DELETE
- Thread in 'General' Thread starter Started by elderwatsondiggs,
- Start date
- Status
- Jul 22, 2012
- 2,605
- 454
How am i on a whole other level? Your on another level by making **** personal because i dont believe in your views. I never said slavery was ok. I was tryin to show how it is taken out of context in the Bible by racist people then you go ahead and call me a racist by saying im for slavery? smh Im mixed my daughter is more black then anything. My wife is Black. I never have nor will I ever be for slavery! So dont sit there and put words in my mouth when i didnt say that just because I have different views on life then you. Like i said about 5 pages ago we can agree to disagree and leave it at that yet then you start to attack me personally again.
Man Michigan is on a whole other level of just...WOW.
Last edited:
- Jul 22, 2012
- 2,605
- 454
This is my belief and i've explained it already. Im a Christian because I believe Jesus died for our sins. John 3:16 says it all. I said this already yet you come back and say thats not logical. What more can i say? We can agree to disagree. What I believe in is not logical to you thats why I say its pointless.
- Nov 20, 2007
- 90,928
- 55,617
You right
I guess I won't bother with the pure chance of you being a Christian instead of a Muslim or Jainist or Scientologist or w/e. That verse in the bible says it all. Jesus died for our sins, not Hesus or Chrishna or Prometheus or Indra.
I must be crazy for thinking you should have some grounded and sensible reasons when forming your beliefs, especially if you're going to become part of a belief system.
- Aug 8, 2007
- 12,264
- 51
Everyone needs to realize that the bible is a collection of essays, and story's from hundreds of years apart. It'd be like mitt Romney adding to the constitution, and 100 years later, other civilizations being like wtf was these dudes on? This is contradictory, talking often about opposite ideologies in the same book n ****. Let's be cereal, anyone talking about slavery in the bible isn't giving the text proper context, and are just as foolish as the believers they love bashing for some reason.
As said before, nobody KNOWS the answer, and I could see how that could motivate certain people to tackle the issue, but use your talents for higher ground. Their are far more better answers to find that could help humanity, as opposed to dividing it.
At the end of the day, if religion is something that serves a purpose in someone's life, either by inspiration, guidance, or just making them a better, more complete individual, than who is anybody to bash that religion. Defenition of lames IMO.
As said before, nobody KNOWS the answer, and I could see how that could motivate certain people to tackle the issue, but use your talents for higher ground. Their are far more better answers to find that could help humanity, as opposed to dividing it.
At the end of the day, if religion is something that serves a purpose in someone's life, either by inspiration, guidance, or just making them a better, more complete individual, than who is anybody to bash that religion. Defenition of lames IMO.
- Dec 26, 2004
- 3,545
- 434
God doesn't tempt anyone? According to the Bible? How were Adam and Eve not tempted by the tree? How was Abraham not tempted to kill his son Isaac?
I really wish people would stop linking any potential god to the idiocy in that bibble (intended spelling). I mean a book that has been translated says anyone who changes the words will suffer "all the plagues of this book" (revelations). Do I need to rip out some pages and wait for it to NOT rain frogs to prove my point? You want to know what my true belief is? I believe that reading the bible truly stunts spiritual growth and church leaders have been hip for centuries.
- Oct 31, 2010
- 2,414
- 586
Do you know what temptation is? God didn't tempt Adam and Eve with the tree...he just placed it there and gave them strict orders not to eat from it. How can a father who loves his son be tempted to kill him? God didn't give him any incentive to do that. C'mon now, if you're gonna argue know your stuff.
member 2323
Banned
- Jul 27, 2012
- 113
- 44
Religion doesn't help people, it's all a facade. Like you said, that energy could be used towards something else. But no, religion wastes people's time and energy, and it also divides humanity.
We need to explore the solar system.
We need to find a new source of energy not called oil (although I believe that it exists, but the higher powers won't let it come to light, just like the AIDS/cancer cure).
These things should be humans' two priorities.
But no, you got these people spending time praying to these imaginary gods, waiting for blessings.
I can understand religion prevailing when humans were cave-men. That was a long time ago.
We live in the technological era. All these stupid religions should be debunked by now. The problem is that, as technology advances, the average human mind takes ten steps back. As scientists get smarter and discover more things, humans get more and more spoiled, and their brains regress.
- Dec 26, 2004
- 3,545
- 434
Ok... I've missed it the last few times... but this HAS TO BE SARCASM, right?
