Your PSA for the day.
Dec. 21st, 2006 12:23 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
"Immaculate Conception" DOES NOT EQUAL "virgin birth."
The doctrine of the Immaculate Conception refers to the conception of Mary, not of Jesus.
(This rage brought to you by the Star Tribune headline linked to by
thistlerose.)
[I am so not Catholic and actually hate the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception -- and am moderately indifferent to the doctrine of the Virgin Birth -- but this is totally one of those errors that makes me twitchy.]
The doctrine of the Immaculate Conception refers to the conception of Mary, not of Jesus.
(This rage brought to you by the Star Tribune headline linked to by
![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
[I am so not Catholic and actually hate the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception -- and am moderately indifferent to the doctrine of the Virgin Birth -- but this is totally one of those errors that makes me twitchy.]
no subject
Date: 2006-12-21 06:53 pm (UTC)I'll agree with you about the Immaculate Conception - it only makes sense if you want to believe in original sin, or in calvin's total depravity doctrine, which are non-starters to me. Virgin birth is at least more scriptural, although I wonder how much it is the influence of other mystery religions, and how much of it is Greek gnosticism creeping in. It works better as a myth (in the true technical sense) than as just history - a way of noting that this birth was special and miraculous. (Points to notes on Week 4 on my page)
no subject
Date: 2006-12-21 07:04 pm (UTC)Just....wow.
*has nothing else to add*