BS: Immaculate mis-conception

Subject: RE: BS: Immaculate mis-conception
From: bobad
Date: 03 Jan 06 - 11:27 AM

A priest in Italy is being taken to court charged to provide proof of the existance of Jesus. Should be an interesting case.

http://www.christianism.com/html/notes/8note57.html

Subject: RE: BS: Immaculate mis-conception
From: Pied Piper
Date: 03 Jan 06 - 07:44 AM

"fecal matter"; good god Martin have made a New Years resolution, or is it an attempt to convince us that you can read without moving your lips.

Happy New Year

PP

Subject: RE: BS: Immaculate mis-conception
From: beardedbruce
Date: 03 Jan 06 - 06:04 AM

LH,

"If he existed, yeah, he would. ;-) "

You mean there ISN'T a Santa Claus??????

Subject: RE: BS: Immaculate mis-conception
From: Once Famous
Date: 02 Jan 06 - 08:53 PM

I would not want to see his show.

the acting is terrible, the plot is thin, and they do not serve any refreshments.

I'd rather watch something with Mickey Rooney in it.

Subject: RE: BS: Immaculate mis-conception
From: Peace
Date: 02 Jan 06 - 08:32 PM

That is a hole? Hell, I thought my socks were Mobius strips. I am gonna save five minutes a day from now on. Clinton, you ARE da man!

Subject: RE: BS: Immaculate mis-conception
From: Clinton Hammond
Date: 02 Jan 06 - 08:28 PM

Wow... you must really hate MG to wish ME on him

heh

Subject: RE: BS: Immaculate mis-conception
From: Little Hawk
Date: 02 Jan 06 - 08:23 PM

I WANT Martin to see your next show, Clinton. If there was an anthropomorphic God out there who cared a hoot about that sort of thing, I think he would arrange it.

Subject: RE: BS: Immaculate mis-conception
From: Clinton Hammond
Date: 02 Jan 06 - 08:09 PM

The HOLE at the TOP of the sock, d'uh.... If it didn't have that hole you couldn't turn it inside out!

Heh

Like if MG didn't have his holes, he daddy wouldn't have any fun at all...

Subject: RE: BS: Immaculate mis-conception
From: Peace
Date: 02 Jan 06 - 07:58 PM

Well, it just means that ya have to roll the sock up yer foot. Turn the sock inside out. Put yuer toes where you want 'em to end up and unravel the sock up yer leg. Nothin' to it. Takes a mere three minutes and you have the left sock on. The right sock takes about as long. So, what hole are ya talkin' about, Clinton?

Subject: RE: BS: Immaculate mis-conception
From: Clinton Hammond
Date: 02 Jan 06 - 07:32 PM

All stockings have a hole in them... otherwise it'd be damn hard to put your foot in it, just like you've done over and over MG...   You just keep proving what a moron you really are....

Subject: RE: BS: Immaculate mis-conception
From: Once Famous
Date: 02 Jan 06 - 06:46 PM

Clinton got fecal matter in his stocking and then it fell out because he had a hole in it.

Subject: RE: BS: Immaculate mis-conception
From: number 6
Date: 02 Jan 06 - 06:13 PM

Then you got a stone or 2 in yer stocking ... maybe then some evergreen.

sIx

Subject: RE: BS: Immaculate mis-conception
From: GUEST
Date: 02 Jan 06 - 06:13 PM

Ain't that always the way.

Subject: RE: BS: Immaculate mis-conception
From: Peace
Date: 02 Jan 06 - 06:13 PM

"You can't prove it."

Yes, I can't.

Subject: RE: BS: Immaculate mis-conception
From: Little Hawk
Date: 02 Jan 06 - 06:07 PM

Spirit is consciousness itself. It's the source of all thought.

You can't prove it.

Subject: RE: BS: Immaculate mis-conception
From: Little Hawk
Date: 02 Jan 06 - 06:06 PM

If he existed, yeah, he would. ;-)

Subject: RE: BS: Immaculate mis-conception
From: Clinton Hammond
Date: 02 Jan 06 - 04:35 PM

Nope... Santa, that old pagan bugger, loves me!

:-P

Subject: RE: BS: Immaculate mis-conception
From: Peace
Date: 02 Jan 06 - 03:57 PM

Clinton, did you get coal in your stocking?

Subject: RE: BS: Immaculate mis-conception
From: Clinton Hammond
Date: 02 Jan 06 - 03:54 PM

So, you make your OWN mind control

LOL

I think the idea of 'spirit' is kinda neat, but I have yet to see any evidence to support it's existance...