I'm still under the impression (read: hope) that this is sarcasm but I'll post this anyway, lest someone gets confused.
New International Version ([emoji]169[/emoji]1984)
By faith Abraham, when God tested him, offered Isaac as a sacrifice. He who had received the promises was about to sacrifice his one and only son,
New Living Translation ([emoji]169[/emoji]2007)
It was by faith that Abraham offered Isaac as a sacrifice when God was testing him. Abraham, who had received God's promises, was ready to sacrifice his only son, Isaac,
English Standard Version ([emoji]169[/emoji]2001)
By faith Abraham, when he was tested, offered up Isaac, and he who had received the promises was in the act of offering up his only son,
New American Standard Bible ([emoji]169[/emoji]1995)
By faith Abraham, when he was tested, offered up Isaac, and he who had received the promises was offering up his only begotten son;
King James Bible (Cambridge Ed.)
By faith Abraham, when he was tried, offered up Isaac: and he that had received the promises offered up his only begotten son,
International Standard Version ([emoji]169[/emoji]200
By faith Abraham, when he was tested, offered Isaac-he who had received the promises was about to offer his unique son in sacrifice,
Aramaic Bible in Plain English ([emoji]169[/emoji]2010)
By faith, Abraham offered Isaac during his testing, and laid his only son on the altar, whom he had received by The Promise.
GOD'S WORD[emoji]174[/emoji] Translation ([emoji]169[/emoji]1995)
When God tested Abraham, faith led him to offer his son Isaac. Abraham, the one who received the promises from God, was willing to offer his only son as a sacrifice.
King James 2000 Bible ([emoji]169[/emoji]2003)
By faith Abraham, when he was tested, offered up Isaac: and he that had received the promises offered up his only begotten son.
It was by faith that Abraham offered Isaac as a sacrifice when God was testing him. Abraham, who had received God's promises, was ready to sacrifice his only son, Isaac,
English Standard Version ([emoji]169[/emoji]2001)
By faith Abraham, when he was tested, offered up Isaac, and he who had received the promises was in the act of offering up his only son,
New American Standard Bible ([emoji]169[/emoji]1995)
By faith Abraham, when he was tested, offered up Isaac, and he who had received the promises was offering up his only begotten son;
King James Bible (Cambridge Ed.)
By faith Abraham, when he was tried, offered up Isaac: and he that had received the promises offered up his only begotten son,
International Standard Version ([emoji]169[/emoji]200
By faith Abraham, when he was tested, offered Isaac-he who had received the promises was about to offer his unique son in sacrifice,
Aramaic Bible in Plain English ([emoji]169[/emoji]2010)
By faith, Abraham offered Isaac during his testing, and laid his only son on the altar, whom he had received by The Promise.
GOD'S WORD[emoji]174[/emoji] Translation ([emoji]169[/emoji]1995)
When God tested Abraham, faith led him to offer his son Isaac. Abraham, the one who received the promises from God, was willing to offer his only son as a sacrifice.
King James 2000 Bible ([emoji]169[/emoji]2003)
By faith Abraham, when he was tested, offered up Isaac: and he that had received the promises offered up his only begotten son.
Last edited:
futuremd
Banned
- Jul 18, 2012
- 6,448
- 1,433
Adam and Eve didn't know right from wrong so how was it wrong that they eat from the tree?
Clearly he was about to though, right?
You can't say "well he'd never do that" well he did and was about to.
If god asked you to kill your son, what would your reaction be?
futuremd
Banned
- Jul 18, 2012
- 6,448
- 1,433
This is too true.
Apparently a year or two ago the Catholic church in the NIV changed "virgin" to "young girl"
Completely changing the definition of Jesus supposedly being born of a woman who never had sex.
Imagine if that just gets arbitrarily changed, WHAT ELSE has been changed just to keep up with the times???
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/42215497/ns/us_news-life/t/bible-edits-leave-some-feeling-cross/
futuremd
Banned
- Jul 18, 2012
- 6,448
- 1,433
Do you have a problem with the slavery of the bible?There you go again with your dumb a** comments. I never said slavery was ok! What I dont get is you start name calling because I have a different belief then you. Who the hell do you think you are to say what I should and should not believe in? ohh I forgot your in college so you think you have the right to bash my views. smhTROLOLOLOLOLOLOL
Yep...Slavery is A'ok!
