Virgin Mary, Ark of the Covenant

[Bucky Ball]

*As if* you can prove ONE thing about your deity. LOL. You of all people should not be talking about "arguing what you can't prove".

1. Asserting something about anything with no reference is crap, and YOU have provided NOT ONE external historical reference for anything you have claimed. What they "believed" it totally irrelevant.

2. The early "Church Fathers" were liars, and they admitted it.
Admitted, purposeful deception in the early Christian Church by "Church Fathers"
http://www.thethinkingatheist.com/forum/...rly-church

The virgin birth of Jesus is the belief that Jesus was conceived in the womb of his mother Mary by the Holy Spirit and born while Mary was yet a virgin.[1] The New Testament references are Matthew 1:18-25 and Luke 1:26-38.

The virgin birth was universally accepted in the Christian church by the 2nd century, was enshrined in the Apostles’ Creed, and, except for several minor sects, was not seriously challenged until the 18th century, and remains a basic article of belief in the Roman Catholic, Orthodox, and most Protestant churches. Muslims also accept the virgin birth of Jesus.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virgin_birth_of_Jesus


THat is right I cannot prove the Virginal birth. I already told you that.

NOw which of the Church Fathers said the VIrgin Birth was a mistranslation and which significant communion of Christians or Church believed the Virgin Birth to be a mistranslation?

THe weak claim that because the Pauline letters do not mention the Virgin birth is proof that the Gospel of Luke is Bullshit...Is Bullshit!

What people believe or not about the virgin birth, and when they cooked up the notion, (virgin-born deities were quite the fad there for a while), is totally IRRELEVANT. By your logic the fact that most people once believed the world was flat means it must BE flat. Maybe you should consider actually taking a CLASS on the Babble. One of the FIRST things main-line schools teach, (to FRESHMEN Bible students), (including Catholic ones), is that this IS a mistranslation. It also doesn't matter which Church Father said this was a mistranslation. If they admitted they LIED in general, then NOTHING they said is reliable. They were ALL deluded liars. Maybe along with a Babble class you might consider a LOGIC class. The Gospel of Luke IS bullshit. There are irreconcilable factual ERRORS in it. It was based on the Q document. I am willing to bet you never have even HEARD of "Q". You haven't, have you ?

Why is it rank beginner non-scholars, actually THINK they can go spout their shit on the internet, and that it has ANY credibility ?