The Virgin Birth

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
41

[quote]smh23 wrote:

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]smh23 wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]killerDIRK wrote:
People continuing to believe in Fairy Tales…blows me away.

Even IF the virgin birth is real it still means that Mary was RAPED and by definition Jesus is a

BASTARD child since Mary and “god” (who gave birth to “himself”) where not married…religion needs

to die ![/quote]

You believe in fairy tales too.

Yours are just new and exciting fairy tales and are not recognized as such by you or others.

Since you are a child of the French Revolution I could even tell you what they are.

Anyhow, what is demonstrated here is the tendency of the post Enlightenment era to dismiss centuries of accumulated wisdom because some aspects of it are rather implausible. [/quote]

One can be grateful for centuries of religious wisdom–by this I mean certain moral teachings that have been indispensable to the development of sophisticated and neighborly human interaction–having bled into our collective consciousness without swallowing the miracles and the supernatural. There is no “wisdom” in the idea of a virgin having given birth, or of a snake speaking, or of a man living inside of gigantic fish.[/quote]

Good post, but seems to me there is no wisdom in, nor is it a productive use of time, to go out of your way to try and “destroy” the beliefs of others. Particularly if those beliefs don’t harm you or your family.

And for the record, and grandchildren I get from my daughter will be from Virgin Birth. Of this fact I believe.[/quote]

hahaha, keep tellin yourself that my friend/

And I do agree re: those atheist crusaders who go to great lengths to belittle people’s beliefs. I’ve been guilty of it before (even though I’m not an atheist) and its a pretty ridiculous thing to do.

When the topic comes up, I enjoy the arguments. But I long ago realized what an asshole you look like when you mock people’s personal beliefs.[/quote]

ha, it is funny, because I learned I was an asshole for doing it as well.

And yes, she will die a virgin.

42

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:

[quote]hungry4more wrote:Me, I just think it’s funny when someone (even HH) [pretends to] takes issue with something as trivial as the virgin birth. Wouldn’t it make more sense to discuss God creating the universe out of nothing, if we wanna discuss mind-boggling stuff? If a supernatural being can through thought/word create a universe, what’s the big deal about making a puny human preggo? Srsly. [/quote]Ya really beat me to this and that was the exact example I had in mind. And actually this IS a nutshell representation of the very epistemology I’m always harping on about. Once you have an utterly non contingent almighty and all powerful God? One whose signature is strobing from every particle of reality I might add. The rest takes care of itself.
From the commanding of light and matter to exist from nothing to 2+2 equaling 4 and anything and everything in between. Like a virgin birth. I do not merely believe in this God’s existence with more certainty than I believe in yours, but I know Him more intimately than I know myself. If He says "I have conceived my eternal Son in the womb of virgin woman so that He could be born a divine man for the purpose of reconciling you to myself? My response is, “THANK YOOOOO my blessed holy Father”. The question of how is arrogant unbelief. I don’t care how. I am just filled with grateful adoration that He did.
[/quote]

Can always read some Neil Turok/ Stephen Hawkings…‘Endless Universe beyond the big bang’ and all that.

Perhaps something has always existed. Haven’t read it yet so I cannot make any in depth comments, have just heard him explain some of his broader ideas.

43

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]smh23 wrote:

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]smh23 wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]killerDIRK wrote:
People continuing to believe in Fairy Tales…blows me away.

Even IF the virgin birth is real it still means that Mary was RAPED and by definition Jesus is a

BASTARD child since Mary and “god” (who gave birth to “himself”) where not married…religion needs

to die ![/quote]

You believe in fairy tales too.

Yours are just new and exciting fairy tales and are not recognized as such by you or others.

Since you are a child of the French Revolution I could even tell you what they are.

Anyhow, what is demonstrated here is the tendency of the post Enlightenment era to dismiss centuries of accumulated wisdom because some aspects of it are rather implausible. [/quote]

One can be grateful for centuries of religious wisdom–by this I mean certain moral teachings that have been indispensable to the development of sophisticated and neighborly human interaction–having bled into our collective consciousness without swallowing the miracles and the supernatural. There is no “wisdom” in the idea of a virgin having given birth, or of a snake speaking, or of a man living inside of gigantic fish.[/quote]

Good post, but seems to me there is no wisdom in, nor is it a productive use of time, to go out of your way to try and “destroy” the beliefs of others. Particularly if those beliefs don’t harm you or your family.