Yo this dude is comedy.
Let me get this COMPLETELY straight.
You're cool with the bible advocating slavery in ANY form?
These are employers. These are slaves.
SLAVES.
SLAVERY my dude.
SLAVERY
You're OK with that in the bible?
Like, you're PERFECTLY fine with slavery being in the bible?
Right?
Don't ignore this. You keep trying to skate around here.
And you don't get to change the definition of slavery because it makes you feel better. If you didn't have a problem, then you wouldn't try to explain away them as "employees"
The bible tells you how much you can hit your slaves as long as you don't kill them.
Unless the bible is saying its OK to hit your "employees"...right?
Leviticus 25:44-46
Exodus 21:2-6
Exodus 21:7-11
Exodus 21:20-21
Ephesians 6:5
1 Timothy 6:1-2
Luke 12:47-48
This is what you even said when you tried to change the definition:
http://niketalk.com/t/503813/do-you...iricism-vol-no-brontosaurus/750#post_16173411
Why worry about "context" if it says slaves clearly?
A slave is not the same as an employee, otherwise you wouldn't change the word. Its not like Slave isn't a modern word either so its not something we need a modern definition to. It currently existed and has around the time of the bible.
Last edited:
- May 10, 2003
- 702
- 63
This is the first logical response I've ever read in one of these threads. I'm still not a believer, but THIS makes sense.
Either way, it's a fictional story not to be taken literally but to apply the lessons learned from. I think? Whatever.
futuremd
Banned
- Jul 18, 2012
- 6,448
- 1,433
Are you seriously quoting the lords prayer?
This does not answer how you know when god does something and when YOU do something.
All you're saying is that you hope god steers you from "temptation" but my question is HOW DO YOU KNOW when god is ACTUALLY doing the steering?
You're not answering the question:
HOW DO YOU KNOW WHEN GOD DOES SOMETHING AS OPPOSED TO YOUR OWN EFFORTS IN LIFE?
WHATS THE STANDARD YOU USE TO MAKE THE DISTINCTION?
Last edited:
futuremd
Banned
- Jul 18, 2012
- 6,448
- 1,433
But thats not what the bible says.How am i on a whole other level? Your on another level by making **** personal because i dont believe in your views. I never said slavery was ok. I was tryin to show how it is taken out of context in the Bible by racist people then you go ahead and call me a racist by saying im for slavery? smh Im mixed my daughter is more black then anything. My wife is Black. I never have nor will I ever be for slavery! So dont sit there and put words in my mouth when i didnt say that just because I have different views on life then you. Like i said about 5 pages ago we can agree to disagree and leave it at that yet then you start to attack me personally again.
Man Michigan is on a whole other level of just...WOW.
It says slaves. This isn't about racism, this is about slavery.
You changed the word slavery to mean "employee" as if that some how changes the fact that the bible says you can still hit your slaves...or in your case "employee"... as long as you don't kill them AND how much you can sell your "employees" for.
Last edited:
futuremd
Banned
- Jul 18, 2012
- 6,448
- 1,433
This is just flat out false.
Who cares if its a collection of essays?
Its the fact there are a group of people who VOLUNTARILY associate themselves with these contradictory stories. Yes, you will be held to that standard because you CHOSE to defend something that is internally contradictory. Stop saying that its cool to pick and choose. Its not. It never will be. Not when you decide that this thing has authority to make decisions yet you're trying to reconcile a book rife with contradictions. The bible doesn't say "hey pick what you want to do, when you want to do it..." And on top of that, I'm pretty sure YHWH would be PRETTY pissed off if he knew you all were playing fast and loose with his fan-fiction novel.
Its not my fault if you choose to be religious. Its yours. If you don't like dealing with "context" issues or "contradictions" then you should take a long hard look at yourself in the mirror and ask why you CHOSE to defend it. And miss me with the "i was born into it" crap. Most of you all are old enough to know what other religions are so you are to blame for your own misfortunes in people exposing the holes in your own logic.
If you choose to defend something thats indefensible thats a decision YOU have made and YOU will live with it until you decide that you don't want to do it anymore. Its not anyone else's responsibility to smooth over pot-holes in the road of logic for you.
Be accountable for your own beliefs.
You have them.
Another dismissive claim IMO.
The fun part about speculation is never having to PROVE anything, isn't it?