Subject: RE: BS: Immaculate mis-conception
From: Little Hawk
Date: 02 Jan 06 - 03:52 PM

But I'm not into religion. I'm into spirituality.

Subject: RE: BS: Immaculate mis-conception
From: Clinton Hammond
Date: 02 Jan 06 - 02:48 PM

One may as well cling to the belief that the world is flat... or that The Sun orbits around Earth...

There's as much evidence to support those as there is for 'religion' as anything more than a tool for domination, hatred and thought control

Subject: RE: BS: Immaculate mis-conception
From: Little Hawk
Date: 02 Jan 06 - 02:45 PM

Okay, Clinton...self-sufficient, then. You're quite correct that we are all fools in our own particular manner (you said wankers...same deal).

But as to what is real or not, that's for each to decide as best he can.

Subject: RE: BS: Immaculate mis-conception
From: Clinton Hammond
Date: 02 Jan 06 - 02:32 PM

Oh ya... BTW... I've been -ON- my 'death-bed'... Didn't turn to any mouldy old mythology then.... I doubt I'll do it when I'm back there....

If it gets you through the day, bully for ya... just don't try to pretend it's in any way real o.k....

Subject: RE: BS: Immaculate mis-conception
From: Clinton Hammond
Date: 02 Jan 06 - 02:23 PM

"your buttons sit in fully depressed mode"
Then you just show one more area where you are woefully uninformed.... You don't know shit about my buttons...

"You just enjoy feeling superior"
Self-sufficient I'll grant you, but I don't feel superior.... I know we're ALL a load of wankers... You, me, MG and the rest of the world....

Subject: RE: BS: Immaculate mis-conception
From: number 6
Date: 02 Jan 06 - 01:31 PM

BTW ,, guest at 1:29 is me

Well said LH.

sIx

Subject: RE: BS: Immaculate mis-conception
From: Once Famous
Date: 02 Jan 06 - 01:29 PM

It's all he will ever have.

Subject: RE: BS: Immaculate mis-conception
From: GUEST
Date: 02 Jan 06 - 01:29 PM

"Clinton in pain on his deathbed pleading, "Oh God, help me."

... good point MG!

sIx

Subject: RE: BS: Immaculate mis-conception
From: Little Hawk
Date: 02 Jan 06 - 01:27 PM

You just enjoy feeling superior and self-sufficient, Clinton. I can understand that. Every human ego enjoys feeling superior. ;-) I know I do.

But at the end of the day it avails us nothing. Your life is an act, like in that play you've been performing in. It's temporary.

You think it's all you've got? Fine with me.

Subject: RE: BS: Immaculate mis-conception
From: Once Famous
Date: 02 Jan 06 - 12:56 PM

Not at all, Clinton, and you certainly don't do it. Last I checked you usually respond to me, not the other way around. So as usual, your buttons sit in fully depressed mode.

Scenerio: Clinton in pain on his deathbed pleading, "Oh God, help me."

Subject: RE: BS: Immaculate mis-conception
From: Clinton Hammond
Date: 02 Jan 06 - 12:33 PM

Isn't MG wound up enough?

:-P

Subject: RE: BS: Immaculate mis-conception
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 02 Jan 06 - 06:48 AM

If you have faith in religion

Impossibility in this context of faith I'm afraid, Clinton. Religion is known to exist therefore the concept of faith cannot be applied to it. I think you are mixing up the terms faith and trust. Faith is the belief in something that cannot be proven in the context of Martins comment.

Unless of course you knew that and were just winding Martin up. Surely not...

:D (tG)

Subject: RE: BS: Immaculate mis-conception
From: Clinton Hammond
Date: 01 Jan 06 - 09:50 PM

Out to sea as usual Little Hawk....

Subject: RE: BS: Immaculate mis-conception
From: Little Hawk
Date: 01 Jan 06 - 09:13 PM

Peter K - I don't care who fathered Jesus. I care about the teachings and example that Jesus provided to humanity. (Same deal with Buddha, Krishna, Lao-Tse, Abraham, and many, many others.)

It probably was the Biblical man Joseph who fathered Jesus, in the physical sense, I would think. Most likely. So? Was it in legal wedlock? Probably. Do I care? No, not really.

I think God fathers/mothers EVERYBODY, because life springs from the unmanifest as pure energy, and that pure energy IS God as far as I'm concerned. So God fathered and mothered you, me, Jesus, the dog, the cat, and everyone else...through their biological parents. God also fathered/mothered plants, plankton, single-celled organisms, planets, stars, and galaxies. Everything that exists is the progeny of God...because everything came out of the pure energy that pre-existed form. Everything also returns into that pure energy, and generally re-emerges into other forms later.

