornered."I think you know the answer to that question..." That was not an answer or a valid response. You have dove back into the mystical to hide and I reject that answer. I agree with your original assertion that abstinence when used works. It's tangible. I reject the practice as valid for experiencing the human condition, and maybe that's why cruelty and church go hand in hand.
Catholics may have been asking the question, but not in a critical way. In Science, and General Investigations, the valid way to come to the truth is the let the evidence lay and not arrange it an a manner that leads you to an answer.
Don't worry, I won't resort to disrespectful assertions such as angle to dismantle your arguments. I won't need to. I'm like Jesus, "Simply let your 'Yes' be 'Yes,' and your 'No,' 'No'; anything beyond this comes from the evil one." Matt 5:37
The answer to the question how Mary could give birth to Jesus as a Child requieres you to accept some preconditions, such as that there is a God who is almighty. Also, you need to understand the symbolism that comes with immaculate conception. But I doubt that we will come very far in this discussion as you have already decided not to accept those premises.
That's a circular argument, then. "You have to believe in God in order to get the answer how miracles were performed."

It is no different than saying that one must believe in Allah in order to accept that Mohamed flew to heaven on a winged horse, or that you must believe in Zeus to accept that lightning is a sign of his wrath.
It's useless, then. It proves nothing, demonstrates nothing, and is incapable of supporting any argument. Circular reasoning is the antithesis of rational, logical thought.
I don't really get the point of this discussion. If you don't believe in God then why do you ask questions about Mary and how she had Jesus?
Go back to the roots


© 2019   Created by Rebel.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service