Virgin Mary

alexdocherty · Post by **alexdocherty** » Sun May 04, 2008 3:05 pm

If the story of virgin Mary baring God's child is true: is it really ethical that God gave her a baby, without her consent?
Just wanted to see some people's thoughts on this...

Evales · Post by **Evales** » Sat May 10, 2008 5:02 am

alexdocherty wrote:If the story of virgin Mary baring God's child is true: is it really ethical that God gave her a baby, without her consent?
Just wanted to see some people's thoughts on this...

Divine Rape. lol
Don't shoot me.

But seriously we think because she didn't mind having it that gave her a reason to keep it.

The only thing I can say is that God probably knew her reaction and Josephs. Something tells me that back then a man would have been likely to beat his wife to death or until she aborts if he thought she was pregnant with another mans child.

alexdocherty · Post by **alexdocherty** » Sat May 10, 2008 1:14 pm

Divine Rape. lol

Haha. When you think about it though, it is actually rape!

Beta · Post by **Beta** » Sun Jun 01, 2008 3:05 pm

I think you forget the conversation that took place between Mary and the Angel and her subsequent agreement.
A different story from the one you are telling. Typical of some to drag God into the dirt they themselves live in.

alexdocherty · Post by **alexdocherty** » Sun Jun 01, 2008 3:51 pm

Yes, but Beta, the conversation didn't lead to her personally agreeing with it. She felt obliged to be 'God's servant' by having the baby for the DUTY.
I find it quite unethical that God could just choose anyone he wants and make them have his child regardless of the consequences for the person carrying it.

Beta · Post by **Beta** » Mon Jun 02, 2008 4:38 am

alexdocherty wrote:Yes, but Beta, the conversation didn't lead to her personally agreeing with it. She felt obliged to be 'God's servant' by having the baby for the DUTY.
I find it quite unethical that God could just choose anyone he wants and make them have his child regardless of the consequences for the person carrying it.

The facts as we read them are that she was approached and she agreed - for whatever reason is not ours to GUESS - and that is all you are doing.
it may astound you to hear that some of us have a sense of DUTY toward God out of respect. God did not just choose anyone against their will and sinful perverted man is certainly in no position to lecture God who created us. But then most of humanity wouldn't consider God to have a plan in which HE must take the lead since we can't save ourselves. This takes wisdom man is not endowed with because of his depraved mentality.

alexdocherty · Post by **alexdocherty** » Mon Jun 02, 2008 4:28 pm

Beta wrote:
alexdocherty wrote:Yes, but Beta, the conversation didn't lead to her personally agreeing with it. She felt obliged to be 'God's servant' by having the baby for the DUTY.
I find it quite unethical that God could just choose anyone he wants and make them have his child regardless of the consequences for the person carrying it.
The facts as we read them are that she was approached and she agreed - for whatever reason is not ours to GUESS - and that is all you are doing.
it may astound you to hear that some of us have a sense of DUTY toward God out of respect. God did not just choose anyone against their will and sinful perverted man is certainly in no position to lecture God who created us. But then most of humanity wouldn't consider God to have a plan in which HE must take the lead since we can't save ourselves. This takes wisdom man is not endowed with because of his depraved mentality.

I'm not guessing, I actually lifted that out of the Bible. I know many Christians have a sense of duty towards God, and I'm not questioning that. I feel you're letting your religious attitudes bias your argument.

'Sinful perverted man' - Your description of humanity is awfully generalised as it clumps all human beings together into one 'sinful' and 'perverted' category. What would motivate you to do this? Do you refer your views to the teaching of the bible and the idea of the 'original sin' and 'sodomy'? If you are then I must remind you that the Bible is hardly an accurate source of information.

Beta · Post by **Beta** » Tue Jun 03, 2008 7:24 am

alexdocherty wrote:
Beta wrote:
alexdocherty wrote:Yes, but Beta, the conversation didn't lead to her personally agreeing with it. She felt obliged to be 'God's servant' by having the baby for the DUTY.
I find it quite unethical that God could just choose anyone he wants and make them have his child regardless of the consequences for the person carrying it.
The facts as we read them are that she was approached and she agreed - for whatever reason is not ours to GUESS - and that is all you are doing.
it may astound you to hear that some of us have a sense of DUTY toward God out of respect. God did not just choose anyone against their will and sinful perverted man is certainly in no position to lecture God who created us. But then most of humanity wouldn't consider God to have a plan in which HE must take the lead since we can't save ourselves. This takes wisdom man is not endowed with because of his depraved mentality.
I'm not guessing, I actually lifted that out of the Bible. I know many Christians have a sense of duty towards God, and I'm not questioning that. I feel you're letting your religious attitudes bias your argument.

