Mate - I have no intent of making you feel guilty. You belief or non belief of the Bible means nothing to me. I was just trying to explain original sin - I can understand your frustration about trying to explain original sin to anyone especially when it is a load of rubbish.
said nothing about Adam and Eve's sex life. That was not their sin. Their sin was they disobeyed God. - The riding instructions given by "god" might not have been explicit enough for these dumb fools to understand. They had no education, etc, why wouldthe outcome be any different and then the whole of the human race suffers because god showed no mercy. What sort of a **bleep** is this guy you follow?
thought I explain the Immaculate Conception to you. The Immaculate Conception was not the Conception Of Jesus but the Conception of his Mother. Jesus, being perfect in every way, could not be born to a woman who had the stain of original sin. Mary was conceived in the womb of her mother, after sexual relations between her mother and father, but Her Conception was without the stain of original sin carried by all humans after Adam and Eve disobeyed God. - Mate I have good knowledge of who concieved who. That is not the problem. The problem is the anatomical impossibility you chose to believe. Then you mix up the debate and throw in a few "stains". How can her parents be relieved of the burden of original sin when it doesn't exist? Why not call a spade a shovel and admit this hocus pocus is nothing but a front to maintain the mystique of the god thing to promote the likes of you from knowing and admitting the truth. Why can't you simply accept there is not truth whatsoever in all this rubbish.
The secular writings at the time of Jesus never denied His existence, ministry, or His crucifiction. Many of them tried to explain away His Resurrection but no one ever produced His Body. My proof of God is the universe which He created when He said "let there be light." Science can not explain how everything was created from nothing.- This one has to be dealt with a little more detail from my point. I believe at some time there was this half baked hippie parading and sandles and long hair arround at that time. He preached eveything people wanted to hear, much like the evangelists do today. The problem started when the idiots who followed him escalated his position in the heirachy to a god like figure and the rest is history which is why we are debating this today. As for that resurrection thing, get real. He lies in the tomb for 3 days, rigormortis sets in and the maggotts go to work, he lifts a 2 ton rock away from the doorway like is a cup of starbucks coffee and you expect reasonably intelligent people to swallow that crap. He must have been a pretty sight after decomposition had done a three day job on him.
Your must be a complete moron to believe some idiot said "let there be light" and all what we know of today through science and exploration was created at the blink of an eye? I think some heavy reading of Stephen Hawkings findings and conclusions should be indulged by you. Regardless if he is correct or not, his theories of how it all began are a 100 times more credability than the theory which religion puts forward. Even so, when god gave the magic signal and all things burst into life as we know it, where did all the matter come from. Let me guess, he made it from nothing? What like the big bang theory? Well Well Well. We have gone the full circle on this.
The choice to blindly follow some blathering bludging hippie who had no education or job or salute the intelligence of todays best brains is not a choice to be made. There is no choice but if you get a warm inner glow from believing that rubbish, go for it.
Have a nice day
