# Part VI:  Virgin Birth



## Asath (May 2, 2012)

The deconstruction continues:

One of the concepts that is essential to the acceptance of the divinity of Jesus, within Christian theology, is the concept of the Virgin Birth.

Unfortunately, with this as with all of the other accepted dogmas, the news isn’t all that good.  I wish I could at least report that the gospel writers were scholarly fellas, and either consciously or unconsciously co-opted this whopper from earlier myths --  in which a King of Heaven impregnates (pick one): Danae, or Io, or Leda, or the Virgin Mary (etc.), resulting in heaven-destined sons (pick one): Heracles, or Castor and Pollux, or, Jesus (etc.).  Similar stories are rife also in Babylonian, Egyptian, and other myths.  In short: this was far from a new theme in the history of myths.  

But the bad news is that this scholarship doesn’t seem to be the case, and the worse news is that the gospel writers were far from scholars:  the problem seems to be one that is so silly that it seems fitting.  Matthew and Luke couldn’t read Hebrew very well.  While searching desperately for something to ‘prove’ a miraculous divinity, a passage from Isaiah offering what looked like a prophesy was taken out of context and mistranslated.  The Hebrew word for ‘Virgin’ is ‘bethulah.’  The original word used was ‘haalmah’ (or ‘alma,’ spelled more phonetically), which simply means ‘young woman.’  

In Greek, the translation reads ‘parthenos,’ meaning Virgin, when it should have been ‘neanis,’ meaning young woman.  It is no mystery that the early Christians would have eagerly embraced the word parthenos as proof positive that they had the right man, and never looked back.  The fact that hardly anyone at the time could read either Greek OR Hebrew made this myth quite a lot easier to spread, and the fact that many of the God myths with which they WERE familiar spoke of similar ‘miracles’ certainly made it easier to accept.  

Among people whose conception of the natural world and the universe around them was driven entirely by fear and ignorance rather than scientific fact, this improbability likely didn’t even cause a raised eyebrow.  Still, those pesky Hebrew scholars pointed out the mistranslation time after time, for centuries, and routinely had their heads handed to them (literally) in response, proving yet again that ‘inspiration’ trumps education and even basic language skills . . .  When a few hundred years of native speakers consistently tell you that you missed a pretty basic translation, and your response is to kill them, vilify them, and marginalize them for pointing that out – well, there isn’t much more to say.

Truth is the mortal enemy of Belief, and has always been.  

I could toss in all sorts of anecdotes here, but the truth is as it is --  there’s never been a ‘virgin’ birth (unless it is your own daughter involved, who would NEVER do such a thing . . . ), and there never will be one.  (And spare the oddities – sperm met egg, somehow – no way around it.) An invisible, amorphous, anthropomorphized ‘God’ has never impregnated a human female, despite hundreds of stories of this sort of an event, and it is purely absurd to think otherwise.

You see, at the time that this stuff was written, the simple mechanics of pregnancy (sperm cell meets egg, often accidentally) was completely unknown.  But today it IS known, and NOBODY thinks that Zeus, or Odin, or any other mythic God ever actually dropped by and impregnated a human woman, despite the number of times such a thing is mentioned in THEIR stories.  

Except for Christians, who cling stubbornly to the Virgin of their dreams and hopes.  (And just to be a pain – wouldn’t being violated by God count as the loss of one’s ‘virginity’?)


----------



## mtnwoman (May 3, 2012)

Does artificial insemination come to mind? Does that make a virgin birth possible, or not?  This is where I believe in science.  Science, don't let me down now.

http://www.medpedia.com/news_analys...hrough-Artificial-Insemination-Can-It-Be-Done


----------



## atlashunter (May 3, 2012)

mtnwoman said:


> Does artificial insemination come to mind? Does that make a virgin birth possible, or not?  This is where I believe in science.  Science, don't let me down now.
> 
> http://www.medpedia.com/news_analys...hrough-Artificial-Insemination-Can-It-Be-Done



Leaving aside that it was already pointed out that sperm and egg had to join somehow, what relevance does artificial insemination have to Jesus mother?


----------



## JB0704 (May 3, 2012)

Asath, interesting post.  I got nothing.  Hopefully some of the scholars on here will be able to debate the facts as you state them.  As for me, I don't have a clue whether or not Mathew and Luke could read Hebrew.  I don't speak it, so I can't really discuss the "proper translation."

But, I do not think that the idea is that God "violated" the woman.  I hope this thread gets some good discussion going......


----------



## mtnwoman (May 3, 2012)

atlashunter said:


> Leaving aside that it was already pointed out that sperm and egg had to join somehow, what relevance does artificial insemination have to Jesus mother?



Well if I believe in talking donkeys, and burning bushes and flying chariots, then I have no problem in believing in artificial insemination of the virgin Mary, wouldn't that be the least of the miraculous of the fore mentioned??? Sperm of God meet the mother of Jesus...kinda like that. Maybe by an angel or an alien mother ship or perhaps just like the book says....the Holy Spirit came upon her.


----------



## Michael F. Gray (May 3, 2012)

It would be more honest to just admit you are a man without FAITH. If that remains your choice till your final breath I am very sorry for that which awaits you. BUT, we all make choices.  You are correct in one sense of the word, it's difficult to grasp the ONLY begotten Son of GOD being born of a Virgin in the eyes of the lost. It's also difficult to understand how HE could love you and I so much he was willing to pay our sin debt on Calvary. BUT, I BELIEVE he did, I accept it, and HIM as my redeemer. He's real, and so is HEAVEN. Everybody isn't going to HEAVEN. You were also correct that only those washed in HIS BLOOD and Saved by FAITH have their name written in the Lambs Book of life. Anyone whose name isn't found there will spend eternity in a far differant place. Eternity is a long, long, long time. Read Proverbs 29:1, that the very verse the message centered around in July of 1976 when my name was added to the BOOK earlier mentioned. Those that seek him early, ...find HIM.


----------



## ambush80 (May 4, 2012)

Michael F. Gray said:


> It would be more honest to just admit you are a man without FAITH. If that remains your choice till your final breath I am very sorry for that which awaits you. BUT, we all make choices.  You are correct in one sense of the word, it's difficult to grasp the ONLY begotten Son of GOD being born of a Virgin in the eyes of the lost. It's also difficult to understand how HE could love you and I so much he was willing to pay our sin debt on Calvary. BUT, I BELIEVE he did, I accept it, and HIM as my redeemer. He's real, and so is HEAVEN. Everybody isn't going to HEAVEN. You were also correct that only those washed in HIS BLOOD and Saved by FAITH have their name written in the Lambs Book of life. Anyone whose name isn't found there will spend eternity in a far differant place. Eternity is a long, long, long time. Read Proverbs 29:1, that the very verse the message centered around in July of 1976 when my name was added to the BOOK earlier mentioned. Those that seek him early, ...find HIM.




