vedaxcool:

Its a pity you are a shallow reader go thru, the wiki stuff u read and u will see that parthogenesis can be induced in mammals, more important it is also has been demonstrated to have been done artificially to human stem cells resulting to producing human embryos, unfortunately I am browsing from my phone, could u do the public good by posting from wiki? Thanks as for convincing you, that is is hardly why I am responding, only exposing that ur claims jave severe K - leg lol

Humans
On June 26, 2007, International Stem Cell Corporation (ISCC), a California-based stem cell research company, announced that their lead scientist, Dr. Elena Revazova, and her research team were the first to intentionally create human stem cells from unfertilized human eggs using parthenogenesis. The process may offer a way for creating stem cells that are genetically matched to a particular woman for the treatment of degenerative diseases that might affect her. In December 2007, Dr. Revazova and ISCC published an article[52] illustrating a breakthrough in the use of parthenogenesis to produce human stem cells that are homozygous in the HLA region of DNA. These stem cells are called HLA homozygous parthenogenetic human stem cells (hpSC-Hhom) and have unique characteristics that would allow derivatives of these cells to be implanted into millions of people without immune rejection.[53] With proper selection of oocyte donors according to HLA haplotype, it is possible to generate a bank of cell lines whose tissue derivatives, collectively, could be MHC-matched with a significant number of individuals within the human population.
On August 2, 2007, after much independent investigation, it was revealed that discredited South Korean scientist Hwang Woo-Suk unknowingly produced the first human embryos resulting from parthenogenesis. Initially, Hwang claimed he and his team had extracted stem cells from cloned human embryos, a result later found to be fabricated. Further examination of the chromosomes of these cells show indicators of parthenogenesis in those extracted stem cells, similar to those found in the mice created by Tokyo scientists in 2004. Although Hwang deceived the world about being the first to create artificially cloned human embryos, he did contribute a major breakthrough to stem cell research by creating human embryos using parthenogenesis.[54] The truth was discovered in 2007, long after the embryos were created by him and his team in February 2004. This made Hwang the first, unknowingly, to successfully perform the process of parthenogenesis to create a human embryo and, ultimately, a human parthenogenetic stem cell line

buzugee: I think this is what you need here
romans 3 vs 23[b] for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God[/b] i think that pretty much ties in mary. so she is a sinner too. and as such 'perfect mary doctrine ' is a heresy, its preposterous, its a doctrine of seducing spirits, its greco-roman mythology and its ludicrous. all the great men of God struggled with sin. king david, solomon, paul, even Jesus struggled with sin when he was tempted but he alone defeated sin. The point here is mary was as much a sinner as the next man

buzugee: well whaddayaknow ? its on wiki. still does not change anything though. ROMANS 1 VS 3[b] The Good News is about his Son. In his earthly life he was born into King David's family line[/b] he was born through the line of king david which is josephs line.

vedaxcool:

Till you can show what i wrote is nonsense we will have to ignore your illitrate display here as nothing more than a manifestation of declining intellect and dullard brain.

vedaxcool: ^

Lol for a man who wakes up every morning not knowing why he exist the above comments can best be described as delusions of a slave of godlessness

italo:

Have all people committed actual sins? Consider a child below the age of reason. By definition he can’t sin, since sinning requires the ability to reason and the ability to intend to sin. This is indicated by Paul later in the letter to the Romans when he speaks of the time when Jacob and Esau were unborn babies as a time when they "had done nothing either good or bad" (Rom. 9:11). 

We also know of another very prominent exception to the rule: Jesus (Heb. 4:15). So if Paul’s statement in Romans 3 includes an exception for the New Adam (Jesus), one may argue that an exception for the New Eve (Mary) can also be made. 