This COULD also be a universe of pizza toppings or our solar system could be atoms of asbestos in a factory for aliens on a different scale of size...or maybe this is all a dream.
Could.
Could.
Could.
Save it.
This is the issue. None of the non-believers are making claims. We don't know everything. We don't claim to know everything.
YOUR RELIGIONS CLAIM TO KNOW EVERYTHING.
Thats the problem. If you're going to associate with something that claims to know and be able to do anything and everything, THEN YES you can be held accountable for the holes in that logic.
If you don't like it, thats TOO DAMN TOUGH.
You should have thought about that before you started making ASSERTIONS that can't be validated.
This comes down to your own credibility.
If you don't know anything...STOP SAYING THAT YOU DO.
If you know everything, and you claim that your religion answers all questions THEN PROVE IT.
Not good enough. I don't care if religion helps people, because it doesn't.
Religion isn't about being a good person. Religion is about being religious. That means FOLLOWING the religion and what it tells/asks you to do.
You don't need a religion to do deeds for the benefit of humanity or to contribute to a societally defined concept of altruism.
On top of that, heres the secret... YOU DONT HAVE TO DO ANYTHING "GOOD" or "BAD"
We make those definitions up as we go.
We are in charge.
We make the rules.
We set our standards.
You all realize that a "foot" or a "second" is something WE MADE UP, right? We create our own definitions to navigate through our existence.
In much of the same way that our units of measurement are arbitrary, so are our units of ethics and morality.
You don't need someone convincing you to do something good to someone else.
You don't need someone to tell you that killing people hurts people.
You don't need someone to tell you that taking other people stuff annoys them.
AND EVEN IF YOU NEEDED THAT, society would tell you. Society would create the rules it wants to follow ANYWAYS so whatever you're defending in the bible is just your attempt at reinforcing what you've already benefitted from.
I'm honestly convinced in times like this that the only reason some of you all are religious is because you're scared of what YOU would do if you weren't...
Last edited:
superblytrife
Supporter
- Mar 20, 2002
- 21,835
- 24,975
Serious questions here for Optimus/Dame Theory/sillyputty/FutureMD:
-Why does it matter so much to you what the next man on the internet believes? Like yo....this **** is getting kind of weird, creepy and obsessive. Is it really THIS deep to you?
-Why do you feel like anyone on the internet owes you any explanation, or has to be accountable to YOU, almost as if you're the end-all-be-all authority on these matters?
-How do you treat your Christian parents? Do you berate them like you do anyone on here who doesn't share your views? If not, why not? Aren't their views just as worthy of disrespect as believers on NT?
Again, all serious questions. No troll.
-Why does it matter so much to you what the next man on the internet believes? Like yo....this **** is getting kind of weird, creepy and obsessive. Is it really THIS deep to you?
-Why do you feel like anyone on the internet owes you any explanation, or has to be accountable to YOU, almost as if you're the end-all-be-all authority on these matters?
-How do you treat your Christian parents? Do you berate them like you do anyone on here who doesn't share your views? If not, why not? Aren't their views just as worthy of disrespect as believers on NT?
Again, all serious questions. No troll.
- Jan 8, 2005
- 17,204
- 1,259
He's under the influence.
futuremd
Banned
- Jul 18, 2012
- 6,448
- 1,433
Take note of a few things here.
1. You didn't ask any christians how they felt.
2. You didn't ask any other non-believers
3. I don't see the matter in asking questions and exposing contradictions
4. If you're going to make claims you can't back up, where is the harm in addressing that?
Honestly...
Is it "that deep" to me? Of course not. I can't change the world with a keyboard. I don't lose sleep over this stuff. Not in the slightest.
But if we're going to have a conversation about this stuff, theists don't get to act like non-believers can't comment. Theists are also free to not to respond to anything they want. Theists tend to be given automatic protection because of the notion that we're supposed to "respect each others beliefs." And... Theists also have the opportunity to parade around in society at large while non-believers (until rather recently) have had to remain in the closet so as to not step on the toes of those who felt they could act with impunity.
Don't start asking questions, making claims, and establishing notions AND THEN WHEN QUESTIONED acting like you're being chastised.
You're really not.
There has been a lot of victimization going on in here masking the inability to answer direct questions. Now, is anyone obligated to answer me or anyone else? Of course not.
On the flip-side, am I going to stop asking questions to make you feel better? No. I don't see why I should.