Dude, that's crazy people talk.


----------



## hobbs27 (May 4, 2012)

ambush80 said:


> Dude, that's crazy people talk.



Yep...foolishness to those that don't know God.


----------



## atlashunter (May 4, 2012)

This topic reminds me of Sam Kinison. "Hey Joseph! How's "Gods son" doing?"


----------



## dexrusjak (May 4, 2012)

Michael F. Gray said:


> It would be more honest to just admit you are a man without FAITH. If that remains your choice till your final breath I am very sorry for that which awaits you. BUT, we all make choices.  You are correct in one sense of the word, it's difficult to grasp the ONLY begotten Son of GOD being born of a Virgin in the eyes of the lost. It's also difficult to understand how HE could love you and I so much he was willing to pay our sin debt on Calvary. BUT, I BELIEVE he did, I accept it, and HIM as my redeemer. He's real, and so is HEAVEN. Everybody isn't going to HEAVEN. You were also correct that only those washed in HIS BLOOD and Saved by FAITH have their name written in the Lambs Book of life. Anyone whose name isn't found there will spend eternity in a far differant place. Eternity is a long, long, long time. Read Proverbs 29:1, that the very verse the message centered around in July of 1976 when my name was added to the BOOK earlier mentioned. Those that seek him early, ...find HIM.



Why?

Faith (blind faith, that is) is not a virtue.  Faith is not something to be proud of.  Faith is for those who are ignorant.  Very little in this world do we accept on blind faith.  We believe what we believe based on what we experience, based on the EVIDENCE.  There is no evidence for belief in a virgin birth.  There are immense quantities of evidence (scientific, experiential, and otherwise) for not believing in a virgin birth.  Follow the evidence.  Believing for the sake of belief, without evidence, is unwise.


----------



## hobbs27 (May 4, 2012)

dexrusjak said:


> Why?
> 
> We believe what we believe based on what we experience, based on the EVIDENCE.



I could tell you of my experience with grace, but you wouldn't accept the evidence.

I will take salvation and ignorance of this world, over all the smarts this place has to offer. God Bless.


----------



## atlashunter (May 4, 2012)

hobbs27 said:


> I could tell you of my experience with grace, but you wouldn't accept the evidence.



You wouldn't accept someone else's testimony either would you?


----------



## dexrusjak (May 4, 2012)

hobbs27 said:


> I could tell you of my experience with grace, but you wouldn't accept the evidence.
> 
> I will take salvation and ignorance of this world, over all the smarts this place has to offer. God Bless.



Someone else's personal experience (if not physical and empirically verifiable) is not evidence.


----------



## 1gr8bldr (May 4, 2012)

Hello Asath, I agree with the incorrect translation of virgin. I also believe that Joesph was Jesus's real father. I suspect that she was a virgin when they consummated their marriage. The NT writers were a bit over zealous to try and find anything they could so as to claim a Jewish writing as Christian. No one believed anything was true unless it were from antiquity


----------



## hobbs27 (May 4, 2012)

atlashunter said:


> You wouldn't accept someone else's testimony either would you?



Oh, I love to hear them..You're really missing out if you've never gone to meeting with folks testifying what Jesus has done for them in their lives.I also love to see someone be born again and come up from being lost, to being saved. Misery to Blessed assurance, Oh God is Great!


----------



## atlashunter (May 4, 2012)

hobbs27 said:


> Oh, I love to hear them..You're really missing out if you've never gone to meeting with folks testifying what Jesus has done for them in their lives.I also love to see someone be born again and come up from being lost, to being saved. Misery to Blessed assurance, Oh God is Great!



I'm not asking if you enjoy listening to the experiences of others I'm asking if you accept their testimony of those experiences as evidence that what they are saying is true?


----------



## 1gr8bldr (May 4, 2012)

hobbs27 said:


> Oh, I love to hear them..You're really missing out if you've never gone to meeting with folks testifying what Jesus has done for them in their lives.I also love to see someone be born again and come up from being lost, to being saved. Misery to Blessed assurance, Oh God is Great!


We used to have a radio show in our area where people would call in and give testimony. Some, as expected, just wanted to be on the radio. Some made me fight back the tears, and I never cry


----------



## 1gr8bldr (May 4, 2012)

1gr8bldr said:


> Hello Asath, I agree with the incorrect translation of virgin. I also believe that Joesph was Jesus's real father. I suspect that she was a virgin when they consummated their marriage. The NT writers were a bit over zealous to try and find anything they could so as to claim a Jewish writing as Christian. No one believed anything was true unless it were from antiquity


I should clarify my position. Even though I hold this position, I consider myself Christian because I have placed my faith in him and not myself. That because I do have the hope of life after death


----------



## hobbs27 (May 4, 2012)

atlashunter said:


> I'm not asking if you enjoy listening to the experiences of others I'm asking if you accept their testimony of those experiences as evidence that what they are saying is true?



The Holy Spirit, will move from heart to heart. When a child of the King gives their testimony, there is a stirring of the spirit within other children, and there is no denying others testimony. 
 I have heard those that had no feeling, and for those I pray for myself that I haven't put something in the way of me and God. 
 The morning my middle daughter ( I have three) was saved, she stood beside me and started weeping during the first song of the service, during the second song she leaned against me crying and I asked if she was ok, she answered "No" I asked, is there something you need to do and she said, "Yes", as she pushed me aside and went to the altar at the church. She knelt down and prayed, she was down for about 2 minutes when another girl came running down to the altar crying.After another 5 minutes or so she looked up, with no tears and said, "Daddy, Jesus saved me!"   Glory be to God!  As she looked over and saw her friend at the altar she said, "I'm going to pray with Savannah, dad",   They prayed and I just stood back looking at those folks still in the benches and at the exact same time two boys...twins, jumped up and came running to the altar. One had been sitting on one side of the church with his mom and the other was sitting on the other side with his grandma. They came to the altar and little Savannah came up from praying and announced Jesus had saved her, my daughter and Savannah, saw the twin boys and went over to them and prayed with them. They weren't down for long when one came up and announced he was saved. The other got restless up there looking around and then went to his mom, and announced his burden was gone, but he wasn't saved. I think he felt his twins' burden...He did get saved about a month later though.
My daughter later told me, "Dad  while I was knelt down praying, I could see some hands off in the distance, and as I prayed they got closer and closer until I could see arms, and they kept getting closer and closer until I could feel them wrap around me, and it was at that moment I knew I was saved.
 God is great...we had no preaching that day, no altar call, no one was coerced to do something or say something, it was all in Gods hands, and those that have read this, that are truly born again, know and feel the spirit of God all in it.So to answer your question, Yes I accept others testimony, especially when the Holy Spirit reveals it.
 Oh and the second song of that service, (What a lovely name) #4 in the bluebook #180 in the red.


