(December 18, 2013 at 4:35 pm)Drich Wrote: How does one goto seminary and not know that the Virgin birth of Christ in of it self is not proof of anything?
First off, it should be in and of itself. But anyway:
in and of itself
considering it alone. The idea in and of itself is not bad, but the side issues introduce many difficulties. Her action, in and of itself, caused us no problem.
http://idioms.thefreedictionary.com/in+and+of+itself
Therefore, you statement meant 'the (alleged) virgin birth of christ, considered alone, is not proof of anything.'
You then state:
(December 18, 2013 at 10:37 am)Drich Wrote: the virgin birth of Christ was a sign of Christ's deity
Hum? whilst you did not allege proof per se, this is certainly not in the same spirit as your first outburst.
You, sir, are acting with a remarkable lack of integrity.