How's that?

It's utter bollocks, my friend, for anyone to think they can prove or disprove something about the details of Jesus' familial lineage at this point in history. They can have an opinion, but that's all.

Subject: RE: BS: Immaculate mis-conception
From: Little Hawk
Date: 01 Jan 06 - 08:50 PM

Well...you've been quite busy immaculately misconceiving for the last couple of days, haven't you?

Subtlety, lads, subtlety! It's badly needed if you wish to talk about such matters as the Virgin Mary and create anything except a bunch of pointless noise.

"Mary" is an archetype. A great symbol. You either know that or you don't. If you don't, you will grasp nothing useful about her whatsoever. The archetype existed eons before the historical woman did, and it will always exist, even if this planet burns up and vanishes into dust.

The historical organized religions on this planet are man's faltering (but often noble) attempts to grasp great truths that predated this world, and will last long after it and those religions have vanished utterly.

You think you're human. Well, you are, but you're more than that. Human is just the most obvious part of you that you see on the surface. It's skin deep and temporary. You are life itself, manifesting as human for a very short dramatic episode which you call your "life" as you presently know it. Life itself is not limited to form. It's intelligent energy. It brings forth form when and where it chooses to.

It chose to make Clinton and Martin just as they are. "Fascinating," as Spock would say...

You guys (Clinton and Martin) think very small, that's your problem. But I love it when you argue with one another...it's funny.

I mean, isn't it great to be someone who knows everything? It provides such self-assurance. We all ought to form a club or write a book or something, and straighten out everybody else, right? We could call it, "My Religion is ME". I bet it would sell like crazy.

Clinton, I think that's what your religion truly is: it's you. You have tremendous faith in YOU. Your God lives in the mirror. Can you understand why this makes a lot of sense to you, but maybe not so much sense to most other people? Still, I'm sure it helps you get things done...

Subject: RE: BS: Immaculate mis-conception
From: Clinton Hammond
Date: 01 Jan 06 - 12:56 PM

If you have faith in religion, you're a bigger idiot than I ever gave you credit for

Subject: RE: BS: Immaculate mis-conception
From: Once Famous
Date: 31 Dec 05 - 04:53 PM

Clinton, there's religion and there is faith. Can you see any difference?

Subject: RE: BS: Immaculate mis-conception
From: Clinton Hammond
Date: 31 Dec 05 - 01:38 PM

"Now that's bullshit."

Find religion that isn't

Subject: RE: BS: Immaculate mis-conception
From: Once Famous
Date: 31 Dec 05 - 01:04 PM

Jesus was the first to break the door down from the inside? Now that's bullshit.

Subject: RE: BS: Immaculate mis-conception
From: number 6
Date: 31 Dec 05 - 12:14 PM

In some ways it is Clinton .... in some ways it is.

sIx

Subject: RE: BS: Immaculate mis-conception
From: Clinton Hammond
Date: 31 Dec 05 - 10:50 AM

Religion... what a load of bollocks

Subject: RE: BS: Immaculate mis-conception
From: number 6
Date: 31 Dec 05 - 12:26 AM

If Mary was a schikseh .... in our lingo meaning a slut or whore ... crude description, I myself don't like it but I'm trying to get a point across .... Jesus (albeit born out of wedlock or not) and his marketing group of guys would have quite a negative black mark on the campaign in selling his dogma ... so, create a myth, a magical illusion to keep the skeletons well hidden away in the closet.

All in all it worked out pretty good, and the afterthoughts provided some goodness to mankind ... but then again humans being humans take things, twist and spin it all around for their own agendas and miss the big point overall.

sIx

Subject: RE: BS: Immaculate mis-conception
From: Peace
Date: 30 Dec 05 - 11:38 PM

Also, she would have been virgin and ever-virgin (given the holy spirit scenarion) if she'd given birth to a girl, but Jesus was a guy and that means she had a pecker in her. Kinda gets messy in terms of argument. Don't mean to be sacreligious, but this kinda stuff throws me off because people believe what they believe--much of it comes from their churches and its leaders, and lots comes from dogmas handed down from other people who got it from their churches, ad infinitum.

Subject: RE: BS: Immaculate mis-conception
From: Peace
Date: 30 Dec 05 - 11:33 PM

I just ain't too hung up on Gods and Godesses. Much ado about nothing, IMO.