----------



## dexrusjak (May 4, 2012)

hobbs27 said:


> The Holy Spirit, will move from heart to heart. When a child of the King gives their testimony, there is a stirring of the spirit within other children, and there is no denying others testimony.
> I have heard those that had no feeling, and for those I pray for myself that I haven't put something in the way of me and God.
> The morning my middle daughter ( I have three) was saved, she stood beside me and started weeping during the first song of the service, during the second song she leaned against me crying and I asked if she was ok, she answered "No" I asked, is there something you need to do and she said, "Yes", as she pushed me aside and went to the altar at the church. She knelt down and prayed, she was down for about 2 minutes when another girl came running down to the altar crying.After another 5 minutes or so she looked up, with no tears and said, "Daddy, Jesus saved me!"   Glory be to God!  As she looked over and saw her friend at the altar she said, "I'm going to pray with Savannah, dad",   They prayed and I just stood back looking at those folks still in the benches and at the exact same time two boys...twins, jumped up and came running to the altar. One had been sitting on one side of the church with his mom and the other was sitting on the other side with his grandma. They came to the altar and little Savannah came up from praying and announced Jesus had saved her, my daughter and Savannah, saw the twin boys and went over to them and prayed with them. They weren't down for long when one came up and announced he was saved. The other got restless up there looking around and then went to his mom, and announced his burden was gone, but he wasn't saved. I think he felt his twins' burden...He did get saved about a month later though.
> My daughter later told me, "Dad  while I was knelt down praying, I could see some hands off in the distance, and as I prayed they got closer and closer until I could see arms, and they kept getting closer and closer until I could feel them wrap around me, and it was at that moment I knew I was saved.
> ...



1. I assume your daughter has been taught that if she were to die without Jesus, she would burn forever.  If I really believed that, I'd be crying too.  Fear is a strong emotion, especially in children.

2. Would you accept the testimony of another Christian who said that god has commanded them to go blow up an abortion clinic?  Why or why not? (And don't give me that, "God would never ask someone to kill a person."  In the Bible, God commands his followers to kill people plenty of times.)


----------



## hobbs27 (May 4, 2012)

dexrusjak said:


> 1. I assume your daughter has been taught that if she were to die without Jesus, she would burn forever.  If I really believed that, I'd be crying too.  Fear is a strong emotion, especially in children.


 It's not fear, it's knowing that He died for you.



dexrusjak said:


> 2. Would you accept the testimony of another Christian who said that god has commanded them to go blow up an abortion clinic?  Why or why not?



If the testimony is that he was told to blow up a clinic, then No. 



dexrusjak said:


> (And don't give me that, "God would never ask someone to kill a person."  In the Bible, God commands his followers to kill people plenty of times.)


In the OT Bible yes. See that's when we lived under the law. Jesus came here, defeated satan, and death, and fulfilled that OT. Now we live under grace, God no longer tells us to kill evil people. He now shares his grace with them. The meanest person you ever known, can come to know the Lord, matter of fact there is none of us that are deserving of his love, but he gives it freely, even to abortion clinic employees, "whosoever will" He takes messes we make, and makes messages out of them.


----------



## mtnwoman (May 4, 2012)

atlashunter said:


> I'm not asking if you enjoy listening to the experiences of others I'm asking if you accept their testimony of those experiences as evidence that what they are saying is true?



Well of course. If I'm asking them to believe my testimony that I once wouldn't have believed then I would believe their testimony that I wouldn't have once believed and neither would they.  That's why we believe each other....we are witnesses to each other.


----------



## mtnwoman (May 4, 2012)

atlashunter said:


> You wouldn't accept someone else's testimony either would you?



Peat and repeat....same question, same answer.

Well of course. If I'm asking them to believe my testimony that I once wouldn't have believed then I would believe their testimony that I wouldn't have once believed and neither would they. That's why we believe each other....we are witnesses to each other.


----------



## mtnwoman (May 4, 2012)

atlashunter said:


> This topic reminds me of Sam Kinison. "Hey Joseph! How's "Gods son" doing?"



He's doin' perfect, how's about you?


----------



## mtnwoman (May 4, 2012)

hobbs27 said:


> Yep...foolishness to those that don't know God.



Well of course...satan is the author of confusion.


----------



## mtnwoman (May 4, 2012)

dexrusjak said:


> Why?
> 
> Faith (blind faith, that is) is not a virtue.  Faith is not something to be proud of.  Faith is for those who are ignorant.  Very little in this world do we accept on blind faith.  We believe what we believe based on what we experience, based on the EVIDENCE.  There is no evidence for belief in a virgin birth.  There are immense quantities of evidence (scientific, experiential, and otherwise) for not believing in a virgin birth.  Follow the evidence.  Believing for the sake of belief, without evidence, is unwise.



Why do you keep bringing up a virgin birth....a virgin birth is possible...proven by science, not faith.

Do you not have faith that you will get to walmart and back safely? Do you not have faith that your children will not make it to school and back alive? Do you not have faith that you will go to work and get a paycheck next week? What is your problem with faith?


----------



## dexrusjak (May 4, 2012)

hobbs27 said:


> It's not fear, it's knowing that He died for you.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I thought the god of the OT and the god of the NT were one and the same.  I also thought that god doesn't change.  If god asked people to kill in his name thousands of years ago, what's stopping him from doing it now?

The point is, you pick and choose which "messages from the holy spirit" are valid and which aren't.  You base these judgments on your understanding of god.  What makes your understanding any more valid or correct than that of someone with a totally different understanding?


----------



## dexrusjak (May 4, 2012)

mtnwoman said:


> Why do you keep bringing up a virgin birth....a virgin birth is possible...proven by science, not faith.
> 
> Do you not have faith that you will get to walmart and back safely? Do you not have faith that your children will not make it to school and back alive? Do you not have faith that you will go to work and get a paycheck next week? What is your problem with faith?



