Gyaaargh! -- FawnDoo's Cavalcade of Whimsy

[ Show ]

Support VoyForums

[ Shrink ]

VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

[ Login ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4 ]

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: 22:00:26 11/20/04 Sat
Author: Goktimus Prime
Subject: Gyaaargh!
In reply to: FawnDoo 's message, "I would tend to agree" on 17:05:08 11/15/04 Mon

What the... last night I actually posted a rather lengthy reply, but it seems...that I didn't press the "Approve" button (it was late!).

*deep sigh* (T_T)

it was you, then could you please explain what you're trying to do?

I was *trying* to raise a semantic point. A religious semantic point, but a semantic issue nonetheless.

Okay... here's an abbreviated version of my initial reply...

* The English language defines "bastard" as a child born outside of wedlock/marriage. I'm using the formal definition of this word here, not its slang meaning.

* P2, I read up those Bible passages you mentioned (John 1:1-5, John 1:15 and Matthew 1:20) - none of these passages actually state that Mary was married to God. Matthew 1:20 does say that God assures Joseph that he is still Mary's husband... yet Jesus wasn't Joseph's biological son, hence he wasn't conceived nor born with the wedlock of Joseph and Mary.

...that's pretty much the crux of what I'm trying to say. I realise that this is a very sensitive 'can of worms,' but there's no reason why we shouldn't be able to discuss it rationally without letting our emotions to overule our logic.

Nothing typed here is intended to offend anyone on any level. I know my initial post was rather tongue-in-cheek, but no offense was intended, so I apologise if any was taken.

I hope that's cleared the air, and I'd like to see some valid/rational (and emotionally dettached) rebuttals to this issue -- if not, then FD might as well delete this entire thread.

Thank you.

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Replies:

*sigh!* -- Perceptor II, 17:41:32 11/22/04 Mon
- In Nirvana -- Goktimus Prime, 23:53:18 11/22/04 Mon