Quote:
Originally Posted by UntoHim
Since the title of the thread is "Virgin Birth..", which is a part of the Gospel, which is a part of the Christian canon, let's go upon the assumption that we are speaking of the Judeo-Christian God of the Judeo-Christian scriptures. If Timotheist or zeek want to start a thread "define God" then we can take up that ginormous question on such a thread. As far as your question "how it is possible for a human being to be that", well this is pretty theologically involved issue, which we can explore on this thread. But if your going to be insisting upon scientific proofs, well that's a non-sequitur on LCD...even in the la la land of Alternative Views.
|
Your assumption begs the question. What is the conception of God of the Judeo-Christian scriptures? Many Jews have perennially rejected the idea of a virgin birth based on their conception of God. That throws the idea of a "Judeo-Christian God" into question. Then there are the various conceptions of the church's creeds, theologians and, of course, lets not forget Witness Lee's. I don't know where OBW comes down on the issue. So I think it was a fair and relevant question.
Non-sequitur refers to a conclusion or statement that does not logically follow from the previous argument or statement. Logic is universal.Therefore, LCD can't have a special standard of non-sequitur.
If you reject science, what standard of evidence to you go by? I think in a discussion like this preponderance of evidence is good enough in most cases and that's well below a scientific standard. Of course, when scientific evidence is available on an issue that is possibly observable, what trumps it but better scientific evidence?