Umm...because the thread is about virgin birth. 

Notice I said "blind faith."  I don't have "faith" in any of those things.  I have experience and evidence that says they are true.  I don't have "faith" that the chair I'm about to sit in will hold me up.  I have evidence and experience that says it will hold me up.

Can evidence and experience lead me to wrong conclusion?  Abso-freaking-lutely.  But it's much, much more reliable than blind faith.

My problem with faith is that it's the product of laziness.


----------



## hobbs27 (May 4, 2012)

dexrusjak said:


> I thought the god of the OT and the god of the NT were one and the same.  I also thought that god doesn't change.  If god asked people to kill in his name thousands of years ago, what's stopping him from doing it now?



A new covenant has been made.God hasn't changed but the promise between man and God has.
 OT, was the law,NT is grace. Can you point to any place in the Gospels or the Epistles that God asks for someone to kill someone else? I know of two people God took out himself but I can't think of any demands on man to kill man.





dexrusjak said:


> The point is, you pick and choose which "messages from the holy spirit" are valid and which aren't.  You base these judgments on your understanding of god. What makes your understanding any more valid or correct than that of someone with a totally different understanding?



I disagree with your premise.


----------



## dexrusjak (May 4, 2012)

hobbs27 said:


> A new covenant has been made.God hasn't changed but the promise between man and God has.
> OT, was the law,NT is grace. Can you point to any place in the Gospels or the Epistles that God asks for someone to kill someone else? I know of two people God took out himself but I can't think of any demands on man to kill man.



That's irrelevant.  God has, in the past, commanded people to kill other people.  What would stop God from doing the same today?  Besides, didn't Jesus come to "fulfill the law"?  If so, it would seem that he would endorse the OT.


----------



## hobbs27 (May 4, 2012)

dexrusjak said:


> That's irrelevant.  God has, in the past, commanded people to kill other people.  What would stop God from doing the same today?  Besides, didn't Jesus come to "fulfill the law"?  If so, it would seem that he would endorse the OT.



I answer and you turned a blind eye to my answer.Im sure God has revealed himself to you, and you've turned a blind eye again...He will continue to reveal himself to you. Will you see him? Will you hear him? It's between you and Him, I hope you finally see Him for who He is.
 God Bless.


----------



## atlashunter (May 4, 2012)

mtnwoman said:


> Why do you keep bringing up a virgin birth....a virgin birth is possible...proven by science, not faith.



Not in the traditional use of the term meaning without being fertilized which would have been the understanding of ancient people if they were told a woman that had never been with a man bore a child.

But even if we go with your explanation of being fertilized through artificial means absent sex then it isn't a miracle and if it isn't a miracle then what's the big deal?


----------



## atlashunter (May 4, 2012)

hobbs27 said:


> A new covenant has been made.God hasn't changed but the promise between man and God has.
> OT, was the law,NT is grace. Can you point to any place in the Gospels or the Epistles that God asks for someone to kill someone else? I know of two people God took out himself but I can't think of any demands on man to kill man.



Matthew 5:18 makes clear in no uncertain terms that the law is still in full effect. Christian history confirms this has been the understanding. The command to kill witches was carried out both by Catholics and Protestants despite it being found no where in the NT.


Concerning personal testimony would I be correct in assuming that if someone told you of their experience with Poseidon or that they were abducted by aliens you probably wouldn't find it very persuasive? But if their testimony was such that it could draw an emotional response that would convince you? This is a poor means of separating fact from fiction.


----------



## ted_BSR (May 4, 2012)

Asath said:


> The deconstruction continues:
> 
> One of the concepts that is essential to the acceptance of the divinity of Jesus, within Christian theology, is the concept of the Virgin Birth.
> 
> ...



Your "deconstruction" is laughable. And blah blah blah blah blah blah. You are arguing with people who believe that the entire universe was "poofed" into existence! No amount of logic or empiricism will sway those of us who have faith. No argument about how stupid faith is will stop us from having it.

Your ranting really seems like a democrat political commercial, or an attempt at a Jedi mind trick. "These aren't the droids you are looking for."

You cannot convince me with your dogma any more than I can convince you with mine!

I think I have found that the entire premise of this forum is pointless. Now I am just along for grins!


----------



## Asath (May 4, 2012)

“ . . . a virgin birth is possible...proven by science, not faith.”

Well, not really.  First of all one would have to demonstrate that God invented in vitro fertilization techniques, about two thousand years ago.  Good luck with that.

Then one would have to suppose, and put forward, the idea that implanting anything whatsoever by any means at all into the womb of a human female does not, in fact, violate the very word ‘virginity.’  After that, one needs to confront the actual reality that THIS COULD NOT HAVE HAPPENED two thousand years ago.

“Your "deconstruction" is laughable.”

I suppose it is.  But remember that this is just one, Part Six, of the observations.  Taken apart, one might well be able to muster up a nearly plausible argument – but taken together, since every observation in this series is taken directly and verbatim from the Book, it becomes a bit of a ground-swell of contrary evidence.  

Contained in the Book itself.  

I’m not embellishing anything here – I’m merely reading what it says, the same as everyone else does.  The difference, I suppose, is that I’m reading ALL of it.  

I’m not interested in convincing anyone – that seems purely impossible, since ‘Belief’ has always been immune to truth – I merely point out what the ‘Believers’ actually believe in, and ask if they are sure about that.

Seems more than a little silly, once you read the whole thing.


----------



## hobbs27 (May 5, 2012)

atlashunter said:


> Matthew 5:18 makes clear in no uncertain terms that the law is still in full effect. Christian history confirms this has been the understanding. The command to kill witches was carried out both by Catholics and Protestants despite it being found no where in the NT.