And for the record, and grandchildren I get from my daughter will be from Virgin Birth. Of this fact I believe.[/quote]

hahaha, keep tellin yourself that my friend/

And I do agree re: those atheist crusaders who go to great lengths to belittle people’s beliefs. I’ve been guilty of it before (even though I’m not an atheist) and its a pretty ridiculous thing to do.

When the topic comes up, I enjoy the arguments. But I long ago realized what an asshole you look like when you mock people’s personal beliefs.[/quote]

And that’s why I like you two… It’s possible to have reasoned discussions. Pettiness does nothing for a cause.[/quote]

Ditto, Pat. You and I have more in common than either of us has with the meaner proponents of our own argument.

44

[quote]Neuromancer wrote:

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:

[quote]hungry4more wrote:Me, I just think it’s funny when someone (even HH) [pretends to] takes issue with something as trivial as the virgin birth. Wouldn’t it make more sense to discuss God creating the universe out of nothing, if we wanna discuss mind-boggling stuff? If a supernatural being can through thought/word create a universe, what’s the big deal about making a puny human preggo? Srsly. [/quote]Ya really beat me to this and that was the exact example I had in mind. And actually this IS a nutshell representation of the very epistemology I’m always harping on about. Once you have an utterly non contingent almighty and all powerful God? One whose signature is strobing from every particle of reality I might add. The rest takes care of itself.
From the commanding of light and matter to exist from nothing to 2+2 equaling 4 and anything and everything in between. Like a virgin birth. I do not merely believe in this God’s existence with more certainty than I believe in yours, but I know Him more intimately than I know myself. If He says "I have conceived my eternal Son in the womb of virgin woman so that He could be born a divine man for the purpose of reconciling you to myself? My response is, “THANK YOOOOO my blessed holy Father”. The question of how is arrogant unbelief. I don’t care how. I am just filled with grateful adoration that He did.
[/quote]

Can always read some Neil Turok/ Stephen Hawkings…‘Endless Universe beyond the big bang’ and all that.

Perhaps something has always existed. Haven’t read it yet so I cannot make any in depth comments, have just heard him explain some of his broader ideas.
[/quote]

I find the concept of an infinite regress (a causal chain leading back into the past without end) exactly as difficult to comprehend/support as the concept of a creator.

I’m not saying “that’s definitely not what happened.” I just think that for too many atheists ignore the fact that the implications of their own beliefs are as incompatible with logic as are those of the theists.

45

[quote]smh23 wrote:

[quote]Neuromancer wrote:

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:

[quote]hungry4more wrote:Me, I just think it’s funny when someone (even HH) [pretends to] takes issue with something as trivial as the virgin birth. Wouldn’t it make more sense to discuss God creating the universe out of nothing, if we wanna discuss mind-boggling stuff? If a supernatural being can through thought/word create a universe, what’s the big deal about making a puny human preggo? Srsly. [/quote]Ya really beat me to this and that was the exact example I had in mind. And actually this IS a nutshell representation of the very epistemology I’m always harping on about. Once you have an utterly non contingent almighty and all powerful God? One whose signature is strobing from every particle of reality I might add. The rest takes care of itself.
From the commanding of light and matter to exist from nothing to 2+2 equaling 4 and anything and everything in between. Like a virgin birth. I do not merely believe in this God’s existence with more certainty than I believe in yours, but I know Him more intimately than I know myself. If He says "I have conceived my eternal Son in the womb of virgin woman so that He could be born a divine man for the purpose of reconciling you to myself? My response is, “THANK YOOOOO my blessed holy Father”. The question of how is arrogant unbelief. I don’t care how. I am just filled with grateful adoration that He did.
[/quote]

Can always read some Neil Turok/ Stephen Hawkings…‘Endless Universe beyond the big bang’ and all that.

