Posted on 01/01/2013 11:38:20 AM PST by neverdem
Anything at all to diminish Christianity.
The author. confuses virgin birth with virgin conception. In a virgin birth, everything remains intact even after delivery.
There are several other major religions into the virgin birth situation.
The faux science of satan... wipe their dust from your feet when these demons appear.
LLS
Well then... there you have it... Virgin birth is possible..
Not only possible but practical in some situations..
Who knew that after all these years it was scientifically provable..
Been that way since Marx and Engels. They jumped on Darwin to try to kill God. If evolution exists, God can’t. Or so I’m told by the libs at work.
Interesting....but it, in NO way, diminishes the FANTASTIC LOVE of the MIRACLE that the Virgin birth is for the world of humans, all created by a God Who loved us enough to make it all happen.
What is truly miraculous is a parthenogenic male.
Show me one instance of parthenogenesis producing a male offspring.
Interesting article, but I think 90% of such research and writing is simply political ground-laying by homosexual activists:
They want no future legal impediments to human cloning by lesbian “married couples” (sic).
First of all, genetic parthenogenesis in certain marine invertebrates, worms, fleas, etc. produces a genetic replica of the parent (same genome, always female, similar to a clone) and does not apply to the Lord Jesus, a male born from a virginal mother.
Second of all, sexually-reproduced offspring (from a sperm and an ovum) could be fairly commonplace among a certain subset of lesbians who reproduce by vendor-insemination, and who do so without any sexual contact with a man. I suppose if such a deviant female then gave birth via C-section, she could still be, physically speaking, an intact virgin, pre-partum, in partu, and post-pastum -- an OB/GYN oddity, but no miracle here.
The splendid thing about Mary is that she conceived through the Holy Spirit, and her holy offspring is the Son of God.
Of course many pre-Christian religions had accunts of virgin births, as well as accounts of a dying god who visited the Underworld and arose on the third day (or maybe at the Spring Equinox). The longing for these realities can be observed in many myths, because they are (albeit in garbled and fragmentary form) longings of the human heart since the dawn of human existence.
It is never fulfilled in a fully transcendant and complete way, except in the "Joy of Man's Desiring," Our Lord Jesus Christ, the son of Man, son of Adam, son of Abraham, son of David, son of Mary the Virgin--- Son of God.
Everyone knew, actually. “Parthenogenesis” is a commonly known word. Even more obviously, asexual creatures reproduce on their own. Even elementary school children know about them. This is just one of those stupid, misleading headlines some smart aleck concocted to get attention. It has nothing whatsoever to do with the Virgin Mary.
By the way, how come they never turn it back on scientists instead of trying to embarrass Christians. It’d take me about five seconds to come up with an alternative headline. “Whoa, There, Biologists! Move Over, Dolly the Sheep. Think Cloning Is So Special? Well, the New Mexico Whiptail Got There First”
Sure, there’s Buddha and the magic elephant who impregnated his mother.
However in the US when you mention “virgin birth” everyone assumes you mean the mother of Jesus. Especially when it is done at Christmas time.
God made all things as he wanted. The virgin birth has nothing to do with animals he created at the beginning of this world. Just his creation tell us of his love.
From the article.
I remembered that aphids do it too as soon as I mashed post. (although I’m not sure late season aphid males are born male, or whether, like some fishes, they flip later)
Jesus was born a man who walked the earth as a man.
If you want to argue about Virgin birth do not show me pictures of snakes, fish or lizards. Show me another man born of a virgin, a man who performed miracles and arose on the third day after his Cruxifiction , and ascended into Heaven, to take a seat next to His Father
And for the devout Bible-Thumpers out there: Have you actually ever READ the Bible? What version? Did you bother to learn another historic language to gain perspective? Do you know the histories of the people who rewrote it under a Roman ‘Imperator’? Do you know WHY Constantine had it rewritten?
I am not a scholar of any sort, Biblical or otherwise. But I try to pay attention.
Correct Perception is a term you all should look into.
The concept that there are a number of levels of truth, each as accurate as the previous or next, but each in alignment with how you are able to ask the question.
Darwin had a working hypothesis. A hypothesis is useful as long as it is ‘useful’. It is not meant as a final answer. Even something as simple as ‘water is wet’ is not universally accurate all the time. At what temperature? At what atmospheric pressure? At what scale (size wise)?
From those with a theological bent, you are confounded by your own doctrines; Why couldn't there be evolution? ALL things are within God's purview.
For those who think a belief in something greater is evidence of mental retardation, perhaps you should look in the mirror. Your arrogance and hubris borders on self-destructive. Is it indicative of a pathological fear, of the unknown, of the dark, of something?
OK...trannies there too, I guess ;o)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.