Just as the Catholics and Proestants killed in Gods name, so did the high preists and scribes kill Jesus in Gods name.if you're a history buff I would suggest "Foxx book of martyrs" or an even harder book to find, "The trail of blood" In both these books you get a clear picture of just what happened in beginning of Christs church and how it had a really hard row to hoe.
 The so-called religous scholars of today will tell you Constatine played a great part in spreading Christianity throughout the world. He did no such thing, he combined paegans and Christians of little faith to form a new religion, he continued to persecute Christs' church, only he did it under Christs name...Jesus says, many will come in his name..
 When it comes to history I like to get the old forgotten books that were written a hundred or hundreds of years ago. I have one such book called, Parables of Jesus written in 1881. In this book the author speaks of the parable of the mustard seed and how, the seed started out like Christ and ten followers and continued on to become the largest of all faiths.He also adds a quote by Napoleon, in St. Helena to Count de Montholon:
 " I know men, and I tell you that Jesus Christ is not a man! The religion of Christ is a mystery which subsists by its own force and proceeds from a mind which is not a human mind.We find in it a marked individuality which originated a train of words and actions unknown before.Jesus is not a philosopher, for his proofs are miracles, and from the first his disciples adored him.Alexander,Caesar,Charlemagne and myself founded empires, but on what foundation did we rest the creations of our genious? Upon force. Jesus Christ founded an empire upon Love, and at this hour milliions of men would die for him. I die before my time, and my body will be given back to the earth to become food for worms. Such is the fate of him who has been called the Great Napoleon. What an abyss between my deep mystery and the eternal kingdom of Christ, which is proclaimed, loved and adored, and is extending over the whole earth!"
 At the same time evil things were being done in Gods name, such as the witch hunts, God was pouring rain down on some families farm that had prayed earnstly for...He was pouring his grace down on some lost person somewhere making them anew. He was making a way for those that were asking.
 So don't use MAN as an example, when you dispute GOD lives. Man will always fail, God never fails.




atlashunter said:


> Concerning personal testimony would I be correct in assuming that if someone told you of their experience with Poseidon or that they were abducted by aliens you probably wouldn't find it very persuasive? But if their testimony was such that it could draw an emotional response that would convince you? This is a poor means of separating fact from fiction.



There is a difference in emotional and spiritual...When the Good Shepherd speaks, I know his voice.


----------



## atlashunter (May 5, 2012)

hobbs27 said:


> Just as the Catholics and Proestants killed in Gods name, so did the high preists and scribes kill Jesus in Gods name.





hobbs27 said:


> At the same time evil things were being done in Gods name, such as the witch hunts, God was pouring rain down on some families farm that had prayed earnstly for...He was pouring his grace down on some lost person somewhere making them anew. He was making a way for those that were asking.
> So don't use MAN as an example, when you dispute GOD lives. Man will always fail, God never fails.



Exodus 22:18
Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live.

Not in God's name, at God's command.

It's nice to know that when some poor woman was being burned alive at the hands of people who were following God's commandment to kill witches that he was sending rain for a farmers field. But that is little consolation to the murder victim who he stood by and watched burn with folded arms.







hobbs27 said:


> When it comes to history I like to get the old forgotten books that were written a hundred or hundreds of years ago. I have one such book called, Parables of Jesus written in 1881. In this book the author speaks of the parable of the mustard seed and how, the seed started out like Christ and ten followers and continued on to become the largest of all faiths.He also adds a quote by Napoleon, in St. Helena to Count de Montholon:
> " I know men, and I tell you that Jesus Christ is not a man! The religion of Christ is a mystery which subsists by its own force and proceeds from a mind which is not a human mind.We find in it a marked individuality which originated a train of words and actions unknown before.Jesus is not a philosopher, for his proofs are miracles, and from the first his disciples adored him.Alexander,Caesar,Charlemagne and myself founded empires, but on what foundation did we rest the creations of our genious? Upon force. Jesus Christ founded an empire upon Love, and at this hour milliions of men would die for him. I die before my time, and my body will be given back to the earth to become food for worms. Such is the fate of him who has been called the Great Napoleon. What an abyss between my deep mystery and the eternal kingdom of Christ, which is proclaimed, loved and adored, and is extending over the whole earth!"



As long as christianity carries with it the threat of eternal burning for non-believers it may not be said that christianity is not rooted in force.




hobbs27 said:


> There is a difference in emotional and spiritual...When the Good Shepherd speaks, I know his voice.



Ever seen the movie Marjoe? I'm sure the people he stoked at his revivals really believed the same as you. The truth is they were being played and couldn't see it. There is a reason the preacher motions the piano or organ player to start playing a soft dramatic tune as he makes his altar call.


----------



## hobbs27 (May 5, 2012)

atlashunter said:


> Exodus 22:18
> Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live.
> 
> Not in God's name, at God's command.
> ...



What were they, witches or some poor woman? The Bible quote you posted said "witch" then you say they burned "poor women"...Another example of what I've already explained...Man fails God, God doesn't fail man!







atlashunter said:


> As long as christianity carries with it the threat of eternal burning for non-believers it may not be said that christianity is not rooted in force.


Due to our sinful nature, we are all deserving of eternal burning...Jesus made a way out for us.




atlashunter said:


> Ever seen the movie Marjoe? I'm sure the people he stoked at his revivals really believed the same as you. The truth is they were being played and couldn't see it. There is a reason the preacher motions the piano or organ player to start playing a soft dramatic tune as he makes his altar call.



Never even heard of it before.I'm a books person and watch very few movies, but it sounds as if you are again pointing out a failure of man...not of God. There is no doubt in my mind that God has revealed himself to you somewhere in your life and there is no doubt he will again reveal himself to you, keep your eyes open and listen for his voice. He can show you things that are only possible through him.


----------



## atlashunter (May 5, 2012)

hobbs27 said:


> What were they, witches or some poor woman? The Bible quote you posted said "witch" then you say they burned "poor women"...Another example of what I've already explained...Man fails God, God doesn't fail man!



Well personally I'm not a believer in witches. I'm sure you are so if we accept that belief, who says the two are mutually exclusive? And you're dancing around the point that she was killed in accordance with scripture that you and the murderers believe to be the word of God and God stood by and watched refusing to make any intervention while at that very moment he intervened on behalf of a farmer's crops.




hobbs27 said:


> Due to our sinful nature, we are all deserving of eternal burning...Jesus made a way out for us.



You're free to believe that but don't tell us a religion which threatens non-believers with eternal burning isn't coercive at it's very core.




hobbs27 said:


> Never even heard of it before.I'm a books person and watch very few movies, but it sounds as if you are again pointing out a failure of man...not of God. There is no doubt in my mind that God has revealed himself to you somewhere in your life and there is no doubt he will again reveal himself to you, keep your eyes open and listen for his voice. He can show you things that are only possible through him.



You're missing the point Hobbs. You should check it out. It's a good movie. Just one man's real life story. The point is people can be led to sincerely believe they are having a spiritual experience when they are clearly being manipulated. They are genuinely convinced that it was real just as you are but someone that sees the bigger picture that they don't can see what is really going on.