Perhaps something has always existed. Haven’t read it yet so I cannot make any in depth comments, have just heard him explain some of his broader ideas.
[/quote]

I find the concept of an infinite regress (a causal chain leading back into the past without end) exactly as difficult to comprehend/support as the concept of a creator.

I’m not saying “that’s definitely not what happened.” I just think that for too many atheists ignore the fact that the implications of their own beliefs are as incompatible with logic as are those of the theists.[/quote]

I agree with you. All of these ideas are on the faaaar side of comprehension, and all or none may be right. And I also agree on the atheistic/theistic logical incompatibilities. At the end, we’re never gonna know, and we all just take our best shot at comprehending wtf is going on.

46

[quote]Headhunter wrote:

[quote]killerDIRK wrote:
People continuing to believe in Fairy Tales…blows me away.

Even IF the virgin birth is real it still means that Mary was RAPED and by definition Jesus is a

BASTARD child since Mary and “god” (who gave birth to “himself”) where not married…religion needs

to die ![/quote]

Logic and rationality…how unique!! :)[/quote]

By unique you mean preposterous?

48

[quote]Headhunter wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]killerDIRK wrote:
People continuing to believe in Fairy Tales…blows me away.

Even IF the virgin birth is real it still means that Mary was RAPED and by definition Jesus is a

BASTARD child since Mary and “god” (who gave birth to “himself”) where not married…religion needs

to die ![/quote]

You believe in fairy tales too.

Yours are just new and exciting fairy tales and are not recognized as such by you or others.

Since you are a child of the French Revolution I could even tell you what they are.

Anyhow, what is demonstrated here is the tendency of the post Enlightenment era to dismiss centuries of accumulated wisdom because some aspects of it are rather implausible. [/quote]

When the probability of this stuff equates to Russell’s teapot in orbit, time to dump the stuff.
[/quote]

All of it?

Or just that specific part?

Because if you dump all of it you might just end up with pseudo rational quackery to fill the void in your soul.

49

[quote]smh23 wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]killerDIRK wrote:
People continuing to believe in Fairy Tales…blows me away.

Even IF the virgin birth is real it still means that Mary was RAPED and by definition Jesus is a

BASTARD child since Mary and “god” (who gave birth to “himself”) where not married…religion needs

to die ![/quote]

You believe in fairy tales too.

Yours are just new and exciting fairy tales and are not recognized as such by you or others.

Since you are a child of the French Revolution I could even tell you what they are.

Anyhow, what is demonstrated here is the tendency of the post Enlightenment era to dismiss centuries of accumulated wisdom because some aspects of it are rather implausible. [/quote]

One can be grateful for centuries of religious wisdom–by this I mean certain moral teachings that have been indispensable to the development of sophisticated and neighborly human interaction–having bled into our collective consciousness without swallowing the miracles and the supernatural. There is no “wisdom” in the idea of a virgin having given birth, or of a snake speaking, or of a man living inside of gigantic fish.[/quote]

A good preacher can give it meaning, but that is not what I meant.

Yes one COULD be grateful, but we are not.

We have ditched the idea of man as a fallen creature, we have ditched traditions, we have ditched the part of theology that basically deals with the nature of sin and therefore the nature of man, we have ditched the belief that there are things beyond what rationality can hope to grasp we have ditched A LOT.

What we have now is the grand three base assumptions of the Jacobins:

Eschatological statism, the infinite malleability of human nature and hyper-rationalism.

All of these are wrong and incredibly dangerous and at least the first and the third quasi religious.

50

[quote]orion wrote:
we have ditched the belief that there are things beyond what rationality can hope to grasp[/quote]

The smart ones haven’t ditched this.

