Reply to "Was Mary really a virgin?"

by **UofLCard** » Jan 26th, '13, 18:27

Since I didn't get to the thread in time before it was locked. :flower:

There's a part of me that thinks Mary got pregnant out of wedlock. To avoid chastization by those around her, she fabricated that God implanted the baby. That is, if Jesus existed at all.

Just wanted to give my opinion.

by **Spyder** » Jan 26th, '13, 19:19

She simply did not have sex, she did get pregnant. How?
This happens today, by intro-fertalization and test tube babies.

It wasn't magic, it was science. But humans back then couldn't comprehend that

by **EG.** » Jan 26th, '13, 19:21

Jesus did exist.

by **Sam.** » Jan 26th, '13, 19:33

God existed unlike now.

by **RoleModel'Est96** » Jan 26th, '13, 19:37

Sam. wrote:God existed unlike now.

Don't know if trollin or being serious. But if you're being serious, that's actually a really interesting viewpoint.

by **BigBoss** » Jan 26th, '13, 19:40

Mary was a whore
Mary had sex
She covered it up good.

Get real mothafuckas, she had sex. It was impossible to get pregnant back then without it (unlike now).

The bible is a lie, 2013 rapture bring it.

by **Sam.** » Jan 26th, '13, 19:58

I'm not trolling. Lack of evidences of the exact nature of events that happened back then makes up come up with such assumption. They did not have any scientific method to prove otherwise too.

by **LK5** » Jan 26th, '13, 20:02

Obviously she couldn't get pregnant without having sex cause at that time there was no 3D movies http://www.popjolly.com/woman-says-she- ... -in-3d-365

by **RoleModel'Est96** » Jan 26th, '13, 20:06

bigray wrote:
Spyder wrote:She simply did not have sex, she did get pregnant. How?
This happens today, by intro-fertalization and test tube babies.

It wasn't magic, it was science. But humans back then couldn't comprehend that

Are u trying to say Science existed back than? How many years ago was that.

Magic and miracles are 2 different things.

Not to seem patronising, but of course Science existed back then. I guess you mean IVF

by **PAINKILLƎR** » Jan 26th, '13, 20:17

Who deleted my post? it related to the topic at hand :angry:

by **RoleModel'Est96** » Jan 26th, '13, 20:20

bigray wrote:How do u know it did for sure? That was so long ago and someone could have just wrote it somewhere and said it existed?

I'm not sure what you're trying to say. D'you mean something along the lines that Science is just a concept that was made-up? Or something that was recently discovered?

by **Spyder** » Jan 26th, '13, 20:44

Because science is always advancing and were finding logical answers for these things.

The bible says, god used magic. Is this a reasonable answer for you?

by **RoleModel'Est96** » Jan 26th, '13, 20:46

I see your point bigray, but I think one of the number one rules when discussing religion should be to not try and demand people to show proof. If both sides had unequivocally legit proof, then I guess their would be no debate!

And also, Science also described in detail how the earth was created through events like the Big Bang, the Red Shift, etc.
Also, you mentioned these discoveries had come about in around the past 100 years and my answer to that is technology and theories and hypotheses. The fact that these theories hadn't come about a long time ago doesn't completely negate the fact that there could be some weight to them. Remember these scientists are humans, not divine or omnipotent or omniscent beings as described in some religions so we as people haven't known the reason behind our existence since the beginning of time.

by **Spyder** » Jan 26th, '13, 20:49

No I'm saying that phenomenon would be called magic today. As he had devine powers

by **classthe_king** » Jan 26th, '13, 20:55

bigray wrote:But thats the thing Religion has the proof it has been written many and many years ago.

Spyder - describe the magic ur talking about so I have a better understanding.

Religion has no proof

Reply to "Was Mary really a virgin?"

Reply to "Was Mary really a virgin?"

Re: Reply to "Was Mary really a virgin?"

Re: Reply to "Was Mary really a virgin?"

Re: Reply to "Was Mary really a virgin?"

Re: Reply to "Was Mary really a virgin?"

Re: Reply to "Was Mary really a virgin?"

Re: Reply to "Was Mary really a virgin?"

Re: Reply to "Was Mary really a virgin?"

Re: Reply to "Was Mary really a virgin?"

Re: Reply to "Was Mary really a virgin?"

Re: Reply to "Was Mary really a virgin?"

Re: Reply to "Was Mary really a virgin?"

Re: Reply to "Was Mary really a virgin?"

Re: Reply to "Was Mary really a virgin?"

Re: Reply to "Was Mary really a virgin?"

Who is online