----------



## mtnwoman (May 5, 2012)

atlashunter said:


> Not in the traditional use of the term meaning without being fertilized which would have been the understanding of ancient people if they were told a woman that had never been with a man bore a child.
> 
> But even if we go with your explanation of being fertilized through artificial means absent sex then it isn't a miracle and if it isn't a miracle then what's the big deal?



Well for that time it was a miracle.
Just like making a blind man see was a miracle....not so much today. Even though if I had been blind all my life and received sight thru a donor or whatever, I'm sure I'd still consider it a miracle.  People are cured of many things today that would've been a miracle throughout the past 2000 years....eh? There is no new thing under the sun. We are just discovering things as we go. Even things that are invented, the product was here all along to create those things. So it's always been possible and not impossible.

Like for example....when I was in the first grade...we were lucky if we could find a can to play kick the can....hahahahahahahahaha....a cellphone...say what...a computer? online games? tv? huh?


----------



## mtnwoman (May 5, 2012)

dexrusjak said:


> Umm...because the thread is about virgin birth. *I meant bringing it up as if it's impossible.*
> 
> Notice I said "blind faith."  I don't have "faith" in any of those things.  I have experience and evidence that says they are true.  I don't have "faith" that the chair I'm about to sit in will hold me up.  I have evidence and experience that says it will hold me up.
> 
> ...


*Really? So when you have faith in your wife or in you children, then that's laziness on your part? I don't get it.*

I don't believe I'm lazy because I have faith that my grandchildren will do the best of their ability in their piano recital or their school play, or their swim meet, or that my daughter will do her best at her inline skating national championship, especially after she goes makes it to Nebraska to compete. I'll just sit back in my big ol' arm chair and consider myself a lazy bum because I have faith them....woe is me...the lazy ol' granny...


----------



## mtnwoman (May 5, 2012)

hobbs27 said:


> There is a difference in emotional and spiritual...When the Good Shepherd speaks, I know his voice.



and we follow!! hallelujah to the Lamb of God


----------



## mtnwoman (May 5, 2012)

Asath said:


> “ . . . a virgin birth is possible...proven by science, not faith.”
> 
> Well, not really.  First of all one would have to demonstrate that God invented in vitro fertilization techniques, about two thousand years ago.  Good luck with that.



Well believing as I do, that God created us in the first place, I don't find that impossible. You can see that, can't you?

All the necessary elements have always been there for this technique, no? What element had to evolve to make this technique possible? only a working brain, right? well a needle...but the elements were always there for that, too.


----------



## atlashunter (May 5, 2012)

mtnwoman said:


> Well for that time it was a miracle.



I suppose that depends on how we define miracle. Rainbows may have been considered miracles before we understood them but they weren't. They had a natural explanation all along which we eventually discovered. If I could go back to the time of Jesus and perform tricks based on science which they perceived as miracles would that make me a miracle worker?


----------



## mtnwoman (May 5, 2012)

atlashunter said:


> I suppose that depends on how we define miracle. Rainbows may have been considered miracles before we understood them but they weren't. They had a natural explanation all along which we eventually discovered. If I could go back to the time of Jesus and perform tricks based on science which they perceived as miracles would that make me a miracle worker?



That's exactly my point. People believed for thousands of years that the virgin birth was merely impossible, and people didn't believe that part of the story due to what they deemed impossible, come to find out a virgin birth is not impossible.

I believe as we go along more and more things that once were deemed impossible will be proven to be true, ie flying chariots or something that looked like a chariot, or something that could fly, like an airplane....something flying thru the air IS possible.


----------



## mtnwoman (May 5, 2012)

atlashunter said:


> I suppose that depends on how we define miracle. Rainbows may have been considered miracles before we understood them but they weren't. They had a natural explanation all along which we eventually discovered. If I could go back to the time of Jesus and perform tricks based on science which they perceived as miracles would that make me a miracle worker?



Well of course, for the time. And just because people didn't believe it for 2000 years didn't mean you didn't pull it off either,  does it? Even though a 'common' man recorded it, no one believed it to be true....2000 years later someone proved it could be done. So the man that saw it 2000 just made it up? wow great imagination on his part eh?

That is the part I can't get around...how did they know?


----------



## atlashunter (May 5, 2012)

Well between the mistranslation and other previous mythologies involving virgins giving birth to deities I think it brings into serious question the truth of the gospel (the two of the four that make mention of this) at least in this detail.


----------



## mtnwoman (May 5, 2012)

atlashunter said:


> Well between the mistranslation and other previous mythologies involving virgins giving birth to deities I think it brings into serious question the truth of the gospel (the two of the four that make mention of this) at least in this detail.



The excuse used to be as simple as a virgin birth is impossible, there will always be a reason not to buy it, ya know? always.

I can look at a bird and find reasons to believe....especially a grouse, if i'm hungry.


----------



## hummdaddy (May 5, 2012)

maybe marie was a virgin to joseph ,but she was hitting it with someone else ,and thats how ya'll ended up with this miracle baby...just another way to look at it


----------



## mtnwoman (May 5, 2012)

hummdaddy said:


> maybe marie was a virgin to joseph ,but she was hitting it with someone else ,and thats how ya'll ended up with this miracle baby...just another way to look at it




who's marie?


----------



## hummdaddy (May 5, 2012)

mtnwoman said:


> who's marie?



mary


----------



## hobbs27 (May 5, 2012)

atlashunter said:


> Well personally I'm not a believer in witches.


 Doesn't suprise me........j/k, I don't believe in them either since Jesus bound Satan and we entered the NT and a new heaven and Earth was founded



atlashunter said:


> And you're dancing around the point that she was killed in accordance with scripture that you and the murderers believe to be the word of God and God stood by and watched refusing to make any intervention while at that very moment he intervened on behalf of a farmer's crops.



Oh Im not dancing, I think it was a valid point.
If God intervened everytime an injustice was made, and there was nothing but good ole days and happiness here on Earth....who would have a desire for heaven? We would just all want to stay here, and fish, hunt, procreate, eat and be merry forever. 
 Israel would do good by God for awhile, be blessed by God, then fall away, do bad and then desire God again, human nature is like that, we tend to call on God in the valley, and forget about him on the mountaintops.






atlashunter said:


> You're free to believe that but don't tell us a religion which threatens non-believers with eternal burning isn't coercive at it's very core.