I will protect the right of anyone to believe in anything they wish...but I will not automatically or innately respect what they believe in the same fashion. If you want the right to start a white-nationalist anti-gay group, go ahead. But I will not support your efforts to do so, nor will I hold my tongue in expressing that notion.
No one is obligated or accountable to me. I never claimed to be that authority, nor will I.
If you choose to respond to anyone, thats a choice YOU made.
The same choice you make to be religious, its the same choice you make in formulating a response or reading anything, that anyone wrote.
I treat them like any grateful child would treat parents who have done everything for them.
If they bring it up, i'll tell them exactly what I think about it. No shame in hiding what you know about something.
If they say something that doesn't make sense to me, I'll tell them.
What do you mean by "respect?"
Many of you all seem to be confusing respect with a concept of voluntary censorship.
If by respect you mean, "tolerating their differences" then yes, but if you mean "refusing to share my honest opinion" then no.
If you must know, my parents aren't THAT religious. My mother is somewhat religious depending on the day, but by no means a bible thumper. If anything I can tell she thrives on the sense of community and just the occasional "god loves us" tip. My dad isn't religious and I'd honestly say he fakes it from time to time just to smooth things over. Hes more of someone who doesn't know hes an atheist but, no disrespect to him, he doesn't really have the time or know as much to really get to that point, if that makes sense.
But no. Views aren't worthy of "respect" merely for having them.
Respect is earned. Luckily, my parents and I don't clash on many issues at all so there isn't much "disrespect" going on.
I don't shield my views to make them feel happy nor do I aim to make claims to make them unhappy.
Basically, I don't bring it up unless they do. But THEY KNOW what they're asking for when they bring it to me.
Oh, and when you mean, "Are NTers views deserving of respect?" ... I say I respect them in the sense that I'm not responsible for making decision FOR them, nor am I going to force them to do anything. But in the sense that I should prevent my opinion from being shared because I think a stance is illogical, irrational, unfounded, silly, outdated, or even unintelligible? Then no.
We can't have these conversations if everyone is reluctant to separate themselves from their beliefs. You can't ask for us to get into the nitty-gritty and analyze what beliefs actually are and what they represent unless you're willing to put everything on the table. Are these notions "personal?" Sure they are. But so is your favorite color and meal. You can't have it both ways.
Hope that answered your questions then.
Last edited:
sumrndmdude
Banned
- Aug 6, 2012
- 3,755
- 1,226
I suggest you reread the verse from James. Because all you are doing is trying to satisfy your own skepticism.Ok... I've missed it the last few times... but this HAS TO BE SARCASM, right?
I'm still under the impression (read: hope) that this is sarcasm but I'll post this anyway, lest someone gets confused.
New International Version ([emoji]169[/emoji]1984)
By faith Abraham, when God tested him, offered Isaac as a sacrifice. He who had received the promises was about to sacrifice his one and only son,New Living Translation ([emoji]169[/emoji]2007)
It was by faith that Abraham offered Isaac as a sacrifice when God was testing him. Abraham, who had received God's promises, was ready to sacrifice his only son, Isaac,
English Standard Version ([emoji]169[/emoji]2001)
By faith Abraham, when he was tested, offered up Isaac, and he who had received the promises was in the act of offering up his only son,
New American Standard Bible ([emoji]169[/emoji]1995)
By faith Abraham, when he was tested, offered up Isaac, and he who had received the promises was offering up his only begotten son;
King James Bible (Cambridge Ed.)
By faith Abraham, when he was tried, offered up Isaac: and he that had received the promises offered up his only begotten son,
International Standard Version ([emoji]169[/emoji]200
By faith Abraham, when he was tested, offered Isaac-he who had received the promises was about to offer his unique son in sacrifice,
Aramaic Bible in Plain English ([emoji]169[/emoji]2010)
By faith, Abraham offered Isaac during his testing, and laid his only son on the altar, whom he had received by The Promise.
GOD'S WORD[emoji]174[/emoji] Translation ([emoji]169[/emoji]1995)
When God tested Abraham, faith led him to offer his son Isaac. Abraham, the one who received the promises from God, was willing to offer his only son as a sacrifice.
King James 2000 Bible ([emoji]169[/emoji]2003)
By faith Abraham, when he was tested, offered up Isaac: and he that had received the promises offered up his only begotten son.
