Hal Finney wrote:
> Doug Bailey wrote: Some other Highfield explanations:
> > The Immaculate Conception: Highfield speculates about Parthenogenesis
> > but concludes Mary Magdalene must have been a hermaphrodite (making
> > the book a gift idea for that special Catholic friend).
> Spike Jones replied:
> > ok, but allow me to correct one small detail. mary of the parthenogenic
> > conception is not to be confused with mary magdalene, who was evidently
> > (?)
> > jesus christ's concubine. spike
> And to add more Catholic trivia that you never wanted to know, the
> Immaculate Conception refers not to the conception of Jesus, but to the
> conception of Mary. That is, Mary herself was conceived miraculously,
> not through sexual relations, and her conception (the moment when
> Mary's mother became pregnant) is called the Immaculate Conception.
> The conception of Jesus is apparently called the Holy Conception, and
> his birth, the Virgin Birth.
> Although Mary was conceived miraculously, the miracle was such that
> she was the biological child of both her father and her mother. Jesus,
> on the other hand, was the biological child only of Mary, and Joseph
> played no part in his biological lineage.
As a person who was raised Roman Catholic, was an altar boy and actually read
the bible, I have to say you are stupendously wrong. An Immaculate Conception
takes place when a virgin becomes pregnant and her hymen remains intact, thus
proving that the child has no earthly father. Its 'immaculate' because it is
prefectly clean, with no blood from the breaking of the hymen... get it?
I have felt the the policy of the Immaculate Conception, which was not
I have felt the the policy of the Immaculate Conception, which was nota part of catholic theology til several hundred years after the supposedly blessed event, was merely a smokescreen by the Church to obfuscate the evidence that Jesus was actually a political figure by the fact that his parents were the culmination of a breeding program to reunite the royal houses of Isreal.