There will be no non-believers burning.






atlashunter said:


> You're missing the point Hobbs. You should check it out. It's a good movie. Just one man's real life story. The point is people can be led to sincerely believe they are having a spiritual experience when they are clearly being manipulated. They are genuinely convinced that it was real just as you are but someone that sees the bigger picture that they don't can see what is really going on.



I'm not one of those...God has shown me things that only He could show me. He's answered prayers , and He's led me away from danger.He will do the same for you, if you answer when He beckons. All it takes is faith from you, and He will rain down the grace.


----------



## hummdaddy (May 5, 2012)

sorry bout the thread killer...was just another theory


----------



## centerpin fan (May 5, 2012)

hummdaddy said:


> maybe marie was a virgin to joseph ,but she was hitting it with someone else ,and thats how ya'll ended up with this miracle baby...just another way to look at it



Mary was "hitting it"?  May God have mercy on your soul.


----------



## atlashunter (May 5, 2012)

mtnwoman said:


> The excuse used to be as simple as a virgin birth is impossible, there will always be a reason not to buy it, ya know? always.



Certainly how the ancients viewed it and they were right given the narrow scope of their understanding of conception. No sperm meeting egg, no birth. Maybe that is why there are many mythologies involving virgin birth and maybe that is why the mistranslation. If you posit that the story is a fiction this all makes sense. If not then you have a mystery on your hands.


----------



## atlashunter (May 5, 2012)

hobbs27 said:


> Doesn't suprise me........j/k, I don't believe in them either since Jesus bound Satan and we entered the NT and a new heaven and Earth was founded



I guess all the christians that engaged in witch hunts missed the memo. Too bad for their victims.




hobbs27 said:


> Oh Im not dancing, I think it was a valid point.
> If God intervened everytime an injustice was made, and there was nothing but good ole days and happiness here on Earth....who would have a desire for heaven? We would just all want to stay here, and fish, hunt, procreate, eat and be merry forever.
> Israel would do good by God for awhile, be blessed by God, then fall away, do bad and then desire God again, human nature is like that, we tend to call on God in the valley, and forget about him on the mountaintops.



 Right and that explains why a perfect being would provide supernatural intervention for the farmers crops to survive but not a drop of water for the woman being burned alive because of him. You're joking right?

Someone lights your house on fire at my behest. I hear your children screaming and have the power to save them at no personal risk to myself and instead I run to your neighbors house to water their houseplants.

Come on Hobbs...


----------



## mtnwoman (May 5, 2012)

atlashunter said:


> Certainly how the ancients viewed it and they were right given the narrow scope of their understanding of conception. No sperm meeting egg, no birth. Maybe that is why there are many mythologies involving virgin birth and maybe that is why the mistranslation. If you posit that the story is a fiction this all makes sense. If not then you have a mystery on your hands.



I am not saying that I know how it happened, how any of the virgin births happened. I'm not even saying others did  or did not happen. If I believe in talking bushes and donkeys, what's to keep me from believing in any possibilites to where God came from? Perhaps a lower god was responsible for the pyramids, most of us believe something is pretty intelligent, higher than what most believe was capable then, built those, designed them whatever. God said that we are not to have any other gods before Him, not that there are no other gods, but that we are to hold Him as the Almighty, the God of Gods and the Lord of Lords.  Chariots of the Gods, comes to mind. I can't disbelieve that totally....I just believe that the God I worship is the highest God, perhaps not the only God, and others probably believe the same about their god.


----------



## mtnwoman (May 5, 2012)

centerpin fan said:


> Mary was "hitting it"?  May God have mercy on your soul.



whew....for real...even if I did not believe


----------



## mtnwoman (May 5, 2012)

atlashunter said:


> I guess all the christians that engaged in witch hunts missed the memo. Too bad for their victims.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I believe most if not all witches that were burned at the stake were victims of a mistake in identity as Christ was. We will all be judged according to our deeds, saved or unsaved. I'm probably pretty far down on that totum pole, i'll be doning a leanto rather than a mansion, I suppose.


----------



## hobbs27 (May 5, 2012)

atlashunter said:


> I guess all the christians that engaged in witch hunts missed the memo. Too bad for their victims.


 Ignorance and in some cases stupidity is not immune to humans that are also (Christian). We're just like the rest of the world as that goes.






atlashunter said:


> Right and that explains why a perfect being would provide supernatural intervention for the farmers crops to survive but not a drop of water for the woman being burned alive because of him. You're joking right?
> 
> Someone lights your house on fire at my behest. I hear your children screaming and have the power to save them at no personal risk to myself and instead I run to your neighbors house to water their houseplants.
> 
> Come on Hobbs...



God works in mysterious ways.
 Is it just because people claiming to be Christian burned a few women they accused of being witches at the stake, that you can't believe? Or do you think that I will defend such an act because of my Christianity, and make myself sound stupid?How about Stephen, and Peter , and Paul, and Luke. They died because they were Christians, all they had to do was denounce Jesus. There were many, many more Martyrs for Jesus and even in the world today, like in Iran for instance and places in Africa, people are being killed  because they will not denounce Christ...Now that is faith! 
 My aunt was working at a gas station in Atlanta back in the 60's, and two men came in the store, held guns up to her face and said, "give us the money". God spoke to her and said, no. She explained to the men that she would not give them the money from the register. They then proceeded to explain that if she did not they were going to blow her brains out.She replied, "God told me to not give you the money from this register and that you will not shoot me". after a few seconds of grumbling back and forth with one another, they ran off.... You think you could convince her that God didn't speek to her? Those personal one on one experiences are the ones that really sink in and make you never doubt.
 I was a single dad of two daughters at one time in my life. I cried out to God to bring me a wife, and He did.He is amazing, you outta try and get to know him.


----------



## Asath (May 6, 2012)

“ . . . just because people claiming to be Christian burned a few women they accused of being witches at the stake, . . . “

Um?  Try out the truth.  Not a ‘few’ women.  Tens of thousands of women and men.  And not ‘claiming’ to be Christian.  The accusers, torturers, trial judges, and executioners were ALL credentialed Churchmen – priests, reverends, bishops, and cardinals.  

The truth, the real truth, will actually set you free.

This behavior, by people who wore the sanctified cloth of Christianity, persisted well into the early 1900’s, and at least intellectually, the ‘witch-hunts’ and organized, well financed persecution of dissent exists to this day.

But we stray from the point – as always, since, lacking arguments of substance, loud distraction and the changing of the topic is the only stock-in-trade.  

Anybody have a single actual bit of evidence of a single actual ‘Virgin’ birth?  