52

[quote]smh23 wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:
we have ditched the belief that there are things beyond what rationality can hope to grasp[/quote]

The smart ones haven’t ditched this.[/quote]

Most people are not smart

53

[quote]smh23 wrote:<<< I find the concept of an infinite regress (a causal chain leading back into the past without end) exactly as difficult to comprehend/support as the concept of a creator. >>>[/quote]The one thing you will NEVER find is that you are a creature of the God of the bible, morally accountable to Him and utterly unable to settle that account yourself. ANY option, but that will be embraced first. At least if I’m myself to take the bible seriously.[quote]smh23 wrote:<<< too many atheists ignore the fact that the implications of their own beliefs are as incompatible with logic as are those of the theists.[/quote]I’ll tip my hat to ya for this one. That’s not the way I would phrase it, but that IS the case. This unthinking and arrogant assertion by unbelievers that they’re somehow THE logical ones is truly comical. EVERYBODY believes EVERYTHING they do by faith. Everybody. Everything. I’ll say yet again. It’s only a matter of what in.

To humbly quote myself again to save some typing:[quote]2+2 does not equal 4 without God because two, plus, equals and four all have no meaning without Him. The statement I just made has no meaning without Him. Every upcoming protestation to the contrary has no meaning without Him. As my man Van Til was fond of saying. “God is Himself the emplacement upon which men mount the very weapons they attempt to use to destroy Him”. They can’t help it.

Atheists jump and down, stamp their feet with red face glowing while they demand there be no circular reasoning. That is humorous at best. When forced to face the foundation of their alleged beliefs, every time it comes down to the laws of logic. Laws which are invisible, immaterial, absolute and universal. Sound familiar? When I demand proof of the validity of the laws of logic they are trapped either re-appealing to those same laws which is circular or hypothetically looking somewhere else which destroys their authority.

Of course I also engage in circular reasoning and make no pretense otherwise because ALL finite reason is by definition and in the nature of the case eventually circular. It never reaches the termination point of ultimate resolution because it’s like finite see? The dead logic of unbelievers circles around THEM and hence never ultimately explains anything whatsoever. Mine circles around an infinite intellect and ultimately explains everything. They by utterly preeminent unconditional faith in themselves loudly proclaim what they fallaciously perceive as the brilliance of their own unavoidably content-less existence. I by utterly preeminent unconditional faith in the triune God of Christianity loudly proclaim HIS brilliance and rest assured that He is the explanation for everything.

It’s not that unbelievers do not advance true knowledge and hence contribute much good to the world. Of course they do, but they do it in spite of and not because of their own foundational beliefs. It’s only because my foundational beliefs are true that anything they do bears fruit. They hate that. They hate God. They are His enemies. Same as I was. That’s why Paul told us in Romans 1 that they “suppress” or as the Greek has it, they “hold under” the truth in their unrighteousness. Picture a beach ball in the water. They keep holding it down, while it keeps popping up. That’s how they attempt to hide from their true selves and the God who created them. Paul says they are without excuse. God has reveled Himself unavoidably everywhere and especially IN themselves as created in His very image, fractured though it is in sin.

THAT is the discussion that has to happen or any quibbling about this or that particular proof or evidence has no genuine framework to even legitimately take place.[/quote] [quote]
orion wrote:<<< Most people are not smart[/quote]I must disagree. Most people are intellectually lazy and undisciplined and hence very sloppy. Even the VERY VERY smart ones are utterly clueless regarding the foundations of their own thought and are not too often interested in finding that out out.

54

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:

[quote]smh23 wrote:<<< I find the concept of an infinite regress (a causal chain leading back into the past without end) exactly as difficult to comprehend/support as the concept of a creator. >>>[/quote]The one thing you will NEVER find is that you are a creature of the God of the bible, morally accountable to Him and utterly unable to settle that account yourself. ANY option, but that will be embraced first. At least if I’m myself to take the bible seriously.
[/quote]

I’m not exactly sure what you’re saying here.

55

[quote]smh23 wrote:

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:

[quote]smh23 wrote:<<< I find the concept of an infinite regress (a causal chain leading back into the past without end) exactly as difficult to comprehend/support as the concept of a creator. >>>[/quote]The one thing you will NEVER find is that you are a creature of the God of the bible, morally accountable to Him and utterly unable to settle that account yourself. ANY option, but that will be embraced first. At least if I’m myself to take the bible seriously.
[/quote]

I’m not exactly sure what you’re saying here.[/quote]Read this: Romans 3 ESV 9th - 19th verses. This most assuredly applies to me too btw. Have legs now.

