🚀 go-pugleaf

rbwinn wrote:
> On Aug 4, 7:13�pm, DanielSan <daniel...@speakeasy.net> wrote:
>> rbwinn wrote:
>>> On Aug 3, 8:57 pm, DanielSan <daniel...@speakeasy.net> wrote:
>>>> rbwinn wrote:
>>>>> On Aug 3, 4:30 pm, DanielSan <daniel...@speakeasy.net> wrote:
>>>>>> rbwinn wrote:
>>>>>>> On Aug 3, 8:54 am, Free Lunch <lu...@nofreelunch.us> wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Sun, 3 Aug 2008 07:50:37 -0700 (PDT), rbwinn <rbwi...@juno.com> wrote
>>>>>>>> in alt.atheism:
>>>>>>>>> On Aug 2, 7:23?pm, DanielSan <daniel...@speakeasy.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> rbwinn wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> The word in question is "egkuos". This word can be defined as:
>>>>>>>>>>>> swelling inside, i.e. pregnant -- great with child.
>>>>>>>>>>>> You are using "great with child" and assuming that's what the writer of
>>>>>>>>>>>> Luke meant. Not sure how you get that, actually. Most people today
>>>>>>>>>>>> would use the word "pregnant", not the phrase "great with child".
>>>>>>>>>>> Well, what you are saying is that you believe that Luke was so feeble
>>>>>>>>>>> minded that he would have believed there was something other than a
>>>>>>>>>>> child in the womb of a pregnant woman. ? Nothing he wrote would
>>>>>>>>>>> indicate that he was feeble minded.
>>>>>>>>>> No, I'm not saying that at all.
>>>>>>>>> Well, you absolutely are. You regard me as so stupid that you think
>>>>>>>>> you can convince me that a pregnant woman does not have a child in her
>>>>>>>>> womb. Why would you treat Luke any different?
>>>>>>>> Once again, you misrepresent the discussion.- Hide quoted text -
>>>>>>>> - Show quoted text -
>>>>>>> The discussion was whether a pregnant woman has a child in her womb.
>>>>>>> You claimed she did not.
>>>>>> There is a fetus in the womb from 9 weeks from conception to birth.
>>>>>> Prior to 9 weeks, there isn't even a fetus.
>>>>>> Did you parents ever teach you about the birds and the bees? (Hint: It
>>>>>> has nothing to do with avians or insects.)
>>>>> I was taught from the time I was born that a pregnant woman has a
>>>>> child inside her.
>>>> Sorry to be the bearer of bad news, but you were taught wrong.
>>>> --
>>> You are saying that my mother was lying to me about my younger
>>> brothers and sisters?
>> No. �She was taught wrong, too, if she claimed that she had children in
>> her womb.
> 
> Well, she was taught from the Bible.  The Bible says,
> 
> 4  And Joseph also went up ...........
> 5  To be taxed with Mary his espoused wife, being great with child.

That's one translation.

Another translation is:
"He went there to register with Mary, who was pledged to be married to 
him and was expecting a child."

If there were a child, why would they be expecting?  It's already there.

In another translation:
"To be enrolled with Mary, his espoused wife, who was about to become a 
mother."

In another translation:
"He took with him Mary, his fiancée, who was now obviously pregnant."

-- 
****************************************************
*          DanielSan -- alt.atheism #2226          *
*--------------------------------------------------*
* Can God create a Thai dish so spicy that even He *
* can't eat it?                                    *
****************************************************