'Sinful perverted man' - Your description of humanity is awfully generalised as it clumps all human beings together into one 'sinful' and 'perverted' category. What would motivate you to do this? Do you refer your views to the teaching of the bible and the idea of the 'original sin' and 'sodomy'? If you are then I must remind you that the Bible is hardly an accurate source of information.

The Bible not an accurate source of information ?
I consider it the infallible word of God and will therefore base my understanding on it. But seeing i'm not perfect yet I may get things wrong at times but I make every effort not to rely on my own personal opinions for which there is no scriptural proof.
The Bible does not paint a rosy picture of man so much so each one of us has to repent and be converted. That says it all to me and just one scripture (among a large number) will bear it out Eph.4v22-24.
The Bible does not say every man is perverted in everything but we are all sinful one way or another and it has to be corrected in order to enter the Kingdom of God.

Goat · Post by **Goat** » Tue Jun 03, 2008 7:29 am

Beta wrote:
alexdocherty wrote:
Beta wrote:
alexdocherty wrote:Yes, but Beta, the conversation didn't lead to her personally agreeing with it. She felt obliged to be 'God's servant' by having the baby for the DUTY.
I find it quite unethical that God could just choose anyone he wants and make them have his child regardless of the consequences for the person carrying it.

The facts as we read them are that she was approached and she agreed - for whatever reason is not ours to GUESS - and that is all you are doing.
it may astound you to hear that some of us have a sense of DUTY toward God out of respect. God did not just choose anyone against their will and sinful perverted man is certainly in no position to lecture God who created us. But then most of humanity wouldn't consider God to have a plan in which HE must take the lead since we can't save ourselves. This takes wisdom man is not endowed with because of his depraved mentality.
I'm not guessing, I actually lifted that out of the Bible. I know many Christians have a sense of duty towards God, and I'm not questioning that. I feel you're letting your religious attitudes bias your argument.

'Sinful perverted man' - Your description of humanity is awfully generalised as it clumps all human beings together into one 'sinful' and 'perverted' category. What would motivate you to do this? Do you refer your views to the teaching of the bible and the idea of the 'original sin' and 'sodomy'? If you are then I must remind you that the Bible is hardly an accurate source of information.
The Bible not an accurate source of information ?
I consider it the infallible word of God and will therefore base my understanding on it. But seeing i'm not perfect yet I may get things wrong at times but I make every effort not to rely on my own personal opinions for which there is no scriptural proof.
The Bible does not paint a rosy picture of man so much so each one of us has to repent and be converted. That says it all to me and just one scripture (among a large number) will bear it out Eph.4v22-24.
The Bible does not say every man is perverted in everything but we are all sinful one way or another and it has to be corrected in order to enter the Kingdom of God.

Why do you consider it the infallible word of God? WHy are there so many contradictions? Why are there so many historical inaccuracies? Why are there so many different Christian interpretations over the same passages?

Beta · Post by **Beta** » Tue Jun 03, 2008 8:00 am

goat wrote:
Why do you consider it the infallible word of God? WHy are there so many contradictions? Why are there so many historical inaccuracies? Why are there so many different Christian interpretations over the same passages?

Because I believe it to be the sure and firm foundation it claims to be.
There are ' seeming ' contradictions but maybe man is not reading into the exact situation as was at the time.
Historical inaccuracies ? We must remember the Bible to be more of a spiritual book than falling in with what man considers important but does in fact distract from God.
Evry traditional christian interpretation is wrong since they are out of step with the word and the commandments in particular.

Debating Christianity and Religion

Virgin Mary

Virgin Mary

Re: Virgin Mary

Re: Virgin Mary

Ah

Re: Ah

Re: Ah

Re: Ah

Re: Ah

Re: Ah