Lil Red Posted January 9, 2011 Posted January 9, 2011 [quote name='MarkKurallSchuenemann' timestamp='1294595512' post='2198175']If this was a debate team, her team would actually lose points for her talking out of turn (especially with such a poorly worded response), just saying.[/quote] have you ever known an internet forum to actually follow the rules of actual debate? lol.
MarkKurallSchuenemann Posted January 9, 2011 Posted January 9, 2011 (edited) [quote name='Lil Red' timestamp='1294603015' post='2198224'] it is against the rules to have multiple sn's. you mind giving the mods your other sn so we can ban it? or do you want this account to be banned and you can go back to your old one?[/quote] I forget my past login, it's been a while, so I just signed in through facebook, like I always do when the option is there. [quote name='Lil Red' timestamp='1294603015' post='2198224'] and i'm going to call the essence of cow on your claim there. if people have a problem with my style, then they can say so, not hide behind passive-aggressive attacks or whine about it months or years later. grow up. [/quote] It wasn't a passive-aggressive attack really, I was being assertive. [quote name='Lil Red' timestamp='1294603114' post='2198227'] have you ever known an internet forum to actually follow the rules of actual debate? lol. [/quote] Yes, I have actually. It comes from when people aren't afraid of different ideas. Edited January 9, 2011 by MarkKurallSchuenemann
HisChildForever Posted January 9, 2011 Posted January 9, 2011 [quote name='Lil Red' timestamp='1294603015' post='2198224'] it is against the rules to have multiple sn's. you mind giving the mods your other sn so we can ban it? or do you want this account to be banned and you can go back to your old one?[/quote] Pretty sure "MakeYouThink" is one of them.
MarkKurallSchuenemann Posted January 9, 2011 Posted January 9, 2011 [quote name='HisChildForever' timestamp='1294603575' post='2198236'] Pretty sure "MakeYouThink" is one of them. [/quote] Yeah, that's one of them. It's been so long that I have forgotten it.
Lil Red Posted January 9, 2011 Posted January 9, 2011 [quote name='MarkKurallSchuenemann' timestamp='1294603723' post='2198238'] Yeah, that's one of them. It's been so long that I have forgotten it. [/quote] yeah right. it's because each one of your sn's has been banned, and you know it.
MarkKurallSchuenemann Posted January 9, 2011 Posted January 9, 2011 [quote name='Lil Red' timestamp='1294604748' post='2198256'] yeah right. it's because each one of your sn's has been banned, and you know it. [/quote] yes, they were, because I was misbehaving.
Lil Red Posted January 9, 2011 Posted January 9, 2011 [quote name='MarkKurallSchuenemann' timestamp='1294604979' post='2198259'] yes, they were, because I was misbehaving. [/quote] and guess what? making new sn's to circumvent a rightly earned banning is [url="http://www.phatmass.com/phorum/index.php?app=forums&module=extras§ion=boardrules"]against the rules[/url].
MarkKurallSchuenemann Posted January 9, 2011 Posted January 9, 2011 [quote name='Lil Red' timestamp='1294605968' post='2198277'] and guess what? making new sn's to circumvent a rightly earned banning is [url="http://www.phatmass.com/phorum/index.php?app=forums&module=extras§ion=boardrules"]against the rules[/url]. [/quote] I didn't make a new sign on, I signed in with Facebook. But hey, if you want to ban me, that's okay. It's hardly material to me. I think I can add a different perspective to this place, and that I actually add to the forums, and I don't take away. but if you want to do that, that's fine with me.
Lil Red Posted January 9, 2011 Posted January 9, 2011 [quote name='MarkKurallSchuenemann' timestamp='1294607382' post='2198293'] I didn't make a new sign on, I signed in with Facebook. But hey, if you want to ban me, that's okay. It's hardly material to me. I think I can add a different perspective to this place, and that I actually add to the forums, and I don't take away. but if you want to do that, that's fine with me. [/quote] it's not just up to me, it's up to all the mods.
MarkKurallSchuenemann Posted January 9, 2011 Posted January 9, 2011 [quote name='Lil Red' timestamp='1294607420' post='2198294'] it's not just up to me, it's up to all the mods. [/quote] How about this, I promise to be respect everybody's opinions, like I have been.
AudreyGrace Posted January 10, 2011 Posted January 10, 2011 [quote name='MarkKurallSchuenemann' timestamp='1294591603' post='2198151'] Thank you for your gracious reply. You live up to your name for sure. I like you reasoning, but I just don't agree with it, so lets agree to disagree[b] for right no[/b]w. [/quote] Hey, no problemo! Thank you too. "For right now".. so there's hope? : ) I'll keep you in my prayers. Please do the same for me.
MarkKurallSchuenemann Posted January 10, 2011 Posted January 10, 2011 [quote name='AudreyGrace' timestamp='1294619087' post='2198373'] Hey, no problemo! Thank you too. "For right now".. so there's hope? : ) I'll keep you in my prayers. Please do the same for me. [/quote] Thank you for your prayers. And I'll keep you in mine.
MithLuin Posted January 10, 2011 Posted January 10, 2011 [b]Mark[/b], question for you. Would [i]you[/i] touch a woman who had become pregnant by the Holy Spirit? Just sayin'. Joseph knew who Jesus' father was, and I really can't see him wanting to violate that in any way.