Ever?

Anybody want to ‘witness’ on this one?  Got a friend or neighbor or family story of someone who got knocked up by GOD?  

Got a credible reason, no matter how far fetched, why a GOD who wished to send a Message to his Creation, aside the ones He had apparently already sent by killing all of them at least once, would choose to impregnate a human woman in a remote desert by way of making His point, and then never say another word for the next two thousand years or more?  

I mean, it had to be pretty embarrassing, to get caught out like that, but you’d think He’d be man enough to at least apologize to poor Joseph for going and knocking up the man’s wife, for pity’s sake.  That seems a little immoral, by Biblical Standards . . .


----------



## mtnwoman (May 6, 2012)

Asath said:


> “ . . . just because people claiming to be Christian burned a few women they accused of being witches at the stake, . . . “
> 
> Um?  Try out the truth.  Not a ‘few’ women.  Tens of thousands of women and men.  And not ‘claiming’ to be Christian.  The accusers, torturers, trial judges, and executioners were ALL credentialed Churchmen – priests, reverends, bishops, and cardinals.
> 
> ...



That right there is taking me to a depth, that I can't even go to....wow....that blew my mind. I finally get where you are coming from...and it's way too scary of a place for me to try to comprehend.  So finally I realize my cost for playing ouija at 8 yrs old.....finally my demon has caught up with me....oh my in the name of Jesus I rebuke.....


----------



## hobbs27 (May 6, 2012)

Asath said:


> “ . . . just because people claiming to be Christian burned a few women they accused of being witches at the stake, . . . “
> 
> Um?  Try out the truth.  Not a ‘few’ women.  Tens of thousands of women and men.  And not ‘claiming’ to be Christian.  The accusers, torturers, trial judges, and executioners were ALL credentialed Churchmen – priests, reverends, bishops, and cardinals.  .



I was actually thinking of the Salem witchhunts, but since you want to take it back farther and be truthful. The first witches to be killed were before Christ was ever born, and even today they can be tried and killed in Saudi Arabia, not exactly a Christian nation..
 BTW, just for the heck of it, and since you don't care anyway, I'll take this space to say, the Christians that believe as I do did not partake in the nonsense. It was Catholics, and Puritans for the most part.


----------



## atlashunter (May 6, 2012)

Funny how christians pick and choose which scriptures still apply.


----------



## 1gr8bldr (May 6, 2012)

atlashunter said:


> Funny how christians pick and choose which scriptures still apply.


We are guilty of that.


----------



## Asath (May 7, 2012)

“I'll take this space to say, the Christians that believe as I do did not partake in the nonsense. It was Catholics, and Puritans for the most part. “

With all due respect, sir, the Christians that believe as you do did not exist prior to you.  Your Belief is unique to you, and is informed as much by your readings, and teachings, and the state of the world around you as theirs were.  If I take your statement as a true consideration, and I have no reason to do otherwise, then you are saying that you, personally, and the Christians of your own acquaintance, have actually progressed beyond the genuine, proven, and documented ‘Beliefs’ and practices of your predecessors.

This is encouraging.  

It shows that you don’t simply ‘believe’ because it is WRITTEN.  You retain the ability to think for yourself.

Go with that, and keep reading.  You’ll find yourself amazed at how ridiculous and fully irrelevant that short Book actually is, today.  You might even realize that you have progressed, all by yourself, far beyond just about all of it, not just the killing of demons part . . .


----------



## atlashunter (May 7, 2012)

Asath said:


> “I'll take this space to say, the Christians that believe as I do did not partake in the nonsense. It was Catholics, and Puritans for the most part. “
> 
> With all due respect, sir, the Christians that believe as you do did not exist prior to you.  Your Belief is unique to you, and is informed as much by your readings, and teachings, and the state of the world around you as theirs were.  If I take your statement as a true consideration, and I have no reason to do otherwise, then you are saying that you, personally, and the Christians of your own acquaintance, have actually progressed beyond the genuine, proven, and documented ‘Beliefs’ and practices of your predecessors.
> 
> ...





These instances of thinking for yourself are also how we know christians don't really get their morality from the bible. They pick and choose the good parts out of the bad which tells us they have some other standard independent of the bible for making those judgments.


----------



## mtnwoman (May 7, 2012)

atlashunter said:


> These instances of thinking for yourself are also how we know christians don't really get their morality from the bible. They pick and choose the good parts out of the bad which tells us they have some other standard independent of the bible for making those judgments.



not just to you Atlasman.


You claim morality outside of the Bible, what makes y'all think we don't/can't either? That's sort of prejudice isn't it??  I didn't kill anybody or rob banks or steal from people before I was saved...just like you didn't...sheesh.


----------



## atlashunter (May 7, 2012)

mtnwoman said:


> not just to you Atlasman.
> 
> 
> You claim morality outside of the Bible, what makes y'all think we don't/can't either? That's sort of prejudice isn't it??  I didn't kill anybody or rob banks or steal from people before I was saved...just like you didn't...sheesh.



You must have misunderstood. You're suggesting that I think the exact opposite of what I said. It is clear that you do have a moral standard independent of the bible that you use to make judgments on the morality of various scriptures. Those you find moral you accept and claim to get from the bible. Those you don't you ignore and say they no longer apply.


----------



## mtnwoman (May 7, 2012)

atlashunter said:


> You must have misunderstood.*Ok I'll take your word for it.* You're suggesting that I think the exact opposite of what I said.*OK* It is clear that you do have a moral standard independent of the bible that you use to make judgments on the morality of various scriptures. Those you find moral you accept and claim to get from the bible. Those you don't you ignore and say they no longer apply.*That's a little bit 'grey'...but I'll take it as a good thing...lol*


----------



## hobbs27 (May 8, 2012)

atlashunter said:


> These instances of thinking for yourself are also how we know christians don't really get their morality from the bible. They pick and choose the good parts out of the bad which tells us they have some other standard independent of the bible for making those judgments.



1. The Anabaptists believed much as I do today,they are neither Catholic nor Protestant.As for thinking for oneself, what does that have to do with believing in God or not?
 2.There was a time in my younger life that my faith was almost gone, and I shunned God from my life. Man what a miserable time in my life that was.I thought I could handle everything of this world on my own without God...boy was I wrong, what a mess I made of things. 
 It was great to dig myself out of the mire and leave those swine lots to come back home to the Father. He welcomed me back with open arms and blessed my socks off. I will never leave Him again. God is great and life is good.


----------