[color= rgb(0, 146, 242)]13[/color]
When tempted, no one should say, “God is tempting me.” For God cannot be tempted by evil, nor does he tempt anyone; [color= rgb(0, 146, 242)]14[/color]
but each one is tempted when, by his own evil desire, he is dragged away and enticed. [color= rgb(0, 146, 242)]15[/color]
Then, after desire has conceived, it gives birth to sin; and sin, when it is full-grown, gives birth to death.
You are a thinking man, I;m sure you can figure out the implications of that statement. I would say also dare to say that the intentions of a test and a temptation to induce evil are two entirely different things.
Do rational thinking a favor, and approach this discussion with fairness and rationality.
sumrndmdude
Banned
- Aug 6, 2012
- 3,755
- 1,226
I thought that you read your whole bible FutureMD
Hebrews 11:
17By faith Abraham, when God tested him, offered Isaac as a sacrifice. He who had received the promises was about to sacrifice his one and only son, 18even though God had said to him, “It is through Isaac that your offspring[sup]b[/sup] will be reckoned.”[sup]c[/sup] 19Abraham reasoned that God could raise the dead, and figuratively speaking, he did receive Isaac back from death.
How do you feel about earlier responses,
sumrndmdude
Banned
- Aug 6, 2012
- 3,755
- 1,226
Because you have to have sex to get pregnant????
futuremd
Banned
- Jul 18, 2012
- 6,448
- 1,433
Are you saying that Mary had in-vitro fertilization? Did she use a turkey baster or a funnel? Or did god really just say *boom* you're pregnant?
Last edited:
sumrndmdude
Banned
- Aug 6, 2012
- 3,755
- 1,226
I assume you know the Lords prayer then, good for you!
You need to stop doing this. You ask questions for the sake of asking the question and don't take time to listen to any responses. Like I said earlier, 'I think/know that you are smarter this'. But, I will indulge you yet again and this time lets try to discuss this, please.
Does the bible indicate that God is responsible for every movement of our lives:
No! i thought this was apparent from the thought in James. The scriptures give examples of things that you can be thankful for (as illustrated in the lords prayer i.e. spiritual concerns, sustenance, relationships with god and man).
In addition there are other items, personal and unique to an individual, that a person may recognize as being indicative of God's blessing. These items need not necessarily be: Money, a mercedes, iPhone, iPad, vacation to Europe.
The scriptures indicate that every individual is capable of utilizing their own personal strength to obtain 'things', whether or not the obtaining of such things is beneficial or not. That is to say, God does not need to take credit for your 'hard work'...furthermore, 'God doesn't care if you win the superbowl'. But , God does care that you at the least, get your 'daily bread.'...especially if your are serve him.
And too further satisfy your inquiry, giving you your daily bread may not mean something miraculous, such as a food truck loosing a shipment at your front door. It may be as anectodal and simple as, 'you' a follower of Jesus, displaying a personality that may perhaps allow you to get a Job you otherwise would not have gotten. There are other example and scenarios....as a bible reader you've probably come across them. I can direct you to some if you need the info.
Does fate rule our lives/has God predestined our lives:
I think this the other angle your question has taken.
In short, NO! We have free will. We can choose to work hard for a Mercedes and an iPhone, we can choose to provide for our families, we can choose to live a life of a socialite. Again, God does not take credit for you being a socialite. The fact that there are consequences to certain actions does not implicate God in some conspiracy to rob us of this free will. As an example, independent of the existence of God there are consequences to jumping off a cliff...you are however free to jump off said cliff with or without a parachute, the decision is however still yours. (James 1:13)
But if God knows everything then that is contradictory?
-God can choose to be oblivious, just as a strong man can regulate the use of his strength.
-God, even with advanced knowledge, can allow a person to make their own decisions (free will). However, he can, and does give information about said decisions...again these decisions need not involve purchasing the next iPhone or not.
Last edited:
sumrndmdude
Banned
- Aug 6, 2012
- 3,755
- 1,226
I think that the person who created man was responsible for her producing offspring. My reference to IVF was only to show that it is not beyond the realm of possibility for a young girl/virgin to become pregnant, albeit miraculously.
*That is my answer, and I'm sure that you disagree with it, and I respect that, because you disagree with the proposal that God created man. And that is fine. But, my response is as stated. You can take that answer and do what you will with it. I am already familiar with your position and will not need for it to be restated in response.
- Status