Subject: RE: BS: Immaculate mis-conception
From: dianavan
Date: 30 Dec 05 - 11:29 PM

I think bobad is right.

"...they might all be using the same story to sell the snake oil."

I'm glad, sIx, that you believe that Mary was someone to be respected regardless of the morality of her time but...

I'm also sure that the figure of Mary means many things to many people. I'm surprised that she has survived at all.

I think that says more about the strength of the Goddess despite the efforts of the church to diminish her significance among the people.

Subject: RE: BS: Immaculate mis-conception
From: Peace
Date: 30 Dec 05 - 11:22 PM

"Children born out of wedlock are not mamzerim in Jewish law and bear no stigma, unless the marriage would have been prohibited for the reasons above. Children of a married man and a woman who is not his wife are not mamzerim (because the marriage between the parents would not have been prohibited), although children of a married woman and a man who is not her husband are mamzerim (because she could not have married him)."

That is from a great site: Judaism 101.

Subject: RE: BS: Immaculate mis-conception
From: number 6
Date: 30 Dec 05 - 11:16 PM

Thank you Carol C.

So back to my question to MG ..

"MG ... your not implying that Mary was a shikseh are you ?!?!"

If Jesus was born out of wedlock ... it certainly would have been extremely scandalous and repulsive in Jewish Society.

Thus the extreme whitewashing of the situation was created to make his birth more pure, closer to YHWH/yahwew/God in creating the 'myth' of a Virgin Birth. Don't forget, the first audience to conversion to the new Christian following were Jews. As Bobad mentioned "Or they might all be using the same story to sell the snake oil."

It is after it has all been done and said and in Christianity's evolution do we rationalize the purity in it's spirituality. I prefer to think of the Virgin Birth to it's feminine side, a mother, a woman is all Mary was. Someone in spite of the mores/morals of the society of her time, someone to be repected regardless. Like all humans should be.

sIx

Subject: RE: BS: Immaculate mis-conception
From: CarolC
Date: 30 Dec 05 - 10:16 PM

Thanks, number 6.

"Shikseh (shiksa)" according to some people, literally translates to mean "female abomination".

This site has a sensative discussion of the word. Many people seem to be unaware of these definitions...

http://www.faqs.org/faqs/judaism/FAQ/11-Miscellaneous/section-7.html

"Shiksa and Shaygetz are the Yiddish derivative of the respective feminine and masculine Hebrew words for something unclean, dirty. The appellations are customarily applied to gentiles who do things inimical to Jewish interests, such as vandalizing Jewish buildings, robbing Jewish kids of their lunch money, or becoming romantically involved with Jews :-). The root is "sheketz", which refers to house rodents and lizards. They impart ritual impurity, and therefore the term lends itself to the same kind of idea. Some have taken to using the term to refer to Christian women in general. If Christians were using the term against Jews in English, they would be saying "Filthy Jews" or "Dirty Jews", and we Jews would rightly be offended.

Hence, use of these terms should really be avoided; it is insulting and inappropriate, even if no bad intent was behind the usage. It is always better to use neutral, less pejorative (judgemental) terms, such as non-Jew or Christian."

Subject: RE: BS: Immaculate mis-conception
From: number 6
Date: 30 Dec 05 - 08:30 PM

Am I jewish .... My mother was, so in some ways I am, though I was never really raised as one.My mother was a devout athiest. After my father died when I was 12 I did live my high school years in a Jewish community in Toronto. Yes the definition of a shikseh is a non-Jewish female, but it is also used in a derogatory manner for a Jewish female of lose morals. Times and expressions/views have changed since those days.

sIx

Subject: RE: BS: Immaculate mis-conception
From: Greg F.
Date: 30 Dec 05 - 06:59 PM

Is this about mythology or faith?

Same Dif, nu?

The Bible rewritten: "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you."

The NeoCon Bible : "Do unto others lest they do unto you."

Subject: RE: BS: Immaculate mis-conception
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 30 Dec 05 - 06:30 PM

I have no problem at all with a virgin birth. If god decides that he or she wants to perform a little miracle every now and again why shouldn't she. Or he. If all god wants to do is perform these feats of mysticism every now and then what harm are they doing. Why shouldn't god do hheris (wayhay - there's a new word for you!) own thing. The moslems have their prayer mats. The jews have their big hats. The christians have their ashes. Why should we deny god this little concession?

After all we need to give minorities their rights and surely god is the biggest (smallest?) minority of all!

There can be only one!

or was that from something else..?

Cheers

DtG