Paul’s comment seems to have one of two meanings. It might be that it refers not to absolutely everyone, but just to the mass of mankind (which means young children and other special cases, like Jesus and Mary, would be excluded without having to be singled out). If not that, then it would mean that everyone, without exception, is subject to original sin, which is true for a young child, for the unborn, even for Mary—but she, though due to be subject to it, was preserved by God from it and its stain. 

italo:

Have all people committed actual sins? Consider a child below the age of reason. By definition he can’t sin, since sinning requires the ability to reason and the ability to intend to sin. This is indicated by Paul later in the letter to the Romans when he speaks of the time when Jacob and Esau were unborn babies as a time when they "had done nothing either good or bad" (Rom. 9:11). 

We also know of another very prominent exception to the rule: Jesus (Heb. 4:15). So if Paul’s statement in Romans 3 includes an exception for the New Adam (Jesus), one may argue that an exception for the New Eve (Mary) can also be made. 

Paul’s comment seems to have one of two meanings. It might be that it refers not to absolutely everyone, but just to the mass of mankind (which means young children and other special cases, like Jesus and Mary, would be excluded without having to be singled out). If not that, then it would mean that everyone, without exception, is subject to original sin, which is true for a young child, for the unborn, even for Mary—but she, though due to be subject to it, was preserved by God from it and its stain. 

buzugee: its all alot of assumptions and innuendos and conjectures and hypothesis and opinions in your post. where did you get that Jesus is the new Adam and Mary is the new Eve ? Notwithstanding i still think all these are vain opinions. i have never seen anywhere in the bible where it says that Mary is holy. This is a roman-catholic church concept. Nothing to do with reality. its make-belief. you do know that subscribing to greco-roman religious doctrine is one of the facets of the mark of the beast right ? you do know this is bordering on idolatry right ? placing Mary on a pedestal created by men with seducing spirits is not the way you want to go brah.

vedaxcool:

Could the authors be mistaken? Remember mathew and luke differ on Jesus genealogy that is at one point of the list they went separate ways. The Qur'an on the other provides Jesus genealogy thru Mary etc and Christians take Joesph to be his Jesus suposed father ( u find as was suppose in some bible translations. As for oga Paul, let take he was just saying his own, as Paul contradicts Jesus at every juncture possible and I wonder did Paul actually say jesus is thru joseph? As he could have been saying thru Mary, well I will say the biblical story sometimes provides this muddle as we see the contradiction in luke and mathew! To sum up the case, Jesus is the son of Mary miraculously conceived.

ijawkid:


Soon we might even be told by italo that mary is sitting @ Yahwehs left hand in d heavens...............

ijawkid:
Soon we might even be told by italo that mary is sitting @ Yahwehs left hand in d heavens...............

italo:

Since you can't keep shut, answer the question I asked you:

How is the Immaculate Conception a heresy, who declared it so and by what authority?

buzugee: its all alot of assumptions and innuendos and conjectures and hypothesis and opinions in your post. where did you get that Jesus is the new Adam and Mary is the new Eve ? Notwithstanding i still think all these are vain opinions. i have never seen anywhere in the bible where it says that Mary is holy.

This is a roman-catholic church concept. Nothing to do with reality. its make-belief. you do know that subscribing to greco-roman religious doctrine is one of the facets of the mark of the beast right ? you do know this is bordering on idolatry right ? placing Mary on a pedestal created by men with seducing spirits is not the way you want to go brah.

ijawkid:

I think d answers to ya heretic questions would be by asking u questions.......


How was mary born

Was. She giving birth to through sex or was her life also transferref to her mothers womb

And then mayb an angel stroled by to tell mary's mum"" look u are going to give birth to a daughter and her name would be called Mary,daughter of God and also mother of God"""


What is immaculate about mary's conception?


I dnt even know why I'm tryin to discuss this issue......

