Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site lanl.ARPA Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!lanl!wkp From: wkp@lanl.ARPA Newsgroups: net.religion Subject: Immaculate Misconception Message-ID: <32503@lanl.ARPA> Date: Mon, 28-Oct-85 02:52:11 EST Article-I.D.: lanl.32503 Posted: Mon Oct 28 02:52:11 1985 Date-Received: Thu, 31-Oct-85 22:18:49 EST Distribution: net Organization: Los Alamos National Laboratory Lines: 14 In article <2396@cal-dbb.fluke.UUCP> zoro@fluke.UUCP (Mark Hinds) writes: > I know several christian married couples who have children, and > I saw the wives getting bigger and bigger, so it wasn't imaculate > conception. Your closing statements seem to reflect ignorance about > christian ethics, which frown not on all sex, but only on extra- > marrital sex.... And your statement seems to reflect ignorance about christian theology. Immaculate conception does not refer to a virgin birth. It refers to being born without original sin. -- bill peter ihnp4!lanl!wkp