56

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
Have legs now.
[/quote]

Me too actually.

I’ll read the verses.

57

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]Headhunter wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]killerDIRK wrote:
People continuing to believe in Fairy Tales…blows me away.

Even IF the virgin birth is real it still means that Mary was RAPED and by definition Jesus is a

BASTARD child since Mary and “god” (who gave birth to “himself”) where not married…religion needs

to die ![/quote]

You believe in fairy tales too.

Yours are just new and exciting fairy tales and are not recognized as such by you or others.

Since you are a child of the French Revolution I could even tell you what they are.

Anyhow, what is demonstrated here is the tendency of the post Enlightenment era to dismiss centuries of accumulated wisdom because some aspects of it are rather implausible. [/quote]

When the probability of this stuff equates to Russell’s teapot in orbit, time to dump the stuff.
[/quote]

All of it?

Or just that specific part?

Because if you dump all of it you might just end up with pseudo rational quackery to fill the void in your soul.[/quote]

Trib, you’re getting to this Orion dude. Invite him to the 313 to talk in tongues with all your mates.

Trouble with you blokes is that you don’t go in for probabilities. Why does religion have to be an either-or?

Your religions are probably less than 1% probable of being meaningful. They’re not worth the odds.

Seriously though…you guys doubt most everything but if a book from 1700 years ago says that a virgin will give birth…“Well, YEAH, let me worship that!!!”

To borrow from Pat: LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL x 10^billion

59

[quote]Headhunter wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]Headhunter wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]killerDIRK wrote:
People continuing to believe in Fairy Tales…blows me away.

Even IF the virgin birth is real it still means that Mary was RAPED and by definition Jesus is a

BASTARD child since Mary and “god” (who gave birth to “himself”) where not married…religion needs

to die ![/quote]

You believe in fairy tales too.

Yours are just new and exciting fairy tales and are not recognized as such by you or others.

Since you are a child of the French Revolution I could even tell you what they are.

Anyhow, what is demonstrated here is the tendency of the post Enlightenment era to dismiss centuries of accumulated wisdom because some aspects of it are rather implausible. [/quote]

When the probability of this stuff equates to Russell’s teapot in orbit, time to dump the stuff.
[/quote]

All of it?

Or just that specific part?

Because if you dump all of it you might just end up with pseudo rational quackery to fill the void in your soul.[/quote]

Trib, you’re getting to this Orion dude. Invite him to the 313 to talk in tongues with all your mates.

Trouble with you blokes is that you don’t go in for probabilities. Why does religion have to be an either-or?

Your religions are probably less than 1% probable of being meaningful. They’re not worth the odds.

Seriously though…you guys doubt most everything but if a book from 1700 years ago says that a virgin will give birth…“Well, YEAH, let me worship that!!!”

To borrow from Pat: LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL x 10^billion

[/quote]

So, if you have removed the highly implausible, roughly 99% of Catholic thought still stands.

If we apply the same standard to you, how much would be left?

60

[quote]Headhunter wrote:<<< Your religions are probably less than 1% probable >>>[/quote]And yours is 100% impossible. In fact you are not capable of even advancing yours without assuming mine. The God I love and serve doesn’t probably exist. He is “the alone foundation of all being, of whom, through whom, and to whom, are all things; and hath most sovereign dominion over them, to do by them, for them, or upon them, whatsoever himself pleaseth. In his sight all things are open and manifest; his knowledge is infinite, infallible, and independent upon the creature; so as nothing is to him contingent or uncertain. He is most holy in all his counsels, in all his works, and in all his commands. To him is due from angels and men, and every other creature, whatsoever worship, service, or obedience he is pleased to require of them.”

Every man is His servant HeadHunter. Some joyously and willingly and some rebelliously yet unavoidably. Every word you type is a living testimony to His absolute Lordship over your life. It cannot be otherwise. I keep praying that He will subdue your stiff-necked heart and make you my brother so you can serve Him by choice instead of necessity.