MarkKurallSchuenemann Posted January 10, 2011 Posted January 10, 2011 [quote name='MithLuin' timestamp='1294624019' post='2198413'] [b]Mark[/b], question for you. Would [i]you[/i] touch a woman who had become pregnant by the Holy Spirit? Just sayin'. Joseph knew who Jesus' father was, and I really can't see him wanting to violate that in any way. [/quote] I don't really know how to answer that. . That's a great question, I'll get back to you on that.
CatherineM Posted January 10, 2011 Posted January 10, 2011 [quote name='MithLuin' timestamp='1294624019' post='2198413'] [b]Mark[/b], question for you. Would [i]you[/i] touch a woman who had become pregnant by the Holy Spirit? Just sayin'. Joseph knew who Jesus' father was, and I really can't see him wanting to violate that in any way. [/quote] Good point. I know if I was a man, I'd certainly keep my hands off. Plus, Mary had shared a blood supply with God for 9 months. That had to affect her in ways we can't imagine. At a very basic physical level, it would be like having an internal spiritual dialysis machine.
HisChildForever Posted January 10, 2011 Posted January 10, 2011 (edited) [quote name='CatherineM' timestamp='1294626152' post='2198426'] Good point. I know if I was a man, I'd certainly keep my hands off. Plus, Mary had shared a blood supply with God for 9 months. That had to affect her in ways we can't imagine. At a very basic physical level, it would be like having an internal spiritual dialysis machine. [/quote] Good point. Her womb was consecrated to and for God alone. I just did a double take, and I feel lame for repeating "good point". Ah well. Edited January 10, 2011 by HisChildForever
KnightofChrist Posted January 10, 2011 Posted January 10, 2011 (edited) [quote name='HisChildForever' timestamp='1294626520' post='2198433'] Good point. Her womb was consecrated to and for God alone.[/quote] Good point. She was the Ark of the New Covenant, ie Christ, and we can clearly see from the Old Testament that the Ark was most sacred and protect from any defilement what so ever. When priests would enter into the Holy of Holys where the Ark was kept they would have a rope tied around them, because their was a good chance they would be struck down dead, and that was the only way to pull them out. Their was also a case when David brought the Ark back, and man went to catch the Ark as it began to fall, and he was stuck down dead because he simply touched it. Instead of the wood that carried it (or whatever was used). [quote name='HisChildForever' timestamp='1294626520' post='2198433']I just did a double take, and I feel lame for repeating "good point". Ah well. [/quote] If lame is cool then I guess I'm just a big lame. Edited January 10, 2011 by KnightofChrist
Jesus_lol Posted January 10, 2011 Posted January 10, 2011 [quote name='Tally Marx' timestamp='1294182318' post='2196675'] Besides, had Mary not planned to abstain all her life, her question of "How can this be for I know not man?" would have been ridiculous. Why ask how you can possibly have kids, if you plan on someday having sex? [/quote] This makes absolutely no sense. I plan on having sex, and kids in the future, but if a woman told me that she bore my child today I would rightly say "what the hell? i havent had sex with you, or any other woman!" my desire or plans to eventually have sex in the future are insufficient to impregnate people in the present, thank God! her statement "how can this be for i know not man" only refers to the present. she did not say "i have never known man, nor will i ever", and even if she had, her spoken assertion of the future is also insufficient to guarantee that she spoke the truth. many have said "i will never" and later put the lie to those words, with intent or through no fault of their own.
TeresaBenedicta Posted January 10, 2011 Posted January 10, 2011 [quote name='Jesus_lol' timestamp='1294632806' post='2198495'] This makes absolutely no sense. I plan on having sex, and kids in the future, but if a woman told me that she bore my child today I would rightly say "what the hell? i havent had sex with you, or any other woman!" my desire or plans to eventually have sex in the future are insufficient to impregnate people in the present, thank God! her statement "how can this be for i know not man" only refers to the present. she did not say "i have never known man, nor will i ever", and even if she had, her spoken assertion of the future is also insufficient to guarantee that she spoke the truth. many have said "i will never" and later put the lie to those words, with intent or through no fault of their own. [/quote] Actually, I think it makes more sense than one might initially think. The angel said that she [i]will[/i] be with child. Future tense. If she was planning on a normal marital relationship with Joseph, being with child in the future wouldn't be out of the question. It would be quite normal and expected. In that sense, I'd think that it'd make sense for Mary to say, "I know not man" regarding her future. I'd like to read the Greek for that particular section of Scripture. That might shed some light on the interpretation.
Archaeology cat Posted January 10, 2011 Posted January 10, 2011 [quote name='CatherineM' timestamp='1294626152' post='2198426'] Good point. I know if I was a man, I'd certainly keep my hands off. Plus, Mary had shared a blood supply with God for 9 months. That had to affect her in ways we can't imagine. At a very basic physical level, it would be like having an internal spiritual dialysis machine. [/quote] They've also found that [url="http://scopeblog.stanford.edu/LAH138.pdf"]some DNA from the child[/url] remains in the mother's body, so Mary would've perpetually had some of Jesus' DNA in her body after bearing Him. Pretty awesome.
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now