Its so crazy,..................

buzugee: ROMANS 1 VS 3[b] Concerning his Son Jesus Christ our Lord, which was made of the seed of David according to the flesh;[/b] according to the flesh means ' by birth'. Joseph was of the lineage of King David by the flesh ( by birth ) and Jesus was the seed of King David by the flesh ( by birth ), hence Joseph slept with mary to produce the messiah because mary was not of King David by the flesh ( by birth )

Uyi Iredia:

It's obvious you've not read the Bible from cover to cover. Read the geneologies in the books of Matthew, Mark Luke & John and note how Jesus' unique case is recorded. Another classic case of taking the Bible out of context.

buzugee: i see where you are getting mixed up. ok quick analogy. a 75 year old man and a 10 year old boy in this world today. you need information about the second world war, who do you ask ? the 75 year old or the 10 year old ? i would hope any rational minded sound thinking person would ask the 75 year old man because he is older and probably lived through that period. The quran is written from the bible. the bible is wayyyyyyy older than the quran so getting your information from a book that was parroted from the main source, when you can easily go to the main source is crazy.

buzugee: ROMANS 1 VS 3[b] Concerning his Son Jesus Christ our Lord, which was made of the seed of David according to the flesh;[/b] according to the flesh means ' by birth'. Joseph was of the lineage of King David by the flesh ( by birth ) and Jesus was the seed of King David by the flesh ( by birth ), hence Joseph slept with mary to produce the messiah because mary was not of King David by the flesh ( by birth )

solidbroda: shut ur maggot shi..t.y mouth up! Mary is a relative of David.

Logic Mind:

shut ur maggot shi..t.y mouth up! Mary is a relative of Samson.

italo:

Anti-Catholics! You always like to change topics when you are being proved wrong.

Firstly, do you agree that when Paul said "all have sinned", he didn't mean absolutely everyone?

After that, we can handle your other allegations one after the other.

Uyi Iredia:

It's obvious you've not read the Bible from cover to cover. Read the geneologies in the books of Matthew, Mark Luke & John and note how Jesus' unique case is recorded. Another classic case of taking the Bible out of context.

Logic Mind:

try and listen to your own advice.

vedaxcool:

Actually u are the one mixed up, Your analogy fail coz wat if the old man suffered dementia? Or have difficulty remembering things? You simply ignored the other points that paints your theory false I will restate them and in addition a very important point that shows you are undergoing a series of cherry picking fallacy. Let remove the Qur'an from the equation so that you do not use it as an excuse not to answer the points that refute wat u wrote:

1. We agreed that its' possible to have the virging birth.

2. Which is the geneaology of christ between mathew and luke is acceptable since they are contradictory.

3. The verse you quoted did Paul refer to Jesus as being from joseph? And could Mary had been from the line of David?

4. Most importantly the annuciation of Mary, nowhere did God say Mary will conceive by any man and pls could you quote the verse that speaks of the annunciation, atleast u should have brought these on the table.

solidbroda: shut ur maggot shi..t.y mouth up! Mary is a relative of David.

solidbroda: are they not all from Abraham? ok...Adam?

buzugee: see, you have been discombobulated by seducing spirits. thats all that is. everything you wrote is irrelevant if you take into consideration the meaning of the word 'virgin' before it got lost in translation by the catholic church.

vir·gin   [vur-jin] Show IPA
noun

2.
an unmarried girl or woman.

now we all know fornication is when you sleep with someone without marrying them because according to Gods laws, whomever you sleep with, you must keep as your wife. therein lied the trepidation of joseph. EXODUS 22 VS 16
And if a man entice a maid that is not betrothed, and lie with her, he shall surely endow her to be his wife.[/b]so joseph was compelled to mary her.

Logic Mind:

Just adding that Genesis 24:16 also makes a distinction between a virgin and a girl that has laid with a man. They are two separate beings. see the "neither".

Genesis 24:16
And the damsel was very fair to look upon, a virgin, neither had any man known her: and she went down to the well, and filled her pitcher, and came up.

buzugee: now lets look at that statement. it says A VIRGIN ( MEANING SHE WAS UNWED ) and then it goes on to say 'NEITHER HAD ANY MAN KNOWN HER' this obviously is another separate statement. these are two statements. dig ? so the two statements will go like this 'she is unwed, and no man has ever slept with her' GERRIT ?

Logic Mind:

We are saying the same thing here. The bible calls a virgin any damsel that may have fvcked the whole neighbourhood but remains unmarried.