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