(November 6, 2017 at 4:16 am)AtlasS33 Wrote:(November 6, 2017 at 2:13 am)Abaddon_ire Wrote: It isn't true in any way and you have no evidence that it is.
Mary was not a virgin. Which is more likely in your mind. An unexpected teen pregnancy (something we know happens) or the arrival of some horny spook (something we know has never happened)? And how likely is it that an unexpectedly pregnant teen would invent a lame cover story? Especially when her only other option was being stoned to death as a harlot? And then we move along to the "sacred" malarkey. I am not having that. "Sacred" is simply an excuse to avoid any and all questions because the beliefs at hand simply are not able to withstand the slightest scrutiny, and yes, I have made my position clear. To not do so would be abjectly dishonest, a position which seems to be common among believers.
So I will state again. I am interested to read your thoughts and I will not reveal a word of it without your blessing.
At worst I will take that to PM and PM alone. Perhaps you are worried about paraphrasis and hyperbole? No that ain't happening either. My word is good.
This does, however, lead me to wonder...Why is it that you are so deeply ashamed of your deity of choice? You must admit, it is a rather strange position to take, no?
Did you see her losing her virginity to a man?
The miracle God caused to her son was enough to shape history permanently. Another sex that brings a child is not enough in my opinion and the opinions of so many to make a story like that.
That child literally brought down the western Roman Empire, presented a new religion that lived for 2000 years and still, believed by Billions -not just Christians; he is holy in Islam too-. His mother was a good woman, a saint that deserves every bit of respect for dealing with her sexist society.
Just a note from my side; that woman was pure. Her son was a Prophet. He talked as a toddler, and cured the sick with his touch.
No. Did you see Mary not lose her virginity to a finger?
And that leaves you in the rather uncomfortable position of claiming that jebus is not a man at all.
Child? You have not idea what that "child actually did for thirty frakkin' years and a man who operated from the age of 30 to 33 is not a "child" that is a stupid claim. Oh and that "child" did not bring down the western Roman Empire, we still have it to this very day.
Was his mother a "good woman"? Perhaps she was, but who knows? The bible certainly doesn't. The Bible says precisely fuck all about the matter.
Was she so pure though. The brief bible description is of a typical teenage pregnancy. Colour me surprised.
Her son was a Profit, sure, but note the spelling. The bible contains no account of whatever jebus did as a toddler and who was there to see jebus heal anybody? You? No.
And before you climb up on some imaginary high horse, your bible also treats additions and subtractions from the text in severe ways. Proceed at the peril of your immortal soul. What is it like to have one of those? What is it like to actually be a slave to an imaginary being and have not thoughts of your own?
