Re: Origins of this board and a silly question
Submitted by F.O.D. on February 18 2000 at 00:19:10
In reply to Origins of this board and a silly question Submitted by Sheesh! on February 17 2000 at 21:41:25
|
Hi Sheesh, Q.1 The board started a bit less than two years ago. Yes, it's usually a quiet refuge like this. I think you saw some of the recent hecklers...it never really gets much worse than that. Q.2 Compassion mentioned the verse about Jesus' brothers. That's enough for the Protestants to say the Catholics are being silly. On the other hand, in some cultures there is just one common word to mean "brother" and "cousin". They differentiate a cousin by saying "brother-twice-removed" if they have to. Catholics apply this kind of reasoning (though I don't know if it does in fact apply to Jewish culture) and declare that where the Bible says "brother", it means "brother-twice-removed", ie "cousin". For my part, irrespective of what "brother" means, I think the basic premise that Catholics are arguing from is ridiculous. That Mary was "immaculate", without sin, and therefore could never have children. For children come from having sex, and as you know, sex is an innately sinful act. Therefore Mary must never have had sex, because she was without any sin at all. Let me know if you need help spotting the flaws in the above argumentation. Don't start me on what "Queen of Heaven" really means. protestantly (nothing personal to any catholics on the board :) I love you truly! ), F.O.D. |